You mean, other than Ted Nugent?bearister said:
GB, bearly, who would your picks be for POTUS of currently eligible Americans?
Why not Klobuchar?
5,365 Views |
77 Replies |
Last: 4 yr ago by concordtom
Among Dems? Andrew Yang. Bloomberg. I am a proponent of tax funded guaranteed health care though I think Bernie's wrong on a lot of things.bearister said:
GB, bearly, who would your picks be for POTUS of currently eligible Americans?
Any establishment, partisan and ideological candidate is bad for America.
GBear4Life said:Among Dems? Andrew Yang. Bloomberg. I am a proponent of tax funded guaranteed health care though I think Bernie's wrong on a lot of things.bearister said:
GB, bearly, who would your picks be for POTUS of currently eligible Americans?
Any establishment, partisan and ideological candidate is bad for America.
I'm voting for Mikey....and if he wins he needs to give Yang a big position and tap that brain.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
I could see Biden selecting Amy as VP
I really liked Yang as well. He seemed to genuinely not care about partisanship, and didn't approach any issue or question with pre-determined judgment or conclusions. I also really liked his bit about changing the concept of what being a valuable person in America today means.
It's surreal that a non-ideologue can be so refreshing in a mainstream political arena.golden sloth said:
I really liked Yang as well. He seemed to genuinely not care about partisanship, and didn't approach any issue or question with pre-determined judgment or conclusions. I also really liked his bit about changing the concept of what being a valuable person in America today means.
already committed to a black VP candidate a the NAACP meeting. Thinking a black woman, such as Harris or Abrams.GBear4Life said:
I could see Biden selecting Amy as VP
She doesn't have Clinton's baggage. A surprising number of my Democratic friends were turned off by Clinton Cash and wanted some one more reform minded and the opposite of Trump, so they didn't vote. The good news is they were in California. But I wonder how many Dems thought Trump could never win, and just stayed home in swing states because of their revulsion to Clinton.Big C said:GBear4Life said:Because she is Hilary Clinton Part 2. Guarantee yourself more of the same, and don't act perplexed when it does.Big C said:
Why not go with Amy Klobuchar as the best bet to beat Trump?
Full disclosure, I was early into the Elizabeth Warren camp. She is probably more to the left than I am, but she always seemed authentic... until she didn't.
The two best things about Klobuchar:
1. Hardly any negatives (so far). About the right age. Decent experience. Not too far to the left. Decent personality. Debates pretty well. Ain't no dummy. Tough enough. Doesn't seem to bring any baggage. Doesn't exactly inspire me, but also doesn't bore the crap out of me.
2. Maybe, being from Minnesota, she runs well in the states we needed last time, like Wisconsin and Michigan.
Pair her up with Corey Booker or Julian Castro. Campaign strategy: "Here's a decent candidate. Let's everybody vote in November and get rid of Trump."
What may have made my up mind was this afternoon, I asked this question to my favorite inside-the-bubble "woke" friend, who gets all her news (and views) carefully curated on her mobile device. She said Klobucar couldn't possibly beat Trump because the Bernie people would just stay home.
If they were to do that, after seeing what happened the past four years, how stupid would they be? (rhetorical question!)
So, why not Klobuchar?
"Hillary Clinton Part 2" in what way? Do elaborate. Female, moderate Dem, obviously. What else? Not charismatic.
Okay. What else?
Klobuchar is a straight arrow. I'm not sure she excites anyone, but in this election, I will take competence over Trump. I won't take Sanders either. I don't consider most of his policies or understanding of trade competent either. I do thing he is a better campaigner than given credit for.
Can't pick a VP when you aren't going to win the nomination. But Abrams has certainly shown her progressive cred is for sale to the highest bidder. $5 million donation to her voting rights organization got her to say nice things about Bloomberg.wifeisafurd said:already committed to a black VP candidate a the NAACP meeting. Thinking a black woman, such as Harris or Abrams.GBear4Life said:
I could see Biden selecting Amy as VP
If Bernie loses, are you going to be Ok?Professor Bearitas said:Can't pick a VP when you aren't going to win the nomination. But Abrams has certainly shown her progressive cred is for sale to the highest bidder. $5 million donation to her voting rights organization got her to say nice things about Bloomberg.wifeisafurd said:already committed to a black VP candidate a the NAACP meeting. Thinking a black woman, such as Harris or Abrams.GBear4Life said:
I could see Biden selecting Amy as VP
You make a valid point.Professor Bearitas said:Can't pick a VP when you aren't going to win the nomination.wifeisafurd said:already committed to a black VP candidate a the NAACP meeting. Thinking a black woman, such as Harris or Abrams.GBear4Life said:
I could see Biden selecting Amy as VP
Will you be when Trump loses?GBear4Life said:If Bernie loses, are you going to be Ok?Professor Bearitas said:Can't pick a VP when you aren't going to win the nomination. But Abrams has certainly shown her progressive cred is for sale to the highest bidder. $5 million donation to her voting rights organization got her to say nice things about Bloomberg.wifeisafurd said:already committed to a black VP candidate a the NAACP meeting. Thinking a black woman, such as Harris or Abrams.GBear4Life said:
I could see Biden selecting Amy as VP
Does anybody remember when I posted many months ago about my conversations with some people waiting for their cars in the Walmart automotive area? I asked them if they thought a woman could be president, and two or three different women said, "no".
I was shocked at the reasons why these women said no. Complete gender bias and lack of faith in their own gender. For this reason, I would not be confident that Amy can be Trump, which is too bad because she is my second choice after Bloomberg. Too many women out there who are not yet woke.
I was shocked at the reasons why these women said no. Complete gender bias and lack of faith in their own gender. For this reason, I would not be confident that Amy can be Trump, which is too bad because she is my second choice after Bloomberg. Too many women out there who are not yet woke.
In the aggregate, males have personality traits better suited for executive positions like Presidency. Of course, there is so much variance in personality traits, preferences, skills, intelligence etc within sexes more so than between them that to write off an individual woman or all women purely on the basis of their sex is silly.concordtom said:
Does anybody remember when I posted many months ago about my conversations with some people waiting for their cars in the Walmart automotive area? I asked them if they thought a woman could be president, and two or three different women said, "no".
I was shocked at the reasons why these women said no. Complete gender bias and lack of faith in their own gender. For this reason, I would not be confident that Amy can be Trump, which is too bad because she is my second choice after Bloomberg. Too many women out there who are not yet woke.
They're wrong and so are you, so there were no winners in those Walmart parking lot conversations, which isn't surprising.
Professor Bearitas said:Will you be when Trump loses?GBear4Life said:If Bernie loses, are you going to be Ok?Professor Bearitas said:Can't pick a VP when you aren't going to win the nomination. But Abrams has certainly shown her progressive cred is for sale to the highest bidder. $5 million donation to her voting rights organization got her to say nice things about Bloomberg.wifeisafurd said:already committed to a black VP candidate a the NAACP meeting. Thinking a black woman, such as Harris or Abrams.GBear4Life said:
I could see Biden selecting Amy as VP
Bernie supporters who divide the Democratic side are Trump's biggest allies
American Vermin
Updated 538 delegate projectionsdajo9 said:Bernie supporters who divide the Democratic side are Trump's biggest alliesProfessor Bearitas said:Will you be when Trump loses?GBear4Life said:If Bernie loses, are you going to be Ok?Professor Bearitas said:Can't pick a VP when you aren't going to win the nomination. But Abrams has certainly shown her progressive cred is for sale to the highest bidder. $5 million donation to her voting rights organization got her to say nice things about Bloomberg.wifeisafurd said:already committed to a black VP candidate a the NAACP meeting. Thinking a black woman, such as Harris or Abrams.GBear4Life said:
I could see Biden selecting Amy as VP
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primary-forecast/
https://i.ibb.co/ggc8zkg/538-Delegate-Math.png
Democrats who abandon so-called Democratic principles in the hopes that a rich billionaire a**hole Republican will come and save them from the terror of a Sanders presidency where they might have to pay slightly more in taxes, where the 1% will finally pay some restitution to their country for their ill-gotten gains at the expense of the working class are the biggest enemies to the future of the Democratic Party and are themselves, little better than Trump supporters. They don't actually care about the rule of law, ethics, and adult conduct from the President as they claim. They just want their party in power, even if their chief executive doesn't support their own platform.
And if you and the other so-called unification people would unify around the obvious frontrunner, we could immediately turn our focus to Trump and start building the war chest to defeat him. But some priorities "trump" others.
Professor Bearitas said:Updated 538 delegate projectionsdajo9 said:Bernie supporters who divide the Democratic side are Trump's biggest alliesProfessor Bearitas said:Will you be when Trump loses?GBear4Life said:If Bernie loses, are you going to be Ok?Professor Bearitas said:Can't pick a VP when you aren't going to win the nomination. But Abrams has certainly shown her progressive cred is for sale to the highest bidder. $5 million donation to her voting rights organization got her to say nice things about Bloomberg.wifeisafurd said:already committed to a black VP candidate a the NAACP meeting. Thinking a black woman, such as Harris or Abrams.GBear4Life said:
I could see Biden selecting Amy as VP
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primary-forecast/
Democrats who abandon so-called Democratic principles in the hopes that a rich billionaire a**hole Republican will come and save them from the terror of a Sanders presidency where they might have to pay slightly more in taxes, where the 1% will finally pay some restitution to their country for their ill-gotten gains at the expense of the working class are the biggest enemies to the future of the Democratic Party and are themselves, little better than Trump supporters. They don't actually care about the rule of law, ethics, and adult conduct from the President as they claim. They just want their party in power, even if their chief executive doesn't support their own platform.
And if you and the other so-called unification people would unify around the obvious frontrunner, we could immediately turn our focus to Trump and start building the war chest to defeat him. But some priorities "trump" others.
I think most Bloomberg supporters are pretty centrist and haven't really abandoned their principles.
American Vermin
dajo9 said:Professor Bearitas said:Will you be when Trump loses?GBear4Life said:If Bernie loses, are you going to be Ok?Professor Bearitas said:Can't pick a VP when you aren't going to win the nomination. But Abrams has certainly shown her progressive cred is for sale to the highest bidder. $5 million donation to her voting rights organization got her to say nice things about Bloomberg.wifeisafurd said:already committed to a black VP candidate a the NAACP meeting. Thinking a black woman, such as Harris or Abrams.GBear4Life said:
I could see Biden selecting Amy as VP
Bernie supporters who divide the Democratic side are Trump and Putin's biggest allies
fify
I'm not sure there is any reason for anyone to fear a Sanders presidency. He hasn't exactly shown any ability to work with other people to accomplish any of his goals as a legislator so I would expect anything that can't be done through executive action won't be done during a Sanders presidency.
The main concern with Sanders is that he might not win because a lot of people fear all the things he says he wants to do even though he won't be able to do them.
The main concern with Sanders is that he might not win because a lot of people fear all the things he says he wants to do even though he won't be able to do them.
Do you think Sanders voters are going to stop voting after 2020? We're gonna be watching what our legislators do from 2020-22 in the Sanders administration and vote the obstructionists out. Primary them if need be.Unit2Sucks said:
I'm not sure there is any reason for anyone to fear a Sanders presidency. He hasn't exactly shown any ability to work with other people to accomplish any of his goals as a legislator so I would expect anything that can't be done through executive action won't be done during a Sanders presidency.
The main concern with Sanders is that he might not win because a lot of people fear all the things he says he wants to do even though he won't be able to do them.
As for why we won't win, our coalition is growing all the time. Trump's is stagnant for now until all the Democratic Never Berner Save Us Bloomer fake Dems go to Trump's side. And then we'll just focus on adding new voters so we can outnumber and defeat them.
The most electable candidate is staring you right in the face. 50% win in Nevada.
I expect that Sanders voters will continue to vote for candidates that align with Sanders but they don't represent a majority of the country and you need to win both houses of Congress to enact his policies.
How will Sanders' coalition help him win the senate? Where is his appeal in red states that he will need to take the senate?
How will Sanders' coalition help him win the senate? Where is his appeal in red states that he will need to take the senate?
Unit2Sucks said:
I expect that Sanders voters will continue to vote for candidates that align with Sanders but they don't represent a majority of the country and you need to win both houses of Congress to enact his policies.
How will Sanders' coalition help him win the senate? Where is his appeal in red states that he will need to take the senate?
This is a problem, but it would be a problem with any Dem candidate for President.
Can't worry too much about down ballot elections right now. Hopefully, the impeachment vote will stain the GOP senators in purple states.
Do you imagine we aren't going to be donating to get Susan Collins and Mitch McConnell and others out of the Senate?Unit2Sucks said:
I expect that Sanders voters will continue to vote for candidates that align with Sanders but they don't represent a majority of the country and you need to win both houses of Congress to enact his policies.
How will Sanders' coalition help him win the senate? Where is his appeal in red states that he will need to take the senate?
Professor Robert Reich said:Do you imagine we aren't going to be donating to get Susan Collins and Mitch McConnell and others out of the Senate?Unit2Sucks said:
I expect that Sanders voters will continue to vote for candidates that align with Sanders but they don't represent a majority of the country and you need to win both houses of Congress to enact his policies.
How will Sanders' coalition help him win the senate? Where is his appeal in red states that he will need to take the senate?
Where were these donors when Beto ran against Cruz? I expect that Collins and Gardner may lose to Democrats but Jones will lose his seat to a Republican. Thinking you will get rid of McConnell is evidence of a gross misunderstanding of how much money and power he commands. He would deploy as much as he needed to in order to win. And he won't need much since he isn't facing a credible threat. Pretending you can flip his seat is no more credible than Republicans claiming they can flip Pelosi's seat red.
I don't think anyone is predicting 4 net seats flipping blue.
Perhaps you are a little late in getting the news.Unit2Sucks said:
Thinking you will get rid of McConnell is evidence of a gross misunderstanding of how much money and power he commands.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/431002-poll-33-of-kentucky-voters-approve-of-mcconnell
You always thought Lucy would let Charle Brown kick that ball didn't you?Professor Grubbly-Plank said:Perhaps you are a little late in getting the news.Unit2Sucks said:
Thinking you will get rid of McConnell is evidence of a gross misunderstanding of how much money and power he commands.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/431002-poll-33-of-kentucky-voters-approve-of-mcconnell
Gardner and Collins both win if Bernie is the candidate. John James flips Michigan.Unit2Sucks said:Professor Robert Reich said:Do you imagine we aren't going to be donating to get Susan Collins and Mitch McConnell and others out of the Senate?Unit2Sucks said:
I expect that Sanders voters will continue to vote for candidates that align with Sanders but they don't represent a majority of the country and you need to win both houses of Congress to enact his policies.
How will Sanders' coalition help him win the senate? Where is his appeal in red states that he will need to take the senate?
Where were these donors when Beto ran against Cruz? I expect that Collins and Gardner may lose to Democrats but Jones will lose his seat to a Republican. Thinking you will get rid of McConnell is evidence of a gross misunderstanding of how much money and power he commands. He would deploy as much as he needed to in order to win. And he won't need much since he isn't facing a credible threat. Pretending you can flip his seat is no more credible than Republicans claiming they can flip Pelosi's seat red.
I don't think anyone is predicting 4 net seats flipping blue.
kelly09 said:Gardner and Collins both win if Bernie is the candidate. John James flips Michigan.Unit2Sucks said:Professor Robert Reich said:Do you imagine we aren't going to be donating to get Susan Collins and Mitch McConnell and others out of the Senate?Unit2Sucks said:
I expect that Sanders voters will continue to vote for candidates that align with Sanders but they don't represent a majority of the country and you need to win both houses of Congress to enact his policies.
How will Sanders' coalition help him win the senate? Where is his appeal in red states that he will need to take the senate?
Where were these donors when Beto ran against Cruz? I expect that Collins and Gardner may lose to Democrats but Jones will lose his seat to a Republican. Thinking you will get rid of McConnell is evidence of a gross misunderstanding of how much money and power he commands. He would deploy as much as he needed to in order to win. And he won't need much since he isn't facing a credible threat. Pretending you can flip his seat is no more credible than Republicans claiming they can flip Pelosi's seat red.
I don't think anyone is predicting 4 net seats flipping blue.
Based on what? Colorado doesn't like Trump and Hickenlooper is well known. I'm not just spitballing, the seat leans D now: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/483911-nonpartisan-election-forecaster-moves-colorado-senate-race-to-leans
To answer the OP:
I like Amy, but I get tired of her saying how she wins everywhere while she is losing everywhere,
I like Amy, but I get tired of her saying how she wins everywhere while she is losing everywhere,
I am not that concerned about this with Sanders. He's never actually withheld his vote in Congress for important Democratic priorities, even if they do represent incremental gains compared to what he personally stumps for. Seems like he's got a practical streak underneath the soaring rhetoric.Unit2Sucks said:
I'm not sure there is any reason for anyone to fear a Sanders presidency. He hasn't exactly shown any ability to work with other people to accomplish any of his goals as a legislator so I would expect anything that can't be done through executive action won't be done during a Sanders presidency.
The main concern with Sanders is that he might not win because a lot of people fear all the things he says he wants to do even though he won't be able to do them.
However, if Republicans are going to remain obstructionist then passing anything through Congress will be impossible anyway. If that's the case then I would rather have a loud voice like Sanders constantly calling them out for it, in ways that Obama didn't.
Both parties have been and will be obstructionist to the opposing party's policy agenda. It's a political imperative (thanks to the American electorate), as party representatives will lose their seat if they cooperate with the other. It is not unique to one party no matter how much liberal media you consume tells you so.
You have absolutely been knocking the ball out of the park for about the last three weeks with your takes on this board.sycasey said:I am not that concerned about this with Sanders. He's never actually withheld his vote in Congress for important Democratic priorities, even if they do represent incremental gains compared to what he personally stumps for. Seems like he's got a practical streak underneath the soaring rhetoric.Unit2Sucks said:
I'm not sure there is any reason for anyone to fear a Sanders presidency. He hasn't exactly shown any ability to work with other people to accomplish any of his goals as a legislator so I would expect anything that can't be done through executive action won't be done during a Sanders presidency.
The main concern with Sanders is that he might not win because a lot of people fear all the things he says he wants to do even though he won't be able to do them.
However, if Republicans are going to remain obstructionist then passing anything through Congress will be impossible anyway. If that's the case then I would rather have a loud voice like Sanders constantly calling them out for it, in ways that Obama didn't.
GBear4Life said:
Both parties have been and will be obstructionist to the opposing party's policy agenda. It's a political imperative (thanks to the American electorate), as party representatives will lose their seat if they cooperate with the other. It is not unique to one party no matter how much liberal media you consume tells you so.
No, the Republicans have definitely taken it to new levels over the last two decades. Democrats have not shut down the government or blocked judge appointments like R's have. This is not about liberal media, it's about facts on the ground.
Democrats have started playing more hardball in response to this lately, but I don't see how it originates there.
GBear4Life said:
In the aggregate, males have personality traits better suited for executive positions like Presidency.
I may regret asking, but what traits are those?
sycasey said:GBear4Life said:
In the aggregate, males have personality traits better suited for executive positions like Presidency.
I may regret asking, but what traits are those?
A *****. Duh.
Featured Stories
See All
Bears Add Former 4 star Wisconsin DE TJ Bollers
by Jim McGill
Bears Add Maryland Portal Tight End Corey Dyches
by Jim McGill
Cal Duo Earns Pac-12 Weekly Honors
by Cal Athletics