Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
John Bonham

2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries—Countdown to Milwaukee

And the democratic nominee will be...  

14 members have voted

  1. 1. Pick Your Poison

    • Bernie Sanders
      4
    • Kamala Harris
      0
    • Joe Biden
      2
    • Beto O’Rourke
      1
    • Andrew Yang
      1
    • Elizabeth Warren
      1
    • Amy Klobuchar
      0
    • Cory Booker
      0
    • Pete Buttgieg
      3
    • Tulsi Gabbard
      1
    • Kirsten Gillibrand
      0
    • Julian Castro
      0
    • John Delaney
      0
    • Mike Gravel
      0
    • John Hickenlooper
      1
    • Jay Inslee
      0
    • Wayne Messam
      0
    • Marianne Williamson
      0
    • Tim Ryan
      0
    • Free Hugs Guy
      0


Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, Facekicker said:

You need someone with star power that can generate the same public and online fervour as Trump. Someone that can draw thousands and thousands to rallies, someone who can trade smartass remarks toe to toe with Trump and win. 

 

The Democrats have nobody that even comes close to this. 

 

Unless Trump is caught fucking choir boys with Putin in the West Wing then he will surely get reelected

 

 


It's basically the same problem the Democrats had in the 80s. Trump is no Ronald Reagan, but he has that unbeatable charisma and star power that Reagan had. The American public loves that. None of the Democrats have that.

If Bernie or Warren is the nominee I could easily see Trump getting close to 400 EV's. People overrate Bernie's appeal. I consider him the George McGovern of this century.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Skeeter said:

Beto couldn't even beat Ted Cruz to win their state......why would the Dems put him up for a presidential run?

Dude was arrested for burglary and for drunk driving in his career. Can't carry his home state. Why would they want him in the race?


The progressive Democratic base/Berniecrats also can't stand Beto. They consider him a bought and paid for sellout. So, there goes his chances of making it through the primaries.

Bernie not getting the nomination is Trump's best hope at re-election. If Bernie isn't the nominee or VP candidate, his cultists will sit home out of spite and safe states will become swing states.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Skeeter said:

The way to beat Trump is with a conservative, NORMAL candidate. Not Warren with all her lies and over-the-top hoopla. Not Hillary. Not a career politician type.

People want somebody they can trust. Somebody that they might not agree with all their political beliefs....but we trust that they are doing what they THINK is best for all of the United States.  Nobody trusts AOC. Or Warren. Or Bernie. Or Hillary. Or Kamala.

 

Both parties need to reign in the crazy.....and give us somebody we can trust. That's how you beat Trump. You don't try and out-crazy Trump.  Warren/AOC/Hillary - those democrats are actually the best thing that ever happened for Trump.

 

Look at BIll and Obama. While I disagree with most of their political beliefs.....you can totally imagine having a beer with them at a BBQ. Talking sports with Obama. Ranking the babes at the party with Bill. Bush - same thing. Reagan - he was your trusted uncle.  Can you imagine having to interact with Hillary for a couple hours?


I actually really hate AOC as a person, but I could easily see her being elected President in say 2024 or 2028. The American public loves a circus. Sanity went out the door in American politics a long time ago.

Ever since Bill Clinton, the people have voted for not the "normal next door type" - that's Gerry Ford - they've voted for the person with the most charisma. Clinton was on TV playing the sax and being basically a rockstar compared to old fuddy duddy George Bush. Bush Jr in turn seemed like your cool, plain speakin' American Texas guy compared to lame ass, boring Gore. Obama was more than just a normal guy - the guy was a tremendous speaker with max charisma who could persuade a crowd. Hillary lost both because she's boring as a rock and because Trump is quite frankly entertaining. People want "entertaining", not "normal" in their White House.

If people wanted a normal guy in the White House, George Bush would've won in 1992, Bob Dole in 1996, McCain in '08, Jeb would've been the GOP nominee, etc. People don't want normal. They want FUN.

Edited by Miser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO it's all about voter turnout

The Democratic base didn't show up for Hillary.

I think they should nominate someone that Dem voters will get fired up for

Not someone who will appease Republicans or these mythical swing voters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, John Bonham said:

IMO it's all about voter turnout

The Democratic base didn't show up for Hillary.

I think they should nominate someone that Dem voters will get fired up for

Not someone who will appease Republicans or these mythical swing voters


The problem is that the media and the Democratic Party seem to think that white people are already a minority and act as such. Whites clearly are not welcome at their table. I was a Democrat until 2016.

The Democratic base - the people who would nominate a Warren or a Sanders - don't make up the majority of the voting public or the country. It's a Catch 22 in my opinion in that the Democratic Party needs to nominate someone they will get fired up for - I agree with that - but the kind of people they get fired up for are the type of people who turn off middle America or in another word, your average centrist like myself.

AOC could only win because she's hot and has a big mouth. Her being a hot piece of ass cancels out her radical and frankly insane ideas. But who's gonna wanna imagine fucking Liz Warren, you know?

Share this post


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


The problem is that the media and the Democratic Party seem to think that white people are already a minority and act as such. Whites clearly are not welcome at their table. I was a Democrat until 2016.

The Democratic base - the people who would nominate a Warren or a Sanders - don't make up the majority of the voting public or the country. It's a Catch 22 in my opinion in that the Democratic Party needs to nominate someone they will get fired up for - I agree with that - but the kind of people they get fired up for are the type of people who turn off middle America or in another word, your average centrist like myself.

AOC could only win because she's hot and has a big mouth. Her being a hot piece of ass cancels out her radical and frankly insane ideas. But who's gonna wanna imagine fucking Liz Warren, you know?

I disagree with a batch of what you’ve said. But that’s 100% OK. It’s good to have different opinions. Who knows who is right. It’s all perspective. 

 

But you you objectively wrong on one point. AOC is far from “hot.”  

 

Not bad? Yes. 

Hot? No. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Skeeter said:

I disagree with a batch of what you’ve said. But that’s 100% OK. It’s good to have different opinions. Who knows who is right. It’s all perspective. 

 

But you you objectively wrong on one point. AOC is far from “hot.”  

 

Not bad? Yes. 

Hot? No. 

 

Yeah, you're right. For some reason I had in my head this image of a hot, feisty Latina chick - yeah, no she's just okay.
 

Share this post


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

 

But you you objectively wrong on one point. AOC is far from “hot.”  

 

Not bad? Yes. 

Hot? No. 

sk-2017_04_featured_listing_mobile.jpg

original_1901b9e51487d9c67e3febd2c21c6d8

Well she’s a smoke to me

I would 👅 like a 🍭 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A normal candidate that doesn’t really do hyperbole, combine that with the UBI to counter Trump “bringing jobs back”.

 

What respectable Joe sixpack is turning down a grand a month? Fuck factory jobs. Free cash to drink light beer and play Tetris on a second hand Huawei? Let’s go! This is the day we dreamed of!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, AxlisOld said:

You know damn well every word of it towards you is deserved. No matter how long it's been, it was bad enough that you never be forgiven. Fuck. You.

 

You shouldn't even be on this forum anyway, other than fucking up your chance at the only other forum that bothered to give your bullshit another shot.

We've pretty much forgiven Bacardi for spamming the forum with images of gaping assholes that still give me nightmares. I don't see why we can't all give Miser another chance. He has been pretty open about his demons. Try being the bigger person. Miser brings a lot to the forums. His encyclopedic knowledge of all things GNR is second to none. Plus his threads about Axl's hair always provide a good chuckle or two. 

Share this post


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

@Miser  I think your a rat 🐀 

 

I think you lack the fortitude to address the claim 

 


What claim?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is pathetic that the Dems are willing to stoop so low as to offer up cash reparations to poor black people in order to try and secure their vote for some stupid election that takes place every four years. Giving poor, uneducated, marginalized people a cash pay out won't help solve anything in the long run. They'll go broke again in a few years just like the trailer park trash who win the lottery. This whole reparations idea is batshit crazy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I thought everyone got a grand month. I’m sure it would be the end of the world as we know it but unless they start dropping nukes this movie is going nowhere. 

 

Reparations would replace welfare? It might be easier. But it’s almost like giving up hope. What will politicians run on? We gave up and so can you.

 

Here we are now entertain us. 

Share this post


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

Oh, I thought everyone got a grand month. I’m sure it would be the end of the world as we know it but unless they start dropping nukes this movie is going nowhere. 

 

Reparations would replace welfare? It might be easier. But it’s almost like giving up hope. What will politicians run on? We gave up and so can you.

 

Here we are now entertain us. 

You are probably thinking of UBI (universal basic income). That's the plan for when the AI take all of our jobs. In order for that to work we are going to have to kill off all of the high achiever types who think constantly chasing after carrots makes life meaningful.

Share this post


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

I think you are probably thinking of UBI (universal basic income). That's the plan for when the AI take all of our jobs away. 

Cash for votes. Will not work for food. 

So everyone gets 1k but then others get extras. 

You should be able to decide if you want 12k up front or in weekly instalments. I’d blow 12k in a week

on a new hologram system. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should be able to sell your vote online. Stockpile thousands of votes in swing states and then sell them to the highest bidder on either side. That would be the perfect merger of capitalism and democracy. 

Share this post


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

sk-2017_04_featured_listing_mobile.jpg

original_1901b9e51487d9c67e3febd2c21c6d8

Well she’s a smoke to me

I would 👅 like a 🍭 

By the time she gets a chance to run the combination of socialism and age will see her hit the WALL (lol) harder than a 5000 pound Lazer guided bunker buster. 

Share this post


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


It's basically the same problem the Democrats had in the 80s. Trump is no Ronald Reagan, but he has that unbeatable charisma and star power that Reagan had. The American public loves that. None of the Democrats have that.

If Bernie or Warren is the nominee I could easily see Trump getting close to 400 EV's. People overrate Bernie's appeal. I consider him the George McGovern of this century.

I agree that his appeal is overrated, but I wouldn't really compare him to McGovern. McGovern's big problem wasn't overrated appeal, it was that he was the architect of the primary system as we know it, where the voters decide who the nominees are and not the party bosses at the convention. This took a large chunk of power away from the party leaders and made them mad enough to, at best, give him lukewarm support if any at all, or at worst throw their support behind Nixon. Then those primaries turned out to be very bitter, during which time he was labelled as the "acid, amnesty and abortion" candidate; that label stuck with him through to the general and, coupled with a few other things, caused a lot of the party to be alienated from him. He was also really hurt by his initial running mate's medical records leaking and revealing that he had been treated for depression, which back then made people think he was some kind of nut case; this further hurt his campaign when he said he'd stick by Eagleton, only to ask him to step aside a few days later, and this wasn't very long after the convention either. By this point, it was pretty well known that Nixon was going to be the winner of the election by a wide margin. The only question was how thorough the defeat would be.

 

Anyways, despite the overrated appeal, I still maintain that Bernie's the best shot for the party, at present at least. But I doubt he's able to beat Trump, at best I think he keeps him from breaking 300 EVs again. He brings his own excited base to the field (which is a whole heck of a lot more than the rest of the candidates bring), and he's not so divisive that he'll scare away that bloc who will vote for whoever has a D next to their name (because at this point, a lot of that crowd just wants to vote Trump out and don't care who replaces him, even if it is an old white Jewish man in an era of identity politics), but I don't know if that's enough to actually win the election. He needs to excite the whole Democratic base, not just his own and the young ones. I'm also certain that he'd be hurt during the general election debates, because Sanders is kind of too "polite" of a debater. Thirty years ago that would have been fine, but in the current climate, where debates are all about making your opponent look like an idiot and verbally destroying them? That won't fly, especially against someone like Trump who has more or less mastered that.

 

As a side note, I hope if Mike Gravel decides to run that he qualifies for the debates. That'll make for some grade A entertainment right there. Especially if he ends up on the same stage as Biden and Sanders. It'll be like "Grumpy Old Men" in suits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nulla Lex Ink. said:

I agree that his appeal is overrated, but I wouldn't really compare him to McGovern. McGovern's big problem wasn't overrated appeal, it was that he was the architect of the primary system as we know it, where the voters decide who the nominees are and not the party bosses at the convention. This took a large chunk of power away from the party leaders and made them mad enough to, at best, give him lukewarm support if any at all, or at worst throw their support behind Nixon. Then those primaries turned out to be very bitter, during which time he was labelled as the "acid, amnesty and abortion" candidate; that label stuck with him through to the general and, coupled with a few other things, caused a lot of the party to be alienated from him. He was also really hurt by his initial running mate's medical records leaking and revealing that he had been treated for depression, which back then made people think he was some kind of nut case; this further hurt his campaign when he said he'd stick by Eagleton, only to ask him to step aside a few days later, and this wasn't very long after the convention either. By this point, it was pretty well known that Nixon was going to be the winner of the election by a wide margin. The only question was how thorough the defeat would be.

 

Anyways, despite the overrated appeal, I still maintain that Bernie's the best shot for the party, at present at least. But I doubt he's able to beat Trump, at best I think he keeps him from breaking 300 EVs again. He brings his own excited base to the field (which is a whole heck of a lot more than the rest of the candidates bring), and he's not so divisive that he'll scare away that bloc who will vote for whoever has a D next to their name (because at this point, a lot of that crowd just wants to vote Trump out and don't care who replaces him, even if it is an old white Jewish man in an era of identity politics), but I don't know if that's enough to actually win the election. He needs to excite the whole Democratic base, not just his own and the young ones. I'm also certain that he'd be hurt during the general election debates, because Sanders is kind of too "polite" of a debater. Thirty years ago that would have been fine, but in the current climate, where debates are all about making your opponent look like an idiot and verbally destroying them? That won't fly, especially against someone like Trump who has more or less mastered that.

 

As a side note, I hope if Mike Gravel decides to run that he qualifies for the debates. That'll make for some grade A entertainment right there. Especially if he ends up on the same stage as Biden and Sanders. It'll be like "Grumpy Old Men" in suits.


True. The landscape was very different. The reason I made the comparison though was  not necessarily McGovern himself or whatever but as an an example of two pie in the sky Liberal Democratic types. I am a Republican, but I would be a Democrat if they stepped away from the identity politics and leaning toward the "white privilege" and reparations shit. I see this reach toward identity politics nonsense on the part of the party as similar to how McGovern and Mondale left the mainstream of American politics which in the 70s and 80s was center right, and embraced more fringe politics. Ultimately I think that's what cost both guys their elections - their politics were just too out of step with the public, besides the charisma factor in 84. I think that the "SJW" contingent which is pervading the youth and media represents probably a minority of views in this country and most would lean centrist if asked about their views. And I have a feeling that the Dems are gonna go full throttle with the identity politics in 2020, because all of them will be attempting to capture the base.

The thing is, I don't know how Trump would debate Bernie. You say he would be hurt but I would argue that his monkish politeness, compared to Trump, might be something Trump doesn't know how to attack. Hillary was a fighter in the debates and her own nastiness (and PERCEIVED nastiness by the public) gave him a lot of wriggle room. In the primaries, none of the guys were polite but they all were worthy of mockery; I don't see the Jeb Bush method working on Bernie. That's what I am curious about - how will Trump attack him in a general election debate without Bernie making him look like a fool with say, one cutting word in edgewise, not said nastily, but you know - a smart barb back at him.

I keep hearing about this Mike Gravel guy. From what you're saying he sounds "entertaining", could you please provide me a video of him being an idiot?

Share this post


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


True. The landscape was very different. The reason I made the comparison though was  not necessarily McGovern himself or whatever but as an an example of two pie in the sky Liberal Democratic types. I am a Republican, but I would be a Democrat if they stepped away from the identity politics and leaning toward the "white privilege" and reparations shit. I see this reach toward identity politics nonsense on the part of the party as similar to how McGovern and Mondale left the mainstream of American politics which in the 70s and 80s was center right, and embraced more fringe politics. Ultimately I think that's what cost both guys their elections - their politics were just too out of step with the public, besides the charisma factor in 84. I think that the "SJW" contingent which is pervading the youth and media represents probably a minority of views in this country and most would lean centrist if asked about their views. And I have a feeling that the Dems are gonna go full throttle with the identity politics in 2020, because all of them will be attempting to capture the base.

The thing is, I don't know how Trump would debate Bernie. You say he would be hurt but I would argue that his monkish politeness, compared to Trump, might be something Trump doesn't know how to attack. Hillary was a fighter in the debates and her own nastiness (and PERCEIVED nastiness by the public) gave him a lot of wriggle room. In the primaries, none of the guys were polite but they all were worthy of mockery; I don't see the Jeb Bush method working on Bernie. That's what I am curious about - how will Trump attack him in a general election debate without Bernie making him look like a fool with say, one cutting word in edgewise, not said nastily, but you know - a smart barb back at him.

I keep hearing about this Mike Gravel guy. From what you're saying he sounds "entertaining", could you please provide me a video of him being an idiot?

I could see Trump being disarmed by Bernie's politeness, but I could also see it going the other way. Really it comes down to how the public perceives it and how it's spun by the media. Bernie's politeness could make Trump look like a bumbling moron because he's unsure of how to attack it, but that won't matter if most people are like "Look at that! Trump's flinging mud at him left and right and he's too big a pussy to say anything back! What a coward!" Like I said, nowadays debates are really all about verbally destroying your opponent, and to some people that just means being louder and more intimidating than the other person. I'll admit though, I'm very cynical about the process and what its become. I would definitely love to see those debates though. In 2016 Trump said he was willing to debate Bernie when Hillary refused to do the last debate with him, but then he pulled out at the last second because Bernie wasn't going to be the nominee, and I've always wondered how those would go down. Would be entertaining if nothing else.

 

Nothing crazy or idiotic from the 2008 debates come to mind off the top of my head (admittedly its been awhile since I watched those debates), but I do remember he made some really weird campaign ads, such as the one below.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...