I think it would be easy (given media fascination) for us to overestimate AOC's pull in Congress. Particularly in the Senate, those old folks are not very impressed, even if the Dems, through some miracle end up with a 51-49 majority there. If Dems hold or make more gains in suburban congressional seats in the House, AOC as a mouthpiece might not serve a Sanders presidency well. But I still see only a very narrow electoral path for Sanders as a presidential candidate. Because I think he loses Florida and Ohio and would need to sweep a bunch of tough midwestern states after that.
I have no doubt the people in Vermont love Bernie. To be clear, I'm talking about "liking" him as in voting for him. I'm sure Bernie's a great guy and people love his character. That doesn't mean they want him to be President. If and when he likely loses the nomination, it will be because the majority of voters didn't want him as their President. Not because the establishment media was propping up Biden (who they also basically spent the last month trashing). At some point, Bernie voters are going to need to understand that instead of jumping on every excuse they can find to avoid "my guy wasn't that popular".
Things like Bernie-style M4A don't even have Democratic majority support in the House or Senate, let alone the full House or Senate. Almost none of the plans Bernie advocates are actually supported by a big chunk of the Democratic Party. The reason you hear so much about AOC and her group is they are such an outspoken minority of the party.
The moment you realize that these establishment figures are human with human desires, the sooner you will be less naive. They aren't inherently evil. They successfully carved out a niche of power and the vast majority of humans who successfully do that will do anything at almost any cost to keep that clout.
Just remember who the opposition is - Trump is hated by half or more , tolerated by a small percentage .... and carries his 35% base. I don't know if you saw it but AOC is has her own political organization now and they are planning to primary Dems who they feel aren't far enough left ... https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/co...late-progressive-candidates-congress-n1140306
or else they are all coming independently to the same conclusion. I don't think they need a whole lot of pressure at this point
That's a great suggestion. I didn't think of that, Os. My preference as Secretary of State would be for someone with deep experience. UN ambassador calls for a different skill set and I think Pete could fill that position admirably.
Honestly, for him the best case scenario: Biden wins and picks someone else as VP Pete takes a job like UN Ambassador or another "non-sexy" cabinet post and then moves up in 2 years when someone retires. For example, could see John Kerry coming back in to start off the Biden administration. Someone like Russ Feingold as well. Maybe even Diane Feinstein.
If we had a candidate of Obama's caliber, that's what we would have. Sadly, we don't currently have one. I should have added, "as a campaigner."
I'm not sure about that. We can assume Dems will lose Alabama, so that leaves them needing to gain 4 seats. They have 3 solid possibilities: Colorado, Arizona, Maine. Then they just need 1 of the following possibilties: 2 in Georgia (helps if Abrams is the VP), Montana (if Bullock runs) and North Carolina (longshot for sure). Then you have your extreme longshots if a crazy like Kris Kobach wins the GOP primary in Kansas. Unlikely for sure, but I'd say at least a 25%ish chance if a Biden type is on the top of the ticket.
I don't even think Obama could deliver that. The states that are up just aren't the right mixture. Just my opinion. Obama wasn't winning in Texas, Alabama, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, etc. This is a hard map. There are 17 "contested" elections according to 538. Of those, 12 are held by Republicans. Of those 12, only 4 are rated "toss-ups." The Democrats currently hold one seat (AL) that is almost certainly going to flip Red. I think the Democrats best case scenario is they end up 51-49, taking Arizona, NC, Maine and Colorado. That's an impressive win and still doesn't get them there.
I'm sure Sanders will compromise with moderates in the House and Senate to at the very least move the country in a right direction. Don't assume Sanders supporters are so naive in thinking that Sanders will accomplish legislating his ideal system. They understand that if we atleast want to make progress in the right direction, some compromise will be made. In a hypothetical Bernie presidency he at least can convince the moderates that a significant enough portion of the country wants his reform self evident in his victory wherr the moderates have to accept some form of compromise. It moves the agenda forward and pushes the discussion further to the left. Look, I'm sure some Bernie fans are dense and naive enough to believe Bernie will accomplish every thing and that it's "everything or nothing" but that's a small percentage of Bernie supporters I think. That's the TYT viewing audience portion and random people online. I think most can accept a middle ground between moderates and Bernie's ideals. But we can't a a discussion in this country where the compromise is between the right and moderates and establishment and establishment. The country has to fix some systemic issues and those things don't get solved in a moderate establishment presidency. I think most people who defend Bernie here acknowledge this. So I guess use Clutchfans as some anecdotal insight.
If the Democrats defeat trump and can gain 3 seats, then add the two independents who caucus with them and you'll have a split chamber. That, and a very busy Vice-President. I'll take that. 2022 looks very good for the Democratic Party. I can be patient.
here's another option--a good one too, Tom Perez has been a disaster for the Democratic Party https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/02/why-pete-buttigieg-should-be-dnc-chairman/ Why Pete Buttigieg should be DNC chairman Former South Bend, Ind., mayor Pete Buttigieg appears at a campaign event on Saturday Feb. 29 in Raleigh, N.C. (Matt McClain/The Washington Post) By Colbert I. King Columnist March 2, 2020 at 5:09 p.m. EST It’s not over for Pete Buttigieg. His presidential bid has been set aside, but his desire to “bring a new kind of politics to our country” could be fulfilled if Democratic Party leaders have the good sense to make him a leader of the Democratic National Committee — now. The DNC chairmanship is occupied. But the role is hardly filled. Missing is a dynamic, well-organized and respected political strategist. The country’s oldest party committee needs such a leader, especially in the time of President Trump. The claim to fame of the current lackluster chairman, Tom Perez, is the Iowa caucuses debacle and controversial rules that helped reduce the most diverse Democratic presidential field ever to an all-white tier of contenders. Perez also engineered rule changes that benefited the late-to-the-party candidacy of billionaire Mike Bloomberg. Meanwhile, two leaders of the Milwaukee host committee for the Democratic National Convention in July were recently fired amid allegations they had created a toxic work environment that included “bullying and workplace harassment.” What’s more, Republicans are outdistancing the DNC in fundraising and have more than $200 million in the kitty. Buttigieg is the person for this job. He ran for it in 2017 as the 34-year-old mayor of South Bend, Ind. Back then, Buttigieg was a late entrant in the contest between Perez, who was President Barack Obama’s labor secretary and an early Hillary Clinton supporter, and Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), who had been one of Sen. Bernie Sanders’s (I-Vt.) most outspoken surrogates. Ideological crevices and hard feelings from the 2016 primary lingered, and Buttigieg stepped forward as an alternative to re-litigating that fight through proxies. “Look, no one sits on his mother’s knee and says, ‘I want to be national party chair when I grow up,’” Buttigieg said when tossing his hat in the ring. “But I can’t think of something more meaningful than organizing the opposition in the face of what I think will be a pretty monstrous presidency and challenging time out here in the states.” He was right about that. Although Buttigieg got in too late to build the necessary support, his candidacy drew strong backing from unexpected places. Former DNC chairman Howard Dean endorsed the young mayor. “Our leadership is old and creaky, including me,” Dean said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” “We’ve got to have this guy . . . running this party.” Former Obama strategist David Axelrod called Buttigieg “one of the most talented young leaders in the Democratic Party” and noted that “he comes from the middle of the country, where the party needs to be strengthened.” David Wilhelm, a former DNC chair who had also been Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign manager, said of Buttigieg, “We need someone who can unify us, who can focus on the grass roots, whose experience is outside Washington, and who represents the next generation of party leadership that will lead us to victories at the national and local level.” Wilhelm said, “I am proud to lend my name to his growing list of supporters.” Joe Andrew, who led the DNC in the late 1990s, also threw his weight behind Buttigieg. “It’s telling that Pete is the only candidate in this race who has the support of two people who have actually run the party.” Andrew’s argument for Buttigieg in 2017 is also the case for Buttigieg now. “The DNC chair,” Andrew said, “needs to be the leader of all of the party, not one faction or another . . . [which] does the party a disservice.” Buttigieg’s presidential campaign aimed to overcome intraparty factionalism and a takeover by an ideologically driven candidate who exploits generational and economic class fissures. He sought to rise above fierce and lingering internecine wars in Washington and to focus the party’s attention on people outside the Beltway who feel overlooked and scorned. The party chairman’s job is to put together a strategy and infrastructure that enable Democrats not to tear down and radicalize the system but win elections. Buttigieg’s intelligence, adroitness and ground-level experience could make that happen. And, at this stage, he could still get in the game. There is precedent. Ed Rendell and Andrew co-chaired the party from 1999 to 2001, with Rendell dubbed the general chairman and Andrew national chairman. If they know what’s good for them, national committee members should carve out one of those roles for Buttigieg and let him get to work on the strategy and mechanics of electing a Democrat to the White House. Doing this wouldn’t rule out a Buttigieg presidency. George H.W. Bush was Republican National Committee chairman in 1973 and went on to be elected president in 1988. Bob Dole was RNC chair from 1971 to 1973 and the Republican presidential nominee in 1996. Democratic Party leaders, don’t let Pete Buttigieg hang up his spurs. Not now, when he’s needed most.
