RickyH.

Dems will hold the House regardless of whether or not Biden wins. It's not in play. Don't let the CA-25 race fool you. Look at the data that have been coming in per districts, the fundraising amounts, and the PVIs.

The increasing chances that Dems will win the Senate, hold the House (this hasn't ever really not been an option) and lose the presidency ? Trump would be *pissed* and the 2022 midterms would be an absolute bloodbath for the GOP.

This. I wish the mods would enforce that. I'd love to discuss the other races at hand, especially with the interesting data that are coming out over the past couple of weeks.

Because any of those people would think twice about voting for a Democrat. Look at voter enthusiasm (across the board), the generic congressional ballot, and all of the other means of polling data. 2016 let many of us jaded, but base these beliefs in what is likely to occur in November.

There are no quantifiable data to back these points up. Hillary was within the same margins, if not lower, prior to the election and she still won those states. Claiming that a 5-7 point margin for Biden (7 months before the election ) dictates an immediate landslide loss for him and the Dems isn't justifiable outside of feelings. I don't know if you're one of those people who assume Bernie was the only person who could win, but that could not be farther from the truth. Please look at polling measures, state trends over time, and what you can gather from country-wide trends/forecasting over time. Also, weigh in on the Morning Consult polling being from Feb, meaning a large margin of opinion were built on and based in Jan. Even if weighing in the two to three polls that had his approval "soaring," (literally one or two points up from his average and still well below 50), they've dropped significantly in the past week. Sorry to come across as abrasive, but don't assume he is a shoe in to win, especially when he won by 80k votes across three states combined in 2016. He certainly has not gained support since then, and to assume widely liberal states that have shown no indication of flipping their support for a party is... just incorrect and lacking in knowledge of the US' political spectrum and polling/political data as a whole.

The conspiracy theories in this thread OT: The public has spoken on what *they* want. We'll see how the upcoming election goes. I'm more concerned about the House/Senate races. Dems look to be at a huge advantage in the Senate now. Hopefully we get a 6-7 seat pickup

So if Bernie does get the nomination (and somehow wins), how do you all/does he expect his lofty proposals to pass through congress, even with the chance of a Republican-controlled Senate? I hope y'all aren't still stuck on the "he'll push it through one way or another" or "get his VP to do it" or "through budget reconciliation." My point stands for *any* Dem president, even the most moderate. Keep in mind getting nothing done will lead to a Republican tsunami. It's one of my prime concerns about us not winning in a landslide large enough to make up for the several House seats we will lose and make a net gain of *at least* 5 seats in the Senate, seeing as we'll lose Doug Jones in Alabama and we want 52 seats at a minimum, not 51, so as to at least try and prevent losing the chamber in 2022. I suppose I'm more interested in his potential proposals for taking office with divided government. It seems none of the candidates have even considered that possibility Honestly the reason I'm skeptical of any plans our candidates have, especially the lofty ones.

I'm wondering (and please, responses from multiple users): What will you all think if the following scenarios were to come true? And by what do y'all think, I mean what would happen to figures like them, too, and their backed movements (i.e., centrism/moderates, mid-left, and far-left/progressivism). Please *no* answers in the vain of "that won't happen" or "it'll only happen if the DNC makes it happen:" 1. Joe Biden wins the nomination but loses the GE 2. Elizabeth Warren wins the nomination but loses the GE 3. Bernie Sanders wins the nomination but loses the GE

Y'all are an off-topic, argumentative mess Maybe it's because I've only read through the last few pages, but is there any discussion on the election going on or just conspiracy theories and screaming from both sides? This thread is going to get shut down. OT: I think it's interesting how the Senate has increased in likelihood to be in play. Also, looks like the House will remain under Dem control. Hoping the candidate will have a strong enough down ballot effect in states where we need Dems in the legislatures for 2021.

While I strongly dislike Bernie (more-so his approach that I find unrealistic and potentially destructive to the party's future, alongside those particular supporters of his who do nothing but attack and belittle others), I've been saying that I will 100% vote for him if he's the nominee. I feel most (and there are many in our party) who strongly dislike/disagree with him will do the same. Either way, whoever the nominee is, I think people will realize what's at risk here and vote blue regardless. If Bernie ends up clinching the nom, I can't imagine most Dems/the left-leaning media will do anything but support him. Regardless, it'll be a messy 2020. Believe that.

Mike Pompeo not running for the open Senate seat in Kansas this year I hope y'all pay close attention to this race. It's looking to (potentially) be one of the largest upsets (favoring Dems) in this upcoming election. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/06/us/politics/mike-pompeo-senate-kansas.html

If he's the one who will win us Senate seats in NC, GA, ME, CO, AZ, IA, AK, and KY (maybe KS/MT/TX depending on the candidates in those states) then sure. But it would take a miracle for me to even consider voting for him in the Primary, as I don't see him being able to carry forth what I mentioned. Only time will tell! Either way, I'll be voting for whoever the Dem nominee is regardless. Primaries are one thing, but hopefully people learned their lesson in the last GE.

I’m currently planning to vote for the potential candidate that I feel will guarantee a Democratic majority in the Senate. I’ll see who that is come my registered state’s (Maryland) primary. I feel that’s an undervalued concept many have yet to realize.

Strongly disagree. I detest both of them, but I'll vote for either if they are the nominee. Even a piece of paper would get my vote. I'm voting Dem no matter who the candidate ends up being. Agreed. I think people learned their lesson from sitting out/protest voting. Hopefully they've learned elections have consequences.

If you can cite every single point you've made here with one or more reliable sources, than I'll happily agree with you and concede that you have made several points to which I was incorrect. Please do not downplay my knowledge of politics in doing so, though. I've followed the subject for *years* and I wouldn't accuse others of not knowing anything about it because I disagree with their points. I prefer to have conversations around politics that don't involve berating and insulting. It's beneath the point you try to make and invalidates what you're attempting to convey. I will add, re: backlash in 2010, much was due to fear mongering by Republicans on a statewide level, while pushing the false narrative that Democrats were to blame for the slowly-improving (though improving nonetheless) economy. Then, ofc, Republicans came into office and threw a wrench in any and all progress that was made. I also do not believe a majority of what was passed during the first two years of Obama's term was bad, such as the Lilly Ledbetter Act, ACA, CHIP, ARRA, Serve America Act, Families Saving Homes Act, Dodd-Frank, DADT Repeal, Job Creation Act, Food Safety/Modernization, CARD Act, Caregivers/Veterans Health Act, etc. I don't wanna get too off topic, though, seeing as this is about 2020. Sorry for the late edit

Perhaps people on forums/Twitter say she lost due to Twitter in 2016, although this is a completely different election. I'm glad that people are impassioned towards candidates running in the Democratic field, although it cannot be understated that it takes a candidate who can relate to a large swath of voters in *different* areas of the country, while also being able to reliably deliver progress, even if incrementally, without sneaking in measures here and there, all while avoiding the elimination of Democrats in the following midterm. Keep in mind that *nothing* will get done if Democrats do not win a solid majority in the Senate. No amount of wishful thinking, public sentiment, or anything in that vain will get Mitch McConnell to bring forth any legislation written by or co-sponsored by Democrats. And said legislation certainly won't get "pushed through" a Republican-held Senate or one with a 51-49 Democratic majority. I will add that, while Biden lacks an enthusiasm factor, seemingly *ALL* candidates do as he's consistently polling in first nationally, while occasionally trading with Warren. Regardless, that can change in the upcoming months depending on how the primaries go, but that cannot be understated. If any other candidates had more enthusiasm, you'd assume they'd be polling far ahead of him. Keep in mind others outside of your belief spectrums do exist, and unfortunately, they're largely not as progressive. Happy to continue a civil conversation, so long as you'll respond to my entire post and not cherry pick part of a sentence I typed as to attack me. If that's what you plan to do, please do not bother responding. It's important to pay mind to all reputable, real sources, aside from those completely biased towards either end of the spectrum.

The seat has been shifted to Safe D by Cook, so we're good there. Re: Biden -- Keep in mind he's been in politics for decades. This wreaks of him saying so to win over swing voters and *cement* huge democratic majorities. They'll (swing/republican voters) fall for what he says and Dems will have the numbers to do whatever they want, especially if the following midterm is not a bloodbath following redistricting/a friendly Senate map. Also, half of y'all clearly get your news from Twitter and Reddit. Just keep in mind that there's nothing or no one more indecisive and swingy than the general American electorate.

This tea

In a perfect world, a Dem president could do so (W. Bush did it for the Senate races in 2002, although he had 9/11/the war behind him). Realistically, though, those not heavily tuned in will see the incumbent as unproductive, while those actively energized (the party not holding the white house) will be angry with the viewpoints that are attempted (likely being deemed as "socialism") and will vote en mass (with Independents swinging with them) to vote in Republicans. The 2022 Senate map is the friendliest for Dems in a generation (it's the same map that Republicans have faced in multiple "good" years for their party (1998, 2004, 2010, 2016) -- '98/2016 being somewhat of an exception although they didn't lose ground and held on to states they were predicted to lose, respectively. If Trump (GOD FORBID) manages to squeak out a victory next year, the 2022 elections will be the "six year itch" phenomenon in which all relative gains made by the party in the white house since their last wave/successful election cycles are essentially erased. In a good year for Democrats, they'd likely pick up North Carolina, Ohio, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Iowa, and potentially Florida/Georgia. If it's a *really* good year, depending on the candidates running, they could also have a chance at Kentucky, South Carolina, Kansas, Louisiana, Alaska and Indiana. If all were to go perfectly, that could be a net gain of +14 seats, netting them a filibuster proof majority (and quite close to a veto-proof one). If it's a bad year for Democrats, they could still make a net gain of one or two, likely by the way of WI/PA, though that depends on the candidates. You'd also have to weigh in on that states such as Colorado, New Hampshire, and Nevada would be very competitive/likely Republican pickups in a good year for said party, along with others if there are retirements/scandals. Also keep in mind that whoever wins the 2020 Arizona Senate race will once again be up for reelection in 2022 as to fill the first full term of John McCain's seat. If Republicans were able to pick up the four seats I just mentioned, even if Dems were to capture one or both of WI/PA, Rs would have a net-gain of +2, likely granting them a slim, but still standing, majority, depending on how strong the Dem majority was at the time of the election. What I'm getting at is that even in "safe" states for Dems, challenging an incumbent can give more weight to the party out of power. It may seem inconceivable, but look at what happened in Illinois, California and Washington in 2010 (the latter two being *very* tight races for such deeply-blue states). That's not to say certain incumbents shouldn't be primaried (some need to be ASAP), but the strategy at how such a process is handled, especially if it's with polarizing figures in a bad year for the respective party, needs to be closely scrutinized. That's not to mention the likely gerrymandering that will take place in certain states in 2021 that will affect House races in 2022. We don't know what those will look like yet. I worry that swinging too hard in the other direction (in this case to the left) without an ability to enact anything will cause Moderates on both ends (and Independents) to vote en mass for the opposing party (Republicans) and place them back into power for another decade *at least* Perhaps we're both too optimistic/pessimistic. Only time will tell, though. Politics is great to discuss, but the circumstances around all of these data change so quickly.

We can agree to disagree, however I'll again state that if someone like Sanders is the nominee (as I said, even a cup of water), I'll gladly vote for them. I'm just not anywhere near enthusiastic about him (or anyone else) running -- I'm not the only one who feels this way, either. Keep in mind that places like this/Twitter =/= the US voting bloc (even though it may seem so). I don't see a pathway forward in the House/Senate for *almost any* of the candidates' major policies. And, even if they're to do so through executive order, keep in mind the judicial system that will stop any said orders (see what happens now with Trump's). I hope you're right about them being able to bring out young voters in both the primaries and GE. Only 35% of our (my) age bloc (18-29) voted in 2018, though hopefully that will increase *significantly* with the right candidate at the top of the ticket. Furthermore, per my original post, my vote in the primaries will be going to the person I both am most excited for at the time (no one has yet to really do that for me), and that I see best fit to prevent a 2022 midterm bloodbath (and of course best fit to beat Trump). What I mean by preventing a bloodbath is someone who has realistic policy ideas (ones that can pass both chambers of congress and without constant executive orders that will get held up in the judicial system) that will make the American voters feel confident enough in them to not outright reject Dems and their administration in 2022 and 2024, respectively.

I'll add my two cents (and sorry for the length). Tl;dr: Sitting out in 2020 isn't an option because anything on the D side is better than what we have now: I'm not particularly enthusiastic about *anyone* running. Let me make that clear before I get attacked for being in one camp or another. Many online places like this are largely echo chambers where similar views can be shared and agreed upon. When you look at polling that shows Biden in such a strong lead (or a continued one, rather), it's not because "people haven't seen him mess up," but rather they're fine with him and his standings. What seems to be generally ignored (largely due to personal preference, not ignorance, I hope) is that the American electorate is *not* progressive, not even largely on the Democratic side. Moderates (for now) run our party, and while that will likely change as time moves forward with our generation (Millennials) and Gen Z being a majority of the voting bloc, this cannot be ignored. As unfortunate as it is, progress is made in incremental steps here. It always has been, always will be. Throwing a wrecking ball into things has not and will not work, barring extreme circumstances in American political history that have either A) Had the support of both parties or B) Had the support of a party with a veto-proof majority in both houses of Congress while also holding the White House. Take Medicare for All, for example. I'm absolutely for every single person in this country having access to quality healthcare. PERIOD. *But* I worry about the way it's being conveyed to the public and its potential implementation. Discussions around implementing it via budget reconciliation are laughable and will not happen, I'm sorry. Having to hide such an important and groundbreaking structural change to our healthcare system (as positive as it is) shows the divisiveness it can cause and unwillingness to try and bring the public on board. I want our next candidate/president (Democrat, I hope) to bring forward explanations as to why we NEED every American afforded healthcare while bringing them on board with said reasoning (not 51% largely due to those who *somewhat favor* such a plan). I think continuing to explain how people are largely suffering, dying, and unable to live is the best way to do this (it's terrifying that it hasn't worked already). But anyways, what I'm really saying is I want someone that's able to unite this country enough to prevent an all out armageddon in 2022. Hopefully everyone here understands how much can change (and how quickly so) in politics, but we also need to plan ahead to ensure we have more than 1.5 (let's be real, because the second half of 2022 will be spent campaigning) years to push a Democratic agenda. Keep in mind that either way, if Dems win in 2020, the headwinds will be against us. But backlash to a party in power is inevitable, and we'd be prudent to keep that in mind with how we showcase and implement our legislative agenda going forward. If we're not careful in doing so, we'll lose the House and Senate in 2022 (if we even get the latter next year, but that's an entirely different scenario all together) and then be faced with the beset of a likely Republican presidential victory in 2024 when Trump isn't on the ballot (God forbid it's someone like Tom Cotton/John Thune/Trump Jr./Nikki Haley). At the end of the day, I'm voting for the presidential candidate with a D next to their name. I don't care if it's a dead rat, glass of water, or whatever. Whether it's, Warren, Biden, Sanders, or any other one of the lot I will vote for them. What I will *NOT* do is sit out because my preferred candidate doesn't make it past the convention. If you cannot see why ANY of them are better than what we have now, then that's another issue entirely. While some candidates aren't as progressive as you may desire, not voting for a more moderate candidate, for example, because their healthcare plan isn't forward thinking enough makes no sense. Building on what we have now to make a path for each American to have healthcare is better than sitting out and reelecting Trump who (if winning a strong victory) will be able to further work towards eliminating healthcare for ALL Americans under the ACA. What I'm saying is that I certainly will not be sitting out in 2020, and I hope none of you will. I know it's Primary season, so disagreements are unavoidable, but remember that we all have a common enemy to defeat. Declaring one or all but one candidate(s) will/won't get your vote if they're the eventual nominee is not the way to go. Especially when you weigh in that the eventual nominee will certainly move more to the left/center, depending on where they stand now by Nov 2020 (and certainly upon entering office). If all of that is not enough, keep the balance of power in the Supreme Court in mind

CNN called it for Beshear!

MS is absolutely going to Reps. Might be their only victory tonight, though

When this was THE hit gif for most of 2014 on here Ugh

Forget 2024 for now. I want someone who will prevent a Dem wipeout in 2022. If Trump somehow *god forbid* wins again, a filibuster proof majority in the Senate is all but guaranteed for Dems that year (take a look at the seats up -- just think, we'd have a solid Senate majority now if this was 2018's map ). The House will be more interesting due to redistricting taking place in 2021, but it's likely that the six year itch will further erode Republicans there, too. If a Dem wins, I don't want another 2010 apocalypse.