Jump to content

U.S. Elections: The Safe Space For People With Good Brains


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Right, and you'd probably have to give those (or some of those) to the Republican candidate if they were really ahead I think. I'd maybe throw Colorado and Virginia into the mix as well. Other states like PA and MI would also be in play, but less so (although they havent gone red in 24 years).

I mean it still is tough and a lot of things have to line up, but more do-able with a generic Republican than Trump.

You are assuming that Trump is not a generic Republican. Maybe the reason he won is because he is the generic Republican

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Pony Queen Jace said:

Gawd, I can't wait to see this. It's either gonna be allegations of evil conspiracy or he's gonna jump in a hole and hide. Either will be great, he'll never be able to go outside again without a thousand reporters hounding for a shot of the fucking clown.

Whatever Trump does, if he loses Republicans will drop him so fast he'll hit the ground like a safe. Within 24 hours of his concession, GOP talking heads will be saying he was never a conservative, a true conservative would have won, blah blah. Same as they did with Romney and McCain before him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TrackerNeil said:

Whatever Trump does, if he loses Republicans will drop him so fast he'll hit the ground like a safe. Within 24 hours of his concession, GOP talking heads will be saying he was never a conservative, a true conservative would have won, blah blah. Same as they did with Romney and McCain before him. 

Well yeah, we know how that's gonna go. I wanna see what Trump does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From that list, I like Booker. I mean, if you're citing his bachelorhood as a con, that's kind of scraping the bottom of the barrel. Plus the Senate seat wouldn't be lost, since NY has a Democratic governor, correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Starkess said:

From that list, I like Booker. I mean, if you're citing his bachelorhood as a con, that's kind of scraping the bottom of the barrel. Plus the Senate seat wouldn't be lost, since NY has a Democratic governor, correct?

Booker's from New Jersey, which has Christie as Governor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

Whatever Trump does, if he loses Republicans will drop him so fast he'll hit the ground like a safe. Within 24 hours of his concession, GOP talking heads will be saying he was never a conservative, a true conservative would have won, blah blah. Same as they did with Romney and McCain before him. 

... which means they end up with Ted Cruz in 2020.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Starkess said:

From that list, I like Booker. I mean, if you're citing his bachelorhood as a con, that's kind of scraping the bottom of the barrel. Plus the Senate seat wouldn't be lost, since NY has a Democratic governor, correct?

Booker has actual Wall Street ties. This is the guy who defended Romney and Bain Capital and attacked Obama back in 2012.

Also deep in the charter school bullshit, though some people I guess are still into that so yrmv.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Castro, Perez, and Garcetti lack the qualifications -- don't pass the "one heartbeat away" test that we criticized McCain for.

It's too bad both Booker and Deval Patrick went to bat for Bain Capital in 2012 (Patrick works for them now). Whatever the merits of the discussion were, I suppose that makes them untenable for a candidate already taking fire for captivity to moneymongers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, lokisnow said:

I like Perez or Garcetti, senators are too valuable to waste on the veep slot. Particularly as DWS democrats are plotting to lose ten-fifteen senate seats in 2018

Well you're in luck then, she's out in all but name today. She'll be officially replaced at the convention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

That's fantastic news. Bernie fans may have hated her, but there was plenty for Clinton supporters not to like as well. All she needed to do was not give the appearance she was favoring Clinton, much like Obama was successful at doing. And she failed at it utterly. Clinton didn't need her help to win. The help Clinton needed was for DWS not to make an issue of herself in the campaign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DanteGabriel said:

I think Castro, Perez, and Garcetti lack the qualifications -- don't pass the "one heartbeat away" test that we criticized McCain for.

Palin's problem wasn't that she was governor of a small state. It was that she was Dan Quayle-level embarrassing.

I mean, how is picking someone from the House (which Romney did with Ryan, and ended up not hurting him) better than, say. picking the mayor of Los Angeles, which is executive experience?

For some reason though the Democrats really like VP candidates from the Senate - Biden, Edwards, Lieberman, Gore, Bentsen, Mondale, Muskie, Humphrey, Johnson, Kefauver, Sparkman, Barkley, and Truman. Only twice since WWII have the Democrats gone for a non-Senator, and in both cases the result was pretty bad - 1972 and 1984, and in the former case McGovern went for a Senator first. Not since 1940 has a winning Democratic VP not come from the Senate (Henry Wallace was Secretary of Agriculture).

Republicans are much more creative historically - Ryan, Palin, Cheney, Kemp, Bush Senior, Agnew, Miller, Warren, and Bricker didn't come from the Senate. Quayle (1988 and 1992), Dole (1976)  and Nixon (1952 and 1956) were the Senators.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, DanteGabriel said:

I think Castro, Perez, and Garcetti lack the qualifications -- don't pass the "one heartbeat away" test that we criticized McCain for.

Not to seem to defend Sarah Palin--really, I am not--but I think RBPL is right; Palin's problem was not her resume but her inability to articulate anything except her obvious unfitness for office. If Garcetti can present himself well, and if he takes to campaigning, I don't think most Americans would have a problem with him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's not on the list, but I've seen it suggested that a good sleeper pick for VP would be Gary Locke. He's not currently in elected office, so no worries about losing anything, but has in the past and has plenty of experience. And he'd also be an historic first. There's not as many Asian American voters as Hispanic voters, but they do vote heavily Democratic and might not be as already motivated by Trump's racism as Hispanic voters (who are more directly targeted).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TrackerNeil said:

Not to seem to defend Sarah Palin--really, I am not--but I think RBPL is right; Palin's problem was not her resume but her inability to articulate anything except her obvious unfitness for office. If Garcetti can present himself well, and if he takes to campaigning, I don't think most Americans would have a problem with him. 

Even without the Palin comparison, I still think mayor and Cabinet secretary is a little thin for the VP spot, but I hope you guys are right.

I think Gary Locke is a nice idea too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...