2020 Democratic Nominee

[used2b 249]

Who will get to run against this incumbent wannabe dictator who has smashed all political norms (and more)?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Kamala Harris

She’s a cop

Edited June 26, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[used2b 249]

4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Kamala Harris 

She’s a cop

Yeah. That will get racial really fast. Forget sexist. I feel like we are just getting warmed up to the crazy that is coming.

[Doc Sam Beckett 5792]

[used2b 249]

2 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

Yeah but I'd prefer he stay in the Senate (if he wins) so Greg Abbott can't replace him with an R.

[used2b 249]

By the way those are both great candidates. I am not trying to be negative at all. Just preparing myself.

Maybe one of the Castros. We seems to have a history of electing presidents who make up for the previous president's wrongs.

[David Dennison 18851]

23 minutes ago, used2b said:

Yeah. That will get racial really fast. Forget sexist. I feel like we are just getting warmed up to the crazy that is coming.

Donald Trump is gonna drop an n bomb one of these days. He basically called Maxine Waters a stupid n word today.

[Bill Clinton 73]

3rd or 4th thread but whos counting. 

Name recognition and ability to collect money is most important to the Democratic Party. They aren't trying to win 2020, they are trying to rebuild and collect cash. 

Funny how nobody has even hinted at running, it will probably be Mrs. Clinton again if her exo-skeleton gets upgraded a bit slimmer.

 

[Pancho 44712]

5 hours ago, Bill Clinton said:

3rd or 4th thread but whos counting. 

Name recognition and ability to collect money is most important to the Democratic Party. They aren't trying to win 2020, they are trying to rebuild and collect cash. 

Funny how nobody has even hinted at running, it will probably be Mrs. Clinton again if her exo-skeleton gets upgraded a bit slimmer.

 

Your Republican Party is currently accepting, proud of, and making excuses for neo naziss, white supremacists, racists, and bigots. Currently. Today. And you support that party.

 

so where is that YouTube link? 

Edited June 26, 2018 by Pancho Negro

[Js1 85289]

LOL "nobody has hinted at running."

Except for everyone.

[Bill Clinton 73]

10 minutes ago, Js1 said:

LOL "nobody has hinted at running."

Except for everyone.

Make a list?

12 minutes ago, Pancho Negro said:

Your Republican Party is currently accepting, proud of, and making excuses for neo naxus, white supremacists, racists, and bigots. Currently. Today. And you support that party.

 

so where is that YouTube link? 

You sound delusional, you want me to provide evidence for your claims? 

PS, I don't support the republican party. They are another side of the same coin. Both parties are controlled war-mongering banksters. These banksters don't give a fuck about sovereign Americans or individual liberty. They want to destroy the family unit, weaken the population to herds of workers just smart enough to pull the levers or prisoners.

The "neo-nazi" vs. "anti-fa" narrative is part of their plan to divide America and keep us fighting about these 2% fringes on either side. Republicans and Democrats aren't evil, but they are driven by their evil minority of extremists. These are known as "leftists" and "alt-right". They both are trying to shut down the entire other side and call for crazy shit. Neither side should have power, but politics has turned into an entertainment show and the most sensationalist parts of each side get all the attention.

Edited June 26, 2018 by Bill Clinton

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

At the moment, John Delaney is the only person in. I don't know anything about him but I heard a long interview with him and I was impressed. He talks a really good game. 

[GRHorn 105]

Kamala Harris would probably lose.  She looks to be the anointed, touring the Hamptons pick.  

As a non Dem, Tulsi Gabbard would be interesting.  Don't know if she has those aspirations, but I'd consider anyone with non hysterical, non interventionist foreign policy stance. 

[Chuckie Finster 22694]

40 minutes ago, Bill Clinton said:

PS, I don't support the republican party.

Oh shut the fuck up

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

2 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Kamala Harris would probably lose.  She looks to be the anointed, touring the Hamptons pick. * 

As a non Dem, Tulsi Gabbard would be interesting.  Don't know if she has those aspirations, but I'd consider anyone with non hysterical, non interventionist foreign policy stance. **

* Lulz, no she isn't. Not even close. That's Gillibrand

** She's apparently strongly considering. 

[Brian Fantana 6681]

3 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Oh shut the fuck up

It's the bad Smokey just downvote everything he posts.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Can’t really predict 2020 winners and losers this far out.  I don’t think Trump runs but I’m not counting him out.

[Bill Clinton 73]

11 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Can’t really predict 2020 winners and losers this far out.  I don’t think Trump runs but I’m not counting him out.

So the Mueller investigation ends? Wow hot take. 

[Js1 85289]

2 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

Yeah, Gillibrand is the Dem version of Chris Christie.  New York media and money people know her so you have to hear about whatever run of the mill thing she’s done today and listen to pundits mention her as a contender.  Then you look at the polls and see her at 3.00% in 12th place.

To be fair, only ~3 elected Democrats have actual name recognition right now where it matters - Bernie, Warren and Biden. 

And Oprah, but whatever.

Wait until January 2019 and see who starts showing up seemingly at random in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada.

[Ghost of LL 15531]

I really like where Hickenlooper is positioned.  He checks all the boxes as a moderate Western governor.

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

5 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

I really like where Hickenlooper is positioned.  He checks all the boxes as a moderate Western governor.

I like Inslee better, but same deal. 

[Continental Op 3934]

Would the Bernie Bros pitch another shitfit and stay home if a moderate Western governor gets the nod?

[Dick Tremayne 103]

Bernie or bust for me. No more moderate Neo libs. 

3 minutes ago, Continental Op said:

Would the Bernie Bros pitch another shitfit and stay home if a moderate Western governor gets the nod?

So at least for me, yes.

[HOOK'EMHOOAH 1610]

If Sally Yates decided to run I would very likely vote for her despite my being largely libertarian. She is a Constitutionalist and there is much evidence to support her being an individual who would work to make things right that trump has been massively fucking up.

[Js1 85289]

Ah the Bernie bros. Better to have someone who disagrees with everything you want than someone who might only agree with you 75-80% of the time. Have your cake and eat it too? Nah, either you get the cake or you go hungry.

[Dick Tremayne 103]

4 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Ah the Bernie bros. Better to have someone who disagrees with everything you want than someone who might only agree with you 75-80% of the time. Have your cake and eat it too? Nah, either you get the cake or you go hungry.

To be fair, I live in a state so red that it really doesn't matter who I vote for. I have the luxury of being a purist. I might feel differently if I lived somewhere else. On the other hand, the only reason I am registered as a Democrat is to move the party left during primaries, so who knows. At the end of the day, I'm just tired of being told that I have to vote for the lesser of two evils and if I choose not to then I'm the problem. That's bullshit.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

4 minutes ago, Dick Tremayne said:

To be fair, I live in a state so red that it really doesn't matter who I vote for. I have the luxury of being a purist. I might feel differently if I lived somewhere else. On the other hand, the only reason I am registered as a Democrat is to move the party left during primaries, so who knows. At the end of the day, I'm just tired of being told that I have to vote for the lesser of two evils and if I choose not to then I'm the problem. That's bullshit.

Bernie has a good message, but it's time for him to tap out and pick a successor.  A 100 year old man will never win the democratic primary as a leftist idealist. A young leftist idealist could win it.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

I don’t understand why Elizabeth Warren gets grouped with Bernie so much. I know there’s some crossover but there are some big differences.  Warren seems like much more of a wonk and knowledgeable about how to work the levers. Bernie is more of a pie in the sky type.

Edited June 26, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Dick Tremayne 103]

6 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Bernie has a good message, but it's time for him to tap out and pick a successor.  A 100 year old man will never win the democratic primary as a leftist idealist. A young leftist idealist could win it.  

I think you'll definitely see that in 2024, and some are starting to rise, I'm just not sure if they'll be ready for 2020. I like Stacey Abrams in Georgia, Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in New York. For me personally, I just can't stomach the idea of another moderate. I honestly think that running a moderate western governor is just counting on backlash against Trump to win the election. Maybe it will work, but it's a clear sign that there's no affirmative argument to elect the democratic candidate. 

[Mapache 1117]

Too young?

[Js1 85289]

6 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I don’t understand why Elizabeth Warren gets grouped with Bernie so much. I know there’s some crossover but there are some big differences.  Warren seems like much more of a wonk and knowledgeable about how to work the levers. Bernie is more of a pie in the sky type.

I actually agree with this.

5 minutes ago, Dick Tremayne said:

I think you'll definitely see that in 2024, and some are starting to rise, I'm just not sure if they'll be ready for 2020. I like Stacey Abrams in Georgia, Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in New York. For me personally, I just can't stomach the idea of another moderate. I honestly think that running a moderate western governor is just counting on backlash against Trump to win the election. Maybe it will work, but it's a clear sign that there's no affirmative argument to elect the democratic candidate. 

2 of the 3 you mentioned are probably not going to win their primaries. Just saying.

[RomaVicta 29902]

President Hickenlooper has a pretty weird sound. I don't know anything about the candidate, but that's a wonky name.

I guess Roosevelt is too, and we elected two of them.

[atomheartbevo 89629]

9 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I don’t understand why Elizabeth Warren gets grouped with Bernie so much. I know there’s some crossover but there are some big differences.  Warren seems like much more of a wonk and knowledgeable about how to work the levers. Bernie is more of a pie in the sky type.

She’s old.  People from both parties are threatened by her.  

[FondrenRoad 4378]

4 minutes ago, Dick Tremayne said:

I think you'll definitely see that in 2024, and some are starting to rise, I'm just not sure if they'll be ready for 2020. I like Stacey Abrams in Georgia, Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in New York. For me personally, I just can't stomach the idea of another moderate. I honestly think that running a moderate western governor is just counting on backlash against Trump to win the election. Maybe it will work, but it's a clear sign that there's no affirmative argument to elect the democratic candidate. 

That's kind of like taking your ball and going home because you lost a game. But the winner still needs that ball to play in the superbowl.  Bernie stands to lose again, not simply because of the party apparatus, but because he is an old white man. Maybe that sucks, and it does include some reverse sexism and/or racism, but there were plenty of progressive women with Hillary.  Bernie was never going to court the majority of them away.

[Js1 85289]

Bernie's biggest problem was minority voters.  No one wins the Democratic primary without them, and especially, black women. You can't just forfeit most of the Southern primaries.

[atomheartbevo 89629]

3 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

President Hickenlooper has a pretty weird sound. I don't know anything about the candidate, but that's a wonky name.

I guess Roosevelt is too, and we elected two of them.

We twice elected a guy with the middle name of Hussein.  Nothing is off the table. 

Well, anybody with a name that starts with “K” and ends with “ardashian”, but after Trump, we very well could elect a kabob. 

[Js1 85289]

President Kabobardashian?

[RomaVicta 29902]

The power of name brand recognition suggests a coming race between Kim Kardashian and Bud Light for the White House.

[Dick Tremayne 103]

7 minutes ago, Js1 said:

2 of the 3 you mentioned are probably not going to win their primaries. Just saying.

I fail to see why that should make a difference when I'm stating a preference for candidates that I personally like. I've already said that my goal isn't to elect moderate democrats, it's to move the party left. 

 

4 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

That's kind of like taking your ball and going home because you lost a game. But the winner still needs that ball to play in the superbowl.  Bernie stands to lose again, not simply because of the party apparatus, but because he is an old white man. Maybe that sucks, and it does include some reverse sexism and/or racism, but there were plenty of progressive women with Hillary.  Bernie was never going to court the majority of them away.

Not really. I continue to be a registered democrat and donate to, campaign for, and vote for candidates that I prefer. I'll continue to do that. What I won't do is hold my nose and vote for someone that is slightly right of center at best. I'll either vote for a third party candidate or I'll vote for local races/issues, and leave the presidential section blank. I'm not saying everyone has to do it the way I do and I completely understand why others feel differently. I'm just saying that I'm at a point in my life where I'm not going to choose the lesser of two evils and judging off of 2016 results, I don't think I'm the only one.

[Mapache 1117]

This guy 

 

Edited June 26, 2018 by Mapache

[Js1 85289]

You're in luck that Trump himself is moving the party left.  Abolish ICE, Medicare for All, etc.  These are ideas gaining traction and more than a few of the 2020 contenders are going to at least run on Medicare for All.

Incremental change is unfortunately the name of the game. Too much too fast and the pendulum swings fast and furious to the other side (Obama 08 to GOP wave of 2010).

Edited June 26, 2018 by Js1

[RomaVicta 29902]

4 minutes ago, Mapache said:

This guy 

 

That that ended his race was a solid indicator of just how shallow the electorate is. It's an amusing, awkward moment that tells us nothing about the man.

[Dick Tremayne 103]

5 minutes ago, Js1 said:

You're in luck that Trump himself is moving the party left.  Abolish ICE, Medicare for All, etc.  These are ideas gaining traction and more than a few of the 2020 contenders are going to at least run on Medicare for All.

Incremental change is unfortunately the name of the game. Too much too fast and the pendulum swings fast and furious to the other side (Obama 08 to GOP wave of 2010).

I actually agree. I guess my view is that if there is no one advocating for leftist positions, that incremental change won't happen. I'm pleased to see more calls to abolish ICE, medicare for all, $15 minimum wage, etc. Will all or any of these happen? Probably not in the near term, but they are making their way into mainstream discussion and that is a good thing.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

3 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

That that ended his race was a solid indicator of just how shallow the electorate is. It's an amusing, awkward moment that tells us nothing about the man.

If a candidate did that now, would it end it for him?  I don't think so.  Different times.  

[Dick Tremayne 103]

8 minutes ago, Js1 said:

You're in luck that Trump himself is moving the party left.  Abolish ICE, Medicare for All, etc.  These are ideas gaining traction and more than a few of the 2020 contenders are going to at least run on Medicare for All.

Incremental change is unfortunately the name of the game. Too much too fast and the pendulum swings fast and furious to the other side (Obama 08 to GOP wave of 2010).

And just to add to that, I've been very disappointed in the fact that Bernie stops short of calling to abolish ICE. I suspect it has to do with his plans for 2020, but it's disappointing to me nonetheless and I hope he rethinks it.

[zork 629]

4 minutes ago, Dick Tremayne said:

And just to add to that, I've been very disappointed in the fact that Bernie stops short of calling to abolish ICE. I suspect it has to do with his plans for 2020, but it's disappointing to me nonetheless and I hope he rethinks it.

 So how does abolishing ICE actually work?  What does it entail?  Maybe a different thread?  Open borders I presume? 

 

[Js1 85289]

3 minutes ago, Dick Tremayne said:

I actually agree. I guess my view is that if there is no one advocating for leftist positions, that incremental change won't happen. I'm pleased to see more calls to abolish ICE, medicare for all, $15 minimum wage, etc. Will all or any of these happen? Probably not in the near term, but they are making their way into mainstream discussion and that is a good thing.

I know some of the Bernie Bros started to smear Kamala Harris as early as last year.

This is a woman who has already publicly signed onto Medicare for All last August,  $15 minimum wage last April, and just this weekend, called for ICE re-examination and possibly starting from scratch (good way to phrase it without using the word 'abolish').

[FondrenRoad 4378]

6 minutes ago, Dick Tremayne said:

And just to add to that, I've been very disappointed in the fact that Bernie stops short of calling to abolish ICE. I suspect it has to do with his plans for 2020, but it's disappointing to me nonetheless and I hope he rethinks it.

To Bernie's credit, he's experienced enough to know that "abolish ICE" means nothing.  ICE does the same thing the INS used to do, and if "abolish ICE" occurs, some other acronym LEO agency will take over those activities, even if its an DOJ/FBI subsidiary rather than DHS.  The policies need to be changed and reformed.  The acronym that enforces them is irrelevant.

Edited June 26, 2018 by FondrenRoad

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

22 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

 People from both parties are threatened by her.  

That’s actually quite appealing 

[RomaVicta 29902]

14 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

If a candidate did that now, would it end it for him?  I don't think so.  Different times.  

I'm constantly mystified by how people will vote. I never predict election outcomes. It's all crazy. I don't know how people would react to Dean's yeeeeaggghhhhh today. Probably depends on how it was framed immediately after people saw it.

"It's nice to see him loosen up and just let go. The people love that."

"He's obviously prone to bouts of madness and social awkwardness. The people hate that."

Edited June 26, 2018 by RomaVicta