A record number of scientists ran for Congress in the last cycle, and that will probably expand further. My only caution, speaking as a scientist: careful what you wish for.
Oh, compared to a craven reality TV star or a trust-fund brat or a commercial real estate developer or a comedy writer or a professional wrestler? ... Not many concerns. Compared to most anyone who wants to run for office? I think a scientist might stack up well, actually, depending on what they've actually accomplished. But my tiny concerns go something like this: (1) there's a funny history (mid-century) where America became enamored of scientific progress and actually thought you could, for example, use systems engineering type approaches to solve the riddles of inner-city decay. This is basically ridiculous. Political and social problems are like scientific problems with 10x the number of variables in play with everything interdependent and dynamic (except the political views of certain BBS posters). (2) Related: if scientists have some humility about this, they can be, I think, very effective. But some (not nearly all, by any stretch, or even a majority) scientists assume they're within the top few smartest people in any room. And maybe for their specialty, sure, but they shouldn't assume other types of areas are "easy" by comparison. (3) Some scientists (especially physicists) don't make much eye contact. Seems like a no-no for politics.
the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board with the closest thing to an endorsement this early in the process: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-case-for-amy-klobuchar-11549836532?mod=hp_opin_pos1 The Case for Amy Klobuchar A Minnesota pragmatist could help Democrats beat Trump in 2020. 532 Comments By The Editorial Board Feb. 10, 2019 5:08 p.m. ET Amy Klobuchar is running for President, and perhaps she can be the Democrats’ consensus candidate. “We are tired—of the shutdowns and the showdowns, of the gridlock and the grandstanding,” the Minnesota Senator said Sunday, standing amid falling snow in a Minneapolis park. “Our nation must be governed not from chaos but from opportunity.” Though Ms. Klobuchar won’t be the first choice of the socialist left, she is running as a candidate who is liberal enough while also a sharp contrast in temperament to President Trump. At 58, she’s a generation younger than Joe Biden, her potential middle-of-the-road competitor. With 12 years in the Senate, she has more experience than Julián Castro or Beto O’Rourke. She’s a Midwesterner, and Democrats need to win back Wisconsin, Michigan and Ohio. As a woman, she ticks the identity-politics box. Yet she doesn’t carry the baggage of Elizabeth Warren (who impersonated a Native American), Kamala Harris (whose zeal as a prosecutor is passé), or Kirsten Gillibrand (whose politics have “evolved” faster than the flu virus). Unlike most 2020 contenders, Ms. Klobuchar hasn’t parroted lefty slogans. Asked last year about abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement, she said it would be better to focus on changing its policies, adding: “We are always going to need immigration enforcement.” She advocates letting people buy into Medicare, rather than forcing it on everybody, while still saying universal health-care is the goal. Ms. Klobuchar once called her approach “pretty pragmatic.” In 2007 she passed a bill tightening safety standards for pool drains, after a few young children were hurt or killed by the suction. In 2011 she stood up for the nutritional value of tomato paste, when the Agriculture Department was debating if school-lunch pizza should continue to count as a vegetable serving. More recently, she has focused on lowering prescription drug prices and boosting privacy online. Critics of her record in the Senate say she plays small ball. Ms. Klobuchar responds that she simply knows how to get things done. Minnesotans clearly take her side. During her re-election last year, she won 60% of the vote, including every congressional district. But when Democrats outside Minnesota are asked about Amy Klobuchar, they reply: Amy who? In a national survey last month, 49% said they’d never heard of her. Another 21% didn’t know enough to have an opinion. Even in neighboring Iowa, Ms. Klobuchar was the first 2020 choice for only 3% of Democrats, according to a December poll. She was tied with—gulp—Michael Bloomberg. She is also getting criticism, albeit anonymously, as a tough boss who mistreated her staff. She has had some of the highest staff turnover on Capitol Hill, but the stories would have more credibility if the critics lent their names. Perhaps the Senator is simply less tolerant of millennial demands. The stories are notable mainly because they contrast with Ms. Klobuchar’s Minnesota Nice public persona. Another question is how far Ms. Klobuchar will go to raise her profile. Last week she quietly co-sponsored the Senate resolution on a Green New Deal. Running on a pledge to eliminate fossil fuels in 10 years? Mr. Trump can only hope. If Ms. Klobuchar, already a solid liberal, feels the need to zag further left, she could lose the strongest argument for her candidacy: She may be the Democrat best able to beat Mr. Trump. Appeared in the February 11, 2019, print edition.
you can count some Senate Republicans among Klobuchar's biggest fans: Amy Klobuchar has an unusual constituency behind her as she launches her run for president: Senate Republicans. In a Democratic caucus filled with presidential hopefuls taking a hard line against Donald Trump’s presidency, the Minnesota senator's brand of pragmatic politics stands out. And numerous Republicans are raving about Klobuchar — her personality, her respect for the other party, even her competitiveness in a general election. In fact, a dozen GOP senators were so effusive in interviews this month that some worried they might damage her candidacy in a Democratic nomination fight that has many candidates embracing the party’s left flank. “I hope I’m not condemning her nascent run for the presidency,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) as he praised Klobuchar. “She’s too reasonable, too likable, too nice.” “She wants to achieve a solution and I would hope that’s not a disqualifying thing for someone who would like to be president,” said Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), who runs the Senate Rules Committee with Klobuchar. “I like her a lot and hope that’s not harmful to her.” https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/11/klobuchar-president-republicans-1159345 more at the link
So her "red flag" was anonymous staffers calling her a hardass boss? On the surface she seems like someone I could actually be happy to vote for. A pragmatic liberal is just what the doctor ordered. Don't think she's socialist or cool enough for young democrats, which may be a problem. Worst case scenario for the party is for them to pout because Bernie doesn't get the nod and not vote for anybody.
The Democrats are setting themselves up for failure moving to the left with candidates like Sanders, Warren, Booker and Harris. Warren and Sanders are too far to the left and honestly lack appeal. Booker and Harris and Castro are self serving whores that will not appeal to moderates. Someone like Klobuchar or Tulsi Gabbard are more centrist and have enough charisma to beat Trump. At some point the Democratic party needs to push aside all of the self serving, lab created w**** candidates that have been percolating and thinking they are the next Obama.
Warren I think has bigger issues than being a leftie. I think she lacks charisma and her...nervousness? I don't how to describe the odd energy about her, but it's a huge turnoff to me. I think it will make her look bad in debates. Kamala Harris is a real challenger. Klobuchar probably isn't, but as a non-Democrat that's who I like the most of the Democrats running. I can tell you that I'm not going to vote for Bernie Sanders.
Looking at the situation, and this is just my opinion of course, but it's interesting to see the current dynamics of the GOP and the Democratic parties. It feels as if the GOP is actually more unified than the Dems these days. What I'm trying to say is, it feels like, the Trumpers by and large probably voted for George W. Bush and would go back to voting for a George W. Bush type GOPer if that type of nominee won the nomination but with regards to the Dems, it seems as if the infighting is more divisive in that a large number of Dems wouldn't necessarily support the Dem nominee if they didn't align with their vision for the Dem party (either to centrist or too far left). idk maybe I'm misreading that.
Warren is odd. She was very much in command and even charismatic until she said she was going to run for President and it has been a nose dive ever sense. A lot of American's would not vote for Kamala Harris. She is very smart and crafty, but she does not come across as sincere and is too self interested. I don't think Bernie Sanders will win the nomination. I would be hard pressed to vote for him either. He is too far to the left. Klobuchar would do very well with moderate conservatives that do are ashamed of Trump and independents. She is grounded and not radical.
and she has shown that she fight back at Trump condescending tweets and hit him back where it hurts
Read some article that said I should pay attention to Klobuchar and seems on the mark for now. Warren has the most bona fides for taking meaningful stands and pushing rights for Americans and consumers, but I don't think voters like professorial candidates who crumble at hints of being out of touch. Id like Warren to turn it around by being warmer and more personal to her crowd but it's too early to count favorites for me rn
Nate Silver with a detailed road map for how Klobuchar could win the nomination. The four main points: Four potential advantages 1. Electability. Democrats really, really want to beat President Trump. A recent Monmouth University poll found that 56 percent of Democrats “prefer someone who would be a strong candidate against Trump even if they disagree with that candidate on most issues,” compared with just 33 percent who held the opposite view. *** 2. Potential strength in Iowa, and in the debates. As compared to candidates such as Harris and O’Rourke, who might hope to blitz their way to victory on the basis of strong fundraising and early delegate accumulation in California and Texas, Klobuchar is probably playing a long game. But doing so requires hitting two important mile markers. First, success in the debates. And then a strong performance in the Iowa caucuses. *** 3. The beer track … without the baggage? Klobuchar’s campaign is likely to emphasize her working-class Midwestern roots, her staff said; you’ll hear stuff about how her grandfather worked as an iron-ore miner, for instance. It will also pitch her to voters on candor, honesty, pragmatism, an ability to “get stuff done,” work ethic and so forth. It’s going to lean pretty heavily into her Midwesternness, in other words. The idea is to draw a contrast — probably softly at first, and maybe more explicitly if the campaign grows more combative — between Klobuchar and more left-wing candidates from the coasts, particularly Harris, Warren, Sanders and perhaps Booker. In some ways, this will recall the old distinction between “beer-track” (“flyover-state” moderates) and “wine-track” (coastal liberals) Democrats. However, Klobuchar isn’t likely to have the beer track to herself; Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown could be playing in the same lane, and, more significantly, so could former Vice President Joe Biden. There’s also what you might call a “craft-beer track,” consistenting of candidates who are from the middle of the country but whose appeal might be stronger among college-educated voters, such as O’Rourke and (craft brewery founder!) John Hickenlooper, a former governor of Colorado. *** 4. A reasonably clear contrast to Trump. Before I started researching and reporting out this story, I thought one Klobuchar strength was that she could formulate one of the clearest contrasts to Trump. It’s almost always helpful for candidates in the primaries to draw stylistic and substantive contrasts against the other party’s president, as Trump did against Barack Obama, as Obama did against George W. Bush, and as Bill Clinton did against George H.W. Bush. My thinking was that Klobuchar’s mild-mannered Minnesota-niceness and long career as a public servant — and the fact that she’s a woman — would look to Democratic voters like the antidote to Trump’s bombast and braggadocio. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/amy-klobuchar-2020-democratic-nomination-kickoff/ more at the link, including analysis of Klobuchar's weaknesses/problems.
If I understand "folksiness" right... people can tolerate, even respect, "being a hardass on staffers" as long as it doesn't translate to "being a terrible tipper". Wheel C
i dont think its a sure thing that harris would beat oruke in california. California has a really really young voter base which oruke would fair better imo
[Premium Post] Klobuchar has no charisma and is physically unattractive. She's out -- basically running for a VP slot at this point. Scientists have some of the worst social skills and business judgement of any profession. They are very smart, yet most of them can't turn that into wealth or leadership roles because they can't persuade people and they are unwilling to take calculated risks (essential in business). These critical business and life skills are really what make The_Conquistador the total package. GOOD DAY
