The Political Junkie Thread

[CrazyNotCrazie]

OK! It's time to fire up the 2028 thread, right?!

Just read an article giving a far distant look at who might be vying for the job on the Dem side, and it dawned on me that it's possible that the next POTUS election will have two fresh faces. That's something we haven't had since Obama's first.

Democrats could have a flood of potential candidates, and there are disagreements within the party over what to prioritize.

Some Democrats say the party needs to start over, injecting itself with new blood for the next presidential contest.

Others say Harris deserves another shot at the presidency, pointing to the 74 million votes cast for her earlier this month.

“Just like in 2016, we’re a little lost and rudderless, and not quite sure what we want going forward,” one Democratic strategist acknowledged.

What seems certain is a crowded field.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/ranking-demo ... 00839.html

Please no Newsom or AOC. I would still vote for either of them over any MAGA Republican but they are both bad in their own way, and, more importantly, unelectable. Newsom is too slick and metropolitan - that will not win in battleground states. And AOC is the greatest thing to happen to MAGA - they are constantly running ads aligning candidates to her because they know it works. She needs to grow up and learn how to pick her battles and occasionally say No Comment.

Harris is too attached to Biden, who for whatever reason is perceived by many to be bad. She is done. Unfortunate, but that is reality.

My main concern at the moment is whether we are even able to have a fair election in 2028. Or whether this country will still even exist in 2028.

[Phredd3]

Harris didn’t make it past the 2020 primaries, then was slotted into the race this year, and lost to the worst Republican candidate of all time. On what planet does she deserve another bite at the apple?

[Furniture]

OK! It's time to fire up the 2028 thread, right?!

Just read an article giving a far distant look at who might be vying for the job on the Dem side, and it dawned on me that it's possible that the next POTUS election will have two fresh faces. That's something we haven't had since Obama's first.

Democrats could have a flood of potential candidates, and there are disagreements within the party over what to prioritize.

Some Democrats say the party needs to start over, injecting itself with new blood for the next presidential contest.

Others say Harris deserves another shot at the presidency, pointing to the 74 million votes cast for her earlier this month.

“Just like in 2016, we’re a little lost and rudderless, and not quite sure what we want going forward,” one Democratic strategist acknowledged.

What seems certain is a crowded field.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/ranking-demo ... 00839.html

Please no Newsom or AOC. I would still vote for either of them over any MAGA Republican but they are both bad in their own way, and, more importantly, unelectable. Newsom is too slick and metropolitan - that will not win in battleground states. And AOC is the greatest thing to happen to MAGA - they are constantly running ads aligning candidates to her because they know it works. She needs to grow up and learn how to pick her battles and occasionally say No Comment.

Harris is too attached to Biden, who for whatever reason is perceived by many to be bad. She is done. Unfortunate, but that is reality.

My main concern at the moment is whether we are even able to have a fair election in 2028. Or whether this country will still even exist in 2028.

Yeah.
Newsom is from California. Too risky.
I agree about Harris. She is done. Sorry.
AOC won’t be ready next time. Perhaps in 20 years? If she does as you state above too.

What about Buttigieg? He has the smarts and the communication skills. He has everything really. Could this country elect a gay man though?

[Furniture]

This is not a mandate! Any thoughts on the House? With the Trump appointees it seems the margin for at least a few months is going to be 217 to 215. That’s going to be tricky for Mega Mike.

[acdevil]

OK! It's time to fire up the 2028 thread, right?!

Just read an article giving a far distant look at who might be vying for the job on the Dem side, and it dawned on me that it's possible that the next POTUS election will have two fresh faces. That's something we haven't had since Obama's first.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/ranking-demo ... 00839.html

Please no Newsom or AOC. I would still vote for either of them over any MAGA Republican but they are both bad in their own way, and, more importantly, unelectable. Newsom is too slick and metropolitan - that will not win in battleground states. And AOC is the greatest thing to happen to MAGA - they are constantly running ads aligning candidates to her because they know it works. She needs to grow up and learn how to pick her battles and occasionally say No Comment.

Harris is too attached to Biden, who for whatever reason is perceived by many to be bad. She is done. Unfortunate, but that is reality.

My main concern at the moment is whether we are even able to have a fair election in 2028. Or whether this country will still even exist in 2028.

Yeah.
Newsom is from California. Too risky.
I agree about Harris. She is done. Sorry.
AOC won’t be ready next time. Perhaps in 20 years? If she does as you state above too.

What about Buttigieg? He has the smarts and the communication skills. He has everything really. Could this country elect a gay man though?

Or a Jewish guy in Shapiro

[ArkieDukie]

Final conversation with Dad, regarding the government jobs that Trump is planning to cut. One of them could realistically be my niece, who recently started a job with the FDIC (one of the agencies on the chopping block in Project 2025, for those keeping score at home). When he was blowing about all the money Trump would save by cutting jobs that Biden created to falsely improve unemployment numbers, I asked the logical question: “What are all those people going to do for jobs?” His response was, “Trump has a plan for that. There will be plenty of jobs once he brings back all those jobs from China.” I said, “(my niece) can go from her FDIC job to working in a factory. That seems fair.”
***crickets*** (I should also mention that my niece has a business/accounting degree and is very interested in forensic accounting. Smart girl.)

So, Trump supporters like my dad believe that there will be plenty of jobs for everyone that gets cuts from the government because of jobs that Trump will bring back from China? Do people not even think about the nature of the jobs that were sent there? His brilliant plan is to take highly skilled people and slot them into factory jobs making clothing (for example)? Don’t get me wrong; I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with this type of job. I’m saying that the typical person employed in the jobs Trump wants to cut is overqualified for the jobs he is planning to add. Wages won’t be especially good, either. If he manages to pull this off, this country is so screwed.

[ArkieDukie]

I am a huge fan of Pete Buttigieg. Something I’ve wondered, though: would Hakeem Jeffries be a good candidate? I really like what I’ve heard from him.

[Furniture]

I am a huge fan of Pete Buttigieg. Something I’ve wondered, though: would Hakeem Jeffries be a good candidate? I really like what I’ve heard from him.

I like Hakeem too. I think he is a real smart politician but he just seems a bit wooden. I know that’s not a good reason why he couldn’t be a candidate. I do think Gretchen, Pete and Shapiro have more of an ‘it’ factor.

[Furniture]

Final conversation with Dad, regarding the government jobs that Trump is planning to cut. One of them could realistically be my niece, who recently started a job with the FDIC (one of the agencies on the chopping block in Project 2025, for those keeping score at home). When he was blowing about all the money Trump would save by cutting jobs that Biden created to falsely improve unemployment numbers, I asked the logical question: “What are all those people going to do for jobs?” His response was, “Trump has a plan for that. There will be plenty of jobs once he brings back all those jobs from China.” I said, “(my niece) can go from her FDIC job to working in a factory. That seems fair.”
***crickets*** (I should also mention that my niece has a business/accounting degree and is very interested in forensic accounting. Smart girl.)

So, Trump supporters like my dad believe that there will be plenty of jobs for everyone that gets cuts from the government because of jobs that Trump will bring back from China? Do people not even think about the nature of the jobs that were sent there? His brilliant plan is to take highly skilled people and slot them into factory jobs making clothing (for example)? Don’t get me wrong; I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with this type of job. I’m saying that the typical person employed in the jobs Trump wants to cut is overqualified for the jobs he is planning to add. Wages won’t be especially good, either. If he manages to pull this off, this country is so screwed.

My daughter works for the EPA and she is contracted remote. She lives close to Annapolis. Anyway, she has a few things going on in life at the moment and the last thing she needs is all this stress.

[acdevil]

I am a huge fan of Pete Buttigieg. Something I’ve wondered, though: would Hakeem Jeffries be a good candidate? I really like what I’ve heard from him.

I like Hakeem too. I think he is a real smart politician but he just seems a bit wooden. I know that’s not a good reason why he couldn’t be a candidate. I do think Gretchen, Pete and Shapiro have more of an ‘it’ factor.

Definitely right about those three having “it”. Shapiro feels like a Jewish Obama to me.

[ArkieDukie]

I am a huge fan of Pete Buttigieg. Something I’ve wondered, though: would Hakeem Jeffries be a good candidate? I really like what I’ve heard from him.

I like Hakeem too. I think he is a real smart politician but he just seems a bit wooden. I know that’s not a good reason why he couldn’t be a candidate. I do think Gretchen, Pete and Shapiro have more of an ‘it’ factor.

The times I’ve seen him he hasn’t seemed wooden. Amy Klobuchar, on the other hand, is extremely wooden. I like her, though.
Let’s turn Big Gretch loose on the rest of the world. To be a contrarian, though, we now have N=2 for highly qualified female candidates that cannot get elected. I fear that there are still too many in our country who believe a woman cannot be a strong leader.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

I am a huge fan of Pete Buttigieg. Something I’ve wondered, though: would Hakeem Jeffries be a good candidate? I really like what I’ve heard from him.

I like Hakeem too. I think he is a real smart politician but he just seems a bit wooden. I know that’s not a good reason why he couldn’t be a candidate. I do think Gretchen, Pete and Shapiro have more of an ‘it’ factor.

The times I’ve seen him he hasn’t seemed wooden. Amy Klobuchar, on the other hand, is extremely wooden. I like her, though.
Let’s turn Big Gretch loose on the rest of the world. To be a contrarian, though, we now have N=2 for highly qualified female candidates that cannot get elected. I fear that there are still too many in our country who believe a woman cannot be a strong leader.

Whitmer is quite different than Hillary and Harris. I think she is more warm and approachable than they are. Harris improved a lot at this from her primary run.

I still need to learn more about him and his health but I am intrigued by Fetterman. And I think it might take someone like him to win. I tend to like the more clean cut moderate types but I also want to win.

[ArkieDukie]

I like Hakeem too. I think he is a real smart politician but he just seems a bit wooden. I know that’s not a good reason why he couldn’t be a candidate. I do think Gretchen, Pete and Shapiro have more of an ‘it’ factor.

The times I’ve seen him he hasn’t seemed wooden. Amy Klobuchar, on the other hand, is extremely wooden. I like her, though.
Let’s turn Big Gretch loose on the rest of the world. To be a contrarian, though, we now have N=2 for highly qualified female candidates that cannot get elected. I fear that there are still too many in our country who believe a woman cannot be a strong leader.

Whitmer is quite different than Hillary and Harris. I think she is more warm and approachable than they are. Harris improved a lot at this from her primary run.

I still need to learn more about him and his health but I am intrigued by Fetterman. And I think it might take someone like him to win. I tend to like the more clean cut moderate types but I also want to win.

I’m also very much a moderate. The candidates I tend to like (John Kasich, Amy Klobuchar types) tend to not make it as far in the primaries. I don’t know enough about Fetterman but will check him out.

I really like what I’ve heard from Whitmer but will reiterate and rephrase my concerns about electability. There’s still a significant portion of our country that does not believe a woman can lead us on the international stage. This is definitely not my opinion; this is based on what I’ve heard from others. Regardless of what people say in exit polls, I strongly believe that this view is one that, in large part, cost Harris the election. It’s an unstated reason why Trump was successful in portraying her as unintelligent. Large swaths of the population still believe women aren’t as smart as men and there are certain jobs women can’t do as well as men. (As a female scientist, I can totally rant on this subject.) These same people tend to view Faux News as being the only reliable news source. Apparently, they also believe that Trump can eliminate entire government agencies and plop those people into factory jobs that Trump is going to bring back from China. Because, hey, a job is a job. Many do not understand that a career is more than just a job.

TLDR: I may be overly cynical, but I don’t think this country will elect a female president in my lifetime. Misogyny is too deeply rooted.

[Phredd3]

Large swaths of the population still believe women aren’t as smart as men and there are certain jobs women can’t do as well as men. (As a female scientist, I can totally rant on this subject.) ...Apparently, they also believe that Trump can eliminate entire government agencies and plop those people into factory jobs that Trump is going to bring back from China. Because, hey, a job is a job.

TLDR: I may be overly cynical, but I don’t think this country will elect a female president in my lifetime. Misogyny is too deeply rooted.

The Good Dr. Phredd would agree with your assessment, but perhaps with slightly more optimism about the future. Misogyny is, indeed, deeply rooted, but the tree is at least beginning to show signs of aging. Younger generations are much better about equality in pretty much everything. As women gradually become mentors and role models in science and other fields, the youth begin to see that and accept the role.

[ArkieDukie]

Large swaths of the population still believe women aren’t as smart as men and there are certain jobs women can’t do as well as men. (As a female scientist, I can totally rant on this subject.) ...Apparently, they also believe that Trump can eliminate entire government agencies and plop those people into factory jobs that Trump is going to bring back from China. Because, hey, a job is a job.

TLDR: I may be overly cynical, but I don’t think this country will elect a female president in my lifetime. Misogyny is too deeply rooted.

The Good Dr. Phredd would agree with your assessment, but perhaps with slightly more optimism about the future. Misogyny is, indeed, deeply rooted, but the tree is at least beginning to show signs of aging. Younger generations are much better about equality in pretty much everything. As women gradually become mentors and role models in science and other fields, the youth begin to see that and accept the role.

True, but younger evangelicals - even women - hold this view. It is ingrained from an early age. I’d love for your slight optimism to hold true, but dealing with Trump supporters in my own family make me more pessimistic.

[Furniture]

So Biden pardons his son. Not sure what anyone else thinks but I love it!

https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... on-hunter/

[CrazyNotCrazie]

So Biden pardons his son. Not sure what anyone else thinks but I love it!

https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... on-hunter/

I 100% understand why he did it and don't fault him for it, but when Trump starts pardoning the January 6 crowd and the rest of his criminal followers, be prepared for a whole lot of whataboutism. Trump was going to pardon those clowns either way, so Biden might as well do what he's going to do. But I thought he might wait a little longer and try to keep it as quiet as possible.

I don't totally understand the original point of the presidential pardon but I think it has officially outlived its useful life.

[Furniture]

So Biden pardons his son. Not sure what anyone else thinks but I love it!

https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... on-hunter/

I 100% understand why he did it and don't fault him for it, but when Trump starts pardoning the January 6 crowd and the rest of his criminal followers, be prepared for a whole lot of whataboutism. Trump was going to pardon those clowns either way, so Biden might as well do what he's going to do. But I thought he might wait a little longer and try to keep it as quiet as possible.

I don't totally understand the original point of the presidential pardon but I think it has officially outlived its useful life.

If you want to go deep I’ll say this. I agree. The presidential pardon makes no sense at all…..

[Phredd3]

If you want to go deep I’ll say this. I agree. The presidential pardon makes no sense at all…..

It makes sense in the socially-responsible context in which it was incorporated. That context has since disappeared, but that's really only taken a decade or two. Family pardons are nothing new, going back to at least Billy Carter.

We have about as much chance getting rid of Presidential pardons as we do of abandoning the Electoral College.

[Chicago 1995]

So Biden pardons his son. Not sure what anyone else thinks but I love it!

https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... on-hunter/

I 100% understand why he did it and don't fault him for it, but when Trump starts pardoning the January 6 crowd and the rest of his criminal followers, be prepared for a whole lot of whataboutism. Trump was going to pardon those clowns either way, so Biden might as well do what he's going to do. But I thought he might wait a little longer and try to keep it as quiet as possible.

I don't totally understand the original point of the presidential pardon but I think it has officially outlived its useful life.

There's a pretty sordid recent history with regard to pardons, whether it be familial (Trump pardoned his daughter's father-in-law, who now stands to be an Ambassador) political (HW and the Iran Contra pardons) or personal (Marc Rich). Whataboutism sucks, but there's a more complete context that makes this, well, more normal.

To me, I think it's just sort of a final reminder of how much faith Biden and mainline Democrats continued to have in norms, systems and the way things are supposed to work. Biden could promise not to pardon Hunter because it seems like it was inconceivable we'd be in a place where Trump's threats of vengance against his numerous enemies and critics could actually be enacted. There's no way that a Justice Department could actually be weaponized that way. No way a party would allow it. No way a Court could countenance it. No way the American people would vote for it.

That naivete, I think, is no small part of why we're where we are.