Why waste very one's time - it is Warren vs Harris

[Cardinal]

It isn't going to be anyone v. Harris. It will be Harris.

The Democrats have decided that this election is going to be about race.

Bear in mind that Republicans decided that the election was going to be about race when they chose a white guy to be their candidate.

 

[Lutherf]

Bear in mind that Republicans decided that the election was going to be about race when they chose a white guy to be their candidate.

LMAO!!!

Like I said in the first place...

 

[Cardinal]

LMAO!!!

Like I said in the first place...

Please explain...coherently if you can...why Republicans choosing a white guy to be their candidate isn't making the election about race.

 

[Obscurity]

Before the first debate, any thought makes it clear the primary is between Warren and Harris - the East Coast liberal elites for Harvard Warren versus the West Coast progressive Hollywood elites supporting mostly white-looking minority Harris.

Democrats are not going to nominate an white haired old white man. It will be a woman - and the others aren't in the game.

The debates were stacked to protect both, mostly Warren. By making it Warren versus Bernie, Warren won't seem so old compared to many of much younger candidates. By making it a Harris versus Biden showdown, they assure the mostly white looking and sounding non-white California progressive prevails.

Harris has the edge in the states that then matter - the fly-over states and the South, but Warren actually is quite intelligent and Harris mostly isn't, so Harris could lose on gaffs and not seeming presidential.

This is a battle between the countries 2 Democratic strongholds - the Northeast Coast versus the West Coast. It was a contest between an East Coast liberal woman and a West Coast Progressive woman from the get-go. Anyone thinking otherwise isn't thinking it thru.

No one gives a ****. In case you haven't noticed, the democrats are waking up to your sleazy games and your absurd assertions that you (the right collectively) can be reasoned with, or that your "advice" is sound.

It isn't.

After last night, do you seriously think Harris, a career prosecutor who has yet to have her horrendous record challenged, can withstand the onslaught of Sanders?

Trump will wither and die like an overripe grape in the face of Sanders' onslaught.

Warren, Sanders, to me it only matters that -anyone- be nominated, so long that they can crush donald trump.

 

[Obscurity]

LMAO!!!

Like I said in the first place...

You're wrong.

This election is about HEALTHCARE. If ANYONE wants it to be about Race - It's DONALD J TRUMP.

Because he can win by spewing racist rhetoric, or so he thinks.

 

[Juggernaut74]

Stupid question: has anything like that ever happened? Sure, Obama made Clinton his Secretary of State, but when has a presidential candidate made another candidate his veep?

Only one that springs to mind in recent memory is Reagan picking Bush Sr as his Veep.

Only other possibility might be Gore with Clinton - it seems like Gore ran for president before 2000, but I don’t recall if he did in 92 or not.

Edit: looked it up, looks like Gore ran in 88 but not 92.

 

[Cardinal]

Only one that springs to mind in recent memory is Reagan picking Bush Sr as his Veep.

Only other possibility might be Gore with Clinton - it seems like Gore ran for president before 2000, but I don’t recall if he did in 92 or not.

Bush Sr ran against Reagan? I was busy sticking GI Joe figures up my nose at the time so I don't clearly remember that election.

 

[Juggernaut74]

Bush Sr ran against Reagan? I was busy sticking GI Joe figures up my nose at the time so I don't clearly remember that election.

We’re probably about the same age then...I don’t recall it first hand, but I did learn later in life that Bush did run for president in 80 as well...again, I’d have to google to see how much of a “race” it truly was.

 

[jimbo]

Bear in mind that Republicans decided that the election was going to be about race when they chose a white guy to be their candidate.

???

Trump was not nominated because he was a white guy. He was nominated and won because the better choice. It's Democrats that turn everything into race.

 

[Obscurity]

Polls have shown Dem voters think beating trump is more important than any issue. Which of the people on the stage last night or tonight have the best chance of that?

Bernie Sanders.

 

[Cardinal]

???

Trump was not nominated because he was a white guy. He was nominated and won because the better choice. It's Democrats that turn everything into race.

Your post is actually a textbook demonstration of white privilege, and I say this knowing full well that there's nothing in the universe that will help you to understand why.

 

[Obscurity]

If Buttigieg is the VP candidate, while VPs are not directly relevant, it would make it almost impossible for the Democrats to win. Increasing unemployment by 600% to 25% unemployment and increasing crime by 300% - as the stats for Buttigieg's little city - isn't the direction most Americans want their city to go.

You mean the unrelenting attacks by conservative christians about his born condition?

That's why Bootyjudge wouldn't win. Let's be COMPLETELY honest.

 

[TobyOne]

I like your analysis. Makes sense. The democrats should shift gears tho. Trump will destroy either of these candidates and both are wayyy to left for the US. Maybe they should run for prez of France.

Before the first debate, any thought makes it clear the primary is between Warren and Harris - the East Coast liberal elites for Harvard Warren versus the West Coast progressive Hollywood elites supporting mostly white-looking minority Harris.

Democrats are not going to nominate an white haired old white man. It will be a woman - and the others aren't in the game.

The debates were stacked to protect both, mostly Warren. By making it Warren versus Bernie, Warren won't seem so old compared to many of much younger candidates. By making it a Harris versus Biden showdown, they assure the mostly white looking and sounding non-white California progressive prevails.

Harris has the edge in the states that then matter - the fly-over states and the South, but Warren actually is quite intelligent and Harris mostly isn't, so Harris could lose on gaffs and not seeming presidential.

This is a battle between the countries 2 Democratic strongholds - the Northeast Coast versus the West Coast. It was a contest between an East Coast liberal woman and a West Coast Progressive woman from the get-go. Anyone thinking otherwise isn't thinking it thru.

 

[Lutherf]

Please explain...coherently if you can...why Republicans choosing a white guy to be their candidate isn't making the election about race.

Well, first thing is that Republicans didn't pick Trump. The American voters did. If you remember the runup and all the Republicans pretty much hated Trump. Beyond that, during the whole campaign I never heard anyone say "I'm going to vote for the white guy". See, voting for someone because of their race isn't really a Republican concept. We're more about cutting taxes for rich people and making business owners wealthy...so we can cut their taxes.

 

[TobyOne]

As I recall, it was kind of a tight race until Reagan pulled away. That was also back when conventions had meaning and Reagan almost made Ford his VP.

We’re probably about the same age then...I don’t recall it first hand, but I did learn later in life that Bush did run for president in 80 as well...again, I’d have to google to see how much of a “race” it truly was.

 

[Cardinal]

Well, first thing is that Republicans didn't pick Trump. The American voters did. If you remember the runup and all the Republicans pretty much hated Trump. Beyond that, during the whole campaign I never heard anyone say "I'm going to vote for the white guy". See, voting for someone because of their race isn't really a Republican concept. We're more about cutting taxes for rich people and making business owners wealthy...so we can cut their taxes.

In none of that bibble-babble was there a coherent explanation for why Republicans choosing a white guy to be their candidate wasn't making the election about race.

 

[jimbo]

Your post is actually a textbook demonstration of white privilege, and I say this knowing full well that there's nothing in the universe that will help you to understand why.

Even if as you state, there is no chance of changing my opinion, I'd like to hear your arguments.

 

[TobyOne]

Lol. This is hilarious.

Your post is actually a textbook demonstration of white privilege, and I say this knowing full well that there's nothing in the universe that will help you to understand why.

 

[TobyOne]

It continues to surprise me how liberals always focus on race - first, last and always. Something is very wrong with them.

Well, first thing is that Republicans didn't pick Trump. The American voters did. If you remember the runup and all the Republicans pretty much hated Trump. Beyond that, during the whole campaign I never heard anyone say "I'm going to vote for the white guy". See, voting for someone because of their race isn't really a Republican concept. We're more about cutting taxes for rich people and making business owners wealthy...so we can cut their taxes.

 

[Juggernaut74]

As I recall, it was kind of a tight race until Reagan pulled away. That was also back when conventions had meaning and Reagan almost made Ford his VP.

Yeah I just wiki’ed it to see. Looks like Bush actually won the Iowa caucus.

 

[Cardinal]

Even if as you state, there is no chance of changing my opinion, I'd like to hear your arguments.

I am definitely wasting my time here, but screw it.

White privilege is taking the white candidate as the baseline, whereas the minority candidate must by necessity be running on the basis of their ethnicity.

It's "obvious" to you that Harris is running based on her ethnicity, yet you're unable to entertain how that could be the case for trump because his whiteness is "normal."

Put another way, Trump isn't "white," he just is. He's free to pursue his election without his race being a component of his candidacy, whereas his opponent, should that person be black, will be the black candidate. And that's white privilege.

By virtue of this, you are actively making the election about race by preferring the candidate that is "normal," and you're completely unable to comprehend why that is.

 

[jimbo]

I am definitely wasting my time here, but screw it.

White privilege is taking the white candidate as the baseline, whereas the minority candidate must by necessity be running on the basis of their ethnicity.

It's "obvious" to you that Harris is running based on her ethnicity, yet you're unable to entertain how that could be the case for trump because his whiteness is "normal."

By virtue of this, you are actively making the election about race by preferring the candidate that is "normal," and you're completely unable to comprehend why that is.

So your argument is that I voted for Trump because he was white. As opposed to the other candidate who was also white?

i preferred the candidate that most aligned with my beliefs. I'll do that in 2020. It won't be any of the Democrats i saw on the debate stage. Except for Injun' Liz, I have little to no data as to ethnicity. Liz is a separate issue. i would never vote for a candidate who falsely exploited a set aside program to gain points on a job application.

 

[apdst]

I am definitely wasting my time here, but screw it.

White privilege is taking the white candidate as the baseline, whereas the minority candidate must by necessity be running on the basis of their ethnicity.

It's "obvious" to you that Harris is running based on her ethnicity, yet you're unable to entertain how that could be the case for trump because his whiteness is "normal."

Put another way, Trump isn't "white," he just is. He's free to pursue his election without his race being a component of his candidacy, whereas his opponent, should that person be black, will be the black candidate. And that's white privilege.

By virtue of this, you are actively making the election about race by preferring the candidate that is "normal," and you're completely unable to comprehend why that is.

Did Obama meet a higher standard than most black folks?

 

[Cardinal]

So your argument is that I voted for Trump because he was white. As opposed to the other candidate who was also white?

i preferred the candidate that most aligned with my beliefs. I'll do that in 2020. It won't be any of the Democrats i saw on the debate stage. Except for Injun' Liz, I have little to no data as to ethnicity. Liz is a separate issue. i would never vote for a candidate who falsely exploited a set aside program to gain points on a job application.

This was an edit in my post:

Put another way, Trump isn't "white," he just is. He's free to pursue his election without his race being a component of his candidacy, whereas his opponent, should that person be black, will be the black candidate. And that's white privilege.

I've done all I can to explain this. I knew you wouldn't understand, so I didn't have high expectations.

 

[jimbo]

This was an edit in my post:

Put another way, Trump isn't "white," he just is. He's free to pursue his election without his race being a component of his candidacy, whereas his opponent, should that person be black, will be the black candidate. And that's white privilege.

I've done all I can to explain this. I knew you wouldn't understand, so I didn't have high expectations.

I gotta admit, you're correct. I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.