Democratic Presidential hopefuls and your thoughts

[darksabre]

I'm stunned you guys don't already have him on ignore. It's pretty obvious that he's a troll.

[SABRES 0311]

Bernie Sanders announces his candidacy for 2020. IMO he is currently the best chance the DNC has because of the support he likely maintains from 2016. The foundation is there where as the other Dems have to build their national support outside of their constituents. However, I think the old man is jumping the gun. 

The other Dems are building the lowest foundations of their base. At some point they will focus on each other. I think he’d be better off letting them establish their own messages and tear each other apart while avoid the political firing squad. Essentially skipping the side show, using his national support to gain access to prime time debates later and coming in later in the game while giving Dem opponents as little prep as possible.

I have this feeling Biden is going to do the above. Call me crazy but I think he will pick Michelle Obama or Kamala Harris drops out and becomes his running mate.

[LTS]

It's getting to be time... where candidates from parties rip each other apart, then only 1 wins and suddenly their former opponents are the greatest thing ever.

Bernie... sigh.

[Weave]

We don't need another retiree President.  Berine, be an influencer of your party, not another geriatric politician.

[SABRES 0311]

13 hours ago, Weave said:

We don't need another retiree President.  Berine, be an influencer of your party, not another geriatric politician.

And bring a broom because it’s a mess.

[LGR4GM]

How do people feel about Kamala Harris. I have been reading up on her. She seems resolute in her views and to have a moral center. 

[LTS]

17 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

How do people feel about Kamala Harris. I have been reading up on her. She seems resolute in her views and to have a moral center. 

To be perfectly honest... and absolutely shallow?

I like her name.  I don't know much more about her.  I've got enough depressing things going on in life that I don't find myself wanting to read political items right now.

But, if she has a moral center... that's a start.  I don't even care which side of the aisle a politician is on.. morality is something that escapes the vast majority of them.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

There are a number of good candidates at first glance.  My wife has been following much more closely than I.

The Dems have to figure out which candidate has the best chance of winning back just enough of the key Trump votes in those few key areas of States he won last time.

If he runs, I expect he will, that is most likely to be Biden.  He is widely liked by both sides.  Biden / Harris ticket?  Maybe.

[Weave]

3 hours ago, LTS said:

To be perfectly honest... and absolutely shallow?

I like her name.  I don't know much more about her.  I've got enough depressing things going on in life that I don't find myself wanting to read political items right now.

But, if she has a moral center... that's a start.  I don't even care which side of the aisle a politician is on.. morality is something that escapes the vast majority of them.

I’ve reached a level of cynicism that has me believing that if you’ve reached the level of federal politician (hell, I’ll lower that to state level) any moral center you’ve had was set aside so you could get to that level.  You have to be a money raiser and back scratcher to get the endorsements.  

I guess that way I’m never disappointed.

[LTS]

21 hours ago, Weave said:

I’ve reached a level of cynicism that has me believing that if you’ve reached the level of federal politician (hell, I’ll lower that to state level) any moral center you’ve had was set aside so you could get to that level.  You have to be a money raiser and back scratcher to get the endorsements.  

I guess that way I’m never disappointed.

I'm pretty much the same.  For some stupid reason, in college, I majored in Political Science. It's not that the study is what enlightened me, it's that I paid far too much attention to politics during that time and recognized what was going on and just kinda got burned out.  Nothing has restored my faith, in fact I am sure it's gotten worse.  I keep hoping for change.

 

[Weave]

11 hours ago, LTS said:

I'm pretty much the same.  For some stupid reason, in college, I majored in Political Science. It's not that the study is what enlightened me, it's that I paid far too much attention to politics during that time and recognized what was going on and just kinda got burned out.  Nothing has restored my faith, in fact I am sure it's gotten worse.  I keep hoping for change.

 

So much potential for conversation here that requires a couple of beverages to really work out....

[North Buffalo]

As I went from idealist to working in Washington, Not sure its any worse, just more blown up immediately because of social media.  The velocity of the cycle has sped up considerably.

[Weave]

1 hour ago, North Buffalo said:

As I went from idealist to working in Washington, Not sure its any worse, just more blown up immediately because of social media.  The velocity of the cycle has sped up considerably.

A thread on how we (personally.  us, as individuals) got to where we are politically would be interesting.  I wonder how many would share their personal journeys?

[5th line wingnutt]

Clown Car Update.

 

In unrelated news…

[Eleven]

I've yet to see one whom I think can win.

[Marvin]

Self-described "Never Trump" Conservative here.

IMHO, if the Democrats want to win, I am in their target demographic.  Socially liberal enough and willing to tolerate some government programs as long as national security is taken care of and someone takes the deficit more seriously than my party's allegedly "fiscal conservatives" do.  You need to think of what Kristin Gillibrand was before she became part of the Democratic leadership.  From my point of view, one of Hickenlooper, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, Booker, Castro, or even Harris would be acceptable.

[North Buffalo]

Booker or Harris to me have the best managerial skills as former Governor and State Attny General.

[Eleven]

On 5/8/2019 at 4:10 PM, E4 ... Ke2 said:

Self-described "Never Trump" Conservative here.

IMHO, if the Democrats want to win, I am in their target demographic.  Socially liberal enough and willing to tolerate some government programs as long as national security is taken care of and someone takes the deficit more seriously than my party's allegedly "fiscal conservatives" do.  You need to think of what Kristin Gillibrand was before she became part of the Democratic leadership.  From my point of view, one of Hickenlooper, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, Booker, Castro, or even Harris would be acceptable.

I don't think any of them are capable of winning, and some of them (definitely Buttigieg and possibly Castro) are as unqualified as the current occupant.  Mayor of South Bend directly to President?  I don't think so.

[LGR4GM]

30 minutes ago, Eleven said:

I don't think any of them are capable of winning, and some of them (definitely Buttigieg and possibly Castro) are as unqualified as the current occupant.  Mayor of South Bend directly to President?  I don't think so.

He speaks several languages, served in the Navy, was a Rhodes Scholar. So this statement right here is way off the mark. Better than Biden. 

Edited May 24, 2019 by LGR4GM

[Eleven]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

He speaks several languages, served in the Navy, was a Rhodes Scholar. So this statement right here is way off the mark. Better than Biden. 

I don't care how many languages he speaks, whether he was in the Navy, or about his educational background.  He's the mayor of a 100,000 person town in Indiana--one that mostly self-governs due to Notre Dame--and that's not enough to be qualified to run the country.

Edited May 24, 2019 by Eleven

[SwampD]

9 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

He speaks several languages, served in the Navy, was a Rhodes Scholar. So this statement right here is way off the mark. Better than Biden. 

Since when have qualifications equated electability?

[LGR4GM]

On 5/24/2019 at 1:02 PM, Eleven said:

I don't care how many languages he speaks, whether he was in the Navy, or about his educational background.  He's the mayor of a 100,000 person town in Indiana--one that mostly self-governs due to Notre Dame--and that's not enough to be qualified to run the country.

He's still more qualified than Trump which was your original point. I'd take Pete over Biden. 

[Marvin]

On 5/24/2019 at 11:24 AM, Eleven said:

I don't think any of them are capable of winning, and some of them (definitely Buttigieg and possibly Castro) are as unqualified as the current occupant.  Mayor of South Bend directly to President?  I don't think so.

That may be.

What I am doing is warning you off of the Bernie wing of the Party.  I won't vote for Trump, but a vast majority of Conservative Trump Haters I know in swing states will NOT vote for a Democrat whom the Socialist Wing can stomach.  Assuming the economy goes bad, then there is a chance of beating Trump if you go the HARD right of your caucus.  If both don't happen, then Trump wins in a landslide.

Then we might have a chance of picking up enough votes in FL and OH to make them competitive and to give we Trump-haters a chance in MN, WI, MI, PA, VA, CO, NV, and NM.  Yes, I am saying that FL and OH are purplish-bright-red, WI, MI, and PA are bright-reddish-purple, and that MN, VA, and CO are neutral purple.  The four best polling aggregators I know (realclearpolitics.com, fivethirtyeight.com, theatlantic.com, politico.com) all agree that Trump lost a lot of support in states he is going to win handily anyway, but he is over-performing, level, or has a certainty of exceeding his poll numbers in states with a large number of Cultural Conservatives.

Democrats need to ignore the coasts and focus 100% on competitive states in Middle America if we want to have a prayer of defeating Trump.  Nominating, adopting the platform of, and campaigning for someone like John Kasich, Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Bill Weld, Susan Martinez, Larry Hogan, and the like would be ideal, but even if you don't, we need them on our side regardless.

[LTS]

On 5/24/2019 at 1:02 PM, Eleven said:

I don't care how many languages he speaks, whether he was in the Navy, or about his educational background.  He's the mayor of a 100,000 person town in Indiana--one that mostly self-governs due to Notre Dame--and that's not enough to be qualified to run the country.

It's an interesting question.  What qualifications does it take?  Do you need to be indoctrinated into the major political systems before you can be qualified?  At that point are you anything more than just a party stooge?

What if the man is a leader who just happens to be trying to bypass something he'd breeze through anyway?

I don't know the guy, but dismissing him outright seems rough.  If he can manage the people under him and knows how to lead he could very well be a successful president.

[LGR4GM]

7 hours ago, E4 ... Ke2 said:

That may be.

What I am doing is warning you off of the Bernie wing of the Party.  I won't vote for Trump, but a vast majority of Conservative Trump Haters I know in swing states will NOT vote for a Democrat whom the Socialist Wing can stomach.  Assuming the economy goes bad, then there is a chance of beating Trump if you go the HARD right of your caucus.  If both don't happen, then Trump wins in a landslide.

Then we might have a chance of picking up enough votes in FL and OH to make them competitive and to give we Trump-haters a chance in MN, WI, MI, PA, VA, CO, NV, and NM.  Yes, I am saying that FL and OH are purplish-bright-red, WI, MI, and PA are bright-reddish-purple, and that MN, VA, and CO are neutral purple.  The four best polling aggregators I know (realclearpolitics.com, fivethirtyeight.com, theatlantic.com, politico.com) all agree that Trump lost a lot of support in states he is going to win handily anyway, but he is over-performing, level, or has a certainty of exceeding his poll numbers in states with a large number of Cultural Conservatives.

Democrats need to ignore the coasts and focus 100% on competitive states in Middle America if we want to have a prayer of defeating Trump.  Nominating, adopting the platform of, and campaigning for someone like John Kasich, Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Bill Weld, Susan Martinez, Larry Hogan, and the like would be ideal, but even if you don't, we need them on our side regardless.

Trump didn't win some of those places by a landslide in 2016, I can't see him increasing his votes in 2020. Part of the problem with the polling now is their methodology and I would be curious to review the methodology of the polls featured. Are they gathering enough from each age group and how do they get them specifically. Further, I know so many people who simply did not want to vote for Hillary. https://phys.org/news/2019-01-poll-majority-millennials-trump-twitter.html 

Quote

UMass Lowell last polled millennials in the days leading up to the 2016 presidential election and found that nearly a quarter of those surveyed would rather have seen a giant meteor strike the Earth than see either of then-candidates Hilary Clinton or Trump elected president. While that response was not to be taken literally, it illustrated the disenfranchisement felt by millennial voters at the time.

The bottom line is that this election is very much up in the air. Trump may sink his own ship with tariffs. He could also help sink it if his Supreme Court Justices are instrumental in over turning Row v. Wade. The real question is who comes out of the Democratic primaries. 

I don't agree with you on the statement that Democrats have to adopt a platform "hard right" of their caucus. Hard right would be what? Right now the entire government is barreling hard right. There seems to be a lot of people not too happy with that. Every Democratic platform will modulate somewhat closer to middle left once a candidate is declared because that is how it typically goes. 

Trump will never win in a "landslide" because he is too divisive. 

Edited May 28, 2019 by LGR4GM