(01-14-2019 02:22 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  What happened to the star of the Kavanaugh fiasco - Corey Booker. I though he basically threw his hat in the ring on day 2 of the inquisition?

his Spartacus moment was political suicide.

...and they're all out of touch with Main Street America.

Personally, I'm rooting for Elizabeth "Fauxcahontas" Warren. She would be so overmatched by Trump it'd be like leading a lamb to the slaughter. Or shooting fish in a barrel.

(01-14-2019 05:31 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  ...and they're all out of touch with Main Street America.
Personally, I'm rooting for Elizabeth "Fauxcahontas" Warren. She would be so overmatched by Trump it'd be like leading a lamb to the slaughter. Or shooting fish in a barrel.

I don't want Fauxcohontas getting anywhere near the nomination. Getting the nomination alone puts her way too close to the White House for my comfort.

(01-12-2019 04:22 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  I'm officially setting the over/under at 18.5 candidates by the first debate....

if 19 enter and one is an LBGLMNOP, then 18.5 is a push....

LGBTQIA+ if you're going to attempt to list it. But the community seems fine with just LGBT or LGBT+. No need to mock.

(01-14-2019 09:43 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-14-2019 05:31 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  ...and they're all out of touch with Main Street America.
Personally, I'm rooting for Elizabeth "Fauxcahontas" Warren. She would be so overmatched by Trump it'd be like leading a lamb to the slaughter. Or shooting fish in a barrel.

I don't want Fauxcohontas getting anywhere near the nomination. Getting the nomination alone puts her way too close to the White House for my comfort.

Dude, she'd be easier to beat than Hillary. That being said, I understand where you're coming from.

Kirsten Gillibrand about ready to make her official announcement too. Tons and tons of women this time around on the D side.

(01-14-2019 09:43 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-14-2019 05:31 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  ...and they're all out of touch with Main Street America.
Personally, I'm rooting for Elizabeth "Fauxcahontas" Warren. She would be so overmatched by Trump it'd be like leading a lamb to the slaughter. Or shooting fish in a barrel.

I don't want Fauxcohontas getting anywhere near the nomination. Getting the nomination alone puts her way too close to the White House for my comfort.

I'm with you on that...actually they're all bad. But she's the looniest and that's saying a LOT.

Where are the white guys?

An election between Trump and Harris will be Biblically hilarious.

The ultimate expression of everything Trump successfully maligned and made fun of versus the master of ****-talking unlike anything seen since Huey Long.

I love it!

It might be easier to list the democrat lunatics that arent running.

(01-15-2019 01:18 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(01-14-2019 09:43 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-14-2019 05:31 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  ...and they're all out of touch with Main Street America.
Personally, I'm rooting for Elizabeth "Fauxcahontas" Warren. She would be so overmatched by Trump it'd be like leading a lamb to the slaughter. Or shooting fish in a barrel.

I don't want Fauxcohontas getting anywhere near the nomination. Getting the nomination alone puts her way too close to the White House for my comfort.

Dude, she'd be easier to beat than Hillary. That being said, I understand where you're coming from.

I was fine with Obama getting the Democratic nomination over Hillary even though I figured he would be tougher to beat. I almost voted for him in the primary. My wife did.

(01-15-2019 06:48 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Kirsten Gillibrand about ready to make her official announcement too. Tons and tons of women this time around on the D side.

She said she will run. Be fun to see her and Hillary on the same stage. She's said Bill Clinton was a rapist.

Perhaps its best just to list what Democratic Senators aren't running.

There won't be anything done in the Senate the next 22 months.

(01-15-2019 06:48 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Kirsten Gillibrand about ready to make her official announcement too. Tons and tons of women this time around on the D side.

Is there any difference between a male socialist and a female socialist?

remember the GOP debates? there were like 11 or 12 up there...

Jeb!

(01-16-2019 11:37 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  Jeb!

(01-12-2019 04:59 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-12-2019 04:17 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Tulsi Gabbard announced the other day. She's just 37 and probably has zero chance of getting anywhere with the bid, but at least she's easy on the eyes.
Julian Castro announced today. He's 44.
So even if those two don't have much hopes for doing much, they are at least lowering the average age of the Democratic field.
Supposedly Kamala Harris will announce officially next weekend to coincide with the MLK holiday. I think she and possibly Biden are the main two for now - maybe Beto too but let's wait a bit on him.

Of those. Gabbard would probably be the one I find least objectionable. At least she appears to be less of a communist than any of the rest.

Hillary is still the democrat I dislike least, other than Joe Manchin who isn't going to run.

Gabbard is the Kamikaze "Democrat" this year. She hates Gays, loves Assad, buys Bitcoin, genuflected to Bannon and Trump for a Cabinet position, parrots Putin's line on globalism, and associates with Golden Dawn. She's probably going to lose her House seat because of the additional scrutiny of her record.

For me, I like that she's in the race. Trumpsi will peel away the stupid and counterproductive Bernie Bro voters (the ones who didn't vote for Hillary in the general and won't vote for a Democrat this time either - a very loud and obnoxious 0.5% of the electorate) and will get no other votes.

Warren and Kamala Harris are going to pull some of the more reasonable Bernie voters.

Between Trumpsi and Harris/Warren, Bernie's base just evaporated.

----

So as things stand right now, here are the candidates

Not going anywhere: Eric Swalwell, Trumpsi Gabbard (stooge), John Delaney, and Richard Ojeda (nuts)

The next Dem nominee will be one of the following: Hickenlooper, Inslee, Warren, Brown, Castro, O'Rourke, Biden, Sanders, Gillibrand, Booker, Klobachar, or Harris

----

I think that Harris, especially if Booker doesn't jump in is looking like a serious contender.

Bloomberg....I think he's probably smart enough to realize that winning the Dem primary when you last held office as a Republican is going to be a bit difficult.

So are there any democrats with a chance to get the nomination who are not radical extremist collectivists/redistributionists?

I use collectivist/redistributionist rather than socialist/communist because I don't want to get into semantic arguments about what is socialist and what is communist. When you start talking about favoring massive redistribution of income and wealth, you are clearly a redistributionist regardless of whatever else you call yourself.

(01-16-2019 08:44 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  So are there any democrats with a chance to get the nomination who are not radical extremist collectivists/redistributionists?

I use collectivist/redistributionist rather than socialist/communist because I don't want to get into semantic arguments about what is socialist and what is communist. When you start talking about favoring massive redistribution of income and wealth, you are clearly a redistributionist regardless of whatever else you call yourself.

I think its perfectly clear it will be one of the one's on Tom's likely list or somebody not on his list.

You know nothing in December, let alone a full year before the Iowa Caucus.