The 2020 thread....

nkotb wrote: You just need the right message and the right messenger.

ding ding ding….we have a winner!

@AlexThomasDC
"write letters to the judge sentencing your former congressman" is the new "call your representatives"

Well, if the goal is to be president, and you win, I think it's hard to say your campaign was "bad".  Likewise, if the goal is to become president, and you lose, I think it's hard to say your campaign was "good".

Now, what if you run a bad campaign, but your opponent runs a worse campaign and you win…relatively speaking, you ran a good campaign as it wasn't worse than your opponents.  But it could still be a bad campaign.  I think Trump's win definitely falls into this category…the difference in PA (20 electoral votes, HRC lost by 44,000 votes)), Wisconsin (10 electoral votes, HRC lost by 23,000 votes), and Michigan (16 electoral votes, HRC lost by 11,000 votes) would've swung it, and not by much!  That seems like a bad campaign IMO, regardless of what "bad" campaigning Trump did.  He won the goal.

If you run a good campaign, but your opponent runs a better campaign and you lose?  Again, relatively speaking, you ran a bad campaign as it wasn't better than your opponents. That said, I'd have to dig for an example.

Julian, wrote:
I think this really needs to get defined in the discussion of this (nearly continual) board argument. Can someone run a good campaign and lose? Can someone run a bad campaign and still win? If so, for either, give real-life examples [and show your work].

I think if you and Hutch answer those two questions (and follow one instructive statement), it will quickly be revealed you are debating different topics at heart.

In essence NKOTB admits he believes if you win you ran the good campaign (or better) and if you lose a bad one (or a worse one)


Preposterous

A candidate can run a good campaign and lose and vice versa….it happens all the time! And it’s kind of like duh common sense.

But I have noticed in America people seem to subscribe to this idea…

Trump’s campaign was a shitshow meanwhile Hillary made a few unforced errors…but hey Hillary ran a bad campaign

To answer Julian Trump ran a bad campaign and still won: his fundraising, the RNC convention was weak compared to the Democrats, he was off message all the time, he went through like 3 Campaign Managers, lost every debate, and one could go on

One might resent Hillary but to objectively argue her campaign was worse than Trump’s beggars belief unless you don’t care what type of campaign a candidate ran and just conclude if they won=good lost=bad

But one could certainly argue Hillary was less likable than Trump as far as the American people are concerned


That is not the same as saying she ran a worse campaign than Trump

hutch wrote:
In essence NKOTB admits he believes if you win you ran the good campaign (or better) and if you lose a bad one (or a worse one)

I think that might be a bit more simplistic than NKOTB would put it but I agree its his argument.

In the abstract, I do think someone can run a much better campaign and still lose. I think there are lots of factors outside the power of a political campaign that are much bigger drivers than the specific quality of the campaign itself.

For example, John McCain (aside from his VP choice) ran a really good campaign in 2008. He also got pasted. This is not something I attribute to "well Obama and his campaign were so much savvier," rather it was more about the fact the economy went in the shitter 4 months before the election and one party was (pre-candidates being decided) much more fired up than the other and just the fact that we generally swap parties back and forth for the Presidency and it was the Dem's "turn".

I think my point is, I do not think "the campaign" is really the deciding factor in most elections – its one of, like, ten things that factor in. Hutch, I think, also agrees with that. NKOTB does not. As I said, I think you're arguing different things when you say "the campaign was good/bad".

And all of that should be taken just as an esoteric, overarching view of elections, not commentary on 2016 in particular.

I agree with Julian (except about McCain…picking Palin WAS the campaign and that was a pretty bad move*), but I think this boils down to 2016.  If HRC won't the popular vote by 3million but LOST because those votes weren't where they really mattered and her campaign actively chose NOT to focus on those states, I don't see how you can say it was anything but bad, even with Comey and misogyny, etc. etc.

But back to the topic at hand…AOC in 2028.

nkotb wrote:
..AOC in 2028.

is that because she won't even be 35 in 2024

Lil' wrote:

nkotb wrote:
..AOC in 2028.

is that because she won't even be 35 in 2024

#HeDidTheMath

Yes, because I'm Yang Gang now.

Also, for as much as I love her, she's only been in office a year lol.  Let's give it time to make sure she has an impact and doesn't sell out.

Julian, wrote:

Lil' wrote:

nkotb wrote:
..AOC in 2028.

is that because she won't even be 35 in 2024

#HeDidTheMath

uh-oh…the tulsi endorsement…and kiss of death

Tulsi Gabbard🌺 @TulsiGabbard
I also met with @BernieSanders  before announcing my candidacy. We had a nice one-on-one conversation and I informed him that I would be running for President. In that meeting, he showed me the greatest respect and encouragement, just as he always has.

also…Lev's defense attorney. Joseph A. Bondy @josephabondy twiter feed is just troll-er-ific
quality content and snark

Both known Russian assets which should be a plus in the general

hutch wrote:
Both known Russian assets which should be a plus in the general

oh snap…shots fired

and if you have time to kill http://www.officialmikepence.com/ ; …good stuff

Julian, wrote:

Lil' wrote:

nkotb wrote:
..AOC in 2028.

is that because she won't even be 35 in 2024

#HeDidTheMath

She'll be 35 before Election Day.

the podcast The Wilderness  with podsavethenation and obmaa speach writer Jon Favreau @jonfavs is awesome and highly recommended

although no baby yoda?

February looks to be a big month for the American voter to pay attention…or time for Team Trump to go Defcon 4 with distraction mode
Feb 2: Super Bowl (for the ads of course)…will trump attend?
Feb 3: Iowa caucuses
Feb 4: State of the Union
Feb 7: Debate
Feb 11: New Hampshire primary
Feb 19: Debate
Feb 22: Nevada caucus
Feb 25: Debate
Feb 29: South Carolina primary
+ An impeachment trial and stone and flynn sentencing

Grr…FL supreme court is making it hard for my friends…the felons, vote

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/478620-florida-supreme-court-rules-convicted-felons-must-pay-fines-fees-before

gotta pay the man, before voting
seems poll-taxy to me.

Maybe some wealthy dem will just pay all their tabs…not holding my breath

maybe julian for the future VP??

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2020/01/16/joe-biden-says-hell-commit-resources-needed-to-win-texas

Biden said …  Beto … and Julian Castro, t.. would consider Texas’ favorite sons as his running mates or members of his cabinet.

althought this is where the plan goes off the rails

But then Biden revealed something …“I’m going to get in trouble for saying this,” he said. “I’m an Eagles fan. ”

https://twitter.com/mattdpearce/status/1217864280126775297


Matt Pearce 🦅
@mattdpearce
Hard to overstate how unpredictable talking to voters can be: Melissa from Algona, Iowa, caucused for Bernie in 2016, then voted for a Trump; she supports Medicare for All but supports Buttigieg, but will likely vote for Trump again if Buttigieg doesn’t win the Dem nomination.

Eagles fan?

I think that’s not a reveal but a joke

There is no doubt the VP should be a African American woman in her early 50s

I will be surprised if there isn’t something agreed with Kamala