I'm starting to think Biden v. Warren will be really, really close

[Alhena]

I expect Warren to start off with wins in Iowa and New Hampshire, then Biden should win South Carolina big and get some momentum back. After that, it looks like both of them will trade victories, and I wouldn't be at all shocked to see this actually be resolved at the convention.

Thankfully, I think they are both pretty strong candidates, and neither of them seems inclined to make any nasty attacks against the other. So hopefully we can come together as a party behind whichever one of them wins (don't really see anyone else doing so).

[SKKY]

1. I think the first "big break" in this primary will be when someone names their...

..running mate. It would be early, way early, but it would also be a chance to "generate" some momentum and open things up.

[Fiendish Thingy]

5. Has a running mate ever been named before the convention?

not in my lifetime (62 years) IIRC.

[SKKY]

15. Not that I could find, but then again, these are different times...

...and I could see a candidate floating that out there.

[boomer_wv]

22. yup.

Ted Cruz named Carly Fiorina as his running mate during the 2016 primary.

Didn't work out that great.

Obviously that wasn't a Democratic primary.

[blm]

27. Heheh ... Biden initially planned a 2016 run, and had a VP chosen ...

Elizabeth Warren

[comradebillyboy]

6. That would be a sign of desperation and a signal to support the other

contender. Only candidates in trouble do an early VP pick. It's a terrible signal to send.

[DrFunkenstein]

19. Biden Already Picked a Woman And/Or Person of Color

But he's probably open to picking and/or a younger person of different sexual orientation, too.

[DownriverDem]

7. When are

folks going to view this as who can take it to trump and win the Electoral College? I just don't understand folks not focusing on who can truly win.

[Green Line]

9. I don't understand it either

Warren won't win the EC, the only issue in this election is beating Trump.

[BlueWI]

12. Two reasons.

1. We don't know who really can win the GE.

2. It's a primary, and our political leanings are not identical.

Are you against primaries? I think it's a perfect forum for deciding on legislative priorities, getting the base excited, and vetting candidates for future races and cabinet positions. It has allowed me to get to know strong Democratic leaders in other states. What's the rush? It'll be over by the convention at the latest.

[NurseJackie]

16. Oh good grief!

Are you against primaries?

Oh good grief! How does anyone arrive at that conclusion?

What's the rush?

The sooner everyone can get behind the obvious winner, the more unified and better-off we'll be as a party.

It'll be over by the convention at the latest.

Not necessarily. It's highly likely we'll know who our party's nominee is BEFORE the convention. We simply don't have the luxury of allowing vanity campaigns for anyone who's already been mathematically eliminated. There's even talk now about how one particular candidate is hoping that he (or she?) can force a "brokered convention".

Yeah... like THAT is the pathway to unity, eh? Surely there wouldn't be any resentment and distrust after something like that, right?

[Gothmog]

26. Does Warren Have Room to Grow?

If the NYT's expert is correct, then Warren may be near her ceiling https://politicalwire.com/2019/10/02/does-warren-have-room-to-grow/

Nate Cohn: “Elizabeth Warren is gaining. She has breached 20 percent of the vote in recent national surveys and might hold a narrow lead in Iowa and New Hampshire. The prediction markets now consider her a clear favorite to win the nomination. It can be hard to see how her Democratic rivals will attack or stop her.”

“But the challenge facing Ms. Warren, if past primaries are any indication, isn’t those rivals. It is whether she will hit a wall: the rank and file of the Democratic primary electorate.”

[blm]

28. Warren will be ruthless against Trump. Working class voters in midwest will

Vote for her with their hearts and heads.

[customerserviceguy]

2. Super Tuesday

isn't that long after SC, and there are a number of southern states selecting delegates that day. But, it has the potential to be a battle to the finish, such as we saw between Obama and Clinton in 2008.

And don't be fooled by the way they've treated each other so far, of the three debates, they only went face-to-face just once, and both of them knew that they'd survive to meet again another day. Early debates are about winnowing the field, not about making a big splash against an opponent in the top tier with you.

[marlakay]

8. CA is also now on that day

So things will look different.

[Blue_true]

14. I have not seen either of those two candidates attack an opponent.

I believe if it comes down to the two of them, they will highlight their policy proposals and stay away from trying to make the other look like something that person is not.

[customerserviceguy]

20. Maybe Warren won't

but it would not surprise me if Joe Biden decided that the best defense is a good offense, as Vince Lombardi used to say.

The last time the two of them were in a debate, Biden was still the front runner. We'll see if tactics change as the dynamic has changed.

[Butterflylady]

3. It will be

A Biden/ Warren ticket.

[Alhena]

11. Interesting- I wonder if Biden would agree not to run in 2024 so Warren

could be the strong favorite then. I'm a Biden supporter, but even I have my doubts whether he has more than one term in him. A one-term unity ticket to defeat Trump would be very strong, in my view. It would help assuage doubts about Biden's age, while providing a diverse ticket that gives those wanting a female president to have something (2024) to look forward to.

[Hortensis]

17. No. It would let down the voters who wanted him for president.

That would not be acceptable to many. It would also promise to trash his incumbent advantage.

And for what? Just in case in future he might develop health problems? Anyone dumb enough to display such bad judgement, lack of confidence in his own vigor, and political weakness at this point would never be nominated. The time to start considering that decision would be the same as for any president in either term: if his health started to fail. That's what VPs are for.

[peggysue2]

18. No, it would make Biden a lame duck president from the start

Whatever might go on behind the scenes is something else but announcing a plan like this publicly would be suicidal for the entire Democratic effort. Unity means just that--unifying behind a single nominee, all torpedoes aimed at Trump.

My only concern is kicking Trump and his fascist friends to the curb. We win in 2020 first, start righting the ship, and then we worry about 2024.

That being said, I think if Joe Biden wins the nomination he'll most likely choose a dynamic, female running mate. Whoever it is, Biden has already indicated the candidate would be someone who is 'on the same page' with his own world view. I don't see Elizabeth Warren filling that bill.

But who knows. We could be surprised!

[sarah92]

24. if that happens, there will be conflicting policies

.. about big money, big tech, lobbies .. list goes on unfortunately.

[Fiendish Thingy]

4. if neither has an outright majority heading into the convention, the superdeleagates get to vote

unless some backroom deal is arranged before the first ballot, and neither Warren or Biden has the majority needed to win the nomination outright (assuming the other candidates don't commit their delegates to put one of them over the top), then the superdelegates get to vote, and we all know these party insiders would choose Biden...

[Towlie]

10. I like Kamala Harris but I guess she's out, so I'm switching to Elizabeth Warren.

We need someone who doesn't resemble Trump, even superficially, in order to drive home to the world that we've rejected what the USA was becoming.

[sarah92]

23. absolutely well said

[Blue_true]

13. I believe that after primaries are over and well before the convention,

if either one sees the chance of winning is remote, that person will concede like Hillary did in 2008 and then work to unite the groups of backers.

[Gothmog]

21. Without significant African American support, one cannot get the Democratic nomination

[Gothmog]

25. Why Black Voters Prefer Establishment Candidates Over Liberal Alternatives

I personally believe that Iowa and New Hampshire are essentially meaningless. These states are 90+% white and do not represent the demographics of the party. The primary process does not really start until South Carolina where the voting population reflects the demographics of the party as a whole.

I found this article from 538 to be very informative https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-do-black-democrats-usually-prefer-establishment-candidates/

So here are a few explanations for why black voters have tended to side with the establishment wing of the Democratic Party. I have tried to order these explanations from strongest to weakest (in my view, at least):

1. Establishment candidates typically have existing ties to the black community
This will sound tautological, but an establishment candidate is … well … established. A candidate who is part of the establishment wing of the Democratic Party likely has fairly strong ties to major constituencies in the party, such as labor unions, women’s rights groups and, of course, black leaders and voters. So when black voters backed Gov. Andrew Cuomo over Cynthia Nixon in New York’s Democratic gubernatorial primary last year, or Andy Beshear over Adam Edelen in Kentucky’s Democratic gubernatorial primary earlier this year, that was not shocking. Not only did Beshear and Cuomo spend years developing their own ties with the black communities in their states, but their fathers did, too. (Steve Beshear was governor of Kentucky, Mario Cuomo the governor of New York.)

Clinton in 2016 and Biden in 2020 similarly entered the primaries with longstanding ties to black voters. It’s worth considering if the story here is not that establishment candidates are smarter in appealing and connecting with black voters during the campaign, compared to anti-establishment candidates. Maybe it’s that the establishment candidate in a race is likely to be the person who enters the campaign with the strongest support among black voters.

2. Black voters are pragmatic
White Democrats are significantly more likely than black Democrats to describe themselves as liberal. Perhaps that’s the simple explanation for why most black voters eschew more liberal candidates. But scholars of black voters argue that the liberal-moderate-conservative framework does not apply well to predicting the actual policy positions and voting behavior of black Americans.

I agree with the conclusion of this article

But even if Sanders or Warren gets more support among black voters in 2020 than the Vermont senator did in 2016, I tend to think Biden will remain fairly popular with black voters overall — because of his ties to Obama and other black leaders and the perception that he can defeat Trump. So there is a very real possibility that black voters will play the same role in the 2020 presidential primary that they have played in Democratic politics over much of the last four years: blocking the path of the liberal left as it attempts to dethrone the party’s establishment.