I agree with all of this. We Liberals are sensitive to the fact that if our own candidates can successfully attack each other then Trump will just go straight for those same weaknesses. Voting record be damned, I want to hear about policies and what you WILL do as soon as you walk into the White House. Attack Trump and not each other. I love Bernie and voted for him in the last primary but I will not be a Bernie Bro. As of today I'm voting Warren.
Agreed. I’m one of those white liberals who can’t make up his mind, but at the moment I actually think Yang might be the best candidate in the race and nobody’s really talking about him in that way which is a mistake by the Dems and what media we have or the media that allows for Dem messaging to break through.
Don't know if I have asked you this and its not an attack but why do you think Yang is the best candidate? What in his past makes you think he is up to the task?
Biden leads Sanders by 7 in new national poll https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/479335-biden-leads-sanders-by-7-in-new-national-poll
To be fair, "up to the task" is very murky. I honestly think Joe and Bernie are just too old to be the kind of active informed president I would want. Warren is too combative and alienating to be "up to the task." Booty-G is too young, etc. Klobuchar is honestly the one with enough experience, proof of work ethic, smarts and level-headedness. I like Yang's background, but if you'd say he hasn't worked enough within a government, I would probably agree with that. I think he has the smarts, the right reasons for running, excellent communication skills, and a deep groundedness about him that would be great as president.
Joe and Bernie know how things work and have interacted with people who know how to operate within that environment. Yang has never held a public office or has run a big corporation. How does he fill out his team? What would he be basing his hires on? How does he handle conflicts on this scale? What exactly is his background? I think Klobachar checks a lot of those boxes.
I think to voters it’s about: -likability -authentic -fresh -don’t speak like a politician inside DC -platform that speaks to regular everyday issues -positive -can be funny and self deprecating Yang is different from the other candidates in the way he talks, and the issues he talks to on the campaign. I like that, and feel like he has the ability to create a cultural moment unlike someone like a Klobachar or even a Warren is really capable of. I think especially with Pop Culture, Yang is someone who can capture those pop culture moments that Obama got, and Trump exploited to turn politics on its head. Yang has the upside to do that. Yangs biggest flaw isn’t his experience in law making. I think that’s a plus with most voters actually. I think it’s the same thing that got him attention in the first place... the dumb freedom dividend. That would be the biggest issue for him in the general.
I think we need to make a distinction between good candidates and good Presidents, and what we ideally are aiming for. Sadly, the skills required don't fully overlap. Everything you described helps make a good candidate, but outside of the bolded ones, I think are less relevant to being a good President.
Ok I understand all of that but what in his resume makes you think he can do the job as president? What has he done to show you he is actually smart enough?
Of course that's 100% correct. However I just believe most low information voters don't see it that way. They don't really get why it might be beneficial to have worked on X Bill or Y Bill. Most people don't even know that Congress passes laws, not the president. Most couldn't name 2 Supreme Court Justices. Selling a fresh perspective outweighs experience on the campaign trail, but yes if Yang won the presidency he would have a challenge that someone like Biden or Klobachar wouldn't have as much in getting to work with Congress on law making, and the nuances of foreign policy, etc. Who IMO would be the most productive president in the classic sense... Probably Amy Klobachar. I think she would get the most bi-partisan and popular bills done. But I obviously know about the civics of law making that low information voters do not know. I also don't know if she can be as popular & unifying as Yang "COULD" be as an outsider. And I don't know if you can put a price on that. What does productivity mean in the end.... unifying the country more has value to our Democracy that sometimes bills passed cannot.
I like Mr Yang as well. The more I've found out about him, the more I like him, but I also like Pete, who isn't wildly popular around here. I simply don't like Ms Warren and I don't think she can win against trump. Bernie isn't a Democrat, which means something to folks like me. That, and like Warren, he irritates me no end. In my opinion, both of them would have a very difficult time winning over middle of the road independents and Democrats. My personal politics are closer to where they are compared to Vice-President Biden, but what's paramount to me is winning the ****ing election. So far, that appears to be Biden. I keep hoping someone else will rise to the top. Still hoping.
On Warren & Bernie: I think were they make ground in gaining back the "rust belt", I think they lose ground that the Dem platform has gained in the FUTURE growth states like Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, and Texas. Those suburban middle class citizens who have diverse neighbors & friends & are those all too familiar folks that say "I would say I'm socially liberal, but fiscally conservative." If you like here in Texas, we know we are surrounded by those folks every day. Alot of them WILL vote for Trump over a Bernie Sanders because they'll justify it by saying "well the economy is good." Still i think there is merit to Bernie & Warren's power to speak to the struggling rust belt workers, and win in the short term. I think just as a broader forward thinking strategy, they don't have the upside that another unifying candidate might have. Biden (IF he's on his gain) checks so many boxes on having a strategy for the rust belt as well as putting those "socially liberal but fiscally conservative" younger suburban voters at ease to have no excuse to vote for Trump. Where Biden is flawed is his ability to sort of grasp the cultural phenom that Obama and Trump were able to do. That's a big reason why I think Dems should at least give Yang more of a serious thought. Lets see if he can gain notoriety with low information voters.
I love the fact that a spontaneous moment of honesty by Biden is what broke the dam against gay marriage.
Biden or Bernies pick for VP will be one of the most consequential decisions made in modern day political history. For multiple reasons the VP has to represent so much that these two are lacking.
Very much agreed. One of the reasons I have warmed on Joe so much is his acceptance and leaning into the Yang platform. Joe and I disagree on a LOT. But Joe knows that the future needs leaders who can take on challenges he cant. He is refreshingly honest about his shortcomings and treats the other candidates with respect. And I appreciate that.
