|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Sept 13, 2019 13:29:54 GMT
See, I think Beto is THE GUY. He's young, passionate, charismatic, he can go toe to toe with the Republicans on their turf. I don't know why other people aren't seeing what I see in him. He lost the senate race. I know he came close to beating Cruz in a red state but close isn't enough. No one likes Ted Cruz and yet with all the effort Beto put in, he could not win. He also doesn't talk enough about specific policies that we really care about. What is his healthcare policy? I've watched all the debates and I can't tell you if he is in the Medicare for All camp, improve ACA or somewhere in between. He just can't deliver a message that stands out. In this case, I don’t think it was Beto’s lack of anything. Republicans put A LOT of $$$$ in Cruz and he came close to losing. MORE people NEED TO GET OUT AND vote! In NC, with this week’s close election, I read that only 35% of the eligible voters actually voted.
|
|
|
Post by peano on Sept 13, 2019 13:33:12 GMT
I was only able to watch about an hour of the debate last night. My very superficial impressions are that Biden and Bernie seem OLD--like even older than in the previous debates. Biden's teeth are SUPER distracting to me in their size and whiteness and Bernie seemed even more bombastic than usual.
Kamala has gotten dinged in the press today for being over-rehearsed but I didn't get that, and she seems like she has the gravitas to get the job done.
Warren is always a great communicator, (although I find her voice to be annoying to listen to) in that she can explain complex financial concepts clearly. I just don't think Joe Pickup Truck in middle America will ever vote for her. Would love to be proved wrong.
Mayor Pete did a much better job in previous debates. I don't know, he just seemed tired.
Klobuchar, my early favorite, still has qualities that I think make her palatable to the middle of the country, but she always seems so nervous. At this stage in the game, I'm wanting someone less establishment-y than her and Biden.
|
|
|
Post by femalebusiness on Sept 13, 2019 14:14:58 GMT
Please do not jump all over me when I make this statement.... I voted for Donald Trump... I will never vote for him again.... I will write in Mickey Mouse before I ever vote for him again! However... Democrats better get a stronger candidate than they had on that stage if anyone is going to defeat him. Kamala is a joke! Biden likes to talk in circle Bernie, what an angry, ridiculous man The only 2 that I even remotely would vote for is Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg, and I am not sure even then. For the first time in the 37 years I have been voting, there is no one running that , in my opinion, is capable of being the President. Putting on my flame proof suit. No flames from me, I think you make valid points. I will vote for anyone who runs against trump but the Democrats do not have a strong candidate yet. I am still hopeful but they all need to be comparing themselves to trump not tearing each other down.
|
|
cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,387
Jun 26, 2014 0:42:38 GMT
|
Post by cycworker on Sept 13, 2019 14:18:03 GMT
I have been on a debate stage with more than 10 people. Yes, Kamala did likely rehearse. A lot. It's what you need to do when there will be that many people on the stage with you, and you want to make sure you get at least a few things out.
|
|
|
Post by lisacharlotte on Sept 13, 2019 15:39:40 GMT
I’m also a disenfranchised voter. I can’t get on board with Beto. He comes across as such a lightweight. I want a uniter not a divider. Just about everyone running I see the us vs them, not directed at just the candidates, but the voters as well. That’s why people are finding it difficult to cross the aisle. I really thought Obama was the one who could help mend that rift, but once in office he went down the divider road as well.
|
|
amom23
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,392
Jun 27, 2014 12:39:18 GMT
|
Post by amom23 on Sept 13, 2019 15:50:19 GMT
Overall I was pretty impressed with the debate. I don't have a clear favorite right now, but no matter who the nominee is they will have one heck of candidate pool in which to pick a VP and fill their cabinet positions from.
|
|
|
Post by thundergal on Sept 13, 2019 15:50:57 GMT
I'm curious. Those who feel like the Democrats didn't have a winning candidate on the stage last night, what does a winning candidate need to look like?
I'll be so discouraged if Biden wins the nomination. I'll vote for him...eagerly. But if Lord Fuckweasel actually agrees to debates, I'm not sure Biden has the natural instincts to fight back in that setting.
I want Warren. Harris. Beto. O'Rourke. Booker. I'd love to see Mayor Pete on the ticket as VP for one of these candidates. A Warren ticket with any of those as VP would have me thrilled out of my mind.
|
|
|
Post by gardengoddess on Sept 13, 2019 16:00:33 GMT
This debate helped me narrow down who I'm going to throw my support and volunteer time behind. Two candidates were eliminated after last night.
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Sept 13, 2019 16:03:46 GMT
Can I just say one thing? Is Bernie incapable of at least clearing his throat? Holy gurgling yogurt!! That was difficult to listen too.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Sept 13, 2019 16:06:53 GMT
I was at tae kwon do during the debate. As always. But this thread is a good recap. Thank you all. I like Castro, but I saw a clip of that attack on Biden and it pissed me off. Tulsi Gabbard AND Bernie should both go home. I like Warren, and Harris is growing on me. I like Buttigieg, but he’s too young and inexperienced. I like Beto and Booker, but in the end, I only care about one thing. Say it with me now: electability. Biden is slowing down some, but he’s still light years better than ... what do we call him now? ... Lord Fuckweasel? ha hahaha haha. If he’s the one who can win, whether it’s because he isn’t too young/female/gay/minority/socialist/or whatever, I don’t care. I just want someone who can beat Lord Fuckweasel. I prefer Jon Stewart's name for him, Fuckface Von Clownstick. If you haven't read or watched video of origin, you should. I'm on my phone, will try to link. www.vulture.com/2016/11/jon-stewart-remembers-his-twitter-war-with-trump.htmlAll I know after this debate is I'd take any of them over the present occupant. I was paying close attention as I was being all crafty so I will have to read the cliff notes. Thanks. I’d forgotten about that!
|
|
|
Post by ladytrisha on Sept 13, 2019 16:18:48 GMT
Is Bernie incapable of at least clearing his throat? Holy gurgling yogurt!! That was difficult to listen too. He sounded so hoarse - I figured its from all the campaigning. He and Biden looked their age last night - and not in a good way. I turned on the debate around 5:30pm. From that time until 6:10, Elizabeth Warren got NO airtime ... nothing. When she finally spoke, it was short and back the ball went between the others. It was interesting considering she's been touted as a front runner to see her so ignored. We left shortly after to run errands (hit the DVR), but did see the closing statements. I don't know about you, but all of those closing statements made me remember exactly why ONE of them needs to get elected - and bring the rest of tribe with them into cabinet positions to clean the swamp out for good. It gave me hope again ... I don't know how we'll make it 4 more years with the grifters in charge.
|
|
|
Post by mom on Sept 13, 2019 16:23:26 GMT
See, I think Beto is THE GUY. He's young, passionate, charismatic, he can go toe to toe with the Republicans on their turf. I don't know why other people aren't seeing what I see in him. There is no way, IMHO, Beto will never beat Trump. He might have had a chance BEFORE last night. But he just gave the GOP a massive favor (CNN article) and I agree. He's betting the conversation has shifted & that people will be ok with being forced to give up their AR-15's. IMHO I'd be surprised if there is any way a Democrat who is saying there will be a mandatory gun buy-back program will ever beat Trump. Edited to add: Take the mandatory gun buy-back and include possibly being forced to lose the insurance people want/already have, and I can see where many will stay home and not vote. They won't want to vote Trump but they also don't want to vote for someone who is going to force them to do things they don't want. And people staying home will keep Trump in office.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Sept 13, 2019 16:35:51 GMT
It blows my mind when people (not singling anyone out here, this is solely a "just in general terms" observation) talk about "electability" or that the "Democrats need stronger/bigger/less loud/more loud/not a woman/not gay/more moderate/more this that or the other" or the "cross the aisle" So then what? What if none of the 20 or whatever are "appealing" or have charisma that charms the pants off of them to be "electable" so who do you vote for? Do you hold your nose and just pick one or do you stay with party and vote for satan?
it's trump on the other side. Do they not realize that? Do they really want to stick with trump for the next 4 years, knowing the damage he has done and think that no other democrat (and by the way the republican party/RNC is going now it will be ONLY trump) can do a better job? Are they really going there?
trump is what the USA is cursed with now. the fuckweasel von clown face voters are never going to change their stripes--he is losing jobs for his base, he is eroding away their "entitlements" of healthcare, social security, medicare, welfare... he is killing their livelihood of farming, taking way land, and these people don't realize that pretty soon, they will have to pay for their children to go to school, because that will be privatized---yet they scream his name from the rooftops.
Do the "disenfranchised" or "moderate" or "progressive/independents" really want to be stuck with that again?
I don't believe that any of the current Democrats/quasi-progressives that are campaigning now are a worse choice than what is already here.
Just blows my mind.
This election in 2020 WHEN someone other than the fuckweasel is in office will be a "reset" for the country. I am okay with that.
But it totally blows my mind...
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Sept 13, 2019 16:36:58 GMT
And....it appears---so far--- that this election, guns will be THE "abortion issue".
|
|
|
Post by gardengoddess on Sept 13, 2019 16:42:11 GMT
Currently we have Trump. That single sentence should stifle any talk of "elect-ability" We have already fallen down that rabbit hole.
GOTV is the single most important thing the Democratic Party needs to worry about.
|
|
scrapngranny
Pearl Clutcher
Only slightly senile
Posts: 4,805
Jun 25, 2014 23:21:30 GMT
|
Post by scrapngranny on Sept 13, 2019 17:18:28 GMT
I don’t like Bernie at all, I hope he is not the nominee. I’m not a big Biden fan either. We don’t need another white old man in the Whit House. I would take either one of them over Trump, though. Any president that follows the rule of law will be refreshing.
|
|
cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,387
Jun 26, 2014 0:42:38 GMT
|
Post by cycworker on Sept 13, 2019 19:00:32 GMT
Warning: Longish post. I agree with mom re: Beto. Now do I think he's capable of doing the job of president, were he to be elected? Yes. But he went too far with the mandatory buy back notion last night. That's not where your country is at this point. Whether or not it should be isn't relevant. You're just not there yet. Background checks, and a few of these other ideas, yes... but between Congress & the Supreme Court, a mandatory buyback will never fly. Now, that said, it shouldn't entirely matter. These are all ideas at this point. One thing I liked last night that Harris said is that while they were all debating minutiae of plans, the real issue & concern for folks is that were it not for McCain, the Affordable Care Act would be gone. That's how the Democrats won in 2018 - assuring folks that at the very least, they won't lose what they have. The other thing she said that was good was that aside from the fringe folks in the alt-right (she didn't say that, but I am) there is more that unites than divides people. What she didn't do well last night was talk about it as her "3 a.m. Agenda." That's the message. No matter who the candidate is, what people want is someone who understands & cares about the things that keep them up at night. I think I have said this before: Do you know why, ultimately, Lenin & Trotsky got into power in Russia? They actually won an election. Do do you know how they did it, in large part? While the folks they were running against blathered on about, essentially, proper parliamentary procedure, Constitutions, policy-making, etc, guess what Lenin was doing? He was saying one thing, repeatedly: Peace. Land. Bread. The folks who didn't make it to the debate last night are done, and they should drop out, so I have no more to say on them. Yang needs to drop out. He doesn't have the skills. Just because you're a good businessman doesn't mean you can be President. He's not held elected office before. That, in and of itself, is reason enough to say no to him. Bernie is the left wing version of Trump. I wish he'd go away. He'd be an awful president. Buttigieg, imo, is someone who has potential,but he's still too young & inexperienced & he'd be in over his head. Though he's also a smart guy, who would surround himself with good people. At least he knows what he doesn't know. Am starting to have concerns about Beto's temperament, but I think he's not terrible. Of the remaining 6, while there are some I like more than others, as a Canadian, I can tell you any of them would have the respect of the world, and from a perspective of their skills, are capable of doing the job. n
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 16, 2024 10:18:59 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2019 20:09:42 GMT
“ like Mayor Pete But he is too young and inexperienced “
An outline of Mayor Pete’s qualifications. Age 37 Education: Harvard and Pembroke College Oxford. First class honors in philosophy, politics, & economics. Worked on John Kerry’s presidential campaign on policy. Enlisted in the Navel Reserve and was an Intelligence Officer. Spent 7 months in Afghanistan where part of duties involved driving his commander over 100 times to Kabul as the armed driver looking out for ambushes and explosive devices along the way. Elected and reelected Mayor Of South Bend, In. While not the largest city in the United States, it’s no little spot along the freeway either. A recap of his experience. - Educated - studied politics and economics. Which gives him a foundation of two subjects that are kind of important if you want to run for public office.
- Worked on John Kerry’s campaign on policy. So he has experience putting together policy.
- Joined the Navel Reserves and became an Intelligence Officer. I think , thanks to trump, us outsiders are understanding more and more how important our intelligence community is to our security. So being a former Intelligence Officer is a plus.
- He spent 7 months in a war zone. Part of his duties involved being the armed driver in a very hostile area. That kind of takes care if he can handle stress.
- He has been mayor of South Bend since 2011 which means he has experience running a government.
For a young guy, he sure has packed a lot of experiences in his short life. So I have to ask what more experiences does he need to be considered as a viable candidate to be president today?
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Sept 13, 2019 22:08:58 GMT
“ like Mayor Pete But he is too young and inexperienced “
An outline of Mayor Pete’s qualifications. Age 37 Education: Harvard and Pembroke College Oxford. First class honors in philosophy, politics, & economics. Worked on John Kerry’s presidential campaign on policy. Enlisted in the Navel Reserve and was an Intelligence Officer. Spent 7 months in Afghanistan where part of duties involved driving his commander over 100 times to Kabul as the armed driver looking out for ambushes and explosive devices along the way. Elected and reelected Mayor Of South Bend, In. While not the largest city in the United States, it’s no little spot along the freeway either. A recap of his experience. - Educated - studied politics and economics. Which gives him a foundation of two subjects that are kind of important if you want to run for public office.
- Worked on John Kerry’s campaign on policy. So he has experience putting together policy.
- Joined the Navel Reserves and became an Intelligence Officer. I think , thanks to trump, us outsiders are understanding more and more how important our intelligence community is to our security. So being a former Intelligence Officer is a plus.
- He spent 7 months in a war zone. Part of his duties involved being the armed driver in a very hostile area. That kind of takes care if he can handle stress.
- He has been mayor of South Bend since 2011 which means he has experience running a government.
For a young guy, he sure has packed a lot of experiences in his short life. So I have to ask what more experiences does he need to be considered as a viable candidate to be president today?
Some national political experience. Even statewide would be better than none. And a little more seasoning. He is 37 years old. I think he’s great. I’d love to see him run for President in about ten years. But he needs a little aging and some national experience first.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 16, 2024 10:18:59 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2019 22:23:38 GMT
“ like Mayor Pete But he is too young and inexperienced “
An outline of Mayor Pete’s qualifications. Age 37 Education: Harvard and Pembroke College Oxford. First class honors in philosophy, politics, & economics. Worked on John Kerry’s presidential campaign on policy. Enlisted in the Navel Reserve and was an Intelligence Officer. Spent 7 months in Afghanistan where part of duties involved driving his commander over 100 times to Kabul as the armed driver looking out for ambushes and explosive devices along the way. Elected and reelected Mayor Of South Bend, In. While not the largest city in the United States, it’s no little spot along the freeway either. A recap of his experience. - Educated - studied politics and economics. Which gives him a foundation of two subjects that are kind of important if you want to run for public office.
- Worked on John Kerry’s campaign on policy. So he has experience putting together policy.
- Joined the Navel Reserves and became an Intelligence Officer. I think , thanks to trump, us outsiders are understanding more and more how important our intelligence community is to our security. So being a former Intelligence Officer is a plus.
- He spent 7 months in a war zone. Part of his duties involved being the armed driver in a very hostile area. That kind of takes care if he can handle stress.
- He has been mayor of South Bend since 2011 which means he has experience running a government.
For a young guy, he sure has packed a lot of experiences in his short life. So I have to ask what more experiences does he need to be considered as a viable candidate to be president today?
Some national political experience. Even statewide would be better than none. And a little more seasoning. He is 37 years old. I think he’s great. I’d love to see him run for President in about ten years. But he needs a little aging and some national experience first. Well I guess I’m going to have to disagree with you on this. I think he has what it takes now.
|
|
|
Post by lisae on Sept 13, 2019 22:35:32 GMT
He lost the senate race. I know he came close to beating Cruz in a red state but close isn't enough. No one likes Ted Cruz and yet with all the effort Beto put in, he could not win. He also doesn't talk enough about specific policies that we really care about. What is his healthcare policy? I've watched all the debates and I can't tell you if he is in the Medicare for All camp, improve ACA or somewhere in between. He just can't deliver a message that stands out. In this case, I don’t think it was Beto’s lack of anything. Republicans put A LOT of $$$$ in Cruz and he came close to losing. MORE people NEED TO GET OUT AND vote! In NC, with this week’s close election, I read that only 35% of the eligible voters actually voted. I recognize that O'Rourke did the near impossible but he still didn't win. He shook up the Republican party. It was good, not good enough though to really use as a strong selling point for him becoming president. He should go back to Texas and run for Senate again if he is the best chance the party has. Yes, absolutely we need to get out the vote. I followed the NC election closely. It isn't my district but I had the misfortune of having to watch all the ads out of Charlotte. It was almost all negative advertising. It was ALL negative advertising from the Republican challenger. There wasn't a single ad that I saw where he stood up and said 'this is who I am and what I believe.' He let the Republican Congressional Committee run all his ads and win the election for him. On Tuesday night I looked at the breakdown of results. McCready, the Democrat, won the early voting counts by a good margin. But he didn't do nearly as well overall on election day. Reelections always favor the Republicans the same way that poor weather favors Republicans in the general election. Unless the Democrat, whoever that ends up being, has a significant lead, getting a good turnout will be key in November 2020.
|
|
moodyblue
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,244
Location: Western Illinois
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2014 21:07:23 GMT
|
Post by moodyblue on Sept 13, 2019 23:33:38 GMT
Some national political experience. Even statewide would be better than none. And a little more seasoning. He is 37 years old. I think he’s great. I’d love to see him run for President in about ten years. But he needs a little aging and some national experience first. Well I guess I’m going to have to disagree with you on this. I think he has what it takes now. I love his intelligence, and his common sense, and I’m impressed with all he has accomplished at a young age. I do think he’d make a good Vice President now and then be better positioned to run for President when he’s a little older with more national experience.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 16, 2024 10:18:59 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2019 23:57:34 GMT
What is the definition of “national experience”
Kamala Harris is a US Senator from CA. Prior to that she was SF District Attorney and CA Attorney General.
Does she have “national experience”? If so what did she do to get it?
Or is the correct term “national exposure”?
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Sept 14, 2019 6:06:40 GMT
What is the definition of “national experience” Kamala Harris is a US Senator from CA. Prior to that she was SF District Attorney and CA Attorney General. Does she have “national experience”? If so what did she do to get it? Or is the correct term “national exposure”? She has won a statewide election ... several, in fact. She has served in Washington and had a chance to learn its ways. She has both executive and legislative experience.
|
|
cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,387
Jun 26, 2014 0:42:38 GMT
|
Post by cycworker on Sept 14, 2019 6:58:08 GMT
Everything lucyg said. I think Pete is fantastic. And I think he'd be a great President - after he wins a statewide election.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Sept 14, 2019 10:09:02 GMT
That moment when Castro went after Biden was rude and uncalled for. I never liked him and I like him even less now. Just rude. Agreed-and I am not a Biden supporter. It was a cheap shot; this is the kind of stuff that turns people off about politics. If you must go after someone’s record, at least be clever about it.
|
|
|
Post by gardengoddess on Sept 14, 2019 14:41:02 GMT
So disappointed in Julian Castro. I thought he was a bright rising star in the Democratic party, but that was a cheap shot. Ageism is alive and well today without the help of our politicians. I was glad to read the blow back he got. I was also surprised that Cory Booker wanted to go down that road with him.
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Sept 14, 2019 17:18:14 GMT
What is the definition of “national experience” Kamala Harris is a US Senator from CA. Prior to that she was SF District Attorney and CA Attorney General. Does she have “national experience”? If so what did she do to get it? Or is the correct term “national exposure”? She has won a statewide election ... several, in fact. She has served in Washington and had a chance to learn its ways. She has both executive and legislative experience. I think he's extremely interesting, but absolutely agree with you with the caveat that Kamala Harris' national experience is frankly light. I am over the idea that an outsider is going to "fix Washington." President Clinton spoke bluntly about his missteps coming from Arkansas with little Washington experience in his book. I think many of my issues with President Obama's first term were based on his inexperience. I don't think we need to delve into how the current occupant and his knowledge or lack thereof. This isn't a training job. I want someone who actually has experience and relationship so that there's an actual prayer of getting something accomplished.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 16, 2024 10:18:59 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2019 20:21:44 GMT
To me “National Experience “ for a politician means running a national campaign. The only two of the top 10 that have done that are Sanders and Biden. Which would mean all of the remaining 8 of the top 10 are a little light when it comes to National Experience.
“National Recognition” would mean people across the country would know who these folks are. Way too many voters do not pay attention to is what is happening in DC and who the players are. Way too many potential voters do not know who the players are in states other than their own.. Prior to running for President the only reason I knew about Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar was because they were on Rachel Maddow’s show which I watch on a regular basis. I still know nothing about the various Governors that are running.
My point is Mayor Pete shouldn’t be dinged for lack of National Experience or National Recognition without including the other 7 of the top 10.
As to winning a state wide election vs winning just a city election - maybe that is an advantage but how many elections did Eisenhower win before he became president? Yes I understand what he did prior to becoming president but that doesn’t necessarily mean those experiences would guarantee he would be any good as a president. As it so happens he became a pretty good president.
When on the other hand there are two former presidents who spent time in Congress and were Vice Presidents, you know worked their way up to president. and were duds. Nixon and Bush Sr. Both of these men won plenty of state wide elections to get where they ended up. How well did that work out?
As to Bill Clinton and his regrets - phooey, there isn’t a human alive who doesn’t have regrets about decisions made. That’s just human nature. And the reasons we give others and ourselves for what we decided are interesting.
As to President Obama? He got robbed. The Republicans, not any lack of experience on his part, robbed him of being a great president instead of the good president he was and in spite of the Republicans.
There is is very little that can prepare a person for being president. One of the reasons I supported Hillary was because she had a very good idea what to expect when you become president. The good and the bad.
Which brings me to character. The character of the individual will help dictate the success and failures of their time as president. President Obama was under attack by the Republicans the entire time he was president and he handled it with grace unlike the sniveling little prick in the White House who won’t tolerate any type of criticism against him without striking out at whoever. And it doesn’t matter if it’s warranted or not. Case in point the drama with that stupid weather map.
IMO Mayor Pete has the character to be president today. He has laid the foundation needed to make him a qualified person to be president now. Running in state wide elections is not going to make him more qualified then he is now.
The only way any of these folks can obtain more experience to run for President is to be president.
He should not be put in the corner, patted on the head and told it’s not your time yet sonny.
IMO.
|
|
cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,387
Jun 26, 2014 0:42:38 GMT
|
Post by cycworker on Sept 15, 2019 5:39:18 GMT
That moment when Castro went after Biden was rude and uncalled for. I never liked him and I like him even less now. Just rude. Agreed-and I am not a Biden supporter. It was a cheap shot; this is the kind of stuff that turns people off about politics. If you must go after someone’s record, at least be clever about it. It was a cheap shot because it was NOT going after his record. It was a personal attack. THAT is what turns people off politics. People don't mind legitimate debate about what should be accomplished & how best to get the work done. As the people who did my advocacy training me: go soft on people, go hard on ideas.
|
|