There's a reason Biden is +11 in the poll and Bernie only +6. People seem to forget America is a center-right country that is drifting more right. Nominating the furthest left candidate in ages is not the path to victory. Also worth remembering even center-left Canada has never given Bernie's Canadian doppelganger, the NDP, the ability to govern. So why would America have a further left leader than Canada has ever had? A pipe dream really.
People want change not just the status quo. If you put forth boring corporate candidates like Clinton and Biden than u push all the people towards the extreme of trump. If biden wins the democrats there is no way Trump loses 2020. Hes just a typical vanilla old grey haired fake smile creepy politician. If Warren or Bernie win it think it would be much more interesting. Half the left hates Biden already.
People want change not just the status quo. If you put forth boring corporate candidates like Clinton and Biden than u push all the people towards the extreme of trump. If biden wins the democrats there is no way Trump loses 2020. Hes just a typical vanilla old grey haired fake smile creepy politician. If Warren or Bernie win it think it would be much more interesting. Half the left hates Biden already.
Warren has zero chance as she's a talking stick, Bernie couldn't beat Hillary so why on earth would it be interesting? Biden(the typical vanilla old grey haired fake smile creepy politician) on the other hand will crush Trump (the typical vanilla old grey haired fake smile creepy moron) in the rust belt which is where Trump won the presidency. Biden will also hand Trump his lunch at the debates
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Snuffleupagus For This Useful Post:
^Yes, exactly. I'm not a Biden lover, and I'd probably line up ideologically with Buttigieg, but he's simply not experienced enough to be president. I think those on the left that hate Biden can put aside that dislike just long enough to click his name at the polling station over Trump.
At least I hope so. The extreme left has become so uncompromising as to be comical. There's a reason why people call politics choosing the lesser of two evils (not that Biden is really evil, just not ideal). I hope the idealists on the left understand there's a bigger fight than what's personally important to them.
But don't forget that we're still early in this race. I wouldn't be shocked to see another candidate have a big moment or two and shoot themselves into the top 4. I don't see Kamala Harris sticking around a lot longer up there. She just hasn't done enough to get people excited about her.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ResAlien
If we can't fall in love with replaceable bottom 6 players then the terrorists have won.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cali Panthers Fan For This Useful Post:
People want change not just the status quo. If you put forth boring corporate candidates like Clinton and Biden than u push all the people towards the extreme of trump. If biden wins the democrats there is no way Trump loses 2020. Hes just a typical vanilla old grey haired fake smile creepy politician. If Warren or Bernie win it think it would be much more interesting. Half the left hates Biden already.
You need to remember Hillary was a historically awful candidate, and she needed 130,000 votes in three states and she would have won. Basically a male version of Hillary (like say, I don't know....Joe Biden?) almost certainly would have won in 2016. Americans might like the idea in theory of Bernie or Warren, until they are facing tax increases at which point they like the idea of the mental patient who will cut their taxes instead. You are overestimating where most Americans are on the political spectrum, and forgetting the electoral college decides things. The fact 70% of California might love Bernie is irrelevant to the fact 50% of Pennsylvania or Ohio don't.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
^Yes, exactly. I'm not a Biden lover, and I'd probably line up ideologically with Buttigieg, but he's simply not experienced enough to be president. I think those on the left that hate Biden can put aside that dislike just long enough to click his name at the polling station over Trump.
Don’t underestimate Buttigieg’s chances. Through coaching debate I’ve gotten to know some people who are, not big, but moderately-sized wheels in the Democratic Party and they are all lining up behind Mayor Pete.
Don’t underestimate Buttigieg’s chances. Through coaching debate I’ve gotten to know some people who are, not big, but moderately-sized wheels in the Democratic Party and they are all lining up behind Mayor Pete.
I can't see him ahead of Biden,Sanders or even Harris. His political message is great, he's very smart and is very like-able but even the left know he would have no chance against Trump because America isn't ready for a gay president. Maybe 2024
I can't see him ahead of Biden,Sanders or even Harris. His political message is great, he's very smart and is very like-able but even the left know he would have no chance against Trump because America isn't ready for a gay president. Maybe 2024
Nah, that's not really the problem, although it would be a factor for some people to not vote for him, but those people would never vote for a democrat in a million years anyway. Being gay isn't a non-starter, otherwise we wouldn't be talking about him as a serious candidate. Being a veteran tends to wipe out being gay on the slate.
No, rather it's because Mayor Pete is just that, a mayor of a relatively small midwest town. He has not been tested as a leader the way you need to be qualified to be president. DeBlasio at least has been the mayor of New York City, which is like its own little country with myriad problems to deal with. Most Americans will see Buttigieg's lack of experience as a disqualifying factor, especially up against an incumbent (as awful as he is).
However, I do see Buttigieg taking a run at the governor's mansion in the near future. After he serves as governor, I think he has a real shot at being president if he keeps up this momentum, but we're talking 10 years down the road or so. Good thing he's so young.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ResAlien
If we can't fall in love with replaceable bottom 6 players then the terrorists have won.
Do you need to be 'battle tested" to be president?
What battle test do Senators go through?
What battle test did Congressmen go through?
Do all governors have a battle test moment?
Are there other indicators of how one would do inappropriate battle test scenario other than a crisis in a large public office?
Would working in intelligence in an active war zone count?
Ironically, no President of the last 26 years has ever been to an actual battle. Mayor Pete has.
My point is, the arbitrary bar of needing to hold a large high level office to be President is arbitrary and while it can be an asset for those running. It shouldn't be a liability.
__________________ "Calgary Flames is the best team in all the land" - My Brainwashed Son
The Following User Says Thank You to Maritime Q-Scout For This Useful Post:
Do you need to be 'battle tested" to be president?
What battle test do Senators go through?
What battle test did Congressmen go through?
Do all governors have a battle test moment?
Are there other indicators of how one would do inappropriate battle test scenario other than a crisis in a large public office?
Would working in intelligence in an active war zone count?
Ironically, no President of the last 26 years has ever been to an actual battle. Mayor Pete has.
My point is, the arbitrary bar of needing to hold a large high level office to be President is arbitrary and while it can be an asset for those running. It shouldn't be a liability.
The most important thing (probably the only thing that matters) about picking a democratic candidate this election is picking someone who will win. I'd feel a lot more comfortable going with him if he showed he could win a large scale general election. That's the battle test that matters. Winning a mayoral election where the turnout was less than 12,000 people and they've voted in Democrats since 1972 isn't really an indication of anything, really.
The Following User Says Thank You to nfotiu For This Useful Post:
The most important thing (probably the only thing that matters) about picking a democratic candidate this election is picking someone who will win. I'd feel a lot more comfortable going with him if he showed he could win a large scale general election. That's the battle test that matters. Winning a mayoral election where the turnout was less than 12,000 people and they've voted in Democrats since 1972 isn't really an indication of anything, really.
Wouldn't winning the Democratic nomination be a major election victory?
I'm not asking to be dismissive, I'm asking as I don't necessarily disagree with your stance, but am exploring what comes to mind as to why I would.
__________________ "Calgary Flames is the best team in all the land" - My Brainwashed Son
Trump had zero government experience and was well known to be a con man. He won the Republican Nomination and the Presidency. Obama was an unknown State legislator and had barely been in the US senate for 5 minutes before he announced his candidacy.
I think people will be more likely to look at the message and capabilities than just the resume. Also, Mayor in a strong mayor system is a lot of responsibility, big or small city. It's being mayor and City Manager at once. But I do see how the perception will be a barrier to overcome for him.
Wouldn't winning the Democratic nomination be a major election victory?
I'm not asking to be dismissive, I'm asking as I don't necessarily disagree with your stance, but am exploring what comes to mind as to why I would.
Yeah, if he wins by a wide margin, and with lots of enthusiastic support.
I'm curious to see how he plays in the rust belt which is really all that matters. He may do well given he's from there and identifies with them. But are the not very socially liberal blue collar democrats who voted for Trump going to be able to identify with a gay, Rhodes Scholar, Harvard graduate? They are a tough demo to figure out, so who knows. But if he's not strong in those states in the primaries, he's going to be in trouble in the general election.
In a general election there's just no way Mayor Pete can win right now. Him being gay will be used against him, sadly. Republicans will be highly energized between Trump and the anti gay horse crap that will come out.
This is Bidens to lose. He's the right candidate to win, and, frankly, should have ran in 2016.
I just don’t see the Democratic Party nominating two white guys....
Sure, but can they win? I mean, the fact that I don't see any reason not to believe what you're saying to be the case in the Democratic Party is frankly a little depressing.
Here's an idea for the Democrats: run the candidates with the best chance of winning. Period. Whatever combination of candidate identities that means.
If that means two white guys, two Asian women, a black guy and a white woman, a black woman and a white guy, an Indian woman and an Asian guy, a moose and a squirrel, two gay lion tamers... I mean ####, just pick the best, the most viable candidates, and go for it. Enough of this crap where "oh, they don't tick enough of our 'diversity' boxes".
Just win. Just ####ing win. You can fill the cabinet with every colour of the rainbow once you win, but you have to win. Otherwise you get only one colour… and that colour is orange. After four years, they should know what's at stake here.
__________________
-James
GO FLAMES GO.
The Following User Says Thank You to TorqueDog For This Useful Post:
