• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Who should run for the Dems?

PitPat said:
Generally agree with this. America is not prepared for a gay president right now. I used to think there was no way a black man could be elected president, but that happened twice.

Also thought that a woman would be elected before a black man. Was wrong about that.

But gay guy, no. At least not right now, maybe in about 20 years. And Schumer is Jewish (so basically a no based on history). Hakeem Jeffries could be a contender if they get the House back in the midterms, IMO.
Click to expand...
I clearly remembering telling my MS students back in the late 1980's that a black man would be POTUS
before any woman.

And no, America is not ready for a gay president no matter what. :seangry:
 
This, and I don't think you'd be a good First Lady. Just Be Best. And not bully, because that's bad.
 
Clooney's wife is human rights lawyer Amal Alamuddin. Not US-born, but then neither is Melania, and Alamuddin is FAR more qualified than her.
 
Surely there must be a former Democratic Party president who only served one term and could suddenly jump back into the race in the middle of 2027. Other than that, we've got the sausage guy, Howard Dean, who could do a proper run instead of waiting till the very last moment to jump in.
 
Sounds like a good reboot for Gilligan's Island. Maybe with a little bit of Lost element thrown in there.
 
Solitaire said:
Surely there must be a former Democratic Party president who only served one term and could suddenly jump back into the race in the middle of 2027. Other than that, we've got the sausage guy, Howard Dean, who could do a proper run instead of waiting till the very last moment to jump in.
Click to expand...
Aww, Scremin' Dean, how appropriate and timely. Strange, isn't it, how one simple mistake can derail a career.

Who's Sausage Guy? I know the Pillow Guy.
 
Orphia Nay said:
I don't think a politician is going to beat the cult of Trump.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone really is. He's as much a product of circumstance as he is any actual ability or personality traits.
Orphia Nay said:
It sucks that America is this way. But the Dems need to accept it and fight with whatever tools will work. That means fame.
Click to expand...
Or, you could let party members prove themselves. See who gets hot at the right monent and go with them.

Naaaa, lets just crown Gavin Newsom.

There's plenty of time for potential candidates to rise and fall. Newsom already has being from California against him. His turn pandering to the worst lowlifes of the right recently isn't going to help him with the base. He always felt like the guy we are "Supposed" to get anyway.

AOC will need an actual leadership position first. Probably Senate if Schumer or Gillibrand go.

Buttigieg is in the same boat. He's better off going for Gary Peters' Senate seat if he plans to stay in Michigan.

Harris had her shot. Time to move on.

The 2 I like now are Walz and Whitmer. Midwestern governors who passed the kind of legislation we keep hearing can't win in the Midwest.

But, this won't be a serious discussion for close to 3 years. A lot can happen between now and then.
 
PitPat said:
Aww, Scremin' Dean, how appropriate and timely. Strange, isn't it, how one simple mistake can derail a career.

Who's Sausage Guy? I know the Pillow Guy.
Click to expand...
Howard Dean was one of the few Democratic politicians who recognized the issues that the Democratic Party apparatus had twenty years ago, and how they would hurt us if not fixed. He wanted a permanent fifty-state campaign setup, where we would set up ground games everywhere, even places that Dems had no hope of winning. This would mean distributing campaign funds everywhere, even in guaranteed loser races, but would have shaved the numbers overall and had Democrats ready for any pickup opportunities if a GOPer got caught in bed with a pack of ferrets or whatever.

But the professional Democratic campaign runners hated that idea, preferring the "Electoral Cicada" approach. You wake up a year before the election, find a campaign that you can make a lot of money running, then hype that race and direct as much money as possible to it. Then you go back to sleep. Who won? Who lost? Who cares? Politicians who win with this approach become grateful to the campaign runners who made it possible, and the cycle continues.
 
The Dems need someone instantly recognisable, not, "hmm, somebody somewhere might know something about them".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom