My major concern about the Beto for President push

[EffieBlack]

Just about everything I've heard or read endorsing a Beto O'Rourke presidential run focuses almost exclusively on his youth, charisma and ability to generate excitement among young people. While all of those are valuable attributes in a candidate, they aren't the most important and I haven't seen much discussion about substance and his ability to manage and govern.

At this point, the Beto for President drive strikes me more like a fan club built on a cult of personality than a serious political movement likely to have real results.

I certainly could change my mind and perhaps will in time. But right now, I'm just not there.

[saidsimplesimon]

1. I agree, thank you.

[applegrove]

2. Beto is authentic. He talks about real problems and solutions. There

is no big lie or propaganda. It is not about creating an unreal favourable image of himself but is about creating favourable outcomes for the people of the country.

Wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_personality


A cult of personality arises when a country's regime – or, more rarely, an individual – uses the techniques of mass media, propaganda, the big lie, spectacle, the arts, patriotism, and government-organized demonstrations and rallies to create an idealized, heroic, and worshipful image of a leader, often through unquestioning flattery and praise. A cult of personality is similar to apotheosis, except that it is established by modern social engineering techniques, usually by the state or the party in one-party states. It is often seen in totalitarian or authoritarian countries.

[JonLP24]

4. I agree

He tackles issues others shy away from.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

101. Beto does seem to have the "it" factor.

[mcar]

132. Stacey Abrams and Andrew Gillum are authentic. They talked about real problems and solutions.

Why are they not being touted as potential 2020 candidates?

[applegrove]

145. They did not get millions to watch their response to town hall questions. People

from outside of Texas tuned into his response on kneeling during anthems at football games. He caught fire nationally and outsiders started calling him to run for President. It was organic. And you want that organicness in a presidential candidate.

[EffieBlack]

148. Um - people from around the country watched and we're inspired and excited by their campaigns

Millions of people around the country were just as excited about Stacey and Andrew as you are about Beto. Perhaps they just don't assume that Stacey and Andrew are magical unicorns and, thus, don't feel the need to insult and down play other candidates in order to support theirs.

[applegrove]

150. I never said they were bad candidates. They were great candidates. Organically

They are not being suggested as Presidential candidates at this point.

[applegrove]

158. Just an FYI.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/11/27/politics/beto-orourke-2020/index.html?__twitter_impression=true

[Demsrule86]

160. I like Beto...very impressive, but he has to win first.

I am not sure he could win a general.

[applegrove]

162. Sometimes you have to strike when the iron gets hot. Someone like

Beto reminds me of Trudeau. Trudeau sets the tone and then recruited brilliant people on his team to implement in their fields of expertise. Not a bad government at all for us in canada. We are pretty happy.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/11/27/politics/beto-orourke-2020/index.html?__twitter_impression=true

[Demsrule86]

163. This is not Canada. And I don't think Beto is our guy for 20...maybe in the future.

[Renew Deal]

3. There are no announced candidates other than John Delaney

So everything is hype and speculation. I don’t think anyone has gotten into the details on who has credible governing experience. Right now from the potential candidates with credible executive experience it’s pretty much Hinckelhooper, Cuomo, Deval Patrick, and maybe Bloomberg. Other than that it’s a bunch of legislators and Steyer.

I don’t know if it’s worth going crazy over experience right now since there are almost no announced candidates. Generally I think it makes sense to encourage people to run. The process will work itself out.

I think threads are being posted about a few people because people fear that they might win. Still, that is mostly part of the hype.

Also, 2020 is a unique opportunity for someone with less experience to win since they are running against Trump and he has no experience.

[TheCowsCameHome]

5. Re: Beto - so far, I like what I see.

[jezebel321]

6. Didnt they say the same thing about President Obama back in 2007? nt

[Freethinker65]

8. Yes. Yes they did.

[JonLP24]

10. Former Obama aide: O'Rourke inspired more enthusiasm than Obama in 2004

Former Obama aide Dan Pfeiffer in a Monday op-ed laid out his argument in favor of a possible Beto O'Rourke 2020 presidential run, saying O'Rourke's Senate campaign inspired more enthusiasm than former President Obama's 2004 bid for the upper chamber.

Pfeiffer, co-host of the podcast Pod Save America, wrote in a Crooked Media article that he has "never seen a Senate candidate - including Obama in 2004 - inspire the sort of enthusiasm that Beto did in his race."

"If Beto were to go to Iowa City next week, I am confident he would draw a crowd three times larger than any candidate has since Obama first stumped there," he continued.

Pfeiffer wrote that he believes O'Rourke would be one of the "strongest candidates" in what is expected to be a crowded Democratic primary field.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/homenews/campaign/418292-former-obama-aide-orourke-inspired-more-enthusiasm-than-obama-in-2004%3famp

[EffieBlack]

17. Pfeiffer helps make my point

"{H}e would draw a crowd three times larger than any candidate has since Obama first stumped there."

He's talking about "crowds" and "enthusiasm," not substance.

[In It to Win It]

51. I think the same argument can be made about Obama in 2007 and '08. All people talked about...

was enthusiasm (as far as I remember), not really any substantive policy. I remember people saying how young, charismatic and enthusiastic he was and all the criticism about his lack of experience.

[EffieBlack]

62. That's not true

Yes, people talked about enthusiasm, but that was only part of it, Obama was seen as a thoughtful, brilliant man with carefully considered and eloquently expressed ideas, policies and plans, an adept political strategist who'd run a flawless, no-drama and ultimately successful campaign and an effective, hard-working, non-showboating Senator.

It wasn't all about enthusiasm, youth and charsima - he had already shown clear signs that he had the substabtive chops and those features were added bonuses.

[Bradshaw3]

78. That's not true

I voted for Obama in the senate primary in Illinois and got to see him speak in person as the buzz about him was building. It was exactly the kind of eloquence, thoughtfulness and ability to translate ideas into speeches that drew people to him. Beto has those same qualities, if you take an unbiased look at him.

Obama didn't do a lot as a a state senator or U.S. senator that you could point to. It was mostly his charisma and ability to connect with people that drew them to him. I saw it firsthand and felt it too. I felt the same way about Beto, something I haven't felt about anyone since Obama. Remember, Axlerod and Obama werre talking about a Presidential run early in his time as a U.S. Senator from a strategic point of view. It wasn't based on well-thought out policies as much as seeing an opening with the same kind of coalition that got him elected senator (blacks and downstate liberals) on a national stage and going for it.

[Separation]

171. Exactly

Even those that were on the right liked to say, "What is he, a Community Organizer, where is his experience?"

And to be quite honest, that's exactly what America needed(s). A great Community Organizer, where America is the community and had he just had an iota of support from Republicans, we'd all probably be talking about what a great 3rd term he was doing. Instead we are where we are now. Republicans defending drunken rapists and appointing them to lifetime Judical positions, trashing the rule of law, and supporting THE MOST CORRUPT American President since our nation was formed.

[In It to Win It]

83. What you saw is different from what I saw.

All I saw people talk about was the enthusiasm, youth and charisma. I won't forget how people noted all the time about how articulate he was. During the campaign that was all.

All the other adjectives came in once he actually won and the media was speaking in hindsight.

[LeftInTX]

74. Obama served in the Illinois Senate for 7 years before he became a US Senator.

Beto served in the House and before that City Council. (If El Paso City Council is anything like San Antonio City Council, it is pretty much JV)

[In It to Win It]

76. I understand that but he stll got the criticism.

[grantcart]

156. Simply because a candidate has "crowds" and "enthusiasm" doesn't mean he doesn't have substance

It can mean that he is able to communicate complex issues in a simple way.


I have taken the time to read virtually everything I can about Beto and I find that he is much more substantial and nuanced than people give him credit for.

See reply 154 below for a detailed example.

[grantcart]

155. I find this difficult to understand

State Senator Obama's speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention electrified the country in a much larger way than anything Beto (who I support) has done.

The NYT argues, correctly, that it was the most important event that launched his eventual Presidential campaign.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/27/magazine/the-speech-that-made-obama.html

[TeamPooka]

59. Yes, but Obama won his Senate seat and was seen as a winner. Big difference.

and then got his Federal experience in office and got ready to run.

[BannonsLiver]

131. Obama wasn't running for a senate seat in a blood red state

“Big difference.”

[EffieBlack]

138. Beto O'Rourke wasn't a black man running for statewide office held by only one other POC in history

Don't try to rewrite history by portraying Barack Obama as a shoo-in whose victory was no big deal while casting Beto as a David who slew Goliath with nothing but a slingshot.

Barack Obama overcame enormous obstacles to win his seat - and if he weren't black, he wouldn't have had to be heads and shoulders more accomplished, gifted and impressive than most political candidates, including Beto, in order to be taken seriously.

And it's not lost on many of us that a young politician who shows promise, but hasn't accomplished nearly what Obama did at this stage in his career and who lost his last race is being characterized as Obama's equivalent - especially when we all know good and well that, if Obama had lost his Senate race in 2004, there's no way in hell anyone would have taken him seriously as a presidential candidate a month later.

Whiteness does indeed have its privileges ...

[Blanks]

151. The big difference is that Obama won...

It’s not nearly as impressive to talk about the Herculean obstacles the loser faced, when that person is being compared to somebody who won.

I wasn’t a huge fan of Obama in 2008, but he did a good job and I was a fan in 2012.

I’d be on board for all of this ‘Beto 2020’ talk if he’d won, but he didn’t and there are other candidates with better experience. He needed the experience in the US senate and that’s a factor. The same is true for Gillum and Abrams, they’re the future of the party, but state assembly and mayor aren’t the kind of experience I want our presidential candidates to have. They need to win the election, do the job and then run on that experience.

Harris and Booker are better choices, I prefer Harris of the two.

[sheshe2]

60. Cornell West said he, Obama, wasn't black enough.

Obama did not exactly have a fan club.

I was for Obama from day one.

[Hoyt]

7. I remember Howard Dean showing enthusiasm. It took him out

after Iowa. Then, there was Gary Hart, John Edwards, etc.

I honestly don’t think O’Rourke running around the stage, cursing, etc., is going to get us there (although, I like the show). His policies are standard Democratic beliefs, though he is a bit more vocal. So, not sure there is much difference there among Democrats.

And, he lost to the creepiest opponent in history. Would definitely support him in general, and would jump on board sooner if he’s running the field and shows staying power.

Personally, I think a woman might just be better for us and the world, than another man.

[oberliner]

9. I think you mean Howard Dean

[Hoyt]

13. Yes, thanks.

[oberliner]

15. He was such a great candidate

It was a real shame the way things played out.

[Hoyt]

31. Agree. Would loved to see him have tackled healthcare, post-9/11 wars, deficit, etc.

His winning in 2004 might have pushed Obama's run back a bit, though.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

36. Plus he promised to pass a law reuniting the Fugees.

It was from a tongue-in-cheek segment on MTV's Rock The Vote back then...

[John Fante]

82. Beto lost to an incumbent senator in RED Texas.

Let's not downplay the tremendous effort he gave. He pushed Cruz to the limit.

[Hoyt]

84. Agree, but there are lots of red, or could be red, states like Texas.

Early, for me at least, to back O’Rourke. Obviously, he could change my mind.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

111. It's like comparing the LeBron led Cavaliers for falling to the Warriors.

[EffieBlack]

113. It was a great effort. But it doesn't prove he's ready to run for and be President

I still haven't seen any serious discussion of substance - all I'm seeing is talk of enthusiasm, charisma and "he almost won in Texas."

That's just not enough.

But we'll see how it develops.

[aikoaiko]

11. I think your concern is fair, but he does have 6 years in the House.

I need to look at his congressional accomplishments.

[TeamPooka]

64. It's been what? 150 years since we sent a Congressman to the White House without winning a state

wide election first.
Big city mayors and Congresspeople are not going to make the cut.
Outsider candidates will not be more outside than trump will still be in 2020
Governors, Senators, and Former Cabinet members make the most successful candidates, historically.

[aikoaiko]

77. I'm not in love with Beto, but I do recognize he is a special US Rep

Not many get the national attention and admire ration he does.

[TeamPooka]

80. There's always one around exciting the base, Gephardt, Kucinich, now Beto. I see him as a VP or more

importantly, as a potential Cabinet post.
We will probably not be able to spare many Senators etc to nominate to those posts in 2021 when we win so Beto and other "available" politicians should fill these slots and it gives him the cred for a national run later.
The guy is young, he has time to build still, but build he must.

[EffieBlack]

85. I think he's great and has a lot of potential.

For his sake, I hope he doesn't get caught up in the fanbase adulation and lose his focus.

I also hope he's able to keep his more fervent supporters from getting on people's last nerve with the "Beto's the one and only and how dare you think he's not!" lectures and alienating others from him, which I've seen happen with some other candidates.

Give him room to grow.

[John Fante]

89. We have reality TV game show host in the White House.

I don't replacing him with a house representative is that big a deal.

[TeamPooka]

93. Ignore the choices the american people have made historically for a century and half

because you don't feel it's important
Whatever

[John Fante]

141. 63 million Americans ignored them quite easily when they voted for

Trump. You know, the idiot currently residing in the WH?

[Old Vet]

110. I was just gonna say that John, We have a fucking reality show person now........

beto lost in the deepest red by a hair in texas, What other dem could come close to that? I will wait..

[EffieBlack]

112. Stacey Abrams and Andrew Gillum almost won in red states

with both arms tied behind their backs.

And let's see how Mike Espy does today. If he beats Hyde-Smith or loses in a close race - amazing outcomes in deep red, Confederate Mississippi, it will be interesting to see whether folks are as enthusiastic about pushing him for a presidential run.

[John Fante]

143. Just as I figured. This isn't about Beto's experience at all.

He's white, you want a POC as the nominee, and based on the last sentence in your post, it's pretty clear you feel Beto is getting rock-star treatment mainly because of his skin color.

You should have just let your feelings be known from the
beginning instead of pretending you had "concerns" about Beto's legislative experience or lack thereof. What a waste of time.

[EffieBlack]

144. Drat! You GOT me!

One has to get up pretty early in the morning to pull one over on you ...

[John Fante]

146. You're not hard to figure out at all.

And I take no joy in calling out that which is painfully obvious.

[EffieBlack]

147. Yes, it must be a terrible ordeal for you

But I'm sure the DU community appreciates your willingness to sacrifice on its behalf to call me out ......

[Old Vet]

164. Wow, Are you fucking kidding me. Seems you throw that bullshit out real quick........

Never once did I ever even think about race until you threw that twisted nonsense into the conversation. I highly doubt anyone else thought so either IMHO.

[John Fante]

165. Lol, you must be new here.

[Old Vet]

168. Yeah, Ive only been here 14 years, Fairly new.........

[Demsrule86]

161. I would like to know why POC who came very very close are not afforded the deep admiration of

a Beto...hey I like the guy. But Abrams and Gillum are very impressive too. Why is they are not mentioned as potential candidates?

[treestar]

100. That would make anyone from red states

unable to qualify. We'd be ignoring a lot of talent.

[octoberlib]

12. Bingo!

[oberliner]

14. Did you have similar concerns about Obama?

[EffieBlack]

16. No.

[oberliner]

23. Why not?

[msongs]

27. 2 years in the us senate nt

[In It to Win It]

28. I don't that qualifies Barack Obama any more than Beto's 6 years in the House.

[EffieBlack]

33. + A successful Senate election, president Harvard Law Review, 2 thoughtful books

provided quite a bit of insight into his views, philosophy, and approach to governance. By the time he was being looked at as a candidate, it wasn't all about speeches and charisma - we had begun to get a true measure of the man and already saw considerable depth.

And he did all of that while having to navigate waters no white candidate had to deal with and could not rely on being given a pass if he slipped up. Case in point - imagine if, on the night he was elected to the Senate, he had roamed around the stage in rumpled clothing, ad-libbing with no prepared remarks, and bellowed to his supporters "I'm SO fucking proud of you!" ...

Very different.

[Small-Axe]

41. And a Constitutional Law professor.

Barack Obama's depth was palpable. Wisdom beyond his years.

[MaryMagdaline]

53. Obama had charisma and was more cerebral. The word that'

Jumped out was “adult.” He was a state legislator and US Senator working on nuclear disarmament.

[Hortensis]

118. "+ Successful Senate election, president Harvard Law Review,

2 thoughtful books provided quite a bit of insight into his views, philosophy, and approach to governance, and all the rest of Effie's post. Plus his background as constitutional law professor and his cerebral nature.

Agree completely. That all mattered tremendously to me. His charisma is a big part of the reason he won but not the reason I supported him.

I'll also throw in this partial explanation of how Obama was able to move directly from the senate to the presidency, one of only 3 in all of American history to do that:

"The skills traditionally associated with US Senators (and I say traditionally for a reason) do not translate to presidential campaigns well or easily," explained Anita Dunn, a top aide to Obama's campaign in 2008, in an email to CNN. "Senators, by and large, aren't executive types who have managed large organizations. A modern Presidential campaign is a billion-dollar business built in a very short period time."

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/26/politics/senator-president-history-analysis/index.html

[sheshe2]

67. He had me here. Right here.

Here. Goddess I miss him. I cried. I stood and applauded.

His keynote speech in Boston 2004.

I am my brothers keeper. I am my sisters keeper.

..................................

OBAMA: Thank you so much. Thank you.

(APPLAUSE)

Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you so much.

(APPLAUSE)

Thank you, Dick Durbin. You make us all proud.

On behalf of the great state of Illinois...

(APPLAUSE)

... crossroads of a nation, land of Lincoln, let me express my deep gratitude for the privilege of addressing this convention. Tonight is a particular honor for me because, let's face it, my presence on this stage is pretty unlikely.

My father was a foreign student, born and raised in a small village in Kenya. He grew up herding goats, went to school in a tin- roof shack. His father, my grandfather, was a cook, a domestic servant to the British.

snip

.. a faith in simple dreams, an insistence on small miracles; that we can tuck in our children at night and know that they are fed and clothed and safe from harm; that we can say what we think, write what we think, without hearing a sudden knock on the door; that we can have an idea and start our own business without paying a bribe; that we can participate in the political process without fear of retribution; and that our votes will be counted -- or at least, most of the time.

snip

That's not what I'm talking. I'm talking about something more substantial. It's the hope of slaves sitting around a fire singing freedom songs; the hope of immigrants setting out for distant shores; the hope of a young naval lieutenant bravely patrolling the Mekong Delta; the hope of a millworker's son who dares to defy the odds; the hope of a skinny kid with a funny name who believes that America has a place for him, too.

(APPLAUSE)

snip

Well, I say to them tonight, there's not a liberal America and a conservative America; there's the United States of America.

(APPLAUSE)

There's not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; there's the United States of America.

(APPLAUSE)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19751-2004Jul27.html?noredirect=on

Loved my President. Was he perfect? I know of no one who is. However this man that I truly love was the best President of my lifetime. If you want to show me one better you all better hurry up, I am not getting any younger.

Thanks, Effie.

[honest.abe]

135. Yep. Me too.

God, I miss him.

[sheshe2]

136. ...

[oberliner]

96. Thank you for sharing those insights

I wish I could have elicited such a thoughtful response when I asked the question initially.

[EffieBlack]

108. Whatever.

But keep doing you, Boo.

[oberliner]

117. I appreciate that

You are one of the most thoughtful posters on DU in my opinion and I always look forward to reading your insights.

[VOX]

18. It's still early, and the field of candidates will likely be a bit of a sideshow.

Times are strange, with noise coming from all directions. I don't expect any breakout individuals as serious potential candidates just yet. Soon, though.

[mokawanis]

19. While he has many qualities

I still am not at all sure he's a viable candidate for 2020. Like a lot of people I'm impressed by him. He's energetic, articulate, dynamic, he knows how to motivate and energize people, but all that doesn't necessarily qualify him to be President.

I'm open to having my mind changed over time, and who knows, I could someday become an avid supporter of Beto for President, but t this point I'm just not there, not yet anyway.

I'm also bothered by a tendency some have to get exited about a public figure, including celebrities (remember the Oprah for President talk not too long ago?), and then be too quick to endorse her or him for President.

[EffieBlack]

20. We're totally on the same page

[libdem4life]

66. "Steady as she goes" I think is appropriate here.

He needs national experience...VP or the Senate. I think the VP is his shortcut to the Presidency, which ultimately, he may aspire and gain.

Now...too early. I hope that vanity does not get the better of sanity for Mr. O'Rourke.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

120. And to add: then have somebody dig up something really embarrassing about him/her

Although the Republicans' digging into O'Rourke during his Senate run didn't ultimately produce much (anything?)

[FSogol]

21. While I completely agree with you on Beto, I think many on DU want to

fall in love (on first sight) with Presidential candidates. They get charged up over a rhetorical speech, campaign ad, or zinger told to a pundit and then fall in line behind that potential candidate.

I would encourage everyone on DU to keep and open mind on the people running and not instantly make up their minds. See what kind of organization each candidate puts together, what kind of support they generate from other Democratic Rep, Mayors, etc and what kind of fundraising they achieve. See what issues they talk about and most importantly what solutions or programs they are proposing.

It is a long drawn out process to make sure we end up with the correct candidate. If someone on 11-26-2018 already know who they are supporting, they are doing it wrong.

[EffieBlack]

22. Excellent post!

[FSogol]

24. Thanks. n/t

[jcgoldie]

39. I don't care about falling in love...

I do think many voters care about falling in love and I want the candidate they can fall in love with. Arguing that Beto is somehow not substantive enough seems to me to ignore the choices that people have made certainly in the 21st century. He's an authentic individual and he had the strength to be unapologetically liberal in deep red Texas in a year when red states doubled down on Trump. The fact that he did not run from things like gun control and paths to citizenship in Texas of all places while Trump was stirring the fear and hate... and he almost won... that is not lost on me. And the argument that his greatest appeal is to the segments of the democratic tent that are hardest to turnout, and reliably blue when we do... that is what makes me think he might be our best shot against Trump. That's what I want is our best shot.

[JonLP24]

48. Good points

I don't understand how they can say there is a lack of substance.

[In It to Win It]

61. Agreed! 100%

I don't care about falling in love with candidates either. I'm sure none of us on DU voter because we fall in love with candidate, but we can't discount that other people on our side will need to fall in love with the candidate.

And the argument that his greatest appeal is to the segments of the democratic tent that are hardest to turnout, and reliably blue when we do... that is what makes me think he might be our best shot against Trump. That's what I want is our best shot.

Could not agree more! This one of the reasons I think he would be a good fit and makes me think he could win.

[In It to Win It]

25. I think a healthy skepticism is okay.

Maybe I’m different in thinking that anyone can run for President. I believe in a government run by ordinary people.

I can make the same about anyone that runs for Congress that has never governed or managed anything before. Why give trust to anyone who has never managed or governed the responsibility of writing our laws? Is writing our laws less important?

When it comes to the presidency, it requires some leap of faith because it’s a whole different ball game. I don’t think anything quite prepares someone for being president. No matter who it is (even Hillary Clinton had she won), it would require some on-the-job training and instant learning. You have to hope they don’t go in and fuck up.

If Beto runs, I’m willing to take a leap of faith on him. I was sold on him before he announced his senate run. I had seen an interview of his. He has bold policy ambitions. I have no doubt that there be substance in any policy positions he has. If he takes competent people with him along for the ride, I think he has the potential to be great. I also think Beto being too early is a better bet than waiting. If he runs, Beto O’Rourke will campaign and show us why he deserves our votes. He would have to show us that he’s a good well-rounded candidate. People never know if the person is a well rounded candidate before the campaigns start. I don’t think he will be a well rounded candidate right out the gate but that’s fine; he wouldn’t be the first one. All of our other frontrunners had to be made into well rounded candidates. The same can be done with Beto.

Lastly, I don’t get the “young” thing either. I don’t think that should matter.

[Lisa0825]

26. I am a Texan and a Beto fan, but I have similar concerns.

I really love the guy, and I think he will do great things someday. I am just not sure that day is in the White House in 2021. I would prefer to see him run for Cornyn's seat in 2020, serve that term, and then run for POTUS.

I also would be pretty happy with him as a VP candidate, serving with someone more experienced.

All that being said, I said similar things about Obama before he announced he was running, and I would vote for a ham sandwich if it has a D after its name.

[In It to Win It]

30. I think if he runs for Cornyn's seat in 2020, I'm not convinced he will win. It will be...

much tougher than 2018.

[Hortensis]

97. :) For a future presidency, I'd like to see Beto serve

as governor of Texas or another state. Ideally with a stint in national government before or after. Being a governor of a semi-independent state is much better training and launch pad than being one in 100 deliberative senators.

We apparently have a crowd of Democratic senators lining up for 2020. though. Perhaps in 2021 Beto could run as VP or get an appointment under a Democratic president, the way Obama put Hillary to work and built her resume for president at the same time.

A lot of Democratic senators want to be President. History shows it will be hard.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/26/politics/senator-president-history-analysis/index.html

History may not matter that much.

[Awsi Dooger]

29. I am concerned about losing to Donald Trump

A standard nominee is more than capable of that. Nobody wants to acknowledge the enormous advantages Trump will own as incumbent.

My big picture theory has always been that you need someone charismatic and likable and special to defeat that incumbent whose party has been in power only one term. I emphasized that here upon joining in 2002. I don't care about resumes in situations like this. We faced the same type of incumbency disadvantage in 2004 and went with the safe resume choice in John Kerry.

Beto fits what I have always prioritized. I'm not going to make it more complicated than that. Frankly I have always expected a defeat in 2020, whether Hillary won or lost in 2016. It always set up as an awful cycle since we'd either be seeking four straight Democratic terms or trying to oust that incumbent whose party has been in power only one term.

Senators are seldom ideal. Since we lacked an outstanding pick from our slim governor ranks I view it as a minor miracle that someone like Beto has emerged. Makes no sense to me that we would nitpick him as opposed to realizing what he brings.

[In It to Win It]

32. Agreed about losing to Tump...

When I think all the good candidates to run, Beto's at the top of my list of people that can actually win. I think we have a ton of great candidates that have lonnnggg resumes, but I'm not completely convinced that they can actually pull out a win against Trump.

[EffieBlack]

35. Why specifically, based on what you know about him right now, do you think he could beat Trump?

[In It to Win It]

40. Even though people only seem to talk about the enthusiam and crowd sizes...

.. and it's not substantive policies, enthusiasm matters more than we think.

At this very moment, I know people are more enthusiastic about him than any other 2020 potential nominee you can think of right now. Trump won on enthusiasm and sound bites, nothing more.

Luckily for us, the demographics for Texas isn't the same as the entire country. If Beto wins the same demographic categories he won in Texas on a national scale, with the same enthusiasm he has today, Beto wins the presidency.

Additionally, he has managed to distinguish successfully himself from the "villains" of the party that the GOP likes to attack (Pelosi, Clinton, Obama, Schumer), which is a great thing for him. He managed to swing some counties in Texas to the left that went heavily republican in 2012 and 2016 by 5 to 10 percentage points.

[EffieBlack]

43. "Enthusiasm," "supposedly distinguishing himself from Democrats who aren't running

and swinging some counties further to the left in a state he didn't win (something many other candidates did across the country) aren't a basis for assuming Beto would beat Trump in 2020.

[In It to Win It]

50. Ok. Under the current circumstances, who do you think will win against Trump?

Others I like are Adam Schiff, Sherrod Brown, Kamala Harris (for Harris, it's more of an enthusiasm behind her as well).

Additionally, I don't understand why losing a senate race is such a hurdle for running for the presidency. I would like to pick your brain on that, if you would allow me to.

[EffieBlack]

57. I don't know - because it's way too early in the process to annoit a savior

And losing a Senate race matters because a candidate needs to have a track record of being able not just to draw big crowds but to put together a successful campaign that pulls together a broad range of voters that win at the polls if a candidate can't win their own state, it's a hard sell to convince people they can win a national election.

That's one of the reasons cingresspersons aren't successful presidential candidates but senators and governors are. Winning a district in one corner of a state is one thing. Pulling together all of the complex pieces necessary to build a coalition that can win a state is another thing altogether. Beto hasn't yet proven he can do the latter. it doesn't matter why he couldn't do it - he was unsuccessful. And he's going to have to show a lot more than big rallies in Texas to convince me that he can beat an incumbent president when he couldn't beat an unpopular incumbent senator in his own state.

[In It to Win It]

75. I was never convinced that Beto was gonna win Texas.

The reason that I didn't put too much stock in the Texas race was because I know left-leaning voters are outnumbered in Texas by a large margin. I think Beto ran the best campaign he could have run, and he did outperform any other Democrat (in presidential years and midterms) in decades. By every measure, Beto's campaign pulled together a broad range of voters.

I think winning as a Democrat in a statewide race in Texas is near-impossible today. I think it will remain that way in 2020. The reason I give Beto's campaign a pass is because I think it's near impossible to win as a Democrat in Texas today. As I mentioned in my previous post, he gets the same voter performance with the same voter groups and turnout on a national scale as he did in the statewide race, he would win. This is my main reasoning for thinking he would win; that same voter performance on a national scale being a progressive liberal that appears to also have some conservative appeal. I can see Beto attracting the "Bernie or Bust" people that Hillary Clinton could not attract.

It's just that these particular voters, the "blue tent" of voters, are outnumbered in Texas even with the decent amount of voters that swung and we can't change that at the moment. I can't even compare Obama's successful senate run because I don't believe they are comparable. I think Barack Obama would have lost a statewide race in Texas also, and he did... twice. Beto couldn't beat an unpopular Republican senator in Texas. Texas is a majority conservative state, most of whom will pick the conservative over the democrat no matter what. Had this been a presidential election year, Ted Cruz probably would have gotten 300k-400k more votes than he got in this midterm based on past trends. Republicans have been outperforming Dems by around 500,000 to 1 million votes per election cycle. That's a massive gap that I did not expect Beto to actually close.

If, on the other hand, Beto ran in Illinois, Washington, Oregon, Pennsylvania, etc. and lost to a Republican... I would agree with you that Beto would not be able to pull together a broad range of voters to bring home a win.

The type of coalition that Beto put together can work nationally because there is more of us nationally but can't work in Texas as they are still outnumbered.

[EffieBlack]

81. Unless he can win in Texas, assuming he can win elsewhere is all speculation.

And the presidential race is too high stakes to trust it with someone who hasn't been able to overcome obstacles to win in his own backyard.

I tend to agree with others here who think he may be a better VP or Senate candidate in 2020. We'll see since we never know how things will shake out in politics.. But no matter what, he'll need to do more than generate "enthusiasm" for me to want to get on board.

[In It to Win It]

86. That's true

Also, we can't assume the winners can win beyond their states and districts.

Until election day in 2020 comes, it's everything 2020 is speculation as to who can actually beat Trump. No matter who we pick as the frontrunner, we won't know if they can beat Trump until then.

[jcgoldie]

102. unlikely voters

Luckily for us, the demographics for Texas isn't the same as the entire country. If Beto wins the same demographic categories he won in Texas on a national scale, with the same enthusiasm he has today, Beto wins the presidency.

This is the key for me... we can argue all we want about how much he's like Barack Obama... of course we know a lot more now about Obama that endears him to us than we did in 2006 so that's not really a fair comparison. Does Beto have the depth and nuance of Obama, I have no clue that's a rather impossible litmus test at this stage. But he showed the ability to inspire a similar coalition. That's how Obama won. On the face of it I don't see the candidate who I think will have that rock star status that inspires large numbers of unlikely voters outside of Beto. I do like others a whole lot like Klobuchar and Harris and even Warren... and as you can tell from my list I would love for it to be a woman against Trump. But I've never in my life wanted to win so bad due to the destruction Trump has done to everything we care about, blue no matter who...

[In It to Win It]

105. To be honest, I don't know if Beto has the depth and nuance either

Once Obama ran, he had the chance to show us that depth on the campaign trail. If Beto runs, he will have a chance to show us that depth. Beto doesn’t have to be the only candidate that runs.

He already has the ability attract people nationally. Who would ever think a Texas senate race would draw so much attention like no other senate race could? Whether we like it or not, we need a rockstar. So far, he’s the biggest rockstar we have. He espouses to Democratic ideals and was able to draw national attention to himself without even trying (at least I think he wasn’t trying to gain national attention). Whether we like it or not, as long as Trump is on the ballot, conventional rules have to be suspended. As long as he’s on the ballot, the game has changed. We go back to the rules when the GOP nominated someone else.

If I look at the field of great candidates as it exist today, the national attention is on him.

[JonLP24]

37. I agree

You make great points as you often do.

[John Fante]

90. "We faced the same type of incumbency disadvantage in 2004."

No, we did not. Bush was a wartime incumbent with approval ratings in the 50% range, and they got as high as 90% after 9/11. Trump has yet to sniff GWB's post-9/11 low point.. Iraq was divisive, but Americans didn't completely turn on that war until 2005-2006. Even with all that in Dubya's favor, he was pushed to the brink by Kerry.

Trump would need the economy to stay this hot to have any hope of winning re-election. It's the only thing propping him up at that point.

[Initech]

34. He needs experience first. He'd make a great VP.

[Garrett78]

38. What Beto said about anthem kneeling impressed the hell out of me, but...

...I think VP (Harris-O'Rourke) or a cabinet position would be best. Or he can run against Cornyn.

The time is now to elect a woman as POTUS. My choice is Kamala Harris.

[Bradshaw3]

87. Beto has more experience on a national stage than Harris does

Six years in Congress compared to her two years as a senator.

[Garrett78]

88. And?

Beto's time will come. He's young enough that he can run for president 10 years from now. Harris is ready now. She will have been in the US Senate for 4 years. And she was previously California's Attorney General.

And it's time to elect a woman. Long past time.

[babylonsister]

42. Thanks and agreed. nt

[tinrobot]

44. I want someone who is inspiring AND knows how to work the DC machine

I don't want someone who needs on the job training. We need to hit the ground running get stuff done.

Beto should run for Senate in 2020 or maybe Governor.

[Gothmog]

45. I got to see Beto in action a couple of times

Beto is not a one trick piney. Beto had a broad appeal to several key groups.

[Hamlette]

46. did we rewind the tape back to 2006

word for word what we all said about Obama

[EffieBlack]

49. See my post upthread explaining why it's very different.

Yes, some people said the same thing about Obama, but it wasn't based solely on enthusiasm and charisma - Obama backed it up with considerably more depth at that stage, something Beto has yet to demonstrate.

And, anyone being honest would acknowledge that, if Obama had lost his Senate race in 2004, even with all of his other accomplishments, no one would have taken him seriously as a presidential candidate immediately afterward.

[MaryMagdaline]

56. Bingo

[Eric J in MN]

47. Beto O'Rourke can run for US Senate in 2020 against John Cornyn instead. NT

NT

[JDC]

52. Completely fair.

[UniteFightBack]

54. I'm gonna solve your little dilemma here....it's Beto for VP. nt

[EndGOPPropaganda]

55. He's run a Cong. office. And Obama was in the same position in 2006.

nm

[EffieBlack]

63. Obama had won a statewide race and ran a Senate office - much

different than a congressional office, Not comparable at all.

I like Beto O'Rourke, but he's no Barack Obama, not even the 2004-6 version.

[John Fante]

92. You're overstating the difference.

Beto narrowly lost in a state that hasn't had a Democratic US senator in over 25 years. Obama won in a state that sends Democrats to the US senate far more often than not. One mountain was easier to scale, no question about it.

[EffieBlack]

106. You think that mountain was easy to scale for Obama?

Ok.

Regardless, if Beto can't win his own state against an historically unpopular candidate, he's probably not ready to take on the role as the party's national standard bearer, regardless how tough his state is or how close the race was. We have too much at stake to grade certain people on the curve just because we like them.

[jcgoldie]

114. It isn't grading on a curve to recognize huge differences in demographics...

... between Texas and the United States. There are a lot of good democratic candidates out there and we all have our reasons for supporting one or the other and everybody may change their minds many times going forward (myself included). But criticizing Beto's viability for not winning a state race in Texas makes no sense to me at all.

[In It to Win It]

116. Agreed 100%

...considering our last democratic president that won the nation, also did not win in Texas.

[In It to Win It]

115. Agreed!

I think comparing Obama’s senate run to Beto’s senate run is apples and oranges.

The electorates in each states are completely different, also apples and oranges. If we’re going to make equal comparisons, had Beto and Little Ted ran in Illinois, Beto would have won... and we have Obama’s performance in Texas. Barack Obama didn’t win in Texas either.

[EffieBlack]

119. Comparing Beto to Obama is apples and oranges in many respects

I didn't bring him up - other people did in an attempt to argue that HE did it, then so can Beto.

But folk can't point to Obama and say "That's what people said about him but HE did it," but when it's noted that the Beto is no Obama, then try to diminish what Obama accomplished.

The bottom line is that Barack Hussein Obama, a black man (with a distinguished record as a constitutional lawyer, author and thought leader, but still a black man in America) won a Senate race in a state that had only elected one black person to the Senate in its history. That's not a "no big deal."

Suggesting that his victory is somehow less meaningful or impressive than a losing race by a man who, while he demonstrates tremendous potential, couldn't beat a singularly unpopular candidate in a blue wave year is, in my view, misguided, at best.

And, of course, if Beto and Cruz had run in Illinois, Beto would have won. But that didn't happen and would never have happener since Cruz would never have been an incumbent senator in Illinois.

[Jarqui]

58. I have a bunch of work to do to acquaint myself with 36? candidates

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211477208

I like what I've learned about Beto so far and some of the others

He'd make my short list

But I need a lot more time to sort through this

[andym]

65. Beto has 3 out of 4 characteristics necessary for a Democrat to win

The Democratic nominee is most likely going to propose a similar set of policies-- probably very similar to what Hillary Clinton ran on in 2016. Also, each candidate should be able to bring a group of well qualified experts with them to help govern technically.

Then, the key differences to distinguish someone as a top candidate are: 1) their story (Obama had a more compelling story than O'Rourke), and 2) how authentic they are (not acting like a politician) and 3) how well they connect with regular people from all walks of life, and 4) how well they inspire others to join their cause and project optimism for the future. The best Democratic candidates: FDR, JFK, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama had at least 3 out of the 4. FDR, JFK and President Obama were fortunate to have all four, which is why Obama was able to defeat the huge pre-primary favorite Hillary Clinton in the primaries.

Someone like Beto has 3 out of the four and will be a top tier candidate if he runs. It's too early to know how good of a candidate he will be until we see him in action on the national stage. I believe, Senators Booker and Harris have 3 out of the 4 characteristics as well. But it's not just having these qualities, but who has the most outstanding combination of them and that remains to seen.

[EffieBlack]

68. What do you think about Stacey Abrams and Andrew Gillum

[andym]

70. Both Abrams and Gillum would be outstanding candidates

Both were barely defeated and would be formidable on the campaign trail. I would love for them to run, as they could achieve 4 out of 4 status using my criteria. Gillum could help win Florida as well which is a key to winning the election.

[EffieBlack]

71. :-)

[John Fante]

166. If Beto is in a tier below Obama based on Obama's two years

in the senate, then surely Gillum and Abram's - who have no legislative experience nationally - are surely below Beto. Yes?

[EffieBlack]

167. No

Most recent presidents had no national legislative experience, but were executives. The presidency is an executive position requiring a great deal of management skill - that's why governors are more likely to become president than legislators.

So, no - Gillum and Abrams aren't "below" Beto in any respect.

[John Fante]

174. Most recent presidents... except Barack Obama.

You'd have a point if Abrams and Gillum had ever governed a state, but sadly they haven't. Abrams was a member of the Georgia house; Gillum was mayor of Tallahassee. Neither position provides the experience six years in the US House of Representatives does.

If you're going to knock Beto down a peg (or 10), at least be consistent about it.

[EffieBlack]

175. Gillum has run a large city

which requires considerably more governing skill than being a junior member of the minority party in the House of Representatives.

But nothing anyone says is likely to shake you from your belief that Beto is a magical unicorn or that anyone who doesn't agree is trying to "knock Beto down a peg (or 10)," so I'll not waste any more of my time trying to reason with you.

[Quixote1818]

69. You could have said the same for Obama early on but it worked out beautifully. nt

[EffieBlack]

73. Actually, I couldn't

Well, I could have, but I would have been wrong.

Obama's attraction was based on much more than charisna - He had won a statewide Senate race and had already demisntrated a tremendous amount of substance - the charisma was a bonus.

[LeftInTX]

72. I agree

It might work for a senate campaign in Texas, but not president.

His strength was his rallies and personality etc. Of course, espoused Democratic ideas. But a president needs a bit more nuts and bolts. He struggled a bit in his debate with Cruz...and that's OK for that position, but president???

[LuvLoogie]

79. I'm with you, Effie.

Beto doesn't have the coalition that JFK, WJC, BHO had when they went nationwide. He doesn't have the guns.

[GoneOffShore]

91. Okay, let's go back a few years and do a little thought experiment.

Because I recall this same sort of thing being said, and possibly by myself, about another candidate.

My major concern about the Obama for President push.

Just about everything I've heard or read endorsing a Barack Obama presidential run focuses almost exclusively on his youth, charisma and ability to generate excitement among young people. While all of those are valuable attributes in a candidate, they aren't the most important and I haven't seen much discussion about substance and his ability to manage and govern.

At this point, the Obama for President drive strikes me more like a fan club built on a cult of personality than a serious political movement likely to have real results.

I certainly could change my mind and perhaps will in time. But right now, I'm just not there.

[seaglass]

94. I donated to Beto even though I'm from MA but did not know at the time that he voted for Tim Ryan

over Nancy Pelosi in 2016 for Minority Leader.

I still would have donated for his Senate run but I won't vote for him in a presidential primary. Not interested in a candidate who supports a conservative man over a liberal woman.

[Vinca]

95. You're trying to think logically in a world that is totally upside down.

Beto is more qualified than the Orange Fuhrer by a million miles. In addition, he's had the experience of living the way normal people do, worrying about bills and wondering what to do next. In a normal world, we'd run the most experienced, most educated, most perfect-on-paper candidate available. This ain't normal. LOL. It might turn out that Beto is the only person who can beat Trump. He certainly figured out how to handle Trump perfectly during the campaign: ignore him. Narcissistic Don goes nuts when you ignore him. When it's primary time, the only thing I'm going to be looking for is the candidate who can beat Trump. I don't care about gender. I don't care about race. I don't care about age. Just who can beat Trump.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

125. I pretty much agree with you

although I would like to know more about him, but I think all that would be sorted out in the primaries if he decided to run.

[LexVegas]

98. People putting this guy in the same league as Barack Obama are funny as shit.

It ain't even close.

[dsc]

99. The train is largely lost on this I think

The fact is people have shown, over and over again, that they don't care about experience or competence. The fact is even our winning candidates (Carter, Clinton, Obama) were elected because of character (Carter), charisma (Clinton and Obama) with the help of GOP making a mess of the country (Watergate, Recession, Huge recession) in each case. Their winners, with the exception of the first Bush, all ran on personality and pretty much nothing else. The presidency has become like a school election where the popular, pretty person often wins and sometimes that leads to good government but often it doesn't. I don't see it getting better anytime soon.

[Trueblue Texan]

103. I agree with OP...

...he may be a great candidate and a good, authentic person, BUT... Call me establishment, but I believe the highest Executive in the land requires a lot more skills than what Beto brings to the table at this time. The current guy in the job had no skills other than political. Doesn't have any morals either. I trust the skill of a seasoned politician who has solid values and cares about the nation and the Constitution AND who can manage the complexities that continue to characterize the position. I'm not sure who that will turn out to be, but I just don't think Beto is seasoned enough. On the other hand, Obama wasn't particularly seasoned either and his education, brilliance, and sterling character made him a fine president.

[sellitman]

104. IMHO he would make a better VP this time around.

I still think Kamala Harris would attract a larger Democratic turnout. She would appeal to women, minorities, and forward thinking pasty old white guys like myself. She is charismatic and also a force to be reckoned with.

That one two three punch with Beto in the wings would be a winner.

[Marrah_Goodman]

107. I thought the same about Obama

I was a Hillary supporter in the primaries back then. I ended up more then pleasantly surprised and think Obama will go down in history as one of our very best Presidents. So I am leaving myself open minded on Beto and I think there is something to be said about the ability to inspire hope and excitement.

[peggysue2]

109. Absolutely Agree!

And have said so elsewhere. Beto is the current Rock Star with charisma to spare. But . . .

I fear we're falling for the latest Celebrity Apprentice, be it Beto O'Rourke or Michael Avenatti or whoever strikes the emotional chord for people during ugly, trying times.

Don't get me wrong, I really liked what I saw and heard from O'Rourke. He's good on his feet, can deliver an emotional, intelligent response, as in the 'take a knee' answer that went viral.

But we need more than a Rock Star. We need someone with leadership chops who can hit the ground running because the damage the Trumpster has done is real on both domestic and foreign fronts.

I'm not convinced Beto O'Rourke is seasoned/experienced/ready for the Cat-Bird seat. That being said if he decides to run, he'll be competing with a number of political heavy-weights. We'll all see how he fares.

I simply don't see it. Not yet.

[elocs]

121. Beto highlights the need of the Left for an exciting and charismatic candidate.

Too many need to be excited and motivated to vote or get involved, too many pout when their own pet candidate fails. Trump is not exciting or charismatic, but he appeals to many who have faulty moral compasses and wish they could, like Trump, say and do and behave however they please.

I don't need the most exciting and charismatic candidate to the exclusion of experience and knowing how to get things done, to being open to other points of view within the party, to not take a 'my way or the highway' attitude, to understand that the Democratic Party needs to have a big tent and not everyone gets to have things all their own way.

But somehow it seems like we have never gotten over the need for charismatic candidates like the Kennedys.

[EffieBlack]

124. Me and you both ...

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

122. Is it possible to get any worse than Trump in terms of ability to govern? n/t

[EffieBlack]

123. That's not the standard I'm going for ...

[Adrahil]

126. Beating Trump is priority number 1.

Honestly, everything else is secondary.

Beto might not be who I would choose in a perfect world. But I think he can win, and he is no idiot. He will actualy make good use of policy experts.

I do think we need a POC on the ticket as well. I’d live Kamala.... and I’d be happy with her at the top of the ticket or the Veep slot

[EffieBlack]

127. It's a long way off and anything can develop

But I suspect lots of base voters - especially African-American women - would not take kindly to Kamala Harris sitting second-chair to Beto O'Rourke.

[Adrahil]

128. Why?

I mean, I’d be happy with her at tip of the top of the ticket, but she’d be an excellent VP too! She is more experienced than Beto, but Biden was more experienced than Obama as well.... but Obama had “it.” So does Beto IMO.

[EffieBlack]

129. Biden had more experience but lost the primaries.

There was no big push in 2006 for an Obama/Biden ticket. In fact, most of the talk was about Obama as vp because "America's not ready for a black president."

I remember it well.

But for people to, at this stage, based on little more than "Beto's so cool" to propose that he lead a national ticket with a more accomplished black woman as his second, is a bit much.

[Adrahil]

130. We'll disagree...

I think the “it” factor is important. But obviously, we’d have to see how he does in the primaries. FWIW, I hope Kamala runs too. She has impressed me.

[Mr. Quackers]

133. It's almost as if people think rules still apply . . .

odd, that.

[BannonsLiver]

134. What push?

So far it’s just a lot of people who would like to see O’Rourke run in a big field in 2020, and a lot of other people saying those people are naive idiots for wanting Beto to run. My hunch is this will all come out in the wash.

I do get the sense those most adamant about him not running are at least in part motivated by fear. As I’ve said, if he’s such a lousy candidate for president whoever you pick in the nominating process should have no trouble beating him. So no need to worry about Beto.

[kcr]

137. I wonder how much of the attention on the national level was more anti-Cruz hype

I think he earned every bit of the enthusiastic support he got locally. He worked his butt off for it. The fact that he almost pulled off a great upset against an incumbent Senator in deep red Texas was beyond impressive. And that's just it. I suspect at least some of it, especially for those watching on the outside, was hope for Texas to turn blue and unseat slimy Cruz as much as it was about Beto. Fighting what's likely to be a packed Dem field will be different. If he can carry that enthusiasm over and maintain it, he's the one to beat.

[LeftInTX]

153. Yes.. Texas attracts national attention because of its size (electoral votes)

Remember Wendy Davis?

[JustAnotherGen]

139. He might not have the national infrastructure

There's only person I believe who has that - and its not O'Rourke.

[apnu]

140. The same was said about Barack Obama. Turned out pretty well.

Beto is smart, learns as he goes, and tends to land on his feat.

I have no problem with Beto running and should he be the nominee from the Democratic Party, no problem voting for him.

My only problem is its 2018 and we have a very long time before the 2020 Primary. And all this speculation is a waste of energy. The field is wide open and its going to get crowded for a while. Let it be for now.

[EffieBlack]

142. Beto O'Rourke isn't Barack Obama

[LeftInTX]

152. I agree with Effie Black

All presidents learn as they go, but Obama had more experience. He was more geared toward the presidency...and I think it was his goal for many years before he threw his hat into the ring.

Beto was unknown to many in Texas before he challenged Cruz. He learned alot on the road, would have made a fine senator. (Lots of room to learn on the job as a senator)

No one is quite 100% prepared to be POTUS. But Obama had been studying the job for along time. He knew the basics before he was elected.

[LanternWaste]

149. I'm going to give the new congress a few months...

and only then begin reading the lay of the land.

Congress in Jan-Mar 2019 will lay a LOT of groundwork for some potential candidates and pull the rug out from underneath others.

That said, and my bias on full display as well, working with O'Rourke's campaign the past nine months forced me to read the fine print of his policy positions. Those positions are logical, consistent with each other, and progressive.

Like you, I certainly could change my mind next year after we see the new congress and its immediate consequences, but for the time being, I am there.

[grantcart]

154. I think you need to take a closer look at Beto

I am not a fan, I prefer Beto for the same hard clinical reasons that I preferred Senator Obama

1) He is a much more thoughtful politician than he is given credit for.

In facing the issue of the Iraqi War, State Senator Obama famously said "I am not against war per se, but I am against a stupid war". In this simple sentence he was able to articulate a simple answer to a complex issue, and he was right.

The Democratic operative that came to work with us in Tucson was a bright young woman from Illinois who had finished her Masters Work in Human Rights and had an interest in going for a PhD in Human Rights. When I told her over the phone that I had worked in Human Rights for the UN for a decade in the field of Refugee Resettlement she was interested in meeting and learning more about how to get a job in the International Civil Service.

At one point I asked her what she thought we should do with the refugees in camps around the world. She answered "we should resettle them". I told her that resettlement was always the last option. Tonight 26 million people will go to sleep in a refugee camp and if they were all resettled another 50 million would flow into camps. While some populations make an easy transition to a new language and a new cultural environment, many others do not. The preferred situation in most cases is to go back and fix the problems in the originating country and region. In the mean time we need camps to give protection and in areas like Syria where the solution is a decade away we need to resettle.

In the case of Central and South America we need to work to re establish the institutions and create stability and there are several things we could do immediately (like debt forgiveness) that would have dramatic effects but we could set up an effective, safe and legal migrant labor program that would solve our labor shortages (especially in agricultural areas) and provide income to poor families. These programs which are working well elsewhere could be established in months.

Beto is the only politician I am aware of who goes to the heart of the problem

https://www.newsweek.com/if-beto-orourke-was-president-heres-how-he-would-handle-migrant-caravan-1230644

O'Rourke said that in the "longer term," the U.S. government must also "work with the people of Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador," where many asylum seekers have traveled from over fears of violence and economic and political instability, "to address underlying conditions that are causing them to flee in the first place."

"That means addressing effects of our failed past involvement in those countries (in their civil wars, drug trade and drug wars) and the institutional failings in those countries (rule of law)," the Democrat wrote.

"It won’t be easy and will involve a much greater investment of time, focus and resources," O'Rourke wrote. "Or we can continue to ignore those countries and their people until they show up at our border."

O'Rourke's message imploring the U.S. government to give migrants the opportunity to make their asylum claims comes as speculation continues to swirl around whether the Texas Democrat will make a presidential bid in 2020

As far as I know he is the only top tier candidate who not only addresses the critical short term problem with the migrants/refugees who are moving to our border but also has a handle on the long term problem.

As far as I am concerned Beto had more substance than any other candidate or office holder I have seen in the last 2 years.

2) Beto can communicate with the masses.

President Obama's great oratory gift is that he was able to talk in a way that made tens of millions of people feel that he was connecting with him personally.

Using different social media mediums and plaltforms Beto has been able to do the same thing. He is able to translate progressive ideas into personal equations in a way that people feel connected to personally.

People dismiss this later quality as charisma or fashion but as Marshal McLuhan stated decades ago "the medium is the message". Talking about empathy and lecturing about values is a good thing and many do that but incorporating empathy and concern for others into your DNA and being able to express complex progressive values in simple empathetic phrases is what is need to motivate tens of millions of people to engage in the political movement and it was exactly the genius of candidate and President Obama.

Beto's ability to go beyond the symptoms of a problem and his ability to make it understandable is exactly the qualities that President Obama had and made him stand out from the other leaders, except that Beto can do it fluently in two languages. One of the realities we face is that we would sweep the Republican party into the dust bin of history if we could attract and motivate Spanish speaking voters in the same way that President Obama was able to motivate African American voters.

I believe that you have concentrated on "charisma and his ability to generate excitement" and not given enough weight to the thoughtful statements that Beto has made.

Lots of people held of supporting Obama because of his "charisma and his ability to generate excitement" because they didn't take time to look at the substance of what he was saying.

In my opinion on the most serious question we face today, how to solve an unimaginable humanitarian crises that is effecting tens of millions of people (and one in which I personally dealt with for 10 years) Beto is the most thoughtful leader and the only one that articulates a long term solution.

[Old Vet]

169. Well thought out post...........

[EffieBlack]

173. I appreciate your post and agree it's well-thought out, but please be careful

assuming Beto's the only leader who "articulates a long term solution." He's not - many young, thoughtful leaders are out there presenting strong ideas and solutions.

[X_Digger]

157. Your concern is noted. n/t

[Demsrule86]

159. Looking for a savior...wrong approach. Get someone who can work in Washington like

Corey Booker,Joe Biden or Sherrod Brown...Kamela Harris or Tammy Duckworth...We need to stop looking for the next shiny thing and prepare for a great deal of hard work in order to take this country back from the Trumpers.

[m-lekktor]

170. I agree and I felt the exact same thing about Obama. nt

[disillusioned73]

172. I think Gillum would be a better choice,

if a new face is what folks want - he'd eat Trumps lunch in a debate & it would be glorious to watch..

Not advocating here, just think he is a better choice than Beto..

[delisen]

176. The emotional voter searching for the Ubermensch is not ready for Democracy.