2016 elections - because it's never too early

[jimmy olsen]

chelsea clinton

maybe the DNC hasn't learned yet.

I consider it a 50/50 proposition that the Democrats will find anything wrong with their own behavior and policies as a result of this election, and if they do decide that part of their loss was their own fault, it's still just 50/50 that they'll come up with the right solution.  I mean, I don't know the right solution, and I reckon I'm smarter than the Democratic leadership, so why would I expect them to figure it out?

The solution is to nominate someone with charsima and without thrity years of baggage.

It's more complicated than that.  To look at just one issue, trade:  clearly there is still a lot of protectionist sentiment among traditional blue-collar Democratic voters, which Trump tapped into this year.  Going protectionist would help get those voters back, and please the far-left wing of the party leadership--but it risks loosing a lot of people are, well, like a lot of the posters here--well educated, reasonably well-off white collar workers and professionals.  Sure, the GOP isn't going to be pro free-trade under Trump, so those folks aren't going to vote Republican in 2020--but they just might stay home on election day.

Let's just go back to 1980

Reagan > Carter
Reagan > Mondale
Bush > Dukakis
Bush < Clinton
Dole < Clinton
Bush > Gore
Bush > Kerry
McCain < Obama
Romney < Obama
Trump > Clinton

Every time there was a major charisma gap, the more charismatic candidate won the Electoral College, every time.  Even if they weren't the most popular nationwide, they were able to tailor the message well enough to win the states needed to win the election. Charisma is everything.

[CountDeMoney]

What about Erin Schrode? 25 year old out of California, ran for Congress once.

She has obvious qualifications (do a google image search  )

I could swear I've seen her on a whack off site.

That's because at first glance she has a passing resemblance to Sasha Grey.

[Tonitrus]

What about Erin Schrode? 25 year old out of California, ran for Congress once.

She has obvious qualifications (do a google image search  )

I could swear I've seen her on a whack off site.

That's because at first glance she has a passing resemblance to Sasha Grey.

[Admiral Yi]

Dude, I know what Sasha Grey looks like. 

[Drakken]

What about Erin Schrode? 25 year old out of California, ran for Congress once.

She has obvious qualifications (do a google image search  )

Would invite for a coffee, then followed by a not-rape hooking-up session at my flat.

[CountDeMoney]

There are a couple others, I suppose.

But that would involve self-incrimination on porn tastes, now wouldn't it? 



I CHOOSE THE FIFTH ON THE GROUNDS THAT I MAY DISCRIMINATE MYSELF

[Caliga]

There are a couple others, I suppose.

Indianna Jaymes?

[CountDeMoney]

Indianna Jaymes?

[Admiral Yi]

  ptooey ptooey 

[Tonitrus]

There are a couple others, I suppose.

Indianna Jaymes?

That'd be some serious whiskey goggles, dude.

Maybe a Nikki Next or Tomi Taylor (probably more the latter)...not that I'd know anything about that 

[CountDeMoney]

Maybe a Nikki Next or Tomi Taylor (probably more the latter)...not that I'd know anything about that 

ICH BIN EIN FREAKINLINER

[FunkMonk]

After more than three years this thread is finally delivering

[Zoupa]

You're welcome

[dps]

Every time there was a major charisma gap, the more charismatic candidate won the Electoral College, every time.  Even if they weren't the most popular nationwide, they were able to tailor the message well enough to win the states needed to win the election. Charisma is everything.

Yeah, but if you're saying that Trump is all that charismatic, then the Democratic nominee in 2020 has to run against him, and then there wouldn't be a charisma gap. 

Besides, who do the Democrats have who has charisma?  Bernie?  He has some charisma, yes, but:  A)  he'll be 79 in 2020, B) he's a wacko socialist, and C) he's not technically even a Democrat.  Biden?  Maybe, but he'll be 77, and arguably he'll have 47 years of baggage by then (he entered the Senate in 1973),  Joe Manchin?  I like Manchin, but I'm not sure that he's really all that charismatic (I doubt I'd know anything about him if he wasn't from WV) and he's probably too conservative to win Democratic primaries in a lot of blue states.  Andrew Cuomo?  Maybe, but does he really have charisma, or just a recognizable name (and maybe people are tired of political dynasties).  Elizabeth Warren?  Maybe, but if Bernie is too liberal to appeal to Valmy, so is Warren, and a Democrat isn't going to win if they can't appeal to the Valmys of this country.  Al Franken?  Hmm.

[Phillip V]

Clinton did not lose "that bad."  Forget Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, etc.  All she had to do was barely cling (by 1%) to the usually Democratic Rust Belt States (Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin), and she would have won the Electoral College. (She won the popular vote!)  Instead, her campaign realized the Rust Belt threat too late, and only started seriously competing in those states (just MI+PA) the final few days.  The battleground list of states has expanded (good!), but all this post-election hand-wringing and over-analysis would be having vastly different assumptions and conclusions if just some votes went the other way in those three states.











Now, we must also begrudgingly admit that what was originally seen as quixotic sustained visits by Trump to the Rust Belt ended up paying off.  Physically, Trump out-campaigned Clinton.