Hey girl....just not yet. Maybe later hon.

[sheshe2]

Last edited Sat Dec 15, 2018, 12:44 PM - Edit history (1)

I hear they just aren't ready for us. Wow! Biden-Beto ticket being talked up. Sorry, I want to see some diversity and not two white males. Misogyny needs to be put back in a cave where it belongs. Wake the F**K up America.

They pat us on the head and tell us to sit down and shut up. Fact is Hillary won the 2016 election.

Fact is the people's voice was not allowed due to Russia's selection of who would be sworn in on 2017. She won the popular vote. She won the hearts and minds of the majority. She won.

It is time the men to step aside and let the women's voices be heard. At the very least they should consider us equal. Sadly even in 2018 we are not.

Nancy Pelosi, weeks ago was being vilified and she turned it and crucified don. The 2018 elections proved the strength and endurance of women. We won so many seats and we were all colors and religions.

Do not pat us on the head and tell us only you know what is right for our America, that only you can lead, that America is not ready for us.

DO NOT TELL ME THE COUNTRY IS NOT READY FOR A WOMAN. WE ARE!

[question everything]

1. Beto - McCaskill

She can fight, she can show them. She will shrivel Pence to nothing.

[msongs]

2. they both lost their last elections lol nt

[Gore1FL]

46. The last thing the Democrats need to do is go to the center.

McCaskill was about the best the Democrats could do in Missouri and it took wave elections and idiots as opponents. We can do much better elsewhere.

[Demsrule86]

189. Looking at the Senate results...I fail to see how we can go 'left' as we live in a center left

I think Sherrod Brown could win...but we lose a Senate seat. As a progressive, I want someone who reflects me...but as a realist, I have to wonder can such a person win a general?

[Gore1FL]

194. America is much more left than our strategies imply.

We act like the 1970s GOP. I want to be Democrats again.

[Demsrule86]

233. I want to win. And I look at the Senate and know in my bones left won't win Tennessee...we got

Arizona with a moderate candidate. If we ever want a judicial pick, we have to run moderates for state wide races in red or even purple states. I don't like it. This is not the 70's ...sadly. We have move to the right as a country.

[Gore1FL]

235. If you buy the post-1984 failed conventional wisdom, yes.

I call bullshit on the post-1984 failed conventional wisdom. Americans want healthcare, college, roads, clean water, breathable air, clean and cheap energy, civil rights, science, and a society where we can all be something.

To fight for anything less is well, Republican. I, for one,am 40 years over being in the Democratic wing of the GOP. I do not stand alone.

[Demsrule86]

237. If they really cared about those things we would not have a Republican senate. Consider

that a majority does agree with what you say...unfortunately they are disproportionately in red states and given our system, this means that we have to run moderate Senators in red or purple states mostly Sherrod Brown is an exception.

[Gore1FL]

238. We don't have a GOP senate because we fought hard for our values.

We have a GOP senate because we didn't.

[The Genealogist]

129. Not McCaskill

I gladly voted for her for senate, but I don't think she belongs on a national ticket. I would LOVE to see a woman on the ticket in 2020, but not her. Maybe a cabinet position.

[Wounded Bear]

3. Not to mention too young and too old...

I'm not super worried right now. Lots of time for things to sort themselves out. But yeah, after all the fight that women have put up over the past couple of years, I don't see any ticket with two white guys garnering all the support we need.

This old white guy has your back.

[pnwmom]

19. So a 65 year old is too old when she's a woman,

but just fine when it's Bernie or Joe or some other guy?

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

72. Plenty of us think Bernie and Joe are both too old.

Personally, I don't want anyone old enough to be collecting Social Security to be running, which does leave out a couple of people I otherwise like.

[Garrett78]

78. Wounded Bear was referring to Biden-O'Rourke being too old-too young.

[pnwmom]

79. I thought he was replying to a post about Beto and McCaskill. n/t

[Wounded Bear]

89. I see that...

No harm, no foul. But yes, I was responding to the OP and the Biden/Beto combination.

Our next ticket probably should have a woman and some melanin on it.

[OnlinePoker]

26. O'Rourke is the same age JFK was when he was assassinated.

He is not too young.

[delisen]

62. Too inexperienced. No foreign policy.Takes more than collecting fans

to win and govern these days.

[Bucky]

93. Agreed. Obama lacks experience and is America even ready for a black president?

Wait, which year were you talking about?

[delisen]

143. Yes Obama did lack experience and we need experience more then ever now.

We have a chance at full democracy--but it is a chance not a certainty.

We can't go back to the past, as attractive as that might seem to some.

[Bucky]

217. Wait, your argument is we can't go back to the past, so let's nominate Biden?

No wait, your argument is we can't go back to the past, so we shouldn't look to history on how we've beaten Republicans in the past?

[Demsrule86]

190. Obama was in the Senate...and had extensive political experience in Chicago. Also,Obama ran during

an economic meltdown...we don't know he would have won in a 2016 style election.I would also add that someone as gifted as Pres. Obama only comes around once in a while...very very talented.

[Bucky]

218. Is there some magic about being in Chicago?

Because other than being from El Paso instead of Chicago, O'Rourke and Obama have almost identical political experience

Your attempts to draw a difference between Obama and O'Rourke are nonsensical. Obama had four years in the Senate, but really only two before he started running for president.

O'Rourke had six years in Congress and also served in local government before that. And before he worked in city government, his civic leadership involved being... wait for it... a community organizer.

I'm not saying there's some magic in the formula of going from the private sector, to community organizer, to local government, to Congress, before running for president. But if your argument is that Obama's experience is what made him qualified you need to recognize that Beto O'Rourke has an almost freakishly parallel background to Obama.

Also, he's good and inspirational at giving speeches and raising money from the grassroots without relying on Pac money. And those are the things that really matter.

[Demsrule86]

232. Beto is in the House not the Senate...and is not serving at the moment.

And yeah Chicago politics are brutal. I would also like to ask you why Beto...he seems good and all but he lost by a larger margin than say Stacy Abrams or Andrew Gillum? Both did better in their races and are in states we might win with a VP or a presidential pick...Texas is not there yet. I find the Beto craze troubling when both Abrams and Gillum are not even mentioned. People of color are one of our largest constituencies.

[Bucky]

236. 1) No, Beto IS in House now. 2) It's not like he asked for a draft movement. He was surprised too

When people started calling on him to run for president. He generated a LOT of national buzz with his campaign. But the chatter of him running for president emerged after he lost the senate run. It didn't come from him or his campaign. It didn't even come from Texas. No one was expecting this. A draft is sexy.

And you ask how he's different from Abrams or Gillum. That's a good question. Here's how he's different:

1- fundraising reach - Beto brought in $79 million from all around the country, the vast majority in small donations. Gillum raised about $55m, but over 20% came from "generous billionaires." I don't fault that, governors play by different rules. Abrams raised $22m, but obviously was running in a smaller state. But O'Rourke's fundraising performance is more impressive by any measure.

2- election performance - O'Rourke was THE high water mark for Democrats in Texas - 48.3%. Other Democrats have won state-wide in Florida in years past. No Democrat has won state-wide in a quarter century. It's not even been close. Our last senate candidate got 34%. Six years ago, Ted Cruz's opponent got 40.6%. Our 2008 senate candidate got 42.8%. Stacy Abrams's performance was more impressive than Gillum's. Coming out neck and neck in Georgia is comparable to doing so in Texas. But governor's elections are less partisan overall (how many Republicans have been elected governor of Massachusetts since 1990? At least 3) than Congressional elections.

3 - different office means different focus - Beto was running for Congress, not governor. The issues he was addressing were national in character, not local. What he talked about on the stump is applicable to all corners of the nation. It's essentially the same public conversation he'd have if running for president. Governors deal with more local issues, which aren't as sexy, and lend themselves less to sweeping inspirational visions.

4- actual experience - There are traditionally two routes to the White House -- being governor or serving in Congress. Neither Abrams or Gillum has served in congress. Race is almost certainly a factor there, but that's the breaks. But also Beto has spend enough years in Congress to be credible and authoritative as a candidate for national office. Neither Abrams nor Gillum has actually spent time as governor.

Both will be considered for cabinet offices in the near future. But whatever the magic threshold for presidentiality is, he's met it and they haven't. I don't doubt that race is a factor in that, but it's far from the only factor.

[delisen]

225. Yes Obama served in U S Senate from 1/3/2005 to 11/16/2008

He announced his candidacy for president on February 10, 2007.

Poor to that Obama served in the Illinois as a state senator from January, 1997 to November, 2004

[Demsrule86]

234. Exactly, I fail to see the swooning over Beto...not that I don't like him but Abrams and Gillum did

better. I would say the Abrams race was lost to massive cheating.

[EffieBlack]

175. Beto's not JFK

[Bucky]

221. And Obama wasn't FDR. But the political parallels are remarkable

No one is saying that Beto O'Rourke is JFK. No one said he's RFK. He's a candidate for this moment and he's perfectly qualified for the job.

You can agree or disagree with his issues, I'm still checking him out personally. But arguments against him based on experience are pretty shallow. He's been in local government, he's been in Congress, he's rallied millions and inspired millions more with his vision for a better country, and he has a proven track record as a fundraiser nationwide without relying on Pac money.

[EffieBlack]

228. I'm not making arguments against him

I'm simply pointing out the absurdity of the starry-eyed worship of him, particularly among those who dismiss as unworthy others with similar attributes and experience.

Beto is talented and has tremendous potential. But he's also in danger of being set up to fail of people don't give him the room he needs to grow but instead push him out in front and force a mantle on him he's not ready to bear.

They not only need to give Beto time and space to develop, they also need to give people who aren't as enamored of him as they are time and space to get to know him for themselves, instead of trying to force him down everyone's throats, which only annoys and drives people away.

[forgotmylogin]

180. Harris/Biden

Kamala knows her stuff and has broad appeal, Joe has the wisdom to back her up.

[Armymedic88]

4. Don't be so pissy..

Not one vote has been cast. Let democracy happen before you get all butthurt! Lol

[sheshe2]

7. Wow.

Armymedic88

4. Don't be so pissy..

What a civil response. My Op did not deserve your derision.

Not one vote has been cast. Let democracy happen before you get all butthurt! Lol

More derision. Pretty cruel response. Fact is these things are being said here and now on DU.

You owe me an apology.

[MLAA]

85. Agree, you are owed an apology.

[MLAA]

86. Armymedic, you do owe Sheshe2 an apology. Your put down was in called for.

[sheshe2]

178. Thanks.

[Armymedic88]

117. Here's my point..

I don't care if our candidate has penis or vagina, more or less melanine in their skin. This divisive litmus test BS in this party needs to stop, for the sake of our democracy. We must defeat Trump and the republicans.

[catbyte]

134. Then just say it in a way that's not so divisive. "Pissy?" "Butthurt?"

Wow.

[Armymedic88]

138. Too many..

Sensitive Steve's and Sally's on here 🙄

[mcar]

148. Wow

[catbyte]

150. It's called civility, Mr. Eyeroll.

Welcome to ignore.

[Tarc]

163. I think your actual problem is that there's "too many adults" here

"Read the room", as they say, bro. This is neither your dorm room nor reddit.

[Tarc]

169. "a womans forum" ?

So you're adding misogyny to your juvenile antics now?

Sure you're in the right forum, son?

[sheshe2]

181. Great response!

Thank you Tarc.

[Tarc]

191. Anytime

The cherry on top, looks like someone flagged a retort of his, and it was removed.

[sheshe2]

220. Hey!

[spooky3]

210. Alas, s/he has bid us adieu. Nt

[sheshe2]

222. Sad that.

[Squinch]

173. Poor you. No one understands you. They're all just too sensitive. It has nothing to do with you

being obnoxious. It's all their failing.

[marble falls]

186. The sort of thing said by a white guy who manages to vote only for a another white guy ...

"its not racism/sexism, the best candidate just happened to be a white male, again."

I heard this all through Obama's terms and Hillary's stolen election from guys around here who look like me.

We Democrats have too much wealth of good candidates to be settling onto two white males no matter how good they are this early in the game.

[Eliot Rosewater]

202. AT least we know what is what when we read that stuff, dont we.

Yeah, we need a WOMAN in the Oval Office.

Now, having said that, I want whoever can win but if at this point a woman cant win, something is really really wrong here.

[MontanaMama]

11. Let democracy happen like it did last time?

I would recommend thinking twice before calling someone pissy and butthurt around here.

[Squinch]

14. You're showing things about yourself that I don't think you mean to be showing.

All hanging out there for everyone to see.

[sheshe2]

16. ;)

Thanks.

[Squinch]

81. But seriously. I wonder if they know they're broadcasting.

I kind of doubt it.

[sheshe2]

149. Ummmhmm.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

44. Amen!! We all may have favorites but it doesnt

Even matter at this point! Mine is Biden/Beto. Biden's got the wisdom and experience. Beto has the sharpness, authenticity an youth. Plus it's a 12-16 year sure thing rule.

[LakeArenal]

58. Absolutely agree. Let's drink on it!!

Laura, pour me a drink! Please.

[not_the_one]

115. In all seriousness, we don't need to put things off for four more years....

Yes, Biden has the experience, and is liked by most everyone, but every time we pull from the stable of the long revered past, they immediately run to the center in an effort to do a reach-around, er.. I mean "reach across the aisle", to prove willingness to.... compromise. We should NOT compromise with the current cabal of republicans. At this point, every time we compromise that brings us closer to the republican goals.

We need to look forward. That is what people are voting for.

I also like Beto, but where others see the "it" factor, I see a young, inexperienced fresh face.

That may be ok for the VP slot. But teaming him with Biden is basically saying we are going to continue with business as usual, and we will get around to actual change four years from now, IF Biden doesn't run again, and Beto actually learns the ropes.

I don't think we have that long. There is a lot of damage that has to be fixed, and "middle of the road" based on "more of the same" ain't gonna get that done.

I think the first quality is having a candidate with SOME real experience, and is a TRUE progressive. America is ready for progress, which means change, and not just baby steps. Our candidates need to reflect that.

But that is just IMHO...

[Guppy]

152. who is progressive with experience

I maintain that sanders, Warren, harris and Klobacher have no more experience than beto. Being in the senate prepares you for nothing.

[JudyM]

171. I agree with your assessment except I give Beto more cred.

He is adept at one of the things our party needs most: passionately articulating our values in sound bites.

We often sound too lofty and esoteric to get voters excited enough to get out there. We need people who can punch ideas home. Beto has that, IMO.

Welcome to DU!

[sheshe2]

224. Amen a men a men...

To a personal attack. Wow.

[SixString]

87. Indeed.

[Mr. Quackers]

90. OMG

wow, just wow

[MineralMan]

95. That's completely uncalled-for.

Why do that? You have embarrassed yourself. Try thinking before posting.

[Eliot Rosewater]

203. And another APPLAUDS that FUCKING SHIT

[Hotler]

107. .......snort!

Welcome to DU.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

5. Harris / Booker

Hillary / Harris would work for me, too.

I'm an old man. We should've had a woman in the White House instead of Rotten Ronnie.

[sheshe2]

8. Hillary won't run....

I would take Harris/ Booker...just not sure yet. Will wait and see. One thing I do NOT want is an all male ticket.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

13. I'd be ashamed to ask her to

She withstood more than any other candidate I've ever witnessed.

Even worse than an all male ticket: all old, white, male ticket. I don't want to look at presidential candidates and see a near mirror image of myself, nor wonder if they'll survive the full term.

And definitely no old, ORANGE, male ticket.

[Eliot Rosewater]

204. No American in history suffered more unwarranted attacks than Hillary and she dealt with it

for 30 years where as rump cant for one hour.

We dont deserve her.

We really dont, especially those who...never mind.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

45. Why the hell not? You (all of us) should #1 pick the

people who stand for what we believe and #2, pick who can beat Monster.

Going at it from the reverse?. I want a man, a woman, whatever, is against everything the Democratic party is all about.

Imho

[TeamPooka]

56. Kamala Harris will unite Obama and Hillary supporters and GOTV for us like no other candidate IMHO

[LakeArenal]

60. Not all of those supporters are united by Harris.

[Eliot Rosewater]

205. Why not?

[Hoyt]

6. Argee 100%. Men have screwed this country up royally.

[sheshe2]

9. Lol...

You are a guy Hoyt, is it okay if I agree with you here?

BTW...thanks.

[marble falls]

187. To put a fine point on it: Men who look like me have royaly screwed this country.

[Hassler]

10. I'll start caring about candidates in November.

[brush]

12. Just last week I got alerted on for saying two white males doesn't work anymore...

for our party—the very same ticket. The alert was for bigotry and my post was pulled.

Can you believe it? White, male privilege is still strong in some quarters, even here on DU, even though I suggested pairing Beto with a woman or a POC as Biden's time has passed.

I appealed the alert and surprisingly it was rescinded the next day but by then the OP was old news.

Let's see how your post fares here.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

47. i do. Pick the person first !!!

[Hermit-The-Prog]

59. ok. I pick Hillary.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

66. Hillary, somehow, someway will replace -45. It is

destunyt!!

[Squinch]

131. No reason why we can't pick a person with a vagina.

This "don't require a female!" nonsense suggests we believe the right candidate isn't female. Right now, I think we're idiots if a woman is not somewhere in the ticket. Our list of suitable women is at least as long as suitable men, and women have NEVER been represented in the executive branch. Its time.

I do. I require a female.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

227. #MeToo!!

[pecosbob]

15. I would love another opportunity to vote for a woman for President as I did in 2016

but I'm a life-long confirmed lefty. I didn't vote in the primary here in Nevada as when I went to caucus I was so put off by all the vitriol that I left after fifteen minutes. I hope we find a candidate that brings us together.

[marble falls]

17. I think we have women and candidates of color with good experiance than to even concider ...

a ticket with two white guys on it. We are too rich in good candidates to settle for that.

[sheshe2]

22. thank you.

[Glamrock]

18. That seems to be an awfully deep read sister sheshe.

Could be, maybe, the thought of Obama's beloved VP coupled with one of the most inspiring Dem speakers since Obama seems like a good ticket. At least that's where I'm at anyway. I won't tell you how or what to think, but I haven't seen any posts making the statements you're proposing are being made.

[sheshe2]

20. I did.

There have been many saying a woman...not her time.

[Glamrock]

24. Okay. Then by all means continue.

I haven't seen em personally. So I didn't know where you were coming from.

[pnwmom]

21. Biden's not beloved by anyone who remembers his dismal failure with Anita Hill,

and he won't be beloved by millions more when they learned that he was key the Democratic leader, in multiple bills, who made it harder and harder for people to get out from under their student loans through bankruptcy.

[LakeArenal]

34. Maybe, but a lot of these possible candidates have their own more recent dismal failure

In the railroading of Al Franken and we are often told to move on and get over it.

[pnwmom]

40. That isn't comparable at ALL. Al Franken wasn't a victim of sexual harassment

as Anita Hill was. And thanks to Joe Biden's mishandling of the hearings, we have Clarence Thomas on the court now.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/joe-biden-2020-harvey-weinstein_us_5a0a0ba8e4b00a6eece3a13e

The man who could have changed that was Biden, who served as chair of the committee in 1991. In the years since, he has publicly presented himself as Hill’s ally, but she made clear in an interview with HuffPost in 2014 that she believes the senator let her down.

“There were three women who were ready and waiting and subpoenaed to be giving testimony about similar behavior that they had experienced or witnessed. He failed to call them,” Hill said. “There also were experts who could have given real information as opposed to the misinformation that the Senate was giving ... and helped the public understand sexual harassment. He failed to call them.”

Biden told The New York Times two days before Hill was set to testify that he began by assuming that Thomas was innocent ― and, as it follows, by assuming that Hill was lying.

“I must start off with a presumption of giving the person accused the benefit of the doubt,” Biden said. “I must seek the truth and I must ask straightforward and tough questions, and in my heart I know if that woman is telling the truth it will be almost unfair to her. On the other hand, if I don’t ask legitimate questions, then I am doing a great injustice to someone who might be totally innocent. It’s a horrible dilemma because you have two lives at stake here.”

[LakeArenal]

43. Not to you apparently.

Baggage is baggage.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

49. All bets are off now. No baggage is even worth

a fraction, compared to Trump's.

We could run a Ken doll and it would have more integrity

[LakeArenal]

51. I'm not the one who brought up 40 year old baggage.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

54. Sorry LA

[pnwmom]

73. You didn't say a word about his shepherding legislation through Congress

that has denied millions the ability to discharge onerous loan debt through bankruptcy. You can get out from under any amount of credit card debt and other consumer debt, but not student loans. Why? Because he took the side of the financial industry in Delaware.

That will hurt him with young people, once it comes to light. And we need a high turnout among young people to win this time.

[LakeArenal]

94. That is speculation on your part that I and and others disagree.

You aren’t uncovering anything new that “young people” are going to uncover like some deep hidden secret. It’s public record.
Most people on DU are aware of AnitaHill so you are also preaching to the choir.

I think also you are denegrating a pretty beloved Democrat.

[pnwmom]

71. No. Being the victim of prolonged sexual harassment is not the same

as what happened to Al Franken -- as he would be the first to acknowledge.

And everyone has some baggage, but Biden's is heavy -- and it will all come back, during the general if not the primaries.

[LakeArenal]

96. Yes I can see you will make sure everyone hears about it.

You aren’t having a lot of luck convincing many here because we all know about Anita Hill.

Think the baggage of those senators is greater. It’s my opinion. I will continue to identify who they are. Harris. Booker. Gillibrand, Schumer, Brown and any of the others that make 2020 noise.

See you again I’m sure.

[mr_lebowski]

68. Your quote from Biden? It's literally perfect from my perspective ...

Here, I'll say it again:

“I must start off with a presumption of giving the person accused the benefit of the doubt,” Biden said. “I must seek the truth and I must ask straightforward and tough questions, and in my heart I know if that woman is telling the truth it will be almost unfair to her. On the other hand, if I don’t ask legitimate questions, then I am doing a great injustice to someone who might be totally innocent. It’s a horrible dilemma because you have two lives at stake here.”

Yeah. That's DEAD ON CORRECT THINKING for a person in his position at the time, and exactly what I'd want him to say.

But then, of course. I'm a man. As a woman, you expect the woman to be believed, period. I understand your perspective. And I think the evidence strongly suggested Hill was the honest party, in the end.

But I still argue that what Biden described is the FAIR and proper perspective to GO INTO something like those hearings ... with. Someone who's an arbiter as Biden was here ... it's not right for him to assume that woman must be honest and the man must be guilty, prior to hearing testimony. Sorry.

Lastly, I think there's another undercurrent to this story that a lot of people forget. Even though both parties in this case were black, there was still the fact the one up for the promotion, Thomas, was a black man. And I think a lot of Democrats, whether they'll admit it or not, felt reticent to go on the same sort attack against a (sadly rare) black SCOTUS nominee for ... anything, really ... not like they may have been ready to do against a white GOP nominee. I think they didn't want to be 'seen' as opposing Thomas, fearing that it would open them up to charges of racism.

It's a BS excuse in many ways, but really ... Bush picking Thomas was actually master stroke that put Dems in a very compromised position.

[pnwmom]

112. No, I don't expect the woman to be believed, period. That wasn't the problem.

The problem was that Biden was the Chairman of the Committee, and he refused to allow 3 corroborating witnesses to speak. And he allowed "experts" for Thomas to speak, one opining that Dr. Hill had "erotomania," but he refused to allow experts Hill requested to speak.

And his stated reason? That he had promised the Republicans on the Committee that he'd finish the job by a certain date (a few days of hearings.) So that was that. They ran out the clock and prevented Anita's side from being heard.


https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/joe-biden-2020-harvey-weinstein_us_5a0a0ba8e4b00a6eece3a13e

“There were three women who were ready and waiting and subpoenaed to be giving testimony about similar behavior that they had experienced or witnessed. He failed to call them,” Hill said. “There also were experts who could have given real information as opposed to the misinformation that the Senate was giving ... and helped the public understand sexual harassment. He failed to call them.”

[mr_lebowski]

114. Yeah I know he wasn't the greatest ... I was speaking only of the quote, since you brought it up

As what I thought was evidence against him.

I think it's the part that maybe spoke BEST for him.

[pnwmom]

130. I agree, and I included his quote because

it didn't seem fair to leave out the part of the article that made him look the best.

But in my mind it was cancelled out by his decision to prevent the collaborating witnesses from testifying -- and that was in his power.

[mr_lebowski]

132. Gotcha ... makes sense now, mama :)

[MicaelS]

108. The fact that you are harping on things that...

Happened 27 years ago is .. really sad.

[pnwmom]

110. The fact that Clarence Thomas is still on the court because Biden,

the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, helped smooth his path is really sad.

[Celerity]

41. +1

[DURHAM D]

48. Agree.

I remember it well and will never forgive him.

[cemaphonic]

65. The student loan issue alone will kill Biden with Millennials and Z'ers

And we can't afford to keep them sitting on the sidelines.

[LakeArenal]

29. I think the same.

Joe Biden seems the most qualified.
No other candidate has any global diplomacy.

[Glamrock]

32. True that!

How you doin lake? All good?

[LakeArenal]

35. Oh life is soo good. Thanks for asking!

Hope you, too.

[Glamrock]

36. One more crazy week then two weeks vacation.

This time of the year is nuts in my industry. My customers realize they still have money left in their budget that has to be spent before the holiday blackout. P.O's being cut with a three week deadline. It's nuts. One more week and then boredom until February.

[LakeArenal]

42. Love boredom. January is one long bore!!!

[Glamrock]

52. And I get to get out of the Chicago cold down to Atlanta in a month!

[LakeArenal]

55. With the climate change..

You may sun in Chicago and freeze, float or blow away in Atlanta.

[Glamrock]

57. I'm just hoping for anything over 50

[Jersey Devil]

23. Too soon for me, but...

I agree that a ticket with 2 white guys is not what we should be doing.

I like a bunch of the current prospects: Klochubar, Harris, Beto, Booker and several others could be on a ticket I could easily support. What order and who is at the top of the ticket I haven't thought about yet and probably won't until next year at some time. I need a rest from all the intensity of the midterms, take a few breaths, then start again. But not yet.

[TygrBright]

25. WHAT SHESHE SAID! n/t

[DoctorJoJo]

27. Biden Is Too Old (I know as I share a birthday with him), As Is Bernie. We Need New Blood!

BTW: No one is more critical of women than other women! Every woman I've ever known in the workplace has told me they would never work for another woman. No idea why--but it is just a fact!

[LakeArenal]

30. I have never experienced women eating women.

And I’m old.

[DURHAM D]

50. I have never once heard a woman say that.

I started working at 13 (no law against it back in the 50s) and retired at 70.

Your comment is definitely NOT A FACT.

[catbyte]

136. Wow, where did YOU work?!? I'm retired & have never heard that from anyone.

[struggle4progress]

28. Paths of victory

[struggle4progress]

31. March of the Women

[sheshe2]

102. +++

[struggle4progress]

111. Life, strife -- those two are one!

Naught can ye win but by faith and daring.
On! on! that ye have done
but for the work of today preparing.

Firm in reliance, laugh in defiance,
Laugh in hope, for sure is the end!
March! march! many as one,
Shoulder to shoulder and friend to friend

[struggle4progress]

33. I am woman

[aeromanKC]

37. Biden/Beto 2020 I love it!!

Too white? Yes. Too male? Yes. But I love it!! Biden is exactly what the country (And world) needs after the Trump fiasco. Statesman, respected across the world, experienced, strong in the rust belt and someone who can bring the country together. (Except for the Trump cult. They are way too far gone)

Beto is the excitement the Dems need similar to Obama 2008. That type of excitement doesn't come around very often. And he's young and represents the next generation.

The ticket is perfect. Well, except for being too white and to male.

But regardless, I'm still voting for any ticket that has a D next to it.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

53. Exactly!!! It's perfect...age and wisdom with youth

and excitement. Beto can learn from Joe !

It's just brilliant!!!

And wtf..isn't our party supposed to be about credentials and then what they look like?

Doesn't sound like it here.

[LakeArenal]

63. You are absolutely right.

I love the idea.

[smirkymonkey]

88. Right now, my criteria is to nominate anyone who Trump cannot make mincemeat of

in the campaign and in debates. Both Biden and Beto will not be trampled on by the likes of Trump. Neither will Kamala Harris or Cory Booker. The others, I'm not so sure. I fear he will pretty much chew them up and spit them out.

This could all change if Trump is not the nominee, but what are the chances of that?

[struggle4progress]

38. Sisters are doin it for themselves

[sheshe2]

103. +++

[struggle4progress]

109. Aretha and The Eurhythmics

[Perseus]

39. I am a man, and I am with you

Could not agree more...

If justice was what it is supposed to be, the orange guy, his gang would all go to jail, and Hillary Clinton would take her right place in the presidency.

[WeekiWater]

61. I had similar thoughts after reading the Move On and CNN polls.

It simply gives some comfort. Three white males at the top. I have no doubt that appearance plays a role.

We should recognize that along with systemic oppression comes a more difficult time gaining name recognition. Clinton is one of the few who doesn’t have to fight against that problem. But she was also not included in the two polls I mention.

[Renew Deal]

64. Are gender and race your top two criteria when judging presidential candidates?

[sheshe2]

104. No.

[Squinch]

135. I hereby declare openly that, in the primary, if there is a female and a male

candidate, I will vote for the female.

Two hundred plus years is long enough to wait.

[Squinch]

133. Do you feel there are no suitable female candidates? Women have never been represented

in the executive branch. Never. There are at least as many good female candidates as male.

In the primary, yes. Gender will be a top priority for me. I am not alone. If the Democratic party doesn't have its head up its ass - and I don't believe it does, it will listen to us.

[DFW]

67. For the record, a woman DID win the 2016 presidential election

The fact that she was manipulated out of serving does not change that.

[sheshe2]

137. Correct.

[Hekate]

69. Harris - O'Rourke

[Raine]

70. I just want two decent people to be nominated

be they man or woman, whatever color, whatever age. I'm not for telling anyone to step aside!

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

74. Two huge mistakes are being promulgated every day here on DU.

One is an insistence that our next President/Vice President ticket be female and non white.

The other is persistently pushing candidates who are old, and piously proclaiming that experience is the only thing that matters.

Actually a third mistake is putting forth relatively untried candidates.

Personally, I wish there would be a complete moratorium on all such speculations at least until the end of 2019. For one thing, none of us has a crystal ball or access to News of the Future and so we simply have no idea what's going to happen in the next year or more. We should all be paying attention to the present, and start thinking about our candidates a year from now.

[apcalc]

75. I'm with you sheshe2.

Our concerns are a priority for me and it is my thinking that our concerns are best represented and brought to the forefront by other women.

I’m done waiting for next time.

[Garrett78]

77. Because they are best represented by women. Research backs that up. See link in post #76.

[Garrett78]

76. A good article on why electing women matters:

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-cohen-why-women-should-elect-women-20160406-story.html#

The global scholarship leaves no doubt: Women in political office make it a priority to advance rights, equality and opportunity for women and girls, in a way and to a degree that men in power overwhelmingly do not.

I think the same can be said for electing persons of color.

We need to recognize and appreciate the moment we're in (Me Too, BLM), and the fact that our electorate is increasingly diverse (and youthful), as is the incoming class of Democratic Congresspersons.

This talk of nominating a white male-white male ticket is foolish, especially given Biden's baggage and penchant for gaffes, and the fact that he'll be close to 80 years old (when the average age of the last 5 Democratic presidents has been 48.6 upon taking office). Right now, some seem to only think of Biden as lovable Uncle Joe who pals around with Obama buying burgers and ice cream. There's a reason his previous bids (plural) for the nomination have come up way short, and his history with the Thomas-Hill hearing will become an issue.

[sheshe2]

105. Thank you...

I will go read the rest.

[phleshdef]

80. Kamala Harris is the only decent female candidate whos name has been thrown out there.

Kirsten Gillibrand is a less than stellar candidate.
Amy Klobuchar has less charisma than a nose hair.
Tulsi Gabbard turns into a neocon as soon as you get into issues of the war on terror.
Hillary Clinton is NOT running again (and thank God because I don't want to see her put herself through that again)

It has nothing to do with female vs male.
I could go through the list of possible male candidates and I'd have many of the same things to say about a lot of them.

[oberliner]

82. What about Oprah Winfrey?

[phleshdef]

118. Unqualified joke.

[oberliner]

121. That's what people said about Trump

[phleshdef]

123. And he has thus far proved it 100%.

So we were right about him. You have a point?

[oberliner]

124. He became president anyway

Oprah is popular enough to win, smart enough to be good at the job, and progressive enough to be on the correct side of the important issues of the day.

[phleshdef]

128. Oprah is smart enough to know she has no business anywhere near the Presidency.

You should follow her lead.

[oberliner]

160. Sometimes folks say they aren't running and then change their minds

But you are probably right.

[milestogo]

91. What about Elizabeth Warren?

She is more qualified than anyone you mentioned.

And Amy Klobuchar is pretty damn fantastic.

[phleshdef]

119. Klobuchar is boring as fuck. Pretend otherwise all you want

Liz Warren can't win nationally.

[LakeArenal]

99. Pretty dismissive of Klobuchar.

[phleshdef]

120. Damn straight. She is boring, no charisma, no personality.

So yea, she can consider herself dismissed.

[milestogo]

125. Intelligence, integrity, and genuineness don't count for shit with our party.

[phleshdef]

127. Sure those things count. But you need charisma to win the Presidency.

She doesn't have it.

[LakeArenal]

139. That's what they said about Tony Evers for Gov of Wisconsin.

Nice guys can and do win. I’d vote for Amy before many of your barely experienced go getters.

In any event I doubt she will consider herself “dismissed”.

[phleshdef]

140. Irrelevant. A Presidential campaign requires more appeal.

I'm not concerned. She would get nowhere in the primary. Thats reality.

[LakeArenal]

141. Your reality. You are just throwing stuff to get a rise out of people

Amy Klobuchar in no way deserves your denigration.

I say your opinion is irrelevant. That’s my reality.

I’m gonna wallow in my reality and ignore any further discussion with you. So long.

[phleshdef]

142. I'm not denigrating her. I like her. She just isn't Presidential material.

[delisen]

145. We need party building; we need truth and we are going to build

over thew next two years. We don't need blind faith in male charisma.

[phleshdef]

147. No one said anything about Male charisma.

Don't put words in my mouth because you lack a valid argument.

[milestogo]

151. Neither did GWB or his father. Neither did Johnson, Nixon, Carter, or Ford.

You're buying in to the celebrity theory of leadership.

[phleshdef]

153. GWB had plenty of "good ol boy" charisma. Same for Johnson.

Ford was never elected President, not sure where you are going with that.

Carter was elected because any Democrat was going to win at that moment in history. His lack if charisma also contributed to Reagan beating him badly (though not as much as the GOP fucking with the hostage crisis).

Nixon and HW are the only valid arguments you made there. But we are no longer in in era where a dry, boring old dude is gonna get anywhere. A side note on HW, as with Carter, a more charismatic candidate came along and made him a one term wonder.

It has nothing to do with "celebrity theory". If that was the case I wouldn't be laughing in people's faces when they mention Oprah.

The candidate in 2020 has to be the whole package. Charisma, brains, temperament, etc. They have to get people excited so that it gets asses into the voting booth. Its foolish to think otherwise.

[crazycatlady]

170. GWB ran against two very uncharismatic men

[phleshdef]

174. I think Kerry has a certain charisma about him.

The Iraq war didn't become unpopular fast enough, otherwise he would've won.

[Squinch]

176. Tammy Duckworth.

[phleshdef]

183. I had not heard her mentioned as running, but I could get on board.

[Squinch]

185. We were talking about lots of them before they announced as running.

I wish we could recruit her. She has something to appeal to everyone. And she's a bad ass. She would win.

[sheshe2]

207. She is a bad ass and I love her for that.

Remember this!

Link to tweet

More
Replying to @SenDuckworth
Please run for president.

10 replies 23 retweets 675 likes
Reply 10 Retweet 23 Like 675

Sandra Tentler
‏

@SandraTentler1
7 Sep 2017
More
I was just coming to say the same thing.

1 reply 3 retweets 164 likes
Reply 1 Retweet 3 Like 164

Allergic_to_Orange
‏

@Linnie_33305
8 Sep 2017
More
Keep kicking ass with that leg

0 replies 4 retweets 94 likes
Reply Retweet 4 Like 94
End of conversation
New conversation

Tenletters
‏

@Tenletters
7 Sep 2017
More
Replying to @SenDuckworth @chrislhayes
I feel like it's wrong to laugh when a lady has busted her leg clean in half, but your face is so perfect!

2 replies 9 retweets 686 likes
Reply 2 Retweet 9 Like 686

Nai Mei
‏

@naimeiyao
7 Sep 2017
More
Never saw someone so happy to break a leg. Tammy's a star!

1 reply 4 retweets 213 likes
Reply 1 Retweet 4 Like 213
1 more reply
New conversation

Floyd Elliot
‏

@FloydElliot
7 Sep 2017
More
Replying to @SenDuckworth
You are just awesome. I'm proud that you're my Senator.

6 replies 10 retweets 471 likes
Reply 6 Retweet 10 Like 471

helenanurse
‏

@christianainmt
7 Sep 2017
More
I have one awesome and one not so awesome Senator (<---understatement) in Montana. I imagine that @SenDuckworth is my other awesome Senator.

2 replies 1 retweet 89 likes
Reply 2 Retweet 1 Like 89


"""""""""""""""""""""

LOL! LOVE her Joe Wilson Teeshirt.

[manor321]

83. It's a democracy. People get to vote for who they want.

These types of posts make it sound like there is "someone" in charge and that "someone" needs to do the right thing by making the right choice. The primary will be decided by the voters.

[Bucky]

92. Biden-Beto is the chatter of unimaginative people. Pay it no heed.

Mostly it's coming from folks who only understand big names in politics, not the process of insurgents rising to the top, which is always the thing that renews democracy.

”Biden-Beto" is the rallying cry of the classes that didn't see Bernie surging among millennials, didn't see Bill Clinton taking the nomination in 1992, and complained America wasn't ready for a black president in 2008. Those are backward-looking people, and they can be safely ignored.

They're only adding Beto on cause they know Biden needs a youth infusion and O'Rourke is the flavor of the month. And I say this as a huge admirer of both men. Beto is on my short list. But it's time to let all our septugenarians (Biden, Bernie, and Hillary) go be elder statesmen.

[SMC22307]

97. Your OP makes no sense.

A woman did get more votes in 2016 but was hosed by the outdated electoral college. It's clear the country IS ready for a woman, so what are you talking about? A woman is Speaker of the House. Women swept the 2018 midterms, with a particularly sweet victory being Spanberger who ousted Teabagger Brat.

Obsessing over race and gender is a losing strategy. We should want the best candidate, regardless of the package they're wrapped in. Cuz I guarangoddamntee if a loon like Sarah Palin or corrupt princess like Ivaaaaaaaaaaaanka ever make it to the top of the ticket, I'll be pleading with women across the country to vote against their gender...

[Squinch]

172. The OP is requesting that women are finally represented in the executive branch. You characterize

that as "obsessing over gender." Your characterization is a losing strategy.

I want a female candidate. I'm not alone in that. More Democrats are women than men. There are at least as many qualified female candidates as male. None of them are like Sarah Palin or Ivanka, but nice try at minimizing the qualifications of our female Democrats.

In the primary, if the choice is between a woman and a man, I will choose the woman. Period. You would probably characterize that as obsessing over gender. I call it working toward 51% of the population being represented in the executive branch for the first time in history. It's not too much to ask. We've waited 250 years and we're done waiting.

Stop obsessing over how terrible it is for women to require representation. It's a losing strategy. We should want the best candidate AND we should want the best representation for all Democrats. Not just male Democrats.

[sheshe2]

177. Thank you, squinch.

I was going to respond, yet to damn tired with mom care. I am so tired of the bullshit.

You would probably characterize that as obsessing over gender. I call it working toward 51% of the population being represented in the executive branch for the first time in history. It's not too much to ask. We've waited 250 years and we're done waiting.

[Squinch]

179. I'm so sick of this shit. All calls for female representation are dependably answered with, "You

have to forget race and gender and pick the best candidate!"

That statement assumes that the best candidate cannot challenge the status quo race and gender, which is white and male.

I've so had enough of it.

And then you have the knuckle-draggers who outright declare that such an assertion is "pissing on men" and telling anyone who makes the assertion that they need to limit themselves to "a women's forum." I see that post was hidden, but Jesus, how did that one even get in here? The prevalence of that kind of ignorance is just exhausting.

[sheshe2]

182. I did not see the response, yet figured it out from the responses.

Sooo...women are going to be regulated to a private room? Is that like the kids table we had at home during family get togethers? Neither seen or heard.

Not on your life.

[SMC22307]

192. So you (and the OP) would choose...

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) over Barack Obama (D-IL) if the primary were held tomorrow (and he hadn't already served as president)?

Many of us would like a woman president but think the vast majority focus more on education and experience than gender. Also, policy positions, background, and being able to get down in the mud against the vile, win-at-all-costs GOP. The package they're wrapped in doesn't top many of our lists.

I'm a woman who doesn't feel "patted on the head" and find the OP ridiculous. It does women no good. If women want representation, women need to run for office. Stop blaming men for there being more of them representing us. As we saw in the midterms, when women run, women win. I reject the victim-y nonsense put forth in the OP.

[Squinch]

193. When Obama and AOC are

primarying against each other I'll decide.

(Why must people always use these asinine examples? More than anything else, it seems to indicate that the writer thinks its likely that any woman who might be put forward is going to be less qualified than any man. I don't share that belief.)

[SMC22307]

195. "I will choose the woman. Period."

No you won't. And many others won't, either.

Most serious voters factor in education, background, experience, policy positions, the ability to "manage" the GOP, etc. You're doing the same thing the OP did, that woman-as-victim thing. "The writer" does not in any way, shape, or form suggest that a woman will be less qualified than a man -- that's on you, "the reader." When women run, women win. Surely you and the OP learned that from the midterms. I'm still savoring Spanberger over Teabagger Brat. Savor the other victories and work to right the voter suppression and corruption that hurt a strong, qualified Stacey Abrams. She came close -- in f'in Georgia. It can be done.

[Squinch]

196. That's nice, dear.

[MineralMan]

98. Someone will be along shortly to mansplain why you're wrong, no doubt.

I agree with you. Men have screwed things up long enough. It's long past time for a change.

[harumph]

100. I believe a black woman needs to be somewhere in the ticket EOM

[Bettie]

101. I hope there is a woman on the ticket

I'm really hoping that Sanders and Biden are winnowed out in the early days. Not that I have anything against either of them, but we need new faces.

I'm not entirely sure that the eventual nominee is even in our minds yet. Should be an interesting process to be sure.

Are we ready for a female president? I am. Most Dems are (I'd hope).

But we've also seen what kind of misogyny is out there and how virulent it is, so whoever ends up on the ticket better have a thick skin and an ability to crack back at it all.

[roody]

106. I would like to hear Anita Hill's opinion

of Biden.

[Sparkly]

113. I'm with you!!!

[herding cats]

116. That Biden and Beto in talks article? It was bullshit. They're not discussing any such thing.

It was a hyped BS story to see the reaction.

This story has been updated to reflect that Biden and O'Rourke have not met to discuss the possibility of a joint ticket.


New headline: JOE BIDEN ADVISERS FLOAT BETO O'ROURKE AS RUNNING MATE FOR 2020 ELECTION

https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-beto-orourke-reportedly-met-discuss-potential-2020-presidential-1260164

My best guess is a clueless advisor who saw Biden's age as his biggest drawback was testing a link to a young, charismatic and popular other possible candidate. I've seen a lot of blowback across the internet as to their ignoring the other factors. So, you're far from alone in your feelings.

Don't worry. The primary will weed out our weak candidates and bring the better to the top. It's going to be very different this time than last, I predict. Time will tell who the pick will be, and then they'll choose their VP based on many factors. With race and gender being two of those. We may even need a man as VP for balance again. At this stage it's entirely possible.

[MicaelS]

122. I think it's time for some younger blood.

That is what I care about most. I'm 61, and my Baby Boomer Generation has fucked things up royally. So Liberal in their youth, then turned into a bunch of Neo-Cons in their 20/30s and voted Reagan into office.

But yes, I say it's time for Women, lots of them. Women can't fuck things up any worse than men have, and probably will do one hell of a lot better.

I still love Beto though.

[Baltimike]

144. We are reasy for THAT women for sure...she won, and the Russians committed acts of war to stop it nt

[mcar]

146. Hey She, remember this? "I want a woman. Just not that woman"

or that one, or that one, or that one, apparently.

[sheshe2]

156. Yep.

I remember that well mcar. Translation, not your time and it may never be.

[RandySF]

154. I'm open to everyone for the nomination except Bernie at this point.

[R B Garr]

155. I would love for Hillary to run again!

Heck, if it turns out to be a rerun of sorts with a certain someone, I would love to see her run. But that’s what’s on my mind right now — having a good Democrat who is not browbeaten for being a Democrat.

Warren, she’s great, but a couple things she said about Hillary looked to be spreading false talking points loved by a certain crowd and that sucked. But I do like her, so I’ll get over it.

Harris! One of my Senators and I love her. She’s a prosecutor, so a bit of a tactician, but impressive as hell!

Not too crazy about what was done to Franken by anyone involved, but I will get over it. Gillibrand, that would be tough because of the help she got from the Clinton’s for Hillary’s seat and then her hypocrisy.

Maybe someone can recruit Barbara Boxer...? Names? I’m open. I saw how excited the crowd was for Biden on Ellen’s show, and she was pleading for him to run (I think she had her hands clasped in a prayer motion towards him... 🙏

I get what Ellen was eluding to—someone safe, stable and sane, proven leadership. That kind of sentiment, not just having a white guy.

[sheshe2]

159. Ha.

I get your drift, R B.

As for Warren, she is my Senator and while I don't like all she says and does she is pretty awesome. A fighter. Harris is an awesome woman and I like what she has to say.

Fact is, we don't know who will be tossing in their hats so it is far to early for any of us to be making decisions. A wish list for now and decisions will be made when the primaries begin.

I look forward to seeing this unfold.

[ariadne0614]

157. Sherrod Brown/Kamala Harris?

I’d be fine with many other options, but that’s the one that came to mind for the moment. It seems like a nice balance.

[McCamy Taylor]

158. I don't care if the Yellow Dog has a dick or tits.

I am voting for it.

[LudwigPastorius]

161. Warren - O'Rourke 2020

Experience & charisma....what's not to like?

[aikoaiko]

162. Sadly, we (Democrats and the DNC) are letting the media define the front runners

I really wish we had our act together and had our candidates do pre-announcement media tours.

I think Abrams, Harris, and Gillibrand (and even Warren) would have benefitted from getting their voices on TV news.

[Tarc]

165. 1) Old 2) White 3) Male

This is Tarc's 2020 Litmus test. In the 2020 primaries, I will be looking for a candidate that is, at most, hitting one of these criteria. If there is a dire situation, e.g. weak field, early flameouts, I'll take a 2. But no 3s.

Of course if a 3 (looking at you, Uncle Joe) makes it to the nomination, then I'd still happily vote for them in the general. But I think we can do better before that.

[orangecrush]

166. We did elect a woman president.

The victory was stolen from us.

[sheshe2]

168. I am very aware of that.

It was outside forces and sadly some inside forces as well.

[Rhiannon12866]

184. I have long been baffled that we have yet to have a female president in this country

And, yes, I'm well aware that the majority of Americans voted for Hillary - but since we've been stuck with the worst candidate in history, I've been thinking of other countries - Theresa May, Angela Merkel - and not just recent times. There's been Golda Meir, Indira Gandhi, Benazir Bhutto, Margaret Thatcher, and those are just the ones I thought of off hand. What's taking us so long??

[sheshe2]

199. I don't know what is taking us so long.

Seems to me the women and the countries you mentioned are in some ways a little more advanced than we are. At the very least voting for a woman as head of state.

I just don't know.

[MicaelS]

200. I am not.

I am a 61 yr old SWM. I have know many women who have said over the years that they would never vote for a woman as President.

When asked why the usual answer was "I have had women bosses and they were horrible to me."

[orangecrush]

198. Agree 100%.

[sheshe2]

201. Hey!

Thanks.

[orangecrush]

211. ...

[Demsrule86]

188. I don't care who runs as long as they can win...I don't think Sen. Sanders nor

Congressman Beto can win a general. I have serious qualms about having a woman at the head of the ticket and I am a woman! This election is so important. We need the presidency and the Senate...Justice Ginsberg can't last forever. And we can do nothing until we wipe the GOP off the map. My future son in law...person of color... told me there was solid resistance to having a woman president in the places he goes to like a barbershops, church or various clubs . He said more than a few men of color simply wouldn't vote for Hillary Clinton because she was a woman. This nice young man tried to explain to them that they needed to vote against Trump, but it fell on deaf ears. I desperately want a woman president but I am more concerned about winning in 20. We can't allow what has become a fascist party (look at Wisconsin and Michigan) to continue to wield the power of the presidency. It truly is a threat to our Republic.

[Baltimike]

197. I think HRC might decide to do it as we find outmore and more how the kGOPb rigged the election. nt

[brooklynite]

206. Why does advocating for a male candidate mean "we're not ready for a woman"?

[sheshe2]

212. Why do we see so many posts advocating a white male ticket?

[brooklynite]

213. Perhaps because they find some choices more appealing than others.

Case in point: Beto O'Rourke vs Kamala Harris. Is the preference for O'Rourke sexist? Or is it because some people, are two years out, fixating on the simplistic fact that O'Rourke makes compelling rally speeches and Harris doesn't?

[sheshe2]

214. I must have missed something.

Pretty sure Senator Harris was not running for her Senate seat and Beto who I really like, was in a primary fight for the November 2018 election. Therefore I am not surprised Harris was not giving compelling rally speeches for a seat that she had already won and was serving on.

I will tell ya what though, she sure as hell was kicking ass during Kavanaugh's hearings. Did you miss that? I tell ya, it was awesome.

[brooklynite]

215. But a prosecutorial style doesn't necessary lend itself to a political campaign.

[sheshe2]

216. Well my comment was an aside to your original question.

Or is it because some people, are two years out, fixating on the simplistic fact that O'Rourke makes compelling rally speeches and Harris doesn't?

A "simplistic fact"

The one you refused to answer as to why Beto held compelling rallies and speeches in his election year and apparently a sitting Senator did not.

[brooklynite]

219. I'm not saying Beto is DESERVING of support because of his rally speeches

I'm pointing out that BECAUSE Beto has held a campaign and made compelling speeches, some folks here have latched on him as a desirable candidate, without considering any other aspects.

[sheshe2]

223. Several posts to get to that point.

Thanks for clearing that up. I was a little confused with your mention of Harris in context to Beto and rally speeches.

[Chemisse]

208. You made us sound like we are passively hoping to be chosen, but the big bad men just won't pick us!

Women like that are victims!

The women who should be president fight for what they want and what they believe. They don't hope to be picked, they reach out and grab what they want!

They are women like Nancy Pelosi, who became Speaker and kept it, against all odds. She didn't beg for it. She made herself the best and then took it!

I will vote for a woman in the primary if she is the best candidate. If all else is equal, I will vote for her also. But it's not going to be a gift; she's not a token; she earned consideration, and if she gets my vote she will have deserved it.

[sheshe2]

209. Sorry you missed the point of the OP. nt

Chosen. No.

[Mike Nelson]

226. A woman won...

...both the Democratic primaries and the national Presidential Election, last time. Women also did very well in the recent midterms. Talking about a Biden-Beto ticket is not going to get Biden votes in the primaries... and, at this point, I don't think a Democrat is going to go with a same gender VP candidate.

[ecstatic]

229. As long as it's not Warren, Biden or Sanders

Last edited Mon Dec 17, 2018, 08:58 PM - Edit history (1)

I'll be comfortable with any choice, as long as the process of getting to the nominee is fair and respectful, especially with regard to any minority candidates. Right now, I want whoever has the best chance of winning.

My top 3 issues right now are 1) making sure trump's crimes aren't swept under the rug, 2) election and electoral reform, and 3) winning the power back in 2020.

[Crunchy Frog]

230. I don't care as long as they can actually get elected

And have some degree of effectiveness once in office.

[BannonsLiver]

231. I'm going to let the primary voters decide

I will choose a candidate and take part in the process. The best candidate will win IMO. Dem primary voters have an excellent record when it comes to picking the right candidate. The gender and race is unknown but will determined by the process at some point in the first half of 2020. That November I will vote for the nominated candidate gleefully and with zero reservations, even if it’s an old milk dud that’s been stuck on a subway floor for a year.