You’re shocked and saddened by that?
Do you know who won the election, despite all the things he and his party have said and done in recent years? Hang on to your monocle, I’ve got to get you up to speed.
The way I see it, I got NO prob with Kamala Harris running again – if she enters the primaries from scratch as just one more, who has to earn it, with no implication that she is some sort of “heir presumptive” or that it’s “her turn”. I supported Hillary C. in 2016 but I did see that perception of a coronation by default work against her.
Thing with this last year is: if on that night of the first debate the “good” Joe Biden had shown up, the whole “is Harris running in 2028” issue would be just one more case of the low chances of a sitting VP making the move up.
Sir, I was and still am upset, shocked and bewildered that a person like Trump won a 2nd term. Living in far away India, my hubby was wondering why I was so upset on the day of election as the results were coming out.When Pennsylvania was called for Trump I closed my ipad and shut off the TV, couldn’t bring myself to watch further.
I was soo looking forward to Kamala being installed as President. (Tbh my relatives…a lot of them usa citizens…cautioned me that the possibility of Trump winning was high but I didn’t believe it till the results were out).
I saw the title of this thread. I wasn’t really interested and gave it a pass. Then, I saw a certain thread in ATMB. I was curious and skimmed the thread, reading the discussion between yourself and Miller.
He’s right. You are wrong. Your position is both racist and misogynist. You have made plenty of unsupported assertions (Miller has already pointed them out).
I never would have seen any of that, if you hadn’t started that ATMB thread.
Part of me says she did well enough to merit another shot. Another part says that the next election is so important that we ought to just say ef it and go with two straight male WASPs.
In the sense of providing what the electorate wants, apparently so. He’s stupid, evil, ignorant, bigoted and incompetent; and that’s what the American public wanted. Along with being a white male, of course.
IMHO both Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris did lose in part because they were women (and in the latter case non-white). But they were also competent, intelligent, educated, in opposition to bigotry and otherwise represented the things a plurality of Americans despise.
The Democrats suffer from an electability problem due to being insufficiently stupid and vile for the taste of the American public.
Sometimes when shit rolls downhill, it just takes a little more time to get there. Trump and his cronies spent the Biden term perfecting which buttons to push, and how far to push them.
I have no idea why you seem to think you caught me doing something inappropriate or something, like I should be deeply ashamed that I left a trail of bread crumbs for you to find my misdeed. I posted all this stuff publically and I’m fine with everything I posted. I also have no idea why anyone would care how you came into this thread.
For the democratic candidate? No, I don’t think he’d get a lot of democratic voters. For the republicans? For the purpose of winning an election? Maybe. Shit is pretty fucking terrible over there. It wouldn’t be the whole picture – just part of the complex table of strengths and weaknesses that gives you a net result.
I get that you seem to be trying to get me in some sort of “gotcha”, that if you ignore the fact that I said electability is a factor, and not the whole of the suitability of a candidate, and that winning elections is separate from competence at fulfilling the job, that you’re trying to say that I say Trump is the best choice for president because he got elected, but I don’t think whatever you were trying to get at really makes any sense.
Imagine, for a moment, the democrats ran openly atheist candidates in 2016 and 2024 and lost both times, but the Christian candidate they ran won in 2020. There’s a strong anti-atheist bias in the US, and while it’s decreasing over time, it’s still a big enough factor to be a significant reason a lot of Americans would not vote for such a candidate. Imagine, too, that the opponent is a theocrat that wants to stomp atheists in the dirt whereas the other potential candidates will advance the cause of separation of church and state even though they themselves are religious. Despite being gung ho about having non-religious politicians, I would absolutely say we shouldn’t run an atheist again in 2028, and that if we do, it will likely elect a candidate that will harm atheists much more than having the first openly atheist candidate would help.
If you guys are logically consistent, you’d say I was massively bigoted against atheists, though we don’t have a term for that which is as nasty to be comparable to sexist and misogynist.
Let’s skip over all the imaginings and get to the point. Which candidate do you think the Democrats should have run against Trump that would be effective against all the lies, rumors and innuendo the Republican Party was ready and willing to spew to gain power?