Trumpka is brilliant.
The credentials would be awesome. I’m not sure he’s a natural, tho. And the republicans have successfully made “union” a dirty word. And other than city/county/state/federal workers, union membership is the lowest in 50 years.
I’d vote Independent before i voted for any San Francisco Democrat. No Harris. Or Newsome.
Yep. SF Liberals are not only Progressive but pretty much all SF politicos are corrupt, I dont trust any of them.
I would not laugh at Michelle as Veep. Maybe. Depends on her Prez candidate. As Prez? No way.
Harris has done nothing as Senator. Not even much as AG of CA. Why on earth is her name even being mentioned?
Because she is a black woman?:dubious:
But Americans’ opinion of labor is the highest it’s been in years. There’s opportunity there, even if union membership numbers don’t show it. I posted this earlier in the thread. Sixty percent of Americans view organized labor favorably; 75% of millenials do; 53% of people over 50 do; and even 44% of Republicans do.
While wages stagnate and employment just doesn’t feel as “full” as it should, people are becoming aware, maybe, that labor is the only organized group fighting that. Trumka could totally take that message to the American voter, especially blue-collar, rustbelt voters. The fact that he represents such a wide swath of workers (from pencil pushers and nurses to factory workers and taxi drivers to skilled trades and librarians to firefighters and football players) means he can speak with some degree of understanding to almost any worker in America.
He’s a bit outside the box, I’ll give you that, but I still think he, paired with Tammy Duckworth or Seth Moulten, would be nigh unstoppable.
Promising newcomers often wilt in the public spotlight. The GOP had a lot more promising newcomers than Democrats have. But by 2016 they just weren’t ready and some will never be. Kamala Harris and Cory Booker both have serious deficiencies to overcome if they want to impress on the national stage.
By all means there should be newcomers in the primary, but if they can’t stand in the same spotlight with Biden and Sanders without looking half as intelligent then it’s time to go back to the Senate and think about 4-8 more years there. On the Republican side I hope to see Marco Rubio and Rand Paul again but that depends on their development, as with any prospect in sports. And I dare say that Harris and Booker especially are not even at Rubio or Paul’s level yet.
He has his issues, but he certainly meets the “has the qualifications and ability to make a good President” threshold. Hickenlooper too.
Biden is the only one I can support without reservations. Booker too if he takes the damn mask off.
Maybe Harris hasn’t stood out except to progressive insiders and hardcore politics fans like me, but Booker has been on the national state to some degree for a decade or so. The idea that he’s not at Rubio or Paul’s level is nuts to me. Booker’s downsides in terms of a Democratic primary are close ties to Wall Street and similar; his upside is that he’s by far the most obviously talented and charismatic Senator since Obama.
Talents which he doesn’t use because he won’t say anything even remotely interesting in unscripted settings. He’s just so tentative and cautious. Obama at least made it look like he was acting naturally in those settings, but Booker looks like he’s scared to death of putting his foot in his mouth or taking a position on an issue not vetted by his handlers.
Besides, he said very clearly on the Larry Wilmore Show that he’s not interested in being President, so case closed.
Of course, Wilmore didn’t believe him and said Booker could have all the “weak tea” thrown at him for not keeping it 100 in his “keeping it 100” spot. If anyone had been watching the Nightly Show it could have been a damaging moment.
Anyway, Booker has to let Cory Booker out, or at least look like he’s letting Cory out, to have any chance against Donald Trump, or even Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders. Real dudes always beat fakes.
Now Harris, I follow her on Twitter and it’s by far the most vapid account on social media. It’s as if Maureen Dowd is writing the tweets. She needs to check out Tammy Duckworth’s twitter to see how to do it right.
If you’re judging politicians by twitter feeds, then you’re doing it wrong.
It’s not only that, it’s just what stands out the most. Realistically, we shouldn’t be judging politicians by one speech, but it happens. IT’s not like Harris says anything remotely useful that isn’t said by her party leadership. She’s a footsoldier, not a leader.
These sorts of sweeping judgments, especially this early, are just silly. We’ll find out.
If she runs, she’ll sink or swim. We can agree on that much. I’m just betting on sink at this point. She hasn’t really established a brand yet beyond being a progressive. But to translate that into a Presidential run, you have to either be a leader of that movement(why take a footsoldier when you can have the leader?), or establishing a brand as an independent thinker, like McCain or Biden. This was also the path Obama chose. He was never a maverick, but he also established early on that he wasn’t just there to take orders from Reid and Durbin. Harris is a consummate team player at this early point in her career. Booker has established his own brand, so he’s got that going for him at least.
Tell me one thing she has done as Senator that stood out. I have seen nothing and she is from my state. Maybe 10 years from now…
I think there will be a revolt almost as bad as the GOP has if they don’t give the VP slot to a serious progressive favorite.
And that’s where Harris could be extremely well suited. She’s a progressive, but a team player, which means she won’t create problems for a corporate Democrat the way someone like Liz Warren would.
But in general I think you’re right, both major factions need to be on the ticket. A progressive should choose a moderate or even conservative from a swing state. I get the feeling though that the Bernie Bros aren’t interested in compromising with the mainstream of the party. If they get their guy on top, the VP is going to be just as progressive.
Which isnt either Harris or Newsome.
If** adahe**r thinks Harris could be good for the Dems, what does that say about her? :eek:
What’s wrong with Newsome?