scrubbedexpat099

Will this be an arranged marriage?

Leslie

I'm different than most people in that I don't care if Hillary or Bernie run again. As long as the fix is not in for any one candidate, anybody who has the money and desire to run should definitely run. Hillary is, IMO, unelectable .... I realized that in 2008 and pissed off a lot of people back then by saying so. By unelectable, I don't mean unqualified. I simply mean she's not a naturally talented politician ... unfortunately that matters more than knowledge or ability. Mike Huckabee is unelectable too but that doesn't stop him from inflicting his tired ass on us every 4 years. I said the same thing about HRC in 2016 and fully expected a Republican victory --- that's why when Trump started emerging as the front runner, the election took a very dark turn for me. I wasn't worried about a Republican winning, there may have even been a couple that I could have voted for, but Trump isn't a Republican.

Leslie

Oh grow up.

robin1234

Leslie

Yeah, I wondered if his heart was ever really in it.

Incidentally, there are apparently 45 potential Democratic candidates.

robin1234

Giantaxe

"Keep your government hands off my Medicare Advantage plan"?

Giantaxe

Meanwhile, back on subject, I'd like to see Amy Klobuchar run. She's been tremendously impressive in the Senate.

Leslie

Indeed. A class act and ten times smarter than most of her counterparts. Will she run?

Giantaxe

North Carolina went this route in 2016 when the Republicans lost the governorship. It's still being litigated apparently. I see Michigan Republicans are doing the same thing. Discussion on FiveThrityEight about it:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...-undemocratic/

BritInParis

The fix being in was the problem last time around. I agree with everything else. In a idealised world Sanders and Trump would've faced off as independents but the bipartisanship nature of US politics means you have to run on one of the two tickets and Sanders got screwed over by the DNC who then treated the election as a coronation which led to Trump. I rather suspect in a straight Sanders v Trump fight that Sanders would've won. But that was then and this is now and 2020 is still two years away. The Dems need fresh blood to take on Trump and someone who can win back the natural Democrat blue collar voters in the swing states.

Hiro11

Mentioning that the de facto leader of the Democratic party, a famously divisive politician, may have some input into selection of the Dem candidate and that involvement may indeed prove divisive hardly seems "gratuitous".

Hiro11

... or I could have been responding to comments earlier in the thread. Sheesh.

Also, hopefully you recognize the hypocrisy of labeling my post as "fear and loathing" while slinging half-thought-through mud. Fear and loathing indeed.

Leslie

Yeah, cause that story that you keep telling yourself really worked out for you in the midterms. Ooooo .... Pelosi .... scary. She's not any more divisive than Mitch MConnell --- are you saying similar things about him? Seriously, get a new act. It's boring.

Her job is to whip votes and raise money. FYI (not that I should be giving you the answers before the quiz) Barack Obama is the de facto leader of the Democratic party. Pelosi is a soldier.

Leslie

Oh I do apologize. I admit to joining the thread recently . Point me to the post in this thread where somebody claimed that Waters is running for president and I'll respond accordingly. I can't find it.

In your post #91 you whined about divisive Democrats and then went on to throw out red meat. Now, if I really wanted to be divisive, every time you bring in gratuitous nonsense, I could point out that (1) the Republican party is dead (2) only a mental defective would have voted for Trump and (3) anybody that still supports him needs to be lobotomized. Now THAT would be divisive.