2020 Election Thread

[Ordos]

4 hours ago, Taylor said:

Someone posted about this guy a few months ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seth_Moulton

He's super young (38, which is basically infant age for politicians), but he's a Democrat and former Marine who might appeal to both millennials and blue-collar folks. 

Yeah, he'd be an interesting candidate. I think he or Bullock could be a reasonable play on their part (which guarantees those idiots won't do it). 

@mtangelsfan I don't know enough about Bullock from the outside. What do you think of him?

[Tank]

6 hours ago, RallyMo said:

You gonna vote for Trump?

Nope. You?

[Tank]

2 hours ago, mrwicked said:

You mean Chelsea?

She'll be running soon, guaranteed.

Ugh.

Her or her mom. But yeah, this family craves power and the spotlight, so I imagine we're not done with this family just yet.

[Spirit]

2020.  Yet another opportunity to #SlipAJohnsonIntoTheWhiteHouse

 

 

[Tank]

6 hours ago, Jason said:

Hello!

This could be one of the best matchings of name (wildebeest) with picture on this website. Standing ovation, Jason.

[red321]

2 hours ago, Geoff said:

2020.  Yet another opportunity to #SlipAJohnsonIntoTheWhiteHouse

 

 

Maybe he can top 3.5 percent of the vote in 2020. Did he actually beat Stein?

[Blarg]

3 hours ago, Geoff said:

2020.  Yet another opportunity to #SlipAJohnsonIntoTheWhiteHouse

 

 

There isn't enough Viagra in the world to move Johnson's pole upwards.

Edited August 10, 2017 by Blarg

[mtangelsfan]

Maybe if they let him in the debates.  But the system is rigged

[Blarg]

He pretty much talked himself out of the election with Alepo. Putting him on stage to take more than a, what's your favorite color, question (which he will probably muff) will just expose how much of a dimwit he is.

Edited August 10, 2017 by Blarg

[Spirit]

10 hours ago, red321 said:

Maybe he can top 3.5 percent of the vote in 2020. Did he actually beat Stein?

 

"Other" beat Stein.

 

 

[Spirit]

9 hours ago, Blarg said:

He pretty much talked himself out of the election with Alepo. Putting him on stage to take more than a, what's your favorite color, question (which he will probably muff) will just expose how much of a dimwit he is.

 

Really?   I wish I could come up with a good example to show that saying something dumb or crazy doesn't prevent a person from becoming POTUS.  I mean, I'm sure there's a good example out there, but I'm just stuck! 

 

[Glen]

19 hours ago, gotbeer said:

If that is Calolfornia's own Kamala Harris.  All the opposition would have to play is the cluelessness of the Dems, where said clueless Dem asked during the potential CIA directors nomination hearing, what is his position on the environment.  Not only did she ask.  But kept pressing him when he didn't answer.

 

After 2016 the dems should (I say should but I know it's not the truth) be able to run whomever they goddamned want to and if the republicans say anything negative the response should be "Trump is the republican president."  Anything negative you can say about any candidate on either side will have already been far surpassed by Trump, and he got elected.

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

9 minutes ago, Glen said:

 

After 2016 the dems should (I say should but I know it's not the truth) be able to run whomever they goddamned want to and if the republicans say anything negative the response should be "Trump is the republican president."  Anything negative you can say about any candidate on either side will have already been far surpassed by Trump, and he got elected.

They can do and say whatever they want but pointing to Trump has very little to do with winning an election as 2016 showed.  Either side can say whatever they want and try to distance themselves from Trump as much as possible but it's going to come down to middle America and the battle ground states.  Maybe the newest group of voters lean more left center than right center and as Trump showed anything really is possible but I still can't imagine those voters would relate to someone like Harris.  The dems need to get away from a candidate that's anything like Hillary - someone average people don't relate to or can't even say "hell I'd at least have a beer with him/her."  

 

[mtangelsfan]

Pride goes before a fall.  Learn your lessons libs.  Stop being arrogant.

[Glen]

3 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

Pride goes before a fall.  Learn your lessons libs.  Stop being arrogant.

Yeah, just look to the WH for a perfect example of this. 

[mtangelsfan]

Better keep your eyes on your own party.  

 

[Taylor]

59 minutes ago, Geoff said:

"Other" beat Stein.

Just like TBA beats the Angels on a regular basis.

[floplag]

1 hour ago, mtangelsfan said:

Better keep your eyes on your own party.  

 

Yeah, this... i mean im no Trumpster but ill be damned if i dont see as much batshit on the left as i do the right these days, its just a different kind of crazy and a different group they pander too.  
The Dems still dont understand why they lost, and thats really kinda sad

[Make Angels Great Again]

On 8/10/2017 at 8:25 AM, Glen said:

Yeah, just look to the WH for a perfect example of this. 

 

Yeah, I wonder what led him to be in there?

[gotbeer]

On 8/9/2017 at 7:06 PM, Geoff said:

2020.  Yet another opportunity to #SlipAJohnsonIntoTheWhiteHouse

 

 

I voted for the fcker and I already forgot.  But who was his running mate?  In the small amounts I saw him, he seemed really polished and held his own in questions.

[UndertheHalo]

didn't the democrats fail miserably running on the moderate platform ?  I'm all for it but it didn't work.  Hillary Clintons positions were very moderate relatively.

I have no idea who they'll run in 2020.  theres definitely no early favorite.  I would oppose any one like Kamela Harris or Keith Eliison and unfortunately it seems to me that their stocks are steadily rising.  Their race baiting is not constructive and is just about as bad as alt right racists that have high jacked the GOP.  I've said it before i'll say it again.

 I'm scoring it a W if we aren't in some massive new war by 2020.  i'll worry about 2020 once we get past this Trump hurdle.

Edited August 11, 2017 by UndertheHalo

[red321]

I guess Debbie Downer is about as close as you can get to the ha ha...but secretly worried...laugh

[floplag]

17 hours ago, UndertheHalo said:

didn't the democrats fail miserably running on the moderate platform ?  I'm all for it but it didn't work.  Hillary Clintons positions were very moderate relatively.

I have no idea who they'll run in 2020.  theres definitely no early favorite.  I would oppose any one like Kamela Harris or Keith Eliison and unfortunately it seems to me that their stocks are steadily rising.  Their race baiting is not constructive and is just about as bad as alt right racists that have high jacked the GOP.  I've said it before i'll say it again.

 I'm scoring it a W if we aren't in some massive new war by 2020.  i'll worry about 2020 once we get past this Trump hurdle.

I disagree that Hillary was running on a moderate platform.  She tried to present herself as such to try to appeal to the middle but i felt it was transparent and misrepresented and the party had a very different agenda.  The fact that Pelosi and other are still in power and that some of the names in this thread are getting so much press speaks volumes in that regard as does the fact that they still cant talk about it without bringing up Russia, racism, and sexism when aside from the extremists those things had nothing to do with her loss. 

Lets be honest, the race battle is what got them there.  Politics was no longer about issues, it was about racism.  It was a conscious effort by the Dem party to create that going back to the beginning of Obama and thru his entire administration.  Every single criticism of Obama was met with accusations of racism and dismissed as invalid without even being heard.  
Frankly i blame the Dems for much of the issues today by stoking those fires for political gain. To say its not constructive might be the political understatement of the century.  Racism exists, on both sides, but using it as a tool then calling the other sides nazis is perhaps the most egregious thing i've ever seen in American politics.

[UndertheHalo]

2 hours ago, floplag said:

I disagree that Hillary was running on a moderate platform.  She tried to present herself as such to try to appeal to the middle but i felt it was transparent and misrepresented and the party had a very different agenda.  The fact that Pelosi and other are still in power and that some of the names in this thread are getting so much press speaks volumes in that regard as does the fact that they still cant talk about it without bringing up Russia, racism, and sexism when aside from the extremists those things had nothing to do with her loss. 

Lets be honest, the race battle is what got them there.  Politics was no longer about issues, it was about racism.  It was a conscious effort by the Dem party to create that going back to the beginning of Obama and thru his entire administration.  Every single criticism of Obama was met with accusations of racism and dismissed as invalid without even being heard.  
Frankly i blame the Dems for much of the issues today by stoking those fires for political gain. To say its not constructive might be the political understatement of the century.  Racism exists, on both sides, but using it as a tool then calling the other sides nazis is perhaps the most egregious thing i've ever seen in American politics.

So all of the positions that her campaign laid out in detail was all a sham ? I think that's a reach man.  Of course there are some political items that she has moved around on but she's been in politics for a long time.  How many politicians don't change positions on things ever ? I disagree that the non stop online trolling campaign to disperse lies and grotesque stories about her had nothing to do with her loss. That was it seems very clearly coordinated by Russian intelligence. Americans guzzled down that bullshit and it worked so well that somehow people thought Donald Trump was more fit to be president. 

I think it's sort of interesting that your upset about liberals talking about nazis on a weekend when there are literally white nationalist nazis marching around in the open by the thousands in South Carolina and Virginia.  I can't recall them being this bold in my life time.  I wonder what's changed ? I think it's that an orange haired fuck head is in power and he has subtly validated much of their garbage. 

And to be clear, I'm not accusing you of being supportive of them or anything.  It's just that I don't understand why so many people misinterpret the motivations of some of these right wing fucks.  It's not that complicated for a lot of them.  They're  just vile fucking racists.  

Edited August 12, 2017 by UndertheHalo

[floplag]

7 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

So all of the positions that her campaign laid out in detail was all a sham ? I think that's a reach man.  Of course there are some political items that she has moved around on but she's been in politics for a long time.  How many politicians don't change positions on things ever ? 

I think it's sort of interesting that your upset about liberals talking about nazis on a weekend when there are literally white nationalist nazis marching around in the open by the thousands in South Carolina and Virginia.  I can't recall them being this bold in my life time.  I wonder what's changed ? I think it's that an orange haired fuck head is in power and he has subtly validated much of their garbage. 

And to be clear, I'm not accusing you of being supportive of them or anything.  It's just that I don't understand why so many people misinterpret the motivations of some of these right wing fucks.  It's not that complicated for a lot of them.  Their just vile fucking racists.  

Why did i know that was coming up... I think they are all idiots, these moronic asshats playing wannabee nazi can go straight to hell, right along side those who think they need safe spaces from every white person.  What i see is a lot of people legitimizing racism on one side and crying about it on another as though its somehow different.    

As far as Hillary and her details, no, i didnt believe her at all.   As you say shes been in politics a long time and she said what she needed to say to give the appearance of a platform, but it was all just politics.    What she said, and what she did, didnt line up.  She didnt care at all about anything outside the liberal metro areas, didnt even bother to campaign there, its a simple case of actions speaking louder than words.  Now dont get me wrong i damned sure didnt believe Trump either i knew he was full of shit, but at least he didnt try to lie about it.   No, i didnt vote for him, or her.