|
Alter Ego posted:My fear is that Andrew Cuomo will jump in and just like with Hillary, the field will be cleared for him. i would not be surprised if he runs but he is shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit and would not win the primaries. he is quite likely the worst democrat in office anywhere in this country right now.
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 16:06 |
|
|
Cuomo is everything Bernie bros thought Hillary was, right down to being a man
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
if any democrat from ny runs in the 2020 primaries it needs to be paul tonko because he is cool and good, but he's also too focused on a single (albeit important) issue to realistically win.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
not even my machine democrat friends from new york like cuomo so i don't think you need to worry
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
Christ, I almost want him to run to make our socialist candidate look great by comparison
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
Cubey posted:he is quite likely the worst democrat in office anywhere in this country right now. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
this + new jersey
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 08:03
|
|
|
"Would you like some water? It's free." --- Cuomo to Sanders as a CNN town hall went into commercial break
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 09:56
|
|
|
Ace of Baes posted:The people who give a poo poo voted for a man recorded on video bragging about performing sexual assault, theyre not voting democrat, the Democrats need the millions of people who showed up to vote for a Black man named Barrack Hussein Obama. Not the anti Islamic biases of the voters, those of Grabbard who people are trying to champion as the dems hope for 2020. It's pretty goddamn bad when people cannot tell whether we're talking about Trump voters, or the person that's supposedly gonna save us from them. KRock posted:I just hope we get a competitive primary in 2020, with at least 8-9 candidates to choose from. The fact that we only had 5 candidates (2 of whom dropped out before Iowa) should have been an early warning sign as to what was to become of the Democrats this year. Yeah, even more fracturing and bitterness, that'll loving help.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 12:29
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Yeah, even more fracturing and bitterness, that'll loving help. Yes? If people aren't allowed the chance to have a "referenda" on the direction the Democratic party should take, then you could just end up repeating the same mistakes of the Clinton coronation. You can't force unity. You can't badger people into feeling enthusiastic about the establishment pick.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 12:58
|
|
|
You can't force unity but you can sure as gently caress destroy it, mainly by inserting and legitimizing bullshit conspiracies about a coronation process and how the system was rigged and unfair. And a reminder that there was a referenda, dragged out way, way past the point where it was obvious one side won and one side lost. Mind pointing out all the great and wonderful things dragging the primary to the end did? Cause from where I'm sitting, the end result was that the primary bitterness just festered and became impossible to kill, killing support for the winner. Fulchrum has issued a correction as of 13:13 on Nov 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 13:09
|
|
|
Someone joked earlier about running Mark Cuban, which is terrible, but it does bring to mind an interview I remember with him from right around the start of the primaries, before everything blew up. He said he was glad Trump was running because it would legitimize the billionaire class directly running for president, which would pave the way for better candidates very soon. So, if that isn't ominous enough...
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Yeah, even more fracturing and bitterness, that'll loving help. I haven't the faintest idea of what your preferred alternative is. The 2016 Democratic primaries were a loving joke; 5 candidates, 2 of which dropped out before Iowa. Is that what we want to emulate going forward? Meanwhile, the GOP had 17 candidates. Their nominating process was endlessly mocked as a poo poo show on these forums, but it looks like they got the last laugh. After all, all of the oxygen and excitement was on their side from the very beginning. They needed two different time slots to hold their debates. Two different time slots to not just bash each other, but to bash the Democratic brand as well. The Republican contest garnered much more media attention, since it was far more interesting and dynamic. As a result, turn out for the Republican primaries was record setting this year, while it was dismal (compared to prior years) for the Democratic side. I'm not suggesting that we get 17 Democrats to run in 2020. But for Christ's sake, we need more than 3. I think 2008 is a pretty good template to follow; it featured 8 candidates representing a pretty broad spectrum of the Democratic Party.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
speng31b posted:Someone joked earlier about running Mark Cuban, which is terrible, but it does bring to mind an interview I remember with him from right around the start of the primaries, before everything blew up. The best candidates will come when billionaires cease to exist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
Bill Gates for US Emperor
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 18:38
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:You can't force unity but you can sure as gently caress destroy it, mainly by inserting and legitimizing bullshit conspiracies about a coronation process and how the system was rigged and unfair. It created the most progressive platform ever for the democrats!
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 18:39
|
|
|
KRock posted:I haven't the faintest idea of what your preferred alternative is. The 2016 Democratic primaries were a loving joke; 5 candidates, 2 of which dropped out before Iowa. Is that what we want to emulate going forward? They needed two time slots because of Trump, not because the GOP had the better primary process. If it was just Jeb and Rubio sniping at each other no one would have cared.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
KRock posted:I haven't the faintest idea of what your preferred alternative is. The 2016 Democratic primaries were a loving joke; 5 candidates, 2 of which dropped out before Iowa. Is that what we want to emulate going forward? 17, a full half of which dropped out before a single vote was cast. Jeb dropped out in February. Rubio in March. Meanwhile, the Democratic primary didn't and would not end until the 25th of July. How can you possibly look at that and think this was a good thing, and should ever be repeated?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
Trump did the most unspeakable things to the other candidates during the primaries and continued to trash them during the general and almost all of their constituents came home, if only against Hillary. Hillary and trump did a great job tearing down trump and people on the left sure do hate him, but then they stayed home. The primary season is too long
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:They needed two time slots because of Trump, not because the GOP had the better primary process. If it was just Jeb and Rubio sniping at each other no one would have cared. Erm, they needed two time slots because it wasn't practical to have 17 candidates go at it within an hour and a half. Fulchrum posted:17, a full half of which dropped out before a single vote was cast. Nah, only five of them dropped out before Iowa. Fulchrum posted:Meanwhile, the Democratic primary didn't and would not end until the 25th of July. How can you possibly look at that and think this was a good thing, and should ever be repeated? The 2008 primary was far more divisive and competitive than the 2016 primary. As a result, it drew more media attention and excitement, compared to the snooze fest on the GOP side, in which McCain quietly consolidated support. That year turned out pretty well for the Democrats, did it not?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 02:44
|
|
|
KRock posted:. quote:As a result, it drew more media attention and excitement, compared to the snooze fest on the GOP side, in which McCain quietly consolidated support. That year turned out pretty well for the Democrats, did it not? How much of that media attention was on The GOP as a whole, and how much was just on Trump getting $3 billion in free advertising? How would that have helped them if literally anyone else got the nomination?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 03:09
|
|
|
theflyingexecutive posted:Trump did the most unspeakable things to the other candidates during the primaries and continued to trash them during the general and almost all of their constituents came home, if only against Hillary. Hillary and trump did a great job tearing down trump and people on the left sure do hate him, but then they stayed home. The primary season is too long Trump's opponents were all scum, and nobody really cares if they're disrespected.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 03:47
|
|
|
I remember the day Cruz dropped out, I was troubled by the fact that Trump was effectively the Republican nominee but at least Ted loving Cruz had been publicly humiliated, that made it easy to wear a brave face
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 04:01
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/SaraMurray/status/800701318188777472?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:https://mobile.twitter.com/SaraMurray/status/800701318188777472?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:https://mobile.twitter.com/SaraMurray/status/800701318188777472?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet Haha is there seriously like anyone not on Trump's State shortlist I'm fairly sure I'm on it somewhere
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/jonathanvswan/status/800706401572007936 https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/800716639092150273
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
Jesus Christ, if this doesn't disqualify her in the minds of any sane liberal for 2020...
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:https://mobile.twitter.com/SaraMurray/status/800701318188777472?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
trying to neutralize possible dem candidates for 2020
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
logikv9 posted:trying to neutralize possible dem candidates for 2020 I wonder if he's still trying to convince himself he's above party politics after appointing GOP hacks to every other position
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 16:33
|
|
|
Marie Furie posted:https://twitter.com/jonathanvswan/status/800706401572007936 Welp
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
The pro-corporate and Natsec dems are all going to sell us out just like the Blue Dogs did during the Bush & Obama years. The reason people tend to have such a hardon for "ideological purity" is because moderates & compromisers are Quislings who will stab you in the back at the first opportunity!
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:Jesus Christ, if this doesn't disqualify her in the minds of any sane liberal for 2020...
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:Don't let your opponents define your allies. My previous support for her was mostly due to her potential, I wouldn't have voted for her in 2016 but could see a way forward for her to be a viable candidate in 2020 Conversely, if she takes one of these cabinet jobs and uses it to be completely indistinguishable from a 2004-era neocon for four years that kind of kills that dream, yeah. We'll see what happens, I guess 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
Is there any good thing that could come from Gabbard taking that slot?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
Abrasive Obelisk posted:Is there any good thing that could come from Gabbard taking that slot? Yes, it would make her politically toxic for any future national ambitions she may have (such as the presidency)
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
Abrasive Obelisk posted:Is there any good thing that could come from Gabbard taking that slot? Depends on her convictions. If they are similar to a previous failed dem candidate then no. But who knows, I wouldn't hold a Trump cabinet position against anyone merely because they were part of the administration.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 17:12
|
|
|
Looking forward to Tulsi's speech at UN proving their active development of WMDs necessitates an invasion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 17:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 16:06 |
|
|
Do these cabinet members get contracts or do they serve at the whims of the president? It's entirely likely that the guy who'se catch phrase is "you're fired" will throw out half his cabinet before the end of the term. If a rising democrat like Gabbard takes a position in the Trump administration, and is canned after a year, that basically ends her career. If I were in her position I'd be real cautious about taking a job with Trump without any guarantees.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 17:32
|
|
