Please, not Tulsi Gabbard.

[DiAnna]

Sherrod Brown is one.

He always fights for lower drug prices and against pig pharma, opposed the dumbass wars from the beginning, backed gay marriage ahead of the curve, and is more realistic on healthcare.

There's a long way to go, but I've always admired Amy Klobachur. She knows how to handle herself, is imminently qualified, and if she was on the ballot, I wouldn't throw up in my mouth voting for her! :lol: But over the next year, I'll learn considerably more about Sherrod Brown, and he may also be someone I'd be happy to vote for.

 

[Surrealistik]

A lot of the progressives don't want to hear it, but many of their dream candidates are simply unelectable.

They think that because the Republicans are crazy that means you can afford to run anybody, ignoring the people in the middle. That's just not how things work. People aren't ready for Medicare for all and the like, whether the Bernie bro's want to hear it or not.

After this experiment with Trump, people are ready for the former status quo to return, not another hard swing to the side.

Warren is probably not electable for POTUS, and I acknowledge that.

Tulsi? Electable. Sanders? Hella electable.

I wouldn't consider anyone else in the primary ring (or likely to declare) progressive.

Also the facts are just dead set against the idea that people aren't ready for MFA; this is a blatant fiction. Virtually every poll I've seen has MFA featuring majoritarian to super majority support; we're talking 70%+ here, including Republican majorities in some polls. Amongst Democrats, a Harvard poll has support at well over 80%: https://www.commondreams.org/news/2...re-all-84-new-poll-want-party-leaders-make-it

Lastly 'Bernie Bro' is a 2016 fiction: https://boingboing.net/2018/01/22/a-future-to-believe-in.html

 

[MovingPictures]

Seriously, lol. Have been since I cast my first ballot, back in the day.

I've always voted a split ticket based on individuals and issues, am clearly liberal when it comes to social issues, but do have issues on which I have always been much more conservative. I really am "Independent", but if I re-registered as one, I wouldn't have a say in either party's primaries!

Husby re-registered as a democratic, so one of us would always be able to vote in both major party primaries.

DiAnna, stop it or I'll bury you alive in a box! :2mad:

 

[DiAnna]

DiAnna, stop it or I'll bury you alive in a box! :2mad:

....

 

[Surrealistik]

No, but he and Cenk are idiots.

Why?

I mean I can see Dore being lampooned as he often flirts with CT level nonsense (and this is coming from a staunch progressive) despite being right more often than not, and his propensity for running deflections for the likes of Putin as an example is nauseating. However, Cenk has consistently featured some of the most astute and accurate political analysis of any talking head I've ever seen, including MSNBC, CNN, Bloomberg and the like.

He certainly wears his bias on his sleeve, which is fine; at least he admits to it. That having been said, his insight into American politics can't be denied.

 

[MovingPictures]

....

Just kidding.

I will, um ...

Write a nasty letter to you!

 

[MovingPictures]

Why?

I mean I can see Dore being lampooned as he often flirts with CT level nonsense (and this is coming from a staunch progressive) despite being right more often than not, and his propensity for running deflections for the likes of Putin as an example is nauseating. However, Cenk has consistently featured some of the most astute and accurate political analysis of any talking head I've ever seen, including MSNBC, CNN, Bloomberg and the like.

He certainly wears his bias on his sleeve, which is fine; at least he admits to it. That having been said, his insight into American politics can't be denied.

Cenk can be informative, but he can also read way too much into Democratic politics, and his purism is exactly what got us in this mess.

 

[Surrealistik]

Cenk can be informative, but he can also read way too much into Democratic politics, and his purism is exactly what got us in this mess.

I couldn't disagree more.

Cenk supported, and repeatedly and vehemently encouraged his viewers to support Clinton when Bernie lost, and slammed Trump non-stop; he still does. What cost us 2016 is the worst candidate we ever fielded combined with one of the worst, most complacent campaigns and muddled platforms we've ever fielded.

There is nothing 'purist' about the guy, so much as he calls corruption as he sees it, and is a firm believer in the progressive policy set. That he scathes establishment figures and holds them to account when they deserve it, or scrutinizes their history/actions doesn't make him some kind of unnuanced/blind zealot.

 

[RAMOSS]

People won't care too much about that.

I disagree.

 

[Mycroft]

Why are people on the left going so crazy for this bigot, what's the appeal?

Her entire family has a long history of anti-gay activism that went beyond even just opposition to same-sex marriage rights. No, her POS father went after gay people's rights up and down the board, making clear he sees them as not worthy of any human decency or respect.

Gabbard defended those views just 13 years ago, when she was 24 years old. She only did her 180' only when the Democratic party as a whole did.

She's awful, find somebody else.

If Obama had waited just a few more years to "evolve", he would be forced out of his own Party by the extremists who have taken it over.

The Dems used to celebrate their "big tent". Not anymore.

 

[Abbazorkzog]

Haven't seen you around in a while Abba. Who are you liking for 2020?

Not Donald Trump

 

[veritas1]

Gabbard opposes Dem support for us getting back into the Syria quagmire and other entanglements. That's the same position Trump has, so she must be trashed. Digging up this old crap is just the pretext for why they really oppose her.

Looking at their support for interventionism, late term abortion and socialism, they should have a new slogan: War, Gore and Making You Poor!! Dems in 2020!!

 

[smallvoice]

Haven't seen you around in a while Abba. Who are you liking for 2020?

Based on the field of Dim candidates, I'm going for Trump this time.

 

[truthatallcost]

Sherrod Brown is one.

He always fights for lower drug prices and against pig pharma, opposed the dumbass wars from the beginning, backed gay marriage ahead of the curve, and is more realistic on healthcare.

I'll have to read up on Brown, he doesn't appear to have the DNC/MSM support at this point. They're going full bore for Harris, from what I can gather.

 

[Abbazorkzog]

If dems nominate Sherrod Brown they may win by a landslide. He'd appeal to the Obama/Centrist coalition while simultaneously appealing to working class indys/cons and the Bernie Left. Not to mention if he won his home state (Ohio), he'd all but guarantee Trump doesn't get a second term because no GOP president has won without winning there (IIRC).

 

[lurchadams]

Why are people on the left going so crazy for this bigot, what's the appeal?

Her entire family has a long history of anti-gay activism that went beyond even just opposition to same-sex marriage rights. No, her POS father went after gay people's rights up and down the board, making clear he sees them as not worthy of any human decency or respect.

Gabbard defended those views just 13 years ago, when she was 24 years old. She only did her 180' only when the Democratic party as a whole did.

She's awful, find somebody else.

Wow! I did not know this about her! See below! She and Mike Pence can team up and "pray the gay away"!

Tulsi Gabbard once touted working for anti-gay group that backed conversion therapy - CNNPolitics

(CNN)Rep. Tulsi Gabbard in the early 2000s touted working for her father's anti-gay organization, which mobilized to pass a measure against same-sex marriage in Hawaii and promoted controversial conversion therapy.

Gabbard, a Democrat from Hawaii, said Friday in an interview with CNN's Van Jones that she will seek her party's nomination for president in 2020. Her past views and activism in opposition to LGBT rights in the late 90s and early 2000s, which put her out of step with most of the Democratic Party at the time, have come under more intense scrutiny since her announcement