Rdskns2000

Presidential Election 2020 - Same Idiot Joker vs Batwoman or Batman

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/10/tulsi-gabbard-how-a-progressive-rising-star-is-a-paradox-for-the-left

 

That's not going to win you a Democratic primary. I'm going with candidates who I don't think will be apologists for dictators. The whole DNC resignation seemed like a politician stunt that worked. She'll have support from Bernie folks but I don't know if that will last when others start bringing up some of the issues up on a debate stage

 

Interesting. 

 

Reading some more, I get what she's doing in trying to keep us from rushing into that war with Syria, you can see from her quotes her intentions and making clear if it could be proven he should be executed (she's not even pretending to be nice, I welcome this change on my side of aisle, even if I don't 100% with everything she does, she came across like he was trying to defend him, that's not what happened).

 

As for the Musin thing, that's another one that kinda helps her more then people realize when you look at why she said stuff like not forcing human rights issues to require a relationship with India.  We don't do that with China because they are our largest trading partner, in an ideal world, we threaten to cut people off if they don't follow all the rules, but right now, if we don't firm up our relationship with India, we risk losing them to China. 

 

She's acting in many ways like a pragmatic republican while still being a progressive liberal, that's rare, and I expect it to ruffle some feathers on both sides (again, something we could use right about now).

 

I still agree with you, I don't like the idea of House members being President, I want more experience in legislation or actual governing.

Edited by Renegade7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

She's acting in many ways like a pragmatic republican while still being a progressive liberal, that's rare, and I expect it to ruffle some feathers on both sides (again, something we could use right about now).

 

I still agree with you, I don't like the idea of House members being President, I want more experience in legislation or actual governing.

That's why she's not going anywhere in the primary.

 

I'm fine with a House member with multiple terms being President. Some of them are very impressive (see Adam Schiff). Now that's probably the lowest position I'd be willing to go. Any body who's only been a mayor isn't getting my vote. Though experience doesn't seem to matter anymore. Any crooked reality TV host can be president now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

That's why she's not going anywhere in the primary.

 

I concede, but I still like her.

 

2 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

I'm fine with a House member with multiple terms being President. Some of them are very impressive (see Adam Schiff). Now that's probably the lowest position I'd be willing to go. Any body who's only been a mayor isn't getting my vote. Though experience doesn't seem to matter anymore. Any crooked reality TV host can be president now.

 

Winning is easy, governing's harder...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2018 at 8:06 AM, Springfield said:

Dems lack of support for Hillary?  They GIFTED her the nomination.  

 

That’s absolutely absurd, in real life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2018 at 8:59 AM, TheGreatBuzz said:

I wasn't a Dem but one of the main reasons I didn't vote for Hillary (voted 3rd party) was because of the way she was gifted the nomination.  One, I felt like she hadn't really been challenged policy discussion wise.  Two, it felt to me like more of the same old DC insider games that I hate so much.  Now I will admit that I thought Hillary would comfortably win the elections so it made my protest vote easier.  I don't know if I would change it in hindsight but I would definetly give it a lot more thought.

 

While I disagree entirely with the premise that a woman has ever been given any position of power in this country, & your thinking gave us both Bush & Trump, & I do respect the subtle hint of humility. Humility, even in a limited capacity, especially on the internet, is something I will always respect.

On 12/11/2018 at 9:19 AM, TheGreatBuzz said:

It is an interesting article though I'm pretty sure I have read it or something very similar before.  I have often argued a similar point.  Using two current hot button topics, I'm not sure how much the collective of politicians want to fix immigration or gun control.  Whatever their position is on it, if they got it passed they would lose that topic to run on.  I'm not saying they consiously don't fix things but it's my guess as part of the reason nothing really happens.  Like the article said, if both parties are against deficits, why do we have deficits?  Because it gives them something to campaign on.

 

Why did Bill Clinton & republicans ever balance the budget? It’s extraordinarily naive to suggest people, which is the state politicians originally come in, don’t want their children, and grandkids, being taught how to handle an active shooter situation. Obama wasn’t pretending to care about it as he wept for the kids in New Town or broke into amazing grace in South Carolina. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2018 at 12:05 PM, Momma There Goes That Man said:

 

That was just one example. The point is just that a lot of Dems weren’t enthusiastic about Hilary which was the original point of her not being supported. Turnout was low for her for several different reasons 

 

Anyone who compares a vote for McCain, who served our country with honor & has always been respected by politicians on each side - with a vote for Trump, who is an illiterate, treasonous, racist, sexual predator, who set up a fraudulent university, boasted of walking in on female children getting undressed, evaded paying taxes, paid off a porn star he cheated on the mother of his child with, who was conspiring with Russia & uses the office for profit ... well, isn’t particularly astute. I don’t suspect writers for “the great debaters II” will be looking to the ES for content. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2018 at 12:05 PM, Momma There Goes That Man said:

 

That was just one example. The point is just that a lot of Dems weren’t enthusiastic about Hilary which was the original point of her not being supported. Turnout was low for her for several different reasons 

 

Yes, that’s why she only got as many votes as Obama did the last time he ran. This was billed as Obama’s 3rd term, most thought it was a done deal, misogyny runs deep in this country, Comey concealed investigations into Trump/Russia while crushing Hillary in an unprecedented act as he abdicated his professional responsibility entirely in an effort to appear tough, for his bro’s, on the woman he assumed would be his next boss... and somehow she only got as many votes as Obama did 4 years prior. Point, made.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Why you say that? 

 

She was one of the first ones in DNC to call out the obvious favoritisim for Hillary over Bernie, even resigned her position if I remember correctly.  She was also a combat medic in Iraq.  I'm not a fan of House members running as opposed to Governors or Senators, but I would not be against her showing what she has to see if someone will put her on a ticket or give her a cabinet position.

 

She's also smoking hot and pulls no punches, but I've seen her full-length interview twice, so again, curious why you're so against this, because from my perspective, that's what we need if we're going to have a progressive wing, ones with actual military experience, not just wishful thinking sunflowers.

 

Favortism from the Democrats, who had their money raised by Hillary, over a guy who simply wanted to use what had been built entirely by others, again, namely Hillary, when it was convenient fir him. Another rich white guy who is a victim of powerful, hardworking, women. Poor Bern - he’s unabashedly not a Dem, until he needs Hillary’s work to work for him. 

 

Humans...interesting bunch. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2016 is over, can't change it.  Just learn from it and do thing different in 2020.

 

I am kind of disappointed no one major has announced yet.  We just got a couple of minor names in the Dem race so far.  If you are running in 2020; you need to be up and running by President's Day: 2/18/18.  

 

2020 Primary Schedule

 

The first caucus is tentatively Feb. 3, 2020.   March 3 is Super Tuesday Part 1 and that now includes the biggie- California.

So, if your a serious candidate for the Democratic nomination; you need be make the decision now and forming your campaign team.  You are going to need lots of money and since some big states have earlier primaries/causcuses now; you need to go to more places than the past. Alot of those early primary states, have early voting in February.

 

So, the Dems candidates need to start running.  Obviously, some are just running to get their names out there. The real serious ones, need to get cracking. It's going to be brutual blood both.  You already have the bright star in Beto.  Betomania could sweep the country.  With 20-30 candidates; it's going to be tought to break through.  For many, the race will be over; long before the actual voting starts.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rdskns2000 said:

2016 is over, can't change it.  Just learn from it and do thing different in 2020.

 

Ah, the pragmatic ESer. What can we glean from 2016? It makes me mourn for humanity when I hear, or read, humans expressing such a misguided sentiment. We need to do things differently because a woman, in the United States, won by 3 million in the face of rampant voter suppression, Comey’s unprecedented act, & a candidate that committed an untold number of crimes to back into the White House? That’s wholly irrational. The obstacles of 2016 are impossible to duplicate & have fired up the left, the left that just won a 3rd term by 3 million. 

 

 People, on television, who puppet that line, simply envy Hillary Clinton.

 

This is like someone stealing a 15 million dollar painting, getting caught, & rather than returning the stolen item to the owner, it is auctioned off to those who claim they have learned from the victims mistakes. “The victim didn’t have a ring device!” If she had, the perpetrator wouldn’t have been able to steal, now her property is available to the highest bidder. Literally, greedily, & conveniently, ignoring the victim of the crime & looking to gain from the commission of that crime.

 

Your premise is slightly flawed, imho.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2018 at 8:31 PM, Renegade7 said:

 

Winning is easy, governing's harder...

 

#UnexpectedHamilton 

 

for Trump it’s “Tweeting is easy, orange man, governing’s harder” 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/beto-o-rourke-narrowly-tops-moveon-2020-presidential-straw-poll-n946501

 

Bernie isn't even winning progressives.  Thankfully.

 

Quote

An early straw poll of members of the progressive group MoveOn.org shows a wide-open competition for liberal voters in the 2020 Democratic presidential contest, with Rep. Beto O'Rourke narrowly beating out former Vice President Joe Biden.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

Beto isn’t even a leftist, he’s just trendy. Kinda confirms my thinking about Bernie’s base of support from 2016. Much of it was more rooted in anti-establishment sentiment than it was true leftist political views. 

 

That said, Beto is trendy because he’s young and charismatic. If he can tap into Bernie’s base like that poll suggests, consider him a front runner the minute he announces. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, skinsfan_1215 said:

 

Beto isn’t even a leftist, he’s just trendy. Kinda confirms my thinking about Bernie’s base of support from 2016. Much of it was more rooted in anti-establishment sentiment than it was true leftist political views. 

 

That said, Beto is trendy because he’s young and charismatic. If he can tap into Bernie’s base like that poll suggests, consider him a front runner the minute he announces. 

 

Beto is trendy because he's the anti-Trump.  Young, thoughtful, coherent, positive, inclusive.  Keep in mind that poll was of MoveOn people, not Democrats as a whole.  In other words, Beto is winning among progressives, but he'll do even better among establishment Dems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

Looks like some State GOPs are proactively squashing any attempt to run against Trump for the GOP nomination.

 

https://www.thestate.com/news/state/south-carolina/article223302340.html

 

 

It's going to be real funny when it all comes crashing down during the primaries. The GOP makes it impossible to run against Trump but that's when everything finally comes out about Trump. The Mueller investigation report us released.  The GOP will be stuck with the Trump cactus around their necks.

 

Plus, the recession should be in full bloom then.

 

One can dream anyway. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But remember, 

 

The reason Trump won was because the DNC rigged the election to mandate Hillary.  

 

(At least, according to a good chunk of Trump voters, and every Bernie Bro who stayed home, hurt, because Bernie wasn't nominated for no other reason than the fact that he didn't win a single actual primary.)  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/17/2018 at 12:58 PM, skinsfan_1215 said:

 

Beto isn’t even a leftist, he’s just trendy. Kinda confirms my thinking about Bernie’s base of support from 2016. Much of it was more rooted in anti-establishment sentiment than it was true leftist political views. 

 

That said, Beto is trendy because he’s young and charismatic. If he can tap into Bernie’s base like that poll suggests, consider him a front runner the minute he announces. 

 

Why isn't he a leftist? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

 

Why isn't he a leftist? 

 

he is capitalist swine, but decidedly liberal.

 

 No True ...... I guess 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Castro has declared. On Meet the Press now. 

 

Know nothing about him. First thought is "Odds of somebody named Castro winning Florida?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.