OT – who will run in 2020?

[ocrenter]

[quote=burghMan]

Biden’s situation isn’t unusual at all. At worst it’s very mild and quite ordinary nepotism.[/quote]

That’s why politicians are so repulsive to the general public. If Dems run another regular politician, Trump will get his second term.

[outtamojo]

Big thumbs down for Bloomberg and his paychecks decree.

[svelte]

[quote=outtamojo]Big thumbs down for Bloomberg and his paychecks decree.[/quote]

Well. He kinda had to do that, or be accused of using his news outlets to stifle his presidential competition. (I’m assuming you’re talking about his stating those getting a paycheck from him can’t investigate Democratic candidates)

It would have been a stronger statement to say his media companies wouldn’t investigate *any* presidential candidate from any party. That would have sent a stronger ethical message.

After all, there are plenty of other news organizations investigating the politicians currently in office.

[FlyerInHi]

As of right now, looks like Pete will win the nomination.
He’s still kinda lame, IMO.

[outtamojo]

They all look lame and fringy actually and stand no chance at all against trump if the economy stays decent.

[spdrun]

How is wanting the same level of public services as other developed economies “fringy?” They’re all moderates by developed-country standards.

“Fringy” would be calling for nationalization of industries.

[Coronita]

[quote=outtamojo]They all look lame and fringy actually and stand no chance at all against trump if the economy stays decent.[/quote]

yup

[spdrun]

Just like the economy was good in 2016 and Trump didn’t stand a chance … some people even said that the Clintons paid him to run to get an easy opponent 😀

Maybe you need a radical to beat a radical.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=spdrun]How is wanting the same level of public services as other developed economies “fringy?” They’re all moderates by developed-country standards.

“Fringy” would be calling for nationalization of industries.[/quote]

I have to admit, it’s brilliant marketing on the part of the Republicans to move the goal post to the right in the minds of that American public.

From an objective political science standpoint, the whole world has pretty much moved rightward, even the Northern European countries.

[outtamojo]

[quote=spdrun]How is wanting the same level of public services as other developed economies “fringy?” They’re all moderates by developed-country standards.

“Fringy” would be calling for nationalization of industries.[/quote]

For us public services expansion is fringy- might it have something to do with megachurches in swing states and prosperity gospel? Overheard one churchgoing coworker declare” I dont want anyone that’s going to bring socialism, well except for the things I need.”

[spdrun]

Did you laugh in their foul face?

[FlyerInHi]

This is wiki’s rundown of liberalism in USA.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_liberalism_in_the_United_States

Hillary admitted to be to right of George McGovern. Obama was basically a neoliberal who supports globalization and global capitalism with a social safety net to soften the effect of change. Even Elizabeth Warren.
Pete Buttigieg is another Third Way Democrat. They are nothing “socialist” compared to Theodore Roosevelt.

Only Bernie Sanders considers himself a democratic socialist.

[Coronita]

Warren is done. Ha ha ha ha ha.

[Coronita]

Looks like Pete and Bernie.

Good.

[spdrun]

Sanders’ results are likely outsized in NH since he’s a local boy from the next state over, though I’m honestly surprised with Warren’s poor performance despite her being from MA.

[Author]

Posts