Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2018 16:01:01 GMT -5
And by the way, despite my doing some defending of Warren here (to the extent that I don't think Warren did anything Evvill and that much too big a deal is being made of it all), this illustrates one reason why I do not want Warren to be the Dem candidate for president in 2020. Her deciding to help Trump make a big deal out of the "Indian" thing with midterms three weeks away and so many really fucking IMPORTANT things that need to be discussed and put before voters is just... yeah. I don't dislike her, I think she's done some good stuff, I think she cares about her constituency, and as politicians go, she's not corrupt. But she's absolutely not the person to rally the Dems to victory in 2020. If there is a bright side to this whole stupid debacle, I think it's that it will likely be the death blow to serious discussions of her being the 2020 Dem candidate. For a whole lot of reasons, I think she would not be a good choice. This mess should make that clear to at least some of her backers. (I'd like to see Bernie blow up, too, frankly.) You're dreaming. You really think being snarked at by sexist pigs like Trump, Graham and Hatch---after the way they dragged Dr. Blasey Ford through the mud and got away with elevating a creep like Brent Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court---is now a disqualifier for Liz Warren in 2020? Think again. There's nothing coincidental in the way the Right has trained its fire on Warren. They read the same articles I do including the one from CNN yesterday where Warren is the leader of the 2020 Democratic pack.The last thing-- the very last thing I want to see in 2020--is another safe-as-milk, bland, boring-ass mainstream corporate Chuck Schumer type of Democrat on the presidential ticket. Maybe Warren fucked up by responding to Trump's taunts. Maybe Warren thought she'd take time out from cruising to reelection next month to devote some of her time and attention to shutting up Trump with facts. That was her mistake. Trump is fact-adverse and so are his legion of zombies. They make up their own facts and ignore all others. Eff them. That's what Warren should have done. But since she didn't, is that a way to put her presidential aspirations in the dumpster? HELL NO. The Left is so eager to eat their own the first time they royally fuck up. The Right doesn't give a damn. Liberals want their politicians to be pure. Conservatives just want them to win. I don't believe in purity tests, and it's not a matter of her being too liberal -- not from my point of view. It's a matter of: (1) I think she turns off too large a percentage of voters (her, more than her politics) to be a viable candidate in 2020. My primary concern is beating Trump. We need a candidate who can do that. I don't think it's her. She's got all the perceived baggage and likability problems Hillary had, only she's far more liberal. We need all the liberals, but we also need the moderates who don't like Trump to come out and vote. I'm pretty confident she'd keep all but the dyed-in-the-wool liberals home. We need more than that. And no, I'm not talking about getting someone c.e. or Mikey might vote for. I'll agree with you right up front that anyone sold on Trump at this point is NEVER going to cross that party line. But ideally, I AM talking about getting someone that, say, Rob might vote for. Don't scoff, NT -- If I'm correct, Rob voted for both Obama and Bill Clinton. There are Democrats out there -- and Democrats we'd like too -- that people like Rob would say "huh, I could live with that, I'll vote for that person." My mom is another example -- she crossed the line for Obama. I know a few independents who voted Clinton and/or Obama, but they went third party this last election. I don't want them doing that this time around. And surely we should pick a candidate that the Optys and Amadans of the world can rally behind. Despite their dislike of SJWs, both of them lean liberal on most stuff, but I don't think either of them are "Democrat or bust" people -- they're people who are willing to go third party. People like them shouldn't even for one second consider staying home or going third party in 2020. Warren, I dunno. I think it's not a matter of finding someone bland. I think its a matter of getting someone with that magnetism that Bill and Barack had -- that's a special quality that can cut right across party lines and pull people in. To my mind, Beto O'Rourke is an example of a Democrat who is actually pretty damn liberal but has that quality, which is why he's giving Cruz a run for his money. Maybe he's not the guy, maybe he is, but we need a candidate like that, IMO. And I don't think Warren has that quality, unfortunately. Liberals like her, but the closer you get to the center, the less that's true. I know lots of center left loyal Dems who are very meh on her. They'll vote for her, yes, but their "meh" is indicative of the problem she'd face as a candidate. (2) I truly think that this DNA thing -- in general and at this moment in time -- showed that unfortunately, Warren is not going to be a woman who runs a campaign that hones in on Trump's defects and just what it is the Dems have to offer Americans. We have plenty, actually -- especially right now. But we need a candidate who will disregard the nonsense and the noise and the ugliness and hone right in on the message. I don't think she'll do that. I think she'll take the bait, again and again. (3) Unfortunately, Warren is EXACTLY the kind of candidate that will get the right, including the center right, whipped up into a voting frenzy. You want to get center-right people who don't care for Trump to vote for Trump in 2020? Warren's the candidate to choose. (Bernie too, IMO.) Me, I want all those conservatives who don't like Trump, if they can't bring themselves to vote for the Dem candidate, to at least stay home or go third party. Pick someone who at least doesn't repel them, and I think many of them will. Unfortunately, I think Warren will fire them up to vote Trump. Personally, I'll vote for whoever the Dem candidate is in 2020. If it's Warren, I will surely vote for her and send her a campaign contribution to boot. But more than anything, I want a candidate I feel confident can beat Trump, and I don't think it's her.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Oct 16, 2018 16:16:37 GMT -5
Opty and Cass have pretty much summed it up for me too. Run Warren in 2020 and Trump's in for a second term. I think independents would stay home in droves given a Trump/Warren contest... unless they finally offer a "none of the above" option.
If Dems can't find a candidate that heeds Opty's warning, it won't matter who they run. If the election is another reality TV series, guess who's the best reality TV president? Get somebody serious or stay home.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Oct 16, 2018 16:19:46 GMT -5
Yeah - there is an idea going around in the far right circles (I think first popularized by Scott Adams, of Dilbert fame, who is a noted iconoclastic crank, Trump supporter, and creationist, among his other interesting beliefs) that Trump is a "master manipulator," that he's always playing "4-dimensional chess" and p0wning the liberals by making them think they've caught him in a gaffe, that the outrage they are generating is going to weaken him, when instead it only makes them look silly and strengthens his position.
(Somewhere out there must be an Emperor Palpatine/Trump meme.)
I will never be convinced that Trump is a 4D chess player. But I am starting to believe that he really does have an instinctive sense for how to troll and bait the left and win no matter how bad it makes him look to reasonable people.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Oct 16, 2018 16:38:21 GMT -5
Exactly. Trump is not a reasonable person, and therein lies the rub. He grossly exaggerated her claims (I'm being generous to Warren by phrasing it that way) and then made a "bet" under the guise of criteria she could not possibly ever hope to fulfill. Right. That's essentially what I'm saying: it's a pseudo-bet that Trump could not actually lose, since there was no way Warren would be able to prove she was an "Indian," based on what Trump's understanding of what that would be. So all of the attempts to ding Trump on this--ala "pay up, you lost"--are huge fails, in my view. And as you say, she took the bait, anyway. Doesn't give me much confidence in her or her advisers, given that they not only released results that don't do anything for her (aside from piss off some Native Americans), but also produced a video to show how clever they were for doing that.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Oct 16, 2018 17:12:26 GMT -5
Opty and Cass have pretty much summed it up for me too. Run Warren in 2020 and Trump's in for a second term. I think independents would stay home in droves given a Trump/Warren contest... unless they finally offer a "none of the above" option. If Dems can't find a candidate that heeds Opty's warning, it won't matter who they run. If the election is another reality TV series, guess who's the best reality TV president? Get somebody serious or stay home. I like what I've seen of Beto O'Rourke so far, but I'm not sure he'll be able to beat Cruz, which is what he needs to position himself for a future POTUS run.
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Oct 16, 2018 18:26:19 GMT -5
I like what I've seen of Beto O'Rourke so far, but I'm not sure he'll be able to beat Cruz, which is what he needs to position himself for a future POTUS run. Lincoln lost his senate race and still became president.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2018 19:17:24 GMT -5
You know, Beto would probably be about as good as any human could be debating Trump. Less because of any debating ability (I mean, Hilary was waaayyyyy better than Trump at debating and knowledge of issues, but I'm not sure it helped her campaign), and more because he has that breezy, likable, sense of humor thing. Like, that moment in a Cruz debate when they were asked to say something nice about each other. Beto found something nice to say, and Cruz took an opportunity to slam Beto (because Cruz is an asshole and can't help himself). And Beto found the perfect response... www.elpasotimes.com/story/news/2018/09/22/beto-cruz-debate-beto-orourke-true-form-quip-ted-cruz-inspires-amazon-t-shirt-trends-twitter/1391563002/See, it's not nasty, it's not defensive -- but it's a perfect little needle jab of a retort, aimed just right. Since Beto's initial response (saying something nice about Cruz) came across as so genuine, and Cruz's came across so obviously as an attack, Beto's easy, good-humored return jab was absolutely perfect. It reminds me of the Reagan debate where he said "well, now, there you go again" to Mondale. It was just a light jab, it didn't make him look mean, yet it was perfectly aimed at his opponent's perceived foible. Anyway. Am going out. Have a good night. Will be interested to hear thoughts on the Beto/Cruz debate tonight if anyone watches.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Oct 16, 2018 20:02:42 GMT -5
You're dreaming. You really think being snarked at by sexist pigs like Trump, Graham and Hatch---after the way they dragged Dr. Blasey Ford through the mud and got away with elevating a creep like Brent Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court---is now a disqualifier for Liz Warren in 2020? Think again. There's nothing coincidental in the way the Right has trained its fire on Warren. They read the same articles I do including the one from CNN yesterday where Warren is the leader of the 2020 Democratic pack.The last thing-- the very last thing I want to see in 2020--is another safe-as-milk, bland, boring-ass mainstream corporate Chuck Schumer type of Democrat on the presidential ticket. Maybe Warren fucked up by responding to Trump's taunts. Maybe Warren thought she'd take time out from cruising to reelection next month to devote some of her time and attention to shutting up Trump with facts. That was her mistake. Trump is fact-adverse and so are his legion of zombies. They make up their own facts and ignore all others. Eff them. That's what Warren should have done. But since she didn't, is that a way to put her presidential aspirations in the dumpster? HELL NO. The Left is so eager to eat their own the first time they royally fuck up. The Right doesn't give a damn. Liberals want their politicians to be pure. Conservatives just want them to win. I don't believe in purity tests, and it's not a matter of her being too liberal -- not from my point of view. It's a matter of: (1) I think she turns off too large a percentage of voters (her, more than her politics) to be a viable candidate in 2020. My primary concern is beating Trump. We need a candidate who can do that. I don't think it's her. She's got all the perceived baggage and likability problems Hillary had, only she's far more liberal. We need all the liberals, but we also need the moderates who don't like Trump to come out and vote. I'm pretty confident she'd keep all but the dyed-in-the-wool liberals home. We need more than that. And no, I'm not talking about getting someone c.e. or Mikey might vote for. I'll agree with you right up front that anyone sold on Trump at this point is NEVER going to cross that party line. But ideally, I AM talking about getting someone that, say, Rob might vote for. Don't scoff, NT -- If I'm correct, Rob voted for both Obama and Bill Clinton. There are Democrats out there -- and Democrats we'd like too -- that people like Rob would say "huh, I could live with that, I'll vote for that person." My mom is another example -- she crossed the line for Obama. I know a few independents who voted Clinton and/or Obama, but they went third party this last election. I don't want them doing that this time around. And surely we should pick a candidate that the Optys and Amadans of the world can rally behind. Despite their dislike of SJWs, both of them lean liberal on most stuff, but I don't think either of them are "Democrat or bust" people -- they're people who are willing to go third party. People like them shouldn't even for one second consider staying home or going third party in 2020. Warren, I dunno. I appreciate your answer, Cassandra. Which is not the same thing as agreeing with it.
I want a Democrat who can beat Trump's ass. Whomever he, she or it is, I don't give a fuck. I'll vote for any Democrat even if they are blind, crippled, crazy with a wooden leg and a kickstand. Don't care. I'm vote for a diseased, rabid wombat over President Pussygrabber.
What I don't want and will not vote for under ANY circumstances is yet another Wall Street Democrat with ethics issues like Hillary Clinton. I'm a cheap lay, but I'm not such a Democratic Slut I'll jump into bed with yet another in an unending series of Corporate Democrats. I'm not getting any younger and I can't keep eating my heart over Democrats who are really only piss flat Republican Lite. I roll with Dems who aren't apologetic for being Dems like Florida gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum who got it right when he said, “[R]unning Republican-lite in the state of Florida is not a strategy for winning. A strategy for winning is by speaking to our voters, by giving our voters something to go out and vote for and not just against. We’ve got to move more black voters, more brown voters, more young voters, more progressive voters, all of those to the polls. And I have to tell you, Don, it’s been my experience that whether we’re in red parts of the state or blue parts of the state or purple parts of the state, that folks are frustrated.”
I'd rather lose in 2020 with a Paul Wellstone Democrat than win with a Chuck Schumer Democrat. Maybe that's my purity test kicking in, but I can't get hyped behind yet another Democrat who takes his marching orders from Wall Street. Barack Obama made that devil's bargain when he declined to unleash hell on the assholes who kneecapped the economy in 2008 and then bailed their asses out. I'm still salty at Obama for going along with Tim Geithner, Larry Summers and others in taking a hands-off approach to the bastards who tanked the economy.
Don't get me wrong (because someone surely will), but honestly, appeals by Dems to guys like robeiae, Amadan or Optimus haven't translated to winning elections. Look no further than the victory of Doug Jones over the odious Roy Moore in Alabama. White men gave 72 percent of their vote to Moore and White women trailed slightly with 63 percent backing the accused child molester. You can't look to the college-educated women of Alabama to deliver a stern rebuke to Moore. A whopping 57 percentage of that group backed Moore over Jones.
How did Jones win? He pulled a massive 98 percent of Black females as opposed to only 30 percent of the White vote. The reason there's a Democrat in the U.S. Senate from Alabama for the first time since 1992 is not because White men OR women chose to support a moderate Democrat over a radical, far-right, kiddie-diddler Republican.
Bottom line: It would be great if the Democrats come up with a candidate in 2020 who can appeal to you, me and mainstream moderates of The Colline Gate, but not at the expense of alienating and turning off women of color like my wife of 37 years. Long term the Democrats cannot win by concentrating on White men at the expense of Black women. They can win regionally by doing so, but nationally? No fucking way. Even if robeiae, Amandan and Optimus are open to the right sort of Democratic candidate, the research indicates their sons (and daughters) are not.
The triumph of Trumpism is how solidly the support for this guy is and nobody, not even a narcotized Kanye West loves Trump like White men love Trump. Is there a candidate out there who can draw them back to voting for the same Democrats I'm voting for? That's a question I don't have the answer for.
Ultimately, I'd prefer if there is a Democratic candidate in 2020 who can unite the various disparate wings of the party and pull together in a concerted effort to decisively defeat Donald Trump. Period/Full Stop. However, pending another weightless, colorless, blander than chewing on a rubber band, safer than mother's milk moderate like a Tim Kaine or older than dirt Joe Biden, I want a Democrat who represents the Democratic wing of the Democrat Party.
If that aligns with the moderates, that's cool. If it doesn't, it's still cool.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Oct 17, 2018 10:15:02 GMT -5
So who fits your bill, NT? Are there a few names you think could do it? I have no idea who is viable for you all. I'm glad Michele Obama isn't running, because I think the GOP would be in trouble. But who out there can do it for the Dems?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2018 10:43:47 GMT -5
I suspect that NT, like me, would drag himself over broken glass to vote for a turnip in 2020 if it were the Democratic candidate and up against Trump.
NT, what I'm saying is not that we need to cater to White men. Nor am I saying we need to throw people of color and liberal principles under the bus. Definitely, absolutely, I think that's a bad idea. We NEED enthusiasm in the base. And I think the GOP is giving us plenty of ammunition to sell the Democrat's message. All I'm saying is we need to pick a candidate who is charismatic enough to sell that message to people who aren't necessarily automatically fully in bed with Democrats (but can be convinced) or who are not 100% committed to voting, but can be inspired to do so. We need another Obama or Bill Clinton.
I keep using Beto as an example -- that off-the-cuff speech he made defending the right of the football players to kneel as being as American as it gets was soaring, uncompromising, and the kind of thing that actually convinces people. Nothing wishy-washy about it. But I played it for my Republican mom, who has been giving the side-eye at the football players, and she was impressed. More to the point, it actually MOVED her on the issue--she gets it now. That's just amazing to me. I think someone like Beto can get her vote in 2020 as Obama did in 2008. (I'm sure she won't be voting Trump. She is one of the lifelong Republicans who is VERY unhappy with her party at the moment. Trump was not what she signed up for. Probably doesn't help that Chris Collins is her representative. But she's one of the many Americans who is happy to vote third party, or just stay home if she hates everyone. ETA: To note, I only recently, on my last trip home, learned for sure that my mom felt this way. It was a vast relief. My brother, of course, is another story.)
Elizabeth Warren is many fine things, but she doesn't have that particular quality, IMO. And as this incident shows, she takes Trump's bait, and that's just not good. I think many voters who aren't dead set on the Democrats--even those who hate Trump and would never vote for him--will stay home or tune her out. And we want them coming out. It won't necessarily be Beto, obviously. But someone who has that thing that makes him/her a contender even in deep red states -- and a winner in purple states. (Does anyone doubt for a nanosecond that he'd KILL Cruz if Texas weren't so extremely red?)
I agree with c.e. that Michelle could pull in voters, but I also think she'll never run.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Oct 17, 2018 12:10:48 GMT -5
Maybe Michelle will take second spot if Oprah offers it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2018 12:28:08 GMT -5
That's another thing, by the way -- I really, really, really do not want a celebrity with no political experience/know-how. Oprah is a fine woman, but I'd rather she get some political experience before going for the presidency. I'm so done with the celebrity thing.
Michelle is another thing for me -- she spent 8 years in the White House, and she's a highly accomplished lawyer who thoroughly understands the nuances of our system of government with up-close experience observing its complications in action. I'd personally rather have someone who served as a Governor, Senator, etc., but she certainly would have a much better idea of what she'd be contending with as president than someone like Oprah would (not to mention she'd have Barack right there with her as a partner).
Again, if Oprah is the candidate, I'd vote for her. But. I really would rather have someone with some experience in our political system.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Oct 17, 2018 12:36:22 GMT -5
Bill Weld's looking at a run at the Libertarian Party ticket. If if were Trump, Oprah and Weld, would you really vote for Oprah?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2018 12:48:08 GMT -5
Bill Weld's looking at a run at the Libertarian Party ticket. If if were Trump, Oprah and Weld, would you really vote for Oprah? I like Weld. But in 2020, yes, I have to go with the Dems no matter what. Paramount to me, beyond any other consideration, is getting Trump out of office. I consider him a serious danger to the republic, the world order, and democracy itself. No matter what, therefore, this will not be a year I go third party. Alas, no matter what, no matter how good the candidate is, the Libertarian party is not going to win, not in 2020. My vote goes to the candidate with the best shot at evicting Trump -- and that's going to be the Democratic candidate. This is normally not where I am. Normally, I am willing to consider third party candidates, if they are good, serious candidates. But not when Trump stands any chance of staying in office with his tiny hands clutching the nuclear codes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2018 13:27:24 GMT -5
Bill Weld's looking at a run at the Libertarian Party ticket. If if were Trump, Oprah and Weld, would you really vote for Oprah? I like Weld. But in 2020, yes, I have to go with the Dems no matter what. Paramount to me, beyond any other consideration, is getting Trump out of office. I consider him a serious danger to the republic, the world order, and democracy itself. No matter what, therefore, this will not be a year I go third party. Alas, no matter what, no matter how good the candidate is, the Libertarian party is not going to win, not in 2020. My vote goes to the candidate with the best shot at evicting Trump -- and that's going to be the Democratic candidate. This is normally not where I am. Normally, I am willing to consider third party candidates, if they are good, serious candidates. But not when Trump stands any chance of staying in office with his tiny hands clutching the nuclear codes. And this, by the way, is why I intend to get my voice and my dollars involved in the race early, and why I'm actively looking at possible options now. I'd like to do what I can to have a candidate I'm really enthusiastic about (as well as stands the best chance of winning the general) win the Democratic primary. Even if it's a turnip, I'm voting for that turnip. But I'd obviously rather get someone who can not only boot Trump out, but also be the president America (and the world) needs in the aftermath of Trump.
|
|