Beto: Hero or Zero?
Love him or hate him, no candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination has polarized the party’s voters more than Beto O’Rourke. The only one close is also the only one who has attracted a similar number of small donors amounting to a large number of dollars, Bernie Sanders.
Thomas B. Edsall of the New York Times takes an in-depth look at what all the fuss is about, checking in with
political science types, politicians and party officials on both sides of the argument.
Most agree he’s to the right of the party center, and acknowledge that his proficiency at fundraising can keep him in the race longer than most. They also agree that he’s so far offering nothing specific on which voters can judge him. What they disagree about is whether that’s a positive or a negative.
Those who think O’Rourke is a passing fad note that a white man running a centrist campaign is wrong for the moment, and focus on his lack of specifics. Those who love him don’t care. They think he’s got charisma and a rare ability to get people to like him.
Edsall doesn’t pick a side. He basically agrees with those he talked to who think it’s too early to say whether the vagueness will be an asset. My take: Vague generalities got Obama elected, and they’re going to make Beto tough to eliminate.
There is a “lane” for Beto (and Biden for that matter) this year called the “terrified Dem”. It is an extreme example of the “worried Dem” that obsesses on “electability” as an important virtue.
A spoke to a strong Bernie supporter who is squarely in the Terrified Dem lane now.
The best story I think is that Beto fucked the Democrat by campaigning for his Repiblican “friend” who proceeded to win by less than 1000 votes. Then Bill Weld goes all in on the Trump agenda. Very Coonsian.
Beto’s district is very blue/very left. Look it up.
But remember kids, Beto is a “Democrat”. Bernie is not a Democrat.
The people who like him don’t give a fig about these things. They’re looking for charisma. From what I see so far, only Bernie and Beto have it.
Yes, that’s true. The folks who like Beto and his ilk don’t care. No doubt.
I just think it’s very illuminating.
I don’t think he has an ilk. He is a unique threat because his people will be unpersuadable.
…his people will be unpersuadable… Sounds Bernie-esque.
People who vote for personality generally are. Look at how many Bernie supporters would prefer him to another candidate espousing exactly the same views. They’ve said so right here.
Which candidate is espousing Bernie’s views again?
On the Bernie front:
“According to the CNN poll, just 30 percent of Democratic voters believe the party has the best chance of denying Trump a second term with Sanders as the nominee. The majority, 59 percent of Democratic voters, think the party would have a better shot at reclaiming the presidency with another candidate.”
https://www.salon.com/2019/03/20/sen-bernie-sanders-falls-in-popularity-among-american-voters-new-poll-finds/
70% of the time it works every time in months with 30 days.
Another well-thought-out response.
Read the article. He’s +1 on net popularity. Ain’t gonna win with that. And hiring a guy to take down Beto isn’t gonna win him the congeniality award.
I don’t see any lanes emerging beyond Bernie, Beto and Biden. Nobody else but Mayor Pete is building any momentum.
I guess what I’m saying is I don’t care about polls. I really don’t. Meaningless.
What if all that means nothing? “He’s +1 on net popularity.” Net popularity…
(I did read the thing yesterday. Population is very skewed.)
Yes, you treat everything you don’t agree with as if it means nothing. That doesn’t mean it means nothing. When the margin is 2-to-1, it more likely means something.
There are people who like Bernie just fine who don’t think he’s best positioned to beat Trump. My take on that is he should address that issue. Everyone knows where he stands, it’s his “electability” they doubt.
That’s ridiculous.
I’ve said many times polls are meaningless to me. The notion of electability is made up and vaguely defined. As soon as you begin to include in your criteria who’s “best positioned to beat Trump” I’m done. Anyone who supports a candidate based on what they think someone they don’t know will do is a very vapid foolish person.
I’ve explained this at length and everyone here knows it.
Which means a majority of Democrats are foolish people. To win, you will have to get a portion of those foolish people to vote for your candidate.
What part of this don’t you understand?
Polls are for candidates to gauge their constituencies. And for Bernie it’s simply a way to refine his message. His core policy prescription will not change. They haven’t for decades.
Unfortunately, polls are now applied to determine who a person should vote for. This is dumb.
And yet it’s reality, which is dominated by dumbness. You seem to have no plan at all for dealing with this.
If you could get me figures on the voting proclivities of first generation Asian professionals in the TX 4th and each candidate’s approval ratings in the Michigan Upper peninsula among non-union laborers…
…I don’t support candidates based on what other people tell pollsters they might do or who they “like”.
That’s for the candidates to shape their messages.
That’s the point. I don’t need to deal with it. In fact, I can’t deal with it!
This should be very clear. Don’t know why you’re missing it. Horserace?
In which case, why comment?
I don’t post this to show who I support. I post it to keep you informed. You then comment that it doesn’t matter, when what you mean is you don’t care.
So why comment at all on it?
To tell you how dumb it is to think an individual voter needs to “deal with” what 2,200 other “potential voters” of various made up categories (strong democrat, independent, etc.) say to a polling agency.
That’s why.
It also doesn’t matter.
A millennial grocery store manager and a Gen X plumber in New Jersey “dislike” Bernie. I’m going to “deal with it”!
A disgruntled Gen Xer in Wilmington loves Bernie, won’t process anything negative said about him and tells us about it all the time.
This is how I deal with it. I point it out.
It’s everyone more or less disgruntled?
The fact that I don’t dig on “polling” is not equal to not processing negatives about Bernard. Of course you know this, but carry on…
Bernie’s old.
Bernie’s a democratic socialist.
Some people don’t like Bernie.
I’ve processed all of this.
You just like polls.
If Bernie can’t win then your enthusiasm for him means very little. If he runs and can’t beat Trump then you and others like you will be partly to blame. But it will make you feel righteous, which is kind of the point, I guess. “Electability” means the ability to be elected (duh). In 2020 that’s even more crucial than usual. It’s ridiculous to ignore it. I like most of Bernie’s views just fine, but that’s not really the point right now. I like the views of some more electable candidates, too.
Oy. Now hold on.
1) Trump wasn’t electable – so your theory is shit.
2) Gore wanted to match up against the less electable George W Bush – so your theory is shit.
3) Kerry was picked by Dems because he was electable, and he lost, so your theory is shit.
4) I said that there is a “lane” for Beto (and Biden for that matter) this year called the “terrified Dem”. It is an extreme example of the “worried Dem” that obsesses on “electability” as an important virtue.
I didn’t say they were right.
Time is a flat circle. Electability means getting elected. See also elections. See also votes.
@NA: In other words, we have no tools at all for predicting anything in the future beyond believing in something really hard.
They would rather play word games than look objectively at the electorate, or believe what it tells pollsters.
President Hillary Clinton.
Yes, you’re absolutely right. If the compass is 5 degrees off, we’re better off just closing our eyes and sailing at random.
I get that y’all are scared. Stop taking it out on me for giving you information you don’t like.
Great thread, folks. Cohorts & frequencies. Standard deviation. R². KS ratios, Median versus mean, margin of error.
I’m pumped.
https://mobile.twitter.com/abc7JoshHaskell/status/1108459387834621952
SenSanders takes the stage at #UCLA addressing students and striking #UC workers. Says he’s not here as a candidate for president, but as someone who supports the striking workers and their union
….
There are cohorts in “high-affluecy” zip codes, over the age of 25….
And also, suburban voters outside Philadelphia who own their own Ford/Lincoln Mercury dealership, but have only a HS diploma…
…they disagree strongly.
Rah, rah, sis boom bah. So interesting.
I do think Bernie’s lifelong support for unions & working people is more interesting than a poll. Yes.
Aren’t we supposed to cheer on our candidate rather than smear opponents? That’s what Jason said. Wholesome.
yes
Ras Tafari
There are a number of people whose greatest concern/goal/objective is to deny Trump a second term in order to stem the hemorrhaging of our society and civilization. Secondarily they would like policies and programs that make sense to treat societal ills such as income inequality, health care, et al.
To the extent that they can have their cake and eat it too (that is, to deny Trump a second term and implement good policies), the candidate they believe can best achieve both will garner their support.
But make no mistake, beating Trump remains the absolute highest priority for a number of people and the degree to which polls are indicative of the way the winds are blowing, they will pay attention to them. There are going to be a whole bunch of undecideds until the pack thins out. So, early polls are mostly popularity as opposed to conviction. Of course the number of people whose highest priority is to beat Trump may be small. So who knows?
Regardless, at this point, I’m not convinced that any of the pack can beat Trump. I think he is only one that can beat himself at this point. And I have no clue what message will resonate with people to get them jump on board the D train. Consequently, I remain convinced that the only way forward is to derail the T train. Anyone have a clue how to do that?
So if you can’t derail him and have him beat himself, you better have someone who is going to win more electoral votes than he does. It’s not going to be about who plays well nationally. It’s about who can win specific states to get to 270. That’s the only number that matters.