I kind of agree, but I dont think you need "fire" to debate Trump and win an election. Warren may have the fire but conservatives will always just chuckle and call her Pocahontas, and mutter "free shit" no matter how many zingers she gets. You really need support and the ability to reach people outside of your base. Yang and Bernie are the two who do that the best. If Bernie merges with Warren that will help her cause considerably. Yang is speaking a different language than the rest of the candidates, his approach is about policy, reason and the future and not about zingers. He really appeals to a broader group of people IMO, just look how many rabid conservatives say they like him. Personally I work in a highly automated industry and he is the only one who gets it and has a legit plan. His book is great, the chapter on young men and video game culture hits close to home for our household. I also went to his rally in Portland a few months ago and the chants of "Powerpoint" and "Math" had me laughing, he is really fun likable guy in general. Most people I talk to seem to agree that Biden is horrible, which makes me laugh that Trump spends so much effort in knocking him down and might ultimately be Trumps undoing.
It's where Hillary lost...she was trying to be low key and she should have gone for his jugular....she looked weak in the debates..I think a woman who can get in Trump's grill with actual facts and bitch slap his childishness for the world to see will run away with the next election....she's already met with the Native American Counsel and clarified her native American assumptions...without blinking. Warren in my view has the best chance at exposing this fake president
naw, debating was not her short fall. It was a combination of bad strategy, bad timing, years of conservative propaganda, interference, and distasteful tactics by her or the DNC. People put to much emphasis on debates, when in fact most people already have their minds made up by the debates and are just looking to cheer on their candidate. All you really have to do is not fall on your face in a debate.
we disagree about this....the presidential debate is the most important part of the campaign...you win or lose there if it's a close race...Hillary let him pace around her time on stage without calling him out...she tried the "high road" Michelle Obama talked about and she didn't have the appeal to unmask his rhetoric. Hillary lost an election she should have run away with...she ignored states that swumg the electoral vote...just ran a campaign that looked like she thought she was a shoe in on Obama's coattails and mailing it in failed her in the end. A whole lot of voters "only" watch the final debates before voting. I couldn't vote for either of them so I voted libertarian.
I suppose since she lost by such a small margin that you could point to any issue and say thats what did it, when if fact it was a perfect storm of issues for her. FOX News had been working against her since 2008 though, so the anti Hillary sentiment was very strong in some. I feel like most voters knew her or thought they knew her enough to have that decision made by the final debates. Would a strong debate made a difference in your vote?
probably....but I wanted change...I voted against partisan govt not ever considering Trump could win. It was a lose lose election for me...not this time....I'm voting against Trump even if it's Roseanne Barr or Pee Wee Herman.....any functioning adult at this point.
Bingo....and the funny things is Hillary has that Black Widow mentality too, she could have played to her perceived strength which is being a real bitch! It surprised me she didnt rip him a new ....! And it really surprised me, and slick Willy, that she did'nt do much in the mid west? Im not she her health and endurance was all that great either, but I do agree that she thought she was the anointed one, and was just waiting for her coronation! Bam
haha, well the potential upside of a Trump presidency is that we might ditch establishment candidates for the next few cycles and ultimately be better off. Pretty much anyone but Biden or Trump would make me happy at this point. Warren is someone I would be proud of as a president. Some of her issues dont sit right with me though, not because I dont agree with them, but because I think they are too ambitious and will stall her ability to get things done. Things like a direct wealth tax or breaking up Facebook and Google will be losing battles.
Good luck with Sanders. He's gonna need more than a ton of it. As for Buttigieg, he's not worse off than Jimmy Carter when he won the nomination. So, probably toast but I can't rule him out just yet.
I agree about the "stall" issue. The biggest problem as far as Warren's and Bernie's plans for increased spending on a variety of social programs, as you touched on, is that they both depend upon new wealth taxes. Without those taxes, there's no money to do their big government spending plans. There are numerous articles available on the web expounding upon why such taxes would be constitutional or unconstitutional because of the "direct" taxation limitation in the Constitution. In order to get anything done, the Dems would have to retain the House and get control of the Senate. They would have to agree on the details of the plan and come to a sufficient majority to pass it in the face of strong Republican opposition, as well as likely opposition from many wealthy Democrats. In the unlikely event that comes to pass, constitutional challenges would no doubt eat up the rest of a first term. All of that would have to get cleared up before any other social spending could be implemented, and each social plan is going to face its own set of legislative and legal challenges.
Trump cult members, aka Conservatives, only comprise about 40% of the electorate. Warren has the other 60% to appeal to. Should Warren win the nomination, and my money is still on Biden, she will clobber Trump. Of course, any Democrat will clobber Trump whether it's Yang, Gabbard, Sanders or any one of the rest of the pack.
Not sure I can agree with any part of that. I'd hope the reaction to Trump will not be electing more Trumps. barfo
Now, Now, Now I have friends and family that are conservative a few voted for trump and most voted Libertarian. I would not classify them as cult members by any stretch. They are decent hard working patriotic Americans that have served our country, contributed to our society and communities.
I generally agreed that he's bound to fade; however I thought it would have happened by now... Not sure they look the same to the average person. Policy-wise, yes. But a lot of winning the presidency is personality, and they are very different in that way. As an old democrat who wants to feel progressive, you are probably right. However, rocking the boat too much leads to the boat taking on water and sinking. That's the reason why you don't want to rock the boat too much. I think you might be right. However, I don't think that's a good thing. The presidency isn't an internship. Well, it is right now, but it shouldn't be. barfo
I think we have different definitions on establishment candidates. I would consider Warren, Sanders and Yang as all firmly anti establishment. Yes the reaction to Trump should be anti Trump, not moderate. I say fuck it, let rock the boat. If you try to appease everyone you get no one. We need someone that people feel passionate about not a replay of 2016. the main difference I see between them is who the appeal to. Warren is palatable to the Hillary bots from 2016 who still blame Sanders and will never vote for him out of spite. Sanders appeals to the young people who are fed up with the system screwing them over and want some radical change. Policy wise they are similar. Thats why I see them merging, if they do then they are unstoppable. I think they know this and are already somewhat working together. Yang has all the best ideas and all the best plans. Bigly.
Yeah, possibly we do. That's exactly what Republican voters said in 2016. I don't want a Democratic Trump. The 'Hillary bots' are the majority of the party, indeed, the majority of the voting public. Say you want a revolution, well, you know... That seems highly unlikely. Merging? How is that done exactly? Only one of them can be president, and the other one isn't going to be the VP. A more likely scenario is Bernie continues to fall in the polls and eventually drops out, endorsing Warren on the way out the door. If that's what you mean by merging, sure. That's what they said about Trump, too. barfo
And thats what Republicans got. I dont see anyone on the Dem side who I would consider a Democratic Trump. Love him or hate him he makes people passionate and his so called 40% base votes like they are 60%. If Biden gets the nod then Trump will get reelected. He is Hillary 2.0 Hillary bots are a vocal minority. The rest of us just did what we thought was best given what we had in a flawed system. Yes, but I would word it in a way that inspires more cooperation between the two and less sour grapes towards Bernie.
If the electorate lets the candidate be smeared by Trump & Co again, then whoever the nominee is is Hillary 2.0 Ok. I agree that Hillary supporters who are bitter about Bernie are a minority. Probably about the same in number as Bernie supporters who are bitter about Hillary. Neither group has any excuse to feel the way they do. I would approve of such wording. barfo
I didn't mean all Conservative were part of the Trump cult. I meant all members of the Trump cult are, well, no, they're not even Conservatives. My bad.
lol...i know you didn't aren't you republican? must have a bit of conservative in ya. Actually Id rather be closer to a conservative than a republican....
