| |
Discussion: Maggie Hassan for 2020?
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 2,555
|
Quote:
Originally posted by heckinglovato
I just don't get it. Both her and Kamala Harris are moderates, why not pick the experienced one that has more potential to win over the white working-class demographic that Clinton lost?
What's wrong with ATRL and this "excitement" thing they need, isn't the first female president exciting enough  |
If she's a moderate, no.
Part of Obama's appeal was that he was also a fresh new young outsider.
Clinton was a career politician neoliberal/neocon with 30 years of baggage.
Moderates cannot be exciting candidates no matter how badly you want them to be.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/21/2011
Posts: 14,053
|
wonder where her surname comes from
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/1/2011
Posts: 10,384
|
Quote:
Originally posted by heckinglovato
I just don't get it. Both her and Kamala Harris are moderates, why not pick the experienced one that has more potential to win over the white working-class demographic that Clinton lost?
What's wrong with ATRL and this "excitement" thing they need, isn't the first female president exciting enough |
No. I do love that she has NH, I'll be honest. But I'm not here for a moderate being the next D pick. It's regression. Also I don't know enough about her attitudes on crime/police brutality, but I'm assuming it's not great being a white woman from New England
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 2,555
|
Realistic 2020 prospects:
White populist male from rural area with leftist economic policies (center-left social policies)
+ POC from a coastal area, can be moderate or leftist as their VP
The head of the ticket won't be Sanders, but it'll be someone like him.
Put then someone like Tulsi, Kamala, or Cory Booker as their VP.
The ticket basically needs to be the Sanders-Warren coalition (young, populist and for socialist-lite economic policy) merging with the Obama coalition (special focuses on the needs of latinos and black voters).
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/28/2011
Posts: 26,425
|
Quote:
Originally posted by heckinglovato
Let's not forget that Democrats now need someone who can win over and appeal to white working-class voters, she passes that test by being both Governor and Senator of a state that's 96% white, and having a strong stance on immigration.
|
and THIS is ehy uou neoliberals will lose again and again. you simply think exchanging one figurehed for another is enough.
being centrist/moderate in this climate is dumb, like Hillary found
being "just democrat" should never be enough to claim minority votes w/o policies aimed AT THEM
another white/blonde woman? lmao no
but HEY good luck booking that stage you speak of!!
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/20/2012
Posts: 8,593
|
Quote:
Originally posted by TheVoiceXtina
and THIS is ehy uou neoliberals will lose again and again. you simply think exchanging one figurehed for another is enough.
being centrist/moderate in this climate is dumb, like Hillary found
being "just democrat" should never be enough to claim minority votes w/o policies aimed AT THEM
another white/blonde woman? lmao no
but HEY good luck booking that stage you speak of!!
|
If she's a Democrat who speaks about immigration, police brutality, a couple of BLM chants here and there, gun control, racial justice, protecting the right to vote, education gap, etc. then there's really not much else to do - minorities on lock!
The breaking point for Clinton was not being able to win over white working-class in places like PA, MI, WI, NC, FL, and such. I think Hassan can do that, I don't know what's laughable about being "blonde and white"; I don't think that's the reason Clinton lost.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 2,555
|
Quote:
Originally posted by heckinglovato
If she's a Democrat who speaks about immigration, police brutality, a couple of BLM chants here and there, gun control, racial justice, protecting the right to vote, education gap, etc. then there's really not much else to do - minorities on lock!
The breaking point for Clinton was not being able to win over white working-class in places like PA, MI, WI, NC, FL, and such. I think Hassan can do that, I don't know what's laughable about being "blonde and white"; I don't think that's the reason Clinton lost.
|
Nah, sis, you need to look into more data.
She would have won PA, WI, and MI if she kept Obama numbers.
Trump's rural white boost was strong, but nothing amazing.
She even lost voters in urban areas of Detroit, Philly and Milwaukee. The neoliberalism and corruption of her campaign + her baggage put some Democrats off or sent them to 3rd parties. If she kept these, she would at least 100% have won and overcame the very small-margin loses in Michigan and Wisconsin at least.
She did great in AZ, NC and FL, but voter suppression on Reps' part got us on the small margins.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/28/2011
Posts: 26,425
|
No it is not a "lock". And i hate the fact you think so little and minority folk are so dense/lack any nuance than just "speaking" about it is enough. This is why you lost to Donald. Democrats (under Obama, Clinton, and probably HRC) have failed to eradicate the poverty problem, the mass incarcceration problem, the over reliance on food stamps problem.
Hillary lost because she sucked. She was a HORRIBLE candidate. Just because you can dab and do a mannequin challenge doesn't make you hip or trendy or anything. Just treated Black folk like some damn fools.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/20/2012
Posts: 8,593
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Communion
Nah, sis, you need to look into more data.
She would have won PA, WI, and MI if she kept Obama numbers.
Trump's rural white boost was strong, but nothing amazing.
She even lost voters in urban areas of Detroit, Philly and Milwaukee. The neoliberalism and corruption of her campaign + her baggage put some Democrats off or sent them to 3rd parties. If she kept these, she would at least 100% have won and overcame the very small-margin loses in Michigan and Wisconsin at least.
She did great in AZ, NC and FL, but voter suppression on Reps' part got us on the small margins.
|
But Clinton camp was also relying on white suburban women in states like PA/WI/MI/NC, and that clearly didn't work out. I still don't see how a Hassan presidency can be unexciting for white working-class, especially without this baggage, alleged corruption and controversy you speak of.
Quote:
Originally posted by TheVoiceXtina
No it is not a "lock". And i hate the fact you think so little and minority folk are so dense/lack any nuance than just "speaking" about it is enough. This is why you lost to Donald. Democrats (under Obama, Clinton, and probably HRC) have failed to eradicate the poverty problem, the mass incarcceration problem, the over reliance on food stamps problem.
Hillary lost because she sucked. She was a HORRIBLE candidate. Just because you can dab and do a mannequin challenge doesn't make you hip or trendy or anything. Just treated Black folk like some damn fools.
|
I don't think little about minority folks, but the numbers clearly show that they currently lean heavily Democratic, and I don't think it takes more than a candidate who taps into their issues on a few occasions to keep things this way for one campaign cycle.
If you want high turnout among minority voters though, that's a completely different story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
