US Presidential Election 2020

4068ac1elhodqr · 08-11-2018 7:50pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

How so exactly?

I'd be far more confident of a republican administration being more favourable to Irish skilled workers than a democrat one.

That's a huge assumption to make.

Trump is (somewhat understandably) acting from a perspective of protectionism, he's already taking 5k from the DV in 2020, in fact he is considering scrapping it alogether.

He's really not a fan of steel dumping (imports), nevermind human imports.

Beto is Demo, and 4th Gen Ire-Amer, so there is a better chance of any or all benefits towards Ire, that otherwise wouldn't be.

Fr Tod Umptious · 08-11-2018 8:40pm

Misael Bewildered Sobriety wrote: »

That's a huge assumption to make.

Trump is (somewhat understandably) acting from a perspective of protectionism, he's already taking 5k from the DV in 2020, in fact he is considering scrapping it alogether.

He's really not a fan of steel dumping (imports), nevermind human imports.

Beto is Demo, and 4th Gen Ire-Amer, so there is a better chance of any or all benefits towards Ire, that otherwise wouldn't be.

A lot of fourth generation Irish Americans could hardly find Ireland on the map.

The only reason they identify as Irish is to distinguish themselves from the Germans, Poles Lithuanian etc.

Ireland is at a huge disadvantage with the DV

I'll post the stats later but here is a snapshot

Kenya - Winning chances = 2.399
Nepal - 1.656
Moldova - 0.629

Ireland - 0.108
Belgium - 0.053
Netherlands- 0.076

So coming from a developing world country is better than coming from a western country when it comes to DV chances.

A points system that credits education and competence in English would be much more beneficial to us Irish.

There is nothing to suggest an democrat would be better for Irish than a republican would.

4068ac1elhodqr · 08-11-2018 8:58pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

A lot of fourth generation Irish Americans could hardly find Ireland on the map.

Politicans usually have 'a bit of an idea' as to the location of countries.

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

The only reason they identify as Irish is to distinguish themselves from the Germans, Poles Lithuanian etc.

Indeed extra votes from about +30m helps greatly.

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Ireland is at a huge disadvantage with the DV

Kenya - Winning chances = 2.399
Nepal - 1.656
Moldova - 0.629
Ireland - 0.108
Belgium - 0.053
Netherlands- 0.076

Kenya has many, many more applicants, hence they may have done better. Only 10,000 or so applied from Ire in the previous DV. Winning chances were 1.26%, reasonable in the scheme of things. There is a lottery element to it so odds of winning are low, but dynamic.

Point is, Trump was/is considering scrapping it altogether.

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

A points system that credits education and competence in English would be much more beneficial to us Irish.

There is nothing to suggest an democrat would be better for Irish than a republican would.

It's not really a points system, and it's not a global event, the E3 is simply the reminants/scraps of whatever the Aussies don't take. So there in no competition element to it, other than a degree etc.

As Trump is clearly understandably protectionist, he would be unlikely to increase the E3 beyond the proposed 5k, if it even makes it that far.

Podge_irl · 08-11-2018 9:14pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

A lot of fourth generation Irish Americans could hardly find Ireland on the map.

The only reason they identify as Irish is to distinguish themselves from the Germans, Poles Lithuanian etc.

Ireland is at a huge disadvantage with the DV

I'll post the stats later but here is a snapshot

Kenya - Winning chances = 2.399
Nepal - 1.656
Moldova - 0.629

Ireland - 0.108
Belgium - 0.053
Netherlands- 0.076

So coming from a developing world country is better than coming from a western country when it comes to DV chances.

A points system that credits education and competence in English would be much more beneficial to us Irish.

There is nothing to suggest an democrat would be better for Irish than a republican would.

The diversity visa is different from any number of other visas that Irish people have a higher chance of attaining. There are already other ways to emigrate to the US.

Fr Tod Umptious · 08-11-2018 9:50pm

Misael Bewildered Sobriety wrote: »

Politicans usually have 'a bit of an idea' as to the location of countries.

But being 4th generation Irish does not guarantee any affinity to Ireland or it's people. It's merely a label at that stage.

Misael Bewildered Sobriety wrote: »

Indeed extra votes from about +30m helps greatly

There is a misconception that all Irish American voters vote Democrat
Many do of course but many don't

Many Irish Americans, especially the older ones tend to be conservative. They are not that favorable to LGBT issues, abortion etc. Items that are very much part of the liberal Democrat party agenda

A century and further ago the Democrat party was the party of choice for Irish Americans, and this continued through to the Kennedy era
Remember that this was a time when the Democrats were the party of the white South.
In the years since Kennedy many have left for the Republicans as they have seen the democrats become more liberal.

Fr Tod Umptious · 08-11-2018 9:52pm

Podge_irl wrote: »

The diversity visa is different from any number of other visas that Irish people have a higher chance of attaining. There are already other ways to emigrate to the US.

Yes but none are that easy to get

The H1B was simple 20 years ago but now it to is a lottery also.

There is no points based system like Australia, Canada or NZ

Such a system would be very attractive to Irish applicants

4068ac1elhodqr · 08-11-2018 9:56pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But being 4th generation Irish does not guarantee any affinity to Ireland or it's people. It's merely a label at that stage.

Maybe, maybe not.

It's certainly useful for marketing. Didn't John 'Kerry' have his name changed to become more 'sellable'? Having a Mex nickname may well help Beto also.

All am saying is that if the Dems want a decent shot at POTUS, this may be their best chance. Currently 3r Fav, and just 10/1.

Rjd2 · 08-11-2018 10:01pm

https://twitter.com/DanRather/status/1060274370608648192

I'd agree with that. Amy would be a serious problem for Trump in the mid west also. Maybe stick O Rourke as VP and ideally he can run in the future.

Rjd2 · 03-01-2019 3:51pm

Bump.

Looks like Warren will run,doubtful if she has much of a chance, but American politics has not exactly been predictable over the last few years.

Other ladies we should know soon enough will be Amy Klobuchar who I think would be very formidable for Trump especially when you look at her base.

Tulsi Gabbard also floating the idea, while she may try to appeal to the progressive base more than most, some of her previous comments and occasional flirting with some pretty right wing beliefs probably would torpedo her.

Harris obviously the most likely women to win in 2020 though.

Ronaldinho · 03-01-2019 9:58pm

Rjd2 wrote: »

Bump.

Looks like Warren will run,doubtful if she has much of a chance, but American politics has not exactly been predictable over the last few years.

Other ladies we should know soon enough will be Amy Klobuchar who I think would be very formidable for Trump especially when you look at her base.

Tulsi Gabbard also floating the idea, while she may try to appeal to the progressive base more than most, some of her previous comments and occasional flirting with some pretty right wing beliefs probably would torpedo her.

Harris obviously the most likely women to win in 2020 though.

+1 for Klobuchar

Sand · 05-01-2019 12:55pm

Rjd2 wrote: »

Other ladies we should know soon enough will be Amy Klobuchar who I think would be very formidable for Trump especially when you look at her base.

What makes Amy Klobuchar very formidable? She is a white corporate lawyer. She seems to be very much an establishment candidate when the US electorate has voted for 'change' candidates in both Obama and Trump. I don't see anything remarkable in her legislative record. Apparently her policy for combating childhood obesity was to have pizza sauce classified as a vegetable. I'm genuinely mystified as to what makes her very formidable.

Sand · 07-01-2019 8:55pm

I've continued to try identify Amy Klobuchar's selling point, and all I can see is that she clashed with Brett Kavanaugh at his confirmation hearing and got some praise on the back of it.

Trump is going to face a tough 2020 because no one believes anymore that he will surround himself with the best people or that there will be adults in the room keeping him in check. Anyone who held their nose and hoped for the best can no longer pretend to themselves that he is anything other than what he is. His only chance is building the wall to energise his base and extricating the US from Syria and Afghanistan. The Democrats might be forgiven in that context for thinking that they can throw out any candidate and beat him. That would be a grave mistake. Trump has proven very capable at dragging weak competition down into the mud and beating them with experience.

Eric Cartman · 07-01-2019 8:58pm

Sand wrote: »

I've continued to try identify Amy Klobuchar's selling point, and all I can see is that she clashed with Brett Kavanaugh at his confirmation hearing and got some praise on the back of it.

Trump is going to face a tough 2020 because no one believes anymore that he will surround himself with the best people or that there will be adults in the room keeping him in check. Anyone who held their nose and hoped for the best can no longer pretend to themselves that he is anything other than what he is. His only chance is building the wall to energise his base and extricating the US from Syria and Afghanistan. The Democrats might be forgiven in that context for thinking that they can throw out any candidate and beat him. That would be a grave mistake.

I think their biggest challenge might be telling HRC that she can't go again. Hopefully for their own sake somebody else beats her to the nod but I'd hope there was a lot of lessons learned from the last campaign.

RobertKK · 07-01-2019 9:10pm

The Democrats will have to stop the wall if they want to take away Trump's selling points which are he will uphold election promises. I am not saying that is good, but for voters he can say I went after China, the wall, reduces tax to get US corporation money back etc as promised in 2016.
If Trump survives, he will be formidable for anyone in the Democrats.

listermint · 07-01-2019 11:56pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I think their biggest challenge might be telling HRC that she can't go again. Hopefully for their own sake somebody else beats her to the nod but I'd hope there was a lot of lessons learned from the last campaign.

No it won't..and no she isn't running again.

FreudianSlippers · 08-01-2019 3:02pm

The Dems are already ripping themselves apart internally over the split between Beto/Bernie/Warren. If Trump makes it to 2020, we'd all better hope the Dems can short their house out quickly or we'll have a repeat of 2016.

seamus · 08-01-2019 10:46pm

Haven't been paying a lot of attention to this, but on paper I'd say Harris is the one best placed to take it. She's centrist enough to mop up all of the disenfranchised voters, has a clean enough background and her experience as an AG/Prosecutor means she could run rings around Trump's nonsense.

But if the Dems continue down the path of trying to appease republican voters by being centre-right rather than centre or centre-left, then she'll be rejected in favour of someone who's less open about gay rights and gun control.

nc6000 · 08-01-2019 10:55pm

listermint wrote: »

No it won't..and no she isn't running again.

Is that definite?

MadYaker · 09-01-2019 1:51am

nc6000 wrote: »

Is that definite?

She's a spent force politically and was a terrible candidate in 2016, I see no good reason why the dems would pick her.

rossie1977 · 09-01-2019 2:28am

Trump will have been campaigning 2.5 years and raised hundreds of millions of dollars (he started his re-election bid inauguration day) by the time most Dem candidates even announce they are running.

So already whoever the Democratic candidate is they are at a massive disadvantage in terms of getting their message out and raising finance. Of course you have the added problem that all the media in the US will be wall to wall with coverage on Trump while ignoring most of the Dems campaigns.

Rjd2 · 09-01-2019 3:17am

rossie1977 wrote: »

Trump will have been campaigning 2.5 years and raised hundreds of millions of dollars (he started his re-election bid inauguration day) by the time most Dem candidates even announce they are running.

So already whoever the Democratic candidate is they are at a massive disadvantage in terms of getting their message out and raising finance. Of course you have the added problem that all the media in the US will be wall to wall with coverage on Trump while ignoring most of the Dems campaigns.

Harris pretending that she hasn't decided if she will run yet is the most absurd. Just admit you are running and hit the ground.

I say that as someone who has money on her since 2017.

Sand wrote: »

What makes Amy Klobuchar very formidable? She is a white corporate lawyer. She seems to be very much an establishment candidate when the US electorate has voted for 'change' candidates in both Obama and Trump. I don't see anything remarkable in her legislative record. Apparently her policy for combating childhood obesity was to have pizza sauce classified as a vegetable. I'm genuinely mystified as to what makes her very formidable.

She's very solid in the rust belt aka the Trump base. The only base who I think she may struggle with is the far left, but meh that only like Bernie and Tulsi.

FreudianSlippers · 09-01-2019 1:34pm

seamus wrote: »

Haven't been paying a lot of attention to this, but on paper I'd say Harris is the one best placed to take it. She's centrist enough to mop up all of the disenfranchised voters, has a clean enough background and her experience as an AG/Prosecutor means she could run rings around Trump's nonsense.

But if the Dems continue down the path of trying to appease republican voters by being centre-right rather than centre or centre-left, then she'll be rejected in favour of someone who's less open about gay rights and gun control.

That's why the primaries will be very interesting. I think Harris (if running) could do very well in the election, but I'm not sure she would be a runaway winner in the Democratic primaries.

Quin_Dub · 09-01-2019 1:41pm

seamus wrote: »

Haven't been paying a lot of attention to this, but on paper I'd say Harris is the one best placed to take it. She's centrist enough to mop up all of the disenfranchised voters, has a clean enough background and her experience as an AG/Prosecutor means she could run rings around Trump's nonsense.

But if the Dems continue down the path of trying to appease republican voters by being centre-right rather than centre or centre-left, then she'll be rejected in favour of someone who's less open about gay rights and gun control.

They don't really have to - There are way more Democrat voters than Republican , they just don't vote very often..

The absolutely key thing for Democrats is getting their voters to actually vote , especially in the Swing states..

The larger the total vote , the more likely it is for a Democrat to win. This is one of the key reasons why people accuse the GOP of Voter suppression as they are the ones to benefit for lower turn-outs.

pixelburp · 09-01-2019 2:51pm

Engaging the Democrat vote is going to be beyond critical; that the 2016 Primary came down to Bernie vs. Clinton should have been a clear sign of Trumps potential to win in the first place. The Democrats, or more specifically their SuperDelegates, ensured the Democrat voting public became split between their own sparky outsider in Bernie, and a quintessential Establishment candidate in Clinton. Maybe it wouldn't have counted for as much if she was charismatic and personable, but that she had little magnetism - a quality IMO more important in national posts in the US than equivalents elsewhere - further doomed things. The party can't rely on the midterms goodwill because that was obviously district to district, state to state & the local personalities that whipped up the vote.

FreudianSlippers · 09-01-2019 3:00pm

Honestly, best ticket probably for the Dems to secure a win in 2020 is Biden/O'Rourke or Biden/Brooker. I think that ticket would mobilise the younger voters without the skittishness / "likeability" concerns from people like Harris / Warren. Perhaps even Biden/Harris would work?
There needs to be a steady hand on the tiller but also someone that will engage younger voters.

DrumSteve · 09-01-2019 3:05pm

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Honestly, best ticket probably for the Dems to secure a win in 2020 is Biden/O'Rourke or Biden/Brooker. I think that ticket would mobilise the younger voters without the skittishness / "likeability" concerns from people like Harris / Warren. Perhaps even Biden/Harris would work?
There needs to be a steady hand on the tiller but also someone that will engage younger voters.

Biden/Harris would make the most sense I reckon.

spacecoyote · 09-01-2019 3:06pm

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Perhaps even Biden/Harris would work?
There needs to be a steady hand on the tiller but also someone that will engage younger voters.

I said that myself recently. I think that they need an establishment man at the top of the ticket, with someone like Harris as VP. It would lay the foundations for a Harris run to follow it up. Biden, given his age, would likely be a one term president.

FreudianSlippers · 09-01-2019 4:03pm

The only thing I would say is that Beto has a lot of traction nationally at the moment, he's almost universally liked by young people and he very nearly won in Texas (which was surprising IMO). I could see Biden/O'Rourke 2020; O'Rourke/Harris 2024.

Personally, I'd vote for Harris or Biden as either as President or VP, but not sure I'd vote O'Rourke for President.
I think running Warren or Bernie for President would be a huge mistake... no real view on them either way as VP.

eagle eye · 09-01-2019 8:08pm

I said it here already and I'll say it again. If you want to make sure you beat Trump in 2020 then Martin Heinrich is your man.
He hasn't expressed any ambition to go for it but in his short time in office he has done enough, like what he did to Sessions, to show he has the toughness to win an election. He has a great image and it appears he doesn't have any skeletons.
You take this guy now and you make him your man. He has the smarts.the charisma and his work history is very good.

I know it's unlikely that a junior senator from New Mexico will get to run but for me he is the standout certain to win candidate.

MadYaker · 10-01-2019 2:36pm

eagle eye wrote: »

I said it here already and I'll say it again. If you want to make sure you beat Trump in 2020 then Martin Heinrich is your man.
He hasn't expressed any ambition to go for it but in his short time in office he has done enough, like what he did to Sessions, to show he has the toughness to win an election. He has a great image and it appears he doesn't have any skeletons.
You take this guy now and you make him your man. He has the smarts.the charisma and his work history is very good.

I know it's unlikely that a junior senator from New Mexico will get to run but for me he is the standout certain to win candidate.

The main problem with candidates like that is they just don't have a national profile. Outside of New Mexico nobody knows him. That can be worked on obviously, like the way Obama sort of burst onto the scene with his speech at the 2004 democratic party convention.

Up until recently I thought Trump would be hard to beat in 2020 but as time goes on he looks weaker and weaker. If he doesn't get something out of this shutdown that he can bring home to his base and they start to waver he could be easily beaten in 2020.

US Presidential Election 2020

Comments