Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
I think we just have to accept that throughout this Primary campaign there is going to be a giant elephant in the room by the name of Trump, and the more that elephant looms over everything else the more that questions of electability will drown out more substantive issues such as policy.
This might explain why certain candidates are coming out for Impeachment whilst others are not. Impeachment means in the best case scenario, Trump is out of the picture. At worst, it distracts him away from the primary giving space for the more policy driven candidates to shine.
Plus, almost any situation where Trump wins means a situation with a senate still controlled by republicans. Another thing about the presidential race is that the more votes the candidate gets in the general election, the more votes the democratic senatorial candidates get. That to me is the strongest argument for an electable candidate, even if I prefer a focus on policy.
My musician pageIn terms of Senate control, Colorado is a must win for the Democrats next year. While its still early, Cory Gardner (R) might be in trouble, due to a strong set of contenders, and a more conservative record than the state's political lean.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.I mean, Trump’s on an authoritarian speed run, enabled by Mc Connell and a stolen SCOTUS. I don’t think that’s hyperbole.
There is only one measurable metric by which "electability" can be quantified. The most electable candidate is the one who gets the most votes in an election. Because that is literally what "electable" means: able to be elected.
Hillary Clinton was the most electable Democrat in 2016 because she was the candidate who got the most votes in an election. She was elected to the nomination over others who were not elected to the nomination. Erego, electable.
Now, I realize that this definition of electability basically renders it meaningless. That's because it is, in fact, meaningless. "Electability" is a dog-whistle. It's a nonsense-phrase used to avoid saying "White Guy".
But that's what people mean by it. Bernie Sanders was "more electable" than Hillary 'cause he's a white guy. Joe Biden is the "electable" candidate 'cause he's a white guy. You can't just come out and say, "We need to run a white guy candidate!" You'll be shunned. And rightly so. So you say "We need an electable candidate."
But the rest of us? We do, in fact, know what it f*cking means and it's not as clever as people think.
Edited by TobiasDrake on Apr 25th 2019 at 8:02:10 AM
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Impeachment isn't a tactical issue anymore (and frankly, it never should have been). In a time when the president is openly flaunting the rules left and right and democracy is systematically undermined, the voters need the security that there are still politicians which will play this by the rules. And by the rules, impeachment isn't an option, it is what has to be done.
![]()
Considering all the violence that Trump inspired from his winning of the election I think it will be dangerous no matter who wins. Whenever we win the election again, we must do everything to curb right-wing, (the most prominent in our nation) violence.
Edited by Wildcard on Apr 25th 2019 at 10:05:53 AM
Trump has been unable to obtain significant legislative victories since his tax plan, because Democrats have kept enough control in Congress to oppose him.
What is really dangerous is how his administration, abetted by Senate Republicans, has been tearing down the institutional foundations of our government. The longer he is allowed to remain in office, the more damage he does to the agencies that actually do the leg work of running the country, the more he can insert conservative judges into our courts. This damage will take years, maybe even decades to undo, and some of it may make democratic governance nigh impossible — the bad decisions handed down by his pet judges will last far longer than his administration.
Republicans are running a case study of how to seize and hold power in a representative democracy with a minority of voters. The longer it goes on, the harder it'll be to undo, which is exactly their purpose.
None of this even addresses the long-term harm to the entire world done by the failure to address climate change, the failure to address wealth inequality, the destruction of our alliances and the empowering of dictators.
Trump himself will go, sooner or later. It's what he represents that is the underlying problem, and it's a cancer that only gets worse with time.
Edited by Fighteer on Apr 25th 2019 at 10:08:45 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I feel that now that Biden is in the race a lot of media coverage will fall in line with him and will only solidify him as the front-runner.
The only other candidate who is in a position to challenge Biden is, Sanders who has has more things going against him then Biden does, at least in terms of media coverage, and leadership support.
I know 538 says to not count out Kamala Harris or even Corey Booker, but given media coverage of them (or lack there of) I think they are pretty much dead in the water bar some really big shift, though I will say that the fact that negative press and “scandals” sunk them so much more easily then it did Biden is really telling of both the media and the electorate in general.
We are probably not going to see a woman President or another President of color for sometime yet.
![]()
Ding ding ding. And if SCOTUS lets them rig the census, they’ll have deliberately skewed data that will enable even more concentration of power via gerrymandering, voter suppression, etc.
I mean, it can literally survive as a blatantly white supremacist state that rigs elections to favor a minority of voters, but I think that’s not what op meant. I suspect they meant survive as a democracy. And I’ll believe we’re out of danger when I see drastic action against authoritarianism and not before.
Edited by wisewillow on Apr 25th 2019 at 7:12:06 AM
Whether that will progress far enough that the US "literally cannot survive" is highly debatable. It's slippery slope logic to presume that this trend with continue unabated.
"...in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.""[L]iterally cannot survive" is hyperbole, and also largely meaningless, because it fails to define "survive". Will the U.S. cease to exist as a sovereign nation? Highly doubtful. Will it continue to be a leader in governance, economic and military power, etc.? That's a good question and one that's not at all clear. Will it continue to be a representative democracy that considers the views of all its citizens? Magic 8-ball says "probably not". Heck, it's barely that now.
Edited by Fighteer on Apr 25th 2019 at 10:13:17 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"The weird thing is that, even if one recognizes that "electability" is a dogwhistle for "white man"...it still does not explain why Warren is trailing so far behind in this. Even when compared to other women and minority candidates.
For crying out loud, she's somehow behind Gabbard in that second survey mentioned in that 538 article.
Disgusted, but not surprisedSelf fulfilling prophecies by chickens. And current media coverage that constantly demands to know if she’s electable. Plus polling this early is incredibly unreliable. Ben Carson was a republican front runner at this time in 2015, ffs.
You know who’s electable? Candidates who build a sound campaign with good tactics and strategy and dedicated, excited volunteers.
Edited by wisewillow on Apr 25th 2019 at 7:16:18 AM
Edited by speedyboris on Apr 25th 2019 at 9:21:04 AM
538 also posits that media may in fact be underreporting Biden's chances.
How Joe Biden Could Win The 2020 Democratic Primary
This lists his advantages, his disadvantages, and potential strategies Biden's campaign may employ to try and win the primaries.
538 overall seems to conclude that while Biden has his issues and is by no means guaranteed to win, he still has pretty good chances.
One of the disadvantages they noted was that his media coverage will probably be skewed against him.
Edited by M84 on Apr 25th 2019 at 10:25:31 PM
Disgusted, but not surprisedTobias Drake, I have to dissent with that explanation.
Fundamentally, a lot of people want to get rid of Trump first and foremost
. Just look at this thread and how many people have said that they'd vote in a general election for candidates they wouldn't support in the primary. It is thus quite important whether a candidate can win in the general election - the concept of "electability".
Sure, there is no perfect metric for measuring that and as a consequence it often turns into fact-free speculation that then ends up being racist and sexist. But it's not always so and one can make legit arguments that e.g people who won their preceding elections with wider than expected (relative to the partisan bias of their constituencies) that shouldn't be dismissed as mere racism.
Also, as much as I don't like to raise that point, but minorities have it harder in elections
and if your priority is to get rid of Trump at all cost this will favour non-minority candidates in a primary.
Real question here though: who could succeed Trump as head of the Trump (still officially called the Republican) Party? I'm struggling to think of someone who doesn't have the last name Trump that could keep the Trumpian cult of personality going. And without that driving force I am not sure the Republican project could continue unabated.

It's also well demonstrated that more moderate candidates have advantages as was noted for Biden
. "Centrist voters" is not the only mechanism; "moderates don't scare the other side into voting against them" is another one.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman