Most electable democrat

[Non Swing Voter]

Biden, obviously. 

There's a reason Trump got himself impeached over his Ukraine conduct and it's because he doesn't want to run against Biden, because they've probably looked at hundreds of internal polls that show he has little chance to win against him barring some massive event or change in the dynamics of the race. 

There isn't a single Hillary state that Biden is likely to lose but there are at least 8 or 9 Trump states he has a good shot of winning.

[morgankingsley]

Sanders or Biden because of name recognition

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Obviously, Biden; consequently,  Bernie reminds voters of Biden, despite his progressive stances, with a heart issue, and Dems wont have to defend VT or Mass in a special election

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Obviously, Biden; consequently,  Bernie reminds voters of Biden, despite his progressive stances, with a heart issue, and Dems wont have to defend VT or Mass in a special election

Peter Welch will slaughter his Republican opponent.

[Kleine Scheiße]

Obviously, Biden; consequently,  Bernie reminds voters of Biden, despite his progressive stances, with a heart issue, and Dems wont have to defend VT or Mass in a special election

Haven't you been arguing that Biden is not electable, recently? Not disagreeing, just asking for clarification.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Obviously, Biden; consequently,  Bernie reminds voters of Biden, despite his progressive stances, with a heart issue, and Dems wont have to defend VT or Mass in a special election

Haven't you been arguing that Biden is not electable, recently? Not disagreeing, just asking for clarification.

It's not worth asking about. Nothing he says is consistent.

[Kleine Scheiße]

Obviously, Biden; consequently,  Bernie reminds voters of Biden, despite his progressive stances, with a heart issue, and Dems wont have to defend VT or Mass in a special election

Haven't you been arguing that Biden is not electable, recently? Not disagreeing, just asking for clarification.

It's not worth asking about. Nothing he says is consistent.

uh consistently AWESOME

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Electability is a lie, a manipulation built to prevent us from seeing the clear truth of how politics actually works. If it was not something people thought about, people would select the candidate that appeals to them well, and that candidate, via virtue of being appealing like that, would in the end win via the actually being really electable because they could convince people to vote for them the best compared to the alternatives.

But... instead we get this second guessing nonsense and insistences that so and so is best for what ever reasons we want to argue for as defining electability. Instead of, you know, people just letting the appeal of the candidates answer the question via the primary election.

Man... I am so done with the term electability. There's a reason I did a youtube video about how its nonsense. And will do so again before the year is up.

Doesn't this assume that the primary electorate is reflective of the general electorate?

[izixs]

Electability is a lie, a manipulation built to prevent us from seeing the clear truth of how politics actually works. If it was not something people thought about, people would select the candidate that appeals to them well, and that candidate, via virtue of being appealing like that, would in the end win via the actually being really electable because they could convince people to vote for them the best compared to the alternatives.

But... instead we get this second guessing nonsense and insistences that so and so is best for what ever reasons we want to argue for as defining electability. Instead of, you know, people just letting the appeal of the candidates answer the question via the primary election.

Man... I am so done with the term electability. There's a reason I did a youtube video about how its nonsense. And will do so again before the year is up.

Doesn't this assume that the primary electorate is reflective of the general electorate?

If elections were purely about the specifics of the message being shared, that would be the consequence of my claim. But campaigns are much more than the contents of the message, its the ability to sell it. And if you can sell your message to the disparate dysfunctional family that is the Democratic Party, you can sell it to the nation. But you gotta actually try to do it, and we gotta make sure our candidates actually try to do it, and not let them rely on inertia/electability/other amorphous concept to have the edge.

So no, it doesn't assume the primary electorate is reflective of the general electorate. But it does assume that the variety and degree of differences in the party are on par with those outside the party core. Which given the long running meme of the Democratic Party not being an organized party, I suspect I'm not off the mark.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Electability is a lie, a manipulation built to prevent us from seeing the clear truth of how politics actually works. If it was not something people thought about, people would select the candidate that appeals to them well, and that candidate, via virtue of being appealing like that, would in the end win via the actually being really electable because they could convince people to vote for them the best compared to the alternatives.

But... instead we get this second guessing nonsense and insistences that so and so is best for what ever reasons we want to argue for as defining electability. Instead of, you know, people just letting the appeal of the candidates answer the question via the primary election.

Man... I am so done with the term electability. There's a reason I did a youtube video about how its nonsense. And will do so again before the year is up.

Doesn't this assume that the primary electorate is reflective of the general electorate?

If elections were purely about the specifics of the message being shared, that would be the consequence of my claim. But campaigns are much more than the contents of the message, its the ability to sell it. And if you can sell your message to the disparate dysfunctional family that is the Democratic Party, you can sell it to the nation. But you gotta actually try to do it, and we gotta make sure our candidates actually try to do it, and not let them rely on inertia/electability/other amorphous concept to have the edge.

So no, it doesn't assume the primary electorate is reflective of the general electorate. But it does assume that the variety and degree of differences in the party are on par with those outside the party core. Which given the long running meme of the Democratic Party not being an organized party, I suspect I'm not off the mark.

It sounds like you're still relying on the idea of electability, you just think that he best evidence of electability is a candidate who can get enthusiastic support from different factions in the party.

[SInNYC]

1 Biden, though he is fast sliding. I used to have him as a clear 1, but now its almost a tie for 2.

2 Sanders. Rule out the south, make VA competitive (yes, minority opinion here), but he gets WI/MI/PA, probably IA, and surprises with some state outside the south. But some (a small part, but still some) Ds would rather lose than vote for him and the convention wont be pretty.

3. Warren. She is still the one who can unify the party factions.

4. Kobluchar: a meh candidate, but she gets people who want some sanity in the white house. She shares Buttigieg''s ideology but isnt as smug about it.

5. Buttigieg: Doesnt get south (not his fault, its bigotry). Also doesnt get rust belt (his fault, he is corporatist + not enough black turnout). Unless the economy tanks I cant really see a path over Trump.

6. Bloomberg: People who know him only know that he wants to take away your soda and guns. But his advertisements have been great, so he might move up to 4 soon. His arrogance hurts, but not too much since the pundits will agree with him ideologically.

The question I really want to analyze is how the candidates will rank in 2022 performance. I expect most (but not all) of these will result in 2022 bloodbaths.

[junior chįmp]

Electability is a hoax perpetrated by the centrists in order to make progressives uncompetitive

[Senator Spark]

Probably Sanders. Despite being strident, he really resonates with independents and much of the electorate.

[Hollywood]

I'm really unsure about Biden now.  I still remember when Democrats thought of Joe Biden as a huge liability to run as President, but a great compliment to Obama.  Sanders and Warren might really be more electable.  Really consider all the unforced errors he's made.  He literally said "I love kids jumping on my lap."

[Nightcore Nationalist]

#1 is easily Amy Klobuchar.  I'm honestly dumbfounded that the elites aren't throwing everything behind her.  She's moderate enough to succeed in the suburban areas that gave the dems their house majority, which would alone be enough for a win.  In addition, she understands that campaigning in rural areas is electoral insurance for the Ds.

She also isn't easily rattled or thin skinned, like some of the other candidates.  I genuinely think she's the best democrat to win a general election.

#2 is, despite his rapidly deteriorating mental state, is Biden.  I personally think he's an arrogant, egotistical blowhard who doesn't belong on stage given his demented mind, but I understand why some people think he has a folksy demeanor and he can be a capable story teller.  Even the "look, fat" may play to his benefit, like Reagan's "I'm paying for this damn microphone" moment.  And he obviously has ironclad black support.  He has the best chance in the South and Arizona.

Tied with #3 is Warren and Bernie. Both would turn off moderates in the suburbs while doing no better with Clinton with any other demographics (aside from young people, perhaps), which is why I'm hoping one of them will earn the nomination.  Warren's big tactical mistake was dropping her populist-liberal persona and follow Bernie to the far left, which makes her both less palatable to moderates and look fake.  To her credit, she hides her true age well and is energetic, and on script she sounds intelligent and articulate.  Unfortunately off script she's a deer caught in the headlights, and anyone who knows how the economy works knows how disastrous a wealth-tax would be.

Bernie has strong appeal, but only to a small sliver of the electorate. The rest would be less than ecstatic, not to mention he'd be almost 80.

As I've said before Buttigieg is not nearly as strong as a candidate as some people think, as the left is very factionalised and he only appeals to the metropolitan Liberals, but not to AAs, Obama-Trump voters, Berniebros or the intersectionals.  But I understand the argument for him, he's polished and a good speaker, just too green.

Steyer is an unlikeable nobody and, if he won the nomination voter turnout would collapse. Trump could very well win the NPV against him and at least 320 EVs.

[Cinemark]

We've gotten a few national and state polls this week and it shows a pretty clear picture: Biden > Sanders/Warren/Pete