Come back! Need discussion...2020 PresidentialFollow

Ahoy crazies.

I simply can't forget my password for this site. Like my very first phone number I still remember.

Here's the thing; there are gobs of dems already declaring their intent to run for prez. I'm already being torn between two great ladies. Need discussion.

My tops right now..

I <3 Liz Warren - like me, she doesn't know when to shut up. She's wicked smaht, tough as nails, but the 'R's despise her almost as much as Hilary.

Amy Klobuchar - She's mouthy too, but more moderately so. She seems to be respected on both sides of the aisle. Is the revelation that she's a 'tough' boss a factor? Her dad was one of the few columnists I read as a youngster growing up in mpls - I'm afraid I can't be neutral

It's a duel between who can best beat the current pres and who can best lead the country and our dysfunctional congress.

As much as I want to like Kamala Harris, I'm leaning toward Amy Klobuchar as of now because she is moderate. However, I have not done any research in their platform. If the DNC doesn't stop chasing shiny objects and get an identity, they will lose again.

Losing the identity politics could help too.

Everyone plays identity politics.

Thanks. Tomorrow is the big day. I've never been so simultaneously excited and terrified.

Well that would explain it. It's such a great partnership in the show, it seems it would have stood out more in the story. I had planned to reread the book before this season, but .....SO much to read!

The rumblings I'm getting from many of the pundits that I allow access into my brain are implying that the only two with a chance to win president in 2020 are Biden and Bernie. While a Bernie-Biden battle going into the primary finals would be a fun battle to watch, I don't think either are the person we need sitting in the white house. I need to find some new voices....

Latest on Hickenlooper. He reminds me of what you might get if you got Mr. Rogers drunk enough to loosen his tongue and forget his niceties.

What is known about Jay Inslee, current gov of Washington?

As far as I know, his primary platform is climate change which isn't going to be enough to carry him far. Maybe it should be, but it ain't.

I've zero interest in Sanders. I like Biden but wish he had run last cycle. I guess my only concern really is his age but he seems hale to me. Interested in Hickenlooper, Klobuchar, Booker, Harris. Maybe Gillebrand if she runs. Warren does nothing much for me. Really I'm just in wait-and-see and data collection mode right now though.

Well Beto is in. Biden is still not, but media makes it sound as if it's inevitable.

I'm skeptical about Beto O'Rourke. He talks the talk, but has, as far as I can tell, skirted the 'walk'.

Right now, I'm putting Amy on top of my list. There's time....

How about that brexit?!

I'm tired of Beto Bernie and Biden already.

Biden made the 'slip' of tongue, which seemed to me to be a properly planned slip, about running. So, I think it's pretty safe to add him to the list of candidates. I suspect he'll have the backing of the DNC and since the last election and the revelation that the DNC are just another elite body deciding who gets to play, they'll be more careful this time around.

Jesus Christ here. How less daft can a human be, compared to you?

Do you even value any policies whatsoever of any candidate? LOL I mean I replied a previous reply wondering but hadn't yet acknowledged such an utter lack of morality. Totally amoral reasons for voting for the most powerful human in the world, who could easily kill millions of others.

"voices" what in the fuck does that mean? Better liars about Medicare for all? Your brain is cottage cheese and I despise the brain such as you have. You're Lori Loughlin's USC bitch child. Nothing more.

Edited, Mar 19th 2019 4:38am by Palpitus1

Gabbard, Warren, and Sanders are the only possible choices here-now that would upset the military-industrial-banking-1%-complex

There's no one you can vote for as president that will seriously impede the military industrial complex. Voting for presidents isn't how that's done. You're shoehorning these murdered kids where they really don't belong.

Keep those kids where they belong, in poor, strategically important countries.

if that's what the pundits are saying, then the Dems have a really tough road ahead. I don't think either of those two are electable in the long run. And that's before even getting into the whole "I thought the Republicans were the party of old white men" angle.

I think that the real problem for the Dems is that they have hitched their wagon to identity/victim politics for so long that it's almost all they have left in terms of platform and agenda. As a result, they are increasingly pressured from the very identity/victim groups they've been courting for so long into accepting, if not adopting, policy positions that are vehemently opposed by those who aren't nutjob crazies. For every young foolish idealist they snatch up via this process, they lose like 1.5 reasonable rational voters. The rise of folks like AOC in the party is pushing out the very voting block that cost them the election last time around: working and middle class blue collar workers.

The Dems need to figure out how to appeal to that group, not double down on the insanity. It's going to be incredibly hard for any candidate to thread that needle and manage to appeal to the young idealists while not pushing away the folks who care about things like their paychecks, mortgage costs, health care costs, providing for their children, having jobs still available in 10 years, heck even having a "plan" they can look to that goes more than 6 months into the future. Once you get out of your turmoil ridden teen and young adult years, you really do want things to stabilize a bit. You want to know what things are going to be like down the road so you can plan your life. What the far left is arguing for would introduce yet more chaos that a lot of voters just aren't going to want.

And those are the voters the Dems need. I suppose if they could find someone who fit the identity checkboxes but wasn't defined by them, they might be able to pull it off. But the problem is that if you are a Dem and a member of any of those identity groups, you kinda have to be defined by that. You can't be a female Democrat without being fully behind every feminist group. You can't be a black Democrat without being fully behind every single black based organization, no matter how out there. Ditto for all other groups. And as some of those groups get more loud and more fringe, they (the politicians, not the groups) find themselves unable to ever say "no" to them. Again, no matter how nutty the positions and proposals are.

The Democrats need to be able to tell the voters where they stand, not just what they stand for. It's easy to say you're for a cleaner environment. But clearly stating where in the spectrum of possible positions on the issue you are is harder. Identifying where the balance between cost to implement and value of the action proposed is difficult. But, IMO, it's necessary. And the Dems just have a hard time doing it. Even the folks getting cornered on the whole NGD thing are having to fall back to half statements, and vagueness to try to wiggle out. It's clear they don't agree with the whole set of proposals, but they can't actually say so openly and publicly. And as long as that's the case, the Dems are going to struggle with this.


Doesn't mean they can't succeed. Just that it's going to either require someone with just the right message, or a whole lot of blatant lying and folks looking the other way until the election is over. It could happen though.

Edited, Mar 21st 2019 11:48am by gbaji

I'm definitely with you on the latter. I'm partially with you on the former.