For those of you who support Warren, Buttigieg or Harris..

[busterbrown]

so do I.... But I don't think they can win back the Rust Belt States,.. the key to a Trump defeat.. Lets admit it...Rust Belt States have a huge "salt of the earth" type personality.. Hard Workers who are caught in the middle of a lousy stinkin economy.
They though Trump might be the answer..(Such a prolific Business man)..They are beginning to see the light... The Economy is great...but not for them..Not even close......I think tough Joe.. Is the perfect choice for them... Smart. salt of the earth type of guy.. who I think can recapture the votes of so many who use to vote straight Dem... Just remember how Obama did very well with these states.

[SouthernProgressive]

1. Buttigieg.

[BeyondGeography]

2. Ok, you win, let's call the whole thing off

[Maven]

10. LOL!

[BeyondGeography]

14. I was looking for the resistance is futile thread...

[jcgoldie]

3. If they still support Trump over any of those candidates...

Then they aren't fucking "salt of the earth" "hard workers"... they are racists and sexist assholes.

[busterbrown]

8. I agree 100%

But I think they are figuring the scumbag out... He baited them with lies and now they are regurgitating the worms.

[Clash City Rocker]

97. In which case they'll vote against him

Even if the alternative isn’t another old white man.

[rownesheck]

43. Ding ding ding!

We have a winner!

My thoughts exactly.

[Raven123]

4. You echo the thoughts in several DU posts, and some MSM commentators

Perhaps I lack your insight, but I think it too soon to write off other candidates.

[zackymilly]

15. There's lots of time left for more gaffes and apologies. I don't think Joe is "the one". n/t

[emulatorloo]

18. He's not the only of ourcandidate who makes 'gaffes'. Not sure voters care about 'gaffes' this time

given that there is a monster in the White House.

Warren, Buttigieg, and Harris are definitely on my short list along w Biden and Beto. All great candidates.

[Sunlei]

63. sure was close in Texas for Beto. His campaign was awesome, if not for the disenfranchised

if not for the disenfranchised...here in Texas there were thousands disenfranchised, some I knew personally had their registration changed and couldn't vote. If not for disenfranchised Beto would have won Texas.

[redstateblues]

27. Time for more flip flopping on health care for your candidate

[zackymilly]

44. Looking for more fake promises from yours. Oh, now he says he's going to cut incarceration by 50%.

Wonder if that will be before or after he cures cancer?

[redstateblues]

140. Nice deflection. We still don't know what Harris's stance on the most important issue is.

Let’s see if she flips again the day after the next debate

[Demsrule86]

48. Give me a break...the 'gaffes' were bullshit to begin with. I personally think he handled the

busing question fine and it will blow up in Harris face...she is less electable in a general now...so those voters who may have been thinking about taking a chance probably won't. Biden is the one who can win. The other candidates have tacked so far left on a variety of issues that they are un-electable in a general in rust belt states. And we must win those states if we are to win a general. This is not the time for the pure progressive candidate...the country is center left at best and only a Perceived moderate can win. I would have thought the midterms would have been a wake up call...as moderates gave us the house. And with a candidate perceived as 'far left' we could very well lose the House as well as failing to take the presidency and the Senate. Imagine an all powerful Trump. It could happen if we choose the wrong nominee.

The stakes were very high in 16 and look at the wreckage Trump has created. It turns me cold with rage when I think of Stein, Turner and Sarandon Etc...the only thing more catastrophic would be to lose in 20...Ginsberg won't last another term...the GOP would finish packing the lower courts and have a 6-3 majority at the very least...they could end up with a 7-2 also. Thus the only issue I care about is beating Trump...the rest can be sorted out after he is gone...much will depend on if we take the Senate. Oh, we will use EO's Harris opines...yes I heard that. However, the Trump friendly courts will deep six any such attempt. Thus if we win the presidency without the Senate...we must try to win in the midterm...otherwise we play defense and will not get a court pick either. I have never seen things as bad as they are today.

[LonePirate]

5. I have a quibble with "caught in the middle of a lousy stinkin economy".

Our economy is not lousy or stinking. It’s been growing slowly but steadily for several years now.

The issue is that our economy is evolving and manufacturing workers - the so-called heart of the Rust Belt - are on the losing side of this economic evolution.

The question before us now is the same as it was back in 2016. Do we adopt a plan like Hillary’s worker retraining plan or do we go the route of the Republicans and lie about manufacturing jobs coming back to the region? Those voters clearly preferred the Republican lies in 2016 over the Democrats retraining plans. If they make the same choice in 2020, perhaps we should let evolution take its course and focus on emerging majorities in other states.

[Blue_true]

41. The problem.

Automation is killing those manufacturing jobs. Jobs are never coming back in the number that they once existed, not remotely. That is one reality that no one is tackling, other than Yang in an indirect and confusing way. If we retrain people, we are simply retraining them for jobs that likely won't exist in five years. Every one can't write software code, even if every one had the skills, that type of work usually require a very small number of people versus what a manufacturing floor call for.

One idea that Hillary had which was very smart and focused on the right issue was to tax the use of robots and use that money to retrain and develop new industries.

One thing that I keep hearing, especially from Bernie and his supporters is that we can build an equitable economy for the future. If that is done, something that has NEVER happened in the history of humankind or even before would have been accomplished.

But what we can do is reduce income inequality by having people that use robots to make more money share some of the gain with others in society. But even such a system is full of mine fields, like how much is shared, who the money goes to, do we look at population control and if so - how is who have babies decided.

[Demsrule86]

49. No if we utter the word re-training... we will lose...it is a dirty word around here.

Jobs must come back. The idea that we don't need to manufacture in this country is a deadly argument for our party and our country. We need to bring modern manufacturing and jobs to the midwest...Give them a reason to vote for us. You can't retrain for non-existing jobs. And I will add a country that makes nothing will not remain a powerhouse for long...look at China cash rich from manufacturing...we will go the way of England if we don't do something to retain manufacturing and attract new manufacturing...this will involve tariffs and government grants as well. The rust belt has signaled that they won't be taken for granted and expected to lose their livelihood's while remaining loyal Democrats.

[LonePirate]

69. Modern manufacturing is a non-human endeavor. Those jobs are not coming back.

We would be lying to them if we tell them the jobs can return. Are you suggesting we do that? I refuse to lie to them.

As for China, the wages paid to their manufacturing are a fraction of US wages. Companies will not pay prevailing wages for manufacturing workers in the US.

[Demsrule86]

76. That is untrue ; the jobs are being done elsewhere, and if you want to lose run on 'the jobs

aren't coming back' because we will lose in a landslide...making things is necessary for this party and this country...we didn't lose jobs to robots this year in Ohio but to Mexico...so your opinion is not correct. And the words you utter is why the rust belt abandoned the Democratic Party last year and will do so again if any nominee says them. We need a plan for jobs...only Biden has talked about this.

[LonePirate]

83. Yes, the jobs are done elsewhere - for a fraction of the wages paid in the US.

I am not sure why it is difficult to understand that $25+/hr manufacturing jobs are never going to return by the hundreds of thousands to the Rust Belt. Companies will use robots or will use much cheaper foreign labor. The Rust Belt needs to accept that truth. Otherwise, they can continue coddling Republicans who will lie to them while we look elsewhere for votes among people who want the truth. We do not need the Rust Belt or its ignorant and racist WWC voters.

[Demsrule86]

92. Yeah...sure and we can just cede the four or five presidential elections to the Repubs...

We should not force our companies to compete against such wages and we shoud penalize countries that have low wage workers using tarifs in a intelligent way...and also companies that move overseas...take the profit out of it. Your answer will lose us the election and other elections.

[LonePirate]

94. MI and PA are not staying red in 2020. AZ, GA and NC are all strong pick up possibilities. Maybe FL.

Your belief that future Dem presidential victories are dependent on the Rust Belt is sorely mistakenly.

[Demsrule86]

96. On what do you base this opinion? We have not won a presidential race in AZ in decades.

GA has not gone for us in decades either. North Carolina has not voted for us since 08 ....Florida voted against a sitting Senator in 18 and a Democratic governor to elect a racist piece of shit. As for MI and PA...Biden is shown beating Trump...the most recent polls do not show any of the other candidates beating Trump within the margin of error (Sanders) or at all (everyone else).

[brush]

70. Well people have eyes. The jobs aren't coming back as trump promised...

and the repugs are in charge. There will be repercussions on the admin in office don't you think?

[Demsrule86]

75. Absolutely, that is our best chance...Ohio is not happy with Trump, we lost a number of auto plants

and parts plants...it is a golden opportunity, but not if we run on the tired old bullshit meme of 're-training'.

[brush]

78. I see what you're saying. Hammer the repugs on the jobs not coming back...

as they promised.

[Demsrule86]

82. Exactly, but for the love of heaven do not offer to 'retrain' for jobs that don't exist or opine

the jobs are not coming back.

[Applegate]

100. So what is it you are offering these workers?

Jobs that aren't coming back?

No retraining?

Or fairy tales about a manufacturing renaissance?

[Demsrule86]

104. You have to create jobs in the mid west...green jobs...whatever and you have to use whatever means

necessary to support American jobs particularly autos so they don't leave the country...this can include tariffs if use wisely and a refusal to accept cars from countries that force us to manufacture there that won't accept our cars manufactured here...like Japan and Korea. Jobs are a big issue and no party that wants to win can throw up their hands and say 'tough shit the jobs are not coming back and we have no interest in helping create other good paying jobs in your region to fill the void...you are on your own...hey we can retrain your for shitty jobs that pay badly and probably don't exist...but please vote for us in 20". Why would they,whereis the carrot? It won't work when the Repugs will counter with..."why they haven't worked yet...but give it some time; we will bring jobs back to your states...vote for us".

[brooklynite]

6. Let's reframe your response...

Biden is the TYPE of candidate who can win the rust belt States. Whether Biden and his campaign team can do it is something I'm uncertain about.

[TexasTowelie]

7. Of the three that you mentioned,

I think that Warren has the best chance of picking up states in the Rust Belt because of her experience as a teacher. If she can explain issues while avoiding being characterized as a teacher, then she could flip states that Trump won.

If Harris is the nominee, then the general election will be about race and her lack of private sector experience. I think that Trump may view her as the easiest to defeat of the top 7 or 8 candidates.

If Buttigieg is the nominee, then Trump will play on homophobia and his age since he would be the youngest president ever.

I'll vote for any of them if they become the nominee, but out of the group it appears that Warren has the best shot of winning a general election.

[redstateblues]

30. If Buttigieg stays at or below 1% of the AAs in S.C.

It won’t matter how much $ he raises

[Demsrule86]

51. Warren will not win the rustbelt...she has come out for MFA...it will end her chances and all

the other leftist positions she has taken will be used against...she will be perceived as a northeasteast liberal /socialist. Geography matters in this election and why would you even take a chance on her? Biden is polliing very high against Trump in the rustbelt...makes no sense and if it Warren or I would add Harris gets the nomination, Trump gets four more years and we may lose the house as well.

[TexasTowelie]

120. I also doubt that she can win the Rust Belt.

That region of the country leans Democratic, but I don't consider the region to be a bastion of progressive policies. I'm willing to giver her credit for being knowledgeable and being able to explain her positions.

[Demsrule86]

130. It is not...and people's eyes glaze over with policy explanation...the KISS principle should be

employed in politics.

[Honeycombe8]

118. I totally disagree. Her support is among progressives.

Not moderates or independents....the two groups who decide the general election.

Buttigieg isn't known well enough. It's too soon for him. Which is a shame. He has the best shot, after Biden, of winning the rust belt. Moderates and independents would flock to him, as well.

Harris - I agree that her election would be about race. Not because she is mixed race, but because she has made it that way. She's on the record as being for forced busing. She can't win the GE, IMO, although she could win the Democratic nomination.


Just a note: WE DON'T BASE OUR DEMOCRATIC CAMPAIGNS ON WHAT TRUMP THINKS ABOUT IT, AND HOW HE WOULD ATTACK THE CANDIDATE. The Republican machine is the best at attacking Democrats...no matter who the candidate is.

Reminder: NIXON MADE A CASE ABOUT JFK'S YOUTH. WE KNOW HOW THAT TURNED OUT. When an old man acts like the other candidate is a whippersnapper, everyone knows it's because the attacker is an old geezer. People view youth as an advantage, up to a point.

[Demsrule86]

131. This is an excellent post.

[wasupaloopa]

9. Nobody knows for sure at this point what it will take to beat trump. The election is over

a year away. Trying to anoint Biden at this point is saying everyone running is enabling
trump.

Which is bull shit. All the candidates have ideas worth looking at. The debates showed that.

Go take your seat and let’s watch the show together.

[Demsrule86]

53. That is not true...it is very clear what we need to do to beat Trump take the rust-belt...it

will still be the same in a year...it is always the key to our general election victory...and this year, it is even more important.

[Maven]

11. IOW: To those who don't support Biden, just admit defeat already

Um, no thanks?

[busterbrown]

22. Hey.Who The Heck said that..

I'll support whoever is nominated.. My top 4 are very viable.

[Sunlei]

58. I think Biden & Warren would consider teaming up-they work well together.

Both of them also have decades long friendships with political advisers. A huge bonus for President & VP to have trusted advisers.

[question everything]

12. Or, putting it another way

All the "freebies": medical care, college tuition, redistribution of wealth, busing (really?) - find audience in large cities. These are the districts that Hillary won, that our nominee - whoever s/he is - will win.

But they do not mean much for rural areas, yes, the middle of the country that Trump won. And, whether we like it or not, they do control a large part of the Electoral College to make a difference.

Voters there believe in the "American Dream" - whatever it is now. Working hard and reaping the benefit. They certainly do not trust government program (except the ones that they do) and will be suspicious of the candidates that run their campaigns on them.

[Turin_C3PO]

13. The right messenger can sell progressive policies.

It’s kind of offensive to suggest people in cities don’t believe in working hard and reaping the benefits. The people in the middle of the country can be brought to the left as long as a candidate has a broad theme and connects with voters. I hope the Democratic platform includes some of Warren’s policies, regardless of who the nominee is.

[Demsrule86]

55. It is possible but not in 20. It will takes years to reverse the distrust of liberal policies...and

those policies do not address manufacturing ...they should...and not with retraining bullshit but a solid plan to create new manufacturing jobs and to retain the remaining manufacturing jobs.

[cwydro]

16. I like all three, but agree with you with the exception of Warren.

Warren’s “I have a plan for that” is the kind of thing that those kind of voters like.

I don’t think Warren threatens those voters in the same way Hillary did (though I never got that).

She’s a smart, capable woman; they can see that.

[busterbrown]

23. Hillary was vilified to the utmost..

It is absolutely horrifying in the manner in which Repubs. crucified her..

Fuck them forever.

[cwydro]

25. Completely agree.

Really, it was just bizarre.

[Funtatlaguy]

38. She had it exactly. They were, and still are, deplorable.

[Demsrule86]

56. I live in Ohio, they won't vote for Warren...I used to live in PA and they won't voter for her

Last edited Wed Jul 10, 2019, 11:58 PM - Edit history (2)

there either...she wants to abolish private insurance.... There is no coming back from that. It was in fact posted here...and said at the debate. The law would require everyone to have Medicare for all...Sen. Sanders plan; Warren said at the debates she supports it and has signed on to it. Let's call a spade a spade...she wants to abolish the ACA and start fresh with Medicare for all...Sen.Sander's plan prohibits 'duplicate coverage'...so there would be no legal private insurance so it would be 'against the law...and I didn't mention before but how many jobs would be lost? I hope that clarifies my position...and it is not a right wing talking point...but I am sure they will use MFA in the general against us should our nominee support it. I do not support MFA...but would vote for any nominee in the general. Trump must go.

[shanny]

101. that's a right wing talking point and should not be repeated here

[Demsrule86]

132. No it is not a right wing talking point...it is true.

[ehrnst]

136. I think that any Democratic POTUS will come to the conclusion that

Sanders' MFA will not be as inexpensive or disruptive of health care as he claims, nor could it be implemented in the 8 year window that he gives.

The CBO analysis - if it even gets that far - will likely put the nail in the coffin.

Once you are in the cockpit, everything is much different than you imagined when you were sitting in the cabin.

It's important to remember that Obama, even into 2008, had NO health care reform plan whatsoever. Yet he and Pelosi got the most comprehensive health care reform in decades into being, and got us further along the road to universal health care than we have ever been.

[Demsrule86]

138. That is nonsense...Obama had a plan which had been done in Massachusetts...we will never

start from scratch thus, time to support the ACA and add a public option. It would cause a huge disruption with many paying more than they do now with less coverage I fear...and would end as Clintoncare ended ...with nothing but as huge defeat for our party. The ACA caused disruption and cost us the house in fact. I shudder to think what MFA could do.

[ehrnst]

139. No, it's not nonsense.

When the Kaiser Family Foundation held a candidates' forum on their health care plans, candidate Obama declined the invitation because he didn't have one prepared yet. As of December 2007 - these were the only candidates that had a health care plan in place:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080201025339/http://presidentialforums.health08.org/

In fact, he was so discouraged by GOP obstruction, that he wasn't going to attempt it. Pelosi assured him she could get it through the House, and he agreed. She delivered.

The ACA caused disruption and cost us the house in fact.

There is usually a turnover in the House in the midterm after a single party wins the House, Senate and WH. If you're going to damn the ACA with us losing the house in 2010, then you need to give it credit for winning back the house in 2018. Democrats ran on preserving the ACA...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/obamacare-once-a-gop-target-is-now-a-midterm-rallying-cry-for-democrats/2018/07/15/829b1c3e-86d5-11e8-9e80-403a221946a7_story.html

So there's that.

[Demsrule86]

141. There already was a working model...and it was a much smaller effort to insure those who have

no access and every person in this country...Obama used a plan already in use in Mass...and even so it took time and was difficult. MFA will not happen and is not popular if private insurance goes away...we won't have a senate majority sufficient to pass it either...And we should not give SCOTUS a reason to take down the ACA by attacking it...and insisting on a plan that will never become law...MFA. We can achieve universal coverage by building on the ACA-starting with a pubic option if we get the Senate.

[ehrnst]

143. I'm just saying that the candidate who had the last full health reform plan among candidates

was able to get it implemented.

I absolutely think that the ACA should be protected. We should not be attacking it, but restoring and expanding it.

[Demsrule86]

146. I am absolutely with you on this.

[blm]

17. No one explains economy in terms of kitchen table issues better than Warren

Perhaps you think midwestern working class won’t respond to Warren’s ability to have common sense conversations about economic issues, but, I think they will.

Yeah....I disagree with your view of working class rust belt voters.

[cwydro]

26. Yes, I think she can appeal to them too.

Hard-working, common sense, no-nonsense. These are qualities valued everywhere, and I think rust belt voters do too.

[at140]

34. Couldn't have said it better myself! nt

[KayF]

19. back to voting straight Dem

you mean back to voting straight white male Dem.

[Demsrule86]

84. I always vote straight Dem...but if that is what it takes to beat Trump...sex and race mean

little to me if a candidate can't beat Trump. I would vote for anyone in a general.

[BigOleDummy]

20. I found the original post...

…. mildly insulting to be entirely honest. A definite "tone" of "now now kiddies let's be reasonable here". While I like Mr. Biden well enough I do NOT think he's the anointed one. You say he's "salt of the earth" and can connect with the rust belters. Well, Ms. Warren seems to be doing ok in that department too. She is from a middle class upbringing and if anyone can relate to the "people" its her. She has actual plans and a clear grasp of what her vision is. Not only that but she can explain her points and opinions in clear understandable language.

I fear Mr. Biden would be a gift of sorts to the GangOfPutins to be honest. Who exactly do the repuglicans hate more than anyone else in the United States? Barack Obama. Who is the candidate most closely aligned in the public mind with Mr. Obama? For better or worse THAT will be what all they campaign on and the repuglican base will eat it up wholesale and be eager to hit the polls.

My opinion of course, as you have yours

[busterbrown]

24. Well I'll add another take if you don't mind..

Nanny State, Reparations, Welfare State, University and Colleges for free...Can't keep your Doctor.. Socialism, Socialist..."Who's gonna pay for all this" and most importantly " They'll take away their guns" Cruz just mentioned that 2 days a go.

This the bullshit we're gonna hear from Repub. National Committee ..I think they'll go after Warren and label her the wannabe Socialist President.

Remember this well.. Repukes have no sense of decency..

But for me and if Warren wins? I would fly to the 7th Heaven..

Too many in our population have little understanding of whats really essential to our way of living.

[Funtatlaguy]

39. Any nominee of ours will be "crucified" by them.

Trumps base isn’t enuf for him to win.
He only wins by making the Dem seem much worse than him.
They will spend tons of money and spin many half truths and full lies along with Russian help to do so.

[redstateblues]

33. The same Obama that won with huge margins?

I don’t see that as a negative.

[BigOleDummy]

95. Yes indeed that Obama

8 years ago Mr. Obama won a astounding victory. 8 years ago. In an election that was relatively free from outside influence. In the intervening 8 years (I cannot stress that time frame enough), trump and his party of traitors have had 8 more years of Rush and fox and Alex to drill into the cultists and move them even farther to the right. We've seen state sponsored interference from at least one hostile power since that election. I may be a BigOleDummy but I cannot see Mr. Putin leaving this upcoming election alone. I would go so far as to say that Mr. Kim will get involved too. With the republicans blocking all attempts to ensure free elections explain to me how this upcoming election will be even remotely like the campaign from 8 years ago?

Mr. Biden is a nice enough man, as I mentioned in my original reply but in many ways in THIS election "nice guy" is not enough. We need a FIGHTER and sadly I just do not believe that Mr. Biden is that. Ms. Warren and Ms. Harris to the contrary ARE fighters and can be counted on counter the narratives that Mr. Putin, Mr. Kim and Mr. McConnell will trot out for the masses.

[thesquanderer]

21. Polls say others can win these states as well.

Michigan (June): Biden and Sanders both lead Trump by 12. Buttigieg by 6, Warren by 4, Harris by 3.

Pennsylvania (May): Biden by 11, Sanders by 7, Warren by 3, Buttigieg by 1, Harris even.

Wisconsin (March): Biden by 8, Sanders and Warren by 4, Harris even (Buttigieg not polled)

These numbers are all before the debates. Everyone but Biden and Sanders still lag in name recognition, so they have good potential to come up from these numbers.

Poll references below.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2019/06/05/biden-sanders-democrats-lead-trump-michigan-poll/1330277001/

https://poll.qu.edu/pennsylvania/release-detail?ReleaseID=2620

https://emersonpolling.reportablenews.com/pr/wisconsin-2020-bernie-sanders-leads-democratic-field-trump-competitive-in-general-election

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2629

[Demsrule86]

57. You site old polls the race has tightened and only Biden and Sanders in one poll was

beating Trump...these polls were posted yesterday here.

[thesquanderer]

126. I think you missed my point

OP says rust belt states are the key, and that only Biden can win them. My response was that there are polls that show other candidates can win them. Yes, the polls are older, but they are the newest polls available for the states we're talking about. The newer polls you're talking about reflect polls of national popular vote. The OP's perspective is that the polls of key states are more important than national polling, and that is the context of my response. Who wins in a national popular vote is a different question.

[Demsrule86]

127. Those polls were taken before the the race tightened and no the polls I refer to are state polls..

for the most part. Biden can win the rust belt...I do not believe any of the others can...those in the top five ...I expect Beto would have a shot and Ryan.

[thesquanderer]

135. re:"and no the {posted Tuesday} polls I refer to are state polls"

I could not find them. Do you have a link? Whether to the ones from Tuesday or even just any Michigan, Wisconsin, or Pennsylvania head-to-head (Trump-vs.-Dem) polls that are newer than the ones I referenced?

[Demsrule86]

142. I saw them on this site...recently. I will see if I can find them...busy today.

[shanny]

28. I think you are exactly wrong if you believe

an economic program/message/plan won't fly in the rust belt.

At least some of those voters were willing to take a flyer on rump, for Dawg's sake...a mistake I doubt they will make again.

[Demsrule86]

59. It wasn't an economic message that lost us the rust belt and it won't give it back to us either.

Presidents never win on policy but on some simple thing that gets voters exceited...Fired up and ready to go...or make America great...I would say healthcare is our issue but not MFA which will crush us...the ACA with a public option ...restore affordable healthcare...reign in the pharmacies...Trump is in court trying to kill healthcare thus it is our best issue and the only one who has not come out for MFA which is insane (to destroy a system already in place) is Biden.

[shanny]

105. oh sure. I totally believe that:

the Rust Belt doesn't care about economic issues.

[Demsrule86]

114. The sort of economics preached by Warren has not helped the rust belt in the past... and most will

consider it socialism. Look it is a matter of trust as well. They won't believe her as she has no ties to that region.

[shanny]

121. the sort of economic justice "preached" by Warren was born in the rust belt

and the idea that the economically disenfranchised will trust Joe "no fundamental change" Biden is rooted in ignorance. The rust belt is shrieking for change--that's why they went for rump in the first place. They bought a pig in a poke; I doubt they will make that mistake again.

[Demsrule86]

122. You don't understand the mid west...they will not respond to what they perceive as socialist polices

It is all about manufacturing and good paying jobs...when Biden does his speech about 'work is more than a job, it gives you dignity etc...that is the message they respond to...her laundry list of basically unachievable policy will not move them.

[shanny]

123. we'll see won't we?

[Demsrule86]

124. I hope not...we need to win. I still predict Biden will be the nominee.

[shanny]

125. btw, I was just going to add to my previous post

perhaps you should check out who won the D primaries in the rust belt in 2016...just for your edification of course

[Demsrule86]

128. I am aware that Sanders won Michigan and Wisconsin in 16...he got union support. And that was

a weakness for Pres.Obama which is one of the reasons, he picked Biden as VP...Biden won the mid west for Obama. I was in Cleveland and Youngstown for his rallies and speeches...he did a great job. Now I don't think Sanders would have pulled out a win in the end in a general in 16. Trump was promising too much for that region. However, If Biden was not the nominee, I would want it to be Sanders based on his 16 performance in rust belt primaries. He and Beto would have a better chance than any of the others...not including Biden.

[shanny]

133. you think Bernie the socialist

would do well in states that you say won't go for socialist policies?

[Demsrule86]

134. Better than Warren or Harris...he connects with working folks...union folks...the others don't...

so yeah...we might have slight chance with Sanders...but we have none with the others...I would vote for a ham sandwich in the general...but this is a tough election and will come down to rust belt states which Biden can win pretty easily.

[Autumn]

29. Those states were called the Blue Wall until the 2016 election.

MI, PA and WI had all voted Dem for President in the 6 previous elections prior to 2016. Ask yourself why and you will realize Trump went there and lied his ass off and convinced them he cared. Any of our candidates will do well in those rust belt states in 2020.

[33taw]

31. Anyone of them can win the rust belt.

Just so they give some attention to rural areas.

[Demsrule86]

60. No they can't...You are kidding yourself and the most recent polls show only Biden beating

Trump within the margin of error.

[33taw]

72. I am talking about Biden as well.

Clinton did not campaign in Wi. Trump knew he would lose Milwaukee and Madison. So, he focused on gleaning votes from Green Bay, Wausau, Appleton and many rural communities. It was enough to push him over the top. And, vote monitoring in those areas sucks. It helped Ron Johnson as well. Without a voter machine audit process, anyone can lose.

I agree Biden has the best shot, but he is not the only one. We need systems that can be audited or paper ballots. I use a paper ballot.

[Demsrule86]

74. It won't matter...the positions taken by our candidate except Biden on Immigrant reform

MFA, reparations etc... doom them in a general in the rustbelt, and geographically speaking both Warren and Harris being from the East Coast and the West Coast are geographically wrong in the three states we need. MI, WI and PA.

[33taw]

86. I am from rural WI. Only Amy Klobuchar and Beto have made brief visits to the area.

Klobuchar visited Eau Claire and Beto Green Bay. Trump works this area every three months. He”s destroying the small farms. 617 small farms have folded. Tariffs are killing the ginseng farms in Wausau. We have limited access to healthcare providers. Large farms utilize immigrants and migrant workers and know their value. If one of the 22 candidates showed up every 2 months to Green Bay, Appleton, Wausau, Stevens Point, or Eau Claire we would have a chance.

We have to hand pain signs for dem candidates in the area. They compete with billboards and hundreds of professionally made signs.

Biden is no lock without a presence in the area.

[Demsrule86]

90. I don't disagree...but I believe he is the only viable candidate with a chance. Klbobuchar and Beto

will not win the nomination. There is not recent polling ...but Biden was ahead of Trump or tied in one in June polls...

[33taw]

103. Agree about Beto and Klobuchar as well as many others.

Biden, Bernie, and Buttigieg have the best chance here.

[Demsrule86]

106. I agree with that. I would rather see Bernie run than either Harris or Warren which may surprise

some because he has a chance. I don't think buttigieg has a chance outside of Wisconsin...they elected a Gay Senator (good on them). But I fear it will hurt him in PA...lots of conservative Catholics when I lived there. And I don't see him picking up support from the AA community. I also think Beto would have a chance. I think it is unlikely that Buttigieg and Beto will get the nominee based on current numbers...I still wouldnt discount Bernie. But his chances have slipped a bit. And I do think MFA will hurt him.

[33taw]

109. I also believe Biden has the best shot overall

I just hope the infighting stops we need to focus on the goal.

[Demsrule86]

110. I agree with that...I will vote for anyone in the general.

[33taw]

113. Totally agree. We could nominate Elmer Fudd and I would vote for him.

[Demsrule86]

116. me too.

[33taw]

112. I will say Senator Baldwin visits northern Wi often.

She is coming to one of our picnics in a small red county. She will never take this county, but she will get more votes than others who ignore this area.

[rzemanfl]

102. I can't decide whether I need to wash socks.

Decisions, decisions.

[ecstatic]

32. Salt of the earth. I'm not familiar with that phrase.

Can you elaborate?

[Celerity]

35. it comes from the xian bible, usually means a good person

it is in the Sermon on the Mount

same verses talk about the shining city on the hill

Chaucer's Summoner's Tale in the 1300's popularised it

it is where 'worth his/her salt' came from too

[ecstatic]

52. Thanks!

Not sure this description fits people who voted for trump, but OK. lol.

[Celerity]

115. The OP called Biden salt of the earth nt

[LakeArenal]

37. Here's another

Basic, fundamental goodness; the phrase can be used to describe any simple, good person: “I like Mary: she's reliable, trustworthy, and straightforward; she's the salt of the Earth.” In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus tells his followers, who are mainly fishermen and other simple people, “Ye are the salt of the Earth.”
Dictionary.com › browse › salt-of-t...

[busterbrown]

42. Sure.. The manual laborer..Union oriented..

Rolling Sones.. Dedicated a song to the group.

Good family Man.. Hard manual laborer . Not paid enough.. Does not complain.Just does his job and takes care of the kids.

https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search;_ylt=AwrWpykPfyVdWTgAniUPxQt.;_ylu=X3oDMTByNWU4cGh1BGNvbG8DZ3ExBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw--?p=Rolling+stones+Salt+of+the+earth&fr=yhs-Lkry-SF01&hspart=Lkry&hsimp=yhs-SF01

[ecstatic]

50. But if they're good people,

why would they choose trump just because his opponent is a woman or gay?

[mahina]

36. I'm only going to vote for the person I think will do the best job.

Or now that we have ranked choice, the persons in order of their ability.

Warren
Harris
Biden
Booker
Sanders
Buttigieg

And I’ll be fine with any of the above.

[Demsrule86]

47. It is clear from polls that a number of Obama supporters voted for Trump. Unless we win them back

we will lose. We have to play our best hand. And polls clearly indicate Biden is our best shot...I don't think some realize the desperate situation our party is in. We don't have a path to win a solid majority in the Senate or any majority without winning states, we have not won in a decade or more. Without the blue wall, we have no path to the presidency in 20 or beyond...And if Trump wins in 20, kiss any chance of a progressive agenda goodbye. It is over.

[Demsrule86]

64. Are you kidding...impeachment is very unpopular in the rust belt and would be used to

re-elect Trump and maybe a Republican house as well. Nancy is exactly right.

[Demsrule86]

73. If we don't win back the rustbelt we will lose 20,24...etc

We have no other path... below is a map showing us winning WI, MI and PA. The next map shows us losing those three states...now consider, It is possible Biden can take Ohio and/or Florida...maybe even Texas could be as landslide but no matter what, we win if we take those three states. Biden is ahead in all of them. The polls posted yesterday show none of the other candidates ahead in those state within the margin of error.

[qazplm135]

77. Your unnecessary fear of Trump

leads you to make poor conclusions like "only Joe Biden can win these three states."

It's not born of any logical reasoning. It's born of fear. The fear that only a white male populist can win, ours or theirs.

[Demsrule86]

81. Did you even look at the maps I posted...you are fucking right I am afraid of Trump winning...

and, all Democrats and decent people should be. Trump could win in 20 ...and any who doubt that have not looked at the electoral college map or the Senatorial map...which shows us to be in a desperate situation. We could even lose the house if we run Warren or Harris...

[Demsrule86]

89. Again...no reason why you disagree...not evidence in polling or maps to show how we win without

the rustbelt or what argument would sway them to Warren's side should she be the nominee...so whatever. Have a nice day.

[Demsrule86]

99. Bye...I really wanted to see how folks think Warren and or Harris win...but I have not seen

a really good argument on this. My day is fine. But thanks for the good wishes.

[qazplm135]

87. See that's the difference

I can logically recognize that Trump COULD win again, and then assess from there.

I don't let fear blow up my logical thought patterns to make arguments based on nothing but that fear.

You have zero logical support for your last sentence. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Just your own personal fear.

[Demsrule86]

88. I presented two maps that show clearly how desperate our situation is.

Make your own maps at 271 to win...prove me wrong...show me how we win without the rustbelt. It is all about the the math, we don't have enough support to win the electoral college without the rust belt...as for logic...you have offered no rational for your opinion nor backed it up...I did offer electoral college maps which you ignored... as evidence...all you did is attack me not my argument...I will offer this...it is because you can't attack my eminently rational argument.

[qazplm135]

107. lol

same map...just slot in whomever our candidate is and they win the same states.

There, done.

You don't offer "the maps" as evidence...you created "the maps" from the argument that only Biden can win PA, MI and WI.

So stop citing "the maps" for anything. I can create "the maps" that say we win all 50 states if I want to.

[Demsrule86]

111. So you disagree with current polling and believe Harris and/or Warren could win MI,WI and PA...

I disagree with that...Trump is going to be tough to beat.

[Demsrule86]

45. I agree...none of them will win PA...and without PA, we are sunk...also Biden has the chance to

have coattails in the Senate...the others are fine people, but they don't.

[SidDithers]

46. Translation - rust belt voters are racist, sexist, homophobes...

so don't run a woman, especially a black woman, or the gay guy? Only the straight, white guy can win?

That's what I'm reading from your post.

Sid

[Demsrule86]

62. I would say don't run any woman...and it pains me to say this. I wouldn't even put a woman on

Last edited Wed Jul 10, 2019, 11:39 AM - Edit history (2)

the ticket as VP...this election is too important and polls show a reluctance of voters to elect a woman president. Given Biden's age, I would not do it... I would add that I will vote for any person in a general...period. I was taken aback by recent polling which showed that even some Democrats had reservations about a woman president...and Trump is so bad...I wish to take no risks in 20. Believe me it doesn't make me happy to see how sexist this country even in 2019.

"A record number of women are running to be the next president of the United States, but Americans still don’t seem to think the country is ready for them, according to a new Daily Beast and Ipsos poll.

Only 33 percent of voters surveyed believed their neighbors would be comfortable with a woman in the Oval Office, despite 74 percent saying they themselves would be comfortable with a woman president. The poll, which was conducted in early June, also showed 20 percent of Democratic and independent men also agreed with the sentiment that women were “less effective in politics than men.”
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/17/18681964/poll-sexism-electability-2020-warren-trump-harris"

And this is an interesting read in the Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/05/06/how-gender-bias-is-shaping-democratic-primary/?utm_term=.3eb493b18f37

[qazplm135]

79. and yet I get warned for calling insipid takes

like this one insipid but you continue on saying we can't even put a woman as VP because you think no one will vote for a woman despite Clinton getting 3 million more votes than Trump and the second most votes ever.

Again, no logical thought behind this...pure, unadulterated fear.

[Demsrule86]

93. I said it based on polls..I want a woman president and backed Hillary in 16...I just don't think we

do it this year. I am a woman and would like to see a woman president before I die...but getting rid of Trump is more important this year.

[Sunlei]

54. I support them all. I think a couple Ds currently running will group up after primary

Trump land disenfranchised(and just turned 18) about 30,000 rustbelt D voters will be able to vote and Ds will win.

I'm with the Obama's, no circular firing squad for me!

[gtar100]

66. Are there no policy reasons to vote for Joe?

Why are the arguments for Biden mostly about how people "perceive" his personality and not his ideas about running the country. He's not very progressive with his ideas which is why I prefer Warren...or Buttigieg, or Harris, or Sanders, or Booker, or O'Rourke. But hey, Joe's a swell guy and "salt of the earth" may as well be tacked on as another winning character trait.

[Demsrule86]

129. He has good policies and is a progressive who can win moderates...we talk about electability

because this year it trumps policy...the orange menace must go...or the progressive movement is finished.

[samnsara]

67. i agree

[brush]

68. Not so fast. Michigan, especially in the Detroit area, had many irregularities.

Tens of thousands of ballots in Detroit, an AA majority city, had no marks in the box for president while the down ballot was filled out. That swung Michigan to trump. I'm pretty sure that tampering won't be allowed to happen again.

And trump is not as popular as many keep repeating. There are many stories of disgusted trump voters who have realized he's not bringing back jobs as he promised. He's effecting industries and farmers negatively with his tariffs, he's caging kids at the border and it's become known that he's just an egomaniacal, misogynist, blow hard. Many white women who voted for him in 2016 rejected him in the 2018 blue wave.

He's not bullet proof.

[Amimnoch]

71. REALLY hard to say at this point.

Most of the polls are still the national level Biden vs Trump.. Warren vs Trump.. etc..

Given that there is now so much evidence that we can win the popular vote by such a large margin and still lose the electoral college, and with it the Presidency.. I'm not so hot on those polls.

Really wanting to see more Wisconsin/Pennsylvania/Ohio/Michigan/Florida specific polls pitting our candidates vs Trump. It's all about that 270 map.. and only a few players are really going to make the difference... again.

For example in Wisconsin, there's only been 1 Emmerson poll back in March pitting Trump against the candidates individually.. I'd bet that a more recent one would change those numbers quite a bit since a fair bit has changed since March:
https://emersonpolling.reportablenews.com/pr/wisconsin-2020-bernie-sanders-leads-democratic-field-trump-competitive-in-general-election

Pennsylvania has had 3 polls, but the most recent was a Quinnipiac in early/mid May.

Last (and only) one for Ohio was a PPP from last November.

3 so far from Florida, and more recent than the rest at last month. It may come down to Florida again, and that state in particular of the swings is not looking strong at all.

[Lefta Dissenter]

80. Is it ok if people get to vote first?

Or perhaps even watch another debate or two?

[bloom]

91. "Joe Biden, Closet Republican He's the liberal Bob Dole, the looser Mitt Romney, the supposedly safe

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/09/opinion/joe-biden-bush.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

Joe Biden, Closet Republican
He’s the liberal Bob Dole, the looser Mitt Romney, the supposedly safe bet who’s owed a shot.

..."But Biden isn’t exactly campaigning on his three and a half decades in the Senate, not when you consider all the chapters — his fury over busing, his treatment of Anita Hill, the crime bill, the invasion of Iraq — that he wishes voters wouldn’t dwell on.

No, Biden is campaigning on his eight years as vice president. He’s also campaigning on the nostalgia of his surname, the familiarity of his presence and the comfort of his aura. And that’s not just a tactic from Bush’s playbook. It’s a quintessentially Republican move.

The last two Democrats to win the presidency, Clinton and Obama, didn’t take a tack anything like Biden’s. Clinton was the man from Hope, Ark., who was determined to give liberalism a modern makeover and set the Democratic Party on a more profitable course. Obama was hope and change — not to mention the audacity of hope — and those nouns in aggregate augured a fresh start...."
_______________

I want someone with plans. Someone who plans to take on big money. Warren is the one to do it.

[dlk]

108. It's Still Very Early in the Primary Process

I’m not so sure I would be so quick to write off these other candidates. They have a lot to offer.

[loyalsister]

117. What would be the cost

Prior to Obama there was a centuries long implied agreement across party lines that the presidency was reserved for white men.
We naively believed that the are we ready for?" question was resolved with the 2008 when both Obama and Hillary competed so vigorously. When Obama was elected the idea of "post racial" politics was fully refuted with the republican response. We discovered how deep and pervasive white male supremacist ideology is during his presidency. The response to Trump was not new. It just came out of the shadows.
To reject all of the non-white and women candidates as consolation to white the male supremacist sentiment would be a compromise I'm not sure I want to see our party make.
If a white man happens to win with a successful campaign I will certainly vote for him. I just don't see returning to agreement that a white man is the only viable or realistic choice as a driver of candidate selection as anything but a huge step backwards.

[mvd]

119. I think Warren and Harris can do it

Warren actually has been connecting very well on economic matters. They are big in the rust belt. She would be good at explaining how Trump has sold so many out. She might want to pick a VP from there to get a further boost.

Harris I am less sure of, but I do like her, and with the right VP she can get the rust belt.

[mvd]

144. Wanted to add..

that Buttigieg has won in the Midwest and is from there. So can’t count him out either.

[StarfishSaver]

137. Why single out these three people?

They have more chance of winning those states than the straight white men in the race you didn't mention.

[demmiblue]

145. I think Warren would do particularly well in Michigan.

Women did really well in Michigan in 2018 (Governorship, AG, Supreme Court, etc.).

Governor Whitmer focused on kitchen table issues; Warren shares that same type of focus.

Plus, Michigan went for Sanders in the 2016 primaries.

* This is not to say that other candidates wouldn't do well.

Election was slam dunk for women in Michigan

Michigan voters overwhelmingly chose women at the ballot box Tuesday, electing women for the first time in state history to all three of the top offices — governor, secretary of state and attorney general.

Debbie Stabenow held onto her U.S. Senate seat and three new female Democratic representatives — Haley Stevens, Elissa Slotkin and Rashida Tlaib — will walk the halls of Congress alongside Debbie Dingell and Brenda Lawrence, both of whom won re-election.

"It’s a big deal," said Shannon Garrett, co-founder of VoteRunLead, a nonprofit organization that trains women to run for office.

"What this tells us is that the Michigan voting public is trusting women’s leadership. In the areas where they had an actual choice, voters were choosing women. There is a shift happening in how we trust women to lead."

https://www.freep.com/story/news/2018/11/07/women-voters-2018-midterm-election/1894384002/

It's like a lot of people here (mostly men) totally forgot about how big 2018 was for women candidates.

Also, Obama ran on change.