Go back to previous topic
Forum nameGeneral Discussion
Topic subjectBeto Should Think About Running For President
Topic URLhttp://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13281427
13281427, Beto Should Think About Running For President
Posted by Reeq, Wed Aug-22-18 09:24 AM
https://twitter.com/nowthisnews/status/1032017750829531142

dude is like a cross between bobby kennedy and barack obama.

he will prolly lose his senate race cuz tx is a brainless conservative shithole. but he should throw his name in the hat for 2020 shortly after that.

people love an inspirational candidate and dude is 10x more compelling than bernie/warren/biden/kamala/etc. he still has that new car smell too.

i dont think theres ever been a non-presidential candidate able to generate excitement (and money) for a single race like this. in this lightning in a bottle era of politics...dude could easily become the dem frontrunner.

13281430, Watched this last nite. Looks like a candidate I could get behind.
Posted by Brew, Wed Aug-22-18 09:36 AM
Though I'd have to learn more about him. Judging by this alone I'd have to assume he's in line with what I'd want in a candidate.
13281438, He's been putting in the work, too
Posted by magilla vanilla, Wed Aug-22-18 09:49 AM
Dude's been campaigning in every county in Texas.
13281432, That exchange definitely made me take notice. Too bad he is from TX.
Posted by Buddy_Gilapagos, Wed Aug-22-18 09:39 AM
I just am kind of over candidates without that much managerial experience besides congress. I want a governor or big city mayor.

Does get me more excited than any name so far though.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"
13281490, like who?!
Posted by ThaTruth, Wed Aug-22-18 11:02 AM
>I just am kind of over candidates without that much
>managerial experience besides congress. I want a governor or
>big city mayor.
13281433, Texas is a purple state with gerrymandered districts and suppressive
Posted by MEAT, Wed Aug-22-18 09:40 AM
Voting ID laws
ALL of the major cities are blue.
13281452, kinda sorta but not really.
Posted by Reeq, Wed Aug-22-18 10:09 AM
a lot of people keep saying this but they dont really know what a purple state is.

voter suppression is obviously an issue. but tx has a lethargic latino voting population regardless (at least on the liberal side). and an organized loyal religious conservative voting base that comes out in full force every election (even conservative evangelical/catholic hispanics). and those margins are lopsided.

north carolina has some of the worst voter suppression in the nation. and statewide races are still close. thats what a purplish/swingy state looks like (even without the hypothetical equalizing).

people think that the latino population in tx would hypothetically even the score if the playing field was more fair. but the numbers arent really there.

and a lot of solid red states have blue metros. but that doesnt necessarily make it a competitive state.

for example...georgia has many of the same issues that texas has. but it was closer (half the presidential vote percentage margin)
than texas was. and nobody considers it a purple state.

wisconsin has arguably the most restrictive voter id laws in country, some of the worst gerrymandering, and dems just outvoted repubs in the primary and look poised for competitive/victorious statewide races. but in texas...dems got blown out in the primary and havent really been competitive statewide since the early 90s. thats not really a purple state...hypothetical or not.
13281455, dallas and houston are not as blue as one would think
Posted by mista k5, Wed Aug-22-18 10:17 AM
they are closer to 50/50 on most voting result maps that ive seen. austin, san antonio and el paso are very blue. south texas is pretty blue. there are so many large towns in-between the large cities that are solid red.

i think most people see texas as 70%+ red. i think its more like 55% red, not quickly enough but definitely heading more towards blue.

13281460, Annise Parker would disagree.
Posted by MEAT, Wed Aug-22-18 10:20 AM
13281466, RE: Annise Parker would disagree.
Posted by mista k5, Wed Aug-22-18 10:26 AM
pretty low turnout and never got over 60% of the vote. not really a good indication in my point of view.

Houston mayoral election runoff, 2009
Candidate Votes % ±
Annise Parker 81,743 53.60% +22.60%
Gene Locke 70,770 46.40% +20.20%

Houston mayoral election, 2011
Candidate Votes % ±
Annise Parker 59,920 50.81%
Jack O'Connor 17,265 14.64%
Fernando Herrera 16,799 14.24%
Dave Wilson 13,858 11.75%
Kevin Simms 8,197 6.95%
Amanda Ulman 1,882 1.59%
Turnout 117,921

Candidate Vote Number Vote Percentage
Annise D. Parker 97,009 57.22%
Ben Hall 46,775 27.59%
Eric B. Dick 18,302 10.79%
Victoria Lane 1,782 1.05%
Don Cook 1,720 1.01%
Keryl Burgess Douglas 1,192 0.70%
Michael Fitzsimmons 1,179 0.70%
Derek A. Jenkins 823 0.49%
Charyl L. Drab 767 0.45%
13281477, yeah presidential vote margin is a pretty good indicator.
Posted by Reeq, Wed Aug-22-18 10:37 AM
since its the highest turnout election.

>i think most people see texas as 70%+ red. i think its more
>like 55% red, not quickly enough but definitely heading more
>towards blue.

trump won by about 9 points (52%-43%) with indie candidates included. he got right around that 55% mark with just the vote share of the 2 major candidates.
13281478, RE: yeah presidential vote margin is a pretty good indicator.
Posted by MEAT, Wed Aug-22-18 10:42 AM
1. White people are polarized by Hillary Clinton
2. https://thinkprogress.org/doj-catches-texas-violating-the-court-order-against-its-voter-suppression-law-d0f750460c23/
13281480, latinos hate clinton too
Posted by mista k5, Wed Aug-22-18 10:45 AM
their attacks on clinton really worked. i sadly know too many people that i found out didnt vote because they hated trump but "hillary would be worse"

i have no love for hillary but there was only one way to vote in 2016. staying home or voting 3rd party was so stupid.
13281706, i legit don't know any latinos that *hate* her that didn't *hate* b.o.
Posted by rob, Wed Aug-22-18 08:21 PM
i pretty much only know middle aged white women that hate her more than barack and it's deep issues they have from the 90s.
13281745, maybe hate is too strong
Posted by mista k5, Thu Aug-23-18 09:23 AM
but i definitely know some that didnt vote at all because they basically believed she would be horrible.

theres no way you can equate hillary to trump.

caught me off guard.

i dont think all of them didnt like obama but maybe some didnt. definitely know of one that voted for obama and was all proud to say so but then proudly voted for trump. he was someone that i would expect to be republican due to perceived economic reasons.
13281704, i'm almost sure texas had thousands of "never trumpers"
Posted by rob, Wed Aug-22-18 08:19 PM
salty enough not to vote for him in 2016 that have come around at this point.
13281701, dallas and houston are heavily segregated/balkanized, and houston
Posted by rob, Wed Aug-22-18 08:16 PM
has crazy non-zoning

the people are bluer than the elections but they're not as blue as in many other cities (especially houston) in other states

the mid sized cities in texas (50-500k) are also definitely not blue.

really el paso and the valley are the bluest parts of the state, but there are so many racists/xenophobes who don't want none of that that people from those areas have trouble stepping up to the state platform.

if beto didn't have that kennedy/santa fe/post-punk/white boy energy he wouldn't have gotten to this point.
13281458, The states metropolitan areas account for 71% of the population
Posted by MEAT, Wed Aug-22-18 10:19 AM
13281465, and repub statewide candidates still win by 20+ points lol.
Posted by Reeq, Wed Aug-22-18 10:26 AM
13281475, Kay Bailey Hutchison wasn’t an extremist, and John Cornyn (AG)
Posted by MEAT, Wed Aug-22-18 10:35 AM
Was a dentist turned inventory
Texas is a weird place
Anne Richards ran our state for the longest as a democratic and she wasn’t blue. She was purple.
13281521, Ann Richards had no red in her. She was a liberal Democrat. A progressive
Posted by PimpTrickGangstaClik, Wed Aug-22-18 12:21 PM
She was a feminist. Fought hard for abortion rights. Pushed for gay rights. Pushed to increase taxes to fund services. Pushed to limit concealed handguns and assault weapons.

There was a time not too long ago that that type of person could hold statewide office in Texas
13281523, You’re right. No hedge. I was wrong.
Posted by MEAT, Wed Aug-22-18 12:25 PM
I was going by memory and sometimes memory fails.
13281703, kay bailey hutchinson only seems like a non extremist in retrospect
Posted by rob, Wed Aug-22-18 08:17 PM
and given our current extremist crazy politicians.
13281435, 915 "El Payso" blowing up
Posted by mista k5, Wed Aug-22-18 09:46 AM
even quest shouting us out


i havent considered this being a possibility and my first reaction is too soon. might be a great idea though. if he somehow beat cruz would it still make sense or only if he loses?

i think he might really beat cruz, hes been campaigning hard. county to county. no one likes cruz. i live in a pretty blue city so obviously here most people support him, tons of beto shirts/signs/stickers everywhere.
13281439, When you start to make that county tour! (Bell County!)
Posted by MEAT, Wed Aug-22-18 09:49 AM
13281447, I could support him
Posted by Lil Rabies, Wed Aug-22-18 10:00 AM
Hope he wins.
13281493, that was my thought too after watching his comments about kneeling.
Posted by PROMO, Wed Aug-22-18 11:08 AM
just wonder if he's enough of a "name rings bells" candidate.

although, did Barack's name REALLY ring bells outside of Illinois before he got going? not a TON that I recall.
13281508, geez..
Posted by Dstl1, Wed Aug-22-18 11:42 AM

>dude is like a cross between bobby kennedy and barack obama.

man...Bobby's transformation was really something. There is superb documentary about him on Netflix. Man, he had the fucking juice before he got killed. I honestly think he had more genuine love than Jack.
13281670, i gotta check that doc out.
Posted by Reeq, Wed Aug-22-18 05:06 PM
13281672, RE: i gotta check that doc out.
Posted by Dstl1, Wed Aug-22-18 05:12 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Io3uQ6Q4NlU
13281509, Instead of Bernie, I like Andrew Yang—For Shake Things Up Reasons
Posted by Cam, Wed Aug-22-18 11:45 AM
He doesn’t have a winning chance, but his policy ideas are worth debating.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-ezra-klein-show/id1081584611?mt=2&i=1000418149827
13281541, Yang2020
Posted by Cam, Wed Aug-22-18 01:11 PM
https://www.yang2020.com/
13315204, Actually nevermind
Posted by Cam, Thu Feb-21-19 07:38 PM
Since his site has been built out, and he has at least 100 policy initives described, I notice not one close to anything like Marianne Williamson‘s moral reckoning - https://youtu.be/lXsEfvaT9Fs - which is a great start.
13281544, Only if he beats Cruz
Posted by handle, Wed Aug-22-18 01:23 PM
Not a good look nominating someone who just lost.
13281557, He should
Posted by Teknontheou, Wed Aug-22-18 02:05 PM
13281572, Beto O’Rourke eats Whataburger, shreds parking lot with skateboard
Posted by MEAT, Wed Aug-22-18 02:22 PM
https://m.chron.com/news/houston-texas/texas/article/Beto-O-Rourke-Whataburger-skateboard-ted-cruz-13168491.php
13281589, Goddamn, crazy, he has Obama swag. I've been hearing his name
Posted by double negative, Wed Aug-22-18 02:42 PM
13281595, Is there a Dem candidate you wouldn't vote for?
Posted by Kira, Wed Aug-22-18 02:49 PM
I'm trying to think of a candidate I wouldn't vote for at this point and can't find anyone that doesn't get my vote. Joe Manchin wouldn't get my vote but he's basically a conservative Republican in a blue seat.
13281669, nobody i can think of. hillary was close to being that person.
Posted by Reeq, Wed Aug-22-18 05:05 PM
i had such a visceral dislike of hillary that i didnt feel like i could vote for her. trump cured that tho lol.
13300439, LOL
Posted by Dr Claw, Wed Dec-05-18 11:52 AM
>i had such a visceral dislike of hillary that i didnt feel
>like i could vote for her. trump cured that tho lol.

this is why I feel like she was the WRONG choice and that the Dems more than anyone else screwed the pooch.

didn't even have to be Bernie. they could have gotten Phil Lamarr dressed up as Rick James to run instead
13300627, yeah its generally a bad idea to nominate a candidate
Posted by Reeq, Thu Dec-06-18 05:50 AM
that a lot of your own base hates, with decades of front page baggage, while under investigation by 2 different departments of the government.

dems showed a lot of audacity on that one. i think most of it had to do with clinton strongarming the party.
13281686, i'm a fan but winning texas is the goal
Posted by rob, Wed Aug-22-18 05:54 PM
the reason dems are fucked is because they put everything in that hillary maginot line.

changing statewide elections in texas would literally change the whole political tone of the country. it would be a big deal for redistricting. it would be a big deal for education reform and insurance/health because of the $$$ and population size. it would be a huge deal environmentally and for socialismishness because the texas state legislature/courts are setting the precedent that cities can't enforce their own local ordinances if there's any question of market freedom.
13281931, RE: i'm a fan but winning texas is the goal
Posted by Dr Claw, Thu Aug-23-18 04:05 PM
>texas state legislature/courts
>are setting the precedent that cities can't enforce their own
>local ordinances if there's any question of market freedom.

"state's rights" doing the bidding of corporations all over again

13281717, gatdamn we easily impressed lol
Posted by _explain555, Thu Aug-23-18 12:22 AM


i mean he aight


ya he got swag

but Obeezy was a Harvard trained consitutional law expert too

dis Beto cat a reformed rock band dude who caught some burglary and DUI charges (ya they was dropped but prolly only cuz his pops was a judge)


meh


i mwean its cool he gets it and it finna be cool if he win senate but...

13281741, lol...
Posted by ThaTruth, Thu Aug-23-18 09:01 AM
>
>
>i mean he aight
>
>
>ya he got swag
>
>but Obeezy was a Harvard trained consitutional law expert too
>
>dis Beto cat a reformed rock band dude who caught some
>burglary and DUI charges (ya they was dropped but prolly only
>cuz his pops was a judge)
>
>
>meh
>
>
>i mwean its cool he gets it and it finna be cool if he win
>senate but...


^^^no lies detected
13281750, So he can help with Criminal Justice Reform
Posted by Case_One, Thu Aug-23-18 09:44 AM

.
.
Current Favorite Song: https://youtu.be/8v_KFHnPImY

"I cannot see how nature could have created itself. Only a supernatural force that is outside of space and time could have done that. ~ Francis Collins
13281943, "Drunk driving Beto could'nt even beat Lyin' Ted"
Posted by Mynoriti, Thu Aug-23-18 05:05 PM
i can see/hear it now
13281979, Fucking puke.
Posted by Brew, Thu Aug-23-18 08:24 PM
13282477, Beto proposes criminal justice reform
Posted by mista k5, Mon Aug-27-18 12:48 PM
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion/outlook/article/Beto-ORourke-Texas-criminal-justice-reform-jail-13181472.php
13282481, It would be cool to have him in the race
Posted by GOMEZ, Mon Aug-27-18 12:54 PM
I'd love to have a robust field of viable candidates.
13282644, RE: Beto Should Think About Running For President
Posted by Quas, Tue Aug-28-18 03:37 PM
I hope he wins Texas first!
13282653, Polls say this dude is within one point of Cruz
Posted by PimpTrickGangstaClik, Tue Aug-28-18 04:07 PM
I don't necessarily believe it's that close right now, but he is running an amazing campaign.

13282656, i dont get how 20% of people are undecided
Posted by mista k5, Tue Aug-28-18 04:24 PM
what does that mean. doesnt give me confidence in the poll.

i did participate in a survey on friday so maybe it helped lol
13286771, new heat.
Posted by Reeq, Mon Sep-17-18 09:04 PM
https://twitter.com/nowthisnews/status/1041790987260108803
13287726, Looks like Cruz is promoting Beto on Twitter. Oh wait...just a dog whistle
Posted by PimpTrickGangstaClik, Sat Sep-22-18 11:50 AM
How could he post this video as an attack on his opponent? This is a topic that pretty much everyone agrees on. The cop was wrong and they way it is being handled is wrong?

But Cruz's message: Look at Beto. Getting all those black folks riled up. We don't want that, do we?

And he is doing it because he knows it will work
https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1043278255740973058?s=19
13287728, Not so fast
Posted by Mgmt, Sat Sep-22-18 01:45 PM
>How could he post this video as an attack on his opponent?
>This is a topic that pretty much everyone agrees on. The cop
>was wrong and they way it is being handled is wrong?
>
>But Cruz's message: Look at Beto. Getting all those black
>folks riled up. We don't want that, do we?
>
>And he is doing it because he knows it will work
>https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1043278255740973058?s=19

This may not work the way Ted Cruz thinks it will. I think we’ve learned that Trumpism only works for trump and that no one has a full grasp of what color Texas is (look at the back and forth above).

Also, Roy Moore.
13289201, This is a campaign of people. All people.
Posted by j0510, Sun Sep-30-18 04:04 PM
This is a campaign of people. All people.

https://twitter.com/BetoORourke/status/1046395685380206597
13289358, ~55k in attendance.
Posted by Reeq, Mon Oct-01-18 01:19 PM
https://twitter.com/evanasmith/status/1046792601863565312

dude is drawing crowds bigger than presidential campaigns.
13291662, You might be on to something...
Posted by Stadiq, Fri Oct-12-18 04:27 PM
While the TX polls are discouraging because I want him to win, obviously...

He's got the message, likability, and Obama-like fundraising down.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/10/12/no-beto-orourkes-insane-million-fundraising-haul-does-not-mean-he-can-win-texas/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f1fbcc457430

(I GET the article's point...but the real take away here is give people an exciting/engaging candidate...and they'll show up. People are donating this kind of cash even though its a very, very long shot AT BEST.)


And if he can make Texas close, what could he do in Florida/VA/Ohio/PA?


Experience is a little weak, but I think people want a fresh face.


If he doesn't win the seat, he certainly still has a bright future.
13291664, i dont really trust the recent polls
Posted by mista k5, Fri Oct-12-18 04:39 PM
i dont think he will win but i do expect it to be within 3%. i think its better for the polls to look likes down instead of possibly winning as it will keep people that want to vote for him interested in actually voting. if it does start spreading more for cruz those folks might stay home also though.

everyone that is registered to vote, or still has time to register, and is against trump needs to head to the polls in november (or early vote).

sadly this will be my first midterm but dont expect it to be the last. cant sit out anymore.
13291669, That's fair...I don't trust polls too much either way
Posted by Stadiq, Fri Oct-12-18 04:52 PM


after '16, especially.

Either way, that fundraising is impressive. I HOPE he wins of course, but if he doesn't, he should throw his hat in the ring for the nomination.


>
>everyone that is registered to vote, or still has time to
>register, and is against trump needs to head to the polls in
>november (or early vote).
>
>sadly this will be my first midterm but dont expect it to be
>the last. cant sit out anymore.

Word. I know a few people with stories like this.
13291672, im def in this boat.
Posted by Reeq, Fri Oct-12-18 05:08 PM
>sadly this will be my first midterm but dont expect it to be
>the last. cant sit out anymore.

i will never miss another election in my lifetime now.
13291674, he really would have a great shot out the box imo.
Posted by Reeq, Fri Oct-12-18 05:46 PM
cali and texas are in the 1st 10 primary states this year. beto would have a shit ton of money to compete there right out the gate. and he would prolly clean up in both states (especially texas). thats a commanding lead in delegates through the opening leg.

i dont know how beto would do among older black voters who dont know him that well (southern states). but *nobody* is better at speaking directly about hot button black issues than he is. its just a matter of whether black folks get a chance to hear him before they vote.

13291675, im fully on board
Posted by mista k5, Fri Oct-12-18 05:55 PM
would definitely consider other options but if he did decide to run, wether he beats cruz or not, i would be with it. i know he said he would serve his term if he won but i dont think anyone would be mad at him if he changed his mind.

he definitely has recognition and buzz. i think he appeals to a broad spectrum of folks. sure he might not have a ton of experience but thats already been shown to not be important. he at least has some government experience.

13291762, cnn released a poll of current possible dem nominees
Posted by Reeq, Sun Oct-14-18 01:50 PM
...and beto got the same amount of votes as mike bloomberg (4%) lol
https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1051479886873985029

biden killing the game over sanders at a distant second.
13291842, depressing af n/m
Posted by benny, Mon Oct-15-18 09:09 AM

>biden killing the game over sanders at a distant second.
13291855, I agree, they are both too old to run
Posted by shygurl, Mon Oct-15-18 09:29 AM
13291860, these early polls are really just name recognition and favorability polls.
Posted by Reeq, Mon Oct-15-18 09:46 AM
biden is extremely well-known/liked in the party and can parachute into any district in america and not be a liability to the dem candidate (100% win rate with endorsements so far).

his age is def an issue in a real election tho. i wouldnt mind him running on a 1 term promise to establish sense/normalcy (backed up by legislation).
13291776, Too early
Posted by Lurkmode, Sun Oct-14-18 04:10 PM
n/m
13291797, first things first ......but
Posted by Warren Coolidge, Sun Oct-14-18 10:46 PM
if he wins.... he sets himself up to be one of the top young prospects....

He'd add himself to Joe Kennedy III....and Gavin Newsom …


13291849, Is this one of those things where after Beto looses we all go, what
Posted by Buddy_Gilapagos, Mon Oct-15-18 09:18 AM
happened, everyone I know and follow on twitter were super into this dude?

I had that first experience when Jesse Jackson ran for president and my 7 year old mind couldn't understand how he could not win, I think that's when i also learned the country was only 12 percent black which a shocker growing up in a 70% community.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"
13292447, No. But it’s one where Righties will brag about him losing
Posted by legsdiamond, Wed Oct-17-18 09:45 AM
Like they didn’t know his chances were slim to none cause it’s Texas.
13292439, does anyone make up their minds after watching debates?
Posted by mista k5, Wed Oct-17-18 09:28 AM
i dont know if the debate last night helped either of them

i kind of liked Beto saying cruz was absent from being a senator because he was too busy in iowa trying to be president. saying that cruz hasnt visited every county of texas but he sure visited every county in iowa.

if Beto wins i guess this could look bad if he decides to run for president in 2020
13292446, Rumor, win or lose - he would be top presidential candidate
Posted by The Real, Wed Oct-17-18 09:42 AM

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13292535, Bad news: He ain't gonna win - so what now?
Posted by handle, Wed Oct-17-18 11:43 AM
Note: I despise Cruz and this Beto would be the right choice, but it is gerrymandered, vote superssin', and deeply racist Texas we are talking about.

Note 2: If you live in Texas turn out and VOTE! He could still win (but he won't.)

So how does losing make him seems as a national candidate?

Also did the excitement factor cause a race that was never that close to "seem closer" for a while then to see "more unwinnable" now that it ever was?

Will he be able to go national if the first thing that can be said about him is "He lost to Ted Cruz- a person no one likes."
13292538, Can he win Wisconsin, Ohio, PA and Michigan?
Posted by legsdiamond, Wed Oct-17-18 11:45 AM
cause we ain’t winning Texas anytime soon so it should t matter

I hope voters are smarter than this IF he is the real deal.
13292539, i wonder what his plan is
Posted by mista k5, Wed Oct-17-18 11:48 AM
he definitely went into this knowing it was a long shot so he has to have a plan-b. im sure hes doing everything he can to win and wants to win but he has to be ready to lose.

it is weird to make the jump to president after losing your first run at US senate.

i cant wait for monday to go vote. need to talk to more people and see if any of them will vote for him.
13300222, abraham lincoln lost a senate race in 1858 and won prez in 1860.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 11:22 AM
people get hung up simply on the 'losing' part.

but if a relative (previously) unknown democrat can get within ~2% of winning solid conservative texas...and flipping the types of voters/districts/counties he flipped to make it that competitive...he can reshape the electorate of the entire country. important states like florida, georgia, ohio and north carolina are all less red than texas.

he significantly outperformed obama and clinton prez election performance in an midterm election that was more unfavorable to democrats (older, whiter, more conservative, more rural). he could outdo that performance in a prez year where there is traditionally more young/non-white voters.
13300243, Yeah, so he'd need to just be equal to Abraham Lincoln
Posted by handle, Tue Dec-04-18 12:16 PM
Sounds completely reasonable now.
13300258, that is not what he said...did Beto f*ck your girl?
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Dec-04-18 12:51 PM

You get real aggy with anything Beto related.

He lost, we get it.


He also came DAMN CLOSE in TX. Raised a bunch of money, has appeal, etc.


I'm not saying we anoint him, but we shouldn't rule him out because he lost TX by 2 points.

No one out there is going to NOT vote for him because he lost in 18 in the general.

Would that hurt him in a primary? Maybe. That's what primaries or for.
13300261, Shit.. lol
Posted by legsdiamond, Tue Dec-04-18 12:58 PM
13300263, oh is dude just a beto hater? i musta missed it.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 01:07 PM
13300268, lol I think its him
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Dec-04-18 01:19 PM
I hope I didn't confuse him with someone else.


But in the 2020 candidate I think he has like 10+ posts about we can't run a "loser" or "the guy who lost to Cruz" against Trump.

If it isn't him, that is my bad.


Like I said, no one is entering the booth in 2020 saying "well I was going to vote for this Beto guy who I really like, but he lost to Ted Cruz so..."

It won't sway people either way in the general. Especially in the age of Trump. Amerikkka voted an incompetent, sexist, racist reality star POTUS.

** Edit

Yeah, its him-

http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13092515&mesg_id=13092515&listing_type=search#13296913


He does NOT like Beto lol

**


13300277, lol damn i wish i knew. woulda saved me some keystrokes.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 01:43 PM
13300293, oh, y’all ain’t know???
Posted by legsdiamond, Tue Dec-04-18 02:34 PM
13300319, haha I was pretty sure
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Dec-04-18 03:55 PM

but then I got worried I mixed him up with someone else.

I had to confirm to be sure.


13300326, Yup, running someone who JUST lost is not a good look in general
Posted by handle, Tue Dec-04-18 04:21 PM
With the exception of Lincoln.

We'll have plenty of time in the next year to see who's running, where they stand on the issues, and then decide.

Right now Beto just has a following because he created excitement for a race he lost. Let's see how he does in California.
13300262, lincoln was actually a pretty unspectacular candidate.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 01:03 PM
only got about 40% of the prez vote against a deeply divided democratic party (north/south) and a field where 3 other candidates split the vote against him (including 2 democrats).

then was so bad in his 1st term (clamped down on civil liberties, failure to end war/slavery, etc) that his own party wanted to primary him.

so bad that he only won re-election by temporarily renaming the republican party and replacing his vp with a former democratic senator to attract pro-war democrats away from his top dem opponent.

im sure all you think about is his 'greatness' defined solely by the emancipation proclamation (which was more moderate/lenient/watered down than his party intended) so i wont bore you with the facts tho.
13300219, progressives are now attacking beto since he might run against bernie
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 11:10 AM
in the dem primary lol.

the fact bernie is likely running again is insane in itself.
https://twitter.com/CNBC/status/1069624877043331073
https://twitter.com/VICE/status/1069715030281732096
https://twitter.com/AP_Politics/status/1069572985177149440

but now it looks like beto is seriously considering running and might have obama alumni and dems in the crucial iowa primary behind him
https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1069218394212306946
https://twitter.com/reidepstein/status/1069628192049307648

so of course 'progressives' have to go scorched earth on him for potentially challenging the coronation of saint bernie.

the same way 'progressives' immediately started to paint kamala harris as a slave to wall street as soon as word got out that she was considering running...they are now tryna paint beto as a slave to big oil/gas.
https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/1069264575202189313

it was all good just a week ago (c)

with friends like these...who needs republicans?

13300220, Bernie Bros gonna be big mad if they elbow out Beto and Kamala
Posted by magilla vanilla, Tue Dec-04-18 11:14 AM
just for Biden to smash Bernie into the turf.
13300225, yeah i dont think bernie wins the dem primary.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 11:34 AM
he will pretty much get killt by a coalition of black voters (particularly in the south) and those educated/suburban moderates that accounted for the large majority of dem house gains in the midterms.

looking at how progressive candidates underperformed in competitive midterm general elections...he might actually be a weaker candidate this time around. a lot of dem voters have soured on the brand.

im just worried about the dem primary becoming toxic again with the potential divisiveness out of his supporters over hard feelings about losing and claims of establishment rigging. they feel entitled to the nomination in 2020 (like clinton in 2016...and 2008 lol).

the senior elections analyst at cnn sent out a tweet asking which potential 2020 dem candidate people thought was overrated. almost 5k replies and like 95% of people said bernie lol.
https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/1069361774640709634
13300227, Bernie looks good vs Hilldawg... but just old vs Beto
Posted by legsdiamond, Tue Dec-04-18 11:43 AM
13300236, yeah beto appealed to non-white voters that bernie struggled with too.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 12:00 PM
black women damn sure aint voting for bernie this go round. they love beto tho (s/o bey).

basically bernies whole focus is winning those white working class obama-trump voters that defected in 2016. but looking at the midterm results in the rust belt and midwest (like dem gov in kansas)...those voters are already parting ways with trump and trending dem again anyway.

i dont think bernie has much utility in a general election this year. he isnt expanding the base like bill clinton and obama. in fact...he could turn off women, black voters, moderates, and suburbanites and actually contract the new dem coalition.
13300223, Pointing out who his major donors are doesn’t seem scorched earth to me
Posted by GOMEZ, Tue Dec-04-18 11:30 AM
As a voter I think it’s a good idea to fully vet each candidate, even Beto. If he has a hard time explaining why he takes so much money from oil companies then maybe he’s not the one. Or maybe he’s the best candidate, even if imperfect. But it’s not wildly out of line to point out who his top voters are. I’m interested to see how his voting record on climate change and environmental issues lines up with his rhetoric as a result.

I hope Beto and his supporters do a better job of responding to legit questions and criticism than HRC.
13300230, context is key tho.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 11:49 AM
sirota and the rest of the our revolution/justice democrats/tyt/the intercept crowd have a history of trying to tarnish dems who run or might run against their preferred 'progressive' candidates. they smeared several candidates in heated races the last 2 years with iffy 'journalism', shoddy vetting, and outright foxnews-type spin/reach (even posted a fake recording of a candidate) and intentionally didnt retract until well after the story had circulated and been debunked by several people.

these are the same people who attacked dianne feinstein for both holding on to the dr ford letter *and* making it available to be leaked lol. just to try to damage her so their preferred primary/general (ran in both in cali) candidate could win.


for what its worth...he is using the exact same deceptive attack (individuals/employees vs corporations/pacs) that clinton ran against sanders in the 2016 primary lol.
https://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/04/01/hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-spar-over-fossil-fuel-donations/
https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?ind=E01&cycle=2016&recipdetail=P&mem=N&sortorder=U
13300232, I doubt it works this time since Trump is in office
Posted by legsdiamond, Tue Dec-04-18 11:53 AM
We don’t have fuck around time this election. If Beto is the wave we gonna ride.
13300237, i'm just saying this doesn't seem like a smear
Posted by GOMEZ, Tue Dec-04-18 12:01 PM
i also saw a bunch of pretty heated primaries in the midterms, and whether AOC or Manchin, people lined up when it mattered.

There are a lot of progressive voters and PACs who are going to try and push candidates to the left. That's their right and responsibility as voters. It doesnt' seem to be malicious.

I think worrying about Bernie's constituents at this point is putting the cart before the horse any way. He as a candidate was not particularly divisive in his rhetoric, and even more than that his wave seems to have crested. I voted Bern in the primary last time around, but that doesn't mean i'm riding for him this time around. I want to hear about all the candidates - the good and bad, so i can make an informed decision. The farther away we can get from voting for competing fairy tales, the better off we'll be as a country.
13300250, trust me. its a smear lol.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 12:35 PM
any other random commentor...ok maybe not. but these niggas? yeah just more of the same cookies out the cutter.

theyve literally been carrying out this exact same playbook for the last 2 years. 'oh hey...i just noticed this dem candidate i want to lose *insert something seemingly sketchy and un-progressive*'. they did it to northam, lance bottoms (they actually backed a conservative against her), davids, cisneros...and the list goes on and on.

they were on betos dick just a few days and several fec reports ago. now hes in the pocket of fossil fuel companies?

but these same folks had no problem shilling for a pro-coal, anti-abortion trump-voting gi joe character in a west virginia house race. or a pro-russia/syria trump-supporting deep state conspiracy theorizing fox news pundit in the ohio gov race.

so clearly its not about issue/policy objectivity and just informing potential voters.

wait until theintercept starts running beto hit pieces about him plotting to sabotage alexandria ocasio-cortez with nancy pelosi and tom perez lol.
13300251, it's not malicious or a smear, at all
Posted by kayru99, Tue Dec-04-18 12:36 PM
This is all standard stuff.
The idea that you can't question someone's donors in American politics is bullshit
13300254, Better now than later
Posted by legsdiamond, Tue Dec-04-18 12:46 PM
If they keep diving and digging after he addresses it then yeah... it’s a smear job
13300323, it is when it's purposefully misleading and lacks context
Posted by MiracleRic, Tue Dec-04-18 04:06 PM
13300327, how is any of this misleading?
Posted by kayru99, Tue Dec-04-18 04:23 PM
and what context is lacking?
13300523, smh
Posted by MiracleRic, Wed Dec-05-18 02:08 PM
what's missing is that these are individual donors meaning they work in the industry...

it doesn't mean the companies within the industry are donating large chunks of money

why this matters is context

the obvious common sense version is...this is TEXAS

that industry is one of the largest industries in the state

so it's pretty obvious that an obvious and unapologetic backer of Bernie conveniently throws out a stat that sounds sensational if you don't know or understand context

it's trying to make him look beholden to big oil when he's really just you know beholden to his constituents

that's only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to how this data is presented btw bc his individual donor was huge across a ton of different industries and scaled pretty predictably based on what industries employ the most individuals in the state
13300533, yeah I'll take my L on this
Posted by Stadiq, Wed Dec-05-18 02:29 PM

You guys are 100% right, and I kinda fell for it at first.


The good news is that it seems like an easy clap back AND a reason to remind everyone that he raised money from INDIVIDUALS not companies.

13300882, the thing about clapbacks is they aren't sensational though
Posted by MiracleRic, Fri Dec-07-18 11:27 AM
so the clapback is never going to reach as widely as the misinformation

this is exactly why fake news is so effective bc most people don't need context to start forming opinions

this isn't even shade at you bc it happens to everyone at some point
13300616, do we know if any of the donations are bundles from corps?
Posted by kayru99, Thu Dec-06-18 12:01 AM
are there stacks of big individual donations from oil execs?
Bundles were used all the time back when people cared about campaign financing; this has been a thing in American politics for a minute.

This isn't a smear, this is politics 101.
13300879, yes, we know the answer to those questions
Posted by MiracleRic, Fri Dec-07-18 11:25 AM
it's a transparent process which is why pointing out one dataset in a vaccuum is intentionally misleading...

it's taking advantage of kneejerk reactions and wildly varying levels of understanding

13300332, The question is, to what end is the investigation going?
Posted by magilla vanilla, Tue Dec-04-18 04:43 PM
Oil, gas, farming and steel are the top employing industries in Texas. So if Beto's raising funds through individual donors, chances are, he's going to have a lot of donors who work in those industries. That's VERY different from receiving large donations from Exxon and Monsanto.
13300343, I think Beto could probably roll with that explanation and be fine
Posted by GOMEZ, Tue Dec-04-18 06:33 PM
same as Bern dog when they tried to pin similar accusations on him.

I think a big difference w/say Beto vs. HRC is that likely no one is going to bring in the same amount of baggage as the Clintons. So like i said above, it's fine to look at that number and ask wtf? It seems like something Beto could fairly easily address in a debate or some other public forum. If he doesn't get defensive and refuse to address it for months on end Clinton-style, and then give some kind of half-assed non-explanation, then it won't amount to shit.

I went of from 'hhhmmm....' to 'who gives a fuck?' after about 2 min.




13300524, that's silly bc the initial "wtf" is based on ignorance
Posted by MiracleRic, Wed Dec-05-18 02:11 PM
the reason we keep expecting them to rationalize this is bc the way the data is presented is implying something that isn't there

it's silly to keep asking them why they get support from certain industries when it's really individuals within an industry that has a large presence in my state

it's pointless and silly bc it sows seeds of stupidity and tin foil hat folks eat it up and ignore the reasonable responses
13300567, Fair point. It's reasonable to ask who he gets money from, though
Posted by GOMEZ, Wed Dec-05-18 03:51 PM
oil industry sets off some flags. I wouldn't mind learning a bit more still, but for now it seem innocuous enough. I mean, what was the average contribution in the pool that was included as 'oil industry'? I know the threshold was 'above $200', but I would be curious to see if it's closer to 50 people donating $10K each than it is to 2500 people donating $200 ea.

The stat as presented was definitely shitty and fairly misleading, but worth asking the question.

And to clarify, my 'wtf' wasn't outrage (though for some it may be), it was more something that I wanted know more about cuz it was a surprising fact (even if it lacked context or understanding). My initial thought was 'did it affect his voting in any significant way?'. I'd still like to hear a bit more about that, since so many of his local constituents work in the oil industry.

I just can't get too worked up either way. It seems like political fair play to me. I mean, if he can't overcome that question...





13300615, yup
Posted by kayru99, Wed Dec-05-18 11:57 PM
13300833, in theory sure
Posted by MiracleRic, Fri Dec-07-18 09:27 AM
but when this is about intentionally misleading "data"

the onus on him to correct it is basically giving a pass to fake newsers

if the foundation of the questions being asked is ignorance and obvious malice...just hold the L and the person presenting the info accountable for being full of shit

as soon as the data is known to be bullshit...continuing to scrutinize data that's easily understood by most to seem fair is rewarding intellectual dishonesty with more of it disguised as critical thinking
13300226, Tried to tell Handle that Beto would change his mind
Posted by legsdiamond, Tue Dec-04-18 11:42 AM
I hope it’s true
13300233, 80 goddamned years old at the end of 2020.
Posted by double negative, Tue Dec-04-18 11:53 AM
I just cant...
13300283, btw these *same* folks are adamant about pelosi being too old
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 01:57 PM
and dems needing new/younger leadership asap.

but are still campaigning for a guy 5 years older than trump...who is already the oldest elected president ever.

then they got pissed and cried ageism/sexism when their handpicked 'progressive' candidate lost the dem caucus chair to a rising star 20 years younger than her. and white 'progressives' actually tried to play 'the race card' because she was a black woman who got passed over. nevermind the fact she got beat by a black man and dems have 2 black people in the top ranks of the party for the first time ever.

goalposts on roam like a flip phone.
13300329, no major progressive has a problem with pelosi's age
Posted by kayru99, Tue Dec-04-18 04:26 PM
they have a problem with her policy and funding and politics.

Is this your side hustle or something?
13300299, he definitely dying in office. old ass.
Posted by BrooklynWHAT, Tue Dec-04-18 03:02 PM
13300306, lol i saw some stat that he has like a 5% chance of dying this year.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 03:17 PM
like a 15% chance of dying by 2021.
like a 35% chance of dying in his 1st term.
and like 50/50 on dying in his 2nd term.
13300240, bernie as president just isnt gonna fly
Posted by mista k5, Tue Dec-04-18 12:06 PM
i like his tactics and policies im hoping if beto runs he gets him onboard. i dont think bernie will try to derail a candidate he could support. his supporters though?

hopefully dems can get organized this time and start getting behind the peoples preferred candidate.


right now im for beto but im open to seeing who else runs and how they compare.
13300242, Fuck Bernie (and you too if you support him)
Posted by handle, Tue Dec-04-18 12:15 PM
He's not becoming president.

This is like Perot '96 all over again.
13300244, Not at all, unless he runs as a third party candidate
Posted by GOMEZ, Tue Dec-04-18 12:19 PM
>This is like Perot '96 all over again.

13300252, I meant in the sense of "excitement" from a certain class
Posted by handle, Tue Dec-04-18 12:37 PM
In 96 - and today - we call them goobers.
13300264, no beto. no bernie. do you like anybody? lol.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 01:09 PM
13300246, I'm happy to let it all play out. No early anointed ones
Posted by PimpTrickGangstaClik, Tue Dec-04-18 12:21 PM
As long as shit doesn't get personal and people don't get entrenched into camps, I'm all for democrat candidates fighting it out.
13300389, Yeah, this is where I am
Posted by Marauder21, Wed Dec-05-18 10:34 AM
I can't with people who already have their person and won't listen to anyone else. Particularly when barely any of these people have said anything about foreign policy (the thing a President can actually impact the most by themselves) yet.
13300255, Cmon Reeq
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Dec-04-18 12:47 PM
It really seems like you have something against progressives. For one thing, you go extra hard on them- even when they are just doing what any other political group would do.

I like Beto. I like his chances, his swag, his funding, etc. I do.


But lets not anoint him. Lets learn from 16. Lets run an actual primary, and select the best candidate.


And no, I don't think that is Bernie. I think Bernie, Hillary, and Biden all need to fall back.


But please don't go back into attacking anything and everything progressives do.

And, do YOU want a Dem candidate/President who is in bed with big oil?
13300260, I expect any candidate to be in bed with somebody
Posted by legsdiamond, Tue Dec-04-18 12:56 PM
you from Cali? I expect Hollywood and tech dollars

You from NY? I expect Wall St dollars?

You from DC? I expect beltway shenanigans.

Just be better than the other guy in office and don’t have no ugly surprises later in the race.

Obama had Wall St dollars and we didn’t give a shit.
13300266, Fair
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Dec-04-18 01:15 PM

Which is why we should just get a real primary this time.


I don't like the oil thing, but maybe he is still the best candidate all things considered.

But in the primary let it all come out- within reason of course. And (like I think you said up top), better now than later.


** I didn't (still don't) like Obama's cozy relationship with Wall St. I think that, along with his tendency to run to the middle sometimes/desire to win over people calling him a socialist muslim, prevented him from being a GREAT president. But, I'd obviously take him back in a heart beat.
13300291, texas gdp growth and employment level are largely reliant
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 02:19 PM
on energy/utilities like fossil fuels. is a candidate from texas supposed to forsake an entire sector that keeps much of the working class tax base afloat? its like 1/5 the state economy alone or something like that.

are 'progressives' also gonna shit on betos support of nafta (that bernie hates) in texas...which has almost half a million agriculture/ranching/etc jobs tied directly to trade with mexico?

see how complex these things get? people cant just broadbush everything.
13300271, Yeah, I agree. These big firms & organizations donate to everybody
Posted by Marbles, Tue Dec-04-18 01:32 PM

They donate to GOP & Democrats who are running against each other for the same office.

That shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.
13300285, beto accepted no corporate money tho.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 02:05 PM
these are donations from individuals/employees who work in those sectors (its mandatorily disclosed). texas has the most fossil fuel employees in the nation. of course a lot of donations are gonna come from people who work them jobs.

its intentionally misleading.

and sirota (and his allies) all know this. because they defended bernie when clinton tied him to 'fossil fuel donors' the same way.
13300297, Word? Yeah, that's a different animal
Posted by Marbles, Tue Dec-04-18 02:52 PM
And you're right, if that's the case it's intentionally misleading.
13300276, i have a problem with 'progressives' not progressives.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 01:42 PM
im a progressive policy/vote-wise. the type with the track record to show for it but get labeled establishment/neoliberal/etc because they dont pledge allegiance to the $27 cult.

im criticizing the brand champions. not the true adherents.

the type that champion diversity and gender equality then try to kneecap a glass shattering lesbian and native american progressive woman candidate in kansas in favor of a mediocre white male carpet bagger from missouri who organized for bernie and wore the 'progressive' label louder.

the type to support a socially conservative anti-abortion pro-assad anti-muslim anti-gay dem senator from hawaii simply because she endorsed bernie when nobody else would. then attack joy ann reid for being 'bigoted' and 'homophobic' over old blog posts.

look im all for scrutinizing campaign contributions. but these *exact* people criticized hillary clinton for running the *exact* same attack on bernie sanders (conflating donations by employees of a disclosed industry with corporate donations).

theyve been doing this passive aggressive smearing against threats to their preferred candidates for an entire election election. it didnt start with beto. thats exactly why they are getting called out.
13300284, who specifically, though?
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Dec-04-18 02:01 PM

Thanks for the response, but maybe I just need to keep a better eye out for specific people/publications...?


I feel you. The Bernie loyalists are...weird...and I have no doubt they have caused damage. The Bernie for Prez folks need to fall back for a number of reasons.


However, I probably get overly defensive because I was consistently accused of being a Bernie Bro cuz I had issues with Hil and her campaign.

In other words, I get a little worried that anyone who has criticisms of the Dem party or their front-runners just get lumped in as Bernie bros- and that isn't necessarily the case.

13300296, i dont think anyone on here hated hillary more than me lol.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 02:49 PM
i just found this old post.
http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=12979692&mesg_id=12979692&listing_type=search#12979773

for me...the term bernie bro is reserved for the cartoonishly/stereotypically devoted. like the unintentionally comedic and completely predictable. theres exactly one person on here who fits that bill imo...and it def aint you.

as far as specific people im referring in the above posts...man...theres like an entire cottage industry filled with them. david sirota, michael tracey, glenn greenwald (and theintercept), thenation, theyoungturks mostly, etc.
13300298, holy shit look at these old predictions of mine from feb 2016.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 03:01 PM
http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=12975861&mesg_id=12975861&listing_type=search#12976593
http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=12975861&mesg_id=12975861&listing_type=search#12976635
http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=12975861&mesg_id=12975861&listing_type=search#12976652
13300304, Damn.
Posted by Brew, Tue Dec-04-18 03:14 PM
13300307, Murph ain’t been the same since
Posted by legsdiamond, Tue Dec-04-18 03:27 PM
Seen him post a few times in sports but dude prolly threw his politic credentials in the Hudson or set them shits on fire.

13300311, Aw man. No one should take it that hard.
Posted by Brew, Tue Dec-04-18 03:32 PM
Cause we were literally, besides reeq apparently, ALL wrong about 2016. Like pundits, most of us here (besides reeq haha), local news anchors, 538, Obama, etc. etc. etc. Everyone (besides ...) got it wrong.

No reason to quit talking shop. Or maybe it's for his mental health in which case ... I get it and should've prolly followed suit.
13300330, He came thru and let us know he was done talking politics
Posted by legsdiamond, Tue Dec-04-18 04:40 PM
Hopefully he comes back but I don’t blame him if he doesn’t. Trump snatched some souls with that election. Folks were so sure... lol.

Thankfully I jumped off that bandwagon early as fuck. As soon as murph told me you didn’t have to show taxes legally to run... and then my wife’s gay white friend in Alabama called and said he was voting for the first time in his life



....for Trump.


I knew shit was funky. Still mad about that. Dude actually called like she would be happy for him. Fucking asshole.

13300336, whoa
Posted by mista k5, Tue Dec-04-18 04:54 PM
>... and then my wife’s gay white friend in Alabama called
>and said he was voting for the first time in his life
>
>
>
> ....for Trump.
>
>
>I knew shit was funky. Still mad about that. Dude actually
>called like she would be happy for him. Fucking asshole.
>
>

13300352, Holy shit.
Posted by Brew, Tue Dec-04-18 09:50 PM
>RE: He came thru and let us know he was done talking politics
>Hopefully he comes back but I don’t blame him if he
>doesn’t. Trump snatched some souls with that election. Folks
>were so sure... lol.
>
>Thankfully I jumped off that bandwagon early as fuck. As soon
>as murph told me you didn’t have to show taxes legally to
>run... and then my wife’s gay white friend in Alabama called
>and said he was voting for the first time in his life
>
>
>
> ....for Trump.
>
>
>I knew shit was funky. Still mad about that. Dude actually
>called like she would be happy for him. Fucking asshole.

That's .... that's fucked up. Really really fucked up.

Yea I mean ... I honestly said early on in general season to a group of my college friends on an e-mail "holy shit Trump's gonna take this thing" and it was based on similar sort of eerie instances that shocked me. People I never would've expected backing him, stories of parts of the country w/Trump signs all over the lawn ... it just *felt* like it was in the air.

But all that said I was *still* being facetious. Like at the time I was so shocked that he would get even 1% of the vote that I wrote that e-mail. But all I really thought was that it would be *far* closer than people had been predicting.

And I would've never gone scorched earth like murph apparently did to bet the house that he wouldn't win. Cause again, it was in the air. The bigotry runs DEEP and you could fucking feel it.

But I mean ... my lack of presence in those 2016 threads is telling. If I *really* thought he had a reasonable chance at winning I'd have been all up in here. And I wasn't. So I, like everyone else (besides reeq !) didn't take him *that* seriously. A fatal mistake, of course.
13300353, I laughed at Denny early on
Posted by legsdiamond, Tue Dec-04-18 10:11 PM
but soon after I started warning people not to trust America.


Also, the hate for Hillary is real.
13300354, Yea it is. And to be fair a lot of it is justified.
Posted by Brew, Tue Dec-04-18 10:27 PM
>Also, the hate for Hillary is real.

She was a horrible candidate because she's not relatable, sadly. Also because the perception that she only won the primaries because it was "her turn" had some merit.

But then the "don't trust America" thing you said comes into play because as cheesy as she was, as unnatural as she was, as many mini scandals she had, as much as you knew people would elicit Bill at every turn ... she was and is STILL a TRILLION times more qualified than 45*. There's not a thing you could say about Hillary, true or false, that would make a rational person think 45* was a better vote.

Still so mindblowing. But yea Hillary was just about the worst person to go head to head with that creature.
13300317, lol yeah that was rough
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Dec-04-18 03:53 PM

I don't remember all the specifics, but I know he was SUPER confident it would work out.

13300308, aight give us the future this time. whats gonna happen.
Posted by BrooklynWHAT, Tue Dec-04-18 03:27 PM
13300310, PLEASE DON'T
Posted by Brew, Tue Dec-04-18 03:30 PM
I have to imagine it's nothing I'd want to hear. Ha.
13300322, lol right now im actually leaning kinda optimistic.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 04:01 PM
ive repeatedly said it on here but trump is basically putting up gw bush 2nd term approval numbers before the crash. and sure enough dems gained even more house seats than they did in the 2006 wave. and it would have been even better without gop gerrymandering districts in key states.

dems ran up the biggest midterm popular vote margin in history. like 10 mil votes between the parties.

the rust belt swung back to dems in a big way (except for ohio). so i think trump can kiss those states goodbye.

repubs gaining seats in the senate is a bummer but dems had a historically bad map. -2 seat net loss and all that bad. and pushing nv and az more blue bodes well for the future. as does significantly better performances (tho losing) in ga and tx.

it wouldnt be a surprise if dems do as good or better than 2008. especially with an inspiring unifying candidate like beto.

the only problem imo is gonna be voter suppression. and looking at whats going on in wi, mi, and nc right now...it looks like repubs think thats their only key to win too. the fl repub gov gets to appoint 3 new judges to the state supreme court too. replacing 3 liberal judges for a 6-1 conservative majority. so you know fl is about to be on some fuck shit without having to worry about the court tamping on voter suppression like it has in the past few years.
13300335, Biggest variable is what's going on in the Wisconsin legislature
Posted by magilla vanilla, Tue Dec-04-18 04:48 PM
If they succeed in lameducking the voter rolls to hell, Trump's got a good chance at reelection. If that power grab gets thrown out, it'll be a Democrat. Hell, Clinton lost by smaller of a margin than the amount the rolls were purged in Wisconsin thanks to the voter ID law.
13300313, id have to wait to see the candidates 1st.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-04-18 03:41 PM
13300316, damn...
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Dec-04-18 03:52 PM

I wasn't really heavily involved at that stage, but you nailed a lot of stuff.


The idea that the choice was Hillary or a 75 year old independent socialist never sat right to me. Wish I could have gotten in on some of those fights...
13300465, there was a great video I watched yesterday about this
Posted by Dr Claw, Wed Dec-05-18 12:25 PM
my dude Michael Brooks (seriously, watch his show) had Kyle Kulinski from Secular Talk (who I feel goes into that "progressive (with quotes)" box of which you speak) and they just kind of talked it out.

really good points made. Brooks (who understands history as it relates to politics) made sure to note that to build a coalition, you need to be serious about certain things to get the groups to come together.

you don't even have to go to 2016. look at 2008.

Barack Obama got the "DMX" response until Iowa caucus happened. a few more wins and people were convinced that he would have their back in certain ways, he rode that wave to the Presidency.

(now whether Obama held up his side of the deal is a different discussion altogether...)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JV5o2aPgiC8
13300493, kyle kulinski is def in the group of 'progressives'.
Posted by Reeq, Wed Dec-05-18 01:06 PM
the type of folks who spend more time attacking dems (supposedly) from the left more than they attack the american taliban (repubs).

kulinski is part of that justice dem pac (along with tyt folks) whose candidates flipped a total of 1 seat in the midterm house wave...but they feel they know whats best for the national party lol.

im glad you brought up coalition building because these folks just constantly produce single-issue litmus tests to filter candidates through. its wall street/corporate pac donations. then its medicare for all. now its green new deal. they progress to new reasons to not vote for someone over.

shaun king (who is great for police and criminal justice shit but absolute trash on just about everything else lol) literally sends out a tweet like every year on some 'im not a single issue voter at all...but i dont think i could ever vote for someone who doesnt endorse (insert new single issue litmus test here)'. he always gets clowned for it because its to the point of parody now.

youll never have a tent big enough to win nationwide if you dont moderate (which is why progressives have trouble winning).

thanks for that link. ima check it out.

13300675, Indeed.
Posted by Dr Claw, Thu Dec-06-18 11:38 AM
>im glad you brought up coalition building because these folks
>just constantly produce single-issue litmus tests to filter
>candidates through. its wall street/corporate pac donations.
>then its medicare for all. now its green new deal. they
>progress to new reasons to not vote for someone over.
>
>shaun king (who is great for police and criminal justice shit
>but absolute trash on just about everything else lol)
>literally sends out a tweet like every year on some 'im not a
>single issue voter at all...but i dont think i could ever vote
>for someone who doesnt endorse (insert new single issue litmus
>test here)'. he always gets clowned for it because its to the
>point of parody now.
>
>youll never have a tent big enough to win nationwide if you
>dont moderate (which is why progressives have trouble
>winning).

you'll probably enjoy Brooks's commentary the most.
Where Kyle had me looking funny was when he was more generous to the amount of "non-flippable" Republicans.

13300552, Bernie got high on all that attention
Posted by Mynoriti, Wed Dec-05-18 03:19 PM
Which is understandable just as a human being. it's like nothing he experienced in 70+ years. He's not gonna be able to recapture that magic. If Beto runs, Bern's about to be grumpy old man as shit seeing that whipper snapper snatch up most of that energy and adulation.

You could see him grit his teeth trying to ride for Hillary. He did what he had to do but he was never able to fake it well.
13300390, Beto or Tulsi
Posted by Vex_id, Wed Dec-05-18 10:35 AM

-->
13300396, What do people like so much about Tulsi?
Posted by Marauder21, Wed Dec-05-18 10:49 AM
is this just because she was an early Bernie backer in 2016, or are there that many Medicare for All supporters that are also Hindu nationalists with very strong opinions on how Assad is a victim?

Like, there's enough actual progressives out there who don't have her weird baggage, so is there something else I'm missing?
13300477, i ask another okp this all the time when he brings her name up.
Posted by Reeq, Wed Dec-05-18 12:45 PM
like have you ever looked at her actual history?

theres a reason why the alt right loves her and she was up for a position in the trump administration.
13300495, I don't get it either...this is where putting "progressive"
Posted by Stadiq, Wed Dec-05-18 01:08 PM
in quotes is fully justified.

She does not seem that progressive at all, and her baggage is unreal.


The **only** potential I see is as a strategic VEEP pick to poach some voters who voted for Trump last time.

But I think there are better picks for that too...such as Klobuchar, who could probably help lock up Minnesota, WI and potentially others.

Or if it is the veteran thing, seems like Tammy Duckworth would be a better VEEP pick...though I'll admit I don't know much about her.

13300502, she didnt support any form of single payer until mid 2017.
Posted by Reeq, Wed Dec-05-18 01:25 PM
didnt join the house progressive caucus til last winter lol.

but they still shit on hillary for 'evolving' only when it was politically expedient (even tho she was fighting for single payer in the 90s lol).

as much as 'progressives' slander 'neoliberals' in congress who have been actually voting for progressive legislation for decades...its really baffling why they stan for this chick (unless its really only about her going out on a limb for bernie).
13300671, I think she must have been very anti-imperialist
Posted by Dr Claw, Thu Dec-06-18 11:36 AM
and willing to talk about the abuses of "both sides".

she basically gives me "converted libertarian" vibes, because yeah. I'd take Bernie Sanders 90x over her
13303832, She's a visionary when it comes to to the anti-war movement
Posted by Vex_id, Thu Dec-27-18 01:13 PM
The (once) only viable challenger in Congress to the Military-Industrial Complex has now been effective at shoring up support to rethink how we draw foreign policy and alliances.

Beyond all of her other progressive attributes, she's a leader on foreign policy and has the ability to resonate with a large swath of the electorate. She's actually a pretty practical choice.
-->
13300719, Gabbard won’t work.
Posted by Willong, Thu Dec-06-18 01:07 PM
Too antiwar for the Democratic primary. Democrats prefer their candidates silent on foreign policy or hawkish.
13300394, Pour one out for Avenatti's campaign that never was
Posted by Marauder21, Wed Dec-05-18 10:45 AM
Could've grifted so much money from so many credulous dipshits.
13300442, i never understood his appeal
Posted by mista k5, Wed Dec-05-18 11:55 AM
13300472, i liked him in the beginning.
Posted by Reeq, Wed Dec-05-18 12:39 PM
not as a potential politician tho lol.

dude should have just stuck to lawyering. but his ego got out of control.

dude turned into an entry level shitshow tho. muddying the kavanaugh accusation convo, swindling beto donations for his super pac, domestic violence accusations, fighting with lefties on twitter, apparently filing the lawsuit against trump/cohen against stormys will, etc.

but i still appreciate the fact that he created the snowball that lead to michael cohen flipping and the 1st concrete trump criminal act being exposed (with more to come).
13300497, yes to this
Posted by mista k5, Wed Dec-05-18 01:12 PM
>but i still appreciate the fact that he created the snowball
>that lead to michael cohen flipping and the 1st concrete trump
>criminal act being exposed (with more to come).
13300554, he'll probably be a fox contributor a year from now
Posted by Mynoriti, Wed Dec-05-18 03:22 PM
13300685, See this is why fast microwave media sucks.
Posted by Buddy_Gilapagos, Thu Dec-06-18 11:59 AM
This dude was never a presidential contender. In the days where news wasn't working on a hourly news cycle, this dude's announcement would have been a blip like Trump's announcement in the 80s.

But because of the hourly news cycle, bullshit gets treated seriously and discussed over and over again until shit is talked into existence.

I am proud to say I didn't read a single article about this dude's "campaign" because it never had a whiff of being a real thing.




**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"
13300737, btw heres a donor summary showing why attacks on beto are misleading
Posted by Reeq, Thu Dec-06-18 02:09 PM
this is a more thorough breakdown from the same site as the chart that 'progressives' are circulating to tie beto to the oil/gas industry.

but strangely...they didnt post this detailed info. *wink*

https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/industries?cid=N00033540&cycle=2018

1st...beto is the #1 recipient for donors in damn near *every* industry but 6. and he is #2 in 4 of the remaining 6 industries.

2nd...the contributions come from 100% individuals. $0 in corporate pac contributions for all industries.

im actually glad they tried this line of attack now. made it much easier to debunk before it could be spun into a real issue.
13300738, dope
Posted by mista k5, Thu Dec-06-18 02:18 PM
thanks for this.

i dont know how to feel about these articles about him meeting with obama or obama's "operatives"

it makes sense if he is considering a run to do his homework and try to get the best people on board.

im just worried about beto being "anointed" so early or push back from faux and foes trying to tie him to obama/clinton.

i think trump being president might have actually removed a lot of obama stigma....not clinton though.
13300749, obama has been regularly meeting with *everybody*.
Posted by Reeq, Thu Dec-06-18 02:52 PM
including biden, bernie, warren, booker, etc.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/11/politics/obama-2020-contenders-meeting/index.html

he even met with andrew gillum recently even tho theres been no real indication he is considering running for president.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/05/politics/andrew-gillum-barack-obama-meeting/index.html

theres no evidence obama is even talking to people specifically about running in 2020. he has been talking to schumer, pelosi, coons and flake too. and im pretty sure none of them are running for prez lol.

i think the media is just ramping up its 2020 narratives because its profitable and they wanna get those ratings up for those ad buy rates during campaign season.

13300765, true
Posted by mista k5, Thu Dec-06-18 04:24 PM
the narrative is what worries me.

those early headlines can stick with people.
13300772, im not sure people care about ties like that.
Posted by Reeq, Thu Dec-06-18 04:51 PM
especially ties to obama. he left office with an almost 60% approval rating.

repubs just spent an entire midterm campaign cycle tying just about every dem candidate to nancy pelosi (who is far more unpopular than obama). dems ended up netting their most house seats since watergate, the biggest midterm percentage margin since 1986, biggest midterm raw vote total margin ever.
13300789, Agreed. Plus, Obama and his team know how to win elections
Posted by Stadiq, Thu Dec-06-18 06:43 PM

Regardless of where you fall on Obama (and team), they can win elections.

AND, it seems he/they learned from their mistakes in 2010.
13300793, yeah obama alumni did well in the midterms.
Posted by Reeq, Thu Dec-06-18 07:28 PM
honestly i think a lot of the losses attributed to obama were just backlash against a black president. issues be damned.

the public opinion trajectory of obamacare pretty much proves this.
13300814, Pretty sure even Obama admitted
Posted by Stadiq, Fri Dec-07-18 01:13 AM

That he eased up on the gas after 08, and didn’t
do the best job selling successes, etc.

I want to say he said something like that in an
interview towards the end of his presidency.

That’s what I was referencing.

I agree with you on the backlash not just in
‘10 but all the way up until now.

But

I do think ’10 didnt have to be as bad as it was- and
I think that was Obama’s point.

Never stop selling, don’t ease up on the message,
don’t take any election for granted.

I really liked that he could admit that mistake- I hope
I didn’t dream it.

One of the things that pissed me off most after 16
is that Hilary folks seemingly couldn’t even entertain
their potential mistakes.
13300841, oh there def were other factors but
Posted by Reeq, Fri Dec-07-18 10:06 AM
the koch brothers going all out, the tea party being unleashed, the courts taking the shackles off voter suppression and dark money, blatant obstruction in states and congress, acceptance of obstruction and rejection of basic governance by citizens just to see him 'fail' (even at their own expense), the biggest exodus of non-college educated whites from the democratic party since the civil rights act, republican voters abandonment of the principle of democracy and full embrace of authoritarianism...all reactions to a black president.

shit...half of white dems refused to campaign with obama and barely hardly ever defended him and his policies because they were terrified of their white constituents at home.

dude saved the economy, gave millions of people healthcare, and mandated fairness for women in the workplace. but he was still on a political island by himself. and he was an anchor around the necks of democrats across the country. because of the color of his skin.

all the salesmanship in the world aint gonna be able to blunt most of that.
13300942, yep, ol girl in Kentucky (Alison Lundergan Grimes) was one of these
Posted by Dr Claw, Fri Dec-07-18 01:38 PM
>shit...half of white dems refused to campaign with obama and
>barely hardly ever defended him and his policies because they
>were terrified of their white constituents at home.
>
>dude saved the economy, gave millions of people healthcare,
>and mandated fairness for women in the workplace. but he was
>still on a political island by himself. and he was an anchor
>around the necks of democrats across the country. because of
>the color of his skin.
>
>all the salesmanship in the world aint gonna be able to blunt
>most of that.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/10/09/40-painful-seconds-of-alison-lundergan-grimes-refusing-to-say-whether-she-voted-for-president-obama/?utm_term=.2f4e6573b77a

she should have, in a world where all these imaginary "rational" people exist, mopped the floor with that corrupt crook turtle McConnell.

but.... white people
13300952, they asked clay aiken (yeah *that* clay aiken) in an interview
Posted by Reeq, Fri Dec-07-18 01:59 PM
if he was gonna have obama come down and campaign with him while he was running for a house seat in nc. he was like 'OH GOD NO'. spent most of his campaign having to 'defend' his vote for obama in 2012 smh. then lost by 20pts anyway.

bill maher called him out when he barked on democrats for distancing themselves from obama (he mentioned grimes too lol).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3p5kzwd7mZo

but think about how racist this country is. democrats had to distance themselves from a true virtuous statesman like obama to win elections. meanwhile repubs run hand and hand with a completely corrupt dirtbag like trump to get votes.

13302954, it was worth it to me to see all of them lose
Posted by Mynoriti, Wed Dec-19-18 04:12 PM
Grimes, Aikin, Mary Landrieu.
What a truly idiotic strategy
Fuck those people

>if he was gonna have obama come down and campaign with him
>while he was running for a house seat in nc. he was like 'OH
>GOD NO'. spent most of his campaign having to 'defend' his
>vote for obama in 2012 smh. then lost by 20pts anyway.
>
>bill maher called him out when he barked on democrats for
>distancing themselves from obama (he mentioned grimes too
>lol).
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3p5kzwd7mZo
>
>but think about how racist this country is. democrats had to
>distance themselves from a true virtuous statesman like obama
>to win elections. meanwhile repubs run hand and hand with a
>completely corrupt dirtbag like trump to get votes.
>
>
13300750, apparently bernie was the 5th biggest recipient of defense cash in 2016
Posted by Reeq, Thu Dec-06-18 02:55 PM
even more than neocon warhawk john mccain.
*wink*

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?ind=D&recipdetail=A&sortorder=U&mem=Y&cycle=2016
13300752, under fire...dave sirota defends himself by re-litigating 2008 primary.
Posted by Reeq, Thu Dec-06-18 03:10 PM
https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/1070745145644003328

clinton derangement syndrome apparently has no expiration date.

'progressives' horseshoeing towards fox news viewers.

its a small sect of bernie fanatics up against...clinton, obama, and beto supporters. basically against the entire democratic party lol. yeah the 2020 primary aint gonna be good for these folks.
13300790, btw this is the tweet sirota is replying to.
Posted by Reeq, Thu Dec-06-18 06:52 PM
https://twitter.com/neeratanden/status/1070707516697403399

its pretty obvious to everyone whats going on.
13300834, he's an obvious fanboy pretending to be a journalist lol
Posted by MiracleRic, Fri Dec-07-18 09:33 AM
13300837, 'progressive' bernie supporter in wapo: beto isnt progressive enough
Posted by Reeq, Fri Dec-07-18 09:50 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-this-progressive-texan-cant-get-excited-about-beto-orourke/2018/12/05/641c7f0e-f8b9-11e8-8c9a-860ce2a8148f_story.html

same 'progressive' bernie supporter: im anti-abortion.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dtxtw0mUcAAntNE.jpg

like cmon.
13300884, smh
Posted by MiracleRic, Fri Dec-07-18 11:30 AM
13301370, beto tops all candidates in moveon.org members poll.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-11-18 11:58 AM
biden in 2nd (lol). bernie in 3rd (yikes).
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/beto-o-rourke-narrowly-tops-moveon-2020-presidential-straw-poll-n946501

bernie got 78% of the vote from this same group in 2016. now hes in 3rd. if progressive activist groups arent firmly behind him then it shows hes lost a considerable amount of support even among his own base.

i see exactly why they would fear beto now. if hes doing well with progressives and young people...then bernie has no path to the nomination.
13301374, RE: beto tops all candidates in moveon.org members poll.
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Dec-11-18 12:08 PM
>biden in 2nd (lol). bernie in 3rd (yikes).
>https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/beto-o-rourke-narrowly-tops-moveon-2020-presidential-straw-poll-n946501
>
>bernie got 78% of the vote from this same group in 2016. now
>hes in 3rd. if progressive activist groups arent firmly
>behind him then it shows hes lost a considerable amount of
>support even among his own base.
>
>i see exactly why they would fear beto now. if hes doing well
>with progressives and young people...then bernie has no path
>to the nomination.
>

If he got 78% of the vote against Hillary only, I think that tells you a lot.


Honestly, the primary "field" 4 years ago was so terrible I don't even think you can compare the results either way.


My main point is that is why Bernie or die heads have to snap back to reality. His only competition last time was a historically disliked/distrusted candidate with a ton of baggage, and a politician so terrible they based a villain on The Wire after him.


I am surprised to see Biden so high with Move On members, but damn at the undecided. And I am honestly shocked Bloomberg is on the list at all. He pay people to vote for him?


Booker might want to pack it in already though lol. I just don't see it with dude.


Honestly, the biggest surprise here is Warren to me. I know its just a straw poll, but I wonder if her people are concerned by that.
13301538, i think the overall point is that bernie doesnt have a stranglehold
Posted by Reeq, Wed Dec-12-18 10:38 AM
on what many considered to be his natural core.

if anyone knows how big of a part moveon.org played in sanders rise then they know how big of a deal this is.

to see him splitting votes with establishment dem biden and beto (who has a lot of position that arent even necessarily 'progressive') should raise red flags.

i said it on here a few times before but i thought bernie would be a weaker primary candidate this go round. thats how things are looking right now (even tho its an early poll).

you hit on something important. a lot of bernies appeal seemed to have been based on acute anti-clinton sentiment. the fact that someone indistinguishable from clinton policy-wise (biden) is beating bernie (and among progressives!) seems to prove this.

i think biden and beto could consolidate a lot of votes split between all of the 'establishment' candidates on the list too (if they were to pull out or not run). the same cant be said for bernie imo. that should be even more alarming to his folks.
13301378, Bernie is too old
Posted by legsdiamond, Tue Dec-11-18 12:13 PM
and now that Trump has shown he has the crazies we need new energy.
13301392, Bernie and his supporters aren't the enemy in 2020 either
Posted by GOMEZ, Tue Dec-11-18 12:36 PM
they're gonna push for a progressive agenda, which they should do. We gotta let the Bernie Bro thing go.

I'm still not even sure, Bernie runs though. I supported Bern in 2016, and i still think a lot of his policy ideas are a great way forward for our country. In the primary I'll vote for whoever comes closest what I think is the best way forward for our country. As a former Bernie voter, my lukewarmness on Bern in 2020 has less to do with his policy than it does with me not wanting a candidate who is old as dust.

I doubt I would vote for Bernie, cuz as mentioned, he's old as fuck. I appreciate that he lit a fire under some actual honest to goodness left wing politicians, though. Our country has been slowly sliding to the right since Jimmy Carter.

Bottom line, i think most people will rally around a Democrat with an actual message and vision. Beto could be that dude, but he's going to have to firm it up a bit as the primary comes near. Right now he's painting in some pretty broad strokes, which is fine at this point in the game, but he's going to need to take a few hard positions at some point. Trying to be all things to all people was one of HRCs biggest flaws.



13301507, I agree with all of this
Posted by Dr Claw, Tue Dec-11-18 09:59 PM
I think that HRC was even worse though.
13301541, i think this is the legacy of the current progressive movement.
Posted by Reeq, Wed Dec-12-18 11:01 AM
>I doubt I would vote for Bernie, cuz as mentioned, he's old as
>fuck. I appreciate that he lit a fire under some actual
>honest to goodness left wing politicians, though. Our country
>has been slowly sliding to the right since Jimmy Carter.

even tho they arent piling up big wins in competitive elections or knocking off moderate incumbents at an extraordinary rate...they are no doubt pushing candidates left on key issues (like cuomo/nixon, northam/perriello, etc).

but that also stunts a lot of their ability to get elected when their more well-rounded opponent (by traditional standards) can just pick off a progressive stance or two from them and render them inert.

if progressives selectively moderated to fit their districts/states instead of the rote dedication to a 'progressive' checklist then they would fare better nationwide imo. like running on a $15 minimum wage in a college-educated suburban swing district isnt really gonna move the needle lol.
13301527, Man I could get hype over a Beto/Harris Ticket
Posted by Buddy_Gilapagos, Wed Dec-12-18 10:02 AM
And I think if they could get Bernie to endorse/bless early and announce he would have a prominent role in their administration, that would be dope and a win for all (Sorry Biden/Clinton).



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"
13301542, this is way too good to happen lol.
Posted by Reeq, Wed Dec-12-18 11:08 AM
thats my dream ticket right now tho.

i hate how dem candidates have to worry about being attacked from the left as much as being attacked from the right. bernie folks already have both beto and harris in their crosshairs and i dont think even bernie can stop his supporters from going michael myers.
13301529, Remember when Warren seemed like she got next?
Posted by Amritsar, Wed Dec-12-18 10:05 AM
yikes not so much anymore


these are her peoples too
13301534, has anyone ever completely tanked their chances
Posted by Reeq, Wed Dec-12-18 10:19 AM
on the (unofficial) opening of their campaign like that before?

homegirl had a short film and an accompanying thinkpiece in a major newspaper and told trump where to send his money like 'domino muthafucka' lol.

niggas saw them opening weekend numbers and immediately pulled the remaining promo run.
13301539, But so much of this is artificial though. Like that michael avenatti
Posted by Buddy_Gilapagos, Wed Dec-12-18 10:44 AM
distraction. He announces he is running for president and the media covers it and takes it seriously though it was so clear that dude never had a chance at being a real contender.

I love Warren but never thought she had a chance of being President of anything other than the NorthEast. Same with Bloomberg. These people don't have real shots.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"
13301546, Well, at least one dude from TX is running: Julian Castro got 5 on it
Posted by Teknontheou, Wed Dec-12-18 11:17 AM
Forms Presidential exploratory committee

https://youtu.be/j9EdmaN-pZ4
13301717, tulsi gabbard seriously considers running.
Posted by Reeq, Wed Dec-12-18 07:31 PM
https://twitter.com/JRBoh/status/1073011363755249665

more power to her lol.
13302261, cnn poll: biden clear favorite
Posted by Reeq, Fri Dec-14-18 03:51 PM
healthy lead over bernie and beto with a sample more representative of the entire dem electorate.

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1073632059397234688

i have no idea why im even posting these polls 2 years out from the election. the same polls have clinton as clear favorite among dems in 2008 and jeb bush among repubs in 2016 lol.
13302262, regardless of how far out we are
Posted by Stadiq, Fri Dec-14-18 03:52 PM

Who in the fuck answers that question "John Kerry"??!?


smh
13302268, and dude still got more votes than elizabeth warren.
Posted by Reeq, Fri Dec-14-18 04:11 PM
13302300, Fans of the Iran nuclear deal and the Paris climate agreement.
Posted by stravinskian, Fri Dec-14-18 06:04 PM

I don't think he'd be a good candidate. Clearly he's benefitting from name recognition. But he was a workhorse in the second Obama term, and he'd be a damn good President.
13302302, I'm talking about someone's ability to win at this point
Posted by Stadiq, Fri Dec-14-18 06:06 PM

There are several people would make great presidents who wouldn't win.

He wouldn't win. **shrugs**

13302306, I think you're taking this poll WAAAYYY too seriously.
Posted by stravinskian, Fri Dec-14-18 06:13 PM

Not everything has to turn into a rant against the Democrats.
13302311, huh? Everyone who is in here is just talking- relax
Posted by Stadiq, Fri Dec-14-18 06:26 PM
In fact, my initial John Kerry response was a joke.

My point is when asked, Democrats should answer with someone who can win.

My Biden post is mostly a response to Reeq's ongoing belief that Biden should be the guy. Its not the first time he has said that, so I posted (on a message forum) my thoughts on it. There was context.


Don't go back to being overly sensitive about Democrats please.

Its been cool to see you contribute without getting all aggy when someone has something critical to say about the party.


** And how is saying other Democrats would be better a choice, a rant against the Democrats? lol lol
13302266, I just hope that's not the complete list of candidates
Posted by GOMEZ, Fri Dec-14-18 04:06 PM
and Joe Biden? Muhfucker is the same age as Bernie.

13302270, who would you like to see on the list?
Posted by Reeq, Fri Dec-14-18 04:14 PM
btw none of those people are officially candidates. these polls are basically just speculation gauges based on name recognition and recent 'scoops'.
13302272, im a no on biden
Posted by mista k5, Fri Dec-14-18 04:22 PM
he should had ran in 2016. i know he was stepping aside for clinton but yeah no need for biden.

13302280, i would vote for biden over booker, bernie, kerry, and warren.
Posted by Reeq, Fri Dec-14-18 04:49 PM
the only knock on him (from me) is his age. even with that...i still think he is more electable in a general than everyone in the poll and could patch together large parts of the obama ascendant majority + bill clinton white working class + hillary clinton romney suburban crossover (and never trumpers) coalitions. and damn near all of his weak spots in a primary are outweighed in the general by trump vulnerabilities in the same areas (anita hill, verbal gaffes, etc).

dude would clean up among black voters, ancestral dems (some who voted for trump) in the rust belt, and the type of moderates who handed dems az, ga suburbs, and tx suburbs in 2018.

that electoral formula sounds like a pretty sizable win to me.
13302297, in the MeToo era? Nah Reeq
Posted by Stadiq, Fri Dec-14-18 05:59 PM
>the only knock on him (from me) is his age.

That is a HUGE knock Reeq. If we are going to knock Bernie for his age, we have to do the same with Biden.

even with
>that...i still think he is more electable in a general than
>everyone in the poll and could patch together large parts of
>the obama ascendant majority + bill clinton white working
>class + hillary clinton romney suburban crossover (and never
>trumpers) coalitions.

Nah. A lot of those people you just listed were frustrated with the Obama administration.

Not to mention, Trump won because people wanted an outsider. Obama won because people wanted an outsider.

The Dems need to run someone who can sell themselves as an outsider.

Biden can't.


and damn near all of his weak spots in
>a primary are outweighed in the general by trump
>vulnerabilities in the same areas (anita hill, verbal gaffes,
>etc).

People said the same about Hilary, and it worked in reverse. Hilary coundn't credibly attack Trump on certain things for various reasons.

You can't have Biden attack Trump on being creepy, mistreating survivors, etc. You lose that higher ground so to speak.

Could you imagine the attack ads, think pieces, and talking heads when Biden tries to go at Trump over his treatment of women?

Hell, that meme of Biden kissing that little girl as she pulls away is making the rounds T O D A Y


Now, even if you want to excuse Biden's past behavior, Biden can't credibly attack Trump on these things- especially not with our false equivalency media.

Cmon Reeq. You know how the media is. Biden plays right into their hands.


>
>dude would clean up among black voters, ancestral dems (some
>who voted for trump) in the rust belt, and the type of
>moderates who handed dems az, ga suburbs, and tx suburbs in
>2018.

I don't think rustbelt folks who were so frustrated with the Obama admin that they voted for Trump are going to come back in droves for Obama's VP.

If you want to win the rust belt, run Brown. Or Klobuchar. etc.


Also, how many women stay home and/or lose enthusiasm when Biden is the guy?

Again, how can Biden look into the camera and tell women "You deserve someone more respectful, who believes survivors, and is more professional"?

He can't.

Plus, the Dems really need the youth vote. College girls for Biden? I doubt it, dog. Cmon.


>
>that electoral formula sounds like a pretty sizable win to
>me.
>

It sounds like Democrat logic/loyalty that got us into this mess, I'm sorry.


The Dem party needs to move forward.

Look, I get that Obama is hugely popular and knows how to wins elections. Biden comes with all of the Obama baggage, and very little of the charm. And none of the outsider brand.


Run a new(er) face with Obama's help? Sure.


But please, please move on from Biden, the Clintons, etc.


Creepy Joe Biden for President? Creepy Joe? He'd get fucking killed with ads.

That is formula for a Dem loss- because the party stayed loyal...sound familiar?

Like someone said, he should have ran in '16. His times up. (oops)


I honestly would be surprised if he won the primary. That said, I hope he doesn't run.
13302303, thank u, next
Posted by mista k5, Fri Dec-14-18 06:09 PM
>The Dem party needs to move forward.
>
>Look, I get that Obama is hugely popular and knows how to wins
>elections. Biden comes with all of the Obama baggage, and
>very little of the charm. And none of the outsider brand.
>
>
>Run a new(er) face with Obama's help? Sure.
>
>
>But please, please move on from Biden, the Clintons, etc.
>

especially this

for the record, i personally am not big on biden. i am not saying he would or would not give dems the best chance. now, would i vote for him over ____

i would need to wait for their campaigns to start. im sure there are many people i would prefer him over but he wouldnt be in my top 5 and i dont have a top 5 yet lol
13302745, hey fam im looking at things numerically/objectively.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-18-18 04:49 PM
theres a reason biden is at the top of most major polls.

theres a reason biden gets some of his highest approval numbers in the rust belt ('middle class joe').

theres a reason why biden is 2nd only to obama in approval among black voters in most polls (even higher than booker and harris).

theres a reason why biden is the *only* national dem that can go stump for conor lamb in a red district in pa. and doug jones in red alabama. and heidi heitkamp in north dakota. and stacey abrams in georgia.

hes literally the only major dem party figure that can be deployed anywhere in the country and not be a liability.

these are real people out here reacting to him. and still viewing him favorably. across the entire country.

there are some key senate seats in play 2020 (some in red states). a dem prez is gonna need to carry those dem senate candidates across the finish line in order to pick up a dem senate majority (a repub senate will completely obstruct a dem administration on judges and key department appointments). so the dem candidate is gonna have to appeal to a *wide* swath of voters. not just the typical blue electoral college majority states.

those rust belt states that swung back to dems in 2018? they love biden.

those college educated suburbs that swung from romney to clinton and did the majority of the legwork for dems 40 seat house victory? they love biden.

those moderates (crossover repubs) and independents who handed dems red state arizona? they love biden.

black people who turnout and vote for dems at a 90% rate? they love biden.

which is why i think the vulnerabilities you/i brought up are a bit overstated. especially since trump is (much more) vulnerable on them too and cant attack biden.

like people criticize bidens handling of the anita hill hearings but never mention he still ended up voting against thomas. and biden was one of the leading drivers for the violence against women act.

as far as the outsider thing...people didnt just vote for obama for change. they voted for him because he was a great fucking campaigner/candidate. people didnt just vote for trump for change. he actually represented regression to an antiquated status quo.

and trump actually soured the *left* on much of that outsider talk now (see the reaction to oprah). it seems like the dem base moreso wants normalcy than change. which is why the base overwhelmingly backed pelosi (even progressives) and basically formed a united front against moderate/conservative anti-pelosi dems.

a lot of times...we think the entire country views things the same way we do. but the majority of *voters* are 50+ and/or dont watch or read political news 24/7 and/or are center/center-right.

fresh perspective is definitely important/necessary. but we have to be careful not to completely ignore the fundamentals.


13302267, republicans have started giving their unsolicited advice on who dems
Posted by Reeq, Fri Dec-14-18 04:10 PM
should choose. its every bit as bad as you would think.

first we have nasal neoclassical conservative george will suggesting dems should run sherrod brown.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-candidate-may-be-the-optimum-challenger-to-trump-in-2020/2018/12/12/86fb4a60-fd7c-11e8-862a-b6a6f3ce8199_story.html

which is not a bad pick per se. except when you realize a republican is suggesting to pull a senator who just won re-election by a closer margin than expected in the only rust belt state dems didnt do well in (and is increasingly trending red). then he basically spends the entire piece saying brown is out of step with the silly liberals and they would pick him if they werent so blinded by foolish identity politics and racism against white males. compelling argument lol.

then you just have this complete bag of shit suggesting biden and romney run on a unity ticket.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/12/11/biden-2020-running-mate-romney-222861

'it could totally work' she says...as she claims an originally intended mccain/lieberman ticket (that she admits would still lose) could have saved us from the political polarization we see today. like people still think lieberman is a democrat lol.
13302273, I'm so mad at the both of those pieces.
Posted by Dr Claw, Fri Dec-14-18 04:24 PM
>which is not a back pick per se. except when you realize a
>republican is suggesting to pull a senator who just won
>re-election by a closer margin than expected in the only rust
>belt state dems didnt do well in (and is increasingly trending
>red). then he basically spends the entire piece saying brown
>is out of step with the silly liberals and they would pick him
>if they werent so blinded by foolish identity politics and
>racism against white males. compelling argument lol.

goddamn George Will doesn't know which way is up in his universe post-Trump, LOL.

Rob Portman is a sell-out corporate buttplug, and people just vote him in bcuz Republican.

always remember Ken Blackwell. he ran for governor in 2006 and took a huge L. I thought the GOP nominating him was a severe case of hubris on their part. "cuz Republican" don't work when you're black, LMAO.



>then you just have this complete bag of shit suggesting biden
>and romney run on a unity ticket.
>https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/12/11/biden-2020-running-mate-romney-222861
>
>'it could totally work' she says...as she claims an originally
>intended mccain/lieberman ticket (that she admits would still
>lose) could have saved us from the political polarization we
>see today. like people still think lieberman is a democrat
>lol.


man, they need to G T F O

Biden and Romney, LOL. that's like basically having Hillary and Hillary 2 on a ticket. and that says nothing about their politics. people would be just thoroughly pissed off at that "unity" ticket that no one would vote for it.
13302277, ask Dilma Roussef how a conservative running mate works out
Posted by GOMEZ, Fri Dec-14-18 04:46 PM
13302304, I was about to mention that chickenshit Biden/Romney story.
Posted by stravinskian, Fri Dec-14-18 06:10 PM

People hold onto some peculiar delusions about politics.
13302915, I hate your post just for reminding me Joe Lieberman exists
Posted by Mynoriti, Wed Dec-19-18 03:21 PM
13302735, national poll of black women has harris-beto-biden 1-2-3.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-18-18 04:01 PM
bernie in...7th.

https://twitter.com/ClaraJeffery/status/1075116858490011648

just over 10% of black women listed bernie as their first, second, *or* third place vote.

the fact that these early polls are basically just referenda on name recognition doesnt bode well for sanders among black women. him being so low while being so nationally recognizable means that a significant amount of black women actually have a *negative/unfavorable* view of him. and black women basically decide entire dem primaries in the south.

when black people on social media tell sanders supporters that black people still aint feeling him...sanders supporters basically shout them down with any variation of corporate shill, clinton/establishment hack, random online poll with bernie more popular than obama among blacks, but nina turner, etc. they refuse to even acknowledge it *might* be an issue.
13302737, is it notable that booker doesn't crack the top 3?
Posted by BrooklynWHAT, Tue Dec-18-18 04:09 PM
13302749, yeah thats not particularly good among black voters.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-18-18 04:57 PM
i think dude has an issue with connecting with black voters (nationally) in an authentic way like other black candidates.
13302758, btw bernie supporters are launching a new reprehensible attack on harris
Posted by Reeq, Tue Dec-18-18 06:01 PM
where they reduce her past work as a complex prosecutor to her being 'a cop'...because they think the term 'cop' will dissuade some black people from voting for her smh.

https://twitter.com/BeerdHead/status/1075154207601295361
https://twitter.com/DrawDaveDraw/status/1071339025863245824
https://twitter.com/LoverOfShrimp/status/1073696319309402112
https://twitter.com/ResistScaryBear/status/1073584952535601152
https://twitter.com/GlenGanaway/status/1073044113459724288
https://twitter.com/Tblj1234Smith/status/1073666313908875267
https://twitter.com/nestwhore/status/1075072322879406080

justicedems comms director with the more subtle dog whistle
https://twitter.com/_waleedshahid/status/1072897399591444480

the good part is...most black people are way ahead of these 'progressive' attacks before 2020 even gets here
https://twitter.com/Bakari_Sellers/status/1073282842174636034
https://twitter.com/ChrisInCHI/status/1074860759300087809
https://twitter.com/nirvanafanclub/status/1072946272909385728
https://twitter.com/Needle_of_Arya/status/1074258753602506753
https://twitter.com/icyjuicy/status/1074365549239566346
https://twitter.com/PhoenixWomanMN/status/1071970485439815680
https://twitter.com/magi_jay/status/1074373250531119104
https://twitter.com/RandallLeonar11/status/1075127067950366726
https://twitter.com/notcapnamerica/status/1073605742266122241


fam these folks are about to be *more* insufferable in 2020. they clearly think black folks are low info voters and they wanna use some of the same suppressive tricks on them that republicans do.

even their own black strategists like symone sanders told them they have a blindspot when it comes to black voters. they seem hellbent on making it 10x worse this go round.
13302777, Goddamn that's infuriating.
Posted by Brew, Tue Dec-18-18 09:56 PM
Such a narrowminded (at best) way to look at her credentials. No context.


>where they reduce her past work as a complex prosecutor to
>her being 'a cop'...because they think the term 'cop' will
>dissuade some black people from voting for her smh.
>
>https://twitter.com/BeerdHead/status/1075154207601295361
>https://twitter.com/DrawDaveDraw/status/1071339025863245824
>https://twitter.com/LoverOfShrimp/status/1073696319309402112
>https://twitter.com/ResistScaryBear/status/1073584952535601152
>https://twitter.com/GlenGanaway/status/1073044113459724288
>https://twitter.com/Tblj1234Smith/status/1073666313908875267
>https://twitter.com/nestwhore/status/1075072322879406080
>
>justicedems comms director with the more subtle dog whistle
>https://twitter.com/_waleedshahid/status/1072897399591444480
>
>the good part is...most black people are way ahead of these
>'progressive' attacks before 2020 even gets here
>https://twitter.com/Bakari_Sellers/status/1073282842174636034
>https://twitter.com/ChrisInCHI/status/1074860759300087809
>https://twitter.com/nirvanafanclub/status/1072946272909385728
>https://twitter.com/Needle_of_Arya/status/1074258753602506753
>https://twitter.com/icyjuicy/status/1074365549239566346
>https://twitter.com/PhoenixWomanMN/status/1071970485439815680
>https://twitter.com/magi_jay/status/1074373250531119104
>https://twitter.com/RandallLeonar11/status/1075127067950366726
>https://twitter.com/notcapnamerica/status/1073605742266122241
>
>
>fam these folks are about to be *more* insufferable in 2020.
>they clearly think black folks are low info voters and they
>wanna use some of the same suppressive tricks on them that
>republicans do.
>
>even their own black strategists like symone sanders told them
>they have a blindspot when it comes to black voters. they
>seem hellbent on making it 10x worse this go round.
13302860, so a lot of name calling and low level twitter wars... 2020 is gonna suck
Posted by GOMEZ, Wed Dec-19-18 12:35 PM
Kamala is a cop! - There's a nuanced discussion to have around her successes and failures as a prosecutor, but 'she's a cop' isn't it.

Bernie supporters are all secret racists! We found some dipshits with like 350 followers in Twitter who said some simplistic shit about Kamala. Bernie Bros are racist!


man, i'm glad i killed my Twitter account.



13302814, Did you see Splinter's should Bernie run/not run debate?
Posted by Marauder21, Wed Dec-19-18 11:06 AM
This was last week.

https://splinternews.com/point-counterpoint-to-bernie-or-not-to-bernie-1831021728

It was interesting, but the "Yes, he needs to run" argument essentially boiled down to "Sanders voters won't vote in 2020 (primary or general) if he doesn't run." Which wasn't true in 2016, so I'm not sure why it would be true in 2020.
13303559, berniecrats are like the tea party w/o the political/financial muscle.
Posted by Reeq, Sun Dec-23-18 03:12 PM
they think hostage-taking and withholding their own power is the key to victory.

like their whole approach to elections is branding their opponent as not as 'pure' as them then threatening not to vote for the winning candidate when they lose.

they think their constituency is bigger than it is. like theyre the backbone of the democratic party. but like...out of the 40 house seats that dems just flipped in 2018...bernie-ish candidates (medicare for all, etc) only won...*1* of those seats. and that 1 candidate was part of a larger dem wave in ca that wiped the entire repub party out of orange county.

that would be cause for most sustainable political movements to self-reflect and focus on *expanding* their appeal. but these folks instead seem intent on pushing for stricter purity criteria and pushing the general dem base further away from them.
13303857, this is why I think Bernie was the best AND the worst thing to happen
Posted by Dr Claw, Thu Dec-27-18 02:03 PM
>fam these folks are about to be *more* insufferable in 2020.
>they clearly think black folks are low info voters and they
>wanna use some of the same suppressive tricks on them that
>republicans do.
>
>even their own black strategists like symone sanders told them
>they have a blindspot when it comes to black voters. they
>seem hellbent on making it 10x worse this go round.

I mean, for one, it finally got people to think about policy in a meaningful way, even if it was subverted by ... the kind of shit that has doomed more progressive ideas in the end

but it was the worst because it's started this perpetual re-litigation of the 2016 election.

Bernie only happened because Hillary was SHIT and the Democratic Party thought they were the Republican Party.

(actually, the Republican Party thought they were the Republican Party, too. Their party crasher got all the votes.)
13302803, just want to point out that this is a survey of black women Dem politicos
Posted by Jay Doz, Wed Dec-19-18 10:03 AM
not necessarily rank and file voters.
13302816, I.. want to like Harris more than I actually do
Posted by Amritsar, Wed Dec-19-18 11:12 AM
You can tell she was going for her moment during the Kavanaugh hearings


He made her look pedestrian



I say all that as someone who can't stand what Kavanaugh stands for too.
13303558, yeah she doesnt move me much either.
Posted by Reeq, Sun Dec-23-18 02:55 PM
regardless of her actual policy positions...she doesnt really seem like a compelling candidate at the personal level. and thats ok as an incumbent who already has a brand. but not so good for a new face at the national level who leaves a door open for their opponents to define them before they can define themselves.
13303834, Doesn’t she have a white husband?
Posted by legsdiamond, Thu Dec-27-18 01:18 PM
Hate to sound petty but...

13303839, this is some serious 14 percenter ass bullshit
Posted by Dr Claw, Thu Dec-27-18 01:22 PM
13303898, It is... shame on me
Posted by legsdiamond, Fri Dec-28-18 06:57 AM
13303557, new bernie world anti-beto strategy: tie him to obama lol
Posted by Reeq, Sun Dec-23-18 02:44 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/22/beto-orourke-voting-record-2020-election-democrats

these folks do know this a democratic party primary right? is their strategy to make beto more appealing to the base by associating him with popular dem figures?

next thing you know theyre gonna say beto might be the next jfk and we should be worried lol.

the fact that they think obama is a stain on a dem candidate in a dem primary says a lot about their outlook. then they wonder why they have trouble connecting with black voters.

seriously bernie needs better advocates. these folks are making his movement *less* palatable to voters.
13303572, Bernie poeple are not democrats
Posted by handle, Sun Dec-23-18 06:01 PM
Remember that - and look at what happened last time.

A vote for Bernie is a vote for a Republican.

A vote for Nader was a vote for Bush.
A vote for Perot was a vote for Bush, and then Dole.
A vote for Anderson was a vote for Reagan.

13303837, here's why this will be a fail
Posted by Dr Claw, Thu Dec-27-18 01:21 PM
you know and I know that Obama failed to meet the promise of his 2008 candidacy

and you may also know why it was a fail:
- bank bailouts
- no relief for the subprime mortgage fiasco
- Clintonite dickheads all over his cabinet
- pretty poor foreign policy

so on and so forth

but those specific reasons got NO play in the corporate media or the public "discussion" of Obama.

for a couple of reasons:
- the corporate media largely agrees with all of the above, especially the giveaways to the rich
- right wingers are given SO much leeway over the national discourse. we had 8 years of them throwing public racist temper tantrum just because he was black
- Dems in red states especially cowered to the aforementioned, in examples you have given in other posts.

so all we got in public is Obama the symbol for the most part, because the Republicans are SUCH shitheads and corporate media REALLY doesn't want to talk about what really went on during that time.

but let the "progressives" hear it and it's RAH-RAH-RAH OBAMA WAS A NEOLIBERAL CORPORATE CRONY BLAH BLAH BLAH MY BUTT ITCHES

the average person/voter doesn't associate Obama with these abuses, so saying Beto is "like Obama" is probably going to get the usual crowd behind him. it didn't work with Hillary, because she is a SHIT politician. Beto at least has an eye for what "plays".

13303852, Yeah, his approval among Dems at the end of his term was like
Posted by Marauder21, Thu Dec-27-18 01:50 PM
90-something percent. Even if it drops a little, nobody's going to run on "Obama was a miserable failure and the single most disastrous Democratic president ever" in 2020, regardless of what Matt Stoller wishes.

Even Medicare For All (which would *technically* get rid of Obama's big legislative accomplishment) isn't being framed that way.
13306406, LOL, that's what you took from that op-ed? SMH
Posted by bentagain, Sat Jan-12-19 02:27 PM
The point being made is that Beto wouldn't be much different than Biden or HRC...and we don't need a BHO 2.O

We actually need the ideas that were presented in the last primary to be implemented now more than ever

Health care for all
Renewable energy
and evening income/wealth inequality

Beto is going to get those done?
Has he done that in TX?

Sincerely asking

I interpreted that article as saying that BHO didn't do enough on those issues...and continuing down that path would be a step back not forward

Care to discuss the merits of the article, or just continue to dismiss anything that doesn't align with your ideas as 'Bernie bros' at it again

?


13306358, Tulsi officially in.
Posted by Vex_id, Fri Jan-11-19 11:02 PM

-->
13313038, Beto vs Trump in El Paso
Posted by Stadiq, Mon Feb-11-19 06:11 PM


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/11/us/politics/trump-el-paso-beto.html

Interesting...
13313039, ill be there
Posted by mista k5, Mon Feb-11-19 06:12 PM
heading out after work.
13313042, for real? Lets us know how it goes
Posted by Stadiq, Mon Feb-11-19 06:19 PM

13313043, for sure
Posted by mista k5, Mon Feb-11-19 06:29 PM
im worried about how much trouble i will have getting there but im definitely going to try. as long as they let me drive near enough to walk there ill be there.

might not make it in time for the march but should be there way before beto starts speaking.

13313103, made it out, great crowd
Posted by mista k5, Tue Feb-12-19 10:25 AM
had to park further than i wanted and it was colder than i anticipated. thankfully the wind calmed down and it wasnt too bad.

the crowd was a great size, hilarious signs, lots of positivity. i made it in time for the march and was like 20 people back from Beto.

when we go to the field where he was going to give the speech there were like 6 GOP supporters telling us we were going to hell and holding anti-abortion signs. i had only seen that in movies lol

the speech was a great vibe. he focused mostly on the positive history of the city. it really felt like a campaign speech, it would have been a great spot to announce he was running but it would have distracted from the purpose of the event. i hope he does run and im starting to feel its almost certain.

i bought a few buttons, one says "its mueller time" put it on my bag i bring for work, well see if anyone complains lol

after it was over i was going to head north back to my car but it was blocked off. there was a bit of a crowd here and some trump stands. i decided to hang out a bit. a little later trump supporters started coming out across the street. i guess this was the designated exit for them. the cops opened a path for them and constantly told them to turn left towards the zoo. the crowd started chanting "to the zoo!" lol

i didnt stick around much longer as i had a good distance to walk back to my car.

im glad i went.

it seems the over all numbers were pretty even. great showing for beto. im a bit surprised and disappointed so many people showed up for trump but what are you going to do.
13313119, I wonder how Betos and Trumps crowds compared in locals vs out of towners
Posted by walihorse, Tue Feb-12-19 10:58 AM
.
13313121, Thanks
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Feb-12-19 11:06 AM

Yeah I was curious about the mood/energy of the crowd.

Was this a last minute thing on both sides? For Beto?
13313124, not sure what you mean
Posted by mista k5, Tue Feb-12-19 11:12 AM
>Was this a last minute thing on both sides? For Beto?

meaning last minute for both trump and beto?? from what i remember beto announced he was having a rally the day after if not same day trump said he would be in el paso, which was i think early last week.

i didnt really look into too many details into where exactly it would be until yesterday.
13313139, RE: not sure what you mean
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Feb-12-19 11:51 AM

Gotcha. Yeah I was just curious how long people
knew about each rally...
13313254, RE: ill be there
Posted by SynsCei, Tue Feb-12-19 04:24 PM
I know Trump was at the County Coliseum (which I have no idea why....)

Where was Beto?

My pops works for FedEx off of Global Reach. Said the Secret Service had called them to make sure one of the gates was clear for AF1.

Told him to play Ice Cube - Arrest the Pres.
13313260, lol
Posted by mista k5, Tue Feb-12-19 04:37 PM
>Told him to play Ice Cube - Arrest the Pres.

beto's rally was at Chalio Acosta Sports Center, the block south east of the coliseum. the march started at bowie high school. you could faintly hear trumps speech at times from i guess the outside showings of the coliseum.
13313041, thats my dawg.
Posted by Reeq, Mon Feb-11-19 06:18 PM
13313116, A politician who is bought by oil money is your dawg?
Posted by falafel stand pimpin, Tue Feb-12-19 10:47 AM
Yikes
13313120, Individual contributions from employees
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Feb-12-19 11:03 AM

In the industry, no?

Is he supposed to say, in Texas no less, “If you
work in the oil industry please don’t donate
to me....” ??
13313163, That's a circular argument
Posted by bentagain, Tue Feb-12-19 12:40 PM
If he wasn't pro-big oil...would 'employees' of big oil donate to his campaign

?
13313167, have you ever donated to a campaign?
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Feb-12-19 12:53 PM

If so, do you only donate to candidates that favor the company you work for?

Of course not.


It isn't circular at all.

You have to enter that shit when you donate. I donate all the time to candidates who my company would hate.

Stop.
13313171, dude consistently has the worst take in any given post.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Feb-12-19 01:00 PM
theres always one specific okp that comes in later to agree with him lol. im waiting for homie to show up.
13313175, He gotta be trolling
Posted by legsdiamond, Tue Feb-12-19 01:05 PM
13313183, read his next reply below. fam is all in.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Feb-12-19 01:17 PM
13313806, Gotta ignore dude, he's only here to argue.
Posted by isaaaa, Thu Feb-14-19 05:24 PM

Anti-gentrification, cheap alcohol & trying to look pretty in our twilight posting years (c) Big Reg
http://Tupreme.com
13313817, RE: Gotta ignore dude, he's only here to argue.
Posted by bentagain, Thu Feb-14-19 05:38 PM
https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/1069805226553536512

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3satJnoBXi8

https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/lobby_contribs_detail.php?id=N00033540&cycle=2018

13313178, not to mention there isn't a perfect candidiate
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Feb-12-19 01:08 PM

Beto got money from oil employees

Klobuchar is too hard on staff and she threw shade at Hillary for not going to WI (have you seen these people?)

Kamala was too gung ho as a prosecutor


Sherrod favors Medicare buy in rather than M4A



I'm not saying all of these are unreasonable critiques, but there is going to be no one left standing.

13313184, the beto one is completely unreasonable.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Feb-12-19 01:26 PM
i would separate that one from the others.

it only makes sense if you assume employees that work in every industry only engage in political activity to advance the interests of that industry.

if youre a secretary at a local bank...you must have donated to your democratic senate candidate because you wanna see the volker rule in dodd-frank abolished right?

to your general point tho...purity tests will be the death of us. i understand why people would take issues with certain aspects of a candidates past. but have you seen the alternative? lol.
13313189, Right I was just making a general point
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Feb-12-19 01:35 PM

And listing recent examples.

It’s not even purity tests at this point- it’s legit
looking for reasons to not support someone.

Seriously, did you see the Hill stans cancel Klobuchar
because she made a joke about visiting WI?

I know that electability is becoming a bigger priority,
but I really am starting to question if some of these
people realize you have to WIN before you can be
President.

13313195, i honestly think a lot of 'our side' just doesnt wanna vote.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Feb-12-19 01:43 PM
so they look for reasons to not do it and rationalize not feeling shame/guilt.

conservatives look for reasons to blame other people for why they *do* vote (political correctness/feminists/etc made me vote for trump, kavanaugh outrage made me vote for whoever, etc).

liberals look for reasons to blame other people for why they *dont* vote (way too many examples to fit in parentheses lol).

13313176, another terrible plea cop
Posted by bentagain, Tue Feb-12-19 01:06 PM
You're 1 person...1

How many people employed by big-oil/gas in TX donated to Beto?

I'm pretty sure it's more than 1 person

...and yes, that would factor into who I donate to...

I work in healthcare

I wouldn't donate to someone that isn't supporting universal coverage
13313186, What?
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Feb-12-19 01:29 PM

You’re 1 person too lol.

If people only donated to candidates that were good for
the company they worked for, a lot of these progressive
candidates would be fucked.

You can see that right?

Hell I don’t know what you do for a living, but folks in healthcare
donating to M4A candidates aren’t exactly looking
out for their company.

You don’t think any bank employees are donating to
Warren, etc?


You haven’t thought this out very well.


If you don’t like Beto- cool. There are reasons to
at least be skeptical.

But holding a grudge over oil employees giving him
money ain’t the look.

13313190, fam save your day. just move along and dont make eye contact lol.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Feb-12-19 01:36 PM
13313205, Good point. Warren received $186,000 from finance
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Feb-12-19 01:56 PM

Employees btw. 40k from oil employees too. In Mass. Lol

https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/industries?cid=N00033492&cycle=2018&recs=0&type=I

Guess all of her tough talk on banks has been a con?


****Disclaimer for those confused. I am a Warren fan, just
pointing out you can’t read too deeply into individual
contributions by industry since most of us fucking hate
the companies we work for *****




13313212, dude done sucked me into giving him a serious reply smh.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Feb-12-19 02:13 PM
i blame you lol.
13313256, RE: dude done sucked me into giving him a serious reply smh.
Posted by Stadiq, Tue Feb-12-19 04:27 PM
>i blame you lol.

lol hey don't follow my lead, man. You know from personal experience I have a tough time letting things go haha


On the real though, I get his white privilege point. I'd add male privilege as well. I'm also not big on how Beto did the Dem candidate in his neighboring district. The white male privilege, in particular, stings though.


On one hand, it isn't "fair" that he has this kind of buzz compared to others currently in the running.


On the other hand, I just wish the others were as good at campaigning and building a buzz.



Like Legs said, even something like this rally, is a way to build momentum.


I gotta beat this dead horse right quick. Beto got attention for leading essentially an anti-Trump rally on the issue of the moment- taking the lead on the issue and making the difference clear. Got his name in the news for something positive.

Warren released a DNA test showing she was .0004% or whatever native.

Kamala basically shrugged off killing an entire industry.

Booker tip toed around attacking Trump straight up, in a time where hating Trump is going to get people to the booth.


You have to run a smart campaign. That is part of "elect-ability"...hopefully enough people on the left consider this stuff.


13313202, I'll just leave this here...
Posted by bentagain, Tue Feb-12-19 01:51 PM
https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?ind=E01++

Notice anything?

FTR, this isn't a personal grudge, just something I'm not willing to dismiss as 'individual' donations

If he were to run, I would expect a better explanation than...shrug...TX

also FTR, I have bigger issues with his yt privilege IRT his arrests.
13313210, its literally individual donations lol.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Feb-12-19 02:12 PM
>FTR, this isn't a personal grudge, just something I'm not
>willing to dismiss as 'individual' donations

all of it is individual donations.
100%.
every 'oil and gas' cent.

https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/industries?cid=N00033540&cycle=2018

theres nothing you need to dismiss. real life has already dismissed it for you lol.


13313200, Dumb...Dumb...Take. Please stop.
Posted by Buddy_Gilapagos, Tue Feb-12-19 01:47 PM

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"
13313173, You simple
Posted by legsdiamond, Tue Feb-12-19 01:04 PM
13313127, a politician in Wisconsin bought and paid for by cheese money!!!
Posted by legsdiamond, Tue Feb-12-19 11:19 AM
Wowzers
13313161, im stealing this.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Feb-12-19 12:34 PM
13313170, LOL
Posted by Mynoriti, Tue Feb-12-19 12:58 PM
13313181, "The great state of Vermont will not apologize for its cheese!"
Posted by mrhood75, Tue Feb-12-19 01:14 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkbdbRjMX2Y
13313245, Everybody knows big cheese runs Wisconsin politics n/m
Posted by Stringer Bell, Tue Feb-12-19 04:11 PM
.
13313162, fam that shit has already been shot down in this post.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Feb-12-19 12:39 PM
http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13281427&mesg_id=13281427&page=#13300737

im surprised to still see somebody on here still regurgitating it. even the people who started that smear abandoned it back in december.
13313051, Leggo!!!!
Posted by isaaaa, Mon Feb-11-19 08:16 PM

Anti-gentrification, cheap alcohol & trying to look pretty in our twilight posting years (c) Big Reg
http://Tupreme.com
13313055, This is how you build momentum for a Presidential run
Posted by legsdiamond, Mon Feb-11-19 09:17 PM
13313115, Trump: it’s 10,000 people in here
Posted by legsdiamond, Tue Feb-12-19 10:45 AM
Fire Dept: He’s lying

Trump addressed Beto and compared crowd sizes... let’s you know he is a bit worried about Beto entering the race.
13313118, the thing that stuck with me was trump saying Beto's name is good
Posted by mista k5, Tue Feb-12-19 10:50 AM
like huh?? so random.

obviously trump was going to lie about crowd sizes. he said there were 35,000 inside...then 11,000 but only 10,000 are supposed to fit...(like you said fired dept corrected him that it only fits 6,500 and they let in 6,500). he said 69,000 signed up to attend and there were 10,000 outside.

he said beto only had 200, or 15. uhm okay dude.

13313310, all of this is some twilight zone shit.
Posted by Reeq, Tue Feb-12-19 07:34 PM
i still dont think we all comprehend the level of crazy we have descended to as a country.

like none of his supporters believe *anything* that contradicts what he says? not even video/pics of official events?

and this new 'finish the wall' slogan...nobody is asking for footage/proof of this new wall that has supposedly been being built (while he was shutting down the government and complaining about not having money to build it)?




13313359, It’s almost laughable but lives are on the line
Posted by legsdiamond, Wed Feb-13-19 09:32 AM
He has these folks hypnotized by hate
13313382, they built a wall right in the middle of the Rio Grande!!
Posted by mista k5, Wed Feb-13-19 10:29 AM
remember the alamo!
13313434, Pass on Beto
Posted by Lurkmode, Wed Feb-13-19 12:32 PM
He voted with the GOP too much.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/20/beto-orourke-congressional-votes-analysis-capital-and-main
13313693, Uh oh
Posted by legsdiamond, Thu Feb-14-19 12:21 PM
This ain’t good for progressives

but it would definitely help Beto in swing states

Hmm... ionno, thanks for posting this info. If he runs I would love to hear his reasons why he voted so shitty
13313818, yeah I'm souring on dude
Posted by Stadiq, Thu Feb-14-19 05:42 PM

This is a bad look, indeed.

I really don't like how he did the Dem in his neighboring district. All but endorsed his road trip GOP buddy.


The white male privilege makes me uneasy too.


That said, other candidates should at least take notes on how to build a buzz, raise money, and campaign in general. Of course, see white male priv.
13313860, Welcome
Posted by Lurkmode, Thu Feb-14-19 08:52 PM
>If he runs I would
>love to hear his reasons why he voted so shitty

Which is reasonable, the establishment stans trying to put bubble wrap around these candidates is not going to help them.
13313725, A politician getting contributions from individuals employed in the fossil
Posted by bentagain, Thu Feb-14-19 01:20 PM
fuel industry...voted favorably for the fossil fuel industry

I AM SHOCKED.

LOL

"Fossil fuels and energy
Advertisement

During his Senate race, O’Rourke was lauded for his rhetoric about the threat of climate change. In Congress, he has questioned the safety of natural gas fracking, and he has high ratings from the League of Conservation Voters.

O’Rourke, however, has also cast key votes with Republicans to boost the fossil fuel industry whose carbon emissions are at the root of the climate crisis.

For instance, O’Rourke was one of only a handful of House Democrats who voted for Republican bills to lift the 40-year-old oil export ban.

During the legislative debate over lifting the ban, the Democrats’ committee report argued that “the extreme approach taken by this bill not only repeals current crude export restrictions, but also ensures that no export restrictions – for any reason – could be implemented or enforced in the future”. The Democratic report added that “the bill could have potentially vast consequences for consumers, the environment and climate change”.

O’Rourke twice voted to lift the ban.

At the same time, O’Rourke helped Republicans vote down Democratic legislation to prevent drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico, and he backed a separate GOP bill to speed up natural gas exports.

He also supported GOP legislation that Democrats said was constructed to protect the utility industry. Republicans said the measure was designed “to ensure reliable electricity service and reduce the risk of fires and fire hazards caused by inadequate vegetation management” in areas where power lines cross federal lands. Repeating charges made by Democrats in the bill’s committee report, the Arizona Democratic representative Raúl Grijalva said during the floor debate: “The bill waives liability for companies that start forest fires or cause other damage. This is nonsense and shifts an incredible burden and risk on to American taxpayers.”

O’Rourke was one of 69 Democrats to support the bill, which passed."

What dumb dumb...simpleton wrote this hit piece?!?

LOL.
13313844, LOL it takes an 'analysis' to reveal that a TX congressman...
Posted by stravinskian, Thu Feb-14-19 07:15 PM

voted with his state?

I'd probably hate a bunch of his votes (haven't read the article because it sounds completely vapid from the headline), but it sounds like they were the kinds of things that would help him massively in a general election (and probably the reason he came close in the TX Senate race). So even if I don't like those votes this 'revelation' makes me like him more.

Our bubble is gonna set back progressivism for a century.
13313859, Lmao
Posted by Lurkmode, Thu Feb-14-19 08:47 PM
You switched from Hillary to Beto stan.

>
>voted with his state?
>

From the article you didn't read

"However, a new analysis of congressional votes from the non-profit news organisation Capital & Main shows that even as O’Rourke represented one of the most solidly Democratic congressional districts in the United States, he has frequently voted against the majority of House Democrats in support of Republican bills and Trump administration priorities.

Capital & Main reviewed the 167 votes O’Rourke has cast in the House in opposition to the majority of his own party during his six-year tenure in Congress. Many of those votes were not progressive dissents alongside other left-leaning lawmakers, but instead votes to help pass Republican-sponsored legislation."


>I'd probably hate a bunch of his votes (haven't read the
>article because it sounds completely vapid from the headline),

lol hopefully you read more than the headline.

>but it sounds like they were the kinds of things that would
>help him massively in a general election (and probably the
>reason he came close in the TX Senate race). So even if I
>don't like those votes this 'revelation' makes me like him
>more.
>

or it could turn progressives against him and make the primaries more of hurdle, before he gets his crown.

>Our bubble is gonna set back progressivism for a century.
>

The real bubble is drawing conclusions without reading the article. Beto is not fragile glass, it's ok to challenge him.
13313864, Shame. Your argument is just as empty as the article.
Posted by stravinskian, Thu Feb-14-19 09:12 PM
>You switched from Hillary to Beto stan.

It was always about being anti-Trump (and anti-Republican in general). If Bernie had a chance of beating Trump (and preferably of being a successful president afterward), then I would have been just as much a Bernie Bro as anyone here. He didn't. I switched from Hillary to Obama in the blink of an eye when he announced in '08.

>>voted with his state?
>>
>
>From the article you didn't read
>
>"However, a new analysis of congressional votes from the
>non-profit news organisation Capital & Main shows that even as
>O’Rourke represented one of the most solidly Democratic
>congressional districts in the United States, he has
>frequently voted against the majority of House Democrats in
>support of Republican bills and Trump administration
>priorities.
>
>Capital & Main reviewed the 167 votes O’Rourke has cast in
>the House in opposition to the majority of his own party
>during his six-year tenure in Congress. Many of those votes
>were not progressive dissents alongside other left-leaning
>lawmakers, but instead votes to help pass Republican-sponsored
>legislation."

Yeah, that gives no specifics at all, and even if it's true it overlooks the fact that he clearly had bigger political aspirations than his House seat. This is a Democrat who nearly won statewide office in Texas in 2018. He's not gonna have a record that Cenk Uygur is gonna like. But Cenk Uygur is an idiot who weakens the progressive cause.

>>I'd probably hate a bunch of his votes (haven't read the
>>article because it sounds completely vapid from the
>headline),
>
>lol hopefully you read more than the headline.

It doesn't sound like I should have.

>>but it sounds like they were the kinds of things that would
>>help him massively in a general election (and probably the
>>reason he came close in the TX Senate race). So even if I
>>don't like those votes this 'revelation' makes me like him
>>more.
>>
>
>or it could turn progressives against him and make the
>primaries more of hurdle, before he gets his crown.

Yeah, that's why "progressives" are the problem these days. If they don't learn that, Trump gets four more years.

>>Our bubble is gonna set back progressivism for a century.
>>
>
>The real bubble is drawing conclusions without reading the
>article. Beto is not fragile glass, it's ok to challenge him.

Indeed it is. I know nothing about Beto except that he almost won in Texas. I've seen clips of only one of his speeches. It was not impressive at all. He looked like he thought he was ten times more important than he is. I guess I also know that he's been on a corny fucking tour of "self exploration" ever since he lost in 2018. Honestly I'm not a fan.

But I'd sure as shit vote for him if he can convince me that he could win the general election. And the Guardian is not the kind of publication you need to win over to win a general election.
13314016, Empty as the article you didn't read ?
Posted by Lurkmode, Fri Feb-15-19 01:30 PM
>>You switched from Hillary to Beto stan.
>
>It was always about being anti-Trump (and anti-Republican in
>general). If Bernie had a chance of beating Trump (and
>preferably of being a successful president afterward), then I
>would have been just as much a Bernie Bro as anyone here. He
>didn't. I switched from Hillary to Obama in the blink of an
>eye when he announced in '08.
>

Lol nah nobody believes you would fall on the sword after Bernie lost the general, the way you did when Hillary lost. Yeah you would vote for him because you had no choice but you wouldn't be a Bernie Bro if he beat Hillary for the nomination.

>>
>>From the article you didn't read
>>
>>"However, a new analysis of congressional votes from the
>>non-profit news organisation Capital & Main shows that even
>as
>>O’Rourke represented one of the most solidly Democratic
>>congressional districts in the United States, he has
>>frequently voted against the majority of House Democrats in
>>support of Republican bills and Trump administration
>>priorities.
>>
>>Capital & Main reviewed the 167 votes O’Rourke has cast in
>>the House in opposition to the majority of his own party
>>during his six-year tenure in Congress. Many of those votes
>>were not progressive dissents alongside other left-leaning
>>lawmakers, but instead votes to help pass
>Republican-sponsored
>>legislation."
>
>Yeah, that gives no specifics at all, and even if it's true it
>overlooks the fact that he clearly had bigger political
>aspirations than his House seat. This is a Democrat who nearly
>won statewide office in Texas in 2018. He's not gonna have a
>record that Cenk Uygur is gonna like. But Cenk Uygur is an
>idiot who weakens the progressive cause.
>

Maybe the specifics are in the article you didn't read. Ambition is a double edge sword. You are saying it's ok to throw Dem politicians and voters in his state, under the bus and help Republicans, so he can run for President. What happens if he gets elected and want a 2nd term, will he help Republicans the way Bill Clinton did ?

>>>I'd probably hate a bunch of his votes (haven't read the
>>>article because it sounds completely vapid from the
>>headline),
>>
>>lol hopefully you read more than the headline.
>
>It doesn't sound like I should have.
>

No, if you are asking for "specifics" and saying "if its true" it means you should have read the article. That way you could disagree with the article based on what you know, not what you guess or assume.

>>>but it sounds like they were the kinds of things that would
>>>help him massively in a general election (and probably the
>>>reason he came close in the TX Senate race). So even if I
>>>don't like those votes this 'revelation' makes me like him
>>>more.
>>>

It also sounds like it could hurt him in a general with his base and hurt his party along the way as he steps over Dems that voted for him, to become President.

>>or it could turn progressives against him and make the
>>primaries more of hurdle, before he gets his crown.
>
>Yeah, that's why "progressives" are the problem these days. If
>they don't learn that, Trump gets four more years.
>
>>>Our bubble is gonna set back progressivism for a century.
>>>
>>
>>The real bubble is drawing conclusions without reading the
>>article. Beto is not fragile glass, it's ok to challenge
>him.
>
>Indeed it is. I know nothing about Beto except that he almost
>won in Texas. I've seen clips of only one of his speeches. It
>was not impressive at all. He looked like he thought he was
>ten times more important than he is. I guess I also know that
>he's been on a corny fucking tour of "self exploration" ever
>since he lost in 2018. Honestly I'm not a fan.
>
>But I'd sure as shit vote for him if he can convince me that
>he could win the general election. And the Guardian is not the
>kind of publication you need to win over to win a general
>election.
>

Does he need the Dem base at all to win a general election ?
13313767, I just think Dems are doomed if a TX congressman voting for Fossil Fuels
Posted by Buddy_Gilapagos, Thu Feb-14-19 03:09 PM
is a deal killer.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"
13313805, Shouts to you and Legs for at least showing up
Posted by bentagain, Thu Feb-14-19 05:15 PM
A few folks had alot to say to me

FTR, we haven't unearthed any deal breakers IMO on any candidate

we're presenting issues with each candidate

and they should be fully prepared to respond to these issues come debate time

Anyway, IRT Beto and big oil, etc...

see reply 74

I actually went through that twitter feed...and found this

https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/1069805226553536512

^^^ the president of XTO energy, which is a fracking subsidiary of Exxon, made a maximum contribution

which was my original point on the matter

Why would industry affiliates contribute to a candidate that wasn't favorable to their industry?

There's also plenty of other issues in his record provided in the post above

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/20/beto-orourke-congressional-votes-analysis-capital-and-main

For example, on finance, I heard a report that the rate of americans that are 3 months behind on their auto loan is the highest it's been since 2010

https://www.businessinsider.com/auto-loan-delinquency-rates-worse-now-than-during-the-financial-crisis-2018-4

Contrasted to Beto's vote to repeal the CPB authorities

To date the POTUS posts have been derailed away from policy discussion by mostly a single poster who feigns insult at any criticism of a candidate he supports

...and ya'll been following him...

13313825, few things
Posted by Stadiq, Thu Feb-14-19 05:56 PM

First up, yeah this is bad. The more I learn about his voting record, etc the less I like him.

I don't think this necessarily proves big oil "bought" him.


I think this, along with his voting record on other things, how he did his neighbor, etc shows that he is a centrist/corporate Dem.


In other words ,I think you could take away 80% of that money from oil and he'd still vote the same way.


Very, very, very disappointing.


>A few folks had alot to say to me
>
>FTR, we haven't unearthed any deal breakers IMO on any
>candidate

Really? You haven't ruled out any single candidate?

>
>we're presenting issues with each candidate
>
>and they should be fully prepared to respond to these issues
>come debate time
>
>Anyway, IRT Beto and big oil, etc...
>
>see reply 74
>
>I actually went through that twitter feed...and found this
>
>https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/1069805226553536512
>
>^^^ the president of XTO energy, which is a fracking
>subsidiary of Exxon, made a maximum contribution
>
>which was my original point on the matter
>
>Why would industry affiliates contribute to a candidate that
>wasn't favorable to their industry?

You ended up being right, but I think your broad generalization is still wrong. You didn't bring up details or anything- just said "big oil owns him" essentially, and accused me of copping pleas.

My point was (and still is) people (meaning regular people- employees) won't always contribute to candidates that favor their employment/company.

See: Bankers contributing to Warren, or insurance employees contributing to any Dem candidate supporting M4A.

The more concerning stuff is how Beto votes and favors the center.


>
>There's also plenty of other issues in his record provided in
>the post above
>
>https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/20/beto-orourke-congressional-votes-analysis-capital-and-main
>
>For example, on finance, I heard a report that the rate of
>americans that are 3 months behind on their auto loan is the
>highest it's been since 2010
>
>https://www.businessinsider.com/auto-loan-delinquency-rates-worse-now-than-during-the-financial-crisis-2018-4
>
>Contrasted to Beto's vote to repeal the CPB authorities

And I think we should be far more concerned how Beto voted, or what he would support as President, rather than where his money comes from.



>
>To date the POTUS posts have been derailed away from policy
>discussion by mostly a single poster who feigns insult at any
>criticism of a candidate he supports
>
>...and ya'll been following him...
>
>

Reeq is a good dude, and I personally don't think he has derailed threads- especially lately.

BUT

I agree that he won't discuss the potential weaknesses of Beto, Kamala, or Biden in a sincere way. It is also disappointing.
13313828, beto being more of a centrist is my main concern with him
Posted by mista k5, Thu Feb-14-19 06:07 PM
only reason why im still open to others.

with what i know about candidates and potential candidates he is still my choice right now. that might be due to blinders but my mind is not made up.

his over all message and apparent intentions are still over all pretty good.

realistically, this is at best case him pandering for success in tx.

if he does run i definitely want him to explain this amongst other things.

i would like a comparison of the voting records of other candidates. i do think some of this is being blown up to be more than it is but it is still troubling.
13313837, word
Posted by Stadiq, Thu Feb-14-19 06:20 PM
>only reason why im still open to others.
>
>with what i know about candidates and potential candidates he
>is still my choice right now. that might be due to blinders
>but my mind is not made up.

I could see that, and I'm not mad at it. I'm just personally disappointed because lets be real- dude can give a hell of a speech, he can build a buzz, he can raise money, etc.

I never thought he would be Bernie JR, but the way the posted above article broke things down...man.

What do you think of him refusing to endorse the Dem candidate running against his travel buddy??

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/01/2020-primary-biden-and-betos-aid-to-gop-candidates-in-2018-is-disqualifying.html

This really irks me for some reason. She lost by less than 1,000 votes, and he had a lot of juice.


>
>his over all message and apparent intentions are still over
>all pretty good.
>
>realistically, this is at best case him pandering for success
>in tx.

I've considered that. But I also read that his district was very solidly Democrat.

Sooo....if he "pivots" he should get the same backlash as Kamala, etc.

>
>if he does run i definitely want him to explain this amongst
>other things.
>
>i would like a comparison of the voting records of other
>candidates. i do think some of this is being blown up to be
>more than it is but it is still troubling.

Agreed. I would just add very disappointing too lol. The most important thing is to beat Trump. Maybe that still is Beto, but I really don't think the Dems need to sprint to the middle to win.

I am curious (if he runs) if his agenda included a bunch of progressive stuff, including specific actions on climate change of course, if this kind of stuff would be forgiven by people...
13313840, Ortiz - i dont like it
Posted by mista k5, Thu Feb-14-19 06:33 PM
i would get it if hurd was more of an actual moderate.

i have to agree that this smells of beto not wanting to upset a buddy instead of what would be better for texas or the country.

it obviously doesnt irk me as much as it does you but i can understand why it would bother people.

not to be all badu-like but there is something to a person acting based on what they think would be best instead of just voting down the party line. its not that simple though. what specific things they vote for and why matter most.

i think ortiz and the votes in the article are what remind me of obama that i dont love about beto. he might have a strategy and might be able to use this to the advantage of the country and dem voters. it is a bit much to ask voters to trust that he would.

i definitely would rather have attention put to these issues instead of if kamala really listened to 2pac.
13313995, RE: See: Bankers contributing to Warren, or insurance employees contributing to any Dem candidate supporting M4A.
Posted by bentagain, Fri Feb-15-19 12:27 PM
Because you've tried this spin a couple of times now...allow me to retort (c)

Beto has received the 2nd most campaign contributions from oil&gas...2nd most of any politician

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?ind=E01++

Warren doesn't even rank in the top 20 for finance or insurance

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?cycle=2018&ind=F

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?cycle=2018&ind=F09

Warren was also the catalyst for the Consumer Protection Bureau

That is to say, her record of action directly effecting those industries stands for itself

and her highest rankings for donations are #3 from gun control and the postal service

She's received the 3rd most donations from those industries

So sure, individual campaign contributions will bake in contributions from specific industries...sure, no doubt

To clarify, the issue with Beto is having received the 2nd most campaign money from oil&gas...of any politician

So let's play out your analogy on insurance for example

Kevin McCarthy is the top recipient of money from the insurance industry

Would you be shocked to learn he's a proponent of dismantling the ACA and wants to privatize medicare and medicaid

Of course not, that's what they're paying him for.

13314008, I'm honestly not trying to spin anything man
Posted by Stadiq, Fri Feb-15-19 01:03 PM
Your point, if you scroll up, was people wouldn't donate against the interests of their employers/industry. You made a generalization that isn't true.

When I pointed out that isn't the case, you said "you are 1 person"

Then I pointed out other examples of politicians receiving contributions form industries they actually want to regulate more- as proof that it isn't just "1 person"

Maybe thats not what you meant, because you didn't go into this much detail, but that was seemingly your point.

The flip side is to look at Warren and assume she is "bought" by the post office or something.

So again, my point is that you can't look at any politicians individual contributions by industry and rule someone out without details. Now you have provided details and you won the overall point on Beto.

As far as Beto, the how he voted is what disappoints me. I personally think he still votes that way even if you cut his oil money in half. I think that because of where he is from, and seems to fit his centrist approach. You can disagree, thats cool.

The only thing I'd add is I'd be careful comparing Beto's totals in any category with other politicians this cycle- because he raised a ton of money.

At the end of the day we seemingly agree that we don't like the way he voted on some things. We also agree on being uneasy with his privilege.


** But before this post gets attacked by anyone else, I would still support Beto if I think he's the best bet to beat Trump. I'm just not convinced of that yet. And I am disappointed as I learn more **




13314013, RE: The flip side is to look at Warren and assume her POLICIES
Posted by bentagain, Fri Feb-15-19 01:18 PM
are favorable to the post office

w/o even looking it up, the topic of privatizing the postal service has been kicked around recently

I would ASSume, she is against that, and the individual contributions from post office donors reflects that

I would make that same ASSumption for gun control

This isn't that hard my dude.

I never said I ruled Beto out

I never said he was bought and paid for

I made the correlation of being one of the top campaign recipients to his policies while in office

DATALL.

BTW, that post with is voting record...is from december 2018

That info was out there from jump.

He made some speech in a church, etc...and folks were all in...w/o considering his record
13314018, that's what you did man.
Posted by Stadiq, Fri Feb-15-19 01:34 PM
>are favorable to the post office

"Seeing her contributions and assuming her POLICIES were favorable to the post office"

That is literally what you did with Beto.


The rest of us are guilty for not looking further, absolutely.

>
>w/o even looking it up, the topic of privatizing the postal
>service has been kicked around recently
>
>I would ASSume, she is against that, and the individual
>contributions from post office donors reflects that


Again, I assume she would be against that despite her donations. Get it?

I don't think politicians are "bought" by individual donations- at least not to the extent that you clearly do.


>
>I would make that same ASSumption for gun control
>
>This isn't that hard my dude.
>
>I never said I ruled Beto out
>
>I never said he was bought and paid for

http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13281427&mesg_id=13281427&page=#13313163

You literally said that he was pro-big oil based on his contributions.

You didn't post up any evidence. You assumed. We assumed too.

>
>I made the correlation of being one of the top campaign
>recipients to his policies while in office
>
>DATALL.
>
>BTW, that post with is voting record...is from december 2018

K. Why didn't you reference it then? You made some generalizations and accused me of copping pleas.

Lurk posted a breakdown.


Why didn't you post it days ago to shut us all up? Both of us are guilty here. I'll cop to it. Will you?


>
>That info was out there from jump.


So why didn't you use it to back your assumption up?


>
>He made some speech in a church, etc...and folks were all
>in...w/o considering his record
>

I.will.fucking.cop.to.this. Guilty. I saw a dude who can give a great speech, had some really good takes on topics, raised a ton of money, and knew how to build a buzz.

In my eagerness to beat Trump, I said "this dude might be it"

And he still might be. But I am disappointed in his votes and how he did his fellow Dem.


This isn't that hard. You assumed he was pro-big oil by making a general and wrong assumption about how employees donate their money. You didn't do the research to back up your assumption, Lurk did.

I was too quick to dismiss the criticism because I thought your premise was weak, etc. Like you, I didn't do my research.


So, lets just thank Lurk for actually posting a breakdown and KIM.
13314034, I assumed he was pro-big oil by making a general and CORRECT assumption
Posted by bentagain, Fri Feb-15-19 02:31 PM
assumption about having received the 2nd most campaign contributions of any politician from big oil

LOL

Thanks for accepting the L

But, you're still spinning.
13313846, It's disturbing that after two years of Trump,
Posted by stravinskian, Thu Feb-14-19 07:22 PM
the biggest right-wing lunatic to take power in the modern era, with lackeys in every seat of authority of the executive branch and congressional oversight at a standstill, with two appointments to the Supreme Court and rumblings about two more, people are still throwing around the word "centrist" like some kind of scarlet letter.

If it's a centrist who beats Trump, give me a fucking centrist!

This shit matters. It shouldn't have anything to do with your self image.
13313856, Do you think only a centrist can beat Trump?
Posted by Stadiq, Thu Feb-14-19 08:04 PM
I personally don’t. At least not yet.

If that’s the only way, or even the more likely way-
then of course.

But it’s out of pocket to get mad at folks on the left
for not wanting someone in the center.

In fact, if the condescending/dismissive attitude
towards progressives continues into the election,
y’all are gonna fuck up and repeat 16.


It’s funny Dems often complain about double
standards in media, the loyalty of GOP base, etc.
Then turnaround andshit on their base in a way the
GOP would never dare.


If a centrist wins the nom I’m all in. I’ll be all in even
sooner if I start to feel that’s the best bet.

But we should still be able to discuss votes and
push for a progressive agenda without ridicule.

Whoever wins shouldn’t be dismissive, condescending,
etc to the base and young people. Neither should
their supporters, volunteers, etc.

Both sides need to learn from 16.
13313871, I think anyone who could win a general election in this country...
Posted by stravinskian, Thu Feb-14-19 09:32 PM
is someone who would be dismissed as a centrist by people in the bubble.

>I personally don’t. At least not yet.
>
>If that’s the only way, or even the more likely way-
>then of course.
>
>But it’s out of pocket to get mad at folks on the left
>for not wanting someone in the center.

It really isn't if that kind of thinking kills someone who'd put progressives in the federal courts in favor of someone who'd put right wing lunatics and rapists in the federal courts.


>In fact, if the condescending/dismissive attitude
>towards progressives continues into the election,
>y’all are gonna fuck up and repeat 16.

LOL, I think you and I still profoundly disagree about who fucked up in 2016. O'Malley was running for VP. Bernie was a vanity candidate. Nobody else ran, because they knew they wouldn't win. And 'progressives' threw a temper tantrum that hampered the obvious nominee in what we should have known was never going to be an easy race for anyone.


>It’s funny Dems often complain about double
>standards in media, the loyalty of GOP base, etc.
>Then turnaround andshit on their base in a way the
>GOP would never dare.

Uhh, I complain about the loyalty of the GOP base because the GOP base is WRONG, because the GOP base wants to ban the teaching of science, punish people for not already being rich, and make the planet uninhabitable.

If our base could be even half as loyal, over the shit that we really need to get done, we would have had a carbon tax and public health insurance over a decade ago.

Our base is RIGHT on the issues (or at least it tries not to be wrong). They're just too fucking scared to actually get any of it done.


>If a centrist wins the nom I’m all in. I’ll be all in even
>
>sooner if I start to feel that’s the best bet.
>
>But we should still be able to discuss votes and
>push for a progressive agenda without ridicule.

This is OKP. We ridicule each other here. Don't take it personal.


>Whoever wins shouldn’t be dismissive, condescending,
>etc to the base and young people. Neither should
>their supporters, volunteers, etc.

Anyone who *actually* cares about the issues won't care about being 'condescended' to. And at any rate, I don't know who you think was condescending to the "progressives" in '16. I remember A LOT of people being dismissive and condescending of our nominee, both before and after she won the nomination.


>Both sides need to learn from 16.

Ugh. Both sides...
13313876, RE: I think anyone who could win a general election in this country...
Posted by Stadiq, Thu Feb-14-19 10:31 PM
>is someone who would be dismissed as a centrist by people in
>the bubble.

So yes then? It isn’t so black and white, and that’s often
been my beef with you.

People, such as myself, can look at some shit Beto
voted for and say “meh he’s too much of a centrist
for my taste”

That doesn’t mean I’m the type of person who
will only vote for an M4A candidate for instance.

Or that I’m a Bernie bro.

Or that I wouldn’t not only vote, but volunteer for,
Beto if he won the nom.

My goal is beating trump. If I feel that’s Brown, Beto,
Klobuchar, Harris when it’s my states turn, then that
person will get my vote.

But I can also be disappointed in some votes someone like
Beto cast and rethink my rankings so to speak.

And if it ends up being Beto, I can still support him
and critique those votes.

In other words, it’s possible to be a progressive and
not be in the bubble as you put it.

>

>>I personally don’t. At least not yet.
>>
>>If that’s the only way, or even the more likely way-
>>then of course.
>>
>>But it’s out of pocket to get mad at folks on the left
>>for not wanting someone in the center.
>
>It really isn't if that kind of thinking kills someone who'd
>put progressives in the federal courts in favor of someone
>who'd put right wing lunatics and rapists in the federal
>courts.
>

It is though. See above. You assume too much
about people.

As you say, it’s only okayplayer. But you have issue
with me calling him a centrist, and equate it to
“Killing” someone’s campaign?

Because I’d prefer someone, at this point, more to the left
I’m putting lunatics in the courts?

You assume too much about people. It’s still very early in the
primary. And no one is that powerful.


>
>>In fact, if the condescending/dismissive attitude
>>towards progressives continues into the election,
>>y’all are gonna fuck up and repeat 16.
>
>LOL, I think you and I still profoundly disagree about who
>fucked up in 2016. O'Malley was running for VP. Bernie was a
>vanity candidate. Nobody else ran, because they knew they
>wouldn't win. And 'progressives' threw a temper tantrum that
>hampered the obvious nominee in what we should have known was
>never going to be an easy race for anyone.

Yeah we will never agree on the candidate. I refuse to
believe folks like Biden, Warren, Booker didn’t want to
be president.

The party owed the Clintons. Everyone fell in line. Trump
wasn’t even a thing at that point.

Leaving the only real challenge to a socialist.


But, when she won, the Bernie or bust crowd should have
gotten over it and rallied to win.

Also, folks like you should have spent less time crying
about a primary (that every candidate faces) and been
more engaging to the base.

It is possible for both sides to be wrong.

Again, you’re too black and white.

>
>
>>It’s funny Dems often complain about double
>>standards in media, the loyalty of GOP base, etc.
>>Then turnaround andshit on their base in a way the
>>GOP would never dare.
>
>Uhh, I complain about the loyalty of the GOP base because the
>GOP base is WRONG, because the GOP base wants to ban the
>teaching of science, punish people for not already being rich,
>and make the planet uninhabitable.
>
>If our base could be even half as loyal, over the shit that we
>really need to get done, we would have had a carbon tax and
>public health insurance over a decade ago.

LOL was this parody? Stop shitting on the base, and
they’ll be more loyal.

I could go into detail about my issues with the party,
but that attitude pretty much sums it up.

“The left should vote for who ever we put up regardless” is
some fuckshit that is a big reason the base isn’t as loyal
as the gop.

And like it or not, it’s a big reason trump is president.

“She’ll pick up suburban moderates” lol

>
>Our base is RIGHT on the issues (or at least it tries not to
>be wrong). They're just too fucking scared to actually get any
>of it done.

Huh? Or the party and elected officials have been
too scared. The GOP nuked the filibuster- look where
we are. What if Dems had balls in 08?

What could they have accomplished?

How loyal would folks be?

That high ground felt good for 2 years I hope.

>
>
>>If a centrist wins the nom I’m all in. I’ll be all in
>even
>>
>>sooner if I start to feel that’s the best bet.
>>
>>But we should still be able to discuss votes and
>>push for a progressive agenda without ridicule.
>
>This is OKP. We ridicule each other here. Don't take it
>personal.
>

I’m not taking it personal, I’m getting worried at history
repeating itself.

You have candidates getting dismissed because of
rap show interviews and how they eat chicken.

On the flip side, folks can’t call a spade a spade on
something like Beto’s votes without being accused
of destroying the country.


>
>>Whoever wins shouldn’t be dismissive, condescending,
>>etc to the base and young people. Neither should
>>their supporters, volunteers, etc.
>
>Anyone who *actually* cares about the issues won't care about
>being 'condescended' to. And at any rate, I don't know who you
>think was condescending to the "progressives" in '16. I
>remember A LOT of people being dismissive and condescending of
>our nominee, both before and after she won the nomination.
>

Is your self awareness really that bad? You were the one running
around calling everyone a Bernie bro if they had anything less than
flattering to say about her.

There’s been all kinds of critiques on our current options- I don’t recall you
in every thread telling people not to be dismissive.

I guess the word centrist triggered you? It’s just okayplayer

>
>>Both sides need to learn from 16.
>
>Ugh. Both sides...

So the left is now = to the GOP to you?

I don’t know what to tell you man. If you really think the party, the campaign,
and the hardcore Clinton heads couldn’t have done things better in 2016
then I’ll repeat something I’ve said before- I really hope you don’t work
for the party. Self-reflection and learning from mistakes is pretty important-
especially in this case.
13314020, Has anyone said they would NOT vote for a moderate candidate
Posted by Marauder21, Fri Feb-15-19 01:39 PM
if they won the nomination?

I'm voting for whoever gets the nomination in the general, no questions. But part of the primary process is evaluating the respective candidates against each other. Yeah they're all ultimately on the same team, but it's a competition for the next year plus. We can't be scared of people critiquing what they see as flaws in a candidate, because once they do win the nomination, it will get REALLY ugly and they need to be ready for it. Because they've ALL got flaws.
13314047, moderate and centrist are trigger words this cycle because HRC Lost.
Posted by bentagain, Fri Feb-15-19 03:09 PM
13314132, dig in. double down
Posted by Mynoriti, Sat Feb-16-19 04:45 PM
Two years into this shit show, not one of these "I refuse to vote for a lesser evil/ im voting for Stein" types will admit it was a mistake
13314070, Beto polling at 45% against John Cornyn in a hypothetical
Posted by Marauder21, Fri Feb-15-19 04:57 PM
2020 Senate matchup. Seems pretty good! Why don't we want him running for Senate again?

https://twitter.com/PatrickSvitek/status/1096513104677097472
.@ppppolls survey commissioned by Dallas Democratic consultant Jeff Dalton: - @JohnCornyn: 47% - @BetoORourke: 45% - Not sure: 8% #txsen
13314072, im not against that
Posted by mista k5, Fri Feb-15-19 05:01 PM
we really need to put double the effort into the senate in 2020 than we did in 2018.

cant accept defeat from the jump
13314074, I think this is my preference, actually.
Posted by Stadiq, Fri Feb-15-19 05:12 PM



And Abrams running in GA, a strong candidate in Maine, etc.


Even if they are long shots, the Dems should take advantage of potential high turnout by making sure there are strong candidates in every race.

I think the base would still be jazzed about Beto winning a Senate seat, so I think he could still raise a lot of money, etc.

Stacey has a much bigger profile now, too. I'd love to see her run in GA.
13314083, absolutely this
Posted by Jay Doz, Fri Feb-15-19 06:26 PM
13316683, Well, he's not running for Senate, so you'll get your wish
Posted by Marauder21, Thu Feb-28-19 09:22 AM
13316684, I regret co-signing this
Posted by MEAT, Thu Feb-28-19 09:22 AM
13354576, Maybe dude will run for Lt Gov
Posted by MEAT, Fri Nov-01-19 05:59 PM
But he seems like he wants a national profile
13354599, Next stop: Footlocker
Posted by handle, Sat Nov-02-19 01:15 PM
Or city council??
13410580, what beto is doing in texas is remarkable.
Posted by Reeq, Wed Oct-28-20 07:35 PM
i know some people like to clown him for various reasons.

but his senate run in 2018 sparked a resurgence of a long dormant statewide democratic party. his campaign, the field offices, and the volunteers basically created a party from scratch in many areas.

he swept a lot of people into office including some of the folks in harris county who transformed it into one of the best places for voter access in the state.

he led the charge for the new/total voter registration record in the state. 60% of new voters are under 25 and/or people of color. voters under the age of 25 are up *600*% already this year compared to 2016.

and when its all said and done...tx is a legit swing state only 4 yrs after donald trump won it by 9 points. thats incredible.

just seeing a democrat come within about 2 points of winning statewide in tx in 2018 forever changed the state in ways people couldnt have imagined (this quickly).
13410583, Yea this is why I'm almost glad his prez run was shortlived.
Posted by Brew, Wed Oct-28-20 08:03 PM
I didn't look to confirm, but I think in this post (definitely on this board) I was in some discussions about how it'd almost be better for him to stick to TX and use his strengths to shift the politics and ideology of the state from home.


>i know some people like to clown him for various reasons.
>
>but his senate run in 2018 sparked a resurgence of a long
>dormant statewide democratic party. his campaign, the field
>offices, and the volunteers basically created a party from
>scratch in many areas.
>
>he swept a lot of people into office including some of the
>folks in harris county who transformed it into one of the best
>places for voter access in the state.
>
>he led the charge for the new/total voter registration record
>in the state. 60% of new voters are under 25 and/or people of
>color. voters under the age of 25 are up *600*% already this
>year compared to 2016.
>
>and when its all said and done...tx is a legit swing state
>only 4 yrs after donald trump won it by 9 points. thats
>incredible.
>
>just seeing a democrat come within about 2 points of winning
>statewide in tx in 2018 forever changed the state in ways
>people couldnt have imagined (this quickly).
13410597, RE: what beto is doing in texas is remarkable.
Posted by Mgmt, Wed Oct-28-20 09:08 PM
Agreed. Still astounding how he got so close to Cruz in this state (even despite how hate-able Cruz is)

>i know some people like to clown him for various reasons.
>
>but his senate run in 2018 sparked a resurgence of a long
>dormant statewide democratic party. his campaign, the field
>offices, and the volunteers basically created a party from
>scratch in many areas.
>
>he swept a lot of people into office including some of the
>folks in harris county who transformed it into one of the best
>places for voter access in the state.
>
>he led the charge for the new/total voter registration record
>in the state. 60% of new voters are under 25 and/or people of
>color. voters under the age of 25 are up *600*% already this
>year compared to 2016.
>
>and when its all said and done...tx is a legit swing state
>only 4 yrs after donald trump won it by 9 points. thats
>incredible.
>
>just seeing a democrat come within about 2 points of winning
>statewide in tx in 2018 forever changed the state in ways
>people couldnt have imagined (this quickly).
13410641, hopefully he will be back in the mix at the national level soon
Posted by ThaTruth, Thu Oct-29-20 09:46 AM
13410665, I wonder what's the right appointment to set him up for a national run.
Posted by Buddy_Gilapagos, Thu Oct-29-20 11:44 AM
Without giving it much thought, he is the long leader who I think is best poised for a Presidential run down the road. Sorry Pete.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"
13410687, i think he might be better suited as a tx dem party boss.
Posted by Reeq, Thu Oct-29-20 02:30 PM
something state/local oriented.

his strength is obviously grassroots mobilization and he might be the best in the country at it in either party (no exaggeration).

i was looking at some of his virtual rallies and phonebanking operation and the numbers were mindnumbing.

i dont know if i wanna see him parked in dc away from the state that he obviously has his finger on the pulse more than anyone right now.

he could go down as a truly historic/transformative figure in tx state politics if he sticks around *there*.
13410697, Exxxxxxxxxactly.
Posted by Brew, Thu Oct-29-20 03:27 PM
>something state/local oriented.
>
>his strength is obviously grassroots mobilization and he might
>be the best in the country at it in either party (no
>exaggeration).
>
>i was looking at some of his virtual rallies and phonebanking
>operation and the numbers were mindnumbing.
>
>i dont know if i wanna see him parked in dc away from the
>state that he obviously has his finger on the pulse more than
>anyone right now.
>
>he could go down as a truly historic/transformative figure in
>tx state politics if he sticks around *there*.
13410722, That mojo wears off though. He can't be jumping on tables at 58 years old
Posted by PimpTrickGangstaClik, Thu Oct-29-20 06:47 PM
His appeal is being energetic and relating to and mobilizing younger folks.

It's not going to be long before he is just old and corny.
13410726, he isnt jumping on tables now. this is stupid.
Posted by Reeq, Thu Oct-29-20 07:00 PM
13410734, Exactly the Democratic Party needs to shift to a younger demographic...
Posted by ThaTruth, Thu Oct-29-20 08:21 PM
overall we can’t be relying on 70 year olds like we are now
13411543, we really need another Democrat to rise from the south
Posted by ThaTruth, Wed Nov-04-20 10:08 AM
13411710, Abrams
Posted by Stadiq, Wed Nov-04-20 02:36 PM

Or do you mean we need a white guy?

Mark Kelly? (Is AZ south?)

How about Mitch Landrieu?


Wait, what do we need them for?
13411742, Older I get the more I realize how damn good Bull Clinton was
Posted by Amritsar, Wed Nov-04-20 03:21 PM
As a politician

Charismatic Southern dude who balled out in elections and appealed to a wide swath of voters.

Like him winning states like Az back in the day is remarkable
13411822, bill played the sax on arsenio and got all the black votes...
Posted by luminous, Wed Nov-04-20 06:17 PM