Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY
WWWwombat

Who should/will the Dems run in 2020?

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, SinisterDeath said:

 

If Shapiro slooows the hell down, maybe i'll be more willing to listen to him?

 

There's a youtube video breaking down Shapiro's debating style; basically he's very, very good at it, like Ted Cruz, but slightly more human.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Tyzack said:

 

There's a youtube video breaking down Shapiro's debating style; basically he's very, very good at it, like Ted Cruz, but slightly more human.

Very good at the fast-talk debate style?

On a scale of Ted Cruz and Mark Zuckerberg, where is Shapiro?

Edited by SinisterDeath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

Very good at the fast-talk debate style?

On a scale of Ted Cruz and Mark Zuckerberg, where is Shapiro?

 

Wwwwwwaaaaaaaaaayyyyy closer to Cruz

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"There's a youtube video breaking down Shapiro's debating style; basically he's very, very good at it, like Ted Cruz, but slightly more human."

 

Actually he comes off much better then Cruz and principally because he does not have an "attack dog" style, but simply is articulate, precise and sticks to his principles (he also will give on points that he does not see as being part of his core arguements when they are weak).

 

 

Here is a video deliniating his debating "Rules"

 

 

 

Zuckerberg is a lousy debater and really does not defend or advance his beliefs in any setting that can be said to be confrontational.

Edited by CUBAREY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/21/2018 at 9:34 PM, CUBAREY said:

Zuckerberg is a lousy debater and really does not defend or advance his beliefs in any setting that can be said to be confrontational.

Rating someone on the Cruz to Zuckerberg scale is more about how human he is, over his debating style.

It be like me saying rate Trump on the Nixon to Ponzi scale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm besides you totally mischaractering Nixon has some kind of scamer (he was not,  you may disagee with his politics {and maybe not if you actually knew his ecoinomic policies and his healthcare policy and many of his domestic policies on such things as civil rights} but he was not pulling a ponzi scheme. 

 

 

As for Shapiro on the "human" scale he has shown that he is both able to keep to his principles but be not only civil but honestly concerned about people he seriously has policy differences with. He has on several occasions asked that Q&A parts of videoed lectures be edited to delete situations where transgender people have become emonitional when they could not logicly answer some of his positions on the transgender issue. He has done the same with other people on other issues where his "destruction" of the oppsing side was almost total but which was also acompanied by the questioners  obviously feeling humiliated by not being able to react to the arguments posed by Shaprio.

 

His demaner in his lectures is also quite humerous and he tends to lower the temperature of the debate by humor.  Unlike Zuckerberg that comes off quite plastic if intelligent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, CUBAREY said:

 

As for Shapiro on the "human" scale he has shown that he is both able to keep to his principles but be not only civil but honestly concerned about people he seriously has policy differences with. He has on several occasions asked that Q&A parts of videoed lectures be edited to delete situations where transgender people have become emonitional when they could not logicly answer some of his positions on the transgender issue. He has done the same with other people on other issues where his "destruction" of the oppsing side was almost total but which was also acompanied by the questioners  obviously feeling humiliated by not being able to react to the arguments posed by Shaprio.

 

 

He asks people who prove feelngs, which is inheriently an unbalanced question, so it makes the questioner - who is already being volenerable/taking a risk by asking a question - feel doubly doubted, first that their observation "I feel discriminated against because of my gender presentation" or "I feel sterotyped or profiled by my race" is not valid, and second by making them try to prove a feeling.

 

But that's not really on topic. This thread will probably go quiet until January when there will be a flurry of announcments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tyzack said:

 

He asks people who prove feelngs, which is inheriently an unbalanced question, so it makes the questioner - who is already being volenerable/taking a risk by asking a question - feel doubly doubted, first that their observation "I feel discriminated against because of my gender presentation" or "I feel sterotyped or profiled by my race" is not valid, and second by making them try to prove a feeling.

 

But that's not really on topic. This thread will probably go quiet until January when there will be a flurry of announcments.

He does not ask people to "prove" feelings, he simply states that "feelings" are irrelevant. People do not care if you feel discriminated, they want proof that you are being descriminated.  And correct feeling that you are discriminated or stereotyped is not something that can be logicly addressed. If you can present facts that you are descriminated or stereotyped we might agree on what steps should be taken to end the objective discrimination or stereotype but feelings are subjective and may be present whether or not their is actual discrimination or stereotyping. While I can respect your feelings I will not act to change either policy or process if their are no objective facts to work with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/24/2018 at 3:36 PM, CUBAREY said:

He does not ask people to "prove" feelings, he simply states that "feelings" are irrelevant. People do not care if you feel discriminated, they want proof that you are being descriminated.  And correct feeling that you are discriminated or stereotyped is not something that can be logicly addressed. If you can present facts that you are descriminated or stereotyped we might agree on what steps should be taken to end the objective discrimination or stereotype but feelings are subjective and may be present whether or not their is actual discrimination or stereotyping. While I can respect your feelings I will not act to change either policy or process if their are no objective facts to work with.

 

We aren't robots. We are thinking, feeling, acting beings. Trump (or anyone) was elected because felt he would help them or felt that the system was against them, or felt that Hillary was more corrupt. People voted for Obama because they felt he spoke for them; because they felt he would help.

 

People feel that it's wrong that they can be evicted or fired for being out about their sexuality/gender identity. They feel this is unfair because cis/straight people are out all the time and no one cares. 

 

People feel that the police are against them. They feel that the system is rigged against them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

Democracy. There are more of them, then you.

1) I doubt that tbh.

2) Tyranny of the majority? This is why we live in a Republic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Nolder said:

1) I doubt that tbh.

Be surprised.

15 minutes ago, Nolder said:

2) Tyranny of the majority? This is why we live in a Republic.

Well you said "what do we do about this?"

I took that to mean, what do we do about you disagreeing with those unnamed people.

 

Solution: Democracy. A Democratic Republic is also possible, but you still may not enjoy the results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CNN has a new list/analysis:

 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/26/politics/democrats-2019-decisions/index.html

 

BIDEN:

 

Quote

"I'll be as straight with you as I can. I think I'm the most qualified person in the country to be president," Biden told an audience in Montana earlier this month. "The issues that we face as a country today are the issues that have been in my wheelhouse, that I've worked on my whole life."


I don't disagree with him; he should've run in 2016, if he wanted to. It would have been a contenous primary against Clinton, and who knows if he would have run, or what "promises" were made 2008. However, I believe that 76 is probably too old to be president never mind too old to run. 

 

Quote

 

"If there's somebody else who appears who can, for whatever reason, do a better job than me, I'll work my ass off to elect him or her," Sanders told New York Magazine in November. "If it turns out that I am the best candidate to beat Donald Trump, then I will probably run."
Sanders has called running for president a "very difficult decision for one's family."

 

 

I read this is as he won't run, also he's too old.

 

Quote

 

Warren is preparing to run for president -- she has aides stockpiled in her Boston and Washington offices, has been talking to advisers about what a run would look like and plans are in the works to base a campaign in the Boston area.
And although Warren told CNN in March 2018 that "I am not running for president in 2020," she has begun to lean into making a decision in early 2019.
"It's time for women to go to Washington and fix our broken government, and that includes a woman at the top," Warren told a town hall crowd in Holyoke, Massachusetts. "So here's what I promise: After November 6, I will take a hard look at running for president.

 

 

 

She's running, and she's the first person (in this list) to get my endorsement.

 

Quote

 

Since then, however, O'Rourke has said he will finish his House term and then make a decision.
"Then Amy and I will think about what we can do next to contribute to the best of our ability to this community," O'Rourke said.


 

 

 

 

#Beto2020

 

 
Quote

 

Harris looked to avoid the 2020 question throughout her efforts to campaign for Democrats in 2018.
"I am not bulls***ing you," she told CNN in October. "I don't know what this all means for 2020. It's really far off."
Since then, though, Harris has called the decision to run "a family decision."
"And over the holiday," Harris said in December, "I will make that decision with my family."


 

 

 

She's running, and I'd support her too.

 

Quote

 

"I will consider running for president," Booker told NJ Advance Media. "That's something that I will do. There's people in New Jersey who are talking to me about it, across the country that are talking to me about it, so I will consider that."
Booker traveled to New Hampshire in December and has been consistently calling elected officials and people he endorsed in early states, seemingly reminding them of his backing. The senator has also been talking to operatives in Iowa and New Hampshire, according to Democrats in each early state.
"Of course the presidency will be something I consider," Booker said in September. "It would be irresponsible not to."

 

 

Two years ago I was on team #Booker2020, but he's unpopular in progressive circles because he used to work on Wall Street (which is a total bs reason), so that's slightly tempered my opinions of him. I'd still endorse him.

 

Quote

 

The biggest question surrounding Bloomberg's possible run is how the Democratic Party, something he was not a part of before October, would accept a former Republican lawmaker.
"I will be a Democrat for the rest of my life," Bloomberg said in November, echoing a statement he made in September where he said it was nearly impossible he'd ever run as a Republican again.

 

 

No.

 

Quote

 

"I will make that decision over the next few weeks, I've got to talk to my family," she said in December. "When I ran for the Senate last time, the first time I ran, my husband found out I was considering it on the radio. I'm not going to repeat that mistake again, that didn't work very well."
Klobuchar has traveled to Iowa -- her neighboring state -- and operatives in the first-in-the-nation caucus state believe, should she run, she would have to perform well in the state.
"I have been talking to people in my state and people around the country about it. I think that there are a lot of good people considering this, but I do think you want voices from the Midwest," Klobuchar said. "And I think you want to have people with different views running. I think it's really important to have that."

 

 

I'd support her too.

 

Quote


"We're probably 63, 64 percent," he told CNN. But people close to Hickenlooper tell CNN that the governor won't consider running until his gubernatorial term is over in January.
"My wife and I are still talking about it. We haven't made up our mind yet," the former brewer turned politician told the Brewbound Podcast. "But (if) you had a craft beer person like myself running for president, I think the industry would unite. I think the industry would come together and say, 'hey, we'd like to put a brewer in the White House.'"

 

 

 

He's Top 10, not Top 5.

 

Quote

 

Castro, unlike other possible candidates, has taken the first big step towards running: An exploratory committee.
"I'm exploring a candidacy for president of the United States in 2020 to renew the promise of this country for all," Castro said in December.

 


Also Top 10


 

Quote

Gillibrand has said she is "definitely" thinking about it and will take the holiday to talk to her children and husband about 2020, but she also backed herself into a rhetorical corner during her 2018 Senate run when she pledged to serve her full six-year term.


Also Top 10.

I'd say Gillibrand and Harris are Top 5 to at least be on the ticket (Ie, VP), probably along with Booker or Hickenlooper (depending on who wins the nomination).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Tyzack said:

I don't disagree with him; he should've run in 2016, if he wanted to. It would have been a contenous primary against Clinton, and who knows if he would have run, or what "promises" were made 2008. However, I believe that 76 is probably too old to be president never mind too old to run. 

I'd only support Biden if we see a WWE Match between Trump & Biden in place of a debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

I'd only support Biden if we see a WWE Match between Trump & Biden in place of a debate.

 

ew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you have against age? Why is 76 not acceptable but 69 is? Personally I would go for fitness and physical health over age. That said, I would prefer a younger candidate. And by younger, I mean under 50, because the older generation has shown they by and large have absolutely no idea how to handle the modern age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Lenlo said:

What do you have against age? Why is 76 not acceptable but 69 is? Personally I would go for fitness and physical health over age. That said, I would prefer a younger candidate. And by younger, I mean under 50, because the older generation has shown they by and large have absolutely no idea how to handle the modern age.

50s and under is straight up Gen X. And that gen isn't much better than Boomers. 😛

Edited by SinisterDeath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Lenlo said:

What do you have against age? Why is 76 not acceptable but 69 is? Personally I would go for fitness and physical health over age. That said, I would prefer a younger candidate. And by younger, I mean under 50, because the older generation has shown they by and large have absolutely no idea how to handle the modern age.

 

Mental agility.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SinisterDeath said:

50s and under is straight up Gen X. And that gen isn't much better than Boomers. 😛

I like Gen X. They are way better than Boomers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Tyzack said:

 

Mental agility.

 

 

Mental agility is what your worried about? So your basing that on... age. Again, age is irrelevant on this. Someone can be 80 years old and be fit as a horse and wittier than they were 40 years ago. Age doesn't matter to me near as much as their values and plans for this country.

 

17 minutes ago, SinisterDeath said:

50s and under is straight up Gen X. And that gen isn't much better than Boomers. 😛

Much better than the Boomers. At least they can work a VCR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Nolder said:

I like Gen X. They are way better than Boomers.

25 minutes ago, Lenlo said:

Much better than the Boomers. At least they can work a VCR.

Maybe, but they are far more entitled. I base this on the idea that Boomers were raised just after the great depression, so they had some inkling as to how tough times were.

Gen Xers basically always had good times, except for maybe the poorish economy in the 70s and 80s. 

 

If we wait another 8ish? years for Millennial to legally run, we can put one of them in ahead of a Gen X....

 

Actually wait. 2020-1985 = 35. Maybe this election?

Edited by SinisterDeath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SinisterDeath said:

Maybe, but they are far more entitled. I base this on the idea that Boomers were raised just after the great depression, so they had some inkling as to how tough times were.

Gen Xers basically always had good times, except for maybe the poorish economy in the 70s and 80s. 

 

If we wait another 8ish? years for Millennial to legally run, we can put one of them in ahead of a Gen X....

 

Actually wait. 2020-1985 = 35. Maybe this election?

That would be lovely, really. I would enjoy that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...