Page 15 of 51
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 5:40 pm
by 96583UP
she is unfit to be president. she has a firewater drinking problem and wants trade the country away to NATO for some glass beads
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 5:41 pm
by 96583UP
Bi_3 wrote:
No reservations about endorsing this announcement.
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 5:42 pm
by B
Give me Kamala Harris or give me death.
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 6:10 pm
by Biff Pocoroba
I like Warren but don't want to see her as President. I'd be happy with a post in a new administration though.
Not that she really has a chance to be elected. But didn't we all think that way about Trump?
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 6:12 pm
by wease
Biden/Warren ticket?
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 6:16 pm
by 96583UP
what's your dream ticket?
Biden / O'Rourke
Warren / Harris
Bloomberg / Springsteen
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 6:21 pm
by Bi_3
wease wrote:Biden/Warren ticket?
That’s not representative of the America that the enlightened people see in Brooklyn and San Francisco
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 6:22 pm
by 96583UP
Bi_3 wrote:wease wrote:Biden/Warren ticket?
That’s not representative of the America that the enlightened people see in Brooklyn and San Francisco
more like the kind of XHALE VAPE conspiracy that those regions have been fuming about: the subjugation of superior female activists to INFERIOR MALE SCUM
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 6:39 pm
by Superblood Wolfmoon
My thoughts on the current Democratic field:
Cory Booker: amateur hour
Kamala Harris: amateur hour
Bernie Sanders: love him but too old
Elizabeth Warren: Hillary part 2
Joe Biden: love him but too old
Beto: probably their best chance if he can get a cohesive message together and run a disciplined national campaign
Amy Klobuchar: "President Klobuchar" just doesn't sound right. Not happening.
Eric Garcetti: Don't know enough about him...that's a problem.
Bloomberg: Please god not another billionaire
Hickenlooper: See Klobuchar
Eric Holder: too angry, too divisive a figure
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 6:52 pm
by 96583UP
we share many similar views. my thoughts:
Cory Booker: lacks charisma and his closeted homosexuality is a political liability
Kamala Harris: is too immature for this race
Bernie Sanders: too far left and too old
Elizabeth Warren: Hillary part 2 only less connected
Joe Biden: love him but too old but would take his corpse over most of the Dem field
Beto: probably their best chance if he can get a cohesive message together and run a disciplined national campaign and prob has a giant d1ck and checks the box with his billionaire wife
Amy ”the rocket” klobuchar: should not be considered a viable candidate
Eric Garcetti: should not be considered a viable candidate
Bloomberg: would be a great president and would beat trump but prob doesn’t have what it takes to win the Dem nomination vs the other plugged-in-to-the-party candidates (remember superdelegates?)
Hickenlooper: See Klobuchar
Eric Holder: should not be considered a viable candidate
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 6:57 pm
by Norah
if you think warren is hrc p2 then you probably don't see much further than the fact that they both have lady parts
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 7:02 pm
by Bi_3
What has Beto accomplished other than handsomeness?
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 7:03 pm
by McParadigm
Bi_3 wrote:What has Beto accomplished other than handsomeness?
Who would you most like to see run?
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 7:04 pm
by run2death
cutuphalfdead wrote:if you think warren is hrc p2 then you probably don't see much further than the fact that they both have lady parts
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 7:05 pm
by Bi_3
McParadigm wrote:Bi_3 wrote:What has Beto accomplished other than handsomeness?
Who would you most like to see run?
Hmmm... Bloomberg/Harris I guess.
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 7:13 pm
by McParadigm
I could live with that.
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 7:21 pm
by McParadigm
Part of the problem right now is that the midterms and specials indicated to a much greater degree than anyone is ready to publicly admit that, barring a third party ticket that splits the vote or a sea change in his behaviors (lol), Trump has no good path to reelection. So a lot of people (like Booker) who simply would never have any odds on a presidency otherwise now recognize that this is the one moment in their lifetime where they might pull it off. It’s hard to throw that away on purpose.
I don’t see any use in tracking the primary process at this stage. It will be like any other process (see: Speakership): the list will thin out as people conduct test polls, find out they can’t win or will risk too much, and/or make support deals in exchange for cabinet level hopes. Some of these people aren’t really even planning to run, but are using the language and motion of it to gain a better seat at the policy table.
Literally business as usual, just a bit more caffeinated this year.
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 7:24 pm
by Simple Torture
In the past hundred years, do you know how many VPs have been elected to the presidency after their POTUS completed their term? I'm asking for a specific reason...
- Spoiler: show
- The answer is 2: HW Bush and Nixon (obvi Nixon had some years between his VP term and his presidency). I'm asking because I wonder if the idea that the vice presidency is a stepping stone is overhyped--why would someone like Harris want to lock herself into a position that doesn't really historically demonstrate a path to the Oval Office, which she so obviously wants?
Worth mentioning that Johnson, Truman, and Coolidge did win presidential elections, but only became president due to a president dying in office, so one could perhaps inscribe an incumbency advantage there (Ford was the other VP who served as POTUS, but he never won re-election--he's a great pub trivia answer for the question "only POTUS never to be elected president or Vice President).
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 7:36 pm
by 96583UP
run2death wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:if you think warren is hrc p2 then you probably don't see much further than the fact that they both have lady parts
HRC2 in that she might appear on the surface like she has a chance to win / could be competitive but ultimately lacks the crossover appeal (among other things) to actually win
personality wise, her overbearing aggression, apparent lack of self-awareness, and lack of charisma (outside of her already-dedicated sect) are similar to hillary. and doesn’t help that physically she actually looks like her too
obv Warren is waaay more liberal than killary, however
but hillary wasnt stupid enough to take a dna test to disprove something DJT said
<smokes peace pipe>
months ago i posted about how much i was looking forward to Warren running; and maybe 3 days later she came out unprompted with that stupid dna test
made herself look like a total ass
and acting as if she was already the nominee / front-runner
she is a good senator and could be a good POTUS but she can’t win this race. she dq-ed herself with the dna thing. but at least she demonstrated to us her judgement skills when under duress early so we can save some time taking her candidacy seriously over the next 2 years
Re: Election 2020
Posted: Mon December 31, 2018 7:40 pm
by Norah
96583UP wrote:run2death wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:if you think warren is hrc p2 then you probably don't see much further than the fact that they both have lady parts
HRC2 in that she might appear on the surface like she has a chance to win / could be competitive but ultimately lacks the crossover appeal (among other things) to actually win
personality wise, her overbearing aggression, apparent lack of self-awareness, and lack of charisma (outside of her already-dedicated sect) are similar to hillary. and doesn’t help that physically she actually looks like her too
obv Warren is waaay more liberal than killary, however
but hillary wasnt stupid enough to take a dna test to disprove something DJT said
<smokes peace pipe>
months ago i posted about how much i was looking forward to Warren running; and maybe 3 days later she came out unprompted with that stupid dna test
made herself look like a total ass
and acting as if she was already the nominee / front-runner
she is a good senator and could be a good POTUS but she can’t win this race. she dq-ed herself with the dna thing. but at least she demonstrated to us her judgement skills when under duress early so we can save some time taking her candidacy seriously over the next 2 years
Asher has the better take on this.