• 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!

2020 Dem Female Ticket

I like her too, but she is black, and is a woman. People lost their minds when a black man won president. I think they might spontaneously combust if a black woman wins.



Yes, and who knows what they are doing. I think we have taken this "everybody can be president" experiment a little too far. Shouldn't be too hard to find someone who knows what they are doing, and also has scruples.

Meh, nonsense. I couldn't believe a nobody like Barack won, and that had nothing to do with the color of his skin. If a capable woman of color wants to enter the race and is capable and has a great platform, has experience other than showing up for some votes, by all means, bring it on.
 
I've been most impressed with Senator Warner and Representative Schiff. They aren't stage thrillers, I know, but they've handled themselves very well throughout this investigation process (and, to be frank, I think we could use a quiet Presidency after this crap filled whirlwind). I think for a presidential candidate, I would be fine with Gilibrand or Harris.

Gilibrand is setting herself up for a run, me thinks. Lets see if she does.
 
I can't imagine Rice ever getting on the ticket with a nutjob like Pence (I know it was reported that they were considering it, but I don't buy it). Ideologically he is a mile to the right of her. Moreover, how can you have a working relationship with Pence when you can't even have a private conversation with him? What is he going to do, have his wife come in the Oval Office every time he would need to talk to Rice?

People love Condi, she would be a shoo in.
 
I can't imagine Rice ever getting on the ticket with a nutjob like Pence (I know it was reported that they were considering it, but I don't buy it). Ideologically he is a mile to the right of her. Moreover, how can you have a working relationship with Pence when you can't even have a private conversation with him? What is he going to do, have his wife come in the Oval Office every time he would need to talk to Rice?

Even Pence or his wife wouldn't have issues talking in private with Condi. The woman seems to be above it all. Anyone have any beef with her? Real stuff, not the usual garbage gossip.
 
Its problematic. Gillibrand just sunk herself with the Franken deal, people in MN arent too happy with her. Gabbard might do well as she is a veteran as well. I think anyone from CA, male or female, is going to turn off a lot of people in much needed electoral states. They are just seen as too over the top liberal. Klobuchar might be good and possibly Patty Murray. Winning electorally is now the big thing so it might end up being a Tim Ryan from Ohio or Sherrod Brown needed to top the ticket. I still have visions of those UAW workers in MI saying they would never vote for a woman for president. There is still a lot like that.

My guess is, contrary to what Hillary is spewing, those UAW workers will either vote for a woman because they have one at home, or they are women themselves. Don't let propaganda fool you.
 
Kamala Harris appears increasingly more interested in testing the waters. As much as I like her, she has a polarizing effect on too many GOP voters. I also doubt she can win over enough Independents to win a General Election. If she teamed up with Warren, I do not see that ticket winning in the General Election either.

We need DEM candidates that can successfully navigate the Electoral Map.

Too little national experience, too much ambition combined with too little patience to pay her dues. I like Harris; I voted for her. But she sashayed into DC and after three months on the job, was in front of tv cameras acting as if she was chairman of a major committee, instead of a green freshman senator who'd barely managed to map out congressional restrooms.
 
she's a lightweight in terms of her actual accomplishments but quota lovers dreams. A woman a year behind me in college is being mentioned. I wasn't all that impressed with her in college since she seemed incurious about politics then but she is a labor populist without all the baggage of Lieyawatha and has far more actual intelligence than quota-woman

Amy Klobuchar of Wisconsin.

She could be a very good choice.

I'm a Corey Booker fan myself, but this thread is about us wimmins! :lol:
 
Too little national experience, too much ambition combined with too little patience to pay her dues. I like Harris; I voted for her. But she sashayed into DC and after three months on the job, was in front of tv cameras acting as if she was chairman of a major committee, instead of a green freshman senator who'd barely managed to map out congressional restrooms.

washington d.c. politics is a shark tank, i admire harris's no nonsense attitude.
 
People love Condi, she would be a shoo in.

I agree. However, I don't think she'd consider cleaning up the mess Trump is leaving in his wake. She's much too smart, lol.
 
She could be a very good choice.

I'm a Corey Booker fan myself, but this thread is about us wimmins! :lol:

amy klobuchar is one of the senators from Minnesota, not wisconsin.

turtle is probably confusing amy with Tammy Baldwin.
 
washington d.c. politics is a shark tank, i admire harris's no nonsense attitude.

If she keeps her head down, does her job, and puts herself in the spotlight when appropriate and keeps her mouth shut when it's not, I'd consider voting for her at the end of a strong campaign, one that mirrors my own pet issues, despite being light on national experience.

But IMO, learning the ropes of executive/congressional policy and procedures takes more than a couple of years in a Senate seat (which Californians expected her to fill for her entire term, as she promised).

Bottom line, I'm not automatically voting for anyone in my mind right now; candidates will have to earn my vote, and I don't give a flying fat rat's ass whether there is a (D) or an (R) by their name.
 
If she keeps her head down, does her job, and puts herself in the spotlight when appropriate and keeps her mouth shut when it's not, I'd consider voting for her at the end of a strong campaign, one that mirrors my own pet issues, despite being light on national experience.

But IMO, learning the ropes of executive/congressional policy and procedures takes more than a couple of years in a Senate seat (which Californians expected her to fill for her entire term, as she promised).

Bottom line, I'm not automatically voting for anyone in my mind right now; candidates will have to earn my vote, and I don't give a flying fat rat's ass whether there is a (D) or an (R) by their name.

This nation would be in far better condition if more of us had that attitude.
 
amy klobuchar is one of the senators from Minnesota, not wisconsin.

turtle is probably confusing amy with Tammy Baldwin.

Could be, but I know exactly who Amy Klobuchar is, because I heard about her last year and made a point of watching for her on tv. I'll confess, I didn't know or much care what state she represents now. I care more about her senate record, and if she runs for the nomination, I will be very interested in her platform. She seems smart, savvy, and grounded.
 
amy klobuchar is one of the senators from Minnesota, not wisconsin.

turtle is probably confusing amy with Tammy Baldwin.

why would I confuse someone I knew from College. Now I do get Minnesota and Wisconsin confused -almost weekly.
 
No more celebrities, no more oligarchs, no more gimmicks.
What we need are public servants, and their gender doesn't matter.
Making this or any election about their gender is incredibly stupid.

The time will come when a woman emerges who is clearly the best choice, and we shall have our female president.
But not because she's female, because she's the best choice.
If we flip that around 180, it's a gimmick.
 
Now I do get Minnesota and Wisconsin confused -almost weekly.

Don't.

One has sports teams that matter.

The other does not and deserves to be embarrassed on a national stage every year from here to eternity. ;)
 
Too little national experience, too much ambition combined with too little patience to pay her dues. I like Harris; I voted for her. But she sashayed into DC and after three months on the job, was in front of tv cameras acting as if she was chairman of a major committee, instead of a green freshman senator who'd barely managed to map out congressional restrooms.

I don't want first term Senators either, but this is American politics where we get it backwards by rewarding the newbies with the top job and get picky with our lower ranks. ;)
 
Don't.

One has sports teams that matter.

The other does not and deserves to be embarrassed on a national stage every year from here to eternity. ;)

amusing
 
Hi yankintx, if you mean a centrist within the context of the current Dem party, I disagree with the premise. For example, Kamala Harris or Amy Klobuchar could be considered centrists, but I don't think they are right for these desperate times. The only woman I would support in the primary would be Tulsi Gabbard. But if Bernie runs, I will support him in the primary. My rationale regarding not wanting a centrist at the top of the ticket is based on my belief that the general public is to the left of both parties. But I will concede that a centrist ticket might be able to beat Trump in 2020. But for me it is much more important that we elect a president who will finally do something serious about the climate crisis. Also someone who will roll back the disturbing militarism in the US.

Precisely.

I'm not sure what this baseless fetish with 'centrists' is about, since a Washington centrist indeed doesn't nearly align with independents contrary to a common misconception around DP, and centrism was not enough to save Clinton from ruin; if anything it may have worked against her.

Again, it's telling that the most popular politico today is Bernie Sanders; equally as telling is that his primary platform/policy ideas still have overwhelming support.

As to the primary nominations, I largely agree with you, though I could consider support for Warren despite her seeming to prioritize her party over her policy.


Kamala Harris has tried to masquerade herself in order to appeal to the resurgent progressive/FDR wing but I don't think she'll get far with us, much as I applaud her commitment to singlepayer/Medicare for All; too much baggage, too many red flags:

https://jacobinmag.com/2017/08/kamala-harris-trump-obama-california-attorney-general

https://www.pastemagazine.com/artic...harris-the-establishment-has-its-champio.html


Klobuchar I don't trust: very much beholden to her top donor industries; to start, her OpenSecrets page is jarring so far as the sourcing of her war chest is concerned. Then you've got stuff like her lobbying on behalf of the Schwan Company to ridiculously classify pizza sauce as a 'serving of vegetables', repealing the medical device tax at the behest of Medtronic, one of her biggest donors, an establishment position on Medicare for All, and so on; I simply don't think she has what it takes to defy her sponsors for the greater good of the country. I will note that, as brighter spots go, she did oppose the TPP, and has a very positive rating from the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union.
 
Precisely.

I'm not sure what this baseless fetish with 'centrists' is about, since a Washington centrist indeed doesn't nearly align with independents contrary to a common misconception around DP, and centrism was not enough to save Clinton from ruin; if anything it may have worked against her.

Again, it's telling that the most popular politico today is Bernie Sanders; equally as telling is that his primary platform/policy ideas still have overwhelming support.

As to the primary nominations, I largely agree with you, though I could consider support for Warren despite her seeming to prioritize her party over her policy.


Kamala Harris has tried to masquerade herself in order to appeal to the resurgent progressive/FDR wing but I don't think she'll get far with us, much as I applaud her commitment to singlepayer/Medicare for All; too much baggage, too many red flags:

https://jacobinmag.com/2017/08/kamala-harris-trump-obama-california-attorney-general

https://www.pastemagazine.com/artic...harris-the-establishment-has-its-champio.html


Klobuchar I don't trust: very much beholden to her top donor industries; to start, her OpenSecrets page is jarring so far as the sourcing of her war chest is concerned. Then you've got stuff like her lobbying on behalf of the Schwan Company to ridiculously classify pizza sauce as a 'serving of vegetables', repealing the medical device tax at the behest of Medtronic, one of her biggest donors, an establishment position on Medicare for All, and so on; I simply don't think she has what it takes to defy her sponsors for the greater good of the country. I will note that, as brighter spots go, she did oppose the TPP, and has a very positive rating from the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union.
Another sign for why you may be right.

People are cconvinced Hillary Clinton is a centrist instead of a liberal.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
In the current culture, I thought it may be interesting to see what folks would think of an all female Dem ticket in 2020. I have my own ideas, save for later. Obviously you know who is not an option. This could be a winner for the Dems in 2020 provided the top of the ticket was a centrist and does not come with the name Clinton.
My first thought is who is a centrist amongst all Democrats not just female contenders. Which prominent Dem could, right now, could attract a large swath of independents and pull some from conservatives?
 
In the current culture, I thought it may be interesting to see what folks would think of an all female Dem ticket in 2020. I have my own ideas, save for later. Obviously you know who is not an option. This could be a winner for the Dems in 2020 provided the top of the ticket was a centrist and does not come with the name Clinton.

I can't answer if it might be befitting unless I know who might be on the ticket that would qualify as a centrist.
TIA.
 
Another sign for why you may be right.

People are cconvinced Hillary Clinton is a centrist instead of a liberal.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

She's definitely a centrist as Democrats go, without a doubt; a consummate New/Third Way Dem.

In terms of the west/developed world in its totality, she's right wing.

In terms of the relatively skewed frame of reference of American politicos specifically, she's left of center.
 
She's definitely a centrist as Democrats go, without a doubt; a consummate New/Third Way Dem.

In terms of the west/developed world in its totality, she's right wing.

In terms of the relatively skewed frame of reference of American politicos specifically, she's left of center.

Did Manchin, McCaskill, Donnelly, Heitkamp etc. magically disappear?

It seems so.

Clinton is *not* a centrist. Never has been.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top Bottom