• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democratic Candidate's Debates 2019

“.......Sitting on a sofa on a Sunday afternoon
Going to the candidates' debate
Laugh about it, shout about it
When you've got to choose
Every way you look at this you lose.......” - Paul Simon
 
Jetboogieman said:
Electing Buttigeig would be incredible for a couple of reasons, first of all, having evangelicals absolutely **** a brick, secondly though, what the hell countries like Saudi are gonna do cause they have to deal with him lol.

That’s gonna be a weird situation for the entire ruling class of a country like Saudi and a state visit.
Click to expand...

It would also be incredible because he's probably the absolute least qualified person in the race. Being a mayor of a small city for a few years does very little to prepare a person to be president of the United States. I think his inexperience is really going to show.
 
MrPeanut said:
I think he should've tried to play a role similar to Gillum and Abrams have after their losses. It's hard to get people to believe that you can win if you lose to Ted Cruz.
Click to expand...

Where he lost to Ted Cruz is significant, though. Excitement for O'Rourke was still extremely positive after November, and I clearly remember crowds responding very positively to him. He then went media-AWOL, and I'm not sure if anybody knows why.
 
dcsports said:
It would also be incredible because he's probably the absolute least qualified person in the race.
Click to expand...

...says the Trump supporter.
 
dcsports said:
It would also be incredible because he's probably the absolute least qualified person in the race. Being a mayor of a small city for a few years does very little to prepare a person to be president of the United States. I think his inexperience is really going to show.
Click to expand...

Well gee, we sure wouldn’t want to elect someone without any experience...

trump_stupid.jpg
 
Cardinal said:
I just think it's so weird that after the rock star status he gained from the midterm run, O'Rourke basically became a shut-in.
Click to expand...

He had the full weight of the DNC behind his senate run... but he's now competing against a wide field for that support, against candidates far more qualified, experienced, and connected. He's going to really have to show something to win more in the party to his cause.

Personally, I don't think he has a chance.
 
Cardinal said:
...says the Trump supporter.
Click to expand...

lol -- whoops! Trying to deflect to Trump there?

We're talking about the race for the democrat nomination. But yes, he was far less qualified than Trump when he ran, and certainly after 3ish years of the presidency.

I do stand corrected though. He would likely be the second least qualified after the author running.
 
dcsports said:
lol -- whoops! Trying to deflect to Trump there?
Click to expand...

I'm just illustrating what is obvious to everybody, which is that if you're a trump supporter, you have zero credibility for pointing out literally anything you perceive as a shortcoming in anyone.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Well gee, we sure wouldn’t want to elect someone without any experience...
Click to expand...

See my other post. More deflection here.

And for the record (as I've said many times before) I didn't put Trump in the category of qualified when he ran. Neither is half the democrat field this round.
 
Jay59 said:
The first debate will be on two nights, 26 and 27 June 2019. Here is an article laying out all the details.
The First 2020 Democratic Debate Is Almost Here. Here’s Everything You Need to Know

There is a large field of candidates, requiring two groups. This is the group for the 26th

Elizabeth Warren
Beto O'Rourke
Cory Booker
Julián Castro
Tulsi Gabbard
Jay Inslee
Amy Klobuchar
Bill de Blasio
John Delaney
Tim Ryan

For the 27th

Joe Biden
Bernie Sanders
Pete Buttigieg
Kamala Harris
Kirsten Gillibrand
Michael Bennet
Marianne Williamson
Eric Swalwell
Andrew Yang
John Hickenlooper

Elizabeth Warren gets the soft draw. This may be good, because she can stand out, but she will not get to face her principal opposition.
Bernie, Biden, Buttigieg and Harris headline the second debate. This could cause fireworks. Harris desperately needs momentum. Buttigieg can show he belongs. Biden has chance to staunch the bleeding. Bernie has a stage and a podium.

This is just the first round. More is coming and the participation standards get tougher.
Click to expand...

I'd watch that ****...if only for the laughs. It'd be like watching a Benny Hill skit.
 
Cardinal said:
I don't think it's so hard if a candidate has a compelling message. I believe Warren will have little difficulty standing out, but in the second debate I believe it'll primarily be a contest between Buttigieg and Sanders.
Click to expand...

I think , at least for the first debates, that there are so many candidates, that it will be very difficult for anybody (and especially Warren) to make a compelling case regarding the merits of her plans. I think most of the debate will be a competition among candidates regarding who among them will tell the best jokes, punchlines and and smart** comments.
 
pamak said:
I think , at least for the first debates, that there are so many candidates, that it will be very difficult for anybody (and especially Warren) to make a compelling case regarding the merits of her plans. I think most of the debate will be a competition among candidates regarding who among them will tell the best jokes, punchlines and and smart** comments.
Click to expand...

In every election there is a field of candidates, and the one that people find most compelling rises above the others. That's how it's always worked, and that's how it will work now. There's nothing strange about this.
 
Cardinal said:
I'm just illustrating what is obvious to everybody, which is that if you're a trump supporter, you have zero credibility for pointing out literally anything you perceive as a shortcoming in anyone.
Click to expand...

Um.. ok. You can deflect and lapse into assumption and personal attack. I expected more from you.

You can make your own assessment if you like. What would you consider appropriate experience for someone running for president?
 
dcsports said:
Um.. ok. You can deflect and lapse into assumption and personal attack. I expected more from you.

You can make your own assessment if you like. What would you consider appropriate experience for someone running for president?
Click to expand...

I would consider that if you're a trump supporter, you have no credibility for talking about "experience."
 
dcsports said:
Um.. ok. You can deflect and lapse into assumption and personal attack. I expected more from you.

You can make your own assessment if you like. What would you consider appropriate experience for someone running for president?
Click to expand...

for this exercise lets focus on Bernie

lgk9atz5u2631.png
 
Cardinal said:
I would consider that if you're a trump supporter, you have no credibility for talking about "experience."
Click to expand...

He's not wrong though.

And in light of the scandal concerning Ryan O'Neill, I wouldn't consider even his mayorship an unqualified success.
 
Cardinal said:
Where he lost to Ted Cruz is significant, though. Excitement for O'Rourke was still extremely positive after November, and I clearly remember crowds responding very positively to him. He then went media-AWOL, and I'm not sure if anybody knows why.
Click to expand...

Buttigieg certainly took a lot of the spotlight from him. I think a decent amount of people thought Beto should've ran for Senate in 2020 as well. He will probably make some small gains when the debates roll around.
 
MrPeanut said:
Buttigieg certainly took a lot of the spotlight from him. I think a decent amount of people thought Beto should've ran for Senate in 2020 as well. He will probably make some small gains when the debates roll around.
Click to expand...

O'Rourke decided to no longer do any tv. That was not wise.
 
Cardinal said:
In every election there is a field of candidates, and the one that people find most compelling rises above the others. That's how it's always worked, and that's how it will work now. There's nothing strange about this.
Click to expand...

Yes, but I do not agree that this rise is related to candidates being more successful than others in describing their political plans. Unfortunately, most of the game is about projecting a persona and attitude which has little to do with cerebral explanations of complicated political plans.. So, yes, Warren seems to be more cerebral than anybody else, and actually I like her the most. I think she does the right thing to focus on describing her policies, but I am not sure if this is the correct thing in winning an election!
 
Surrealistik said:
He's not wrong though.

And in light of the scandal concerning Ryan O'Neill, I wouldn't consider even his mayorship an unqualified success.
Click to expand...

Which of the Democratic candidates is your personal favorite?
 
MrPeanut said:
He intentionally did that because he wanted to relaunch the campaign right?
Click to expand...

If that was his strategy then it almost certainly backfired. Unlike his race in Texas, there are several good candidates he will be competing with, all of whom have been getting increasing notoriety, whereas O'Rourke is now starting from scratch.

Yes, there is an argument to be made that that is a good thing for him. I'm well aware that the candidates on top early on have a greater chance of being pulled down. I just don't think that particular dynamic will work for O'Rourke here. He created the impression that he wasn't a serious candidate.

But there's nearly a year until the Primary and a lot can happen. We'll see.
 
pamak said:
Yes, but I do not agree that this rise is related to candidates being more successful than others in describing their political plans. Unfortunately, most of the game is about projecting a persona and attitude which has little to do with cerebral explanations of complicated political plans.. So, yes, Warren seems to be more cerebral than anybody else, and actually I like her the most. I think she does the right thing to focus on describing her policies, but I am not sure if this is the correct thing in winning an election!
Click to expand...

Projecting a persona is part of how this works. You're not just electing a policy. You're also electing a human being.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom