Jump to content
TGHusker

The Way to Early 2020 Presidential Election

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

 

The truth drives people nuts sometimes. The level of vitriol towards female politicians makes it pretty clear to me that it (the level, not its existence) is due to their gender. Same goes with Obama. Disliking these people doesn't mean you're sexist or racist. But overall the level of negative attention and lack of negative attention for others makes it pretty obvious that gender and race are a factor.

 

There is a big difference between people who think everyone who disliked Obama disliked him because he was Black and people who think the level of hatred towards him was due in part to his race. You should be differentiating between the 2, even if the former annoys you, and not get annoyed when someone points out the latter. Do you really think they are treated equally by the media?

 

I agree completely with the people who said yes to the top question. Even a woman's clothing is scrutinized if she wants to run for office. And there is a tight rope they have to walk between being too serious and not being charismatic/friendly enough. I don't envy the ones that try.

 

FT_16.05.19_womenLeaders_more_offices.pn

 

 

Who were the respondents for that poll? Gen pop? Politicians?

Share this post


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

 

 

Who were the respondents for that poll? Gen pop? Politicians?

 

 

I think it was general population. I don’t have the link anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Clifford Franklin said:

 

You're dang right I'm disappointed in Liz Cheney for not having the backbone to denounce her party's obvious racism.

 

That doesn't mean I'm not disappointed in Warren for lack of judgement. It's damn near disqualifying for me and as a result she's pretty far down on my 2020 wishlist.

 

Are you willing to agree both are wrong as well?

That’s fair. 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Clifford Franklin said:

I usually don't give a flying f#ck about the eyerollers but apparently ITT they want me to just exclaim loudly how stupid Warren is and give Liz Cheney a pass.

I’ll admit openly I was one of the eye rolls and I’ll stand by it with how that post read. You clarfied later and I agreed with you. 

 

Liz Cheney isn’t running for president though. 

 

Doing what Elizabeth did and then expect to be voted for as the person with great morals.....well, doesn’t quite work that way. 

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

I’ll admit openly I was one of the eye rolls and I’ll stand by it with how that post read. You clarfied later and I agreed with you. 

 

Liz Cheney isn’t running for president though. 

 

Doing what Elizabeth did and then expect to be voted for as the person with great morals.....well, doesn’t quite work that way. 

 

Your second line is fair as well. :cheers

 

Considering the wide field of potential 2020 candidates aiming to take on Trump, an error of judgment of that magnitude is pretty dang near disqualifying. Especially if Trump and the GOP is going to make it central to re-election because they're decisively losing the war of ideas. At least Warren is contributing some good ideas to the discussion.

 

I don't think she's very likely to win the nomination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, StPaulHusker said:

Amy for America

 

#Klobuchar2020

I liked what she had to say. The snow made for quite the scene too. Love the idea of people being automatically registered upon turning 18. Universal health care was in there, strong focus on being green. Net neutrality. Improving quality of life for middle class.

 

Seems like someone who can work across the aisle and garner bipartisan support. Not sure what her chances are but she did get some great exposure during the Kavanaugh hearings and could appeal to the Midwest.

 

Through the full event I only counted 4 mentions of Prince and about a dozen instances of circle jerking about being tough Minnesotans. Seemed kind of low. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, mrandyk said:

I liked what she had to say. The snow made for quite the scene too. Love the idea of people being automatically registered upon turning 18. Universal health care was in there, strong focus on being green. Net neutrality. Improving quality of life for middle class.

 

Seems like someone who can work across the aisle and garner bipartisan support. Not sure what her chances are but she did get some great exposure during the Kavanaugh hearings and could appeal to the Midwest.

 

Through the full event I only counted 4 mentions of Prince and about a dozen instances of circle jerking about being tough Minnesotans. Seemed kind of low. 

 

 

 

I agree that the references to Prince and the weather were getting tiresome.  Otherwise I thought she did great.  I think she will appeal to more people across the spectrum compared to some others that have announced their candidacy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think all the Warren native american stuff was a way overblown, dumb, thing that doesn't have any bearing over whether i would vote for her. I'm sick of people like Trump beating things like this to death and making them far more important than they really are. I want to know a candidates policies/agenda, and their chances of  actually getting things done that i want done. Too far left i think wont work, and too far Right, i hope they don't get their agenda passed as i support none of it.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, schriznoeder said:

 

The stupidity and shallowness of American politics is well represented in this Twitter exchange....

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Klobuchar's issue is that she doesn't suffer fools, that could work in her favor. 

 

Klobuchar and Kamala are occupying a lot of the same space; tough, smart Democrats who look calm and fearless grilling the weasels brought before the Senate. Gillibrand has a lot in common, too, and Warren was in the same space four years ago and just seems less fresh. They will be asked to separate from each other and probably undermine each other. It will be interesting to see how it shakes out, and perhaps unfortunate if a man like Biden steps in to clean up the cat fight. 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Elizabeth Warren and the tribal citizen.  Yes it was wrong, stupid, and was claiming that which wasn't her's to claim.  Long term it won't amount to a hill of beans IMHO.  I'm glad Warren is in for a couple of reasons 1.  I think her entry keeps Bernie out. (just watch Bernie announce on Tuesday:facepalm: to prove how little I know).  She is more articulate in communicating the same things Bernie stands for.  2. I don't think she wins the nomination but I think it will force the Dems to look at younger candidates who have a similar message.   3. At this point, I'm thinking Sen Booker is helped by her  entry.  Why:dunno  Because there are  several female candidates with very similar political view points who are Senators who may end up splitting the vote of those who want a female nominee and because Booker's message is a bit different than the other Senators in the race.  Perhaps a bit more moderate. In 2016 the GOP had several experienced, true conservatives in the primary and 3 were senators.  Trump was able to differentiate himself from them and pick them off one by one.

Senators Harris, Klobuchar, Warren, Gillibrand are all cut from a similar cloth and I'm not sure how well they will be able to differentiate themselves from each other.  Throw in Rep Tulsi Gabbard who is not a lot different and we have a big log jam of similar female candidates.  The same would be true if all of these were male candidates.   Of these, I think it will come down to Klobuchar (experience), Harris (the flaming new star) and Booker - the alternative.   If Biden gets in, you may see him take the 'experience ' mantle and become the compromise candidate.  But I don't think he would be the best choice for the Dems.  I think the country is crying out for new younger leadership that understand today's problems.  Also, can't forget the darkhorse South Bend Mayor Buttigiegs and Tex Rep Bevo or I mean Beto (couldn't resist).  I don't think either will get the nomination but I think they will bring some fire into the discussion. 

 

https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-political-scene/pete-buttigiegs-quiet-rebellion

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my thoughts on Warren.  You remember there was a woman years ago that worked for the NAACP and claimed to be black....which it found out she wasn't actually black.  Well, she lost her job and was publicly ridiculed.  Now, thinking about that, it's quite possible that she did that so she could get a job at the NAACP because she really believed in the cause and wanted to further the cause.


Well.....nothing about what Warren did was to "further a cause".  It was completely 100% to take advantage of benefits that are put in place to help minorities.  If she got into the college because they thought she was native American...well..that very well may have kept a real Native American out (or some other minority member).  Her actions were completely 100% self serving.  Does that mean she should resign or have her career in congress ruined?  No.  But, I have no desire to vote for her for President because of it either.  

 

We have been building to a point where political people all across the spectrum are having their lives ruined because of crap being dredged up from decades ago.  I'm fairly uncomfortable about that and I wish it would stop.  We even try ruining people over stuff that can't be substantiated.  

 

I wish there was a way out of this never ending cycle of people accusing people of stuff from decades ago.  But.....I'm not sure there is one.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

Regarding Elizabeth Warren and the tribal citizen.  Yes it was wrong, stupid, and was claiming that which wasn't her's to claim.  Long term it won't amount to a hill of beans IMHO.  I'm glad Warren is in for a couple of reasons 1.  I think her entry keeps Bernie out. (just watch Bernie announce on Tuesday:facepalm: to prove how little I know).  She is more articulate in communicating the same things Bernie stands for.  2. I don't think she wins the nomination but I think it will force the Dems to look at younger candidates who have a similar message.   3. At this point, I'm thinking Sen Booker is helped by her  entry.  Why:dunno  Because there are  several female candidates with very similar political view points who are Senators who may end up splitting the vote of those who want a female nominee and because Booker's message is a bit different than the other Senators in the race.  Perhaps a bit more moderate. In 2016 the GOP had several experienced, true conservatives in the primary and 3 were senators.  Trump was able to differentiate himself from them and pick them off one by one.

Senators Harris, Klobuchar, Warren, Gillibrand are all cut from a similar cloth and I'm not sure how well they will be able to differentiate themselves from each other.  Throw in Rep Tulsi Gabbard who is not a lot different and we have a big log jam of similar female candidates.  The same would be true if all of these were male candidates.   Of these, I think it will come down to Klobuchar (experience), Harris (the flaming new star) and Booker - the alternative.   If Biden gets in, you may see him take the 'experience ' mantle and become the compromise candidate.  But I don't think he would be the best choice for the Dems.  I think the country is crying out for new younger leadership that understand today's problems.  Also, can't forget the darkhorse South Bend Mayor Buttigiegs and Tex Rep Bevo or I mean Beto (couldn't resist).  I don't think either will get the nomination but I think they will bring some fire into the discussion. 

 

https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-political-scene/pete-buttigiegs-quiet-rebellion

Maybe from the conservative perspective Harris, Warren, Gillibrand, Klobuchar, and Gabbard seem similar, but I see Warren and Gabbard as being significantly different from the others. Warren is much more progressive on policies similar to Bernie (although Bernie is still to the left of her on most issues). Gabbard is one of the only outspoken anti-war, non-intervention candidates running. Harris, Gillibrand, and Klobuchar are somewhat similar in that they're from the corporate/establishment wing of the party but as the primary continues I think we'll see that they'll distinguish themselves from each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe Klobuchar will be able to distinguish herself apart from the others because she is from the middle(in general terms) of the country.  Which is where Clinton lost big and where Democrats still lag behind.  Harris and Gillibrand are from the coasts.  And while it shouldn't be a disqualifier, people from the Midwest typically take an unfavorable view towards them compared to others from the start.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

I believe Klobuchar will be able to distinguish herself apart from the others because she is from the middle(in general terms) of the country.  Which is where Clinton lost big and where Democrats still lag behind.  Harris and Gillibrand are from the coasts.  And while it shouldn't be a disqualifier, people from the Midwest typically take an unfavorable view towards them compared to others from the start.

I think her coming from the middle won't be an advantage since winning the California primary is worth more delegates (362) than Minnesota (65), Wisconsin (67), and Michigan (109) combined. But it's a proportional split, not a winner-take-all, so this is just to give a rough idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

I think her coming from the middle won't be an advantage since winning the California primary is worth more delegates (362) than Minnesota (65), Wisconsin (67), and Michigan (109) combined. But it's a proportional split, not a winner-take-all, so this is just to give a rough idea.

 

I don't think she will have a difficult time winning over Californians.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

I believe Klobuchar will be able to distinguish herself apart from the others because she is from the middle(in general terms) of the country.  Which is where Clinton lost big and where Democrats still lag behind.  Harris and Gillibrand are from the coasts.  And while it shouldn't be a disqualifier, people from the Midwest typically take an unfavorable view towards them compared to others from the start.

And the all important Iowa caucus is right next door.   Good points on Amy.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, schriznoeder said:

 

 

I'm slowly remembering shallowness and attention paid to the most puerile details on political Twitter, and by extension our politics in general, and it's making me begin to hate it.

 

But my goodness, what a good response from Klobuchar. I think a winning approach to 2020 is to stay focused on the issues most of the time and pick your spots to respond to him in a way that portrays him as the non-serious buffoon that he is.

 

Focusing on issues is how people beat Burlusconi in Italy. You certainly don't want to get down in the mud with Trump - as the saying goes, only the pig will enjoy it.

 

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


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

 

I don't think she will have a difficult time winning over Californians.

Over Kamala Harris who's a Senator from California? Or Biden or Sanders who have much better name recognition?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump:  "Tells it like it is"

Klobuchar:  "She's mean"

 

Trump:  Has weird dining habits

Gillibrand:  Eats fried chicken with a fork and is deemed out of touch

 

Trump:  Advocates that police be more physical with criminals

Harris:  Has to defend her prosecution record as being too strong.

 

I'm seeing a trend here

  • Plus1 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

Over Kamala Harris who's a Senator from California? Or Biden or Sanders who have much better name recognition?

That's correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

That's correct.

Ran some calculations, and you’re being slightly biased with your opinions. 

  • Plus1 1
  • Eyeroll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Waldo said:

Ran some calculations, and you’re being slightly biased with your opinions. 

Ran some calculations and couldn't give a f#&% less what you think.

  • Plus1 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, StPaulHusker said:

That's correct.

I'll go ahead and call my shot: Klobuchar won't break 5% of the vote in any state that isn't Minnesota or it's neighboring states, and she'll drop out of the race before the end of March 2020.

 

I don't think she's a bad candidate, but I think the field is too crowded for anyone without name recognition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

 

I'll go ahead and call my shot: Klobuchar won't break 5% of the vote in any state that isn't Minnesota or it's neighboring states, and she'll drop out of the race before the end of March 2020.

 

I don't think she's a bad candidate, but I think the field is too crowded for anyone without name recognition.

Believe me if Trump has an opportunity to nominate another SC justice - Harris, Klobuchar, and Booker will be trying to out do each other on the justice committee seeking name recognition.

 

Share this post


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

Believe me if Trump has an opportunity to nominate another SC justice - Harris, Klobuchar, and Booker will be trying to out do each other on the justice committee seeking name recognition.

 

Didn't they already do that on the Kavanaugh hearings?

Share this post


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

Ran some calculations and couldn't give a f#&% less what you think.

I laughed out loud. It was an obvious joke though. 

  • Eyeroll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

Didn't they already do that on the Kavanaugh hearings?

yes they did - before they all announced. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, StPaulHusker said:

Trump:  "Tells it like it is"

Klobuchar:  "She's mean"

 

Trump:  Has weird dining habits

Gillibrand:  Eats fried chicken with a fork and is deemed out of touch

 

Trump:  Advocates that police be more physical with criminals

Harris:  Has to defend her prosecution record as being too strong.

 

I'm seeing a trend here

Is that what the "fried chicken thing" is about?  Eating with a fork?

 

This guy says hi!

Image result for trump kfc air force one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, funhusker said:

Is that what the "fried chicken thing" is about?  Eating with a fork?

 

 

She should have kept eating it with the fork and responded like George Costanza eating his candy bars:

Image result for costanza fork gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/6/2019 at 6:30 AM, StPaulHusker said:

I wonder what the record is for shortest presidential campaign.  

Well this year Richard Ojeda declared in Nov/Dec and dropped out in Jan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, RedDenver said:

 

I'll go ahead and call my shot: Klobuchar won't break 5% of the vote in any state that isn't Minnesota or it's neighboring states, and she'll drop out of the race before the end of March 2020.

 

I don't think she's a bad candidate, but I think the field is too crowded for anyone without name recognition.

Who are the big names running? Warren is the only one that stands out to me, and honestly that has a lot to do with the Native American fiasco. I know Biden and Sanders could run. Who else is there that the general public will know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, mrandyk said:

Who are the big names running? Warren is the only one that stands out to me, and honestly that has a lot to do with the Native American fiasco. I know Biden and Sanders could run. Who else is there that the general public will know?

Corey Booker and Kamela Harris are the other big names.  I think they're known to varying degrees, Booker probably more so based on some of the things he did as a young man and Mayor (?) of Newark NJ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, mrandyk said:

Who are the big names running? Warren is the only one that stands out to me, and honestly that has a lot to do with the Native American fiasco. I know Biden and Sanders could run. Who else is there that the general public will know?

Kamala Harris is getting a lot of the big money donations and CNN already let her have her own town hall, so she seems like the main establishment candidate unless Biden runs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

Kamala Harris is getting a lot of the big money donations and CNN already let her have her own town hall, so she seems like the main establishment candidate unless Biden runs.

They also hosted Schultz the following week and Klobacher is scheduled for next week in NH, so I think they'll be fair with the candidates as they get rolling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I’m fairly interested in hearing what Tulsi Gabbard has to say. 

 

 

She's my favorite I've listened to but I saw this thing 538 did and they had like 30 candidates and she wasn't even listed. So I dunno if she's gonna get enough attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NM11046 said:

They also hosted Schultz the following week and Klobacher is scheduled for next week in NH, so I think they'll be fair with the candidates as they get rolling.

There's something like a dozen candidates in the race and only Harris has had her own townhall that I'm aware of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, RedDenver said:

There's something like a dozen candidates in the race and only Harris has had her own townhall that I'm aware of.

Yes, my point is there has also been one for Howard Schultz, and they are hosting one for Amy Klobacher this Monday.  So they may not do all the 14+ candidates, but as of Monday will have done 3 with candidates.

 

I think Tulsi, Buttageig, Castro an others will drop out pretty quickly, so perhaps they're just trying to invest in those that will be around awhile.  Certainly with the buzz out there Harris and Klobacher will be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

I’m fairly interested in hearing what Tulsi Gabbard has to say. 

She's going to have a hard time distancing herself from the anti-LGBTQ messaging in her past. I don't think the people that got duped by Trump when he held up a rainbow flag are going to fall for that trick a second time but who knows.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

She's my favorite I've listened to but I saw this thing 538 did and they had like 30 candidates and she wasn't even listed. So I dunno if she's gonna get enough attention.

I liked the interview she did that was posted on this thread a few pages back.  Smart and not with an oversized ego & seems very approachable and honest (rare trait when a politician isn't hedging their answers all of the time).  If she doesn't make waves now, she will in the future.  Still very young and I think she will be a rising star. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Biden, maybe a voice of the past as seen by some dems. weaker than Hillary - an old white guy in an era when the party is looking at fresh faces with fresh ideas.

 

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/campaigns/article226007090.html

 

Quote

 

Joe Biden is everything a Democratic political consultant should love: He’s experienced, well-liked, and his poll numbers look great against Donald Trump.

And yet many party strategists have a bleak assessment of his potential 2020 campaign: It’s a bad, bad idea.

“This last election cycle, we’ve seen a whole new level of energy that has emerged through a lot of fresh faces, and the party has moved in that direction and wants to hear new ideas and different messages,” said Norm Sterzenbach, a former executive director of the Iowa Democratic Party who now works as a consultant in the state.

 

 

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.

×