What do Democrats need to do to win the 2020 election?

Lose the popular vote.

“Will their ultra-left policies be enough to carry the day?”
– &@$* that noise! The Democratic Party has been corporate centrist for far too long.

If enough people vote in the election, they should win.

I think that means they probably mainly need to disgust voters less than they did with their Clinton campaign. So not just being “at least we’re not Trump!” As in, bring out someone who seems to actually care somewhat about serving the people, not seem like just another establishment politician. So, Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard, or at least Elizabeth Warren or possilby Julián Castro or Andrew Yang.

Like the rest of pollsters, they need to stop measuring popularity by single-choice votes and polls with multiple candidates. The question needs to be “for each candidate, would you approve of them?” NOT “which one of these many candidates do you r̶e̶c̶o̶g̶n̶i̶z̶e (cough) t̶h̶i̶n̶k̶ ̶w̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶b̶e̶a̶t̶ ̶T̶r̶u̶m̶p̶ (cough) vote for?

They also need to make sure the voting machines aren’t going to be hacked.

Put forth a viable candidate. And get all of their buddies to GET OUT THERE and VOTE!

@zaku, just one point…the voting machines were never a target. The point in the process we have to worry about is the tally machines. The individual voting machines transmit to a central unit that tallies the votes. THAT is what would be a hack target, though so far it doesn’t seem to have been targeted. However it was noted several years ago that the way it tallies votes is biased…in favor of Dems.

Simple.
1. Have higher voter turn out. Too many people didn’t vote in 2016, based on their assurance that Trump being elected was impossible, so they felt no reason to waste their time adding to a landslide Dem victory.

2. No 3rd party/independent, who would take votes that would have otherwise gone to a democratic candidate.

3. Former Trump voters, pull their heads out of their asses…

I’m seeing an interesting thing. I asked two questions…one about how Trump won in 2016 and this one about what the Dems need to do to win in 2020. There are 35 response on the one about how Trump won and only 5 on this one. Not sure what that says other than people are more opinionated about how Trump won and less concerned about what the Dems need to do to win.

Trump is going to have to run on his record and the Democrats need to run against it. That record includes the economy, climate change, infrastructure, immigration and foreign policy. There is plenty of material for the Democrats to distinguish themselves. In particular, if we have an economic recession, as some economists are predicting, Trump will not be re-elected.

Be sincere about what they claim to stand for

Offer viable solutions and not pie in the sky

Run appropriate candidates

Get off the corporate teet

Give up some of the trivial political hot buttons like identity politics.

Don’t offer blind change, offer realistic improvements.

^GA

AYKM. You make very valid points. Dems have ideas, that would greatly improve the country, and the world. But rarely offer realistic plans, on how to make these changes. Of course, Trump made ridiculous promises, and had ridiculous ideas as well. And had no realistic ways of getting his stated goals accomplished either. But that didn’t stop his supporters, or success.

The dems, liberals, and some centrists, all agree on some issues. But there are not enough similarities, in how to address the issues that they are all concerned about, from any single democratic candidate.

The right, share almost all of their own concerns, and are easily manipulated by fear (realistic, or not.) So Trump has a huge advantage, simply by doubling down on several of the right’s hot button issues.

If a Democrat is to win in 2020, they will need to find a few issues that everyone who isn’t on the right can agree on, and come up with reasonable ways of acting on these concerns. Only that strategy can unit enough voters, to conquer the sheep voting republican.

As usual, I won’t be participating, in the “voting” process. But I do hope that the lesser of the two evils, will “win.” At this point, I can’t think of any candidate for the dems, that would not qualify as, at least the lesser of Trump’s evil. I just hope the dems don’t stick with the “hey, at least we aren’t Trump” strategy. Which still seems to be the only main factor in common, with all the dem candidates…

@seawulf575 . IMO. There are not a lot of diehard Democrats, in this country. Simply people who want the right person as POTUS. That explains why this thread didn’t get the level of responses, that your other one did. Just because there are a majority of people who are smart enough to know Trump shouldn’t be POTUS, doesn’t automatically make them dems. That’s a constant fact that you can’t seem to wrap your head around. Anti-Trump, does not equal Democrat, or liberal. Anti-Trump, just means they aren’t mindless sheep… You have exposed this, with your own questions…
Trump is a cancer, that needs to be removed. But that doesn’t mean people want another cancer in his place…

@MrGrimm888 let’s be honest. A large percentage of the Anti-Trump folks are liberals and Democrats. There are a few Independents or Libertarians, but most are liberals and Democrats. And given the attitudes of so many of you on these pages that anyone that voted for Trump or doesn’t just jump on the idiotic liberal bandwagon is somehow automatically a fool, a racist, an uneducated person, a redneck, or any of the dozens of other things I have been called, I just can’t jump on that bandwagon. I cannot carry that much mindless hate and be that influenced by media lies.
As for wanting the right person as POTUS, I am one of those. That is why I am a registered Independent. That is why I call for reforms that impact both parties. That is why I actually have stated some of the things Trump has done that I don’t like. It is certainly more fair and balanced than what I get from the left on these pages.
Right now, all I see from the Democratic candidates is ridiculous proposals that will bankrupt the country and end up killing millions. Every one of them (except Yang) has embraced the GND. That plan would certainly fundamentally change our country. People wouldn’t be able to live in their homes because they either couldn’t meet the prescribed guidelines of the GND or afford to make them meet those guidelines. Jobs would be lost at an alarming rate due to the changes from fossil fuels. Not just power plant jobs or refinery jobs, but every gas station in the country would disappear. Truckers would all be out of work because they would no longer be allowed to use diesel for their trucks. As gas stations disappear, a large revenue source for every state in the Union would also disappear. Mechanics, plumbers, carpenters, landscapers, contractors, grocery stores….every aspect of our lives would be gone. Why? Because the GND would dictate that fossil fuels would be gone by 2025. That is what they are talking about. Plastics would basically be gone since they also use petroleum products for production. This is just a small part of the impact of that idiotic idea. And why are they doing this? Control. They want control of our lives. So no, I cannot get behind that sort of thing. So which Democrat would I vote for? None of them…they are all Socialists looking for power. Do I want Trump for another 4 years? Not really, though to be honest he has done a lot of good things for the country. But I would gladly take him over any of the proposals from the Dems.
To put it into perspective, I like H. Ross Perot when he ran for POTUS. But he had ideas that, while I liked them, I didn’t like in his timing. He was proposing many changes that, if all rolled out at once, would have shaken our society. And that was minor compared to what the Dems are proposing.

I agree that some of the ideas about fossil fuels, are unrealistically radical. But all candidates pushing such changes, have already admitted that their goals are unlikely to be met, in the time frames suggested. As for jobs related to fossil fuels lost, one could easily argue that the new technologies replacing the old, would open an equal.amount of employment opportunities. Something has to be done, to reduce/eliminate the usage/gathering of fossil fuels, and that is a fact. Radical changes, will be need to even come close to healing the environment. Or at least slowing down the process of it’s damage. Every single thing, you listed, for example, gas stations, would simply be replaced by electric charging stations. As you may be aware, gas stations, make no profit, from selling gas. They profit from the goods they sell, at a marked up price for “convenience.” The short term effects, of that specific transition would be no doubt supplemented by the government. Like when Obama basically gave new home buyers money to restart the failing realestate market.
As far as bankruptcy of the nation, you must be off of your meds. Trump has skyrocketed our debt, and only survived his own business ventures, through multiple bankruptcies of his own.

As far as your opinions that millions will die, as result of ANY of their proposals. That has zero basis in reality. Especially, when compared to abolishing the ACA, which WILL result in large scale deaths, mostly from treatable issues.

Your socialist control conspiracy, makes ZERO sense. And ,frankly, it’s FAR beneath someone with your intelligence. I find it hard to belive you could have kept a straight face, while typing that nonsense.
This is especially interesting, considered Trump’s dictator-like approach to EVERYTHING.

Trumpers, don’t like being called uninformed, or stupid, but when you make statements, like the above, what exactly are we supposed to infer?

I agree with moving away from fossil fuels. I think it is a great idea. But you don’t ban them and then see where you land. That is lunacy. You develop technology, you invest in infrastructure, and you plan for unintended consequences before you phase them out. That is not what is being talked about. Some of the candidates have stated they probably can’t meet the time frames proposed, but they have not provided what they see as a realistic goal. So they either are lying about supporting it or they are lying about wanting to change the time frames or they are so spineless they don’t want to come out and say 50 years.
Bankrupting the country. We are already teetering and the latest budget (that was not proposed by Trump) didn’t help. It added more than a trillion dollars into the debt. Yet the GND proposed $93 Trillion over the next 10 years. And that was a conservative guess since the unintended consequences can’t be quantified at this time. That is $9.3T per year on average. Our tax revenues projected for 2020 are only $3.6T. That’s like you making $100,000 per year and spending $250,000 each year. How long do you think you could do that? Let’s think about that for a minute. How long before the world determines that our leaders (the Dems that are proposing this lunacy) aren’t fiscally responsible enough to bolster confidence in our ability to maintain as a world power and they decide the US dollar is no longer the reserve currency? I doubt it would take long. And when we lose that status, we will see ridiculous inflation…in the category of what was seen in Argentina, the Weimar Republic, and Rwanda and probably worse. Look at what’s going on in Venezuela right now. Picture that and worse in this country. You don’t think people could die? Of course they could.
And the socialist control conspiracy is far from that. It is based on historical records of what happens when socialism takes over. Look at Russia. Look at China. Look at N Vietnam. Look at any of the countries that have tried socialism and failed (which is pretty much all of them). And most of the Democratic candidates have called themselves Socialists. And their policies back up those claims.
You call Trump “dictator-like”. Yet you ignore the fact that he has asked Congress to take on issues. That isn’t dictator-like. He didn’t say all he needed was a phone and a pen to lead the country. That would be dictator-like, but that was Obama, so you would disagree. You cannot really point to a single thing that Trump has done that just walked all over the Constitution. That was Obama’s style, but isn’t Trump.
And now we see the problem. You believe Trump supporters are uninformed or stupid, yet you base that on us not being willing to go along with the uber-left diatribe. Maybe we are the ones that are actually informed and aware and those on the left are the ones dodging reality?

Trump has made a habit of making executive orders. Many of which get knocked down by the courts. He doesn’t know what he’s doing. Obama had to deal with an obstructionist congress. And is/was an expert on the constitution.

Bill, had the US on the way out of debt. That’s pretty fiscally responsible. Trump’s trade wars, have already negatively affected the economy, and by his own admission, his tariffs, will simply mean American consumers will pay more for many things. Many companies are having to find different suppliers, for supplies that they need. Others are simply closing shop.
Inflation, is all but inevitable. Regardless of which party is running things.

And, you are confusing Communism, for Socialism. America already has many socialist policies in place. Paying farmers, because of problems Trump caused, is a prime example…

Remember when you make statements about Obama being an expert on the Constitution that what you are saying is that he purposely violated it repeatedly. That makes him dictator-like as well.

@ARE_you_kidding_me ”...offer realistic improvements.”

Who gets to decide what’s “realistic?” The establishment? Corporate media (i.e. Comcast, AT&T, Disney, Jeff Bezos…)?

Incrementalism/moderation is a recipe for tepid enthusiasm, underwhelming turnout and 8 years of Trump. FDR was able to achieve massive changes in his presidency most of which carry forward to today, and have been a big reason for the success of the USA.

@gorillapaws The experts that know what the hell they are doing and not just a political promises on a whim like from Sanders and A.O.C. for starters.

@ARE_you_kidding_me “he experts that know what the hell they are doing”

You mean the geniuses who ran the Clinton campaign? or the ones who were running the party when the Democrats lost over 1000 seats nationwide? You want to keep listening to those guys?

You’re right that they do know what they’re doing—BUT their goal isn’t to win, it’s raising money and keeping their jobs. Political “experts” truly are excellent at that. Winning elections and helping push actually meaningful, inspired policy that the American people overwhelmingly support? Not so much.

No, not those guys.

@seawulf575 . I can concede that, to a point. But it pales, in comparison to Trump’s rhetoric, and overall behavior.
I would think that one could find some dictator-like traits, in all former POTUSes (probably not the right plural, for POTUS.)

Whatever it is they’re not doing it

@MrGrimm888 as I have stated in many other threads, I disagree with the excuse of “Trump’s rhetoric”. I have found that much of the hateful rhetoric that is attributed to him is actually created by the left. But that discussion can be held in another thread.

Works for me. We’ve definitely beat that dead horse, long enough.