Kamala Harris 2020 campaign megathread (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 22, 2024, 09:29:54 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2020 U.S. Presidential Election (Moderators: Likely Voter, YE)
  Kamala Harris 2020 campaign megathread (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Kamala Harris 2020 campaign megathread  (Read 127369 times)
Deleted User #4049
MT2030
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 386
United States
« on: January 21, 2019, 12:32:51 PM »

Wall Street and the 1% are having a ball. Their girl is in.
They'll be even more excited when pharma Booker runs.
Logged
Deleted User #4049
MT2030
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 386
United States
« Reply #1 on: January 23, 2019, 08:36:58 PM »

2008 Hillary was the opposite of 2016 Hillary.
Logged
Deleted User #4049
MT2030
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 386
United States
« Reply #2 on: January 24, 2019, 02:38:21 PM »

If Clintons want her as a frontrunner, that is good.

You really want that second term for Trump?

Progressives are kind of annoying sometimes, not only on this forum. I am a mod on a Polish forum about American politics, and few days ago incidentally someone (who identifies on this forum as a kind of progressive, but not a Democrat like me, just independent progressive) began discussion about "how Bernie would win in 2016", and few peoples joined her (that person is a woman), and I was the only one not-progressive Democrat who presented that Bernie wouldn't have won 2016 elections if chosen nominee.

Kamala and Biden (if he'll run) or maybe Castro and maaaaaybe Beto (if he'll run) are the only ones who are, let's say, federally electable candidates among those who have real chances in this primary. I mean, progressives are making huge gains, breaking glass ceilings one after another (Bernie in 2016, AOC etc.) but from my mainstream POV (with little assistance of certain electoral nuances in America) they are not capable to also win in Bronx, New York City or Vermont or San Francisco or DC, let's say, but also in more rural America like Kansas, Iowa, Missouri or rural Virginia (2017 VA GOV primaries showed that or IL-3 primary, Dan Lipinski's district), and whole, I mean, whole Democratic Party needs a candidate who will be most federally electable or who will be a bridge linking mainstream and progressive elements (like KH does). Progressives can be nationwide electable in 10 or more years, when things like 15$ minimum wage or Medicare-for-all or at least further reforms of healthcare will be impacting not only New York City or Seattle or San Francisco, but also Kansas City, Oklahoma City or Little Rock. That needs some time, time to enact it and time to get people used to it, to understand the changes, to simply get to knew that I can benefit from ex. 15$ minimum wage, like I can benefit from ACA or end of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell Policy" when in military and breaking these glass ceilings don't mean that progressives must act against Eleven Commandment in politics (not to criticize other party members). Especially in these polarized, partisan times.

A third wayer lost the last Presidential election despite massively outspending her reality star opponent who was less popular than Goldwater, and polls showed Bernie doing much better against Trump, but you still think that progressives are the unelectable ones? The American people want to to vote for someone who talks about the issues and doesn't suck on them, not the vapid third wayers that the Democratic party loves to nominate.

You're almost right but not quite. American voters don't want to hear specific policies, they want a clear vision that they agree with. Bernie presented a strong and clear vision for America, so did Trump, Hillary did not.
Logged
Deleted User #4049
MT2030
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 386
United States
« Reply #3 on: January 24, 2019, 02:56:32 PM »


You're almost right but not quite. American voters don't want to hear specific policies, they want a clear vision that they agree with. Bernie presented a strong and clear vision for America, so did Trump, Hillary did not.

Gimme a break.  Hillary most certainly did present a strong, clear vision for America--the Democratic vision of fairness, inclusion, equality, and opportunity. Not enough voters found that vision as compelling as the regressive, nativist hate espoused by the Trump campaign, but the vision, and the choice, was clear.
"America is already great" is not a strong, clear vision. Wonky lists of policies and making small tweaks around the edges of our currently existing system, is not a strong, clear vision.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 12 queries.