Future of the democrat party

[Crazyhole]

Who are the next leaders in waiting? This election cycle has basically a bunch of old people and a few younger ones that have been marginalized. Outside of buttigieg still holding his own, there doesn't seem to be any 30-40-50 year olds that will become the face of the party outside of "the squad". Is this a bad omen, considering the fact that for the last 70 years the Democrat party has found their best success with younger candidates?

Let's just say that trump wins reelection this November, who are the up-and-comers for 2024? Biden, Bernie, and Warren are all at that point of aging out. Klobuchar seems like the Duncan Hunter of 2008: decent record but uninspiring. So who's up next?

 

[bqknight]

The Castro's could have a bright future, Cory Booker and Kamala Harris are not old by any means. I'm sure there will be people who pop up between now and 2024.

Who's the future of the Republican party? Trump Jr.?

 

[goodknightfl]

Hunter Biden and Chelsie Clinton.

 

[KnighttimeJoe]

Tulsi is a hottie.

 

[Sir Galahad]

Party won’t be able to hold all the fringe groups together if Trump wins.

 

[Crazyhole]

The Castro's could have a bright future, Cory Booker and Kamala Harris are not old by any means. I'm sure there will be people who pop up between now and 2024.

Who's the future of the Republican party? Trump Jr.?

I could see people like Ben Sasse, tom cotton, and Thomas massie being the face of the party. Rand paul, ted Cruz, and mike lee are relatively young and will continue to be influential but I dont see them really leading the party but being more like the chuck Schumer/mitch McConnell figures.

 

[Cubs79]

Who are the next leaders in waiting? This election cycle has basically a bunch of old people and a few younger ones that have been marginalized. Outside of buttigieg still holding his own, there doesn't seem to be any 30-40-50 year olds that will become the face of the party outside of "the squad". Is this a bad omen, considering the fact that for the last 70 years the Democrat party has found their best success with younger candidates?

Let's just say that trump wins reelection this November, who are the up-and-comers for 2024? Biden, Bernie, and Warren are all at that point of aging out. Klobuchar seems like the Duncan Hunter of 2008: decent record but uninspiring. So who's up next?

I don't really think you need "leaders in waiting". Obama wasn't really considered a leader in waiting, until he ran a great campaign. Trump certainly wasnt a leader in waiting for the GOP. Even Bush and Clinton kind of came out of nowhere, at least on the national stage when they first ran.

 

[Cubs79]

I could see people like Ben Sasse, tom cotton, and Thomas massie being the face of the party. Rand paul, ted Cruz, and mike lee are relatively young and will continue to be influential but I dont see them really leading the party but being more like the chuck Schumer/mitch McConnell figures.

If Trump wins re-election I don't see how most of those guys are the future of the Republican party. I can't possibly see the Republican partying going in a more moderate and boring direction if Trump is able to win 2 elections. Sasse for instance, is more of a moderate and also a seemingly nice, normal human being. He would be a huge contrast to Trump, and I don't see that happening unless Trump loses and the GOP decides they need to get back to normal.

 

[Boosted87]

Who are the next leaders in waiting? This election cycle has basically a bunch of old people and a few younger ones that have been marginalized. Outside of buttigieg still holding his own, there doesn't seem to be any 30-40-50 year olds that will become the face of the party outside of "the squad". Is this a bad omen, considering the fact that for the last 70 years the Democrat party has found their best success with younger candidates?

Let's just say that trump wins reelection this November, who are the up-and-comers for 2024? Biden, Bernie, and Warren are all at that point of aging out. Klobuchar seems like the Duncan Hunter of 2008: decent record but uninspiring. So who's up next?

For Democrats, the country is edging closer to a tipping point for major progressive economic reform. As long as the income and wealth inequality trends continue in their current direction, support for things wealth taxes and MFA type healthcare reform is going to continue rising. Much of where the Democrats go after 2020 is going to depend on the election. In most outcomes, I think they keep moving towards Warren style economics.

If Warren or Bernie beat Trump, then you'll see wholesale adoption of progressive economics by the democrat party. If Biden/Mayor Pete lose to Trump, you'll also see a substantial shift in that direction as well. If Biden/Pete beat Trump, the shift is still happening it just won't be as fast. Only if Warren/Bernie loses to Trump does that philosophy take a major hit.

The problem the left has is probably identical to the problem the right has. There's plenty of establishment-nurtured individuals who on paper, make for a good presidential candidate. But if the country is moving towards cultural populism on the right, and economic populism on the left - the establishment simply hasn't been nurturing those kinds of personalities for the past 20 years. It was the opposite - those kinds of personalities were shunned and pushed away.

So yes - there is a vacuum for "progressive" leadership on the left. But Obama came out of nowhere 4 years prior to his election. I suspect that a Bernie/Warren administration would create a whole bunch of potential torch bearers.

 

[sk8knight]

For Democrats, the country is edging closer to a tipping point for major progressive economic reform. As long as the income and wealth inequality trends continue in their current direction, support for things wealth taxes and MFA type healthcare reform is going to continue rising. Much of where the Democrats go after 2020 is going to depend on the election. In most outcomes, I think they keep moving towards Warren style economics.

If Warren or Bernie beat Trump, then you'll see wholesale adoption of progressive economics by the democrat party. If Biden/Mayor Pete lose to Trump, you'll also see a substantial shift in that direction as well. If Biden/Pete beat Trump, the shift is still happening it just won't be as fast. Only if Warren/Bernie loses to Trump does that philosophy take a major hit.

The problem the left has is probably identical to the problem the right has. There's plenty of establishment-nurtured individuals who on paper, make for a good presidential candidate. But if the country is moving towards cultural populism on the right, and economic populism on the left - the establishment simply hasn't been nurturing those kinds of personalities for the past 20 years. It was the opposite - those kinds of personalities were shunned and pushed away.

So yes - there is a vacuum for "progressive" leadership on the left. But Obama came out of nowhere 4 years prior to his election. I suspect that a Bernie/Warren administration would create a whole bunch of potential torch bearers.

I don’t think voters on the right are looking for cultural populism. They just want someone that sticks to their values and doesn’t back down like so many Republicans have over the years. This can be done without the nastiness that the Democrats employed for years and then Trump trumped them with recently.

 

[Boosted87]

I could see people like Ben Sasse, tom cotton, and Thomas massie being the face of the party. Rand paul, ted Cruz, and mike lee are relatively young and will continue to be influential but I dont see them really leading the party but being more like the chuck Schumer/mitch McConnell figures.

Remember when Romney lost in 2012 and the RNC did that big autopsy about changing demographics and where the party needed to reform itself? Trump burned that in a dumpster, went in the opposite direction, and the RNC is full on Trump today.

If Trump loses to a progressive, I can't imagine right-wing media being introspective and pointing out Trump or the party's political shortcomings. I expect they will double down. Trump loses 2020 but spends 4 years on TV talking about witch hunts and rigged elections - and right wing media personalities embrace and amplify this as an effort to undermine a new democrat administration - Trump is going to be the figurehead in 2024. He'll remain the most influential member of the party from 2020 on.

I can't imagine Trump taking the traditional role of fading into the background. He's going to put his thumb on the scale and I think it is highly likely that whoever he supports wins that primary. That means it's going to be total public capitulation and humiliation by Republican candidates in an effort to win that endorsement. The entire primary campaign process will fighting for a single vote. And we know how Trump demands loyalty.

If you think my read above is wrong, I hope your right.

 

[Cubs79]

Remember when Romney lost in 2012 and the RNC did that big autopsy about changing demographics and where the party needed to reform itself? Trump burned that in a dumpster, went in the opposite direction, and the RNC is full on Trump today.

If Trump loses to a progressive, I can't imagine right-wing media being introspective and pointing out Trump or the party's political shortcomings. I expect they will double down. Trump loses 2020 but spends 4 years on TV talking about witch hunts and rigged elections - and right wing media personalities embrace and amplify this as an effort to undermine a new democrat administration - Trump is going to be the figurehead in 2024. He'll remain the most influential member of the party from 2020 on.

I can't imagine Trump taking the traditional role of fading into the background. He's going to put his thumb on the scale and I think it is highly likely that whoever he supports wins that primary. That means it's going to be total public capitulation and humiliation by Republican candidates in an effort to win that endorsement. The entire primary campaign process will fighting for a single vote. And we know how Trump demands loyalty.

If you think my read above is wrong, I hope your right.

They were talking about this on Bill Maher the other night. If Trump loses, there is the possibility that he even becomes a more powerful voice. He will obviously be on Hannity and Fox and Friends and all those shows constantly, and they will still push his narrative constantly and keep all of this supporters riled up. The people who Crazyhole named people to potentially step us as new leaders of the party after Trump, I just don't see that happening. I think Ivanka is going to be pushed to run, and if she decides not to I think it be someone out of the blue, a talk show host or someone in the style of Trump that will keep trying to push his agenda.

 

[Crazyhole]

I don't really think you need "leaders in waiting". Obama wasn't really considered a leader in waiting, until he ran a great campaign. Trump certainly wasnt a leader in waiting for the GOP. Even Bush and Clinton kind of came out of nowhere, at least on the national stage when they first ran.

Obama emerged in 2004 and it was obvious he was going to be a leader in the party after his convention speech.

 

[Crazyhole]

If Trump wins re-election I don't see how most of those guys are the future of the Republican party. I can't possibly see the Republican partying going in a more moderate and boring direction if Trump is able to win 2 elections. Sasse for instance, is more of a moderate and also a seemingly nice, normal human being. He would be a huge contrast to Trump, and I don't see that happening unless Trump loses and the GOP decides they need to get back to normal.

Typically a party steers away from the defining aspect of the last guy. For trump, his brashness defines him so I could see a pivot towards Sasse in 2024.

 

[Cubs79]

Typically a party steers away from the defining aspect of the last guy. For trump, his brashness defines him so I could see a pivot towards Sasse in 2024.

His brashness is what won him the election and is what hides all of his deficiencies. You think someone in the mold of Ben Sasse is going to be able to keep Trump's base? I don't.

 

[Cubs79]

Obama emerged in 2004 and it was obvious he was going to be a leader in the party after his convention speech.

He started getting attention in 04, but I don't think anyone thought he was going to be president in 08. At the 04 convention Hillary was considered the future of the party, and we see how that worked out.

 

[Crazyhole]

His brashness is what won him the election and is what hides all of his deficiencies. You think someone in the mold of Ben Sasse is going to be able to keep Trump's base? I don't.

Of course he will. They are generally the type of people who vote republican no matter what. It's no different than gore keeping the clinton base together or obama keeping the kerry/clinton base together.

 

[Boosted87]

I don’t think voters on the right are looking for cultural populism. They just want someone that sticks to their values and doesn’t back down like so many Republicans have over the years. This can be done without the nastiness that the Democrats employed for years and then Trump trumped them with recently.

We're speaking in generalities here and obviously there's a complex mix of people at all points on the political spectrum. I agree with you that voters aren't out there explicitly looking for cultural populism (same story on the left). But what particular brand of politics creates a winning formula changes over time. After 2012, the RNC made a huge effort to calculate where the party needed to go based on demographic and social changes to win in the future. Then Trump showed up with his brand of politics and that entire analysis went in the dumpster.

Whether anyone is explicitly looking for it or not, it's where we are.

 

[Cubs79]

Of course he will. They are generally the type of people who vote republican no matter what. It's no different than gore keeping the clinton base together or obama keeping the kerry/clinton base together.

His base is made up of a lot of people who probably weren't that politically motivated before he came along. I am not talking about Republicans in general, I am talking about that % of people who think Trump is some sort of King or something. I don't see those people going to a Ben Sasse type, I see those people going to Ivanka or some other brash strongman type of person who gets in the mix.

 

[Boosted87]

Of course he will. They are generally the type of people who vote republican no matter what. It's no different than gore keeping the clinton base together or obama keeping the kerry/clinton base together.

Sasse could keep Trump's base, but he'll never win Trump's base. Why? His moral character is too high. Trump will bless and anoint his successor. It's going to be like the apprentice. Sasse isn't going to out-ass-kiss other people for that role.

 

[UCFKnight85]

The Castro's could have a bright future, Cory Booker and Kamala Harris are not old by any means. I'm sure there will be people who pop up between now and 2024.

Who's the future of the Republican party? Trump Jr.?

If Booker or Harris had a future as a national spotlight candidate, they would have broken through a little higher than the 3% or whatever they were both polling this time around. They're irrelevant.

 

[UCFWayne]

If Booker or Harris had a future as a national spotlight candidate, they would have broken through a little higher than the 3% or whatever they were both polling this time around. They're irrelevant.

alot can happen over the next 4 years. they got their names out there and failed but this could be the set up to being bigger players down the line.

 

[sk8knight]

If Booker or Harris had a future as a national spotlight candidate, they would have broken through a little higher than the 3% or whatever they were both polling this time around. They're irrelevant.

I’d like to see more candidates on both sides with some sort of Executive experience prior to their candidacy. Being part of a hyper-partisan Senate should not be your strongest qualification.

 

[Cubs79]

I’d like to see more candidates on both sides with some sort of Executive experience prior to their candidacy. Being part of a hyper-partisan Senate should not be your strongest qualification.

Cory Booker was a Mayor of a pretty large city, he has executive experience. Granted, he didn't fire D list celebrities from a fake job, but still he has executive experience.

 

[UCFBS]

Cory Booker was a Mayor of a pretty large city, he has executive experience. Granted, he didn't fire D list celebrities from a fake job, but still he has executive experience.

So did Gary Johnson, 8 years in a 44% Hispanic state ... a heavily Democratic, under-water (financially), state.

 

[Knight_Classes_begin_7pm]

They were talking about this on Bill Maher the other night. If Trump loses, there is the possibility that he even becomes a more powerful voice. He will obviously be on Hannity and Fox and Friends and all those shows constantly, and they will still push his narrative constantly and keep all of this supporters riled up. The people who Crazyhole named people to potentially step us as new leaders of the party after Trump, I just don't see that happening. I think Ivanka is going to be pushed to run, and if she decides not to I think it be someone out of the blue, a talk show host or someone in the style of Trump that will keep trying to push his agenda.

Faux news and friends

 

[UCFBS]

Faux news and friends

That's the whole US Media too. Once Trump one, it's like Fox News of the Obama administration took over the Mainstream Media. Seriously.

 

[UCFWayne]

That's the whole US Media too. Once Trump one, it's like Fox News of the Obama administration took over the Mainstream Media. Seriously.

im pretty sure the person you are responding to eats crayons

 

[sk8knight]

Cory Booker was a Mayor of a pretty large city, he has executive experience. Granted, he didn't fire D list celebrities from a fake job, but still he has executive experience.

Good for Booker. Does he have a chance at the nomination?