Who do you see being the Democratic Party frontrunner in 2020? (1 Viewer)

Heathen Saint

"Socially distanced"
VIP Subscribing Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
5,526
Reaction score
7,952
Location
The Desert
Offline
I've always been really partial to Corey Booker. I know he's gotten a lot of flak because of his ties to Clinton, but he's very well liked by the younger generation in/around NJ and to a lesser degree around the US.

Young voters were not completely satisfied with Clinton, heck, some even didn't want her at all, and it showed. Personally, I think a Booker/Warren or Warren/Booker ticket would be particularly fierce.

Short list in no particular order:

Andrew Cuomo--not a fan
Elizabeth Warren
Corey Booker
Tim Kaine--too "nice"
Sen. Sherrod Brown
Julian Castro
Kamala Harris
Martin O'Malley
Michelle Obama--Ok, ok..HIGHLY unlikely, but would be amazing if she ran

Am I leaving out someone? Who do you think will be the frontrunner?
 

RussTKD

Hall-of-Famer
VIP Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2003
Messages
4,875
Reaction score
5,514
Age
49
Offline
Hillary's head would literally explode if Michelle Obama was the first woman POTUS.
 

coldseat

Super Forum Fanatic
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
9,117
Reaction score
15,247
Age
45
Offline
IDK, but this is an interesting opinion article on some lessons the democratic party should learn from the disastrous elections results.

On the surface, it's astounding that a man who ripped off thousands of people who worked for him became the champion of the regular Joe. But, as Bernie Sanders reiterated in a recent podcast with me, the problem is that people have ceased to see a difference between the parties, particularly on economic issues. I'll briefly cite a few examples.

Starting out with NAFTA, Bill Clinton forced "free trade" upon the party. I warned multiple times during the election that Trump would make inroads with voters in the Rust Belt unless Democrats made a clean break from corporate trade deals. Around the globe, these deals are a key tool to drive down wages, exploit workers and prosecute global class warfare. But, the current president still serves up the malarkey about the benefits of these deals.

Bill Clinton's broader economic agenda was even more corrosive. During Clinton's so-called "good economy," the decline of organized labor continued. The president, and his secretary of labor, Robert Reich, did very little to arrest the decline.

No Democratic president was more focused on letting business interests off the leash. He gave more power to media companies, triggering consolidation and a powerful wave of concentration of the media into a few hands. The average person, not steeped in policy, understood this every time he or she opened their skyrocketing cable bills.

Hand-in-glove with Wall Street, Clinton got rid of the Glass Steagall Act, which removed the separation between commercial banks, insurers and investment banks, allowing the self-dealing manipulation of mortgages and interest rates and accelerating the shifting of huge wealth into the hands of a few.

Again, the average person, just trying to make ends meet, eventually got the sharpest end of that spear when millions of people lost their homes, jobs and retirement in the thundering collapse known as the Great Recession, which, for many, has been a depression.
Democratic Party must burn for a new start - CNN.com

He has a point. No doubt this was a huge part of Clinton's undoing.
 

FuzzyDunlop

waste of paint
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
2,096
Reaction score
3,926
Offline
Elizabeth Warren. I'm hoping anyway.

I like Cory Booker a lot as well.
 

guidomerkinsrules

W H A T E V I R
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
62,874
Reaction score
104,417
Location
by the cemeteries
Offline
I've been a fan of Booker's for awhile - I do get the impression that he's a "confirmed bachelor" and i'd be interested to see how that was handled

not sure Warren has the temperament for a long campaign (but then again, neither did trump...)

but here's my curveball...ready for it... Elon Musk!
 

Goatman Saint

Subscribing Member
Platinum VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 18, 1999
Messages
22,567
Reaction score
20,734
Age
49
Location
Between here and there
Offline
Kamala Harris. Very bright, and talented person. No more controversy surrounding her than the normal person. I would get behind her quickly.

Brian Schweitzer ex Montana governor. Democrat that almost was devoid of any outright party leanings. Ran a very grounded pragmatic lead in Montana during the recession. Only problem is he detests people tearing into his personal life being a private family sort of person and has shown an unwillingness to run for president because of it. He is one of the best governors I've ever paid attention to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

RetroMcBananaFace

AKA: retrobanana
Joined
Feb 1, 2015
Messages
10,061
Reaction score
20,849
Location
Henderson, Kentucky
Offline
I like the Booker/Warren idea. Warren will be 71 by the next election, so I don't know about her as president, but with her gumption I could easily see her playing Joe Biden to Booker's Obama. There's a blueprint already made out even. Obama campaign strategies would mostly apply, assuming that Trump's first term is as ineffective/disastrous as a lot of people believe it's going to be.
 

Rugger

Super Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
VIP Subscribing Member
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Messages
16,243
Reaction score
9,500
Age
39
Location
Las Vegas
Offline
I do not have a name in mind, but I would love to see a progressive thinker that is truly intending to unify the country. One that will stop making race the main focal point in their campaign. I want to see a focus on real, meaningful comradery and not just with the population, but with the political parties. I would also love to see a ballot that included one member from each party running together. That would be a great sign of sincere unity.

Washington has done a masterful job of creating a polarizing environment that almost forces people to "pick a side" and defend their turf zealously. It is intentional to distract the population from focusing on the real issues surrounding our country. Basically allowing the wealthy to get wealthier. Allowing to powerful to stay powerful. And milking the public while they spend more time fighting with each other.
 

RetroMcBananaFace

AKA: retrobanana
Joined
Feb 1, 2015
Messages
10,061
Reaction score
20,849
Location
Henderson, Kentucky
Offline
Washington has done a masterful job of creating a polarizing environment that almost forces people to "pick a side" and defend their turf zealously. It is intentional to distract the population from focusing on the real issues surrounding our country. Basically allowing the wealthy to get wealthier. Allowing to powerful to stay powerful. And milking the public while they spend more time fighting with each other.
Boy, ain't that the truth.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

 

New Orleans Saints Twitter Feed

 

Headlines

Top Bottom