Has nothing to do with misogyny. Warren and Harris are relatable, she isn't.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
2020 Democratic Presidential Primary | OT | Hickenlooper makes it to the debate
- Thread starter pigeon
- Start date
- Status
Does anyone actually like this kind of talk from politicians? It's so hackneyed.
You don't need to be "inspired" by talking to the common folk. Just pass policies they want.
I do think her actions regarding Al Franken were really brave.
I just think Harris kind of makes her redundant.
Same here. Harris took all her good points, and modified it to an insane degree where she's redundant. This is very bad when she's a candidate without a niche, unlike someone like Warren or Tulsi.
Also I'm having trouble visualizing a scenario where one of the Tier 2 candidates jumps up to Tier 1... I guess if Biden and/or Beto don't run that would mix things up, but even then Sanders and Harris are the most likely beneficiaries.
Someone I know is a diehard Bernie supporter, ok with Warren, and distrusts the rest of the Democratic field EXCEPT for Gillibrand because 'she has no principles - she goes wherever the party is going, so if it's going left, she'll abandon her previous position and go for Medicare for All and free college. So she's fine with me.'
Her calls for him to resign were made at the perfect time, not too soon before enough evidence had built, but not too late that she was an also-ran.
She also took a bunch of shit for it too.
Honestly, being somewhat malleable is not the worst trait in a politician. A politician is, after all, someone who balances the (sometimes conflicting) wants and needs of his/her constituents and what's right.
Harris is just better positioned and much more charismatic. The differences would be even more stark if face to face in a debate.
Jesus Christ...do you just like, normally shit on people that would rather be your Allies in pushing a progressive agenda?
Seriously, what the fuck did Betso ever do you to ellicit this kind of ire?
IIRC there were some rumblings on Twitter a few months ago, about certain people being blocked being a glitch/bug in Twitter's algorithm.
It's happened to me as well. I wouldn't think anything of it, except for Twitter being shit
Imagine being so outraged by the fact that two years ago one Congressman spent two days in a car with another Congressman from a neighboring district who happened to be from the other party, because a blizzard canceled their flights to DC and they had to get back for a floor vote...
Family who is largely Black and West Indian that live in and around Loudoun County, VA.
It was mostly hot takes railing against her criminal justice record and "not authentic". Most have been pro Clinton even since 08 though and generally were fine with Biden, Beto and Booker, with everyone loving Biden the most.
I dont view those that gives off impressions of being okay on reaching across the isle to Republicans as allies, I view them as obstacles.
Yeah, next time dont use it for publicity and one wouldn't catch my ire. Read the damn times.
Have all those politicians in the OP officially announced their candidacy? I don't recall Beto announcing but I could have missed it
I'm thinking on putting money on Biden or Sanders being the nominee. Probably Biden since I don't think candidates will hold back on attacking Sanders this time around.
The only thing holding me back is Robert might throw a wrench in it if he gets in.
I think those are people expected to officially announce at some point. Biden and I think Gillibrand haven't officially announced either.
So you want nothing to pass in a republican controlled Senate. Cool.
Wait until you hear about how it's longstanding practice for women in the Senate to not campaign against their colleagues from the other party... maybe I shouldn't have mentioned that, another reason for Dem women to not pass a Berniebro purity test...
Robert will definitely run, and I think he should. Dude came very close to beating a well known (albeit well disliked and with an untrustworthy perception by the public) republican senator in a red state. I am not sure he'd fare better running in 2020 against Cornyn in TX and 2 loses for the senate seat would be bad for his future presidential bid. The time is now. Dude is known nationwide and is polling well to be the nominee. I would expect Cortez to run too, but she's not old enough yet.
The irony....
How a Young Joe Biden Turned Liberals Against Integration
Biden's Record on Race Is Scuffed by 3 Episodes
Joe Biden's Record On Racial Integration Is Indefensible
Biden was also good friends with both Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond (link):
There was nothing unusual about the Biden-Helms friendship. He was also close to the late South Carolina Republican Sen. Strom Thurmond, as well as other conservative Republicans.
===
Joe Biden's Role in '90s Crime Law Could Haunt Any Presidential Bid
Joe Biden, Mass Incarceration Zealot
Joe Biden Has A Serious Drug Policy Problem
Last edited:
Actually, yes, that is exactly what I want barring extreme circumstances in which it becomes necessary.
I'm aware of this. Unsurprisingly, politicians on the Democrat side still have yet to learn or adjust, it will be their undoing if they continue to flaunt their naivete.
On second thought, Democrats naturally become stronger with demographic trends so long as Republicans have their balls clutched by the alt-right/extreme right.
He should stay in Texas and leave the presidency grab to those who are more progressive. If he runs, I would wish for his failure of course.
Bernie will do really well if Biden stays out.
In such a crowded field, Bernie getting 25% in early primaries will get him a ton of delegates even if he never gets above 50% while other candidates stay in the 5-15% range. Trump didn't get above 50% in any state primary until 2.5 months into primary season. It's a risk to have so many people running that are somewhat interchangeable that 75% or the party would be fine with, but none get more support than the 25% diehards.
Wouldn't some traction on an issue be better than nothing? How does doing nothing help your causes?
Except the mainstream Dems won the majority of the primaries and generals in the mid-terms.
Demographic trends aren't that easy to adjust in our favour. There's various road blocks to doing this, from the GOP cheating in elections to non-white voting blocs (like latinos) being more conservative so they'll vote Republican.
Trump having a bigger shot at winning in the general is not what I'd call awesome. There's a reason the party avoids this.
Biden benefits from Obama. Please note, I was and am repping Kamala.
I would expect if that happened that the party would either choose Bernie/Harris, Harris/Bernie, or Biden/Harris. The last is the "safest" option but unless Biden and Harris were the top two in the delegate count it will cause the Bernie faction to explode.
It allows him to feel superior. Actual people would suffer but that's a small price to pay.
Is your family not aware of Biden's record on such issues, or do they just not care because of Obama-Biden memes?
Lol, traction with the current form of Republicans? That doesn't sound like any traction I would be for, so I rather a stalemate. I can wait until Democrats are in control again.
That isnt what I meant, I am talking about the issues of our political system and how fixing it requires dumping the idea of compromise or reaching across an isle full of those ready to cut your hand off.
Some of the Democratic leaders recognize this, Warren and Buttigieg are examples.
To an extent, I am mostly talking about the urbanization of U.S and the decline of the White vote, which benefits Democrats. I am aware and slightly alarmed of the attempts of them trying to integrate Latinos (Hispanics) into the White voting bloc. Yet to be seen if they can pull it off. I would say its Democratic failure in outreach if they lose too many.
It would be awesome simply for history reasons and the chaos could be a bit amusing.
Dont get me wrong though, I do not want it to get to a brokered convention.
Lol, nice insinuation, feel free to believe what you wish.
They are generally well educated and fully more up to date about politics than I am.
I think it's more they liked Obama's governing and a return to that is appealing. I noted, they were staunchly for Clinton in 2008 and begrudgingly voted for Obama.
I was more surprised that they're willing to drag Queen K for stupid "top cop" talking points.
If Beto could brand himself the fresher better Biden he'd likely be President.
The only one that's declared that's not listed yet is Marianne Williamson.
Speaking of her she talks about Yemen, personal transformation, coalition building, strategizing, activism and democracy in this clip.
Has a motivational speaker run for President before?
The only one that's declared that's not listed yet is Marianne Williamson.
Speaking of her she talks about Yemen, personal transformation, coalition building, strategizing, activism and democracy in this clip.
Has a motivational speaker run for President before?
I'll be very surprised if Biden stays out. Very. This is unarguably his last chance and he's still very popular, constantly polling in the top 3. He'd be stupid not to answer IMO. We all know and understand why he didn't do it in 2016, but things are different now. I'm expecting him to enter the field in the next couple of months. IIRC someone said the first debate was in June or something? So by Mid May at the latest.
There's absolute;y nothing awesome about a brokered convention... nothing
This is an intriguing candidate. I agree with many things she says, but she's still in motivational speaker mode - not politician mode. These are exciting things to say, but they're themes and the only actionable plan she says is "no." She's ignoring the elephant in the room about how we got into this place and why America is reacting to Yemen like it is - the system and the government that creates and maintains it. Any politician who hasn't got any credible, realistic plans to reform the system inside is going to be eaten and chewed up by the system and the status quo will remain intact, this would be her fate from how she presented herself with this speech.
edit: I could agree with everything she says, but I'd be foolish to bet on her making any headway in reforming it from the White House.
Last edited:
The fact there is a possibility she can be President shouldn't be discounted. She supports many of the plans that are already being made. It's not like she wants to rework the system. She wants to guide it, work with democrats and people in general with the intent of a better moral conscience. What proof is there of this quality?
It was the closing to that wapo mag article and a question during the Iowa town hall that made me think yeah...
If I were a Democrat I would support her for President. Let's see how far this goes, if she wins she wins, if not then can say voices were heard included in coalition stuff that's being made like the Green New Deal and whatever else. Voices of better nature support the nom in harmony with the party and at the polls to join in the inauguration and lead afterwards.
As it stands she might drive more conversation in the establishment. She started her campaign speaking about reparations at these town halls and sowing that into the conversation at that level had to have contributed to driving the conversation of it nationally recently.
I mean, not sure how else you'd define a contest decided by a wider margin than a general election with roughly four times as many votes!
on the other hand I don't have a reaction image that conveys enough sheer disdain for these words in this order
How's she polling? Maybe I'm mistaken but I thought she was coming from a leftist angle to rework the system, she was simply using different terminology to get the same, or similar, goal. That was a striking quote, if she manage to boost that reception on a national scale that would be wild.
I watched the video but her coalition building discussion didn't impact that much on me for some reason. That is an inviting theme, yet from what I gathered the Dems weren't that interested in mending fences with Republicans post-Trump. It's a nice sentiment but for that to work she's going to have to get down to business in the muck and compromise etc except what I've seen it's been kind of blank at how she was going to do that. Maybe I need to see more of her interviews to dig deeper into her mindset, her personality is simply not resonating with me on a political level like others are in this case.
That's true, that was a important issue to discuss which hans't had air time in POTUS politics.
Haven't heard any mention of polling yet. She might be getting close to the support needed for the early debates as her twitter account mentioned having 15 states. If she has that now than it should be possible for her to make it not only to the early debates but to the first round? If so, that's worth getting excited about.
I'd like to see some polling though. There were a lot of undecided out there as there should be at this stage.
How is this for a leftist rework?
That's fair. I'd like her to get to the debates to see what she can do in that setting. She definitely should be able to tap into the undecided vote, maybe independents too.
I can work with that. Just the impression she left me with that video, maybe I'm just reading her wrong. Which is possible. My cynicism with politics has been increased lately, which may be throwing me off. She's certainly a candidate to keep an eye on, regardless.
Now they're just making her sound awesome. First witch president is a wonderful niche to define your candidacy.
Great photo. Goddess pose. Sounds like an endorsement.
This could help bring witches into her coalition. She did mention witches herself during her Harvard Divinity talk the other day.
- Status