Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Is There a Democrat “Trump” Out There to Take 2020 Primaries by Surprise?

Is There a Democrat “Trump” Out There to Take 2020 Primaries by Surprise?

Some mentioned include those pictured: Rep. James Delaney (D-MD), New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu

There are a few Democrats who think that since President Donald Trump won in November 2016 then maybe they can, too. After all, how did a man with no political experience beat the all mighty Hillary Clinton?!

So a handful of politicians that not a lot of people have heard of believe they have a chance to take on Trump in 2020, including mayors and congressmen “low on the seniority totem pole.”

Here’s the thing, though. EVERYONE knew about Trump and if you didn’t then you must live an isolated life.

Politico ran an article on Tuesday about these Democrats. Rep. John Delaney (D-MD), a former finance executive, believes he could win the presidency and announced his intention to run in July even though hardly anyone out of his district have heard of him. Delaney has already visited Iowa and New Hampshire 90 times since July:

The 55-year-old former finance executive is part of a rapidly proliferating group of declared or potential 2020 candidates driven largely by one overriding principle: If Donald Trump can do it, why not me?

The usual early trickle of potential presidential candidates into Iowa and New Hampshire is already a full-on flood ahead of Trump’s reelection bid. And in the place of the traditional assortment of senators and governors is an ever-expanding hodgepodge of long shots — from mayors to House members to state-level bureaucrats — each absolutely convinced they hold the key to kicking the president to the curb come 2020.

“We need new people and ideas,” said Delaney, who was elected to a House seat in Maryland in 2012. “Whether you’re a governor, a senator or a member of the House of Representatives, that’s really irrelevant to voters.”

Former Missouri Secretary of State Jason Kander unsuccessfully ran for the Senate in 2016, but ordered his “campaign manager to open a field office in Iowa last year.” He also started a voting-rights organization, which has brought him to “Iowa and New Hampshire so many times that he’s become a fixture at private and public local party events.”

South Bend Mayor Peter Buttigieg has also visited Iowa a few times along with Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) and Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA).

Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH), the man who challenged House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) for her position has visited Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA) visited a steak fry with Ryan in Des Moines last year, too.

Others have eyed South Carolina. New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu made an appearance at the Democratic Party conference last month. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) spoke at that event, too.

Sean Bagniewski, chairman of the Democratic committee in Polk County, told Politico that people he has talked to believe “that it’s going to be the most crowded primary in decades.” Iowans think there will “be a good dozen credible candidates running, and then a good dozen behind them.”

Bigger Names?

In November, The Hill spoke with Democratic insiders about the top possible 2020 Democratic presidential candidates. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has always been a name near the top. Mike blogged this morning that she has stated she is not running for president, but is building on a $13 million dollar war chest.

There’s a possibility that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) will make another run for it in 2020.

The obscure names may also have to deal with former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen Kristen Gillibrand (D-NY), who has shot up in the news lately with the sexual misconduct allegations hampering Capital Hill lately.

The Hill mentioned that Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) comes up when the Democrats talk about needing “fresh blood” for the part.

Can One of Them Do It?

Politico called these people the “Why-not-me caucus” and it shows no sign of slowing down since at least 40 people have either made it known they want to run or have shown signs that they may throw their hat in the circus:

“It’s probably a combination of, ‘If Trump can do it, [so can I],’ but also alarm at the direction of the country, and thinking, ‘I’ve got to step up and add my voice,’” suggested Lincoln Chafee, the former Rhode Island governor and senator who sought the Democratic nomination against all odds in 2016.

It’s been nine decades since the Democrats’ nominee had no experience as a senator or governor. Yet roughly half of 2020’s potential presidential contenders have none, and many are under 45 years old.

A few things may help them. First off, the Democrats have no front-runner. No one expected Trump to defeat Hillary and after that happened, the party has gone down the drain. Secondly, thanks to the internet, it cuts out time to raise money for a campaign and means you don’t have to spend a lot of time going after big dollar donors.

Politico also thinks that the “political penalties” of showing too much ambition “have also faded, judging by voters’ rewarding of garish flouting of political traditions in 2016.”

Who knows? Even though, like I said, everyone knew about Donald Trump before he ran for president, no one (including me) thought he would beat Hillary Clinton. Maybe politics have taken a new road and voters will now choose those who aren’t a big name in the political world.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

…declared or potential 2020 candidates driven largely by one overriding principle: If Donald Trump can do it, why not me?

Oh, I dunno, because you’re not Donald Trump?

The Landrieu “regime” has been among the most corrupt administrations and families in American history, ranking up there with the Daley’s in Chicago. Why would America want anything like that when we already have the “swamp”?
People vote with their pocketbooks and the economy should be roaring in 2020, so Trump 2020 is looking very good. Bring on the parade of morons and midgets from the left.

    Eddie Baby in reply to snapper451. | January 3, 2018 at 11:38 am

    Mitch Landrieu is going to be guilty by relation to Miss Piggy in much the same way as W Bush is for Jeb.

    Milwaukee in reply to snapper451. | January 3, 2018 at 4:53 pm

    “The Landrieu “regime” has been among the most corrupt administrations and families in American history, ranking up there with the Daley’s in Chicago. Why would America want anything like that when we already have the “swamp”?”

    Hello? This is about the “Democrat” nominee. Being sleazy and immoral are part of the job qualifications. Necessary, but not sufficient qualifications.

      Milwaukee in reply to Milwaukee. | January 3, 2018 at 5:03 pm

      From the paper of record, the New York Times: “The Most Expensive Mile of Subway Track on Earth”
      “The budget showed that 900 workers were being paid to dig caverns for the platforms as part of a 3.5-mile tunnel connecting the historic station to the Long Island Rail Road. But the accountant could only identify about 700 jobs that needed to be done, according to three project supervisors. Officials could not find any reason for the other 200 people to be there.”

      With the Democrat Party, corruption isn’t a bug, it is a feature. The trick is to get on the gravy train when the getting is good, or there will be nothing left for you.

      Tom Servo in reply to Milwaukee. | January 3, 2018 at 11:57 pm

      Still, the Landrieu’s can’t even win in Louisiana anymore, much less anywhere else.

      Looks like all the political dynasties are fading. On the national scale, the Kennedy’s and Clinton’s and Bush’s are washed up, and state level dynasties like the Long’s and the Landrieu’s are done too. Good riddance to them all.

The first thought that comes to mind is who is paying for all of these travel expenses?

“After all, how did a man with no political experience beat the all mighty Hillary Clinton?!”

Well, two answers there…

1. Der Donald has been running for POTUS for about a decade, and he is a born snake-oil salesman able to read a crowd and reverse himself on a dime, and

2. Hellary was a historically bad, weak, really terrible candidate (and person).

    The Ragspierre theory of politics: Voters are ignorant sheep who can be easily swayed by someone with a snappy patter.

    Or could it be that a significant portion of the voting public has realized that all career politicians, especially those who have held federal office, are part of the Establishment, regardless of their party affiliation? And, that this portion of the voting public, is tired of being shafted by the Establishment and its lapdogs?

    Naw, Rags is right here. We are all mind-numbed Trump bots who do not know what is good for us. [*sarcasm* y’all] Thank the Lord that we have people like Rags to show us the way.

      Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | January 3, 2018 at 12:36 pm

      Stupid, lying troll > ignore

        Oh, Yeah? LOL

          Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | January 4, 2018 at 8:27 am

          Mac45,

          One of your formulaic responses, to wit…

          You have no pwooof of what you say.

          Nothing new here. Happens all the time. Oh, and blah, blah, blah about other crap.

          I’ve done such and such. I’m a realist.

          But your next ingredient in your trite formula is a filthy attack that comes from a fantasy world.

          “Why you would work so hard attempting to destroy a President who is light years closer to the wants of ordinary conservatives than the alternative is puzzling, to say the least.”

          Here you impute a power I could never have and ascribe a motive to me that’s really just a filthy lie. Plus, you inveigle the whole of “conservationism” which you expressly reject.

          I have no desire, and could never manage, to “destroy a President [sic]”. My purpose here is much more modest. I oppose the cult. I oppose the man, T-rump. And I oppose bad policy.

          For that, I’m routinely viciously attacked for any post I make, which shows I have been effective. The ThoughtPolice can’t stand to have anyone here who is not of the hive.

        Shane in reply to Ragspierre. | January 3, 2018 at 1:05 pm

        Fuck me Rags … adding “Stupid, lying troll > ignore” only further bolsters Mac45’s point that you think people are stupid and you’re smarter than everyone. This Rags, is EXACTLY why Trump was voted into office … haven’t you figured that out by now? Rags … your thinking is the problem and what people are sick of.

          Ragspierre in reply to Shane. | January 3, 2018 at 1:23 pm

          Not feeding you trolls.

          Shane in reply to Shane. | January 3, 2018 at 3:28 pm

          You’re feeding the “trolls” by constantly commenting with stupid playground rhetoric and refusing to address points with counter-points, and then most importantly not leaving it alone when you have made your point. People will agree or they won’t just make your point and move along.

          You’re now projecting Rags and it is very unbecoming.

          Ragspierre in reply to Shane. | January 3, 2018 at 7:38 pm

          I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, and just suppose you can’t read, or read very, very selectively.

          I made two points. I was immediately attacked…and with false bullshit…and my points never dealt with.

          Both points are valid. My “thinking” was given credit for T-rump’s victory, which is flattering in a perverse sort of way. But in all modestly, not only can I not take credit for it, the charge is simply silly.

          We all know that a portion of T-rump voters ARE sheep. We know that some of the cult of personality worshiping Der Donald were Obama cultists…maybe in two elections.

          Another cadre of T-rump voters are simply people who only listened to the T-rump of 2016, and chose to ignore his history, personality, and character. You either know this, or you are delusional. T-rump skillfully told them what they most wanted to hear, and he created a new persona for the campaign (though really a persona he’d been polishing for at least a decade). All that supports my first point.

          We know that many votes were cast for T-rump by people who had to force themselves to do it. Bearing out my second point.

          But nobody did anything but attack me, and mostly with lies.

          So I’m not “projecting” any-flucking-thing. You need to look up the term.

          Ragspierre in reply to Shane. | January 3, 2018 at 7:45 pm

          “You’re feeding the “trolls” by constantly commenting with stupid playground rhetoric…”

          and

          “Fuck me Rags …”

          No. You seem to do that very nicely by yourself.

          Mac45 in reply to Shane. | January 3, 2018 at 10:31 pm

          Let me address your points.

          First that we “KNOW” that some of the Trump supporters were Obama supports. Exactly how do we know that? And if so, who are they? It is, of course possible that some people who voter for Obama did choose to vote for Trump. There were also Obama voters who voted for Romney. Changing one’s mind does not make one stupid.

          As to your claim that “(a)nother cadre of T-rump voters are simply people who only listened to the T-rump of 2016”, this is probably correct. This happens in every election. But, it is not restricted to Trump. Look at Ted Cruz. I know that I keep bringing him up, but his epitomizes a politician who reinvents himself to gain office. Cruz has historically been closely linked to the Establishment in the US, through both the Bush clan and Goldman-Sachs. When he entered the Senate, he took positions which made it appear that he was working against the aims of the Establishment. None of his positions resulted in blocking any of these aims, however. And, he fully intended to run as the maverick, anti-Estblishment candidate for President, to take advantage of the growing anti-Establishment feelings in the electorate.

          As to forcing oneself to vote for a candidate, I FORCED myself to vote for the Democrat John McCain and for the liberal Mitt Romney. So, welcome to the real world, little pardner.

          What you refuse to accept is that there is no evidence that Trump will not deliver most of his promised agenda and certainly the most important parts of his agenda. In fact, he has delivered on a large portion of his promises and we are less than one year into his first term of office.

          You might not like Trump, the man. Many people do not, including many of his supporters. You might not agree with everything that he does. I certainly don’t. You might fear that he will not be able to keep all of his promises. Personally, I do not expect him to be able to keep all of them, not with a Congress, the Media and most of the bureaucracy working against him. But, if he keeps most of them, we are still better off. Why you would work so hard attempting to destroy a President who is light years closer to the wants of ordinary conservatives than the alternative is puzzling, to say the least.

    Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | January 3, 2018 at 1:27 pm

    I will note that I observed in 2016 that…”Voters have elected a lying, pathological narcissist asshole twice now. It could be a trend.”

    I think Americans get to make choices. They should eat the consequences, too. Hopefully, there will be some learning…

      Shane in reply to Ragspierre. | January 3, 2018 at 3:33 pm

      Let’s see what awful consequences we got …

      Our money back in the form of less taxes
      Our jobs back through lowering of the fucking highest corporate tax rate in the world. Please watch for repatriations (more jobs)
      Our choice back when the individual mandate went away pretty much gutting Obamcare.
      Our dignity back when we kicked the fucking U.N. in the balls
      Our friends back when we announced our choice for an embassy in Jerusalem

      Yup, terrible awful we deserved that.

      murkyv in reply to Ragspierre. | January 3, 2018 at 8:08 pm

      Maybe you should run in 2020 to show everyone how it’s supposed to be done.

      Rags/Sasse has a nice ring to it and it just kinda flows out across ones lips. (unless you have a lisp)

      murkyv in reply to Ragspierre. | January 3, 2018 at 8:10 pm

      I just hate eating the consequences of having a President enact the REAL conservative agenda that your heroes have promised us for decades and never produced

      I will note that I observed in 2016 Ragspee was a prog.

      He’s also deranged. It colors every thing.

Sounds like generals fighting the last war.

“We need new people and ideas,” said Delaney . . .

If you’re looking for new ideas they won’t be coming from any Democrat who repeatedly repacking tax-and-spend as if it were anything new. Socialism is quite old.

Rag: two reasons…

Let’s incredibly stupid in Alice’s considering that Trump has the best 1st year results since Ronald Reagan.

Please try to catch up to 2018. The election that you’re still moping around about was over a year ago. Grow up. The Sally Struthers School of Law is depending on their one and only “star” graduate…

The Dems are hedging their bets, for 2020. They are attempting to find a candidate who can be identified as an outsider, yet is controlled by the Establishment.

    Shane in reply to Mac45. | January 3, 2018 at 1:07 pm

    Lul .. they need to keep doing that. The more time they waste with that pipe dream the more their shitty policies can be rolled back.

    C. Lashown in reply to Mac45. | January 3, 2018 at 5:52 pm

    re: “They are attempting to find a candidate who can be identified as an outsider, yet is controlled by the Establishment”

    I don’t think they’ll have any problems with that. Recall how Obama was introduced? A do-nothing, know-nothing young Senator from Illinois with a speech in the DNC convention of 2004. Forty-eight months later this foreigner was elected POTUS with a Nobel Peace Prize tucked under his arm.

    Society is littered with this moral degeneracy, and worse.

buckeyeminuteman | January 3, 2018 at 12:37 pm

The issue is, hardly anybody is excited about the ideas coming out of the Democrat party. Not a single Dem voted to lower your taxes, but all of them though it was a good idea to force you to pay for health insurance. With the current economy, stock market, unemployment numbers and the fact that finally someone with balls is the CINC of the mightiest military the world has ever seen; there’s no way the electorate turns on Trump in 2020.

    C. Lashown in reply to buckeyeminuteman. | January 3, 2018 at 5:56 pm

    re: “…there’s no way the electorate turns on Trump in 2020.”

    Nice dream, comforting actually. Do you recall that Wendy’s commercial (and it’s effects)? “Where’s the BEEF”

What exactly will the Democrats run on in 2020? We demand higher taxes, universal healthcare, reopened borders and unlimited immigration , reimposed regulations and a clamp-down on fossil fuels and cancel the space initiatives… again. Oh, and immediately reach out to Europe and offer up apologies for the Trump episode.

hahahaaa. They have no chance. And it’s an insult really to say there could be such a thing as a Democrat “Trump”. That’s an impossibility and tell me the author has no idea where Trump came from or what he really is. Sad.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to RobM. | January 3, 2018 at 5:57 pm

    RE: “he author has no idea where Trump came from or what he really is”

    Touche!

    C. Lashown in reply to RobM. | January 3, 2018 at 6:06 pm

    re: “What exactly will the Democrats run on in 2020?”

    President Trump is working on becoming an American hero, so the Dems will have to become even a greater hero to beat him…or slap something on Trump he can’t dodge.

    People are FICKLE! Just look at the puritanical drive for retribution against the sex industry of Hollywood and DC. Seldom has there been, in modern history, a more lascivious environment encouraged. Yet when people respond, their lives are destroyed. Similar to going fishing with a worm, and then cursing the fish for biting your worm!

    Trump can fall in an afternoon of careless speech, either by him or by others…the Dems don’t care where they get their bait from.

no one (including me) thought he would beat Hillary Clinton.

Not so.

It really wasn’t a huge mystery. Almost from the start it was crystal clear that Trump was by far the strongest candidate in the race. And as the campaign progressed it was just as clear that only two candidates stirred up any genuine enthusiasm, and one of those wasn’t even a candidate after the primaries.

And it’s just as clear that none of these Dem midgets will make any headway at all. Bernie the Red’s the only one who will ever poll above the noise level, and, just like last time, The Party will make very sure that he’s not nominated.

As long as I can remember, the dems always roll out their candidates with a picture of their shirts off, showing their vitality. This article makes me thing they are rolling out Tulsi Gabbard for 2020.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/11/06/what-does-tulsi-gabbard-believe

Here’s more reason to think she’s going to be The One. Notice in this article how they distance her from her from unpopular progressive policies to make her look more moderate. If they want to defeat her, here is the road map the GOP can use to know what they are afraid of in 2020

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/05/tulsi-gabbard-president-sanders-democratic-party

    elle in reply to elle. | January 3, 2018 at 2:16 pm

    It’s brilliant the way they do this, they pretend that this article is bad mouthing her, but it’s a puff piece in disguise to make her appealing to the young and moderates.

    Notice how they start piece with her Bernie bona fides and distance her from old guard Hillary who young voters hated.

    Then after a few slaps on the wrist for LGBTQ, they innoculate her thus:

    “Gabbard does not actively work against gay rights. In fact, she’s cosponsored and supported numerous bills favoring the LGBT community during her time in Congress, from the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

    Still, her questionable loyalty to LGBT and abortion rights is disquieting considering her public reputation as a beacon of progressivism.”

    Next, she is not to be trusted by progressives because she is willing to get tough on terrorism.

    Here, they tell us why Gabby is not to be trusted:

    “Like campaign-era Trump, Gabbard may be against miring the United States in blunderous, short-sighted conflicts that backfire, but she’s more than willing to use America’s military might to go after suspected terrorists around the world (and inevitably kill and maim civilians in the process).”

    It goes on, but you get the picture. The GOP better get started knocking down this phony staging now, or she will be a tough candidate in 2020.

      notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to elle. | January 3, 2018 at 5:55 pm

      Oh just great!

      The Dems think they can steal more elections for a “female” Barrack Obama!

American Human | January 3, 2018 at 1:54 pm

Believe me, even people (most) in Delaney’s district don’t know who he is.
He is a product of the MD State super-majority of democrats who gerrymandered our district to include a lot of Montgomery County which ensured that Delaney would win and MD House Speaker Busch and Senate Majority Leader Miller could then control the entire State including all of Western MD which should be a separate State entirely.
Delaney has done nothing, accomplished nothing, knows nothing, and could care less about most of his district. He literally believes that we serve him. He is a puppet of the Busch/Miller cabal.

pablo panadero | January 3, 2018 at 2:23 pm

None of these are even remotely similar to Trump, as all of these candidates have run for office. Comparable to Trump would be Marc Cuban or Mark Zuckerberg. One of them will run for the nomination and win it.

    Ragspierre in reply to pablo panadero. | January 3, 2018 at 2:30 pm

    Nope. T-rump has been running for POTUS since…what?…1999. He ran as a Reform Party candidate.

    That’s a good point, however Zuckerberg is not likeable. Don’t know much about Cuban.

    I don’t think it’s a given there will be a Trump repeat. They have been very consistently laying the groundwork for a woman president for 2020. Ask any lib woman and they will all say how great it would be if we could have a woman president. They will back it up by noting, “it’s time” and “We wouldn’t have to worry about accusations of sexual harassment.”

The really good news about all of this is that there will be at least twenty Demorat candidates running and that means we will get to hear the most extreme views that they have. They will also be competing against other extreme candidates and the rhetoric will get more and more left. This will pull the moderate mask from their lying faces and then the public will see their real choice. Can anyone imagine Kamela Harris as a president? The only reason she has ever accomplished anything in her career is because of her color and gender. obama only had one and he proved the “Peter Principal”.

No. Say what you will about him, it is obvious Donald Trump loves America.

Don’t see a Dem pulling that off…

Not mentioning Maxine Waters as a candidate is quite racist. Keith Ellison is ready too.

And let’s not forget that Jesse Jackson Jr. is out of prison.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend