2020 Democratic Nominee

[Bozo_Casanova 26847]

damn stacey
 

That being said, she’s making the same mistake that he is. He should run against Cornyn and she should run against Purdue.

[Bama Chick 28596]

My only mention of Biden was to say he’s at the bottom of my list.

And I don’t think polls right now mean jack nor shit.

I do think people throwing their underwear on their heads and freaking out about Biden and acting like he’s already won and extrapolating that to what that means for the next election are being hysterical.

My point is let the process play out but be prepared to support the nominee, even if he isn’t your true love.

I’ve been on record on this board for months with my prediction that Biden will not be the nominee.

There are 20+ candidates. Only one will run against Trump. So there are going to be a majority of Democrats whose choice didn’t win.

If we all pout about it and act like the Bernie Bros did in 2016, we deserve what we get.

Some of y’all are way too worked up this far out. You’re going to be a mess by the time the voting actually rolls around.

[Bozo_Casanova 26847]

Btw- I’m voting for Harris in the primary. But I was a Biden guy in 1988, 2008 and 2016, and I’m happy to pull the lever for Biden in 2020. And if he’s too old, inshallah, I hope he has a VP like Harris who can carry on for 8 more years until the tide of anti-enlightenment energy has receded.

[Anastasis 23717]

3 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Btw- I’m voting for Harris in the primary

Why Harris bozo.  Sincerely interested in hearing your take on the Dem slate. 

[Js1 87179]

Sincerely uninterested in anything you have to say bro. You ain’t voting for any of them. 

[gmr548 16697]

I've actually never encountered a Harris supporter in person or online so I'd be interested too.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Bozo_Casanova 26847]

Why Harris bozo.  Sincerely interested in hearing your take on the Dem slate. 

Just to be clear, I’m not saying Harris is going to win (I think Biden will win). I’m saying that she would be my choice from this field at this particular moment.

I probably have less well defined thoughts about this field than I have in any previous cycle. All the top candidates are deeply flawed. At this moment I’m sort of defaulting to Harris.

That being said, unlike 2016, I don’t see a potential nominee that turns my stomach the way Clinton did so I’m not starting this process planning to vote for a Republican, which is where I was at this point in 2015 before it became clear that I wouldn’t have that option either.

[Js1 87179]

11 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Just to be clear, I’m not saying Harris is going to win (I think Biden will win). I’m saying that she would be my choice from this field at this particular moment.

I probably have less well defined thoughts about this field than I have in any previous cycle. All the top candidates are deeply flawed. At this moment I’m sort of defaulting to Harris.

That being said, unlike 2016, I don’t see a potential nominee that turns my stomach the way Clinton did so I’m not starting this process planning to vote for a Republican, which is where I was at this point in 2015 before it became clear that I wouldn’t have that option either.

I'm in the same boat.

I waffle between Warren because she gives me a policy boner - I know what she wants do in very concrete terms and Harris because I think she's the most likely to put together the Obama coalition and put a few more states into play (GA, NC). 

[tucker 238]

49 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Just to be clear, I’m not saying Harris is going to win (I think Biden will win). I’m saying that she would be my choice from this field at this particular moment.

I probably have less well defined thoughts about this field than I have in any previous cycle. All the top candidates are deeply flawed. At this moment I’m sort of defaulting to Harris.

That being said, unlike 2016, I don’t see a potential nominee that turns my stomach the way Clinton did so I’m not starting this process planning to vote for a Republican, which is where I was at this point in 2015 before it became clear that I wouldn’t have that option either.

 

37 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I'm in the same boat.

I waffle between Warren because she gives me a policy boner - I know what she wants do in very concrete terms and Harris because I think she's the most likely to put together the Obama coalition and put a few more states into play (GA, NC). 

So you both want the same corporatism policies of the Obama years but maybe less naivety? 

[NBMisha 224]

Well, at a minimum that would be an acceptable outcome.    

I'm also uncoommitted in that I look at the big crowd without having settled in my own mind what the positions are that I unequivicolly support.  There is a good case for Warren and Harris as being the least damaging.  But the Biden and Bernie factions will dominate the ladscape for the next year.   The dems going with Biden would be the cop out of the century.

[GSU&UT 1799]

Unless Harris absolutely destroys the SC primary, I really don't see her necessarily getting a huge push in Georgia even though we have the largest black population.

[Bozo_Casanova 26847]

1 hour ago, tucker said:

So you both want the same corporatism policies of the Obama years but maybe less naivety? 

What I want is the government managing the guardrails of a competitive and robust free market that puts price discovery in a central position, where we use market forces to achieve the outcomes we want (like UHC, a growing middle class, and a clean and verdant environment) rather than force majeure central mandates.

 

But I can't get that, so I'd settle for not Trump. 

[bad_teammate 13514]

Yes, the Bernie faction will live on regardless, but the Biden faction?

Factions exist because of ideology (Bernie) or personality (Obama/Hillary). I have no idea why a Biden faction would exist if he loses the primary or general (both possibilities).

[Mojo Hand 4580]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Yes, the Bernie faction will live on regardless, but the Biden faction?

Factions exist because of ideology (Bernie) or personality (Obama/Hillary). I have no idea why a Biden faction would exist if he loses the primary or general (both possibilities).

*shivers* at people in a personality faction for... Hillary. 

[happyfunball 481]

[bad_teammate 13514]

13 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

*shivers* at people in a personality faction for... Hillary. 

Terrifying, but true

[Mojo Hand 4580]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Terrifying, but true

Oh I wasn't disputing that it is true.  I know several. *shivers again*

[bad_teammate 13514]

Bernie can't pull in Alyssa Milano or Lena Dunham, so it's basically useless for him to even try.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

11 minutes ago, happyfunball said:

 

It's not clear from those numbers that Biden really took from Bernie.  Arguably it suggests that Warren has taken from Bernie. 

Also, I disagree with the "socialist" premise. 

Also, many Dems are thirsty for the familiar "uniparty" Ds and Rs that got us into this mess. It will take time and leadership to make the D party really stand for something. 

Edited May 1, 2019 by Mojo Hand

[bad_teammate 13514]

I don't think Joe's rise has any real impact on Bernie's path. His path has always been largely about motivating non-voters, grabbing independents, and increasing youth turnout. Biden's name-recognition and lack of negative feelings within the party are going to grab a huge chunk of reliable Democrats over 45/50 and that was never going to be Bernie's power base. Obviously Bernie can't completely ignore them, but those people were going to primarily go with non-Bernie's anyway.

If Biden can make inroads among non-voters/independents/youths, then Bernie's path gets blocked.

[Hank Scorpio 17924]

15 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Biden campaign is fear based and he will probably win because we are a nation of whipped dogs. 

A Biden campaign isn't fear based. It's based on his raw, sexual charisma. 

[henrygandorf 29225]

3 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

A Biden campaign isn't fear based. It's based on his raw, sexual charisma. 

duh.  that's why he's crushing it.

[bad_teammate 13514]

Only 12% with learned helplessness. Lower than I would guess.

 

[American Swindle 102]

 

[Chuckie Finster 23058]

This is not a comment on her ability to win the election, but Kamala Harris is definitely the most likely to bait Trump into saying some vile shit during the debates.  

[Bozo_Casanova 26847]

Honestly Kamala Harris’s goading skills and demeanor are part of the appeal for me. Of all the candidates in the field, the two most likely to deeply annoy, confuse and rattle the president are her and Biden.

 

However- I think it’s 50/50 that Trump refuses to debate a challenger the event that Harris, Biden or Mayor Pete are the nominee. And of course he will claim that they refused, and his base will believe it.

 

[Anastasis 23717]

@Bozo_Casanova why the preference for Harris over Warren, or Butti?

[Js1 87179]

I love watching her grill people at Senate hearings.

I want her to be the one cross-examining Trump on a debate stage.  Holy fuck, it would be like a female Joe Jamail. 

[tucker 238]

7 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

What I want is the government managing the guardrails of a competitive and robust free market that puts price discovery in a central position, where we use market forces to achieve the outcomes we want (like UHC, a growing middle class, and a clean and verdant environment) rather than force majeure central mandates.

 

But I can't get that, so I'd settle for not Trump. 

So why not Warren in the primary?

[Bozo_Casanova 26847]

[mention=1259]Bozo_Casanova[/mention] why the preference for Harris over Warren, or Butti?

Warren missed her window and I question whether she has a good ear based on her mishandling of the Indian bullshit. On top of that, I also disagree with with a lot of her policy ideas, even though I agree with the objectives.

I like Mayor Pete, but he’s just too green. I’d like to see how he performs as Governor Pete or Pete the CEO first.

[Dbeasy 15593]

What web site best compares the candidates?

 

[Js1 87179]

 

[mchookem 16765]

she's pretty badass

[henrygandorf 29225]

1 hour ago, Js1 said:

 

dear bill barr...

 

[retread 2951]

I don't follow the campaign stops as closely as some, but she doesn't seem to have as much command of the room on the campaign trail as she did in the testimony today. Maybe she's still working through some of her positions and she'll be more forceful as those develop?

That's not intended as a shot at her. I think I saw part of her town hall on CNN, and she did fine. Do you guys think she needs to translate the committee performance to campaign stops?

Edited May 2, 2019 by retread

[henrygandorf 29225]

9 minutes ago, retread said:

I don't follow the campaign stops as closely as some, but she doesn't seem to have as much command of the room on the campaign trail as she did in the testimony today. Maybe she's still working through some of her positions and she'll be more forceful as those develop?

That's not intended as a shot at her. I think I saw part of her town hall on CNN, and she did fine. Do you guys think she needs to translate the committee performance to campaign stops?

i didn't think she was very commanding in her town hall actually.  a lot of waffling about certain issues, a lot of vague answers.  when she's in a hearing, hammering someone with a line of questioning, she's in her element, and she's awesome.  i think she's good giving speeches, and has her moments on the trail, and she'll get better at that other stuff.

[retread 2951]

Yep. Didn't want to be hypercritical b/c I haven't seen that much of her in campaign speeches. If she can get the level of comfort that she showed today to translate to the campaign stump, she will be formidable.

[Hank Kingsley 21778]

2 hours ago, Js1 said:

 

She's a great prosecutor. That was awesome. What does that have to do with being a good President?

 

[henrygandorf 29225]

2 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

She's a great prosecutor. That was awesome. What does that have to do with being a good President?

 

if anything, it shows we need to keep her (and more like her) in the senate, while we wash out some of the olds.

[Js1 87179]

16 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

She's a great prosecutor. That was awesome. What does that have to do with being a good President?

 

Dunno but I’d cream my jeans watching her do that to Trump. Except he’d pansy out and refuse to debate 

[henrygandorf 29225]

at this point, i would give it even money that he even shows up to a debate.  why would he?  what would possibly happen if he didn't?

[Mojo Hand 4580]

25 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

if anything, it shows we need to keep her (and more like her) in the senate, while we wash out some of the olds.

Or attorney general. 

[Patrick Bateman 3966]

1 hour ago, retread said:

I don't follow the campaign stops as closely as some, but she doesn't seem to have as much command of the room on the campaign trail as she did in the testimony today. Maybe she's still working through some of her positions and she'll be more forceful as those develop?

That's not intended as a shot at her. I think I saw part of her town hall on CNN, and she did fine. Do you guys think she needs to translate the committee performance to campaign stops?

As my buddy likes to say, it's because she's a cop.  She's at home cross examining a witness, unfortunately, there's not a ton of use for that skill set as the President.  She's impressive but needs to take some of that presence and translate it to the campaign.  It'd also be cool if she got an actual platform.

 

[TexArcher 39069]

I'm with others in that I'd like to see Kamala stay where she is or get a post like AG or even SoS.

Buttigieg has replaced Beto at the top of my list. 

But we're not getting any of these people.  We're getting Joe Biden, and hopefully he's smart enough to pick one of these three for VP to get the younger voters on board.  And they should be able to crush Trump and his little sycophant hoard.

I think we're fucked in ways that would make me sound like a crazy alarmist if that son of a bitch gets another term.  

So go Joe.  Kick the shit out of him.

[Celery Man 21095]

Just echoing that what I liked about Kamala early on was that she seemed like she’d be formidable, but she seemed uncomfortable on the cnn thing. I think she referred to “pundits” and way overcorrected trying to tell Don Lemon that he wasn’t a pundit (which she didn’t but if she did nobody cares).

[Bozo_Casanova 26847]

4 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

What web site best compares the candidates?

 

pornhub

[bad_teammate 13514]

Bernie and Warren need to go tag-team on this goofy

When Berno gets tired of splashing Joe from the top ropes on trade, he can tag out to Liz so she can drop some banking elbow-drops on him

[Fozzz 152]

This is good.

 

[horncyclist 1391]

Don't worry guys, Amy's got this. Just have to try harder to work with the party of liars and traitors.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Oh go throw a binder at an underling, Amy and shut up.