Ready The Clown Car: The First Batch of Democrats Are Ready To Announce Their 2020 Bids

I agree with pretty much all of that. Like you said before, how different are most of the other candidates from Bernie Sanders with regards to their platforms and positions on the issues? Answer: not very. Is there even such a thing as a "moderate Democrat" anymore? Hillary was cast as a "moderate," but in truth she was whatever her focus groups told her to be. She was in fact completely unprincipled.

Is there a principled moderate "Democrat" who is running as a Democrat this year? To be honest, there is only one person I have seen so far that I could even put firmly in this category, but he appears to be running as an independent. His name is Howard Schultz. I suspect he is running as an independent in part because he does not believe an principled moderate (unlike what Hillary Clinton was) can win the nomination for the Democrats this year. And it appears that he very well might be right.

 

Except much of the hard left and the SJW/BLM crowd is not going to be very stoked about old Joe. Joe may win the nomination, but how much will the broader party support this very old, gaff-prone, melanin challenged, toxic masculinity afflicted candidate?

 

Good point. Which is why the Democrats will be smart to try to stay as much to the center as they can during the primaries, so that the sprint back to the center in the general does not turn into a full iron-man length triathlon (2.4 mile swim, 112 mile bike, and a 26.2 mile run) just to cover the necessary distance.

But the Bernie Bros and the Kamala-bots are not going to dig it if they do that.

 

The DNC is preparing to ask Bernie to affirm in writing that he is a Democrat party member. If he refuses to sign, he apparently will not be a candidate for president in the party primary contest. If he signs, he will no longer be an independent.

This should be interesting.

DNC to ask Bernie Sanders to affirm he's a Democrat

2020 presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., will be asked next week to sign a piece of paper affirming he's a Democrat.

The Democratic National Committee is expected to brief the campaigns of declared candidates as well as contenders who have formed exploratory committees in the coming days. This year, the briefing packet will include a "candidate affirmation form," a DNC official told the Washington Examiner on Wednesday.

"Candidates who have officially announced their candidacy will have a week to return a signed copy of the affirmation form to the DNC," the official said.​

 

New York Mayor Bill DeBlasio looks like he is going to run for president, too.

De Blasio will continue 2020 flirtation with another Iowa trip

Mayor Bill de Blasio will bundle up and head to Iowa this weekend in his long-shot quest for the White House, The Post has learned. The mayor will arrive in Iowa on Saturday afternoon and depart Sunday afternoon. He expects to have events in Des Moines and Sioux City, though final details are still being worked out, according to a person familiar with the arrangements.

The travel comes just a week after de Blasio canceled a scheduled trip to another early presidential primary state, New Hampshire, following the tragic friendly-fire death of New York City police Detective Brian Simonsen. De Blasio has spent the last several weeks since his State of the City speech making the rounds on national television programs — including CNN’s Sunday public affairs program, “State of the Union,” and HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher” — building his national profile.

But Hizzoner’s decision to once again flirt with national politics comes amid sagging poll numbers and a spate of brutal headlines over the city’s embattled housing authority and Amazon’s decision to withdraw from a deal to build a campus on the Queens waterfront.​

This guy is a kook if he thinks he is going to win the nomination for the Democrats. So he is the Mayor of New York City. OK. What else does he have, aside from a double helping of NPD?

Some of these other candidates who are jumping in who have no chance to win in my opinion, I understand. Senator Warren and Senator Booker, for example. They will improve their national stature within the party and within the US Senate. They will also improve their fundraising capacity and will strengthen their holds on their senate seats.

But DeBlasio? How does this make sense for him, other than he gets a few more interviews on television and gets to appear in a few debates before he is kicked to the curb as one of the very early outs?

 

Senator Kamala Harris and Senator Elizabeth Warren have come out publicly and announced their support for "Reparations" to black people people. This is likely going to force other Democrat candidates to take a position on this issue as well.

Senators Harris & Warren Endorse Reparations

Two leading Democratic presidential candidates -- U.S. Sens. Kamala Harris of California and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts -- have reportedly said they support reparations for black Americans affected by slavery, reflecting a shift in the importance of race and identity issues within the party.

The New York Times reported Thursday that Harris doubled down on her support for reparations after agreeing with a host on the popular radio show “The Breakfast Club” that the race-conscious policy was necessary to address the legacies of slavery and discrimination in the United States.

"We have to be honest that people in this country do not start from the same place or have access to the same opportunities," Harris said in the statement to the Times. "I’m serious about taking an approach that would change policies and structures and make real investments in black communities."

Warren also supports reparations.​

This is borderline lunatic stuff. Also, while it will likely play well with a sizeable portion of the activist Democrat base, it will not play well in a general election. For that reason, I am not wholly surprised to see Senator Warren make this sort of a "Hail Mary" downfield throw, as she is not a serious contender for the actual nomination and this will strengthen her among the base of people that I believe she is trying to impress.

But until now I have regarded Senator Harris as one of the frontrunners for the Democrats. This declaration on its own may well be enough to sink her candidacy. It makes me wonder if she really regards herself as a serious candidate either. If she really did, I would expect her to be more careful than this.

Harris could still be competitive for the party nomination, but running a general election campaign on a platform that features advocacy for "Reparations" is a fools errand. I am really surprised to see Senator Harris announce that she is running for president and then immediately come out with this sort of nonsense.

This is a killer for her. Maybe she does not really want to be President after all. And who can blame her if she doesn't.

 

I seem to have missed one from a few weeks ago. Author Marianne Williamson, who is Oprah's 'spiritual advisor, a self help guru and a writer of new age books and stuff.

First here is a brief quote from an article at the Hill announcing her candidacy:

Author Marianne Williamson running for 2020 Dem nomination

Author and activist Marianne Williamson has announced a bid for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, joining a crowded field of candidates.

Williamson, who launched her campaign at an event in Los Angeles late Monday, called on voters to have a "meaningful conversation" about potential political solutions and described the current national discourse as "shallow."

"I want to engage voters in a more meaningful conversation about America," she said in a statement.​

And because I had never heard of her, here is an article from Marie Clarie magazine which provides more background and a bit of a profile about who she is:

Who Is Marianne Williamson, 2020 Presidential Candidate and Also Oprah's Spiritual Advisor?

One candidate, however, is less political, and more spiritual: Marianne Williamson, author, activist, self-help guru, and Friend Of Oprah—a tier of status, not a person—has announced her candidacy for President, as a Democrat.

Williamson, whose previous run for the seat of California's 33rd congressional district as an Independent in 2014 was endorsed by Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm and former Congressman Dennis Kucinich, as well as actors and celebrities like Laura Dern and Kim Kardashian, isn't like most candidates running today—mainly because she's not a politician. But here's everything you should know about her.

{The rest of the article at the link}
​

In any case, she has some billionaire media bigshot named "Oprah" who is apparently in her corner, so that together with her books and social media presence should make her an interesting darkhorse candidate to watch.

 

Early in this thread, I identifies four brackets to this contest, which are somewhat similar to what you have described. But still, I would break it out a bit differently. Let's go through this again, with the leaders of each bracket.

But first, a list of the apparent or very possible noteworthy candidates at this point.

1. Michael Bennet
2. Joe Biden
3. Michael Bloomberg
4. Cory Booker
5. Sherrod Brown
6. Steve Bullock
7. Pete Buttigieg
8. Julian Castro
9. Bill de Blasio
10. John Delaney
11. Tulsi Gabbard
12. Kirsten Gillibrand
13. Kamala Harris
14. John Hickenlooper
15. Eric Holder
16. Jay Inslee
17. Amy Klobuchar
18. Terry McCauliffe
19. Beto O'Rourke
20. Bernie Sanders
21. Eric Swalwell
22. Elizabeth Warren
23. Marianne Williamson
24. Andrew Yang

That is 24 candidates which would make for a very evenly divided 3 debate panels of eight candidates each. DNC Chairman Tom Perez has already said candidates will NOT be ranked by polling numbers, so there will have to be some sort of a random draw or something. While this will make for a bit of chaos, I do believe this is a better and more fair way to do this than what the Republicans did in 2016.

So, now for the four brackets. I do not know all of these candidates well enough to assign them to the brackets below, so I will just name a few top names to help characterize that respective group:

1. Establishment bracket: Joe Biden, Terry McCauliffe, Amy Klobuchar, Sherrod Brown
2. Socialist bracket: Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Beta O'Rourke (He will compete here or nowhere)
3. SJW/"Identity politics"/"Political correctness" bracket: Kamala Harris, Corey Booker, Eric Holder
4. Other Bracket: Michael Bloomberg, Tulsi Gabbard, Marianne Williamson, Andrew Yang, Jay Inslee

Of course these candidates will also try to appeal to potential voters in other brackets. Their platforms in most cases will not be entirely one dimensional.

So, do you agree with this breakdown and the division of the brackets? If not, then what do you think it should be?

 

I think you are right that this is what she is trying to do. But she changes her stripes more often than a chameleon lizard.

I get it that many on the left see an opportunity to express support for Gillibrand is an opportunity to engage in virtue signalling, which we all know is one of their most favorite things to do. But is anyone really believing Gillibrand's shtick? Even the preening, posing, virtue signalling lefties that are briefly and very publicly cheering her on?

I guess we will see, but I expect Gillibrand to be one of the very earliest outs in this contest. It does not appear to me that she will be very many Democrat's first choice in the primaries at all.

 

This is why the establishment types want to try to dust off old Joe Biden for one last try. Part of the reason they have so many candidates running is that there is nobody in the race that anyone really regards as an obvious winner. So they all think: 'Why not me? I think I have a good chance to beat the people on THAT list.'

It is really not a very strong field in terms of the quality of the candidates, only in terms of the number of people running.