Nodack wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 03, 2020 2:40 pm
Mori Chu wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 03, 2020 8:27 am
3rdside wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 03, 2020 1:13 am
Avenatti may be right, that to beat Trump you need the same gutter tactics - and a mega advertising budget - so maybe Bloomberg's the guy.
I see the argument for such tactics, but ultimately I think it's a bad idea. The thing you don't want to do is get independent voters thinking, "They're all the same," or, "The Dems are just as lewd and rude and awful as Trump." You call Trump out for his awfulness and run on a different vision for the future of the country, not devolving to become just like him.
I agree. I want to vote for the party that represents good, not evil. Becoming evil just to compete with evil just makes you evil too, then what’s the point?
Agree also - it's just frustrating as always to see the D's try to be the good guys but a mistake here or there and they're made out to be hypocrites and just as bad as the R's, who revel in doing bad things and getting away with it, so a bit of bite in return might not go astray if used properly.
Which leads to the second takeaway from the UK general election if the Dems want to win:
Sacrifice personal / factional ambition and come up with a collective plan to do it - if that means Bloomberg is the personal-insult aggressor from one angle but doesn't get the nomination then so be it.
Or Warren is strictly the anti-trump facts lady from another angle and likewise doesn't get the nomination then so be it also.
Just don't fight each other.
The Conservatives strategy over here revolved around an impossibly over-simplified 3 word slogan "Get Brexit Done" and expecting the opposition to be unable to come together, which is exactly what happened.
(Without going into it too much, a combination of hubris, narcissism, pig-headedness, ignorance and stupidity from the opposition saw Johnson to the biggest parliamentary majority since the 1930's - like the slowest motion car crash ever that could easily been avoided)