O'Rourke doesn't know if he's a progressive.

It was only Trump who made them look lightweight.

Biden is basking in Obama's reflected glory, but he's nothing like Obama. He's not nearly as smart, and verbally, he's gaffe prone. Trump could blow him out of the water.

I very much look forward to their debates if Joe is the candidate.

Jeb was a "safe" establishment "respectable" Republican who was afraid of Trump. Crooked Don ran circles around them on his stances, he was all over the map, unstable, they didn't know how to respond. They all seemed very inauthentic, reactive. Joe won't be.

not a debater. He got away with it before because of the spectacle, but he’s a cornered rat now.

Biden also came up with “a noun, a verb, and 9/11,” one of the most brilliant put-downs ever, so he can hold his own pretty well.

He rocked both

if you don't know if you are a progressive, you probably aren't
so time to become one

even if the House impeaches him.

So Trump could well be running.

I think he will resign for a pardon to stay out of jail
and rethugs are turning on him
and many of them may be in hot water too
follow the money

...the Republican electorate is much different than the Democratic electorate. There were factors at play in 2016 that won't be in 2020. We had a Democratic nominee who had been under ruthless attack for 3 decades, Comey's last minute announcement and Trump was new (he still has a cult following, but he's even more hated now than he was 2 years ago).

MI and PA were blue for 6 straight elections prior to 2016, and WI was blue for 7 straight. I think any number of potential Democratic nominees will carry all 3 states, which would give our nominee 278 electoral votes. Because I don't think Trump can carry a single state that Clinton won. Be it VA or NV or CO, I just can't see Trump winning any state that he lost in '16.

Other states that will be in play include Florida (which is less red in presidential elections), North Carolina, Arizona and Georgia. Maybe even Iowa, Ohio and Texas. At the very least, Republicans will be forced to spend money in those states.

There's also a chance that some right winger will launch a 3rd party bid and pick off a state such as Utah, which would make Trump's path to 270 even more challenging. This is assuming Trump doesn't resign between now and then.

My strong preference is for Harris, but there are other potential candidates who can win.

nt

I think the odds are best if he's at the top of the ticket though. His effect would be watered down as VP, and he would be less likely than he already is to carry Texas.

I am, and I'll be voting for progressive candidates. I suggest Beto make up his mind. This little foray into the "middle of the road" needs to come with caution. I'd like to think that I'm smart enough to know politics, and I know people have to say certain things for votes, but Beto's gentle affect may serve to his detriment if he comes off as uncertain.

Before supporting him I would have to see his voting record and platform. I've heard rumblings on other sites that he is not as progressive as we might hope. I'll reserve judgment until I know the facts.

Another reporter from Politico trying to stir up a story.

That is so very Beto.

I'm sure the purity police will waste no time in attacking Beto for giving anything less than a full throated "I'm a Progressive".

to what they do.. not what they call themselves. And, I notice what they disingenuously try to label someone else as.

Very telling.

I'm assuming it was not because he found her politics to be too conservative...just sayin'. How many here were recently slamming all the 'Dems' among the Problem Solvers for this? Granted he hails from my home state of Texas and in local comparison that makes him Karl Marx.

.... not supporting Pelosi.

I take comfort in the fact that, at least now, Beto seems to have a pretty good grasp of how important it is to address systemic racism, unlike Ryan.

I'm certainly open to Beto as VP.

...which is subservient to corporate lobbyists.

He doesn't belong to the Progressive Caucus.

Call me a liberal, a social democrat or a bleeding heart. I embrace them all.

Don’t call me a progressives. I read history. Your definition of progressive may well not jive with the history of the movement.

for me things like gun control, abortion rights and other issues and where they stand on those will be more important than what they claim to be.

this should give you an idea:




https://betofortexas.com/issue/gun-safety/

what is trying to be pinned on him, so good for him.

He wouldn’t join the Congressional Progressive Caucus. He is a member of the New Democrat Coalition. He advocates that congresspersons shouldn’t join any caucus and should work with everyone.

Two things I know about O’Rourke...

1) He is a new shiny object and we Democrats seem to really like shiny new things at the national level.

2) He is a progressive willing to compromise on legislation.

I don’t think he can win if he runs for President this time around. People will quickly learn that inspiring in Texas in a run against Cruz is much different than being inspiring on a stage with Warren, Sanders, Booker, Harris, etc.

and meaningless word, IMHO,

Labels are divisive for people who are too lazy to think through the issues. People use them to prescribe rather than describe candidates.

Because he's hot right now, Beto O'Rourke is getting a lot of smears. Because people who are interested in smearing other candidates are intellectually lazy, all they can come up with are unresearched, clueless, ridiculous label attacks.