2020 Presidential Election

[Brock Beauchamp]

Now I read the article and woof.

 

"A simple solution: every network should commit now to ensuring 50/50 male/female representation on every show."

 

No. Networks should not give equal representation, they should not give BAD representation. 

 

Look at Klobuchar. She got a raw deal that someone like good ol' Joe would never get. THAT'S what needs to change.

 

It's not the time, it's the tone.

[ewen21]

 

 

I have no idea who I'm going to vote for at this stage. I don't begrudge Carole her preference for a woman to be in office, but I cannot understand the recent fascination with "mayor Pete".

 

Could someone please breakdown what makes Buttigieg such an attractive candidate?

[Badsmerf]

I have no idea who I'm going to vote for at this stage. I don't begrudge Carole her preference for a woman to be in office, but I cannot understand the recent fascination with "mayor Pete".

 

Could someone please breakdown what makes Buttigieg such an attractive candidate?

Have you watched or heard him speak yet? He's very articulate and comes off as a genuine person. He also has great credentials. I'm impressed with him so far, can't wait to see a debate.

[ewen21]

 

Have you watched or heard him speak yet? He's very articulate and comes off as a genuine person. He also has great credentials. I'm impressed with him so far, can't wait to see a debate.

I most certainly have seen him speak and this is why I ask.  Being articulate seems a compulsory attribute to  me and I really cannot determine if he is genuine just yet.  Not sure how anyone can be so convinced of him so early in the game

[Squirrel]

Now I read the article and woof.

 

"A simple solution: every network should commit now to ensuring 50/50 male/female representation on every show."

 

No. Networks should not give equal representation, they should not give BAD representation.

 

Look at Klobuchar. She got a raw deal that someone like good ol' Joe would never get. THAT'S what needs to change.

 

It's not the time, it's the tone.

Yeah, I’m not in favor of their solution, but the issue itself is definitely is a thing and needs to be addressed. And I agree with you about Buttigieg. He’s just too ... raw for me, but of the male candidates, I think he offers the best option. But I think he’d be great as a VP choice, but not Klobuchar. Klobuchar needs a balance with someone from a big state outside the Midwest.

[TheLeviathan]

Isn't some of the reason Buttigieg is out there is because he's fresh?  I don't see much of anything from Corey Booker either and I suspect it's the same reason as Klobuchar and Harris.....they aren't currently offering anything new or newsworthy.  It's less about their gender and more that they are knowns with nothing new to say as of now.

[Squirrel]

 

Isn't some of the reason Buttigieg is out there is because he's fresh?  I don't see much of anything from Corey Booker either and I suspect it's the same reason as Klobuchar and Harris.....they aren't currently offering anything new or newsworthy.  It's less about their gender and more that they are knowns with nothing new to say as of now.

The people generating the most media attention are Biden and Sanders ... and Buttigieg. Aren't Biden and Sanders known? Sorry ... I don't agree ... I see NOTHING of the women running that is anywhere close to Sanders or Biden in the media. Nothing. You can say it's not about gender. That's fine. I don't buy it.

[TheLeviathan]

 

The people generating the most media attention are Biden and Sanders ... and Buttigieg. Aren't Biden and Sanders known? Sorry ... I don't agree ... I see NOTHING of the women running that is anywhere close to Sanders or Biden in the media. Nothing. You can say it's not about gender. That's fine. I don't buy it.

 

Why don't we see anything about Booker?  Rourke fell off the map too.  Give Buttigieg two weeks and he'll be O'Rourke'd too.

 

Biden's name is out there because of his prominence. Sanders because he's the front runner.  I think it's the simplest explanation and likely the correct one.  What's the alternative?  A grand, national conspiracy by right and left wing media to downplay women?

[TheLeviathan]

Also...we're in that weird lull between the fanfare of people announcing their bid and actual debates.  If the women on stage get less time to debate, I'm 100% there.  Right now?  It's the nature of the game.

[Squirrel]

 

Why don't we see anything about Booker?  Rourke fell off the map too.  Give Buttigieg two weeks and he'll be O'Rourke'd too.

 

Biden's name is out there because of his prominence. Sanders because he's the front runner.  I think it's the simplest explanation and likely the correct one.  What's the alternative?  A grand, national conspiracy by right and left wing media to downplay women?

None of the women have seen much of anything. Sorry, as I said, you can believe what you want. I don't buy it. I just don't. And nothing will convince me otherwise.

[TheLeviathan]

Seems like a poor way to approach things.  I thought Warren got quite a bit of fanfare, right in line with Rourke and Buttigieg.

 

Harris and Booker less so.

[PseudoSABR]

Warren is getting publicity because she keeps putting ideas out there, though not as much as she deserves.  Buttigieg is new and gay.  Bernie is getting attention because of his taxes, going on Fox News, being a socialist, and front running.  Biden gets attention because he hasn't announced and benefits from speculation.  Booker and Beto, as Levi has pointed, have fallen off.   Harris, who was arguably seen as a front runner, isn't getting much attention, but she hasn't been putting out her own policy ideas (that I've seen).  Klobouchar was getting attention but not for the right reasons.  And Gillenbrand hasn't received really any attention, but I've read there's been a lack of cohesion and direction in her campaign.

 

I think there's clearly a bit of sexism (probably both in terms of distribution and consumption of the news), but there's also been lack of news-making on the part of the female candidates beyond Warren.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

 

None of the women have seen much of anything. Sorry, as I said, you can believe what you want. I don't buy it. I just don't. And nothing will convince me otherwise.

I hear you. Loud and clear. However I just don't have a lot of confidence that Klobuchar is saying anything interesting or worth reporting on. The others I don't know about, partly for the reasons you raised, partly because I'm not paying much attention at the moment. 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

 

I have no idea who I'm going to vote for at this stage. I don't begrudge Carole her preference for a woman to be in office, but I cannot understand the recent fascination with "mayor Pete".

Could someone please breakdown what makes Buttigieg such an attractive candidate?

Because his name is pronounced Buddha Judge, and that is awesome?

 

(although I've also heard the second part as more like, "jidge")

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Also, not to be a social scientist or conspiracy theorist, but when was the last time a president had a complicated last name? Looking at you, Buttigeig and Klobuchar.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Also, not to be a social scientist or conspiracy theorist, but when was the last time a president had a complicated last name? Looking at you, Buttigeig and Klobuchar.

 

Cleveland.

[PseudoSABR]

 

I have no idea who I'm going to vote for at this stage. I don't begrudge Carole her preference for a woman to be in office, but I cannot understand the recent fascination with "mayor Pete".

Could someone please breakdown what makes Buttigieg such an attractive candidate?

Because he's super articulate and hasn't taken hardline policy positions, and instead offered nuance on a variety of issues.  He's also pretty likable and has an interesting biography, veteran, rhode scholar, etc.

 

He's about as opposite as Trump as there is. 

[Craig Arko]

Also, not to be a social scientist or conspiracy theorist, but when was the last time a president had a complicated last name? Looking at you, Buttigeig and Klobuchar.

Eisenhower.

[PseudoSABR]

 

 

Also, not to be a social scientist or conspiracy theorist, but when was the last time a president had a complicated last name? Looking at you, Buttigeig and Klobuchar.

Eisenhower (which I misspelled on my first try)?

[LaBombo]

 

Eisenhower.

 

You mean Ike?    

 

Buttigeig and Klobuchar will probably be harder to nickname.

[TheLeviathan]

 

You mean Ike?    

 

Buttigeig and Klobuchar will probably be harder to nickname.

 

Butti is fun already.

[LaBombo]

 

Butti is fun already.

 

I like it, but at the same time I'm wary of it in a sort of 'It's only funny when it's used right" sort of way. If I were able to post a .gif, it would be Futurama's squinting Fry saying "Not sure if ok when straight guy says it"

 

In any case, he may be the easier candidate to market than Klobsie, strictly in terms of image and charisma. Klobuchar (Klobu? Char-O? AK-46?) remains my dark horse hope, although Andrew "Yang-y Doodle Dandy" would be my runaway choice as the best "I'm making popcorn, this is gonna be good!" candidate.

[Squirrel]

 

I hear you. Loud and clear. However I just don't have a lot of confidence that Klobuchar is saying anything interesting or worth reporting on. The others I don't know about, partly for the reasons you raised, partly because I'm not paying much attention at the moment. 

Yeah, I wouldn't know if she is or isn't ... it's not being reported! Maybe she gets more play in Minnesota, but in Chicago? Not really. Of course, I don't rely on local media all that much unless I want local news, so I'm not really hearing much from the sources I do read.

[ashbury]

Yeah, I wouldn't know if she is or isn't ... it's not being reported! Maybe she gets more play in Minnesota, but in Chicago? Not really. Of course, I don't rely on local media all that much unless I want local news, so I'm not really hearing much from the sources I do read.

How do you expect other hopefuls to gain attention in the news cycle, when Mayor Pete continues to wow with new abilities we could barely have guessed?

 

 

 

_{^{/ yes, yes, it's the Onion}}

 

[Mike Sixel]

A reminder.... The Russia probe was not important. Let's hope the candidates remember this.

 

https://news.gallup.com/poll/244367/top-issues-voters-healthcare-economy-immigration.aspx

[ewen21]

Beavis and Buttigieig

[gunnarthor]

Looking at the senate map, Trump could hurt his party and a good Dem candidate could help his down ticket selections. At best, the Dems could flip Arizona, Georgia, Iowa, Maine, North Carolina, Colorado. They'll likely lose Alabama unless they get Roy Moore again and there are a few states that they can't ignore but it's a better map than last time out.

[Badsmerf]

Good luck in Georgia and Iowa. Ernst is well liked here for some reason. Democrats could lose a house seat here in 2020 too.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Looking at the senate map, Trump could hurt his party and a good Dem candidate could help his down ticket selections. At best, the Dems could flip Arizona, Georgia, Iowa, Maine, North Carolina, Colorado. They'll likely lose Alabama unless they get Roy Moore again and there are a few states that they can't ignore but it's a better map than last time out.

 

Of these Colorado and NC seem like solid opportunities.  AZ is running a good candidate, but I'd be surprised if they had two Democratic Senators.  (Not that I won't be voting to help that)

 

The Senate map is better, but it still sorta sucks.

[Mike Sixel]

The Senate map will suck for a long time, it took the GOP a couple decades of impugning Democrats as worse than Satan, it will take longer to change people's minds.