Discussion: Beto Raises $6.1M In First 24 Hours Of Campaign, Surpassing Other Candidates

[rick]

It’s different to say he doesn’t have realistic plans as opposed to “no plans”. He certainly has plans.

Given that pretty much every candidate is rallying behind bills that would get filibustered by Republicans in the Senate, I don’t think it’s fair to single out Sanders here. His plans are just as realistic (or unrealistic) as the rest of the group’s, and they tend to be more popular. Popularity translates into political power … it may take a while but it’s the better long-term bet. Most of what Republicans have implemented this century are ideas that would have been dismissed in 1980 as totally unrealistic. Things change.

[castor_troy]

@imkmu3

I’m not willing to shrug and say, “there’s only one way to find out” after the damage Trump has done in last four years.

Agree. If he starts making headway and raising attention levels, will certainly be watching for how the religious wing begins handling things. If it’s a non-issue (which I don’t believe for a second), fine. If he’s going to get Pocahanus’d, we’re better off sticking with a safer option.

There is no room to lose in 2020, just way too much at stake.

[kelaine]

@imkmu3

I think you far underestimate America’s homophobia.

Hopefully, you’re overestimating it.

[kelaine]

@zenicetus

Unfortunately, identity politics still matters. People need to see something similar to their own lives to feel comfortable electing a President.

I understand what you are saying, but Indiana (specifically South Bend Indiana) sees something similar in their own lives to Buttigieg and to what he is saying. And that says a lot.

[castor_troy]

@kelaine

I understand what you are saying, but Indiana (specifically South Bend Indiana) sees something similar in their own lives to Buttigieg and to what he is saying. And that says a lot.

And that’s one city. Are there plenty of places which would be no problem? Sure, but largely in already “safe” Blue States.

This is one where you’d have to have indepth analysis of the stances in the swing States, and the potential to win or lose in those ones with Conservative and highly religious populations.

[rucleare]

@pluckyinky

One of the real issues within minority communities, and one I’m doing all I can to change, is hostility toward the LGBT community. It’s not a small thing either. I don’t think Pete could get the nomination because of if actually. Makes me really sad.

Plucky, I often dialogue with black church leaders to address community justice issues, and the lengths to which many of them will go to denigrate LGBTQ folks and stoke fear and faux- outrage in their congregations is truly disturbing.

[kelaine]

I do know all that. I also dismissed Buttigieg when I first heard about him. How could a gay mayor of a small Midwestern city ever even consider running for president?? I thought that he must be a fool. He would get pulverized - mostly by the religious right.

But then I read up on him and saw and listened to him in action.

So far he’s the only one who’s brave enough (tough enough?) to go on Fox News to speak directly to Trump’s base. That’s nothing to be dismissed.

And as far as the highly religious populations who voted for Trump - they’re just a bunch of vile hypocritical assholes if they adore a serial adulterer who screws porn stars and who has surely paid for his own share of abortions, etc…, but refuse to even learn about Buttigieg. And if that is the case, then we MUST squash those same vile hypocritical assholes in 2020 no matter who our nominee is.

[kumquat16]

I’m not going to disagree with either you or plucky but can I respectfully ask that we wait until we have a little more data? If Mayor Pete’s orientation is going to be an issue, that will show up in the primary polls and voting, at which point we’ll have the data to confirm or refute some of this speculation.

I refuse to rule out a candidate at this early stage of the game solely because of something that might happen later.

[tena]

Whoa! Take that Bernie!

[castor_troy]

@kelaine

That’s nothing to be dismissed.

And wouldn’t want to. He’s certainly one of the interesting candidates. We’ll just want to see how things start developing and polling. I’d be happy for it to end up being a non-issue. Certainly way too early to rule anyone out (except Klobacher and He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named)

[kumquat16]

Back on topic, for those who insist that Beto “couldn’t beat the most hated man in the Senate in his Senate race despite having twice as much money and riding a Democratic election year wave,” let’s run the numbers.

a) In 2012, Cruz beat a Republican primary opponent who outspent him 3 to 1. He then went on to win the election by 16 percentage points. O’Rourke beat that prior Democratic candidate’s performance by 13 percentage points.

b) Cruz started at roughly 12 percentage points ahead of O’Rourke. O’Rourke gained nine percentage points over the course of his campaign.

c) The national election results had Democratic candidates with an average 8.5 percentage point advantage over Republicans. O’Rourke beat that, as well.

d) The final RCP poll average showed Cruz up by 7. O’Rourke beat that by over 4 percentage points, demonstrating that he had no problem getting his voters to turn out.

e) O’Rourke demonstrably had no problem raising funds, something that clearly still holds true today.

f) O’Rourke demonstrably had no problem connecting to average voters and exciting the base.

g) O’Rourke had no problem getting favorable press.

On every metric that you care to name, when it comes to pure politics and the ability to get money and votes, O’Rourke has clearly demonstrated that he has what it takes.

And I say this even though O’Rourke isn’t even in my top five list of the candidates running for the Democratic nomination.

Edited to add, courtesy of bonvivant: “Beto came within 3 points of beating an incumbent Republican in a state where Republican voters outnumber Democrats by a 3 to 2 margin.”

[causeforconcern]

From Poli Sci Celeb Reader Email - TPM – Talking Points Memo

You might not be thinking about Beto’s potential base of support the right way. Those of us who follow politics closely always tend to think about the world in terms of ideology. But decades of research in political science suggests that most Americans do not think in ideological terms.

This innocence of ideology manifests itself in both inter- and intra-party contests. The latter is important as it relates to Beto. Remember that the folks who supported Bernie over Hillary were, on average, less, not more, liberal. This suggests that Bernie attracted his supporters on grounds other than ideology.

Our research suggests that the other thing is something more fundamental, what we call worldview. Those who supported Sanders have a worldview that values niche things over mainstream things. They stream rather than using cable. They drive hybrids rather than gas powered cars. They like underdogs and are repelled by the establishment.

This crowd not only voted for Sanders in 16, it voted for Obama in 08, and Bradley in 00. For reasons that have nothing to do with ideology, we think they are going to love Beto in 2020. He’s niche. He’s not establishment. This will be what devastates Sanders’ candidacy. When it was Bernie against the establishment, these people all went for Bernie. But Bernie against Beto will be different. That vote will be split, and I suspect an 80 year old guy from New England will struggle to win that much of it against a 40 year old guy from Texas who used to play in a punk band.

[tena]

This has been my hope. Thanks for this.

[zenicetus]

@causeforconcern

You might not be thinking about Beto’s potential base of support the right way. Those of us who follow politics closely always tend to think about the world in terms of ideology. But decades of research in political science suggests that most Americans do not think in ideological terms.

Yeah, that’s a different way of stating my personal mantra that elections are driven by 1/3 policy and 2/3 marketing. With identity politics folded in there somewhere. Beto is a marketer’s dream. Not my first tier choice at this point, but this will be a fascinating contest to watch.

[tena]

You got it - policy does not drive candidates home. It’s marketing and charisma. That’s what sticks in voters’ minds.

[murgatroid]

Agreed, but HRC trounced 45 in each of the three they had, and look what good it did her.

[murgatroid]

I was almost certain HRC would be a shoo-in to beat 45 in the last election, but I did have this one nagging doubt: Americans do not always, even usually, love the A student. In many cases, they cheer the class clown or bully. And that certainly came to pass in the election.

[dommyluc]

It could be a way to attract those poor, oppressed, disenfranchised, aggrieved working white Trump voters.

SKEET SURFIN! (and a good excuse to hear the amazing backup vocals of Flo and Eddie):

[tena]

Really true - just look at the elections since 2000. They all scream this. If we voted policy, Al Gore would have won. John Kerry would have won.

We don’t. W had more personality than both of those candidates put together and less than half the brains. He won.

[castor_troy]

@tena

They all scream this. If we voted policy, Al Gore would have won. John Kerry would have won.

This. Spot on. It’s Charisma all the way. Details can be filled in later. Just need to have the person that has the right general vision and the ability to motivate the whole team of professionals that can fill in the details.