You have to think about electability

[demmiblue]

Let me begin by stating that I, personally, have no problems with any of the candidates. I am excited by all of them. So excited. Super excited and not even a tiny bit uncomfortable. Gosh, I would vote for these candidates as many times as I saw “Get Out,” as well as once for every mug or tote bag I own that says “The Future is Female” or “Love is Love” on it. (Imagine a lot of mugs and tote bags.) Were only that legal!

But you have to think about electability.

I just think people — again, not me, I’m on board, just … people — might not vote for this candidate. Because the candidate is a little, well, you know.

I mean, it doesn’t bother me. But think of people, other people, people maybe with trucks or something, people who aren’t as, well, enlightened as you and, of course, me. These benighted, backward people might not be ready to vote for … someone like this.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/25/you-have-think-about-electability/?tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.4d0ff2d3c550

Link to tweet

[ancianita]

1. You have to think about winning even more.

[Siwsan]

2. We are currently in no position to "Risk" anything

At this point, electability is #1. We have a bunch of great candidates that, even if not at the top of the ticket, can help, in so many ways, to work towards the repair of what is becoming a dangerously broken system.

[demmiblue]

3. I personally don't think having a woman, PoC or LGBT candidate is a risk.

Nor do I think that it makes them less electable. Opinions vary on this, though.

[Siwsan]

4. You don't and I don't. We have to worry about a whole lot more people, though

People on the 'edge' of the political divide. Whose beckon are they more likely to gravitate towards. Who will they, right or wrong, feel more comfortable and confident in, as POTUS. I'm not saying it's right. I'm just saying it's reality.

[demmiblue]

8. Did you feel that way about Clinton or Obama?

Clinton won three million more votes than Trump (facing a lot of interference); Obama won Michigan by 17% over McCain in 2008. That's some reality right there.

[Siwsan]

10. I readily admit that it was a bit of a worry in 2008.

I remember the feeling of joy and astonishment that washed over me, election night, where I almost pinched myself, to see if I was dreaming. I worried less in 2012, but still, as I recall, the vote did a little movement away from Blue.

I believe there are people who didn't normally vote, but did come out and vote for trump*. It might be a toss up if they were voting for him, or against Hillary. Did they not want her because of her gender, or because of her husband? I just don't know.

Let me be really specific, though. I've never been more terrified about the future of this country. Right now it's too early to really take a temperature of how people feel. I'd be THRILLED to be a part of the voting block that elects the first female POTUS. Hillary getting the majority vote gives me some hope. BUT as long as we have an electoral college that benefits the traditionally neo-con populated red states, my pragmatic side is going to take control over my hopeful side.

Does that make sense?

And I DO SO want to be proven to be a ridiculous fretter. And I just finished a Margarita so my thought process might be a bit woozy.

[demmiblue]

17. Yes, Obama had a lower percentage in 2012, but...

he was also up against a native son.

2016 was just a weird election in Michigan... a one-off, as I recall Senator Peters saying. I don't think it was primarily because Hillary is a woman, though. There are a lot of factors that went into the loss of our state. However, look at what we achieved in 2018: Governor Whitmer, AG Nessel, Sen. Stabenow (that was a given, really), Associate Justice Cavanagh, etc.

All over the country, women, PoC, and LGBT candidates have made tremendous progress. I think we focus too much on those who will never vote for us (but I also believe we can get back a lot of the Obama/Trump crossovers).

That being said, I am going to wait it out to see what emerges regarding our candidates. Also, there is nothing wrong with backing Biden; he has a whole lot of positives.

[Siwsan]

19. Great "chatting" with you!

[demmiblue]

21. Have a wonderful rest of the day!

I'm leaving politics aside for the day to binge watch something or other.

[JonLP24]

7. Neither do I

I will not be evaluating candidate based on racists' feelings. I support my candidate based on policy and consistently but Warren & Gabbard are also my top options.

[Demsrule86]

11. I don't agree. You have to consider who can be elected.

[BlueStater]

5. All of our candidates are electable.

Personally, I'm not going to allow a motherfucker like Trump impact who I vote for to be our nominee. Apparently, quite a few people feel differently.

[demmiblue]

9. It has been a little shocking to see some of the attitudes regarding our candidates. n/t

[Demsrule86]

12. Wrong . Other years are different. But this year we need to rebuild the blue

wall . Only Biden or possibly Ryan can do this,

[BlueStater]

14. How do you know?

A lot of the candidates aren't even well known yet, for shits sake.

Sorry, not going to let my hatred for that orange fuck in the White House make me vote for a candidate in the primary that I don't like. Not going to happen.

[Demsrule86]

36. I can look at the electoral map and see where we can win.

I posted this a while back. You could search...or it is online.

[Demsrule86]

38. Vote for him when he wins the general. This is what counts. But I predict barring

A miracle, if Biden isn't the nominee, we lose. We simply don't have candidates other than Biden who can win the states we need.

[mobeau69]

28. +100,000,000,000

[yaesu]

6. All our candidates are electable, tRump is too but in a very bad way. He lied, committed crimes to

get elected, like most republiCons do.

[Demsrule86]

13. He has a good shot at getting reelected if he holds PA...

Biden will see that doesn't happen.

[Butterflylady]

15. Even if it's not Biden

PA will be a blue State in 2020.

[BlueStater]

18. Yes, thank you.

A Biden supporter that I actually agree with.

[Demsrule86]

32. I don't think we can count on that without either Biden or Ryan on the ticket.

[IphengeniaBlumgarten]

16. The WaPo article seems to be an attempt at sarcasm. nt

[JonLP24]

20. I don't think Biden can survive negative press articles especially during a general election

Specifically, DFP designed a survey to test whether Biden’s advantage over Trump is sturdy enough to survive negative attacks. For its first round of polling, they presented voters with a hypothetical Biden-Trump match-up, and asked whether they would back the Democrat, the Republican, “someone else,” or “not vote.” In this framing, DFP found Biden enjoying a lead — albeit, an aberrantly miniscule one of 39.4 to 39.2 percent (or 50.1-49.9 percent, among voters who were willing to pick one of the two major party candidates).

DFP then presented voters with a series of negative statements about both Trump and Biden. It alerted respondents to the former Delaware senator’s support for rolling back bankruptcy protections for working families, and the regressive nature of Trump’s tax cuts. The pollsters then described Biden’s support for the Iraq War, Trump’s mindless withdrawal from the Iran nuclear agreement, and finally, Biden’s backing of a crime bill that led to the long-term incarceration of many nonviolent offenders, and Trump’s ongoing insistence that the (exonerated) Central Park Five should have been given the death penalty.

After sharing this information with voters, DFP asked them how concerning they found each aspect of the candidates’ records. For every pair of negative statements, more voters were alarmed by Trump’s baggage than by Biden’s (i.e., 43 percent were concerned by Biden’s support for the crime bill, while 57 percent were concerned by the fact that our president believes several African-American men should be executed for a crime that they did not commit). Nevertheless, Trump’s initial supporters proved more loyal than Biden’s. After hearing all of the negative statements, one in eight of Biden’s initial backers switched their preference to either Trump, someone else, or staying at home. As a result, Trump opened up a 39.4 to 34.2 percent lead (or 53.5 to 46.5 percent, among that subset of voters who were willing to pick between the two major party candidates).

https://www.google.com/amp/nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2019/04/poll-joe-biden-may-be-less-electable-than-he-looks.html

[Demsrule86]

33. I don't think Sanders can win a general. The smears won't work.

[Demit]

22. I'm afraid Alexandra Petri's satire is sailing right over some heads.

The last election's "Oh I would totally vote for a woman for president, just not THAT woman" has become this election's "Oh I would totally vote for a woman, just not THIS year."

And Jennifer Rubin(!) is right. People talk about "electability" as if it's some kind of settled scientific fact and not a concept that's being foisted on them. It sounds like it must be true, so they accept it as wisdom and repeat it. It's a perfect example of Stephen Colbert's "truthiness."

[demmiblue]

25. And I'm afraid you're right.

Ah, well.

[elleng]

27. Seems like it.

I just got here, and then got IT!

[Gothmog]

23. Electablity is a key factor in this race

We have to defeat trump. There is a very good chance that trump will win if we pick a weak or unsafe choice. There are posters who believe that we can nominate the most liberal/socialist nominee as possible and that candidate will easily win because everyone hates trump. It is their position that this is a historic opportunity to nominate someone would otherwise not be electable.

From Larry Sabato https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-economy-got-nixon-reagan-and-bush-reelected-it-could-do-it-for-trump-too/2019/04/23/b8920d34-65e6-11e9-a1b6-b29b90efa879_story.html?utm_term=.a35b315730d2

Ultimately, Trump may turn out to be at the mercy of conventional factors. In 2016, academic predictive models based on fundamentals such as the state of the economy suggested that Trump, or any other Republican candidate, was in position to win the election or come very close. This time, such models (once they become operative next year) could make Trump the early favorite despite his poor approval ratings.

Credit the powers of incumbency and a strong economy, the state of which may matter more to Trump’s odds than nearly anything else. Incumbency and the economy, among other matters, ended up being more than enough for Nixon, Reagan and Bush. Despite Trump’s unprecedented outlandishness, that same combination might work for him, too.

Most POTUS are re-elected if the economy is good. Here is a scary study that shows this

Link to tweet

There are good reasons to doubt this study

Link to tweet

I do not believe that trump is assured of winning. If we want to win, Democrats need to nominate a strong nominee who is NOT too far out of the mainstream

[elleng]

24. By Alexandra Petri

WHO?

'Columnist offering a lighter take on the news and opinions of the day'

[elleng]

26. Satire, anyone???

[Fiendish Thingy]

29. I don't think Biden is any more "electable" that the women

In fact, nominating another white male, other than possibly Mayor Pete, could actually depress turnout among young voters and WOC.

I hope and trust the upcoming debates will reveal the strengths and weaknesses of all the candidates, from which voters can make informed choices, and better prediction of electability can be made.

[Demsrule86]

35. The women are not winning the primary, I wish it was different.

I don't think any can win a general because we need to take the rustbelt and they are not the right candidates to do so... thus I would not vote for them.

[Fiendish Thingy]

41. Nobody's winning any primaries until January 2020

You seem to be trying to create an atmosphere of "inevitableism"...as we've seen before, that only serves to sow division.

I hope you will reconsider your decision note to vote for our nominee in November 2020 if she is a woman.

[Sherman A1]

30. You have to think

about a lot of things.

[delisen]

31. So many Democrats ignoring the reality of Putin. nt

[Otto Lidenbrock]

34. Jimmy Carter is the most electable democrat eligible for 2020

He'd get my vote

[BlueStater]

37. He'll only be 96 and he's technically eligible to run for another term.

Why not?

[Demsrule86]

39. Bernievsanders older than Biden.

[Otto Lidenbrock]

40. Carter-Mondale 2020!