HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Brilliant pundits . . . "...

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 05:48 PM

Brilliant pundits . . . "Democrats should choose a person who can win."

I bet everyone has heard someone on TV seriously say this. Some say to choose a new face. Some say experience. Then the real geniuses say to choose a person who can win.
Sh*t!!! why didn't we think of that? We want to win.
Don't we choose someone we want to win every time?

8 replies, 454 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 8 replies Author Time Post
Reply Brilliant pundits . . . "Democrats should choose a person who can win." (Original post)
pdsimdars Saturday OP
rusty quoin Saturday #1
FSogol Saturday #2
LisaM Saturday #3
marylandblue Saturday #4
pdsimdars Sunday #7
Bradshaw3 Saturday #5
quaker bill Saturday #6
elocs Sunday #8

Response to pdsimdars (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 05:50 PM

1. That's why they get the big bucks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 05:52 PM

2. Turn off your tv. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 05:52 PM

3. Choose someone the media will cover fairly.

That would be quite refreshing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 05:54 PM

4. They mean something specific by that.

It means don't pick someone you actually like, pick someone you think other people will like. Who will lose because because nobody would actually like him or her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #4)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 09:23 AM

7. Nailed it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 06:18 PM

5. The two are not the same

Choosing "someone we want to win" is not the same as choosing someone "who can win". Since there is no link I assume, whoever the pundits are, they mean choose someone who is more likely to win than other candidates. And primary voters don't always vote based on who is most likely to win in the general; in fact, I think for many that is down the list of considerations. You will see it played out on here many times over the next year and a half.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bradshaw3 (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 08:34 PM

6. The problem with this logic

is that when we pick someone "who can win" we often choose poorly. We tend to go with resume' over inspiration (Obama being the rare exception). Questions like who has the most "electable" policy positions come to the fore.


If 2016 should have taught us anything, it should have taught us that people in sufficient number do not vote for the very best resume' and least edgy policies. Now a great many people do vote for this, no doubt, just not enough. We have lots of potential candidates that can and absolutely would get 48% of the vote, a very dependable and loyal 48%. However, we need someone who can get 53 or 54%. This takes a bit of risk and a bit of courage to venture outside the box. The candidate probably needs to be somewhat larger and more colorful than normal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 09:36 AM

8. Yeah, my first presidential vote was for George McGovern

and we were sure he could win. After all, who would ever vote for Nixon?
We can nominate anyone and because that person is our candidate we will be sure they could win even if that's not the reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread