I really don’t think it’s accurate to say that the electorate doesn’t put veterans in the presidency.
It would be more accurate to say that, in recent years, the candidates who have won elections have tended to not be veterans. But it doesn’t follow that they lost the election because they were veterans.
The past two presidents (including Trump) have been non-veterans. Trump ran against a non-veteran. Obama won against a veteran (McCain) and then a non-veteran (Romney.)
I don’t know what exactly George W. Bush would be classified as. A lot of people would say he is not a veteran, but there’s no denying that he signed his name on the line of the proverbial blank check payable to the government, because anybody who joins the military in any capacity does so. W flew a supersonic fighter-interceptor, which is not something that just anyone can do. I’ve never been one to jump on the bandwagon of denigrating his military service; whatever war may have been going on in another country, someone has to be here manning the domestic defenses, and supersonic interceptors were a key component of SAC (Strategic Air Command.) Maybe W really did join the ANG to “get out of” Vietnam, but he could have done nothing, as Trump did.
In both of his elections, Bush ran against veterans who had actually deployed to Vietnam, and he defeated both of them. Gore was behind the lines, not in the field, but he was “in country”. Kerry served in combat, though the opposition really managed to do a number on his service and make him out to be some kind of anti-war hippie who “disgraced” his service. Whatever…it worked, apparently.
OK, how does this sound? Hickenlooper as President, with Duckworth as VP. You’ve got your standard old-young ticket balancing, the headliner is a white male to appease the bigots, but you still have a woman on the ticket. Duckworth also brings out the veterans, and she’s already successfully navigated one attempt to swift-boat her.
I think thats’s perfect. Hickenlooper can’t be cast as an “ivory tower” east coast elite, and plus he has a funny name so any attempt by the haters to make fun of it will backfire. I’ve thought of him as a possible top of the ticket but I couldn’t think of a veep until your post.
I think the issue is more that few people could name anything positive or even notable from Hillary’s tenure in those positions. So no, not really an analogy fail, John.
I don’t think Trump has an overwhelming Republican base. I think he is losing them daily and that those who stepped in line when he was elected will desert him in the next election if someone electable comes along. So far, that person is not in the picture. I think Rubio wants to run again, but that town hall pretty much buried him. Ironically, I think he participated in it because he wants to run again, but it didn’t work.
Kamala Harris is a “San Francisco liberal”, who has been staunchly opposed to the death penalty. Why not run the original-- Nancy Pelosi? She’s a young and vigorous 77.
Now, I’m all in favor of ditching the death penalty, but I’m not sure an anti-death penalty candidate can win.
I could live with that. Except Hicks is only 66, not really “old”. Nice combo. Illinois and Colorado. Il is criritcal. I would love to see someone from Fla, however.
Who’s going to beat him? Kasich? Cruz? The clown car?
I have full faith and confidence in the base at the very least saying, well, he’s the only one who could beat the Dems, and voting accordingly…not to mention the delusionals who still buy into how he’s Making America '50’s Again.
I love Bernie Sanders, and it is nice to have the most popular politician in the country in your potential field of candidates. But he’s way too old (he was too old last time, too, though it didn’t matter because his opponents were too). I am hoping some younger progressive will emerge who can unify and add to the Bernie coalition. I have generally favorable impressions of Booker, Harris, and Gillebrand, but don’t know a whole lot about them. Warren would be OK, but if we’re going with an elderly white person from New England, there’s a better option. My personal dream candidate would be Tammy Baldwin, but she doesn’t appear to be considering it.
I saw a story in 538 a while back mentioning that Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon had been doing some speaking engagements in Iowa, but haven’t heard him mentioned anywhere else. My friends and family in Oregon, who all adore him, haven’t heard any rumors about him running. As the only Senator who endorsed Bernie in 2016, he would go to the front of my line if he runs, as long as he proves he can run a strong campaign.
Someone will presumably run on the right side of the Dem primaries, which could well be Hickenlooper or Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar. These candidates wouldn’t excite me, but of course if it comes down to it I would vote for a ticket of Joe Manchin and and dalej42 against anyone the Republicans are likely to nominate.
Biden is a wild card, as he could potentially bridge the gap between the Clinton and Sanders factions by appealing to Obama nostalgia. He’s also far too old in my opinion, but if he runs, he seems to be the early favorite in the polls. I like the guy…everyone seems to like him, but I don’t know how many primary voters will make him their first choice.
