Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Which Democrat Would have Best Chance at Beating Trump in 2020 for President?
Elizabeth Warren 19 17.12%
Jason Kander 6 5.41%
Tim Kaine 5 4.50%
Tim Ryan 5 4.50%
Keith Ellison 6 5.41%
other (explain) 70 63.06%
Voters: 111. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-19-2017, 05:26 PM
 
Location: Ohio
24,621 posts, read 19,191,292 times
Reputation: 21743

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by l1995 View Post
I know it's early, but I've been wondering about who the Democrats should run in 2020.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RunD1987 View Post
Jim Webb
I like Jim Webb.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-19-2017, 05:28 PM
 
11,445 posts, read 10,499,409 times
Reputation: 6284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyperthetic View Post
Kucinich?

Sweden gave the Nobel Peace prize to Obama.

They got some insane white guilt.
Dennis Kucinich will be way too old
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2017, 05:29 PM
 
12,270 posts, read 11,342,826 times
Reputation: 8066
Democrats should forget the automatic top three candidates. You'll never win the national election with Biden, Warren or Sanders. Biden will be too old and the others are too polarizing. The angry base will want them but unless Trump is a total disaster they won't have a chance.

Cory Booker would love to be the next Obama, but Booker is no Obama. I know there's some talk about Andrew Cuomo, governor of NY. He's an awkward speaker, but he has that famous last name. There are hints of a major scandal stalking him, but it's NY, every politician has a major scandal stalking them. I like Joe Manchin and would seriously consider him over any Republican, but he doesn't have a prayer in the Democrat primaries.

Kirsten Gillibrand's name comes up a lot, but it's hard for me to get past the sense she's anything more than Chuck Schumer's puppet. I'm sure they love Kamala Harris in California, but she won't play with a national electorate.

I hate to say it, because I think she is very electable, Michelle Obama may well be the Democrats best bet in 2020. Unless Trump has been highly sucessful. Then she might want to wait till 2024. She'll only be 61-62 and people won't be so allergic to the Obama last name after 8 years of Trump.

Last edited by Dockside; 02-19-2017 at 05:55 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2017, 05:29 PM
 
9,911 posts, read 7,718,247 times
Reputation: 2494
Duckworth/Webb, Gabbard/Webb, Gabbard/Kander, Kander/Duckworth, Kandard/Klobuchar, or Gabbard/Klobuchar would be ideal
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2017, 06:05 PM
 
5,719 posts, read 4,307,175 times
Reputation: 11723
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chowhound View Post
The Dem's need someone a little more in the center, they are going too far left and I think if they can find someone more even keeled than say Elizabeth Warren, they might stand a shot. If Trump doesn't step on his pecker and bring the economy around I don't see him losing in 2020, but who knows, this last election cycle was a complete game changer, EVERY pundit got it wrong. The middle of the country came out in droves against Hillary, granted she won the popular vote, but got a serious beat down in the electoral vote.

Hilary in her arrogance did nothing for middle America and I think that's part of why she lost.

The Dems need to do an open and honest post mortem to see what they missed. I'm afraid that they are just going to double down and keep going in the same direction.

The Dems missed the same thing that you missed. That a more progressive candidate that appeals to the younger demographic is what they need, not a more centrist one. They nominated the wrong person, paid for it with a loss, and Bernie will be too old in 4 years. Young people don't want someone "more in the center", and for every old person who might stay home rather than vote for a progressive candidate there will be 2 young people who set down their smart phone long enough to vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2017, 06:10 PM
 
Location: So Cal
52,309 posts, read 52,771,567 times
Reputation: 52807
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deserterer View Post
The Dems missed the same thing that you missed. That a more progressive candidate that appeals to the younger demographic is what they need, not a more centrist one. They nominated the wrong person, paid for it with a loss, and Bernie will be too old in 4 years. Young people don't want someone "more in the center", and for every old person who might stay home rather than vote for a progressive candidate there will be 2 young people who set down their smart phone long enough to vote.
I disagree, most of the country isn't inline with the far left progressive agenda, hence part of the reason trump won, he tapped into the fly over states resentments about how things are going.

If the dems go further left, they most most certainly will lose in the 2020.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2017, 06:23 PM
 
Location: Atlanta metro (Cobb County)
3,169 posts, read 2,222,857 times
Reputation: 4237
Quote:
Originally Posted by l1995 View Post
Also, as far as states go, I think Democrats should have Arizona, Georgia, and Texas in their crosshairs. The former two states, Hillary did not lose by a large margin and I can see the next Democrat possibly winning those states. Texas is a little more of a long shot, but it's not impossible. If the Dems get Texas, the Republicans would have very little chance of winning.
Democrats need to get Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania back before they start going after the traditionally Republican Sunbelt states. Clinton was a weak candidate and yet she lost each of those three northern states by less than 1%. Many voters in those states want a focus on the basics - the economy, national security, entitlements (Social Security & Medicare) - and not peripheral fringe issues.

Counting on the Sunbelt states to flip due to their demographics is very questionable, and an identity politics focus encourages those who feel left out by societal and economic changes to listen to voices like Trump's. Clinton's strategy of taking the Rustbelt for granted and going after voters in states she didn't need to win backfired badly, and the next Democratic nominee would be well served not to repeat her mistakes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2017, 06:25 PM
 
Location: Avignon, France
11,163 posts, read 7,982,730 times
Reputation: 28978
They still have 8 years to come up with a viable candidate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2017, 06:34 PM
 
Location: Phoenix
30,480 posts, read 19,236,406 times
Reputation: 26373
I think the Demoncrast should disband and be thrown into the scrap heap of history due their their racial hatred past and present.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2017, 06:37 PM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,608 posts, read 16,586,021 times
Reputation: 6055
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas75 View Post
Democrats need to get Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania back before they start going after the traditionally Republican Sunbelt states. Clinton was a weak candidate and yet she lost each of those three northern states by less than 1%. Many voters in those states want a focus on the basics - the economy, national security, entitlements (Social Security & Medicare) - and not peripheral fringe issues.

Counting on the Sunbelt states to flip due to their demographics is very questionable, and an identity politics focus encourages those who feel left out by societal and economic changes to listen to voices like Trump's. Clinton's strategy of taking the Rustbelt for granted and going after voters in states she didn't need to win backfired badly, and the next Democratic nominee would be well served not to repeat her mistakes.
Clinton lost Arizona by 90,000 votes. Democrats will forever go after that state now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top