Until Pence asks her, “Senator Harris, while you were California’s Attorney General, why didn’t you appeal a Ninth Circuit Court decision that rendered part of your state’s own Constitution, put there by majority vote of the people, to the United States Supreme Court?” (The decision invalidated California’s “Proposition 8,” which put the statement “California only recognizes marriages between one man and one woman” into the state’s Constitution.)
You think that’s a trick question? The US Constitution, and US Supreme Court rulings based on it, supersede anything at state level, despite all this Federalist nonsense. Pence knows that too.
I can’t even begin to make a good guess as to who would ultimately make the best foil to Trump. I’m going to watch for the candidate that seems the most natural, charismatic and able to connect with people, and vote for that one.
That being said, if I could pick my dream ticket based off of resume and demographics, it would be Richard Trumka and Tammy Duckworth. Trumka’s a big burly coal miner from Pennsylvania who would easily capture the blue collar and labor vote, he’s a Washington outsider who knows intimately how Washington works, he’s a fiery speaker and would make the race a good old fashioned labor-vs-capital slobberknocker. And Duckworth’s a suburban mom who brings female-ness, color, vet status, Midwestern cred and a bit of feel-good inspiration to the ticket, plus she’s not afraid of mixing it up with Trump. Trumka-Duckworth 2020!
Second pick: Bill McRaven and Hilda Solis-- a retired Navy Seal who led the raid on Bin Laden, from Texas, a leader from outside the beltway, likely a moderate, good speaker, has been praised by Trump in the past for his leadership. Pair him up with a progressive, pro-labor (her father was a union organizer) daughter of Latin immigrants who served somewhat under the radar in the Obama cabinet, and also served as a Congresswoman, currently serves on Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. McRaven-Solis 2020!
Just FWIW, Deval Patrick is starting to test the waters, even though he’s been out of the MA governorship for awhile, and refused Clinton’s contacts about being her running mate due to family pressure. Or maybe it’s just more rumormongering.
I mean, I get what you’re saying but I don’t really see the connection to my original point, which was that the debate is more than just the candidates debating their position, it’s a performance where they demonstrate their abilities at not just answering questions but also getting emotional reactions out of the audience and out of each other. It’s a battle of wits, a battle of egos, a battle of personas, it’s political theatre. That’s just what it is.
Typically that battle is rather sedate because politics used to be different. Trump changed all that. Now it’s a crazy Wagnerian psychodrama. Just calmly trying to answer Trump’s questions isn’t going to win the debate. Making him look like a bitch is what’s going to win the debate. Making him look scared, shaken up, making him fucking choke like Eminem in that rap battle at the beginning of “8 Mile.”
About Hillary’s being female:
It’s shitty that we’re in a situation where this is a weakness to electability. OK? It’s shitty. But now is the time to finally depose this stupid motherfucker from office and put an end to the circus once and for all, and failure is not an option. This is not the time to make a stand, blaze trails, break barriers, etc. It is the time to win at all costs.
Sure, but Clinton smashed Trump in “a battle of wits”, too. I’m pointing out what mattered to the Trump audience, and it wasn’t (just) about him being a proud boor.
She *did *all that. It didn’t matter.
Yes. But confidence creates charisma. Being scared of what the deplorables think has been a massive strategic blunder. Showing strength and confidence and boldness can even attract some of their votes.
In terms of fantasy favourites, I’d love to see Ted Lieu (D-Hawaii) headed for higher office. I’d be fine with him as Veep.
Are we restricting this to people who might actually run? Because Brian Schweitzer, former Montana governor, would mop the floor with Trump… but he’s made it absolutely, completely, abundantly clear that he wants no part of Washington politics.
For plausible candidates, I’ll agree with E-Dub on Hickenlooper/Duckworth.
And even if it’s not Duckworth, I definitely want to see a woman in the VP debate against Pence. The resulting inevitable meltdown would not only be good for turning voters against him, but it’d be hugely entertaining, too.
If that’s really what you believe, I don’t think anything I can say is gonna change your mind. I guess I can only speak for myself in saying that I do not believe she did all that, not remotely.
“Because you’d be in jail” is not the kind of comeback delivered by a guy who is rattled by his opponent.
Biden.
He has name recognition. He doesn’t alienate racists or sexists (which lets be honest, is important for the time being). I believe polling showed him the strongest against Trump in 2020 (and yes I know polling isn’t perfect).
As long as he signs decent left wing legislation and he uses the powers of the executive, I’d support him.
He’s an extremely good speaker. A little bit folksy and can make a point without sounding like a politician. I would vote for him. Just be aware Dems that he is very pro-energy companies so if he wins expect fracking wells in your backyard
Really, the correct answer here is “two people with pulses”. Unless Trump somehow becomes massively less unpopular in the next two years, any halfway decent candidate will be a heavy favorite against him.
Politics these days is 90% turning out your base, so screw all this “we need a Southern white guy with a military pedigree!” crap.
I’ll go with Sanders-Harris as my dream ticket right now, but we have IMO a great many perfectly good options.
Also: Tammy Baldwin!
When you talk about his unpopularity, you’re implying that you trust the polls. I learned on November 9th of 2016 to never, ever, ever do that again. To me, the numbers, polls, and prognostications of pundits and analysts have been discredited permanently. I never believe them anymore.
Actually, recent polling showed Sanders and Biden both beating Trump by about 15%, with Warren winning by 4% and others in dead heats or losing. In all cases, though, Trump had only about 30% support consistently; what changed was the ratio of Dem supporters to undecideds. (I’m on my phone, but I linked it somewhere around here).
What this says to me is that it’s ALL about name recognition at this point. But Bernie Sanders was at like 3% name recognition at this time last cycle, so that doesn’t really matter; there’s plenty of time for a good candidate to introduce him or herself.
Again, to hell with the racists and sexists. We lose more votes than we win by pandering to them (coughTimKainecough).
Having said all that I would certainly be fine with Biden, though he wouldn’t be among my first choices.
Well, you’re being kind of silly then. The polls were fine, actually a bit better than they usually are. They predicted that Clinton would win by 2-4%, and she did. The polls indicated that Clinton was about a 2-1 favorite to win the Electoral College, and the slightly less likely outcome occurred.
Anyone who thought “2-1 favorite” meant “absolute guaranteed lock winner” just doesn’t understand numbers, and that’s not the numbers’ fault.
Many people used to take a certain competency for granted at this level. I don’t think they will so much next time around.
I think we found out that competency matters to far fewer people than we had assumed.
If you can state what she should have done differently in the debates, then by all means, please enlighten us. All that you, and some other posters, have done here is just bashing.
So maybe we’ll just have to stay with “Not suck” and “Be Bernie”.
Agreed. I like Biden, but I’m afraid he’s too old. And he’s really starting to look it, which is even worse. I might go with someone more experienced than Duckworth, though. Not sure exactly who, but I don’t think the 2nd line of the ticket matters all that much.
I like Bernie, too, but he also has an age problem. He was able to use that pretty effectively last time, but I don’t think he can pull it off again.
It’s fascinating to see people seeing Biden as super-electable. I like the guy too, on a personal level, but I think he already comes off as a goofball-- and will seem like more of one two years from now. Elderly white goofball is already a somewhat poisonous brand. Of course, I could be totally wrong.
I’m gonna propose Gillebrand/Harris as a solidly electable ticket. Both have experience, solidly progressive (but not too much so) credentials, young and fresh (but not too much so), and they’re smart women, a perfect counterpoint to a dumb-ass man (no matter which one the GOP nominates).
I’m putting G at the top because I think she’s a little sunnier and friendlier; Harris makes a good #2 attack dog. I’m sure racial stereotyping has something to do with this perception, but we’re supposed to be ruthlessly pragmatic in this thread, so I won’t feel too bad about it.
TWO WOMEN? WHAT? Look, we’re ready as a country, it’s going to happen, and more women vote than men in presidential elections already. Pandering to the sexist vote is not going to gain a Democrat many more votes these days; the people who think women are inferior (ETA – enough so that they strongly think a woman shouldn’t be president) are really unlikely to vote Democratic anyway. A not-too-lefty, smart, blonde white woman – who doesn’t have Clinton’s baggage – will gobble up GOP women voters who don’t like Trump for any of the obvious reasons.
That’s my WAG.