Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 10-04-2018, 05:57 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,525
Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush Governors every one. In fact the only Presidents elected in the 20th or 21st centuries where Senator was highest previous post are Warren Harding, and two with super charisma: JFK and BHO.

There are several Governors touted for the big job. Let's please discuss them and watch them speak on YouTube before giving up and going with a Senator.


Quote:
Originally Posted by muldoonthief View Post
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.
Correction: the precedent has been established for foreign-born Republicans. (IIRC there wasn't the slightest whimper of "not natural-born" McCain, except perhaps from the fringiest fringe.) It is the GOP which bases its campaigns on Lies, Lies, Hatreds and Lies. I'll bet two cases of the delicious sweet-sour sticky rice whiskey that if Duckworth becomes a nominee FoxNews will rant about her "non-Americanness" every single day.
  #102  
Old 10-07-2018, 12:42 PM
Emily Litella is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The swamps of Jersey
Posts: 1,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
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.
NUGENT/PALIN 2024 - my worst nightmare
__________________
NM
  #103  
Old 10-07-2018, 03:58 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 23,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush Governors every one. In fact the only Presidents elected in the 20th or 21st centuries where Senator was highest previous post are Warren Harding, and two with super charisma: JFK and BHO.

There are several Governors touted for the big job. Let's please discuss them and watch them speak on YouTube before giving up and going with a Senator.

...
Okay.

Let's see how I can do with the list.

Bullock; Hickenlooper; Cuomo; former MA gov Patrick; former VA McAuliffe ... anyone else worth discussing? The governor bench is deeper on the R side than on the D one.

Cross off McAuliffe as too tied to the Clinton legacy. Patrick currently works for Bain? Hard to get the progressive wing to embrace that. Cuomo? No. Hickenlooper and Bullock? May both be too moderate to get the nom even if they'd represent good options in a general.


Happy to be sold on one of them though!

And besides governors we've had former military too, but McRaven has significant chronic illness, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, concern about which would dog him in a campaign making every sniffle into a big deal for the media.
  #104  
Old 10-07-2018, 04:15 PM
cmkeller's Avatar
cmkeller is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 13,678
Attack from the 3rd Dimension:

Quote:
Kamala Harris, as a mixed race woman would absolutely unnerve and freak out Pence
Seriously? You really think Mike Pence could have been in elected office for almost 20 years and have a problem simply being around people who aren't white males?

One thing that won't help Democrats defeat Republicans is their treating them like the caricatures of Republicans in their heads, rather than the actual people (however much you may dislike or disagree with them) they are. Underestimating the opposition is a bad, bad strategy.
  #105  
Old 10-07-2018, 06:18 PM
Martin Hyde is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 14,285
There's a number of Democrats that probably shouldn't run:

Cory Booker - Unmarried, that's a political problem. He also is weirdly detested by a number of the hardcore progressives even though I think he's a pretty liberal Senator.

Tammy Duckworth - Amazing woman, but I don't think she should run. I don't think she looks like Americans believe a President should look, she's also disabled. None of that should matter but I 100% think it does matter, sadly.

Kamala Harris - I worry that she doesn't have the firebrand streak in her that I think a successful Dem will need in 2020. She's smart, competent, and mainstream--but I'm not sure that's what it'll take to get the electorate on your side anymore. I also worry about her general political base. She's not lefty enough to have the foaming-throngs of leftism like Sanders and Warren, and she hasn't built up a big "establishment" base either. Her approval ratings in California are mediocre for someone who wants to run for President, in a State where a Democrat should be very popular.

Andrew Cuomo - I don't see a lot of popular support for him regardless, but this guy is a bad idea. New York politics is a contact sport and he's got a lot of dirt on him from playing that game so long, he's also too divisive. He'd be a good target for a lot of Trump's attacks too.

What concerns me is the two who I think would be strongest, right now, would be either Biden or Bernie at the top of a ticket, with maybe Harris as VP. I don't know a lot about Hickenlooper, it sounds like he could be okay but I feel like he has no name recognition.

I feel like Elizabeth Warren would be a strong VP pick but I'm not sure she's ideal for the top of the ticket.
  #106  
Old 10-08-2018, 02:42 AM
foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 15,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
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 guess you were blissfully unaware of Rush Limbaugh 24 years earlier. Hillary had been the target of conspiracy theories for about a quarter century. It was reckless for her to run.

Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush Governors every one.
And I hope by now we've learned our lesson.

Quote:
I'll bet two cases of the delicious sweet-sour sticky rice whiskey that if Duckworth becomes a nominee FoxNews will rant about her "non-Americanness" every single day.
I can't speak to what non-Midwesterners will think, but whenever Tammy Duckworth speaks, she proves how American she is, unlike that funny-sounding New Yawker with two foreign parents.
  #107  
Old 10-08-2018, 08:12 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 88,635
Quote:
Quoth cmkeller:

Seriously? You really think Mike Pence could have been in elected office for almost 20 years and have a problem simply being around people who aren't white males?
That's not speculation: It's established fact. He's not allowed to meet one-on-one with women: His wife needs to be present to chaperone him.

Martin Hyde, don't forget that the reason for Duckworth's disability is war wounds. I don't think that you can lump "disabling war wounds" in with disability in general, in the eyes of the American electorate.
  #108  
Old 10-08-2018, 08:15 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,525
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Martin Hyde, don't forget that the reason for Duckworth's disability is war wounds. I don't think that you can lump "disabling war wounds" in with disability in general, in the eyes of the American electorate.
Maybe. Don't forget that 38% of Americans had no objection when Trump criticized the war heroism of John McCain.
  #109  
Old 10-08-2018, 10:04 AM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 3,419
I supported Jim Webb in 2016 (well, until he dropped out, anyway) - a guy like that could NEVER be "swiftboated" under any circumstances. Not gonna happen. And he's a true conservative Democrat, he's pro-gun, he's the kind of guy who could kill it in the Rust Belt and Middle America with blue collar white voters and veterans. But he was far too conservative to make it in the primaries.
  #110  
Old 10-08-2018, 10:18 AM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW.
Posts: 13,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Maybe. Don't forget that 38% of Americans had no objection when Trump criticized the war heroism of John McCain.
The Democrats aren't going to get that 38% regardless. They could nominate George Washington Lincoln II, and still not get those votes.
  #111  
Old 10-08-2018, 10:37 AM
cmkeller's Avatar
cmkeller is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 13,678
Chronos:

Quote:
That's not speculation: It's established fact. He's not allowed to meet one-on-one with women: His wife needs to be present to chaperone him.
First of all, in a debate, he would not be alone with her. He'd be in front of an audience, a moderator or panel thereof, a camera crew, etc. And even then, if he wants his wife in the vicinity, I'm sure that's available to him.

Secondly, Attack from the 3rd Dimension also said that her race would make him uncomfortable.

Basically, that poster is trying to say that because he's a Christian fundamentalist Republican, he's so pathologically racist and sexist that to debate Kamala Harris on stage would give him too much a case of the willies to function properly. That's ridiculous.
  #112  
Old 10-08-2018, 12:13 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 3,419
I agree that the characterization of Mike Pence - who I don't like at all, mind you - is totally absurd. The guy is a brick wall. He's one of the most composed and polished politicians I've ever seen in my lifetime (32 years), just solely in terms of presentation - certainly more so than anyone else in Trump's whole administration (I'm excluding James Mattis because Mattis is not a politician.) Pence is not going to be rattled by anything in a debate, and it doesn't matter how stupid you may find his ideas about women to be.
  #113  
Old 10-08-2018, 01:47 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
I supported Jim Webb in 2016 (well, until he dropped out, anyway) - a guy like that could NEVER be "swiftboated" under any circumstances. Not gonna happen. And he's a true conservative Democrat, he's pro-gun, he's the kind of guy who could kill it in the Rust Belt and Middle America with blue collar white voters and veterans. But he was far too conservative to make it in the primaries.
Altho I like him, ANYONE can be swiftboated.
  #114  
Old 10-08-2018, 02:07 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 3,419
I just don't think that's true. It worked with Kerry because he turned against the war after his service, grew his hair out, attended anti-war rallies, spoke out against the idea of Vietnam being a justified war...the fact that he served in combat didn't make up for this behavior in the eyes of his opponents. Perhaps just as importantly, Kerry came from a moneyed family and his stint in the military was spun as more of an attempt at pedigree-building than a genuine desire to serve the country. (Yeah, yeah, I know - I'm just saying how it was spun.)

None of those things are true of Webb, the circumstances are just different, plus Webb was also Reagan's Secretary of the Navy, those are pretty unimpeachable credentials.

They could try to swiftboat him, but I doubt it would work, mostly because I imagine he would push back against it personally.
  #115  
Old 10-08-2018, 02:31 PM
Gray Ghost is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
I just don't think that's true. It worked with Kerry because he turned against the war after his service, grew his hair out, attended anti-war rallies, spoke out against the idea of Vietnam being a justified war...the fact that he served in combat didn't make up for this behavior in the eyes of his opponents. Perhaps just as importantly, Kerry came from a moneyed family and his stint in the military was spun as more of an attempt at pedigree-building than a genuine desire to serve the country. (Yeah, yeah, I know - I'm just saying how it was spun.)

None of those things are true of Webb, the circumstances are just different, plus Webb was also Reagan's Secretary of the Navy, those are pretty unimpeachable credentials.

They could try to swiftboat him, but I doubt it would work, mostly because I imagine he would push back against it personally.
As he was a Marine who saw combat in Vietnam (receiving a Navy Cross, and a Silver Star), I wonder if there are any Bob Kerrey-like stories about him and his unit that would be used? Not that I think he committed any war crimes, or have any evidence of same, but in war, especially that one, shit happened. Things that made sense at the time might look horrific to a populace not used to thinking about war or understanding that occasionally some people are just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Or maybe I'm just thinking that too much of Fields of Fire was autobiographical.

I liked his candidacy as well, and wanted him to run in 2008.

Last edited by Gray Ghost; 10-08-2018 at 02:31 PM.
  #116  
Old 10-08-2018, 02:36 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 3,419
I really doubt that would be a turnoff for most people. Humans admire combat veterans pretty much universally, except in a handful of religious sects who are not meaningful voting demographics, and the idea that someone killed people in a war is not going to really bother anyone.

But furthermore, could you imagine Trump trying to argue about military policy in a debate with Jim Webb or someone like him? Can you imagine what an idiot he would sound like? I do think the debates (and the subsequent replays and discussions of them online) are a huge part of the election, and in this regard someone who can, for lack of a better word, swing a bigger pair of balls at Trump would be able to take him down a notch or two, to put it mildly.
  #117  
Old 10-08-2018, 02:51 PM
Gray Ghost is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
I really doubt that would be a turnoff for most people. Humans admire combat veterans pretty much universally, except in a handful of religious sects who are not meaningful voting demographics, and the idea that someone killed people in a war is not going to really bother anyone.

But furthermore, could you imagine Trump trying to argue about military policy in a debate with Jim Webb or someone like him? Can you imagine what an idiot he would sound like? I do think the debates (and the subsequent replays and discussions of them online) are a huge part of the election, and in this regard someone who can, for lack of a better word, swing a bigger pair of balls at Trump would be able to take him down a notch or two, to put it mildly.
It was enough of a turnoff to torpedo any ambitions Kerrey had for higher office. A bigger problem would be that Webb will be 74 in 2020. And while that's the same age as Trump, if Trump campaigns like he did at the end of October in 2016, no one should have any questions about Trump's stamina. Biggest problem seems to be that the Democrats don't seem to want white males as their candidates for higher office, which is a reason I don't think Hickenlooper will get much traction if he runs in 2020. It would be interesting to see Webb have to disavow his 1979 article, Women Can't Fight. He had to a bit for his Senate campaign, but it's obviously a much different climate today.

Trump would get his head handed to him by Webb in a debate question concerning military affairs. Which is why Trump would rapidly try to make it about personality or anything else instead. Webb was renowned for being a gigantic asshole who couldn't get along with people when he was SECNAV. And probably contributed to him only being in the job for a year. Did he have the same reputation as Senator?

Of course, all this is academic: I seriously doubt he'll run.
  #118  
Old 10-08-2018, 03:00 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
I just don't think that's true. It worked with Kerry because he turned against the war after his service, grew his hair out, attended anti-war rallies, spoke out against the idea of Vietnam being a justified war...the fact that he served in combat didn't make up for this behavior in the eyes of his opponents. Perhaps just as importantly, Kerry came from a moneyed family and his stint in the military was spun as more of an attempt at pedigree-building than a genuine desire to serve the country. (Yeah, yeah, I know - I'm just saying how it was spun.)

None of those things are true of Webb, the circumstances are just different, plus Webb was also Reagan's Secretary of the Navy, those are pretty unimpeachable credentials.

They could try to swiftboat him, but I doubt it would work, mostly because I imagine he would push back against it personally.
Sure, maybe as far as just attacking his Military service. But now "swiftboating" has grown to mean such things as Birtherism, Hillary Murdered Foster, etc.
  #119  
Old 10-08-2018, 03:02 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost View Post
It was enough of a turnoff to torpedo any ambitions Kerrey had for higher office. A bigger problem would be that Webb will be 74 in 2020. And while that's the same age as Trump, if Trump campaigns like he did at the end of October in 2016, no one should have any questions about Trump's stamina. Biggest problem seems to be that the Democrats don't seem to want white males as their candidates for higher office, which is a reason I don't think Hickenlooper will get much traction if he runs in 2020.
Age isnt a barrier anymore.

Yeah, the Dems hated Bill Clinton.
  #120  
Old 10-08-2018, 03:34 PM
Gray Ghost is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Age isnt a barrier anymore.

Yeah, the Dems hated Bill Clinton.
And today's Democratic party is totally like the one when Bill ran and won. For one, you lot actually seem to care about sexual harassment by your political figures these days...

But hey, go on rolling your eyes. I like seeing my political opponents continue to shoot themselves in the feet.
  #121  
Old 10-08-2018, 04:06 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 3,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost View Post

Of course, all this is academic: I seriously doubt he'll run.
No, there's no way in hell he'll run. And if he did, there's no way he'd get the nomination.

I do think the Democrats' only chance moving forward is guys like Webb though. Unlike a lot of people who think the Democrats need to move to the left and get the "progressive" vote out, I think moving to the right is more likely to win the Presidential election. I'm not saying the Democrats collectively as a party need to abandon progressive platforms, just that at this point in time, I don't think Bernie-type candidates are the ones that can beat Trump in 2020.

I think the Democrats need to win back the Rust Belt from Trump. I think it can be done. I think it will require a man. I think this man will have to have a tough personality, he will have to be aggressive, and be capable of making blue collar workers think he is on their side. I don't think this is impossible. Human beings and their opinions are malleable and subject to being swayed by a charismatic personality. But the focus needs to be on job growth, economic growth, patriotism, the idea of America being a leader in the world again, it needs to be Kennedy-esque...I think it's possible. But I don't know who among the Democrats could step up and do it?
  #122  
Old 10-08-2018, 04:20 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost View Post
And today's Democratic party is totally like the one when Bill ran and won. For one, you lot actually seem to care about sexual harassment by your political figures these days...

But hey, go on rolling your eyes. I like seeing my political opponents continue to shoot themselves in the feet.
I always like when the Repubs give "heartfelt suggestions" on who the Dems shoudl run....
  #123  
Old 10-09-2018, 04:15 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,525
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
I supported Jim Webb in 2016 (well, until he dropped out, anyway) - a guy like that could NEVER be "swiftboated" under any circumstances. Not gonna happen. And he's a true conservative Democrat, he's pro-gun, he's the kind of guy who could kill it in the Rust Belt and Middle America with blue collar white voters and veterans. But he was far too conservative to make it in the primaries.
Polices, schmolicies. Neither Clinton nor Obama had much in the way of policies, but are regarded as great Presidents because they had strong leadership abilities and ... most important ... won their November elections!

I was very disappointed by the 2016 Democratic debates. There were five on the stage: two were just there as stuffing, two got most of the questions, and one — Jim Webb — just stood around getting understandably angry he was seldom called upon. Is it too late to try Webb again?

Or are we just focused on the top names? Two octogenarians and Kamala Harris?? Are those our choices??? (Just give me my cyanide pill now; this is getting too painful to watch.)

Cheer me up, please! Mention someone who has a chance. Hickenlooper? I've never heard of Hickenlooper — should I search for him speaking on YouTube and hope I get enthused?

Last edited by septimus; 10-09-2018 at 04:16 AM.
  #124  
Old 10-09-2018, 07:34 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 88,635
Of course you've never heard of Hickenlooper. You're not a Coloradan. Why would you have heard of him?
  #125  
Old 10-09-2018, 07:52 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,525
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Of course you've never heard of Hickenlooper. You're not a Coloradan. Why would you have heard of him?
Who cares why I've not heard of him before? I'd not heard of most of the proposed candidates. What I want to know is: Is Hickenlooper the man who will ride in and save America?

Kamala or the octogenarians they ain't it. Surely even the D's aren't masochistic enough to go with Warren or Booker. So, should I just pencil Trump in for six more years?
  #126  
Old 10-09-2018, 09:44 AM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 3,419
I'm not sure Booker is as masochistic of a choice as you might think. I think he just might be able to pull it off. The rest, I agree, are unlikely to get it done. I used to think Biden could be a contender, but I don't know anymore. I don't think his age is as big a weakness as many people seem to think, but it still a potential weakness and the candidate has to have as few of them as possible.

My gut feeling is that it will wind up being Warren, and she will lose, and we will have to look at Trump's orange mug every day until 2024.
  #127  
Old 10-09-2018, 09:53 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,855
I'm comforted by the following fact: there are tons of liberals and liberal-leaning voters (and moderates) who either didn't vote or voted 3rd party because they thought Hillary was a shoo-in to win. And she still barely lost, by only a few tens of thousands of votes in 3 states.

So without evidence that Trump's popularity and appeal has grown since election day 2016 (and I've seen no such evidence), then all we need is a candidate slightly better than Hillary Clinton. Maybe not even that, since I don't think as many of those non or 3rd-party voting liberals and moderates will sit out this time.

IMO, all the major Democrats (plus Sanders) discussed in this thread meet that wicket.
  #128  
Old 10-09-2018, 10:09 AM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 3,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
So without evidence that Trump's popularity and appeal has grown since election day 2016 (and I've seen no such evidence), then all we need is a candidate slightly better than Hillary Clinton.
You're making the mistake of underestimating his appeal, the same mistake everyone made the last time around. I do think his popularity has grown among the base, which seems more fired up now than ever...I see no reason why the Rust Belt states who helped him win would be any less inclined to vote for him again, and he continues to hold constant rallies touting his supposed job growth. He will be the incumbent, and the incumbent usually wins.

I don't think "just slightly better than Hillary Clinton" is an acceptable qualification for the Dem nominee. Is this really - really - the time to half-ass it?
  #129  
Old 10-09-2018, 11:10 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
You're making the mistake of underestimating his appeal, the same mistake everyone made the last time around. I do think his popularity has grown among the base, which seems more fired up now than ever...I see no reason why the Rust Belt states who helped him win would be any less inclined to vote for him again, and he continues to hold constant rallies touting his supposed job growth. He will be the incumbent, and the incumbent usually wins.

I don't think "just slightly better than Hillary Clinton" is an acceptable qualification for the Dem nominee. Is this really - really - the time to half-ass it?
Of course not -- hopefully we'll have the best and strongest candidate, and nothing I said conflicts with that. And it's only a feeling -- I'm not making any predictions this early.
  #130  
Old 10-09-2018, 12:34 PM
foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 15,896
I was thinking about this this morning. I think that a lot of the Senators we're discussing seem less than impressive as potential chief executives. Some of that is that we don't always think of Senators as leaders, which is perhaps unfair. I think a lot of that is that we have a stereotype of what a Presidential candidate is like; someone with a feminine manner doesn't fit our stereotypes.

I'm kind of going back to my idea of talking to the senior State Department staff that Trump let go early on. See who they would want to work with, or if one of them would even run personally.

But of high-ranking pols, the names we know, I think the answer may be in leaving behind a conventionally "masculine enough" ticket, and just going with pols who are personally appealing.

Today, maybe for the first time, I thought this: A Warren/Duckworth ticket makes a kind of sense. One has Great Lakes roots and represents the idea of military sacrifice; the other has Great Plains roots and speaks for the middle class and common man. I'd put Warren at the top of the ticket, because she's older and wouldn't have to be the mother to a two-year-old at the time. But Tammy Duckworth as Veep might work out.

Or maybe Warren/Harris. I would like Kamala to stay in the Senate longer and not try to jump ahead to the Presidency too fast; I think being out of the Senate & Bill Clinton's VP for eight years made Al Gore's reputation just a little more ridiculous. But Kamala Harris is not Al Gore, so maybe it'll be OK. Unfortunately for my preference that Kamala stay in the Senate, "Warren/Harris" rolls off the tongue too well. (And of course, as a nerd, I remember that Warren and Harris were the names of two different publishers of hyper-femme comic-book icon Vampirella. This means nothing; but the low-grade weirdness of it makes this ticket feel, absurdly, more plausible.)

Last edited by foolsguinea; 10-09-2018 at 12:39 PM.
  #131  
Old 10-09-2018, 01:32 PM
Catsie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 232
Quote:

. . . there's been SO much anti-Obama propaganda from the right, much of it being racist dog-whistles, that they've turned Obama into a bad word and Trump will double down on Biden's connection with Obama. I can see it in my mind's eye clear as day: "This is a guy who worked for OBAMA, folks. That's right, OBAMA. He was following Obama around like a......like a pet DOG or something. BIDEN THE DOG, folks. OBAMA. OBAMA. While Obama was DESTROYING the economy, yeah, destroying, he destroyed, he was destroying the ECONOMY, he was destroying the COUNTRY....Obama was RUINING AMERICA, with Biden at his side. Biden....OBAMA. OBAMA."
You are persuasive. I can see it, too. All Trump has to do is tweet that a couple of thousand times along with enumerating the cons' perception of all the terrible things OBAMA did and, bye-bye, Dems.

That is, however, assuming Trump runs again. My spidey says he won't. Trump has been awash in stuff from the beginning that he doesn't like and is no good at -- not to mention his low boredom threshold. (He spends much of his time ignoring or even walking out on his advisors when they're trying to brief him on something.)

So who will run instead will have an effect on who the Dems put up.

Right now, Biden is making early-run noises. As for who else they've got? Nobody stands out, but it's early days yet -- kind of. Others had better get on the stick pretty soon, though.

I could live with Biden. (It's amazing, how far my standards for Good President have sunk since Nov 2016. I think I'd consider Booboo Bear at this point.) But I'm not crazy about Harris. We must always remember the "heartbeat away" thing. Gotta think about my VEEP choice some more.
  #132  
Old 10-09-2018, 01:42 PM
Catsie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 232
[QUOTE Trumka-Duckworth 2020![/QUOTE]

Okay, but then it'd be Trump/Trumka. People would get them confused and might vote for the wrong guy by accident.

Last edited by Catsie; 10-09-2018 at 01:46 PM. Reason: better word
  #133  
Old 10-09-2018, 01:44 PM
Inigo Montoya's Avatar
Inigo Montoya is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: On the level, if inclined
Posts: 16,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Who cares why I've not heard of him before? I'd not heard of most of the proposed candidates. What I want to know is: Is Hickenlooper the man who will ride in and save America?
Can he do it? He did a good job as mayor of Denver and then as governor of Colorado. Colorado has a nontrivial immigrant (legal & illegal) population which seems to be well-managed; Colorado pioneered legal weed during his tenure without it becoming a national embarrassment. Colorado isn't particularly large in terms of economy or population, but he was equal to the task of running it and its largest city. I'm pretty sure he'd have to win the election with zero Bible Belt states.

Hickenlooper might make a good president, but from what I've seen of him he's too nice to effectively annihilate Trump in any meaningful (read: Neanderthal) way in ritualized combat. For voters who respond to chest-thumping, it's Trump all day long.

Last edited by Inigo Montoya; 10-09-2018 at 01:46 PM.
  #134  
Old 10-09-2018, 02:50 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,919
Not Hickenlooper. I disqualified him when he and John Kasich began kicking around the idea of a Kasich/Hickenlooper joint ticket. If Kasich has become a "moderate Republican," then the battle is already lost. (Check his record.) That Hickenlooper would even consider such a joint run disqualifies him in my view based on his bad judgment.

I want to see a Mark Warner/Tammy Duckworth ticket. They're both young and have actual government experience. Both could be safely sacrificed from the Senate by 2020 and replaced by Democrats. They know how things get done. They understand the importance of diplomacy in a global world.

Warner is wealthy, but he has voted against his own personal best interests as a senator (tax bill, e.g.). Duckworth brings the military cred. Plus they're both simply stellar individuals, IMHO.
  #135  
Old 10-09-2018, 03:21 PM
Akaj's Avatar
Akaj is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: In the vanishing middle
Posts: 1,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
You're making the mistake of underestimating his appeal, the same mistake everyone made the last time around. I do think his popularity has grown among the base, which seems more fired up now than ever...I see no reason why the Rust Belt states who helped him win would be any less inclined to vote for him again, and he continues to hold constant rallies touting his supposed job growth. He will be the incumbent, and the incumbent usually wins.

I don't think "just slightly better than Hillary Clinton" is an acceptable qualification for the Dem nominee. Is this really - really - the time to half-ass it?
This is my concern, too -- that Rust Belters who maybe only voted for Trump out of dislike for Hillary will vote for him again just to prove they weren't wrong the first time. It's human nature to want to confirm you were right, especially when there are others calling your decision stupid.

So people who might have chosen a Biden over Trump in 2016 will go the other way in 2020.

We need someone who's not just better than Hillary, but in a whole different strata,
__________________
I'm not expecting any surprises.
  #136  
Old 10-09-2018, 03:53 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 3,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
I want to see a Mark Warner/Tammy Duckworth ticket. They're both young and have actual government experience. Both could be safely sacrificed from the Senate by 2020 and replaced by Democrats. They know how things get done. They understand the importance of diplomacy in a global world.
Warner sounded like a good prospect to me when someone here described him, but I remember looking up videos of him on YouTube and feeling like he lacked the charisma and aggression to get it done in the election. His voice and mannerisms reminded me of Tim Kaine. I don't think that's the kind of guy we need.
  #137  
Old 10-09-2018, 03:56 PM
Inigo Montoya's Avatar
Inigo Montoya is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: On the level, if inclined
Posts: 16,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Not Hickenlooper...
Fair enough. BUT even if he's a DINO, he's neither incompetent nor evil, and he can grab Republican votes away from Trump. If he runs as a Dem, what are liberal Dem voters gonna do--throw a tantrum and sit it out so Trump gets reelected?
__________________
Y'all are just too damned serious. Lighten up.
  #138  
Old 10-09-2018, 04:07 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
Warner sounded like a good prospect to me when someone here described him, but I remember looking up videos of him on YouTube and feeling like he lacked the charisma and aggression to get it done in the election. His voice and mannerisms reminded me of Tim Kaine. I don't think that's the kind of guy we need.
It was probably me that described him earlier. I'm still sold on him.

I've watched him a lot, and he's no Tim Kaine. He's the co-chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, working with Richard Burr (R-NC) on their part of the Russia investigation. It's the only congressional committee that's managed to hold it together and has continued to work in a bipartisan way. I admire Warner for that.

I'll allow I may be wrong, but it's possible you're underestimating the public's appetite for draaaaama and chaos by 2020. I have a feeling that a steady, non-dramatic, competent, experienced and honest ticket may be just what the doctor ordered.

He ticks the white male boxes and isn't "coastal." Duckworth brings the women and the non-white interest.

I've no idea if he's even interested in the job. But I'd sure get behind him if he is. I urge you to give him another look.

Last edited by Aspenglow; 10-09-2018 at 04:08 PM. Reason: More thoughts.
  #139  
Old 10-09-2018, 04:47 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,525
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
Warner sounded like a good prospect to me when someone here described him, but I remember looking up videos of him on YouTube and feeling like he lacked the charisma and aggression to get it done in the election. His voice and mannerisms reminded me of Tim Kaine. I don't think that's the kind of guy we need.
Yes, stage presence is the key quality we need. Forceful presence and good rhetoric skills are important traits for a President to have but, even more importantly, they're essential to getting elected. I agree with you about Tim Kaine he was quite lacking in "Presidential stage presence."

But I'm not sure I'm always a good judge of "stage presence." That's why I asked others to evaluate Hickenlooper. Booker? I don't think so. Harris? Maybe, but I'm doubtful.

Biden? I love Joe Biden, and I think he has good "stage presence." But health can deteriorate very quickly in old age. He might be a youngish 75 year-old now but an old 77 year-old when debating for the big job. Read my posts in 2016 I was rooting for the Democrats to ignore the primaries and select Biden instead! (Dopers laughed at me for this and suggested that I study Civics 101 but then it turned out the Chairwoman of the DNC was seeking the same solution behind closed doors.)

But Biden in 2020, four years older? No. Drop it.
  #140  
Old 10-09-2018, 04:50 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 13,259
I would like to see Mitch Landrieu be taken seriously.

The Landrieu family tree is a bit mysterious, with rumors suggesting that his family have some African ancestry. Even if they don't, he clearly understands the plight of Black Americans and he understands racial injustice that ordinary whites don't. Moreover, he understands racial polemic in ways that other "progressives" (like Bernie Sanders) don't really seem to feel comfortable acknowledging or talking about openly.

At the same time, Landrieu is a guy who is well connected to state politics and he understands generally how the game of politics is played. Unlike Bernistas, he understands you can't just fall on your own sword. You have to have pragmatism and a real-world understanding of issues, not just chant "$15 per hour" to actually accomplish change. Landrieu understands you have to build coalitions.

I gotta say, I've got nothing against Kamala Harris, Corey Booker, or Joe Biden, but Landrieu just seems like a better choice.
  #141  
Old 10-09-2018, 05:27 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Biden? I love Joe Biden, and I think he has good "stage presence." But health can deteriorate very quickly in old age. He might be a youngish 75 year-old now but an old 77 year-old when debating for the big job. Read my posts in 2016 I was rooting for the Democrats to ignore the primaries and select Biden instead! (Dopers laughed at me for this and suggested that I study Civics 101 but then it turned out the Chairwoman of the DNC was seeking the same solution behind closed doors.)

But Biden in 2020, four years older? No. Drop it.
Why not? Look, 80 ain't what it was when you were a kid.
  #142  
Old 10-09-2018, 06:29 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 13,259
Mitch.

Bitch.
  #143  
Old 10-09-2018, 06:55 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Mitch.

Bitch.
Ditch.
Itch.
Hitch.

Whatthefuck is your point?
  #144  
Old 10-09-2018, 07:29 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 88,635
Quote:
Quoth Aspenglow:

Not Hickenlooper. I disqualified him when he and John Kasich began kicking around the idea of a Kasich/Hickenlooper joint ticket. If Kasich has become a "moderate Republican," then the battle is already lost. (Check his record.) That Hickenlooper would even consider such a joint run disqualifies him in my view based on his bad judgment.
It's not that Kasich is a centrist. He's quite conservative. But the thing is, that makes him pretty much unique among current Republican politicians: He's the only conservative Republican out there. Most of the rest are Trumpist radicals. And, frankly, we need conservatives.
  #145  
Old 10-09-2018, 07:39 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
It's not that Kasich is a centrist. He's quite conservative. But the thing is, that makes him pretty much unique among current Republican politicians: He's the only conservative Republican out there. Most of the rest are Trumpist radicals. And, frankly, we need conservatives.
I don't like many of Kasich's stances, but at least I respect him.
  #146  
Old 10-09-2018, 07:49 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 3,419
I don't respect him. He shouldn't have run in that primary if he wasn't running to win, and he half-assed it. He talked a big game about how uncouth Trump was, so if he wanted to be president instead of Trump, he should have tried to, you know, beat Trump. He didn't try. He totally lacked heart in those debates. At one point in one of the debates, in his closing statement, he said something like, "I hope you vote for me...I'd really appreciate it", in a supplicating tone that utterly undermined any stage presence he might have had. I actually laughed out loud when he said it because it sounded so pathetic. I respect people with mettle and moxie, not sad-sacks like Kasich.
  #147  
Old 10-09-2018, 07:53 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
It's not that Kasich is a centrist. He's quite conservative. But the thing is, that makes him pretty much unique among current Republican politicians: He's the only conservative Republican out there. Most of the rest are Trumpist radicals. And, frankly, we need conservatives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
I don't like many of Kasich's stances, but at least I respect him.
Think women will get behind him?

Pay particular attention to the first segment on abortion. Also wants religion taught in schools.

We don't need conservatives like this, IMHO.
  #148  
Old 10-09-2018, 07:58 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 13,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Ditch.
Itch.
Hitch.

Whatthefuck is your point?
Mitch Landrieu. President of theeee U-nited States of 'Merkuh
  #149  
Old 10-09-2018, 07:59 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 13,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
I don't like many of Kasich's stances, but at least I respect him.
Kasich is a nice guy, but he's a pussy.

America needs a lion.
  #150  
Old 10-09-2018, 09:11 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Think women will get behind him?

Pay particular attention to the first segment on abortion. Also wants religion taught in schools.

We don't need conservatives like this, IMHO.
Well, he's no Democrat. He's moderate for GOP.
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 11:09 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