It won't take a white man to defeat Trump, so let's just stop pushing the notion that gender or race should factor in who is the nominee. Warren could easily defeat Trump, because she is progressive, but still pragmatic enough to win over swing voters. Besides that, Trump won by about 70k votes across three states to secure 270 and lost the popular vote by millions, so he's far from being in a position of being that secure against credible candidates.
>the nominee shouldn't be a white male
Did you guys (the Democrats) learn ANYTHING about identity politics from last year's election? This is the one reason I won't join the Democratic Party (and why I endorsed Trump despite being center-left), the f'ing identity politics!
The Democrats need to concentrate on nominating a candidate who appears to be the most experienced, most competent, and most ready to lead. For the Democrats, what was a hopeless negative in 2016 will need to be the biggest positive if they are to dump a sitting President. Nominating a rock star, flavor-of-the-month newcomer will cause them to lose Virginia and Minnesota, in addition to what they lost in 2016.
I'd love to have you back with us, and I wish the party would ignore identity politics, but don't you realize Hillary ran both her campaigns on "most experienced, most competent, and most ready to lead"? I mean, her slogan at one point was literally "ready one Day 1". For one thing, that sort of campaign doesn't inspire strong support. Two, by that standard you should have supported Hillary yourself. The last four presidents (Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump) all ran as outsiders, literally none ran on experience and actually all of them defeated candidates with more experience than them. As I said in the other thread, I think people are more motivated by substantive differences or how the candidate is perceived character wise, than things like experience.
