[Discussion] The (likely) Depressing Road to the 2020 Election Thread

It's going to be a circus.

Will 45 get impeached or step down or challenged? All 3? MAYBE.

Will the democrats eat themselves alive and hobble literally every potential candidate before the primaries are done? PROBABLY.

Talk about that junk here.

On the brighter side of things, I finally broke down and bought a "Kamala for the People" t-shirt.

The recent news of the justice department not defending the ACA really brought me down. It was to the point that I still have thoughts that this is the tipping point into a dictatorship. He may not have FBI or the CIA but the Justice Department is otherwise compromised to the point that Trump can overtly lash out against institutional protections and may be able to bully strong Democratic candidates to not run with implied threats.

So I did something positive to make me feel better and it worked

fangblackbone wrote:

On the brighter side of things, I finally broke down and bought a "Kamala for the People" t-shirt.

IMAGE(https://cdn1us.denofgeek.com/sites/denofgeekus/files/styles/main_wide/public/2018/05/ms-marvel-kamala-khan-mcu-kevin-feige.png?itok=RRkiS5VZ)

Spoiler:

My favorite Marvel future is where she becomes President

+1 Nathanial. + MFin 1.

As someone with a hopelessly unpronounceable last name, I appreciate Pete’s efforts to figuratively and literally get his name out there via branded merch and a savy social media campaign.

Reaper81 wrote:

As someone with a hopelessly unpronounceable last name, I appreciate Pete’s efforts to figuratively and literally get his name out there via branded merch and a savy social media campaign.

Seems easily pronounceable enough to me. Or is Reaper81 your first name?

JeffreyLSmith wrote:
Reaper81 wrote:

As someone with a hopelessly unpronounceable last name, I appreciate Pete’s efforts to figuratively and literally get his name out there via branded merch and a savy social media campaign.

Seems easily pronounceable enough to me. Or is Reaper81 your first name?

No, his first name's the same as mine. The problem with his last name is that the 8 is silent.

Keldar wrote:
JeffreyLSmith wrote:
Reaper81 wrote:

As someone with a hopelessly unpronounceable last name, I appreciate Pete’s efforts to figuratively and literally get his name out there via branded merch and a savy social media campaign.

Seems easily pronounceable enough to me. Or is Reaper81 your first name?

No, his first name's the same as mine. The problem with his last name is that the 8 is silent.

And the “1” is actually pronounced with a “y” sound.

And the “1” is actually pronounced with a “y” sound.

The proper pronunciation is "Butt Tag" ;P

In all seriousness, Mayor Pete makes a compelling case for his candidacy. If one of the frontrunners doesn't pick him up for VP (barring him winning the nomination), they are fools.
I am also really impressed by Gillium. He hasn't entered the race but he would be a good VP if he doesn't enter.

Yeah, Mayor Pete is looking good, and not just because he said he'd try and bridge the gap with Chick-fil-A.

I've always thought what the Democrats needed was someone who makes voters feel like they're delivering a punch in the mouth to...as many people as possible, but I'm not so sure after seeing Mayor Pete. Maybe America wants another presidency where the biggest drama is a tan suit. Maybe he's just enough for a time where we don't need--if we could even find--a leader, and we just need a President who will do the job. Let 'leadership' this time around be a collaborative effort.

cheeze_pavilion wrote:

Yeah, Mayor Pete is looking good, and not just because he said he'd try and bridge the gap with Chick-fil-A.

I've always thought what the Democrats needed was someone who makes voters feel like they're delivering a punch in the mouth to...as many people as possible, but I'm not so sure after seeing Mayor Pete. Maybe America wants another presidency where the biggest drama is a tan suit.

I've never been on board with Democrats running a Tea party-like campaign in which they "own the cons" like the the GOP "owns the libs." I said during the convention that HRC would be better off never mentioning Trump's name at the convention, and really, avoiding his name during the campaign. Let the others around her sling the mud, but allow the candidate to focus on the ideas and the future, to be a sense of calm and stability. HRC did not pull that off, and it hurt her.

Jayhawker wrote:
cheeze_pavilion wrote:

Yeah, Mayor Pete is looking good, and not just because he said he'd try and bridge the gap with Chick-fil-A.

I've always thought what the Democrats needed was someone who makes voters feel like they're delivering a punch in the mouth to...as many people as possible, but I'm not so sure after seeing Mayor Pete. Maybe America wants another presidency where the biggest drama is a tan suit.

I've never been on board with Democrats running a Tea party-like campaign in which they "own the cons" like the the GOP "owns the libs." I said during the convention that HRC would be better off never mentioning Trump's name at the convention, and really, avoiding his name during the campaign. Let the others around her sling the mud, but allow the candidate to focus on the ideas and the future, to be a sense of calm and stability. HRC did not pull that off, and it hurt her.

I think the political landscape is fundamentally different after the 2016 election. I could not believe the way people sprung to action like, Day One of Trump's Presidency. The Clinton collapse left a space that people have stepped up to fill in a way that was unimaginable.

I think the Democratic party is stronger if its leader does not also have to function as the leader of 'the Resistance'. I like a Democratic party where it's less about telling voters what they're going to do, and more about making all these people who have been fighting back feel like they have a voice. If there was someone who could make everyone feel like s/he was 'their' candidate, that would be great, but I don't see one of those--those are rare.*

They need some core: we certainly don't need any more 'triangulation' with the Republicans or someone who doubts bold plans just because they are bold. I just wonder more and more if we don't need a President as Leader as much as a President as First Among Equals.

Maybe just a charismatic-but-firm candidate that makes people feel like they'll have a seat at the table is enough for now. And that even militates against Bernie, which makes me sad, but maybe it's true.

*

Spoiler:

maybe RFK was the last? Like, the conversation in another thread and some stuff on the news got me thinking about that again. Like, what if the Irish had completed becoming American in the late '60s under someone like RFK with all his credibility on race, instead of under Reagan in the 80s running on polite, dogwhistle racism? How different this country, this whole world might look. Doesn't matter now though--it's all counterfactual ancient history, only relevant to not crowning every leader as the be-all-end-all of leaders; to simply remind us that you have to work with what you've got in any given generation.

Dude, that is exactly how Bill Clinton won two elections. RFK was hated by the right as much as Clinton was, but it was far enough ago, and he was killed before he could be elected, that we nostalgically believe he was bigger than he was.

I like a Democratic party where it's less about telling voters what they're going to do, and more about making all these people who have been fighting back feel like they have a voice. If there was someone who could make everyone feel like s/he was 'their' candidate, that would be great, but I don't see one of those--those are rare.*

This basically describes Trump's campaign, or, you know, fascism.

Jayhawker wrote:

Dude, that is exactly how Bill Clinton won two elections.

In the 90s. Even granting what you say for sake of argument--and ignoring the long term legacy of those short term victories--times change.

RFK was hated by the right as much as Clinton was, but it was far enough ago, and he was killed before he could be elected, that we nostalgically believe he was bigger than he was.

It's long enough ago that it's long before Reagan turned European Catholics from Democrats into Republicans. Sure the right hated him, but the 'right' has changed considerably over the years.

Heck, 1968 is closer to Al Smith's candidacy where the KKK came out to burn crosses than it is to today.

edit: in case my point is not clear, a candidate that could have brought the African-American and the Irish-American vote together would have been huge, no matter how much the right hated him. And it only would have gotten bigger as time went on. If African-Americans coming into the Democratic Party after the realignment of the 60s had not been set off by the departure of Reagan Democrats in the 80s, how different does history look?

I like a Democratic party where it's less about telling voters what they're going to do, and more about making all these people who have been fighting back feel like they have a voice. If there was someone who could make everyone feel like s/he was 'their' candidate, that would be great, but I don't see one of those--those are rare.*

This basically describes Trump's campaign, or, you know, fascism.

Also describes FDR, or, you know, the New Deal but that was a long time ago so it wasn't Green it was just in Black & White.

So, wait, now you are for campaigning on actual policies and not just being a voice for disaffected voters.

You can’t seem to even keep your semantics straight.

Jayhawker wrote:

So, wait, now you are for campaigning on actual policies and not just being a voice for disaffected voters.

You can’t seem to even keep your semantics straight.

Well no, but we've reached the part of the conversation where your abusiveness begins to outweigh your contributions, so all that can happen from this point is (actual, real) moderation, so here's where the story ends.

Pete Buttigieg Says His Democratic Presidential Bid Has Raised $7 Million-Plus

Pete Buttigieg, a Midwestern mayor who in late January launched a seemingly long-shot bid for the 2020 Democratic presidential bid, announced Monday that his campaign raised more than $7 million in this year’s first three months of 2019.

The full significance of Buttigieg’s haul will rest on still-unknown details, including how much of the money he still has on hand and the number of donors who contributed.

But for a 37-year-old politician from South Bend, Indiana, who was largely unknown when he entered the White House race, the figure represents a coup likely to heighten the seriousness with which his campaign is viewed.

I hope this is a joke but whether it is or not, I am GD EXHAUSTED with this man.

oilypenguin wrote:

I hope this is a joke but whether it is or not, I am GD EXHAUSTED with this man.

I'll assume given the date it is not to be believed.

oilypenguin wrote:

I hope this is a joke but whether it is or not, I am GD EXHAUSTED with this man.

4/1

Oh I’m well aware.

karmajay wrote:
oilypenguin wrote:

I hope this is a joke but whether it is or not, I am GD EXHAUSTED with this man.

4/1

And yet, completely believable.

What I hate the most about April Fool's is that people tend to forget that jokes still have to be funny.

Are you kidding me? I would love it if Comey ran against Trump.

Atras wrote:

Are you kidding me? I would love it if Comey ran against Trump.

IMAGE(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3tnc7ZBuj1rvzu9do1_500.gif)

Atras wrote:

Are you kidding me? I would love it if Comey ran against Trump.

It would be great. I don;t think the american arm of the FSB known as the RNC would never let him primary the president though.

Jayhawker wrote:
I like a Democratic party where it's less about telling voters what they're going to do, and more about making all these people who have been fighting back feel like they have a voice. If there was someone who could make everyone feel like s/he was 'their' candidate, that would be great, but I don't see one of those--those are rare.*

This basically describes Trump's campaign, or, you know, fascism.

It's kind of hard to parse how little sense this makes. I've read a post or two of you that definitely made you seem smarter than this, I think you can do better.

farley3k wrote:

Pete Buttigieg Says His Democratic Presidential Bid Has Raised $7 Million-Plus

Pete Buttigieg, a Midwestern mayor who in late January launched a seemingly long-shot bid for the 2020 Democratic presidential bid, announced Monday that his campaign raised more than $7 million in this year’s first three months of 2019.

The full significance of Buttigieg’s haul will rest on still-unknown details, including how much of the money he still has on hand and the number of donors who contributed.

But for a 37-year-old politician from South Bend, Indiana, who was largely unknown when he entered the White House race, the figure represents a coup likely to heighten the seriousness with which his campaign is viewed.

https://jacobinmag.com/2019/04/pete-...

Jacobin wrote:

The recent craze for Pete Buttigieg — multilingual Rhodes Scholar and all-around smart guy — is just the latest incarnation of the meritocratic cult of “smartness.” It’s social Darwinism for liberals.

Yikes: I love Jacobin but that article is a pretty good example of how leftist populism can fall into the same anti elitist traps that have consumed the right.

Buttigieg’s policies are great (which the author admits), we need an intelligent president (which the author admits), and electing someone like Buttigieg would absolutely provide some relief for those of us who think science and reason are the only things that can solve the coming climate apocalypse (which the author admits). If anything this is a pretty positive piece about the man while simultaneously making fun of his name and his supporters.

I’ll go ahead and say it out loud - thank God Buttigieg is gay because the American Left seems utterly fed up with white gentile men: especially straight ones.

edit: I can’t really blame them for being fed up btw.

Seriously, we need to let the chips fall were they may without more of these infighting pieces. There are many accomplishments and traits of Bootigieg aside from intelligence conspicuously missing from that article.

We don't need any more jaded perspectives on fairness when someone has a bit of the limelight. We should be supportive because it also reflects well on us.

It makes me wonder if the Bernie Bros are going to start complaining about his lack of air time again. Because for someone that is raising a crapton of money, he doesn't appear to be very visible on the airwaves. So far, that seems like it is on him.

... At what point did intelligence become a handicap in elections? (He asks rhetorically.)