USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Where no two people are likely to agree.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15616
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jan 09, 2018 5:26 pm

Hah, hah.......................you probably don't recognize that you started it. got to get real simple .....................
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Nikki Nyx » Tue Jan 09, 2018 6:02 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:Concerning equivalency between the parties:
One nominated a demonstratively unqualified man to be president. Someone who cannot answer the most basic questions about the political system, the Constitution or the military he's supposed to be the commander of.
The other didn't.

Nuff said.
OTOH, the other party nominated a known war-monger with deep ties to Wall Street and fossil fuel companies, and a federal investigation hanging over her head, then rigged and cheated their way to the primary win. She then chose a DINO exactly like her as her running mate, and kept the money intended for down-ballot candidates. And she failed to campaign between the convention and the general, fully expecting to be crowned Queen as if it was her right and not something she had to earn.

No senator in the party voted against all 22 of Trump's swamp cabinet nominations, and 20 of them voted in favor of at least half the nominations. Tom Perez, 'chosen' to lead the DNC, immediately began purging the party of real progressives, despite the obvious fact that they are the party's only hope. Nor has the DNC supported progressive Democrats, only weak neoliberal candidates whose best argument is "I'm not Republican."

So, the equivalency is best characterized by "maintain the status quo at all costs," otherwise known as "cut off your nose to spite your face."
"An extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof."—Marcello Truzzi

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."—Christopher Hitchens

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by ElectricMonk » Tue Jan 09, 2018 6:59 pm

Are we really doing the "Hillary is as bad as Donald" bit?
She could have been a better campaigner, but plenty of analysts have shown that it probably wouldn't have affect the Electoral collage: she did manage to win the popular vote, despite the fact that (unlike her opponent) she had to by TV airtime.
BUT SHE KNOWS WHAT THE CONSTITUTION IS! She knows about the nuclear triad, or what the DOE does.

She might well have been a bad president, but at least she would spend some time governing instead of watching TV.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Nikki Nyx » Tue Jan 09, 2018 7:38 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:Are we really doing the "Hillary is as bad as Donald" bit?
She could have been a better campaigner, but plenty of analysts have shown that it probably wouldn't have affect the Electoral collage: she did manage to win the popular vote, despite the fact that (unlike her opponent) she had to by TV airtime.
BUT SHE KNOWS WHAT THE CONSTITUTION IS! She knows about the nuclear triad, or what the DOE does.

She might well have been a bad president, but at least she would spend some time governing instead of watching TV.
I maintain she would have been as bad as he is, but in drastically different ways. This is based on an in-depth examination of her record as Secretary of State, carpetbagging Senator, First Lady, and in private practice. Really, how is it any better to be incrementally regressive and kill with a thousand paper cuts?

How many more people have been imprisoned because of prison 'reform' under the Clinton administration? More to the point, how many more people of color have been unjustly imprisoned because of sentencing disparity?

How many poor folks have suffered because of their welfare 'reform?'

How many soldiers died for nothing because she voted to invade Iraq?

How many Hondurans suffered and died because she and Obama failed to support the democratically-elected government, and chose to lobby the OAS to have Honduras readmitted, even though it was now a fascist military state?

How many Libyans have suffered and died because she and Obama destroyed their country, including the Great Manmade River, and created a new stronghold for terrorists, armed by Qaddafi's unsecured weapons cache?

What is progressive about her lobbying for fossil fuel companies to sell fracking technology in Europe and Asia?

Is it really ok that she lauded Kissinger as her mentor?

That her State Department publicly excoriated countries with abysmal human rights records while privately selling them weapons?

That her campaign pandered to every marginalized group possible, then targeted Republican voters while ignoring the progressive wing of the party?

Is it acceptable that, for four years, she violated national security and retained a civilian to spy for her?

Are we so divided, demoralized, and desperate that we're willing to suffer cognitive dissonance by condemning the legal, ethical, and moral violations of the 'other side' while excusing the exact same behavior on 'our side?' That we're ok with considering a candidate 'good' only in comparison to horrible candidates, while ignoring the record? How is this any different from Republicans voting for Roy Moore?
"An extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof."—Marcello Truzzi

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."—Christopher Hitchens

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by ElectricMonk » Wed Jan 10, 2018 5:57 am

Nikki, you sound dangerously like plenty of reluctant Trump supporters who believe it is better for the system to break than to go in the wrong direction.
This kind of thinking is fundamentally at odd with a democracy, which is all about persevering the county and its institutions for the next peaceful transition of power. Everything can be corrected as long as the system itself can keep going.
Maybe Clinton would have done more or less everything wrong (very unlikely, since she would have had at least as fierce opposition in Congress as Obama did), but at least she would have kept the Departments staffed with people capable of doing the job. And she wouldn't have turned the Supreme Court and Federal Courts in the Federalist Society's wet dream for decades to come.
EPA, DOJ, State Department, DOE and many other departments have already lost invaluable life experience of employees who got kicked for purely ideological reasons without any replacement. Such a brain drain will kneecap the functioning of the government for at least a decade.
Do you really think that suffering 4 years of a president you don't like is worse than having a president who basically makes it impossible for his own and the next to administrations to function at all?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15616
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:04 am

Good Discussion. What we have though is a mismatch. Hillary was terrible, Trump was an unknown. I can see lots of reasons to vote the gut/heart on the issue and assume that Hillary would be as bad as she always has been and that Trump was only posturing to get elected.

Its in hindsight that I think EM's analysis is ahead but only by a nose.

You two might want to agree on what time reference to use. One year ago: Hillary a known commodity, Trump the Unknown. Today: Hillary might be viewed with more allowance for her own variability, and its Trump that has the record he does.

I'm 50/50 as to a year ago, about 90/10 in favor of Not Trump today.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Aztexan
King of the Limericks
King of the Limericks
Posts: 9249
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:39 pm

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Aztexan » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:51 am

I also don't understand why some people think we dodged a bullet by not having Hillary as president. I get it. She wasn't a perfect candidate. She could have done things so much differently. And there is her record, as Nikki points out. Sure, we may have dodged a bullet but in doing so we jumped into a huge pile of {!#%@}.
I know Nikki's criticism of Hillary does not equate an endorsement of that idiot, trump, but at least we wouldn't be questioning her mental stability, or lack thereof, if she were in office. We would not be embarrassed on a daily basis by moronic tweets.
I just don't understand the sentiment.
trump is Putin's bitch

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3042
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:08 pm
Custom Title: Yes that one.
Location: Chicago

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:28 am

Aztexan wrote:I also don't understand why some people think we dodged a bullet by not having Hillary as president.
Because she sold favors as Secretary of State.
Aldous Huxley wrote:A government with a comprehensive plan for the betterment of society is a government that uses torture.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by ElectricMonk » Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:28 am

Good points, bobbo, but Trump wasn't an unknown: we knew plenty, including long testimonies of people how have been close to him for years. We knew about the CIS money he used to bail himself out and sell overpriced real estate. We knew about Trump University. We knew about all the times he lied, even under oath.
We had Manafort having to quit, and Flynn obviously being up to his neck corrupt. And we had the interviews, nomination debates and Presidential Debates: especially from watching the latter, it should have been a no-brainer to pick Clinton over Trump - there was no contest at all about who made more sense and who was more believable.
The Trump presidency hasn't been surprising at all: he is too incompetent to get anything done and too paranoid to let anyone else do anything.
Sorry, but not voting for Clinton because she would have been a bad president is no argument, compared to having no president at all, only a baby that watches TV, eats cheeseburgers and needs to have his ego rubbed.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 25686
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by scrmbldggs » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:45 pm

And many people didn't only know Trump's disposition, but also that of much of the GOP.


I think it much worse than simply voting for the parasite, is to put the vector/disease into full power.
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15616
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jan 10, 2018 9:06 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:Good points, bobbo, but Trump wasn't an unknown: we knew plenty, including long testimonies of people how have been close to him for years. We knew about the CIS money he used to bail himself out and sell overpriced real estate. We knew about Trump University. We knew about all the times he lied, even under oath.
Thats all true........and very damning. You left out he discriminated in housing and he was a birther. Thats why I put him at 50% in a tie with terrible Hillary. "Most People" grow when put into positions of power and responsibility. Who knew Trump would just roll the Presidency into his ball of fraud? Many people said so, but they can't predict the future any better than anyone else. So.........absent going into the streets and rioting..... how you gonna send a message to the Vested Powers That Be...that you have had enough?????? In my view, electing a non-politician is a good way to to that........NO ONE......thought Trump would be as bad as he is.
ElectricMonk wrote: We had Manafort having to quit, and Flynn obviously being up to his neck corrupt. And we had the interviews, nomination debates and Presidential Debates: especially from watching the latter, it should have been a no-brainer to pick Clinton over Trump - there was no contest at all about who made more sense and who was more believable.
I would repeat the above. Of note: what Trump did was scam a few people out of money. He was against the war unlike Hillary. War kills thousands............and so forth. The Political Process is not pretty. If playing High School Jock is what it takes to woo the Republican Voting base..........what would most anyone do? The 17 opponents to Trump were all too status quo and playing that game to break character. .................... but it wasn't all just politics....... it has turned out to be very much Trump himself as well. Again: NO ONE knew that for a certainty. Still back to Hillary and Trump both being HORRIBLE....for very different reasons.
ElectricMonk wrote: Sorry, but not voting for Clinton because she would have been a bad president is no argument, compared to having no president at all, only a baby that watches TV, eats cheeseburgers and needs to have his ego rubbed.
Sorry........thats a conclusion supported only by hindsight. People do change in office. Trump didn't............but people do.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 25686
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by scrmbldggs » Wed Jan 10, 2018 9:33 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:...People do change in office. Trump didn't...
Oh, he did. He got worse. Power corrupts, absolute power...
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 14148
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by JO 753 » Wed Jan 10, 2018 9:47 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:....NO ONE......thought Trump would be as bad as he is.
I did. Obama did. Anybody who had a ballpark awareness uv wut the job requirez and the inadequesy uv Trumps IQ and personality did.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 14148
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by JO 753 » Wed Jan 10, 2018 9:52 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:I maintain she would have been as bad as he is, but in drastically different ways.
She iz at least competent, experiensed and intellijent.

I think your opinion may be tainted by the constant torent uv propaganda agenst her.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15616
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:08 pm

My goodness. Get the right subject, and people are into diagnosing at a distance, knowing the mind of another person, and being able to read entrails.

There is a YUUUGE difference between your best guess, and voting on that estimation and judgment, and actually "knowing."

C'mon boys............look deep.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15616
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:13 pm

Not that it should matter, but I would have held my nose and voting for Hillary..........on a close call, I'll go Democrat. Given the stench the Republican Party gives off these days..........I might actually go Demo no matter what the match up is.

((I live in California.........no reason to actually vote.))
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15616
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:27 pm

JO 753 wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:I maintain she would have been as bad as he is, but in drastically different ways.
She iz at least competent, experiensed and intellijent.

I think your opinion may be tainted by the constant torent uv propaganda agenst her.
That is an interesting truth.......a sad measure of the partisanship raising party and power above country. There IS a vast right wing conspiracy....we see it in unvarnished operation all the time......aka: talking points of the day.

so......very much Yes....we have to remove that propaganda and look at Hillary's record. .........Hah, hah: and that is why she is terrible. She simply is too far right and too corrupt herself. Its true, she does give some crumbs to we the people but the cost is so very high. My Magic 8-Ball, she doesn't have the credibility to be able to win the nomination next time around. Too many qualified younger candidates without her baggage, which includes Bill in this Age of Me Too and the newer meme that escapes me at the moment.

Saint Ralph Nader said it decades ago: We need a non-corporatist party. aka: a real progressive party. Both the Dems and Pukes need to find their space in the dustbin of History.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3042
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:08 pm
Custom Title: Yes that one.
Location: Chicago

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Thu Jan 11, 2018 1:19 am

Uh oh.

Oprah is a heretic.



I wonder if she floats? ;)
Aldous Huxley wrote:A government with a comprehensive plan for the betterment of society is a government that uses torture.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15616
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Jan 11, 2018 1:45 am

Re Ophra video: she didn't go there too many times.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 14148
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by JO 753 » Thu Jan 11, 2018 2:47 am

:twisted: "Power uv darkness" gets a big applauz.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Nikki Nyx » Thu Jan 11, 2018 5:07 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:Nikki, you sound dangerously like plenty of reluctant Trump supporters who believe it is better for the system to break than to go in the wrong direction.
I don't believe that, and I have never, ever been a Trump supporter, even reluctantly. I come from a long line of old-school Massachusetts liberals. I voted for Bernie Sanders in the primary, and Stein/Baraka in the general. However, I live in the bluest of blue states, and there was no question that Clinton would win here, so I had the luxury of voting my ethics. If I lived in a swing state, you bet your ass I would have held my nose and voted for Clinton...then spent the next four years annoying my Congresscritters to keep her in line.
ElectricMonk wrote:This kind of thinking is fundamentally at odd with a democracy, which is all about persevering the county and its institutions for the next peaceful transition of power. Everything can be corrected as long as the system itself can keep going.
But this is not how I think. In retrospect, I believe a combination of circumstances is responsible for Trump:
• There are too many people with knee-jerk hatred of Hillary Clinton, not because of her record, but because of her past. If she wasn't so egocentric, and took the time to examine her own weaknesses, she would have realized that the mood of 2016 was not in her favor. People wanted populist candidates, and Sanders would have beaten Trump in the general quite handily, according to all polls up to the general election.
• Clinton's case was not helped by the email scandal. Many people, quite correctly, determined that she did, in fact, violate numerous federal laws and national security. If she were male, it may not have been an issue, based on any number of male candidates with criminal accusations...including Trump himself.
• Clinton's case was also not helped by her insistence on campaigning on a platform of incremental progress, and following Obama's policies. While I admire her competency in many areas, campaigning is not one of them.
• Trump played to ignorant people's fears and biases. He may not be a politician, but he is a salesman, and he chose his target market well.
• In addition to the email investigation, people were turned off by the DNC leaks showing collusion against Sanders, the multitude of 'irregularities' in the Democratic primary (including the disparity between exit polls and vote tallies), Bill Clinton blocking polling stations, and the fact that she failed to campaign between the convention and the general.
People were clearly able to see that the system was already broken, and that it was politicians who broke it. Why they believed Trump would be the solution is beyond me; the man had literally nothing to recommend him.
ElectricMonk wrote:Maybe Clinton would have done more or less everything wrong (very unlikely, since she would have had at least as fierce opposition in Congress as Obama did), but at least she would have kept the Departments staffed with people capable of doing the job. And she wouldn't have turned the Supreme Court and Federal Courts in the Federalist Society's wet dream for decades to come.
EPA, DOJ, State Department, DOE and many other departments have already lost invaluable life experience of employees who got kicked for purely ideological reasons without any replacement. Such a brain drain will kneecap the functioning of the government for at least a decade.
I agree. Unfortunately, people were no longer interested in what she was preaching; they wanted change, not another 4-8 years of Obama. Well, they certainly got change, didn't they? What really amazes me is that Trump still has supporters.
ElectricMonk wrote:Do you really think that suffering 4 years of a president you don't like is worse than having a president who basically makes it impossible for his own and the next to administrations to function at all?
Of course not. I don't vote based on personal likes and dislikes. I haven't 'liked' a president (or a presidential candidate) since Carter, but I still voted for Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton, Gore, Kerry, and Obama, because I can't afford to allow my personal feelings to affect my decision. That would be silly.
"An extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof."—Marcello Truzzi

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."—Christopher Hitchens

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Nikki Nyx » Thu Jan 11, 2018 5:18 pm

Aztexan wrote:I also don't understand why some people think we dodged a bullet by not having Hillary as president. I get it. She wasn't a perfect candidate. She could have done things so much differently. And there is her record, as Nikki points out. Sure, we may have dodged a bullet but in doing so we jumped into a huge pile of {!#%@}.
I agree. I certainly was not celebrating on election night, because I knew Trump would be a disaster.
Aztexan wrote:I know Nikki's criticism of Hillary does not equate an endorsement of that idiot, trump,
I have never, nor would I ever, endorse Trump for anything. He's unqualified to be a city councillor, never mind president.
Aztexan wrote:but at least we wouldn't be questioning her mental stability, or lack thereof, if she were in office. We would not be embarrassed on a daily basis by moronic tweets.
I just don't understand the sentiment.
I don't either, Az. On the daily, I'm appalled at Trump's statements...and actually embarrassed not only by him, but also for him. He parades around, utterly clueless, like the Emperor in his new clothing, oblivious to his nakedness. Frankly, I suspect he may have early onset dementia, not helped by his inherent paranoid narcissism.

The sentiment...I see someone I know constantly posting on Elizabeth Warren's FB page things like, "Just wait until we vote you out." The anti-Warren group ignores her sterling senate record in favor of their personal opinions. I don't think she'll have any trouble being re-elected, especially given the fact that her opponent is extremely right wing...and Indian. Right wingers tend to be bigoted. Thankfully, they're a small minority in Massachusetts.

I was not at all happy that Warren failed to endorse Sanders, feeling that she placed her career above her ethics. However, I will still vote for her with enthusiasm; she's the best Senator we've had since Teddy Kennedy died.
"An extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof."—Marcello Truzzi

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."—Christopher Hitchens

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by ElectricMonk » Thu Jan 11, 2018 5:23 pm

Thanks for the reply, Nikki.
Living in a state where your vote doesn't count is bound to give you more time to consider the merits of the candidate who is going to be elected no matter what.

I think you are right to point out that Clinton's major flaw was the extra X-chromosome: most of her character flaws wouldn't have mattered in a man.
For me, that is an extra reason to, when in doubt, vote for a women and not a man - not because I believe that women are better at job X than man have traditionally been, but because it is healthy to make new mistakes instead of repeating the old ones time and again.
Trump is doubtlessly shaking up the US, but I'm sure Clinton would have done the same by creating hyper-partisanship. The difference being that Clinton wouldn't have had the support of Congress, making her by definition less of a threat no matter her personal policies.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Nikki Nyx » Thu Jan 11, 2018 5:23 pm

JO 753 wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:I maintain she would have been as bad as he is, but in drastically different ways.
She iz at least competent, experiensed and intellijent.
Very true. Had I lived in a swing state, I would have voted for her without question.
JO 753 wrote:I think your opinion may be tainted by the constant torent uv propaganda agenst her.
Now you're insulting my intelligence, JO. My opinion has absolutely nothing to do with propaganda, and everything to do with my extensive research into her record, as my previous post clearly showed. Had I been drinking the KoolAid, I would have mentioned Benghazi. But I know she was not at fault in that situation; Republicans are responsible, because they continually cut State Department security funding.
"An extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof."—Marcello Truzzi

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."—Christopher Hitchens

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Nikki Nyx » Thu Jan 11, 2018 5:34 pm

ElectricMonk wrote:Thanks for the reply, Nikki.
You're very welcome, EM!
ElectricMonk wrote:Living in a state where your vote doesn't count is bound to give you more time to consider the merits of the candidate who is going to be elected no matter what.
Well, frequently my vote does count in Massachusetts; it helps to elect progressives at every level of government. I vote in every election, even if it's just my city's School Board.
ElectricMonk wrote:I think you are right to point out that Clinton's major flaw was the extra X-chromosome: most of her character flaws wouldn't have mattered in a man.
As a man, she would have been viewed as intelligent, competent, experienced, firm, and in control. I'm more than familiar with those qualities in me being questioned because of my gender, and it's annoying AF. People would still have questioned her record, but they would have excused much that they blamed her for, had she been a man.
ElectricMonk wrote:For me, that is an extra reason to, when in doubt, vote for a women and not a man - not because I believe that women are better at job X than man have traditionally been, but because it is healthy to make new mistakes instead of repeating the old ones time and again.
My daughter and I always take the time to research the backgrounds of the candidates in any election, no matter how small. Both of us considered Sanders far more of a feminist than Clinton, based solely on their records.
ElectricMonk wrote:Trump is doubtlessly shaking up the US, but I'm sure Clinton would have done the same by creating hyper-partisanship. The difference being that Clinton wouldn't have had the support of Congress, making her by definition less of a threat no matter her personal policies.
Exactly. In Massachusetts, the state legislature is probably at least 95% Democrats. Our current governor is Republican, but in the classic sense. He keeps a rein on spending, but also supports social welfare and is a staunch environmentalist. If he runs for re-election, I'll vote for him. Honestly, he's been a better governor than Deval Patrick ever was.
"An extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof."—Marcello Truzzi

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."—Christopher Hitchens

User avatar
gorgeous
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5055
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by gorgeous » Fri Jan 12, 2018 9:51 pm

Oprah says it won't happen, not her strength... https://youtu.be/_B5jq_yZNms
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3042
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:08 pm
Custom Title: Yes that one.
Location: Chicago

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Sat Jan 13, 2018 12:38 pm

gorgeous wrote:Oprah says it won't happen, not her strength... https://youtu.be/_B5jq_yZNms
Hillary got to her.

Hillary is putting the fix in AGAIN.

Only Condi can save us now.
Aldous Huxley wrote:A government with a comprehensive plan for the betterment of society is a government that uses torture.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29607
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Matthew Ellard » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:47 pm

Abdul Alhazred wrote:Hillary got to her. Hillary is putting the fix in AGAIN. Only Condi can save us now.
Bring back Madeleine Albright! She only has to stare at the USA's enemies and they will run away!
Albright.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

craig4
New Member
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2018 4:14 pm

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by craig4 » Sun Feb 11, 2018 1:55 pm

John Hinkenlooper, currently the term limited governor of Colorado looks pretty good. He's a self made man with just enough of a political resume to be qualified but not enough to be considered part of the Democratic establishment. As a two-term governor of Colorado, he's got proven swing state appeal. We could certainly do worse.

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3042
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:08 pm
Custom Title: Yes that one.
Location: Chicago

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Sun Feb 11, 2018 2:10 pm

Not bad, but maybe not "ethnic" enough.
Aldous Huxley wrote:A government with a comprehensive plan for the betterment of society is a government that uses torture.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Nikki Nyx » Sun Feb 11, 2018 8:51 pm

Abdul Alhazred wrote:Not bad, but maybe not "ethnic" enough.
Tulsi Gabbard/Nina Turner...you can't get more ethnic than that. Plus, they're both women, because we all know that women are mandated to vote for women, or they're gender traitors. :roll:

(However, I don't see "Votes for Vaginas" becoming a campaign slogan any time soon. :P )
"An extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof."—Marcello Truzzi

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."—Christopher Hitchens

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 25686
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by scrmbldggs » Mon Feb 12, 2018 4:59 am

I'd like to see Warner or Schiff run, but how about President Castro? :mrgreen:
(Julián)
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: The Baby-eating Bishop

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by ElectricMonk » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:25 am

US politics has always been reactionary: Obama was a reaction to Bush, Bush to Clinton etc.
The reaction to Trump might be very dramatic indeed, and I would put the chances for a female challenger above those of a male.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 25686
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by scrmbldggs » Tue Feb 13, 2018 2:43 am

Stormy! :lol:
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Nikki Nyx » Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:04 pm

scrmbldggs wrote:I'd like to see Warner or Schiff run, but how about President Castro? :mrgreen:
(Julián)
All three are too Third Way for my taste. Plus, Warner's a multi-millionaire, and I personally think we've had enough of those, since they seem to be unable to think outside their financial box. (When you habitually spend $300 on a haircut, it's hard to understand that $300 is a lot of money for most people. It's a month's groceries for my household.)

Don't get me wrong; if it's a choice between one of them and Trump, any one of them would get my vote. But I would prefer someone more progressive. Incrementalism accomplishes one step forward at the expense of three steps backward.
"An extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof."—Marcello Truzzi

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."—Christopher Hitchens

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 25686
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by scrmbldggs » Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:11 pm

AFAIK, Warner (yes, he's currently the wealthiest Senator) is a truly self-made man, who also voted against the tax cut for the rich that would have benefited him personally. (And so far, he seems to value his family above that formerly prestigious office. He seems to be a principled and decent man.)
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

Aztexan
King of the Limericks
King of the Limericks
Posts: 9249
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:39 pm

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Aztexan » Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:20 pm

Man being the key word.
trump is Putin's bitch

Aztexan
King of the Limericks
King of the Limericks
Posts: 9249
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:39 pm

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Aztexan » Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:25 pm

Is it considered sexist if I say we need a female president? I think the most qualified person should get the job and there are certainly a good number of potential female candidates who could potentially be good presidents but is it wrong to just say that right now, the Democratic party shouldn't even consider a man as their 2020 choice?
trump is Putin's bitch

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 15616
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:29 pm

do we know enough about the potential women candidates (any of them?) to say they are all good? All we know is they are all better than Trump.............so, yeah.........looks like a fair thing to advocate.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29607
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: USA 2020 Dem presidential candidate speculation thread.

Post by Matthew Ellard » Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:31 pm

ElectricMonk wrote: She might well have been a bad president, but at least she would spend some time governing instead of watching TV.
I'm Aussie. Before the election I had no idea that there was so much USA domestic animosity towards Hillary Clinton. We had the "usual suspects" on our forum saying nasty things about Clinton, but our general Australian public press and media was quite supportive.

In retrospect, I should have picked up on the bad blood.

I still think she would have been a good president. I would like to see the Democrats wipe the slate clean and put forward four or five good new people, now, to let them grow on people before 2020.