Jump to content


Dems Rebuild


Recommended Posts


13 hours ago, Moiraine said:

I think I brought it up a day or 2 ago, but I wonder how term limits would effect how the GOP members of congress are dealing with Trump. If they didn't have to win their next election, maybe they wouldn't be so despicable.

But they'd also be a lot less accountable to the people. Double edged sword.

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

Pelosi laying the groundwork to force the GOP's hand on a DACA protection bill. If Paul Ryan is going to continue to be a moral coward who is too afraid of his right flank to act, someone will need to twist his arm.

 

As much as Pelosi gets ripped on when she screws something up, she should get a modicum of credit when she does something right. As much as many of us may not like it, she will be the new Speaker next year if Dems flip the House.

 

 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, dudeguyy said:

Pelosi laying the groundwork to force the GOP's hand on a DACA protection bill. If Paul Ryan is going to continue to be a moral coward who is too afraid of his right flank to act, someone will need to twist his arm.

 

As much as Pelosi gets ripped on when she screws something up, she should get a modicum of credit when she does something right. As much as many of us may not like it, she will be the new Speaker next year if Dems flip the House.

 

 

Pelosi has to win re-election before she can be the speaker: Nancy Pelosi just got a challenger and he's a 'pretty hard-core' Bernie Sanders supporter

Link to comment

30 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

Hey, the tax cut bill was unpopular, so the Dems will run against that, right? Right?

 

 

More wishy-washy mealy-mouthed nonsense.

Repeal & replace is a bit too reactionary for my tastes. I'd tell most of them to run on fixing the tax law so average people aren't getting ripped off to give Trump & his rich buddies or gigantic corporations tax breaks. Make fat cats like Trump pay a fair rate instead of seizing power & immediately cutting themselves a massive check at everyone else's expense.

 

In other words: Don't just be a reactionary that lies to people (repeal & replace). Explain, in simple, powerful terms, why Trump & the GOP are wrong, & how we can fix it.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment

This is definitely someone to keep your eye on. He first caught my eye when he ran to be the DNC chair, but honestly I'm pretty glad he didn't get it. His career trajectory is probably better staying in South Bend.

 

Could he be the Rust Belt hero Dems are looking for? Lord knows running as a progressive out of South Bend would be a stark contrast from Pence. On the other hand, I'm not sure how well an openly gay Democrat could do statewide in Indiana or nationally, for that matter. I'd like to think we're in a new era vis-à-vis sexuality, but we've also seen how the nation reacted to electing the first black president, and in many ways it hasn't been pretty.

 

 

A couple interesting quotes:

 

Quote

Sipping a brown ale last summer at Four Winds Field, home to a Chicago Cubs minor league affiliate, Buttigieg laid out his strategic pitch. Democrats should fight for fairness and their own, pro-government version of freedom—to marry or bargain collectively or switch jobs without fear of crippling medical debt, all with the help of basic public protections. “Some people my age are seduced by this libertarian idea,” he says, “[of] having very little of anything by way of a role for government. I found that in my personal experience, freedom is secured by good government just as it’s threatened by bad government.”

It is a message that should resonate throughout the country, Buttigieg feels, among voters from diverse racial and socio-economic backgrounds. Targeting discrete slices of the electorate is counterproductive, and Democrats aren’t that effective at it anyhow. “I don’t think the left-versus-center competition is really intelligible anymore,” he adds. For too long, Democratic politics were “simply keyed off whatever’s going on on the Republican side.” Now that the Republican Party is “completely scrambled,” a Democratic Party that “doesn’t know how to be anything but [the GOP’s] mirror image is in an equal-but-opposite scramble.”
------
Buttigieg believes Democrats shouldn’t shy away from uphill battles. “It matters how we compete, even in the areas we’re never going to win,” he says. “Especially if you believe true victory looks less like a day when Democrats are in control everywhere, [and] looks more like a day when Republicans are starting to sound more like Democrats.”

 

Certainly for me, that's hitting a lot of the right notes. I think there's a lot of wisdom in there.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

I hate to admit this but having a gay presidential candidate in 2020 would worry me. I want the safe bet right now to get rid of the current trash. I'm already thinking of some groups that wouldn't vote for him in as high of numbers (religious Black and Hispanic voters, for example), that the Democratic candidate needs to have. I like to think 10-20 years from now a gay candidate wouldn't be anything for people to bat an eyelash at.

Edited by Moiraine
  • Plus1 2
Link to comment

I agree about 2020. Maybe that'll still be Buttigieg in a decade or two? He's still really young at 36. 

 

I find myself thinking a straight white male is probably the safest option quite often. I'd like to think a Kamala Harris or a unique candidate like Buttigieg would be good but there is a definitely some risk there. White America was obviously feeling threatened or marginalized in 2016 and we all saw how that worked out. It's going to be very interesting, though, because the 2020 field will likely feature a diverse mix of candidates like Harris, Booker, Garcetti, maybe a Castro & possibly Warren along with the staple, safer options like Biden, Bernie, Cuomo & De Blasio. Wonder which way things will go.

Edited by dudeguyy
Link to comment
1 hour ago, dudeguyy said:

I agree about 2020. Maybe that'll still be Buttigieg in a decade or two? He's still really young at 36. 

 

I find myself thinking a straight white male is probably the safest option quite often. I'd like to think a Kamala Harris or a unique candidate like Buttigieg would be good but there is a definitely some risk there. White America was obviously feeling threatened or marginalized in 2016 and we all saw how that worked out. It's going to be very interesting, though, because the 2020 field will likely feature a diverse mix of candidates like Harris, Booker, Garcetti, maybe a Castro & possibly Warren along with the staple, safer options like Biden, Bernie, Cuomo & De Blasio. Wonder which way things will go.



Yes I agree with this too. I hate the fact that it even enters my mind.

To be really blunt, I'm hoping 10 years from now after a bunch of senior citizens die it'll help with that some. I know there are younger people who are racist but hopefully a smaller percentage.

Edited by Moiraine
Link to comment

2 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

yes...Please Dems....If Trump is still in office, don't go haywire and put up someone who is going to be controversial.  

I don't think there's a non-controversial candidate since controversy can (and will) be manufactured by the opposing side. If the Dems can get out of the way and have an unbiased primary, I think a decent candidate will emerge. (Or at least I hope.)

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
4 hours ago, RedDenver said:

I don't think there's a non-controversial candidate since controversy can (and will) be manufactured by the opposing side. If the Dems can get out of the way and have an unbiased primary, I think a decent candidate will emerge. (Or at least I hope.)

 

 

They also need someone without baggage.

And also, I don't think a female candidate is necessarily controversial, but Warren is pretty boring. I don't think she would appeal to enough people. I would definitely prefer Harris over her.

 

Really I just want someone who can pull independents and a few Republicans over. And someone who won't excite Trump's base into voting in higher percentages. That was probably part of the problem with Clinton. I bet more Republicans voted because of her.

Edited by Moiraine
Link to comment
4 hours ago, RedDenver said:

I don't think there's a non-controversial candidate since controversy can (and will) be manufactured by the opposing side. If the Dems can get out of the way and have an unbiased primary, I think a decent candidate will emerge. (Or at least I hope.)

And that has been that way since the beginning of time.


But, some candidates are more so than others.

Link to comment
33 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

They also need someone without baggage.

And also, I don't think a female candidate is necessarily controversial, but Warren is pretty boring. I don't think she would appeal to enough people. I would definitely prefer Harris over her.

 

Really I just want someone who can pull independents and a few Republicans over. And someone who won't excite Trump's base into voting in higher percentages. That was probably part of the problem with Clinton. I bet more Republicans voted because of her.

That's what Hillary's campaign tried to do and failed. Remember this horrifically wrong take by Schumer: “For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia, and you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin.”

 

A different candidate might have better success, but it's risky. I'd prefer a more progressive candidate, but the Dems need to go with a candidate that at the very least appeals to the Democratic base voters.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...