Your 2020 Presidential Candidate Speculation Thread

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed

Well, since Gabbneb still isn't here to kick around anymore I guess I'll take the reins again.

Danny gets the honors:

I think it would be reasonable for any of the following Democrats to run for President:

Cory Booker
Kamala Harris
Tim Kaine
Julian Castro
Amy Klobuchar
Deval Patrick
Tammy Duckworth
Tom Perez
Keith Ellison
Donna Brazile oops, sorry
Kirsten Gillibrand

This is by no means an exhaustive list.

― the Hannah Montana of the Korean War (DJP), Friday, November 10, 2017 3:31 PM (thirty-six minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Randall Jarrell (dandydonweiner), Friday, 10 November 2017 21:07 (eight months ago) Permalink

medicare and social security for all. free college tuition. tax the rich to pay for it

reggie (qualmsley), Friday, 10 November 2017 21:08 (eight months ago) Permalink

And I guess for Republicans we have:

Trump
Cruz
Sasse
Kasich?

Randall Jarrell (dandydonweiner), Friday, 10 November 2017 21:09 (eight months ago) Permalink

Moore

Josh in Chicago, Friday, 10 November 2017 21:09 (eight months ago) Permalink

I assume Sanders will run again until/unless he explicitly rules it out

Simon H., Friday, 10 November 2017 21:10 (eight months ago) Permalink

Kasich is almost a certainty.

Ⓓⓡ. (Johnny Fever), Friday, 10 November 2017 21:11 (eight months ago) Permalink

the four women on that list are more impressive than any of the men imo

Dan S, Friday, 10 November 2017 21:12 (eight months ago) Permalink

Dolores is missing from this list

Simon H., Friday, 10 November 2017 21:14 (eight months ago) Permalink

Is that Sarah Sanders?

Josh in Chicago, Friday, 10 November 2017 21:25 (eight months ago) Permalink

here we go

sleeve, Saturday, 11 November 2017 00:51 (eight months ago) Permalink

eff gabbneb and this thread

ice cream social justice (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 11 November 2017 01:21 (eight months ago) Permalink

aka "This is the thread where we make premature ejaculations"

A is for (Aimless), Saturday, 11 November 2017 01:24 (eight months ago) Permalink

the rock
tim tebow

brimstead, Saturday, 11 November 2017 01:34 (eight months ago) Permalink

I don't think there's any chance whatsoever that Pop would run, but I wouldn't not vote for him.

Ⓓⓡ. (Johnny Fever), Saturday, 11 November 2017 01:50 (eight months ago) Permalink

lol morbs. How long ago was gabbneb banished? Seems like about ten years ago now.

Randall Jarrell (dandydonweiner), Saturday, 11 November 2017 14:16 (eight months ago) Permalink

his crackpot insights into the political affiliations of the critical ozark mountain czech-american bloc were a thorn in the side of the 2016 threads iirc

Doctor Casino, Saturday, 11 November 2017 14:24 (eight months ago) Permalink

How long ago was gabbneb banished? Seems like about ten years ago now.

gabbneb was banned about four or five years** back, then he returned for at least a year as benbbag (or some such moniker). that gabbneb had come back was not a secret. he behaved for a time, then was banned again maybe a year** back.

**chronology subject to a weak memory for such trivia

A is for (Aimless), Saturday, 11 November 2017 18:47 (eight months ago) Permalink

I feel like the Democrats have a ton of great VP candidates, but no Presidential candidates yet.

grawlix (unperson), Saturday, 11 November 2017 19:18 (eight months ago) Permalink

Julian Castro would have been a great VP pick this time IMO (and probably in 2020) but he doesn't have Obama's charisma to leap from minor political office to President so quickly.

louise ck (milo z), Saturday, 11 November 2017 19:22 (eight months ago) Permalink

He's kind of screwed in that regard, though, Texas won't be electing a Democrat to a statewide office just yet.

louise ck (milo z), Saturday, 11 November 2017 19:23 (eight months ago) Permalink

three weeks pass...

The Inevitability of Kamala Harris

Randall Jarrell (dandydonweiner), Sunday, 3 December 2017 18:13 (seven months ago) Permalink

Kamala Harris would make for a very interesting race, assuming Trump survives to run again as incumbent. Her presence on the ballot would ensure Trump would retain all the social conservatives whose hatred of Hillary was deeply entwined with her being a woman and perceived as a liberal and feminist. On the flip side of that, Harris would easily grab HRC's core constituencies for herself.

The main interest for me would be in what issues she chose to highlight as the definition of her politics and how she'd react to the inevitable attacks about being 'soft' (iow, being a woman). Would she hit hard on profressive issues, or soft peddle herself as a centrist, or 'triangulate' in a Clintonian way?

Any way, a national campaign is a brutal trial by fire. I wish her well, if she decides to run.

A is for (Aimless), Sunday, 3 December 2017 19:38 (seven months ago) Permalink

I still see the Dem nomination coming down to Harris vs. Gillibrand, and I'd be ok with voting for either.

Ⓓⓡ. (Johnny Fever), Sunday, 3 December 2017 19:42 (seven months ago) Permalink

i really dig gillibrand.

sean gramophone, Sunday, 3 December 2017 19:50 (seven months ago) Permalink

For this outsider, after the last month or so, I really don't see how the nomination goes to anyone but a woman. The anger and the energy is there, and I would assume anyone trying to portray it as 'tokenistic' or only about identity would be shouted down pretty fast.

Frederik B, Sunday, 3 December 2017 19:58 (seven months ago) Permalink

"Inevitable" is an albatross as a political tag

Οὖτις, Sunday, 3 December 2017 20:09 (seven months ago) Permalink

The one that seems to be getting dragged down by the 'inevitable' tag is Bernie, or is it just me? That that profile of Harris includes so many snide remarks about his voters illustrate that quite well, imo.

Frederik B, Sunday, 3 December 2017 20:42 (seven months ago) Permalink

i really dig gillibrand.

I can't remember if it was Pod Save America or Axelrod's podcast where she did it, but Gillibrand openly and convincingly apologized for a vote she once cast and that she now has a full understanding of why it was the wrong side to take on an issue (gun related legislation, iirc) and I've never heard a politician on any level in either party be so contrite and willingly admit to being wrong. That won me over on her for sure (and voting no on all of Trump's cabinet appointments for as long she did helped).

Ⓓⓡ. (Johnny Fever), Sunday, 3 December 2017 21:19 (seven months ago) Permalink

At the Women's March almost a year ago, Harris was a shockingly flat public speaker. I wonder if she has improved since then? Compared to the fired up Duckworth and Gillibrand, she just wasn't that compelling.

Josh in Chicago, Sunday, 3 December 2017 21:39 (seven months ago) Permalink

Gillibrand wanted to run in 2016 but that was not going to happen with Hillary around. But she is well connected in NY and is very good at raising money.

Not really sure what the core source of love for Harris is.

Randall Jarrell (dandydonweiner), Sunday, 3 December 2017 21:50 (seven months ago) Permalink

Also, the Kamala article mentionsJason Kander as a possible candidate.

Randall Jarrell (dandydonweiner), Sunday, 3 December 2017 22:00 (seven months ago) Permalink

re Johnny Fever

I think I heard the same (Axelrod) interview, and it's largely responsible for my pro-Gillibrand feelings. Contrast the way she talks about this stuff - or, say, Bill Clinton on The Daily - with Kamala Harris's bland calculations and I know where I fall. Even pre-election, she was loudly advocating Sanders and Warren.

sean gramophone, Monday, 4 December 2017 00:40 (seven months ago) Permalink

I would really prefer not to have a prosecutor as president tbh

Simon H., Monday, 4 December 2017 00:41 (seven months ago) Permalink

(re: KH)

Simon H., Monday, 4 December 2017 00:41 (seven months ago) Permalink

I’d take Harris over Booker every time, at least

.oO (silby), Monday, 4 December 2017 00:45 (seven months ago) Permalink

My guess would be that criminal justice reform is going to be a bigger issue than it was in 2016, and whether or not that hurts or helps KH I don't know. According to that article she could run on that issue if she wanted to, and I'd guess she'd win if she managed to do so.

Frederik B, Monday, 4 December 2017 12:02 (seven months ago) Permalink

former prosecutor is not a career path that leads one to restrict fellow prosecutors' discretion, which is what is necessary to accomplish criminal justice reform.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/are-prosecutors-the-key-to-justice-reform/483252/

El Tomboto, Monday, 4 December 2017 18:03 (seven months ago) Permalink

agreed

my current faves: Gillibrand, Duckworth, and Oregon's Junior Senator Jeff Merkley.

sleeve, Monday, 4 December 2017 18:15 (seven months ago) Permalink

"Inevitable" is an albatross as a political tag

especially 3 years out from an election

flappy bird, Monday, 4 December 2017 18:18 (seven months ago) Permalink

i really dig gillibrand.

I can't remember if it was Pod Save America or Axelrod's podcast where she did it, but Gillibrand openly and convincingly apologized for a vote she once cast and that she now has a full understanding of why it was the wrong side to take on an issue (gun related legislation, iirc) and I've never heard a politician on any level in either party be so contrite and willingly admit to being wrong. That won me over on her for sure (and voting no on all of Trump's cabinet appointments for as long she did helped).

― Ⓓⓡ. (Johnny Fever), Sunday, December 3, 2017 4:19 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i think it was immigration actually, unless she's done it twice, in which case all the better.

evol j, Monday, 4 December 2017 18:21 (seven months ago) Permalink

one month passes...

The Secret to Understanding Kamala Harris

Alan Watts (dandydonweiner), Thursday, 11 January 2018 22:32 (six months ago) Permalink

nothing to add here pic.twitter.com/ARYNwCaqA3

— Shuja Haider (@shujaxhaider) January 12, 2018

Simon H., Friday, 12 January 2018 13:52 (six months ago) Permalink

one month passes...

Warren says she's not running.

http://www.newser.com/story/256430/warren-not-running-for-president-but-hedges-on-one-thing.html

Simon H., Sunday, 11 March 2018 20:07 (four months ago) Permalink

Warren is pretty clear about it every time she gets asked. I don't know why it makes news sometimes and doesn't at others.

Johnny Fever, Sunday, 11 March 2018 20:59 (four months ago) Permalink

I have no idea whether she will in fact run, but anytime anyone says "I'm not running" without further specification, they should be understood to be referring only to the present moment and not any future moment.

Moo Vaughn, Sunday, 11 March 2018 21:05 (four months ago) Permalink

Warren will not run.

El Tomboto, Sunday, 11 March 2018 22:24 (four months ago) Permalink

but who will unite the dems, whoooooooo

NBA YoungBoy named Rocky Raccoon (m bison), Sunday, 11 March 2018 22:30 (four months ago) Permalink

Yeah, some socialists like myself were critical of her from the beginning.

Frederik B, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 16:52 (two days ago) Permalink

But it's a reference to something something Palestine, no?

Frederik B, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 16:52 (two days ago) Permalink

People got mad when she came out in support of the two state solution.

Nerdstrom Poindexter, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 16:54 (two days ago) Permalink

warren or cortez?

akm, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 16:57 (two days ago) Permalink

some socialists like myself were critical of her from the beginning day she sat down with The Intercept.

fixed

the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 16:59 (two days ago) Permalink

she put out two dumb statements in quick succession (one on israel/palestine, another on the military being "socialist" or some shit)

Simon H., Tuesday, 17 July 2018 17:00 (two days ago) Permalink

as I see NP covered the former

Simon H., Tuesday, 17 July 2018 17:00 (two days ago) Permalink

xpost Ocasio. Although that reminds that there were some big twitter leftist accounts who got mad at Warren some months back because she was stressing the need to save the Iran Deal.

Nerdstrom Poindexter, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 17:02 (two days ago) Permalink

Man at the beginning of AOC mania i chickened/boringed out of posting that she was merely someone who hadnt voted to crush yr feels yet, but its amazing how quick she was revealed impure, i guess.

Hunt3r, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 17:05 (two days ago) Permalink

a two-state solution is "dumb" now?

devops mom (silby), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 17:06 (two days ago) Permalink

on the military being "socialist" or some shit

the military is the most socialist thing in the US

El Tomboto, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 17:13 (two days ago) Permalink

no that's the major league drafts

𝔠𝔞𝔢𝔨 (caek), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 17:18 (two days ago) Permalink

honestly i don't care about these stupid purity tests and would have no issue voting Warren or any of these people. none of them have the baggage of Clinton, her Iraq War/Patriot Act voting record, etc. that we were told to ignore & the recent memories of which makes it extra hilarious when non-US ILXors bang on about how horrible these people are because they wrote a bad tweet or something.

Hazy Maze Cave (Adam Bruneau), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 17:25 (two days ago) Permalink

a two-state solution is "dumb" now?

― devops mom (silby), Tuesday, July 17, 2018 5:06 PM (thirteen minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

it's been a process of discovery for me that the current position we're apparently all supposed to have is for a single democratic secular state; a two state solution, which "recognizing israel's right to exist" is apparently understood as a euphemism for, is seen as more of a catchphrase than a feasible reality by now given the incursion of settlements into what would otherwise be a notional palestinian state.

BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 17:26 (two days ago) Permalink

xps to tombot-- if you wanna put your galaxy brain hat on, the military is a jobs guarantee for fit americans between the ages of 18-35

ant banks and wasp (voodoo chili), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 17:27 (two days ago) Permalink

the military is the most socialist thing in the US

citation needed there

a two-state solution is "dumb" now?

the (relatively) popular consensus among most left-wing folks with an interest in the topic is that a single secular state is a preferable solution, the case for which is laid out in a ton of places, here's an example

http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/why-two-state-solution-refuses-die-natural-death-1257096527

(xp!)

Simon H., Tuesday, 17 July 2018 17:27 (two days ago) Permalink

"recognizing israel's right to exist" is more traditionally a euphemism for "and they can do whatever the fuck they want"? I share the bemusement.

Andrew Farrell, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 17:28 (two days ago) Permalink

For clarification I also recognise Israel's right to exist! - I mean in the context when the phrase is used as a total answer to "What are your views on this fucked-up thing that Israel has done"

Andrew Farrell, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 17:33 (two days ago) Permalink

this election is going to be a blast

Karl Malone, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 17:40 (two days ago) Permalink

I'm sure all the candidates will have the correct left position on Israel!

President Keyes, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 17:44 (two days ago) Permalink

Re: Israel/Palestine, here's a colleague of mine on the subject:

But the reality is, what Israel is posing as a, quote, two-state solution is a Swiss cheese, in which Israeli-controlled territory is the cheese, meaning it’s contiguous, and the Palestinian towns and villages in that small, shrunken part are the holes, not contiguous. So that’s what we’re dealing with.

What we have today is one state. If we define a state as a territory in which one government controls, that’s what we have in historic Palestine. Israel, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, West Jerusalem, and Gaza, all together are controlled by one government. That’s the Israeli government. The Palestinian Authority has municipal authority–garbage collection, teachers, etc. It doesn’t control land, people, courts. It has courts, but they’re not the dominant courts. The Israeli military courts are still dominant in the West Bank. We hear that Gaza is no longer occupied because in 2005 Israel made the decision to withdraw the 7,000 settlers and take the soldiers and redeploy them out of Gazan territory onto the border of Gaza, which is also completely enclosed in a wall. We don’t hear as much about the Gaza wall as we do about the West Bank wall, but both are completely enclosed.

What we have in that situation is the exact definition of the international covenant against the crime of apartheid, which defines the situation in which two different populations live in the same territory with two different legal systems designed to privilege one group over another group.

JAY: Yeah. One group can’t vote.

BENNIS: One group not only can’t vote, but one group–for example, if you look at the West Bank today, if you look at the question of children, if children throw stones, if a settler child throws a stone, in fact, nothing happens. In fact, they are never really held accountable. But in theory that child is appropriately brought to a juvenile court, where the goal of the court is rehabilitation of children and where the dignity of the child is to be paramount.

If a 12-year-old Palestinian child–or in one case a three-year-old child was pulled out of her bed in the middle of the night and told if she didn’t say where her brother was, who was charged with throwing stones, that–the soldiers said they would destroy her home. A three-year-old. I mean, it’s impossible to imagine. But a 12-year-old child, Palestinian child, charged with the same thing, of throwing rocks, is held accountable in a military court.

And now they have a special military court for children, which is–you know, this is the definition of apartheid in one state. So that’s, I think, important to recognize what exists today, because if we’re looking at what there needs to be, we have to start with what exists.

JAY: Right. And I would even say that even if you got rid of the Swiss cheese and then had two-state, you’re going to have one country with this practically modern European economy–

BENNIS: Right. Twenty-third wealthiest country in the world,–

JAY: –next to–.

BENNIS: –and another country of enormous impoverishment.

JAY: I don’t understand how two-states could ever be equal.

BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 17:55 (two days ago) Permalink

I mean maybe complete Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and devolution of settlements to a notional second state with normalized relations is a pipe dream but at least one can articulate it as a goal, and I know ethnic nationalism is illegal now or whatever but I don’t think it’s any less of a pipe dream to suggest that Israel will reconstitute itself to not be a Jewish State. But I’m willfully dumb about all this stuff.

devops mom (silby), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 18:02 (two days ago) Permalink

Wrong thread tho at this point

devops mom (silby), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 18:09 (two days ago) Permalink

ya heard that

BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 18:12 (two days ago) Permalink

Yup. Substantially changing Israel's policies toward the Palestinians is not likely to occur in the foreseeable future through near term changes in the direction of the Democratic Party.

A is for (Aimless), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 18:16 (two days ago) Permalink

nor, uh, 2020 presidential candidate speculation

BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 18:29 (two days ago) Permalink

Kamala Harris to publish memoir in early 2019. https://t.co/xrS2TXvZkQ pic.twitter.com/djPx13O1yQ

— San Francisco Chronicle (@sfchronicle) July 17, 2018

𝔠𝔞𝔢𝔨 (caek), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 20:28 (two days ago) Permalink

Later than Obama published his iirc

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 20:43 (two days ago) Permalink

It’ll barely be out before she announces!

devops mom (silby), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 21:04 (two days ago) Permalink

the chapters about getting the bankster's wrists slapped with hefty fines will be riveting

officer sonny bonds, lytton pd (mayor jingleberries), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 21:25 (two days ago) Permalink

She will get to tell the moving tale of her difficult struggle to prevent imprisoned trans people from accessing HRT

devops mom (silby), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 21:26 (two days ago) Permalink

Is Adam Schiff ever mentioned? I like him whenever's he on CNN. He's quite boring and would make a good president, I think.

clemenza, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 22:22 (two days ago) Permalink

to be honest we could really use a boring president again

(The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 22:26 (two days ago) Permalink

if it comes down to sanders v harris it's gonna be 2016 all over again but worse

global tetrahedron, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 22:46 (two days ago) Permalink

If sanders runs I will personally push him into a crevasse

devops mom (silby), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 22:46 (two days ago) Permalink

I mean like also he wouldn’t make it far in a bigger field where all the candidates including Cory fucking Booker have moved in on his territory

devops mom (silby), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 22:47 (two days ago) Permalink

ehhh not that i think he'll run but a bigger field would help him this time around because he has the largest ride-or-die fanbase built in. plurality wins, like trump in 2016. obviously that year, the small field was a tremendous benefit to sanders tho obviously by itself not explanatory (see: martin o'mentum)

This is a total Jeff Porcaro. (Doctor Casino), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 22:50 (two days ago) Permalink

I like what Schiff is doing wrt to the investigation and calling out GOP obstruction but he’s only a congressman and not that progressive on the whole.

Nerdstrom Poindexter, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 22:50 (two days ago) Permalink

I don't know if it's just homerism or what, but most of my Oregon friends seem to be under the impression Merkley's going to give it a go.

Johnny Fever, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 22:52 (two days ago) Permalink

and here in WA I'm not the only one thinking Inslee will give it a shot

alomar lines, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 22:54 (two days ago) Permalink

merk def appears to be keeping his options open, but i doubt he makes a dent in a big field

Clay, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 22:54 (two days ago) Permalink

Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti hasn't said he won't run yet. I suspect he'll do about as well as Jeb! did if he tries.

nickn, Tuesday, 17 July 2018 23:23 (two days ago) Permalink

Inslee isn't term limited and he would probably coast to reelection in 2020 so I don't know why he would run for president. I'd bet on Bob Ferguson over him, if I were picking Washington state people to run for president.

devops mom (silby), Tuesday, 17 July 2018 23:37 (two days ago) Permalink

Merkley's started his own PAC for electing Democrats in 2018 and my wife and I decided to feed his kitty for a hundred bucks. We figure it couldn't hurt him to have chits to call in later on, whether or not he shoots the moon on a presidential run in 2020.

A is for (Aimless), Wednesday, 18 July 2018 00:00 (yesterday) Permalink

Is Adam Schiff ever mentioned? I like him whenever's he on CNN. He's quite boring and would make a good president, I think.

this is a wonderfully Canadian sentiment and I applaud it. Alas, no, he wouldn't stand a chance.

El Tomboto, Wednesday, 18 July 2018 01:00 (yesterday) Permalink

Can't help but read "we could use a boring president again" as "can't wait till I can safely not give a shit about politics while the world burns down in a quieter fashion"

Simon H., Wednesday, 18 July 2018 02:19 (yesterday) Permalink

Yeah you shouldn’t actually

Nerdstrom Poindexter, Wednesday, 18 July 2018 02:21 (yesterday) Permalink

But it's a reference to something something Palestine, no?

― Frederik B

it's "begin reagan palestine"

Arch Bacon (rushomancy), Wednesday, 18 July 2018 02:30 (yesterday) Permalink

inslee pres bid gets talked abt for “attack dog” vp, ferguson vs constantine for wa gov. all imo acourse

alomar lines, Wednesday, 18 July 2018 05:05 (yesterday) Permalink

it's "begin reagan palestine"

Birthday party cheesecake jelly bean boom

nonsensei (Ye Mad Puffin), Wednesday, 18 July 2018 14:57 (yesterday) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.