Politics: 2020 Dem POTUS candidate catch all discussion thread

I bet most of Trump’s base supports stop and frisk policies, so he won’t bring that up.

Bama 8Ball said:

There are a ton of folks out there that are tired of Nanny State Policies. If you don't think that is an issue, then we interact with totally different types of people...which is ok.

Click to expand...

Those folks are voting for Trump, no matter what.

One of the weird things in politics are exactly how things like that can become the container for so many more assumptions about a candidate. The soda pop and gun stuff will be the starting point for a host of other assumptions biased media will be more than happy to fill in the gaps between.

Stop n' frisk is one of those things that could sour Bloomberg to the left flank. I think his biggest problem with the left is simply being a billionaire and giving off the appearance of an oligarchy.

crimsonaudio said:

Agreed. There is a segment of voters out there who want less intrusion and it's a hot-button item for them. These aren't typical Trump supporters (heck, I'm betting Trump would regulate everything if he could) but they will shy away from anyone who wants to meddle with their lives to the degree of telling them how much soda they can buy.

Click to expand...

Maybe, but if a single person tells me that he is voting for Trump because of this I would feel sorely tempted to punch them in the face. Trump is the most dangerous man in office in the history of our presidency and has done things which cannot be tolerated. To vote for Trump instead of a guy who passed some laws that you don't like in NYC is the kind of thing that has me losing faith in humanity.

See, this is why politics drives me crazy.

I swear I did NOT speak this into existence:

B1GTide said:

Maybe, but if a single person tells me that he is voting for Trump because of this I would feel sorely tempted to punch them in the face. Trump is the most dangerous man in office in the history of our presidency and has done things which cannot be tolerated. To vote for Trump instead of a guy who passed some laws that you don't like in NYC is the kind of thing that has me losing faith in humanity.

See, this is why politics drives me crazy.

Click to expand...

MICHAEL BLOOMBERG TIES BIDEN TO BEAT TRUMP BY WIDEST MARGIN OF ANYONE IN DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY, NEW POLL SHOWS

Tulsi Gabbard speaks out on $50M lawsuit against Hillary Clinton


Tulsi Gabbard explains decision to sue Hillary Clinton: 'They can do it to anybody'

i see tulsi's latest marketing campaign is hitting the target audience.

For awhile I thought she was trying to be Bernie's would-be VP. But at this juncture I think she's just trying to make herself into a brand for a future in media. I'd rather see Andrew Yang be Sanders VP if I had to choose between the two weird "progressives."

rgw said:

For awhile I thought she was trying to be Bernie's would-be VP. But at this juncture I think she's just trying to make herself into a brand for a future in media. I'd rather see Andrew Yang be Sanders VP if I had to choose between the two weird "progressives."

Click to expand...

she's angling for a fox news sinecure

Girls just wanna have fun.......

B1GTide said:

See, this is why politics drives me crazy.

Click to expand...

Politics drives me to hit the "Ignore" button.
"A plague on both their houses."

B1GTide said:

See, this is why politics drives me crazy.

Click to expand...

The problem is that too many people seek a simplistic answer for a complex game, and that is why we are where we are today.

81usaf92 said:

The problem is that too many people seek a simplistic answer for a complex game, and that is why we are where we are today.

Click to expand...

The problem is that our government answers to special interests, not the people. The solution really is simply. Once special interests are removed, we can once again have a government which imposes the will of the people instead of the select few.

B1GTide said:

The problem is that our government answers to special interests, not the people.

Click to expand...

A problem within the problem, but not the main problem

B1GTide said:

The solution really is simply. Once special interests are removed

Click to expand...

A comedian I listen to kill time once said. "2004 was when elections became less about what a candidate can bring to the table and more about exposing the stupidity of voters, and it has became progressively worse ever since. When George Bush's first campaign ad literally says ' I'm the anti-terrorism president', my first response was 'Who is the pro-terrorism president'?."

Whether 2004 was the starting point or not you can debate it to kingdom come, but I think the point is that until folks stop falling for the bullcrap and start really researching who to vote for, everything is pointless in discussing changes for the political structure.

I know people who would probably vote for Dennis Radar if he was against abortion and ran as Republican, and people who would vote for Ted Kaczynski if he promised free health care for all and ran as a democrat.

B1GTide said:

The problem is that our government answers to special interests, not the people. The solution really is simply. Once special interests are removed, we can once again have a government which imposes the will of the people instead of the select few.

Click to expand...

i imagine if we got significantly higher voter participation rate, that would help focus politicians on the will of the people.

92tide said:

i imagine if we got significantly higher voter participation rate, that would help focus politicians on the will of the people.

Click to expand...

Wouldn't matter unless we got candidates to vote for who are not already owned by those special interests

B1GTide said:

Wouldn't matter unless we got candidates to vote for who are not already owned by those special interests

Click to expand...

chicken and egg i guess

92tide said:

chicken and egg i guess

Click to expand...

Tom Clancy them.