Obviously a lot of Democratic soul searching to come, and who knows what the political dynamics will be in 3-4 years, but who are the leading possibilities?
Bernie - probably too old. He'll have passed average Male life expectancy in 2020. Agree.
Elizabeth Warren - certainly can straddle both progressive and centrist wings. No, she absolutely cannot straddle anything. She's quintessentially representative of the sanctimonious politics that were just rejected. She'd be destroyed.
Cory Booker - might remind people of Obama in style and politics. One of the better options, but he's despised by teachers, which would make it pretty tough to get the nomination. Also, he's unmarried, which shouldn't matter but does.
Tammy Duckworth - decorated war veteran She's a pretty bad public speaker and I'm not sure how she gets the base energized.
Chris Murphy - Connecticut Senator, strong gun control advicate. White guy. Don't know much about him other than the filibuster after Sandy Hook.
John Hickenlooper - popular governor in a swing state. Fun name. Another white dude. Same here, only know him from his speech at the DNC this year, seemed pretty boring.
Some less congenital choices:
Oprah Winfrey - hey, stranger things I do think she'd probably win. I don't think that would be a good thing.
Kanye - again... End of the world.
Michelle Obama - Very unlikely, but she is basically the anti-Trump I dunno, would she win? For one thing I think there's no way she'd do it.
Michael Moore - Midwest factor Fantasy election booking: Moore vs. Coulter. Who wins?
An actor - say Tom Hanks, Leonardo DeCaprio.Don't think they'd have a chance. Would just come across as elitist.
I think the best option they may have is Deval Patrick, but he doesn't seem at all interested in getting back into politics. Seems to want to just make piles of money for the time being.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
Speaking of the media, I do have to wonder how Trump's cheerleaders are going to handle his waffling on his major campaign promises.
He has already bailed on the whole "deporting 11 million illegals" thing, and repealing Obamacare, and The Wall, and the ban on Muslims.
The election wasn't even a week ago and he's already changed the script.
I think it's a good thing of course, but I'd be getting a little antsy if I was a supporter.
From what I've seen, the Trump supporters see those campaign promises as more ideology than things the actually expect him to do.
So as long as his actions are in keeping with the ideology behind those promises, they be happy. They don't actually expect Trump to do all those things.
Also, on the tour of rallies thing, if his rallies have the same tone as his acceptance speech it might actually calm the masses a bit. The visual is terrible but I do think that at minimum he should be giving more "unity" speeches than he has been, preferably of the "love thy neighbour" flavour.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Speeches definitely. Trump should be out in front of the rallies addressing their concerns instead his camp asking Obama and Clinton why they aren't doing it, giving the police working a protest free dinner, saying the protesters are fake, threatening those that criticize him, etc.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Speeches definitely. Trump should be out in front of the rallies addressing their concerns instead his camp asking Obama and Clinton why they aren't doing it, giving the police working a protest free dinner, saying the protesters are fake, threatening those that criticize him, etc.
protesters won't listen to the person they are protesting about.
they just need to protest it out of themselves until they feel better
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
Speeches definitely. Trump should be out in front of the rallies addressing their concerns instead his camp asking Obama and Clinton why they aren't doing it, giving the police working a protest free dinner, saying the protesters are fake, threatening those that criticize him, etc.
Trump doesnt have to address these kids concerns any more than Clinton would have addressed the concerns of the right had she won. Obama didnt address the concerns of the right, Trudeau didnt address the concerns of the right. Why the double standard?
I bet there arent even 100 people total that are rioting that even know what "TPP" stands for.
If voting was mandated Trump's margin of victory would've been larger.
There is some belief out there that Trump tapped into a previously uncourted portion of the white male vote while many republicans stayed home rather than cast a vote.
A large part of Trump's support was a voter who traditionally does not vote.
It's an interesting political science notation.
Interesting. That statement is 100% opposite what CBC was reporting in the aftermath on election night.
They stated that Trump brought in about the same number of votes as Romney did, but that Clinton brought in about 5,000,000 less than Obama did.
So it isn't that Trump got a bunch of hillbillies to the polls, it's that a lot of Sanders supports and anti-political class democrats stayed home.
__________________
"OOOOOOHHHHHHH those Russians" - Boney M
Why is it up to Trump to speak to Hillary/Democrat protestors and rioters? That makes no sense. Especially considering Trump is not even President yet.
The Following User Says Thank You to zamler For This Useful Post:
I'm saying that he got the same number of Republicans as the last guy did, but that Clinton didn't get the same number as the previous election.
I dislike any suggestion that Trump supporters are all backwoods hicks as a way for Democrat supporters to deflect the failings of the Democrats to address the rejection of the political elite from both sides of the spectrum
__________________
"OOOOOOHHHHHHH those Russians" - Boney M
The Following User Says Thank You to killer_carlson For This Useful Post:
I'm saying that he got the same number of Republicans as the last guy did, but that Clinton didn't get the same number as the previous election.
I dislike any suggestion that Trump supporters are all backwoods hicks as a way for Democrat supporters to deflect the failings of the Democrats to address the rejection of the political elite from both sides of the spectrum
i know, i got my posters mixed up see edit
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
The Following User Says Thank You to GirlySports For This Useful Post:
Trump doesnt have to address these kids concerns any more than Clinton would have addressed the concerns of the right had she won.
Obama and Clinton have both already said that Trump is president and that they'll do whatever they can to make him successful.
It's not about left or right winning, they're not protesting the result, they're protesting the individual who won because they fear what he might do based on what he's said. The only person who can respond to that is the person they're protesting.
Add in that any time there's protesting leaders should be doing what they can to calm things down. Obama called on Charlotte protesters to be peaceful. He acknowledge that some protesters weren't doing it the right way and that that wouldn't help them. He acknowledged the protesters' feelings but said that the way to improve things was to reach out and engage and that required being peaceful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zamler
Why is it up to Trump to speak to Hillary/Democrat protestors and rioters? That makes no sense. Especially considering Trump is not even President yet.
The technicality of when he can start pulling the levers of government isn't relevant here, he's now the leader of the people, all of them, not just the ones who voted for him. Obama and Clinton have already voiced their support. It's Trump's ball, it's not going to mean anything unless the call for peace comes from him. Pretending it isn't happening or saying shouldn't utilize their rights to protest isn't going to help, it'll do the opposite.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
I'm saying that he got the same number of Republicans as the last guy did, but that Clinton didn't get the same number as the previous election.
I dislike any suggestion that Trump supporters are all backwoods hicks as a way for Democrat supporters to deflect the failings of the Democrats to address the rejection of the political elite from both sides of the spectrum
It's entirely possible for both to be true (Trump matching Romney but getting far more infrequent or first time voters and less frequent voters), it'll take a while for the analysis to really tweak out the true numbers since a lot of the first-blush analysis is based on exit polls, and the exit polls were very wrong about the results so it's possible they're wrong about some of the details.
What the results will eventually show, what we like, and the narrative assigned to the results are all separate things.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
This is the kind of thing I'm talking about, this is good:
Trump told CBS News’ Lesley Stahl that he hadn’t heard about the acts of violence carried out in his name either by his supporters or targeting his supporters. He also told Stahl that he hadn’t heard about reports of racial slurs or personal threats by his supporters that have targeted African Americans, Latinos and gays.
“I am very surprised to hear that,” he told Stahl, “I hate to hear that, I mean I hate to hear that.”
And he added that he he had seen only “one or two instances” but “I think it’s a very small amount.”
Stahl asked whether he wanted to say anything to those perpetrators.
“I would say don’t do it, that’s terrible, ‘cause I’m gonna bring this country together,” he responded. Told that they were harassing Latinos and Muslims, he added, “I am so saddened to hear that. And I say, ‘Stop it.’ If it-- if it helps. I will say this, and I will say right to the cameras: Stop it.”
Write his speech what should Trump say to the crowds of rioters.
No need to, just look back through all the speeches by all the presidents in response to protesters. Or just Obama's. They're all very similar, they really don't have a lot of content but the method of dealing with anyone who is upset and feels wrong is well established.
I like how you choose to characterize them as rioters only though, good job.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
