Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 09-13-2018, 06:42 PM
Attack from the 3rd dimension is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Soviet Canuckistan
Posts: 5,806
I'd be cool with David Ige, but we need you to suggest a Veep as well.
  #52  
Old 09-13-2018, 07:21 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,904
What record of success does David Ige have (I've honestly never heard of him)? Hawaii is an extremely Democratic State, so just getting elected Governor there isn't a particularly impressive achievement.
  #53  
Old 09-14-2018, 04:01 AM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Where haggis roam free
Posts: 31,112
Wikipedia's page on Ige.
  #54  
Old 09-14-2018, 07:18 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Attack from the 3rd dimension View Post
I sometimes wonder, if she'd turned on him when he was following her around the stage and told him to back the fuck off, if she'd be president now.
That would be unladylike.
  #55  
Old 09-14-2018, 10:24 PM
foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 15,896
Ladylike is not Presidential.
  #56  
Old 09-22-2018, 10:58 PM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Attack from the 3rd dimension View Post
I sometimes wonder, if she'd turned on him when he was following her around the stage and told him to back the fuck off, if she'd be president now.
I think someone who can attack Trump from a streetwise smarts angle rather than an intellectual angle would do well. Someone who could pull off an answer that includes "and unlike my opponent I won't be Putin's bitch" during a debate when asked about Russian interference. I'm not sure which candidate could pull off something like that and still seem genuine, but that's the sort of thing that I think would win voters who are turned off by someone who seems too intellectual.

Last edited by FlikTheBlue; 09-22-2018 at 10:58 PM.
  #57  
Old 09-23-2018, 03:51 PM
Lantern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,138
Cory Booker

He is obviously the candidate most in the Obama mould: youngish, charismatic and black.He is also in the mould of almost every Democratic winning candidate for the last 60 years: youngish, relatively moderate and with an optimistic unifying message.

Compared to some of the other contenders he isn't positioned too far left which I think will be a liability for the general.My impression is that he has a lot of tactical smarts, finding just the right issues to appeal to the base without committing himself to positions that would be too radical for the general. He will probably be good at raising a lot of money.
  #58  
Old 09-24-2018, 11:55 AM
Attack from the 3rd dimension is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Soviet Canuckistan
Posts: 5,806
Ok, so who are you putting forward a Booker's Veep? Dude needs a Veep.
  #59  
Old 09-24-2018, 01:26 PM
Lantern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,138
I don't think veep picks matter all that much so it could be a number of people. If there is a tough left-moderate fight in the primaries maybe the leading left candidate, say Warren? Sherrod Brown could also be interesting ; he may both help unite the party and help in the all-important Mid-West. Or perhaps someone of the Biden type: an older experienced figure who would be an asset in governing.
  #60  
Old 09-29-2018, 04:16 PM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 12,068
Warren just said after midterms she is taking a hard look at running.
  #61  
Old 09-29-2018, 08:08 PM
pjacks is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lantern View Post
Cory Booker

He is obviously the candidate most in the Obama mould: youngish, charismatic and black.He is also in the mould of almost every Democratic winning candidate for the last 60 years: youngish, relatively moderate and with an optimistic unifying message.

Compared to some of the other contenders he isn't positioned too far left which I think will be a liability for the general.My impression is that he has a lot of tactical smarts, finding just the right issues to appeal to the base without committing himself to positions that would be too radical for the general. He will probably be good at raising a lot of money.
Cory Booker is a closeted gay man. How does that affect his chances?

(It sinks them.)
  #62  
Old 09-29-2018, 08:16 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjacks View Post
Cory Booker is a closeted gay man.
Cite?
  #63  
Old 09-29-2018, 08:24 PM
pjacks is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Cite?
My cite is he is a longtime confirmed bachelor at 49.
Also as a gay dude myself, my gaydar is another cite.

The US may elect a gay person president. Unlikely, but not unimaginable.... but electing a possibly closeted single man? No, sorry.

The same was true of Lindsay Graham and his doomed run in 2016, btw.
  #64  
Old 09-29-2018, 08:58 PM
jaycat is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lantern View Post
Cory Booker

He is obviously the candidate most in the Obama mould: youngish, charismatic and black.He is also in the mould of almost every Democratic winning candidate for the last 60 years: youngish, relatively moderate and with an optimistic unifying message.

Compared to some of the other contenders he isn't positioned too far left which I think will be a liability for the general.My impression is that he has a lot of tactical smarts, finding just the right issues to appeal to the base without committing himself to positions that would be too radical for the general. He will probably be good at raising a lot of money.
I didn't love the way he sucked up to Grassley the other day (and went on, and on, and on...)

Regarding Deval Patrick, I worked for him (indirectly) for eight years. Not a fan.
  #65  
Old 09-30-2018, 03:28 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,525
I don't follow the news well enough to know if Cory Booker is a hero. (I did think that naming some of his D colleagues in his 'I am Spartacus moment' went against the nature of a suicidal Spartacus claim.)

But, heroic or not, Booker is NOT a candidate who will find it easy to beat Trump or Pence. That he's being seriously touted puts me in grave doubt (and not for the first time) about Democratic wisdom.

I am an equal-opportunity doubter. I'm worried that Sanders, Warren or Harris would also have difficulty winning. The country is starting to hate Trump and time is ripe for a Democratic victory in 2020 but they don't have a winning candidate yet.

ETA: Booker or Harris might be OK for the Veep slot.
__________________
Some or all of the above statements may be intended as sarcastic.
.
andros had more faith in an American jury than I had; and he was right. I'm happy to lose a bet and hope this trend continues.

Last edited by septimus; 09-30-2018 at 03:30 AM.
  #66  
Old 09-30-2018, 10:13 AM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 12,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjacks View Post
My cite is he is a longtime confirmed bachelor at 49.
Also as a gay dude myself, my gaydar is another cite.

The US may elect a gay person president. Unlikely, but not unimaginable.... but electing a possibly closeted single man? No, sorry.

The same was true of Lindsay Graham and his doomed run in 2016, btw.
if he's gay then he should run for NJ governor.
  #67  
Old 09-30-2018, 01:41 PM
ITR champion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,477
I get less and less interested in the two-party horse race as time goes on, but as the OP didn't say that only Democrats can answer, I'll give my two cents anyway. I would tell Democrats that you want to beat Trump in 2020, there is one name by which you must be saved: Bernie Sanders.

First of all, we may as well acknowledge that Bernie's surge in 2016 from complete unknown to almost winning the nomination happened because he wants what Democratic voters want. They want the federal government to pay for health care for all, and so does Bernie. They want the federal government to pay for college education and so does Bernie. They want to double the minimum wage and so does Bernie. They want a bundle of pro-union legislation and so does Bernie. They want to shrink the military and so does Bernie. etc...

Mainstream Democratic politicians do not actually want these things, though a few have recently tried to grab hold of a small part of Bernie's platform. But does anyone take them seriously? Booker is now in favor of Medicare for all, after previously being opposed, but does anyone take that seriously? Supposing that Booker did become President, does anyone think that he wouldn't walk back that promise and start looking for a health care compromise that would please the insurance companies?

Bernie, on the other hand, is a dyed-in-the-wool true believer. He will not walk back his positions or seek squishy compromises on anything and he's spend decades proving that fact. And deep down, that's the kind of candidate the Democrats want. Ever since Bill Clinton, they have been tired of all the compromises that their party has made while trying to court the political center and bring in big corporate donations. They want a candidate who will plant a flag and challenge the insurance companies and banks and other big corporations to fight.

People are tired of politicians who seek the squishy middle. Whether in the USA or Britain or Italy or Germany or India or elsewhere, they're turning to support politicians who sound genuine and tough and will put up a fight. For the Democrats, that means Bernie. It's no surprise that he's the most popular Senator.

Also, he's smart enough to know what issues matter to people. When people are polled about what issue is most important, negligible percentages answer with gun control or abortion or forcing nuns to pay for birth control or other culture war issues that New York Times editorial writers go batty over. Bernie focuses on the issues that actually matter to working class people.

Looking at these maps, we can see that in 2016, Bernie already shown strength in the key midwestern battleground states. He's a total flop in the South, but he wouldn't need the South to beat Trump if he could restore the Democrats' strength in the Midwest.

On the downside, if Bernie, that article he wrote in 1972 is sure to resurface.
  #68  
Old 10-01-2018, 08:52 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,525
Bernie would be 79 years old when inaugurated. Trump was only 70 when inaugurated.

Bernie's hugely expensive social spending may be a good vision, and may appeal to the Democratic base, but it's not practicable in the near term and would lead to ridicule in the general election campaign.

I touted a Biden-Harris ticket 3 weeks ago in this thread, and that's still a good choice if Biden stays in good health. But Biden is only a year younger than Bernie, so a ticket headed by Kamala Harris might be the best choice among the top contenders.

The battle for the 2021 Presidency begins in November 2018. Time is running out for the knight on a white horse to ride up and save us.
__________________
Some or all of the above statements may be intended as sarcastic.
.
andros had more faith in an American jury than I had; and he was right. I'm happy to lose a bet and hope this trend continues.
  #69  
Old 10-01-2018, 06:28 PM
ITR champion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,477
Sure he's old, but he doesn't look or act like it. Plainly he is healthier and more active than a typical man of the same age. As for the idea that young voters won't be interested in supporting an old candidate, I'd say he's proven that wrong already.
  #70  
Old 10-02-2018, 06:37 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,525
I'd never heard of Amy Klobuchar until I was astounded during the Kavanaugh hearing. She asked the witness in several ways if he had a drinking problem. His repeated answers were paraphrases of "How about you? Do you have a drinking problem?"

If I were the Senator I'd say: "You're supposedly a judge. What would you do in a courtroom or deposition if the witness starts questioning the lawyer, as you just did?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ITR champion View Post
People are tired of politicians who seek the squishy middle. Whether in the USA or Britain or Italy or Germany or India or elsewhere, they're turning to support politicians who sound genuine and tough and will put up a fight. For the Democrats, that means Bernie. It's no surprise that he's the most popular Senator.
You make good points.

I clicked on the Senate-popularity link and found it interesting. Here are the top 10 and bottom 10 Senators as measured by popularity with interviewees in their home state:
1 BERNIE SANDERS (I-VT) +49
2 PATRICK LEAHY (D-VT) +42
3 JOHN THUNE (R-SD) +36
4 AMY KLOBUCHAR (D-MN) +35
5 MICHAEL ENZI (R-WY) +34
6 JOHN BARRASSO (R-WY) +31
7 MIKE ROUNDS (R-SD) +31
8 ANGUS KING (I-ME) +29
9 JOHN HOEVEN (R-ND) +31
10 JON TESTER (D-MT) +23
...
91 DEAN HELLER (R-NV) -3
92 RICHARD DURBIN (D-IL) -3
93 LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC) 0
94 LISA MURKOWSKI (R-AK) 2
95 TAMMY BALDWIN (D-WI) -2
96 JOE MANCHIN (D-WV) -1
97 CLAIRE MCCASKILL (D-MO) -5
98 JOHN MCCAIN (R-AZ) -7
99 JEFF FLAKE (R-AZ) -18
100 MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY) -18
(I've appended the [Approve minus Disapprove] figure. Some of the ranks may appear wrong; this is due to differing 'Don't Know' numbers. Surprised to see McCain so low in this survey from early 2018.)

Amy Klobuchar ranks as quite popular, but hasn't been mentioned in this thread. Maybe we should be talking about her.
__________________
Some or all of the above statements may be intended as sarcastic.
.
andros had more faith in an American jury than I had; and he was right. I'm happy to lose a bet and hope this trend continues.

Last edited by septimus; 10-02-2018 at 06:39 AM.
  #71  
Old 10-02-2018, 07:25 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,855
I love Amy Klobuchar. If I were forced to choose who to vote in the primary for now, I'd choose her. I hope she runs, but I'll wait for the actual primary campaign to choose which Democrat to support.
  #72  
Old 10-02-2018, 07:34 AM
BrotherCadfael is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vermont
Posts: 10,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Attack from the 3rd dimension View Post
Hickenlooper was a geologist who started a brewery. I'm cool with that. I don't suppose there's any way to get him to run as "John Hicks" or "John Hicken" or even "John Looper" is there?

Because Hickenlooper/Duckworth sounds like a presidential ticket they might have in a "The Music Man".
Back when, the Bill Safire said he had to give Gary Hart a pass on changing his name from Hartpence to Hart, because, "Hartpence was the weeniest politician's name since Millard Fillmore".
  #73  
Old 10-02-2018, 07:45 AM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 31,199
But I've said it before about Hickenlooper and I think it applies to Duckworth as well: their weird names might be an asset, because their opponents will not be able to resist trying to make fun of them for their names, but I don't think that would resonate outside of their base since both of them seem like no nonsense type of folks.
  #74  
Old 10-02-2018, 08:04 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 88,635
Even more than that: Attacks on their names are the sort of thing that might have short-term traction, but not long-term. If you say at a rally, "What kind of name is Hickenlooper?", or ask your audience "Just how much is a duck worth?", you're likely to get a reaction in the moment. And so their opponent would spend more time on that sort of attack, at the expense of attacks on substance. But then folks are going to go home from the rallies and think, "wait, am I seriously voting against this person because they have a silly name?". Especially since a lot of those rally-goers will themselves have silly names of one sort or another.
  #75  
Old 10-02-2018, 08:24 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 22,347
Anyone not named Hillary Clinton would have a good chance. I dare say more people voted against her in 2016 than for her opponent. So take nearly anyone that the Republicans haven't lied about for a generation and their chances are good.

Take Joe Biden. As comfortable as an old chair. Reasonably progressive. Someone who actually cares about the people.

Or take Tammy Duckworth. She could take on Space Cadet Bone Spurs and win a good share of the military worshippers. Maybe Donald would call her peg leg- who knows?

Or take Cory Booker. He's got that earnestness and policy knowledge of Obama.

Whoever is the winner should pick a Latino vice president. Let the Pubs have the angry old white male racist vote, we'll take everyone else.
  #76  
Old 10-02-2018, 10:40 AM
adaher is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 29,047
I'm going to pick two best tickets:

1) Biden/Booker. This is the competent, comfortable ticket. Two super smart guys, moderate to old style liberal background, totally clean, no scandals likely to come up that will stick. Booker has executive experience and now some DC experience, which would make fears of Biden's age less of an issue since Booker is a guy you could have confidence in being a heartbeat away from the Presidency.

2) Booker/Duckworth. This is the young, exciting, rainbow coalition ticket. It would win easily given America's demographic change and what motivates minority and young voters, provided Booker has a message and can articulate it, qualities which are in question with him.
  #77  
Old 10-02-2018, 10:59 AM
pjacks is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 350
Tammy Duckworth was born in Thailand. Is she even eligible to be either prez or VP?
  #78  
Old 10-02-2018, 11:05 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjacks View Post
Tammy Duckworth was born in Thailand. Is she even eligible to be either prez or VP?
IANAL, but since she was born to a US citizen parent, I think that makes her a natural-born citizen no matter where she was born.
  #79  
Old 10-02-2018, 11:17 AM
pjacks is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
IANAL, but since she was born to a US citizen parent, I think that makes her a natural-born citizen no matter where she was born.
I see. I'm definitely not excited for another round of birtherism from republicans if she does decide to run.
  #80  
Old 10-02-2018, 12:11 PM
adaher is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 29,047
It's not birtherism if it's an argument over actual facts. As long as we agree she was born in Thailand to an American citizen parent, it's fair to argue over whether she's eligible.
  #81  
Old 10-02-2018, 12:57 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by adaher View Post
It's not birtherism if it's an argument over actual facts. As long as we agree she was born in Thailand to an American citizen parent, it's fair to argue over whether she's eligible.
What's the argument? Children of American citizens (even 1 American citizen + 1 foreign national) are citizens from birth, in all but a very, very few circumstances (IIRC something weird about living in the US for 7 years at some point after turning 18 or something like that), no matter where they're born.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 10-02-2018 at 12:57 PM.
  #82  
Old 10-02-2018, 01:53 PM
foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 15,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
I'd never heard of Amy Klobuchar until I was astounded during the Kavanaugh hearing.
I had.

Looks like she's been wearing her contact lenses lately, which may mean something.
  #83  
Old 10-02-2018, 02:42 PM
pjacks is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by adaher View Post
It's not birtherism if it's an argument over actual facts. As long as we agree she was born in Thailand to an American citizen parent, it's fair to argue over whether she's eligible.
See, it already begins.

I'm fine with her sticking around as my senator instead. Maybe a cabinet position down the road.
  #84  
Old 10-02-2018, 02:57 PM
muldoonthief's Avatar
muldoonthief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North of Boston
Posts: 11,481
Quote:
Originally Posted by adaher View Post
It's not birtherism if it's an argument over actual facts. As long as we agree she was born in Thailand to an American citizen parent, it's fair to argue over whether she's eligible.
John McCain was born in Panama, and he was the Republican nominee in 2008. So the precedent of "natural born citizen" meaning "citizen at birth", not just "born inside the United States" has already been established.

And Tammy Duckworth's father was a WWII, Korean War, & Vietnam war veteran who is buried in Arlington National Cemetery. Yeah, let birther types try to argue his daughter isn't eligible to be President.
  #85  
Old 10-02-2018, 04:25 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 88,635
Not even that: John McCain wasn't a citizen at birth. At the time he was born, there was a weird loophole in the law that was retroactively corrected while he was a child. But he was still a citizen by virtue of the circumstances of his birth, which is apparently good enough.
  #86  
Old 10-02-2018, 05:01 PM
Akaj's Avatar
Akaj is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: In the vanishing middle
Posts: 1,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjacks View Post
See, it already begins.

I'm fine with her sticking around as my senator instead. Maybe a cabinet position down the road.
I live in Illinois and I think the world of Duckworth. But our state is an economic shambles. I know the US Senator has nothing to do with running the state or its finances, but could incompetence-by-association hurt her?
__________________
I'm not expecting any surprises.
  #87  
Old 10-02-2018, 07:49 PM
pjacks is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akaj View Post
I live in Illinois and I think the world of Duckworth. But our state is an economic shambles. I know the US Senator has nothing to do with running the state or its finances, but could incompetence-by-association hurt her?
I don't know if that would stick as a criticism, but her stint running Illinois' Department of Veterans' Affairs was apparently a disaster and could be mined for a lot of controversy by Rebublicans.
  #88  
Old 10-02-2018, 08:12 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 3,419
I used to think that a sufficiently strong Democratic candidate could beat Trump in 2020. I don't feel that way anymore. I think his cult of personality is so powerful, and his support base too strong in all the states that matter, for him to be defeated in the next election. I think the only way Trumpism can be overcome is to simply wait out his second term. Trumpism is totally centered around Trump. When he is no longer president, it won't really be able to exist anymore, and I do not see a successor for him on the horizon.
  #89  
Old 10-03-2018, 07:13 AM
adaher is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 29,047
I don't know, the trial heat polls look disastrous for him, unless the Democrats actively try to screw things up by going for the candidate they want, rather than the alternative the public wants.
  #90  
Old 10-03-2018, 10:28 AM
Attack from the 3rd dimension is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Soviet Canuckistan
Posts: 5,806
A little update on Booker's personal life.

https://pagesix.com/2018/10/01/cory-...hip-a-secret/?
  #91  
Old 10-03-2018, 12:55 PM
Akaj's Avatar
Akaj is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: In the vanishing middle
Posts: 1,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjacks View Post
I don't know if that would stick as a criticism, but her stint running Illinois' Department of Veterans' Affairs was apparently a disaster and could be mined for a lot of controversy by Rebublicans.
"Disaster" is overstating it quite a bit. A couple of whistleblowers claimed she ignored their appeals and tried to shut them down, and while their claim may have merit, her Republican opponent in 2016 didn't get much traction with the issue.

Considering the ongoing disaster that VA hospitals nationwide seem to be, and that she herself is a decorated vet, and that Trump tried to make his personal doc with no admin experience the head of the whole department, I think she'd be OK on the issue.
__________________
I'm not expecting any surprises.
  #92  
Old 10-03-2018, 01:45 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by ITR champion View Post
I get less and less interested in the two-party horse race as time goes on, but as the OP didn't say that only Democrats can answer, I'll give my two cents anyway. I would tell Democrats that you want to beat Trump in 2020, there is one name by which you must be saved: Bernie Sanders.


On the downside, if Bernie, that article he wrote in 1972 is sure to resurface.
Oh fuck no.Karl Rove and the Kremlin are salivating over Sanders as a candidate. You dont think they cant manufacture a credible Communist Party card with his name on it? Find his picture at a Communist rally? He would go down in flames, winning the least states on record.

I like Biden. However, for a Veep you need a rust belter or Southerner (Delaware isnt Southern enough, but Biden does have Penn creds) and preferably a Woman or a minority- and someone younger- a lot younger. Hell, even tho I think Harris would make a HORRIBLE choice for Prez, I could see her as Veep. Tammy Duckworth would be great also.

Booker might work. He'd be a excellent Veep also.

My idea is for Biden to run as a one Term prez, then hand the reins over. His age wont be such a issue then.
  #93  
Old 10-03-2018, 03:50 PM
Attack from the 3rd dimension is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Soviet Canuckistan
Posts: 5,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Oh fuck no.Karl Rove and the Kremlin are salivating over Sanders as a candidate. You dont think they cant manufacture a credible Communist Party card with his name on it? Find his picture at a Communist rally? He would go down in flames, winning the least states on record.

I like Biden. However, for a Veep you need a rust belter or Southerner (Delaware isnt Southern enough, but Biden does have Penn creds) and preferably a Woman or a minority- and someone younger- a lot younger. Hell, even tho I think Harris would make a HORRIBLE choice for Prez, I could see her as Veep. Tammy Duckworth would be great also.

Booker might work. He'd be a excellent Veep also.

My idea is for Biden to run as a one Term prez, then hand the reins over. His age wont be such a issue then.
Another Biden / Harris supporter, I see.
  #94  
Old 10-03-2018, 04:13 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Attack from the 3rd dimension View Post
Another Biden / Harris supporter, I see.
Harris is not my first choice as veep/
  #95  
Old 10-03-2018, 07:58 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 88,635
You can't run to be a one-term President. If you try, what you end up doing is running to be a zero-term President.
  #96  
Old 10-03-2018, 08:28 PM
JohnGalt's Avatar
JohnGalt is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Med city USA
Posts: 2,310
Amy Klobuchar is my senator, and will win her election easily, but this is Minnesota after all. She's been getting lots of exposure the last few years on MSNBC and of course has a high profile in the senate. I do know if she would excite anyone from other states though.

I kind of wish Al Franken was still viable. For that matter, Paul Wellstone would have mopped the floor Trump. It's painful for Minnesotan Democrats to remember the good times.

I'd say Klobuchar, and don't really know who should be VP.
  #97  
Old 10-03-2018, 08:37 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 3,419
Is this the time to test the viability of a female candidate, when the consolation prize is 4 more years of Donald Trump?

I'm not SURE exactly if sexism was as big of a contributor to Hillary's loss as a lot of people claim - it may have been all of her past baggage and an unlikable public persona more than the fact that she was a woman - but I don't know if it's a risk worth taking. I just don't know.
  #98  
Old 10-03-2018, 09:55 PM
ITR champion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Oh fuck no.Karl Rove and the Kremlin are salivating over Sanders as a candidate. You dont think they cant manufacture a credible Communist Party card with his name on it? Find his picture at a Communist rally? He would go down in flames, winning the least states on record.
Should the Democratic Party choose a candidate based on what "Karl Rove and the Kremlin" will say about that candidate? Or should they choose a candidate based on who will actually rally Democratic voters?

If Democrats are considering the "let's take a boring centrist because then the Republicans won't attack him/her" theory again, ask yourself one question: how did that work out in 2000, 2004, and 2016? Where's the evidence that it ever works?
  #99  
Old 10-03-2018, 10:22 PM
Gray Ghost is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,819
Hickenlooper and Tulsi Gabbard. Both of whom are too smart to run so long as the economy keeps going gangbusters, and the US isn't up to its neck in some hideously unpopular war.

EDIT: I believe her birth in American Samoa, to a father who became a naturalized US citizen at age 1, and an American citizen mother, should satisfy the citizenship requirement, but I'm not 100% on that.

Last edited by Gray Ghost; 10-03-2018 at 10:26 PM.
  #100  
Old 10-04-2018, 01:19 AM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by ITR champion View Post
Should the Democratic Party choose a candidate based on what "Karl Rove and the Kremlin" will say about that candidate? Or should they choose a candidate based on who will actually rally Democratic voters?

If Democrats are considering the "let's take a boring centrist because then the Republicans won't attack him/her" theory again, ask yourself one question: how did that work out in 2000, 2004, and 2016? Where's the evidence that it ever works?
No, they should pick a candidate based upon their electability in the general election. Anyone branded (with solid evidence) as a Commie will lose. Simple as that. Why on earth do you think that someone who couldn't rally Dem voters in the last Primary will magically do so now? Bernie will rally his fans- which are about 40% of the Democrats. That's not enough to win. Bernie lost even worse that Hillary did.

Rove and the Kremlin won it for Trump by making up lies about Hillary.

Look, even here in this thread- "The Democrats nominated the least popular person, so she lost"- and what made Hillary so unpopular so fast? Karl and the Kremlin and the power of social media.

I am not saying take a boring centrist so much as take someone that isnt ready made for the GOP Big Lie campaign. And who isnt a loser already.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:35 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017