Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

wolfpack1

2020 Potential Democratic Candidates for President....

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, alum93 said:

Don't forget that Trump voters don't care one bit how he talks about women or directly to them either.  Whether it's grabbing their you know what, bleeding from wherever, or making fun of their looks, his voters are fine with it.  Trust me, Democrats will run a male in 2020 as presidential.  I do see a good chance at a female VP.

Well, if you're correct, then start looking for African American, Asian or Arab Candidates.

Maybe Preet Bharara for POTUS?

 

No way will it be a White Male.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, alum93 said:

Don't forget that Trump voters don't care one bit how he talks about women or directly to them either.  Whether it's grabbing their you know what, bleeding from wherever, or making fun of their looks, his voters are fine with it.  Trust me, Democrats will run a male in 2020 as presidential.  I do see a good chance at a female VP.

The Dems won't be after the Trump base voters but the middle swing votes.  As @Thomas stated, I don't know that a female Dem that can control her emotions exists, but if one exists I think she'd clean up vs Trumps lack of character.

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Thomas said:

That's what they did last time.

Instead of responding to the polls in rust belt states, they kept playing from a 2008/2012 playbook, and ignoring those states, because they were "a BLUE WALL".

They don't learn from their mistakes, and they can't even get over the 2016 loss, it's eternal excuses and non-acceptance of reality.

 

Their strategy will be different in 2020, but it will still be based on the same priorities, and Virtue Signalling is one of the highest ones, even though it's stupid, and gains them zero votes from the middle that they need.

 

You are right.  All is lost because of one election.  They aren't going to try and win or fix anything.  But just a reminder for young voters who think everything revolves around yesterday, here are the last 7 elections over the last quarter century.  We tend to go in cycles.  Every time one side wins, the other thinks the sky is falling.  Carry on.

2016 Republican

2012 Democrat

2008 Democrat

2004 Republican

2000 Republican

1996 Democrat

1992 Democrat

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, alum93 said:

You are right.  All is lost because of one election.  They aren't going to try and win or fix anything.  But just a reminder for young voters who think everything revolves around yesterday, here are the last 7 elections.  We tend to go in cycles.  Every time one side wins, the other thinks the sky is falling.  Carry on.

2016 Republican

2012 Democrat

2008 Democrat

2004 Republican

2000 Republican

1996 Democrat

1992 Democrat

 

 

Your side is the one overreacting to a single lost election.

Everything is just the END OF THE DAMN WORLD.

None of the reactions to Obama's 2 Terms were anywhere near is ridiculous, emotional, over the top with slanted news coverage, or anything else close to this nonsense.

 

 

LOL

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Thomas said:

Your side is the one overreacting to a single lost election.

Everything is just the END OF THE DAMN WORLD.

 

LOL

 

It's not my side.  I am an independent.

And unless you lived under a rock before Trump,  the losing side is always crying end of the world.  All you had to do was watch Fox any night of the week when Obama was president.  Today, it's Democrats.  Tomorrow it will be Republicans.  The majority of your posts just prove the point, fueled by negative emotion.  It's what sells.  With social media moving forward, partisanship will only get worse.  It's like nobody wants to admit if their guy isn't what they thought he would be.  And most can't admit they disagree with anything, even something as simple as stating yanking kids from parents is unacceptable.  Instead they say well Obama did it so it must have been ok.  But it's the world we live in.  I've lived long enough to know the pendulum will eventually swing back.  It always does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, alum93 said:

It's not my side.  I am an independent.

And unless you lived under a rock before Trump,  the losing side is always crying end of the world.  All you had to do was watch Fox any night of the week when Obama was president.  Today, it's Democrats.  Tomorrow it will be Republicans.  The majority of your posts just prove the point, fueled by negative emotion.  It's what sells.

Oh, you mean ONE network, vs ALL OF THE NETWORKS?

 

Like I said, nothing even CLOSE to the level of ridiculous over-reach, shitty reporting, fake news and convenient prepackaged narratives that we're seeing since Trump was elected.

The "news" just can't help itself. By the end of Trump's first term, NOBODY will be trusting the Media, ever again.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Thomas said:

Oh, you mean ONE network, vs ALL OF THE NETWORKS?

 

Like I said, nothing even CLOSE to the level of ridiculous over-reach, shitty reporting, fake news and convenient prepackaged narratives that we're seeing since Trump was elected.

The "news" just can't help itself. By the end of Trump's first term, NOBODY will be trusting the Media, ever again.

 

Plenty of people trust the media.  Maybe a majority of a certain red hat wearing diehard group won't, but then again they don't represent the majority.  They just voted more by a hair in the swing states.  50% of registered voters didn't even bother.  The rest that did won the popular vote, and lost the election.  We'll be fine.  Trump will be gone soon enough, replaced by the next president.  Time marches on.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, alum93 said:

Plenty of people trust the media.  Maybe a majority of a certain red hat wearing diehard group won't, but then again they don't represent the majority.  They just voted more by a hair in the swing states.  50% of registered voters didn't even bother.  The rest that did won the popular vote, and lost the election.  We'll be fine.  Trump will be gone soon enough, replaced by the next president.  Time marches on.  

Whatever. That's not what the polls of confidence in the media say.

https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/235796/americans-misinformation-bias-inaccuracy-news.aspx?g_source=link_NEWSV9&g_medium=TOPIC&g_campaign=item_&g_content=Americans%3a%20Much%20Misinformation%2c%20Bias%2c%20Inaccuracy%20in%20News

 

Gallup_Poll_Media.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the Democrats to have any chance in 2020 they have to forget about what voters in California think , and find out what makes voters tick in Rural Pennsylvania, Indiana, North Carolina, Wisconsin etc. Californians would elect a ham sandwich for president if it was the Democrat candidate. 

Too bad for them that they refuse to learn from their 2016 mistakes and are still stuck on stupid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bornontheblue said:

For the Democrats to have any chance in 2020 they have to forget about what voters in California think , and find out what makes voters tick in Rural Pennsylvania, Indiana, North Carolina, Wisconsin etc. Californians would elect a ham sandwich for president if it was the Democrat candidate. 

Too bad for them that they refuse to learn from their 2016 mistakes and are still stuck on stupid. 

How do you know they haven't learned when we haven't even had a midterm or (obviously) presidential election?  It's been whole 18 months.  See previous post about last 7 presidential elections and cycles - Republican, Democrat, Democrat, Republican, Republican, Democrat, Democrat.  Even if Trump does win in 2020, that would just be par for the course going back to 1992.  Bush Sr. was the only one that couldn't secure a second term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, alum93 said:

How do you know they haven't learned when we haven't even had a midterm or (obviously) presidential election?  It's been 18 months.  See previous post about last 7 elections and cycles.

Exactly, this certitude on the right that the left can’t win elections because they are going full retard and the middle won’t lean that way is ridiculous. If you believe that, I’ve got a 2015 made in China MAGA hat to sell you.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Thomas said:

I hope not for Democrats' sakes.

 

The only two VPs to successfully run and win the Presidency in modern history without succession, etc, are Richard Nixon and George H.W. Bush.

Everyone else has failed.

Not a great statistical trend to be following-on with.

The rate for return failed POTUS candidates is even worse.

I think that was a sitting Vice-President. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, sactowndog said:

Can’t we get an independent to run that is not captured by the extremists in both parties?????

Kind of need someone like Clinton or maybe Reagan. They found ways to get things done and also were able to get people in the middle to vote for them but also get people on their base to vote for them at the same time. I mean its hard to say Reagan was a moderate but compared to what we are seeing now he was moderate. But again they also both knew how to reach across the aisle as well to get things done that had to get done. 

I also think that is either of them ran today, they would both win in landslides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, wolfpack1 said:

I think that was a sitting Vice-President. 

Bush 43 yes, Richard Nixon, no.

But you have a point, it's been 50 years since it was done without an incumbent VP, and 60 years since he WAS the VP.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, mugtang said:

Biden could.  

I don't know if he would get enough support from the extreme left of the Democratic party. Now if he had someone like Warren as his VP very possibly. However in another article I read one of the leaders of the Party talked about their members want someone new and not the same type of candidate they have been putting forward. 

I mean i still stand by my statement that whoever won the last election was only going to be a one term president.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, alum93 said:

Warren doesn't have the personality.  Sanders is too far left to get elected, but has a tremendous following.  I just can't see him ever winning.  No to any of the other guys or ladies not named Biden at this time.  I think Joe has a puncher's chance.  I could see Warren as a VP candidate, but not presidential.  

Reading things people are saying she could appeal to the progressive women in the party. However I will be the evil on to say age I think will play a factor as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, alum93 said:

Trump has proven clearly both as president as a candidate that not just lying, but being a complete jerk at times doesn't matter if you can galvanize your base.  The guy literally got caught bragging about grabbing women between the legs and people didn't care.  Women bleeding from wherever when he didn't like questions from one of debates.  Making fun of a handicapped person, literally shaking his arms in a rally.  And his fans still loved him for it.  I highly doubt anything related to Native American Heritage would disqualify Warren.  

I do believe it takes a special talent to pull off what Trump did and behave the way he did and say the things other candidates couldn't.  I don't think Warren has the personality to go up against Trump, but Biden does.  And Warren would do just fine in debates with Pence.  They would both put people to sleep.  She could hold her own though with her experience and knowledge of world and US politics, and give Biden cover to do what he does.  I can see Sanders making a serious run at VP as well, assuming he doesn't get the party presidential nomination again.  

I don't know if he would be interested in a VP slot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn’t there talk of Kasich and Hickenlooper running as a “dream ticket” in 2020?   

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Aslowhiteguy said:

A reality star who was much more qualified than the community organizer who preceded him.

It would be funny if Biden ran.  It would also dann near assure a second term for Trump.

It would be Biden's 3rd try, right? 

He ran in 1984, 1988 and 2008.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...