(Dems).. Do you think '20 Dem Ticket should include...

[GoTfan]

Identity politics is the definition of this question. How about what people are on the actual issues?

3rd wayers do their best to avoid the issues, because they suck so badly on them.

You are both completely off base, but you are both white males so anything that remotely revolves around representation for other groups must seem foreign to you. If you really think advocating for a racially or gender diverse ticket means putting some unqualified, incompetent hack that "sucks on the issues" on board then you aren't wrapped too tight.

So because they're white males, they're automatically racist?

That is actually pretty racist in and of itself.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Identity politics is the definition of this question. How about what people are on the actual issues?

3rd wayers do their best to avoid the issues, because they suck so badly on them.

You are both completely off base, but you are both white males so anything that remotely revolves around representation for other groups must seem foreign to you. If you really think advocating for a racially or gender diverse ticket means putting some unqualified, incompetent hack that "sucks on the issues" on board then you aren't wrapped too tight.

So your plan is to run some neoliberal identity politics that attacks white males for being born white males and then expect the votes of white male progressives? Good luck with that.

Of course I'm sure if it's Joe Biden vs Tulsi Gabbard, there will suddenly be crickets from the identity politics people as they talk about how we need the most experience candidate. You are such hypocrites.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Tom Steyer/Althea Garrison

[Spiffy]

Other than Oprah I’m not sure which serious potential candidate who happens to be a woman or minority isn’t already qualified and competent enough to be president. I feel like the implication with questions like these is often that the only reason a woman or minority might be on the ticket is to satisfy some sort of quota that Democrats demand, rather than that they have earned it.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Identity politics is the definition of this question. How about what people are on the actual issues?

3rd wayers do their best to avoid the issues, because they suck so badly on them.

You are both completely off base, but you are both white males so anything that remotely revolves around representation for other groups must seem foreign to you. If you really think advocating for a racially or gender diverse ticket means putting some unqualified, incompetent hack that "sucks on the issues" on board then you aren't wrapped too tight.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Identity politics is the definition of this question. How about what people are on the actual issues?

3rd wayers do their best to avoid the issues, because they suck so badly on them.

You are both completely off base, but you are both white males so anything that remotely revolves around representation for other groups must seem foreign to you. If you really think advocating for a racially or gender diverse ticket means putting some unqualified, incompetent hack that "sucks on the issues" on board then you aren't wrapped too tight.

So your plan is to run some neoliberal identity politics that attacks white males for being born white males and then expect the votes of white male progressives? Good luck with that.

Of course I'm sure if it's Joe Biden vs Tulsi Gabbard, there will suddenly be crickets from the identity politics people as they talk about how we need the most experience candidate. You are such hypocrites.

And stop acting as if the bolded is any different than you expecting black people to give 90 percent of our vote to Bernie Sanders in 2020 while he ignores our issues and tends to the "white working class". LOL.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Identity politics is the definition of this question. How about what people are on the actual issues?

3rd wayers do their best to avoid the issues, because they suck so badly on them.

You are both completely off base, but you are both white males so anything that remotely revolves around representation for other groups must seem foreign to you. If you really think advocating for a racially or gender diverse ticket means putting some unqualified, incompetent hack that "sucks on the issues" on board then you aren't wrapped too tight.

So because they're white males, they're automatically racist?

That is actually pretty racist in and of itself.

Where did I say they were racist? LOL. Goodbye.

Identity politics is the definition of this question. How about what people are on the actual issues?

3rd wayers do their best to avoid the issues, because they suck so badly on them.

You are both completely off base, but you are both white males so anything that remotely revolves around representation for other groups must seem foreign to you. If you really think advocating for a racially or gender diverse ticket means putting some unqualified, incompetent hack that "sucks on the issues" on board then you aren't wrapped too tight.

......

Yawn.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Identity politics is the definition of this question. How about what people are on the actual issues?

3rd wayers do their best to avoid the issues, because they suck so badly on them.

You are both completely off base, but you are both white males so anything that remotely revolves around representation for other groups must seem foreign to you. If you really think advocating for a racially or gender diverse ticket means putting some unqualified, incompetent hack that "sucks on the issues" on board then you aren't wrapped too tight.

So your plan is to run some neoliberal identity politics that attacks white males for being born white males and then expect the votes of white male progressives? Good luck with that.

Of course I'm sure if it's Joe Biden vs Tulsi Gabbard, there will suddenly be crickets from the identity politics people as they talk about how we need the most experience candidate. You are such hypocrites.

And stop acting as if the bolded is any different than you expecting black people to give 90 percent of our vote to Bernie Sanders in 2020 while he ignores our issues and tends to the "white working class". LOL.

The SNCC organizer would have done at least as well with them as the Goldwater girl who talked about superpredators.

[Beet]

There should be at least one woman on the ticket, but only if the woman is the best person for the position. Given the female candidate talent out there, I'm virtually certain that will be the case.

I wish we had a competent woman running in 2016. Unfortunately Hillary's machine scared away most of the competition. Fortunately the field is open now.

Hillary never prevented anyone from running. If Martin O'Malley could run, if Sanders could run, so could any other of them. Stop trying to blame everything on Hillary. Hillary is awesome.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

Identity politics is the definition of this question. How about what people are on the actual issues?

3rd wayers do their best to avoid the issues, because they suck so badly on them.

You are both completely off base, but you are both white males so anything that remotely revolves around representation for other groups must seem foreign to you. If you really think advocating for a racially or gender diverse ticket means putting some unqualified, incompetent hack that "sucks on the issues" on board then you aren't wrapped too tight.

So your plan is to run some neoliberal identity politics that attacks white males for being born white males and then expect the votes of white male progressives? Good luck with that.

Of course I'm sure if it's Joe Biden vs Tulsi Gabbard, there will suddenly be crickets from the identity politics people as they talk about how we need the most experience candidate. You are such hypocrites.

And stop acting as if the bolded is any different than you expecting black people to give 90 percent of our vote to Bernie Sanders in 2020 while he ignores our issues and tends to the "white working class". LOL.

The SNCC organizer would have done at least as well with them as the Goldwater girl who talked about superpredators.

If the worst thing she ever did was support a right-wing presidential candidate when she was a teenager, she must be a saint. Also of course Sanders would do about as well with black voters as HRC did, but he would get lower turnout from them most likely.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Identity politics is the definition of this question. How about what people are on the actual issues?

3rd wayers do their best to avoid the issues, because they suck so badly on them.

You are both completely off base, but you are both white males so anything that remotely revolves around representation for other groups must seem foreign to you. If you really think advocating for a racially or gender diverse ticket means putting some unqualified, incompetent hack that "sucks on the issues" on board then you aren't wrapped too tight.

So your plan is to run some neoliberal identity politics that attacks white males for being born white males and then expect the votes of white male progressives? Good luck with that.

Of course I'm sure if it's Joe Biden vs Tulsi Gabbard, there will suddenly be crickets from the identity politics people as they talk about how we need the most experience candidate. You are such hypocrites.

And stop acting as if the bolded is any different than you expecting black people to give 90 percent of our vote to Bernie Sanders in 2020 while he ignores our issues and tends to the "white working class". LOL.

The SNCC organizer would have done at least as well with them as the Goldwater girl who talked about superpredators.

If the worst thing she ever did was support a right-wing presidential candidate when she was a teenager, she must be a saint. Also of course Sanders would do about as well with black voters as HRC did, but he would get lower turnout from them most likely.

The Hillary campaign assumed they would get the same turnout as Obama. That obviously didn't happen. I don't see why turnout would have been lower with Bernie. Bernie would have done much more for poor minorities than Hillary.

[YE]

Identity politics is the definition of this question. How about what people are on the actual issues?

3rd wayers do their best to avoid the issues, because they suck so badly on them.

You are both completely off base, but you are both white males so anything that remotely revolves around representation for other groups must seem foreign to you. If you really think advocating for a racially or gender diverse ticket means putting some unqualified, incompetent hack that "sucks on the issues" on board then you aren't wrapped too tight.

So your plan is to run some neoliberal identity politics that attacks white males for being born white males and then expect the votes of white male progressives? Good luck with that.

Of course I'm sure if it's Joe Biden vs Tulsi Gabbard, there will suddenly be crickets from the identity politics people as they talk about how we need the most experience candidate. You are such hypocrites.

And stop acting as if the bolded is any different than you expecting black people to give 90 percent of our vote to Bernie Sanders in 2020 while he ignores our issues and tends to the "white working class". LOL.

The SNCC organizer would have done at least as well with them as the Goldwater girl who talked about superpredators.

I'm pretty sure he viewed Clinton as a lesser of two evils. When I first started positing, I thought he was an establishment hack, but over time, I think I understand his viewpoints (or more broadly speaking, and I say this as a white male, why Bernie struggled with the black vote) a little better. I could be wrong, but I don't think he trusts Bernie as much as say Kamala Harris to take action on racial issues, and to him, Bernie is just some old white dude from a rural white state that yells a lot on the debate stage, and feels that Bernie's appeal to the working class is ignoring those issues. Of course, I disagree (I think Bernie wants us to put aside the cultural war issues that overall have contributed to the current levels of polarization to try to bring people together by making a case for voters to vote their self-economic interest), but given that Bernie is basically trying to politically transform the system, I see how someone in his shoes can be skeptical, given how horrible they've been treated in past political realignments.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

Identity politics is the definition of this question. How about what people are on the actual issues?

3rd wayers do their best to avoid the issues, because they suck so badly on them.

You are both completely off base, but you are both white males so anything that remotely revolves around representation for other groups must seem foreign to you. If you really think advocating for a racially or gender diverse ticket means putting some unqualified, incompetent hack that "sucks on the issues" on board then you aren't wrapped too tight.

So your plan is to run some neoliberal identity politics that attacks white males for being born white males and then expect the votes of white male progressives? Good luck with that.

Of course I'm sure if it's Joe Biden vs Tulsi Gabbard, there will suddenly be crickets from the identity politics people as they talk about how we need the most experience candidate. You are such hypocrites.

And stop acting as if the bolded is any different than you expecting black people to give 90 percent of our vote to Bernie Sanders in 2020 while he ignores our issues and tends to the "white working class". LOL.

The SNCC organizer would have done at least as well with them as the Goldwater girl who talked about superpredators.

If the worst thing she ever did was support a right-wing presidential candidate when she was a teenager, she must be a saint. Also of course Sanders would do about as well with black voters as HRC did, but he would get lower turnout from them most likely.

The Hillary campaign assumed they would get the same turnout as Obama. That obviously didn't happen. I don't see why turnout would have been lower with Bernie. Bernie would have done much more for poor minorities than Hillary.

It doesn't matter what you, a coastal elite white bro living in California, think he would have done more for poor minorities. This was obviously not the way poor blacks in the Democratic primary percieved him, considering he got wrecked among black voters in most states.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Identity politics is the definition of this question. How about what people are on the actual issues?

3rd wayers do their best to avoid the issues, because they suck so badly on them.

You are both completely off base, but you are both white males so anything that remotely revolves around representation for other groups must seem foreign to you. If you really think advocating for a racially or gender diverse ticket means putting some unqualified, incompetent hack that "sucks on the issues" on board then you aren't wrapped too tight.

So your plan is to run some neoliberal identity politics that attacks white males for being born white males and then expect the votes of white male progressives? Good luck with that.

Of course I'm sure if it's Joe Biden vs Tulsi Gabbard, there will suddenly be crickets from the identity politics people as they talk about how we need the most experience candidate. You are such hypocrites.

And stop acting as if the bolded is any different than you expecting black people to give 90 percent of our vote to Bernie Sanders in 2020 while he ignores our issues and tends to the "white working class". LOL.

The SNCC organizer would have done at least as well with them as the Goldwater girl who talked about superpredators.

If the worst thing she ever did was support a right-wing presidential candidate when she was a teenager, she must be a saint. Also of course Sanders would do about as well with black voters as HRC did, but he would get lower turnout from them most likely.

The Hillary campaign assumed they would get the same turnout as Obama. That obviously didn't happen. I don't see why turnout would have been lower with Bernie. Bernie would have done much more for poor minorities than Hillary.

It doesn't matter what you, a coastal elite white bro living in California, think he would have done more for poor minorities. This was obviously not the way poor blacks in the Democratic primary percieved him, considering he got wrecked among black voters in most states.

They kept talking about how Obama did poorly with Hispanics during the  2008 primary, and then he won the big time in the general.

[Beet]

After the 2008 election a chorus of Hillary Clinton critics suggested African Americans hated her. I pointed out again and again that if you looked at the polls, she was very popular with black Americans. It wasn't that they disliked Hillary; they just liked Obama more. But now people, like amnesiacs with no memory of history, are making the same mistake. Bernie has 73 percent favorables with black voters; he is liked. His civil rights work is appreciated. They just liked Hillary Clinton more.

As far as the black electorate, I really feel they should diversify and stop giving the Democrats 90 percent of their vote. No matter how well intentioned the Democrats, that kind of bloc voting almost guarantees an attitude of being taken for granted. In some ways black voters had more leverage in 1948 and 1960, when they were an important urban swing group, than they do today. Further, monolithic ethnic voting tends to create the impression that politics break down along ethnic tribalism, which actually reinforces racist attitudes. That's my worry with the Kamala Harrises and Cory Bookers. We need ethnic depolarization as a part of national healing from this divisive time.

[GoTfan]

Identity politics is the definition of this question. How about what people are on the actual issues?

3rd wayers do their best to avoid the issues, because they suck so badly on them.

You are both completely off base, but you are both white males so anything that remotely revolves around representation for other groups must seem foreign to you. If you really think advocating for a racially or gender diverse ticket means putting some unqualified, incompetent hack that "sucks on the issues" on board then you aren't wrapped too tight.

So because they're white males, they're automatically racist?

That is actually pretty racist in and of itself.

Where did I say they were racist? LOL. Goodbye.

Identity politics is the definition of this question. How about what people are on the actual issues?

3rd wayers do their best to avoid the issues, because they suck so badly on them.

You are both completely off base, but you are both white males so anything that remotely revolves around representation for other groups must seem foreign to you. If you really think advocating for a racially or gender diverse ticket means putting some unqualified, incompetent hack that "sucks on the issues" on board then you aren't wrapped too tight.

......

Yawn.

Your hatred of whites has reached some pretty insane levels.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Identity politics is the definition of this question. How about what people are on the actual issues?

3rd wayers do their best to avoid the issues, because they suck so badly on them.

You are both completely off base, but you are both white males so anything that remotely revolves around representation for other groups must seem foreign to you. If you really think advocating for a racially or gender diverse ticket means putting some unqualified, incompetent hack that "sucks on the issues" on board then you aren't wrapped too tight.

So because they're white males, they're automatically racist?

That is actually pretty racist in and of itself.

Where did I say they were racist? LOL. Goodbye.

Identity politics is the definition of this question. How about what people are on the actual issues?

3rd wayers do their best to avoid the issues, because they suck so badly on them.

You are both completely off base, but you are both white males so anything that remotely revolves around representation for other groups must seem foreign to you. If you really think advocating for a racially or gender diverse ticket means putting some unqualified, incompetent hack that "sucks on the issues" on board then you aren't wrapped too tight.

......

Yawn.

Your hatred of whites has reached some pretty insane levels.

Yes, I hate whites so much that I have a username inspired by a white man and every candidate I am supporting this year with the exception of Stacey Abrams is white. LOL.

[Rookie Yinzer]

I'm pretty sure he viewed Clinton as a lesser of two evils. When I first started positing, I thought he was an establishment hack, but over time, I think I understand his viewpoints (or more broadly speaking, and I say this as a white male, why Bernie struggled with the black vote) a little better. I could be wrong, but I don't think he trusts Bernie as much as say Kamala Harris to take action on racial issues, and to him, Bernie is just some old white dude from a rural white state that yells a lot on the debate stage, and feels that Bernie's appeal to the working class is ignoring those issues. Of course, I disagree (I think Bernie wants us to put aside the cultural war issues that overall have contributed to the current levels of polarization to try to bring people together by making a case for voters to vote their self-economic interest), but given that Bernie is basically trying to politically transform the system, I see how someone in his shoes can be skeptical, given how horrible they've been treated in past political realignments.

Bernie Sanders is just not my cup of tea. Some of what you posted is accurate in regards to how I feel.

I did not want to vote for Hillary Clinton. She was what was on the ballot, and as a black American, I do not feel that I have a position to be a purist snob. So I supported her. I guess according to this forum that makes me a neoliberal, capitalist shill. LOL. I am not even sure why the poster brought her up while addressing me. She lost and I have moved on.

And I do not hate white males. Sherrod Brown and Steve Bullock are my top two choices for 2020. I just expect the Democratic Party to place an "other" on the ticket alongside them. Minority communities have consistently had to vote overwhelmingly for candidates, even when they do not speak to us directly or outright hostile to us. Asking for a qualified person who can provide a different perspective does not seem like a big ask to me. Let the best man or woman win the nomination, but choose a VP accordingly. 

[dw93]

Ideally we should work towards a diverse ticket, but not just in a sense of race or sex. It should be diverse regionally and ideologically as well. While overall I don't think Tim Kaine was the worst possible pick (and he did and still does seem likeable on a personal level IMHO), it was still flawed and it was flawed because there was no ideological balance on the ticket. We also can't have two candidates from the coasts on the same ticket again. We need someone from the rust belt or the west on the ticket, preferably the rust belt as winning WI, MI, and PA back is crucial.

[Cold War Liberal]

Your hatred of whites has reached some pretty insane levels.

"Guys as white people you probably can't quite wrap your head around how important representation is to minorities"

"OMG YOU HATE ALL WHITE PEOPLE"

[OSR STANDS WITH PALESTINE]

Kennedy III/Harris 2020

[The Govanah Jake]

No and I'll stress this again: I, and I hope everyone votes off the actual policy of a canidate. I don't vote off their identity.

[ViaActiva]

I used to have some sympathy with the 'we should pick people based on their qualifications/capability and not their identity' line of argument, but at the same time so many women and minorities are overlooked (through either conscious or unconscious bias or lack of confidence on their part) when they clearly are capable and have likely overcome more hurdles in their life to reach their position. Politics in both sides of the Atlantic is full of mediocre white middle class men who receive no way near the level of abuse and criticism directed at women and minorities, while more talented individuals from a range of backgrounds could have succeeded with more opportunities/aspirations.

I just can't see how the Democrats nominating two men would be tenable in this environment. When 50% of the population has been underrepresented for so long not to have female representation for one of the two highest offices just seems plain odd.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I used to have some sympathy with the 'we should pick people based on their qualifications/capability and not their identity' line of argument, but at the same time so many women and minorities are overlooked (through either conscious or unconscious bias or lack of confidence on their part) when they clearly are capable and have likely overcome more hurdles in their life to reach their position. Politics in both sides of the Atlantic is full of mediocre white middle class men who receive no way near the level of abuse and criticism directed at women and minorities, while more talented individuals from a range of backgrounds could have succeeded with more opportunities/aspirations.

I just can't see how the Democrats nominating two men would be tenable in this environment. When 50% of the population has been underrepresented for so long not to have female representation for one of the two highest offices just seems plain odd.

We've never had a non Christian President, and yet no one used that as an argument for Bernie. 3rd way is so selective in their use of identity politics.

[Sestak]

I used to have some sympathy with the 'we should pick people based on their qualifications/capability and not their identity' line of argument, but at the same time so many women and minorities are overlooked (through either conscious or unconscious bias or lack of confidence on their part) when they clearly are capable and have likely overcome more hurdles in their life to reach their position. Politics in both sides of the Atlantic is full of mediocre white middle class men who receive no way near the level of abuse and criticism directed at women and minorities, while more talented individuals from a range of backgrounds could have succeeded with more opportunities/aspirations.

I just can't see how the Democrats nominating two men would be tenable in this environment. When 50% of the population has been underrepresented for so long not to have female representation for one of the two highest offices just seems plain odd.

We've never had a non Christian President, and yet no one used that as an argument for Bernie. 3rd way is so selective in their use of identity politics.

This is actually a valid point.

Though I'd argue Trump only pretends to be Christian.