How the Democrats win in a Landslide

[_Icarus]

Thomas Friedman says he's figured it all out.

And interesting read: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/25/opin ... F1z9VPEUmA

[_honorentheos]

That was pretty good and not much if anything I'd disagree with at this point. I actually wish candidates were expected to name their cabinets at their conventions so that was a known going into the general election.

Jersey Girl started a fantasy cabinet thread a while back that parallels this:

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=52017

[_EAllusion]

I have a hard time seeing how this would move any meaningful number of votes, but an easier time seeing how this harms a future Democratic administration. It's extending one of the biggest faults of the Obama admin for a fantasy that has no empirical evidence that it will of be any electoral help whatsoever.

To me, it reads as a talk piece for people to show they're a very serious moderates (tm) more than a serious proposal. Brought to you by a guy who is infamously wrong on just about everything, no less.

[_honorentheos]

His concern seems to be with keeping the Democrats united so they show up in November. It's a fantasy, other than the VP pick which is a big question for any candidate. But the idea of how to maintain party focus on beating Trump is reasonable and not automatic. Well, unless things keep going bad in the markets in which case we can at least be content knowing the new Democratic president will be blamed for a bad economy started on a Republicans watch again.

[_moksha]

How many millions of votes could be against Trump and still allow Trump to win in the Electoral College? With a heavy enough turnout, could the number be close to 50 million?

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

How many millions of votes could be against Trump and still allow Trump to win in the Electoral College? With a heavy enough turnout, could the number be close to 50 million?

According to a NBC News piece I just googled the answer is 5,000,000.



- Doc

[_EAllusion]

His concern seems to be with keeping the Democrats united so they show up in November. It's a fantasy, other than the VP pick which is a big question for any candidate. But the idea of how to maintain party focus on beating Trump is reasonable and not automatic. Well, unless things keep going bad in the markets in which case we can at least be content knowing the new Democratic president will be blamed for a bad economy started on a Republicans watch again.

Bernie Sanders announcing Mitt Romney as a cabinet appt. seeems like it would do far more to disunite Democrats than unite them. That would generate almost no votes and risks losing many by dispiriting the hell out of Sanders’ core supporters. One of the reasons people who like him do so is an implicit understanding he’d never do that.

[Guest]

Fair enough, but again the idea appears to be about uniting the party. A Sanders as nominee who makes Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez his VP is not accomplishing that even if his core base jizz in their skinny jeans over the idea and love how he never concedes anything to anyone ever. As fantasy dream cabinets go, it's alluding to the parties Democrats have a chance at winning over this November and speculating on what they could do to maximize their capture rate among those groups. And that's about it.

[_Res Ipsa]

This Tom Friedman? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedman_Unit

[_Morley]

This Tom Friedman? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedman_Unit

Yep. And this one:

https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/create-your-own-thomas-friedman-op-ed-column