Your 2020 Presidential Candidate Speculation Thread

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

fixed

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

as I see NP covered the former

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.

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.

a two-state solution is "dumb" now?

on the military being "socialist" or some shit

the military is the most socialist thing in the US

no that's the major league drafts

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.

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.

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

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!)

"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.

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"

this election is going to be a blast

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

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.

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.

Wrong thread tho at this point

ya heard that

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.

nor, uh, 2020 presidential candidate speculation

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

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

Later than Obama published his iirc

It’ll barely be out before she announces!

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

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

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.

to be honest we could really use a boring president again

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

If sanders runs I will personally push him into a crevasse

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

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)

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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"

Yeah you shouldn’t actually

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

― Frederik B

it's "begin reagan palestine"

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

it's "begin reagan palestine"

Birthday party cheesecake jelly bean boom

Biden is good in a room and he does the hardhat thing well. But do you really think re-litigating '08-'16 is the way to win?

— Richard M. Nixon (@dick_nixon) July 25, 2018

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, July 18, 2018 2:19 AM (one week ago)

go to hell, btw

i only take political advice from twitter parody accounts impersonating dead traitors

Most of the presidents considered 'boring' by Americans have dropped bombs on or invaded other countries. Or instigated coups de etat. Even hapless Gerald Ford presided over the last gasps of the US Vietnam debacle. Whichever country Jimmy Carter bombed escapes me at the moment, but I am certain one exists.