>dems gotta do better winning the media war (where elections
>are really won). and that includes vesseling your message
>through likeable faces/voices.

Exactly- I should have used the term media war. But this is exactly it.

>
>imo this would have been a great opportunity for beto...who is
>from the state with the longest length of border land...is a
>great deliverer of targeted relevant information and sound
>bytes...represents the future of the party...and already has
>tons of experience driving public support around the issue
>with his numerous campaign stops in the midterms. it would
>also provide a lot of moral/political clarity to a potential
>2020 nominee should he ever run and need to draw a sharp
>contrast to trump/repubs.

I thought about suggesting Beto for these very reasons...but figured giving this moment to a potential POTUS candidate might be seen as anointing someone.

Which is why I suggested someone like Gillum (who I assume isn't running) or Castro (the one who isn't running- Joaquin) or something.

But then again, I agree it could be an opportunity for a potential candidate to draw a line.

>
>but this is relatively short notice (unlike state of the union
>addresses) and im not sure of the logistics of prepping other
>people, running things past strategists/lawyers/etc, and so
>on.

Very good point.

>
>chuck and nancy have been living and breathing this issue for
>the last 2 years and probably have more inside baseball
>knowledge than anyone. so technically they would prolly be
>the most qualified...especially when it comes to speaking on
>the legislative wranglings, constitutionality issues, etc.
>but like you...i worry about their effectiveness presenting
>that information to the public.

Right. You know I go hard on some Dems, but I've learned a lot more on Nancy's effectiveness.

My only concern was/is how are these two going to do in trying to reach independents, a-political people, and the mythical moderate Republican...on national TV...when they are pissed that they are missing the latest episode of CSI: St Paul or whatever.

>
>chuck just exudes mundane weakness and comes off as a detached
>manicured politician. and nancy...while a g in the
>chamber...is just a bad public persona (for various reasons)
>to look at and listen to.

Thank you. That's all I'm saying.

I also wonder if having someone from a border state would play better.

>
>in the end...it might not matter that much either way.

This is probably the truest statement in this entire thread to be honest.

and
>they might just be the best options available given the
>current constraints.

Like I said this is a great point.

but itd be nice to see dems really
>button things up on a regular basis...rise to the
>occasion...and start going for headshots when trump/repubs
>give them the opportunity (which is basically all the time now
>lol).


I agree man. We'll see- maybe they'll do fine. Like I said, I hope I'm wrong.


Hope you're doing well Reeq.