Let’s get down to brass tacks ...

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

12 minutes ago, keepthefaith said:

 

I think Booker can be very viable.  He's a terrific speaker and communicator and if he stays quiet over the next year or so he can distance himself a bit from some of his hard left past statements and positions.  He'll need to adopt a more centrist and rust belt friendly platform than Hillary, Obama and some others.  In other words, he'll have to run a bit away from what might be some of his true core values.  He's got the presentation skills though. 

 

Yeah, no.

 

Booker anywhere outside the northeast or california is a non-starter.

 

[3rdnlng]

33 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

 

I think the "hold your nose" crowd will still show up for Trump in 2020 (assuming he runs) because even though Hillary likely won't make it in a primary, the left will ensure whomever it is makes their case as a devout progressive, with 'free' stuff for everyone while talking about liars and vagina grabbers. They will likely look like Booker but sound like Sanders and Warren, and while the left would love that (because they could again throw out the racism card), the right will step up because regardless of what anyone wants to believe about racism, I think the middle of the country simply hates the idea of handouts. Obama shot the wad on entitlement campaigning and they won't tolerate it again.

 

I think Cuomo would get killed, as would Jerry Brown. Coastal elites are a big problem for the left, and those two are their poster children.

Cuomo isn't qualified to run for President. He's an undocumented immigrant.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/19/andrew-cuomo-claims-hes-undocumented-challenges-officials-to-deport-him.html

[LeviF]

1 hour ago, Juror#8 said:

 

 

So “yes” to a Terry McAullife, a John Delaney (who will run), an Andrew Cuomo, or a Corey Booker?

 

Delaney...maybe.

 

Cuomo is a non-starter in any state that isn't mostly cidiots.  He sealed his fate on January 15, 2013 - his absolute ceiling is governor or (god forbid) senator for New York.

[Tiberius]

34 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

Yeah, no.

 

Booker anywhere outside the northeast or california is a non-starter.

 

Obama did! 

[LeviF]

31 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Obama did! 

 

Obama was the perfect storm: young, charismatic, good campaigning, relatively new in national politics, and went up against quite possibly the worst Republican candidate the RNC could have come up with.  McCain was basically a sacrificial lamb and Republicans just didn't have the self-awareness to know it.

 

Could Booker replicate that?  Possibly.  I'm not laying money on it though, and I don't think he's far left enough (single payer health care and such) to rile up the youngest, most liberal voters.  See: Clinton, Hillary.

[snafu]

1 hour ago, Juror#8 said:

 

So for 2020, do you feel that the only hurdle between Democrats and the presidency is a (nationally) politically untainted candidate, outside the machine, who avoids controversial statements about middle-America?

 

So “yes” to a Terry McAullife, a John Delaney (who will run), an Andrew Cuomo, or a Corey Booker?

 

And basically “no” to Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden or a Bernie Sanders?

 

This question is admittedly tough because the “hold your nose and vote for Trump” crowd will now (for better or for worse) be able to stand on his four-year record the next time the ballot box opens. 

 

It is way more than avoiding controversial statements about middle-America.  It is about taking an actual message to them.  Middle-America heard for a long time that manufacturing jobs would never come back.  They heard for years that their "culture" is arcane and outmoded.  Clinton called them deplorable, didn't go to Wisconsin, and told coal country to figure out something else to do. 

 

The left, starting in 2008, made a concerted effort to move the pole defining where the "left" stood.  Further left and left and left in the name of progressivism.  Then they tried to normalize that shift.  Part of the normalization process was to cast anyone who was "left" as a "centrist", and anyone who was a "centrist" as  someone who was the new "conservative".  Regular "conservatives" were moved to the fringe and marginalized, labeled racist, nativist, intolerant, and left behind. Both middle-America and regular conservatives  still hear all these things from the left, because the left blames them for taking the crown off their candidate's head, and continues to throw a temper tantrum over it.

 

Voters sensed the 2008-2016 shift and most likely didn't want at least 4 more years of being told that you're abnormal if you didn't shift the way Washington wanted you to shift.  I don't think this is a new phenomenon.  Voters will revert back to the other side if they think that things are going too far one way or the other.  They obviously didn't want Clinton to cement the shift -- and I think that shift would have been etched in stone by now if she won.  I call it the "miracle of Trump" because to me, no party representing it's constituents should move too far past one pole or the other.  The country is too diverse for that. 

 

I think (obviously this is all my dopey opinion) that there's going to be a noticeable rift in the Democratic party in the lead-up to the 2020 election and who the nominees will be and how they club each other over the head in the primaries.  I think that a lot of voters will "hold their nose" and vote for Trump if a truly "full-of-koolaid progressive" tries to trot out that message again.  I don't know anything about Delaney, but NONE of the other candidates you name will make it to the White House if they rehash the Obama/Clinton drumbeat left, left, left -- and if you're not with me, then you're the spawn of Hell.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BringBackOrton]

Trump is about to get a Nobel Prize for helping non-whites.

 

Good job, good effort, leftists.

[B-Man]

1 hour ago, joesixpack said:

 

Yeah, no.

 

Booker anywhere outside the northeast or california is a non-starter.

 

 

 

[Tiberius]

9 minutes ago, LeviF91 said:

 

Obama was the perfect storm: young, charismatic, good campaigning, relatively new in national politics, and went up against quite possibly the worst Republican candidate the RNC could have come up with.  McCain was basically a sacrificial lamb and Republicans just didn't have the self-awareness to know it.

 

Could Booker replicate that?  Possibly.  I'm not laying money on it though, and I don't think he's far left enough (single payer health care and such) to rile up the youngest, most liberal voters.  See: Clinton, Hillary.

2020 might be the same perfect situation for Dems, too, though. Then again, we don't know if it will be Trump or someone else. One thing is for sure, politics will probably stay kind of interesting for awhile 

6 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

He's a fighter for Progressivism! Love him now! 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

37 minutes ago, LeviF91 said:

 

Obama was the perfect storm: young, charismatic, good campaigning, relatively new in national politics, and went up against quite possibly the worst Republican candidate the RNC could have come up with.  McCain was basically a sacrificial lamb and Republicans just didn't have the self-awareness to know it.

 

Could Booker replicate that?  Possibly.  I'm not laying money on it though, and I don't think he's far left enough (single payer health care and such) to rile up the youngest, most liberal voters.  See: Clinton, Hillary.

 

I'm not so sure about that. Booker's pretty liberal.

 

[LeviF]

29 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

I'm not so sure about that. Booker's pretty liberal.

 

 

Looks like he is trending that way.  We'll see. 

[Deranged Rhino]

2 minutes ago, LeviF91 said:

 

Looks like he is trending that way.  We'll see. 

 

He stopped Pompeo's confirmation hearing to get his thoughts on the morality of gay sex.

 

He's a tremendously leftist progressive. And from everything I've heard he's got lots of skeletons... LOTS. 

 

Booker won't survive what's coming, not enough to be a serious candidate for POTUS. 

[LeviF]

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

He stopped Pompeo's confirmation hearing to get his thoughts on the morality of gay sex.

 

He's a tremendously leftist progressive. And from everything I've heard he's got lots of skeletons... LOTS. 

 

Booker won't survive what's coming, not enough to be a serious candidate for POTUS. 

 

I haven't been following politics nearly as closely as I used to.  Sounds like he's gone full TDS.

 

I don't think he's a serious POTUS candidate to begin with.  He "balanced" Newark's budget on the backs of fired cops. 

 

Fewer cops. 

 

In Newark. 

 

What could go wrong?

[Juror#8]

17 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

He stopped Pompeo's confirmation hearing to get his thoughts on the morality of gay sex.

 

He's a tremendously leftist progressive. And from everything I've heard he's got lots of skeletons... LOTS. 

 

Booker won't survive what's coming, not enough to be a serious candidate for POTUS. 

 

I wonder if you hear what I hear about Vandome and twenty-somethings. 

 

Who knows if it’s true but I hear it enough around the watering holes to wonder. 

 

But seriously you hear **** about everyone because everyone has a story to tell. 

[Deranged Rhino]

10 minutes ago, Juror#8 said:

 

I wonder if you hear what I hear about Vandome and twenty-somethings. 

 

Who knows if it’s true but I hear it enough around the watering holes to wonder. 

 

But seriously you hear **** about everyone because everyone has a story to tell. 

 

I believe I have heard those same things (without going into detail since they're unproven). But your last point is spot on. There's a lot of bs out there on both sides about people, so I'm hesitant to say anything is definitive right now. 

 

I'm assuming the climate and political field will look different in 6 months, let alone 2 years from now.

 

We we will see though.

[PPP Is Full of Racism]

22 minutes ago, Juror#8 said:

 

I wonder if you hear what I hear about Vandome and twenty-somethings. 

 

Who knows if it’s true but I hear it enough around the watering holes to wonder. 

 

But seriously you hear **** about everyone because everyone has a story to tell. 

 

is vandome in connecticut? if so ive heard some interesting rumors about that place...

[Juror#8]

2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I believe I have heard those same things (without going into detail since they're unproven). But your last point is spot on. There's a lot of bs out there on both sides about people, so I'm hesitant to say anything is definitive right now. 

 

I'm assuming the climate and political field will look different in 6 months, let alone 2 years from now.

 

We we will see though.

 

Just that recognition shows that you’ve probably heard what I’ve heard which if true could mean an interesting detour for his career unless he has good payoff people. Since I’ve heard it from paper pushers on the hill who hear everything there is to hear then there probably is some there, there. 

 

Since we both know what that’s about, and everyone else can probably use their imagination and guess in the right area, it’s interesting that his name is mentioned prominently as a presidential candidate. Because that “there” is there with him. 

 

Its like with Mark Warner. Ever wonder why he doesn’t run for president? The guy seems like a textbook candidate on the dem side, right? Well he realizes that his “there” is too much of a threshold to overcome so he doesn’t even dabble. And his ishouldntrunforpresidentitis syndrome becomes acute when mixed with unprescribed Viagra, gin, Georgetown and dirty blondes. But just allegedly though.   

Edited May 2, 2018 by Juror#8

[Deranged Rhino]

4 minutes ago, Juror#8 said:

 

Just that recognition shows that you’ve probably heard what I’ve heard which if true could mean an interesting detour for his career unless he has good payoff people. Since I’ve heard it from paper pushers on the hill who hear everything there is to hear then there probably is some there, there. 

 

Since we both know what that’s about, and everyone else can probably use their imagination and guess in the right area, it’s interesting that his name is mentioned prominently as a presidential candidate. Because that “there” is there with him. 

 

Its like with Mark Warner. Ever wonder why he doesn’t run for president? The guy seems like a textbook candidate on the dem side, right? Well he realizes that his “there” is too much of a threshold to overcome so he doesn’t even dabble. And his ishouldntrunforpresidentitis syndrome becomes acute when mixed with unprescribed Viagra, gin, Georgetown and dirty blondes. But just allegedly though.   

 

 We're on the same page. 

[Juror#8]

2 hours ago, m_w_hunter said:

 

is vandome in connecticut? if so ive heard some interesting rumors about that place...

 

Yup. More fun than a puppy, I hear. 

[B-Man]

3 hours ago, joesixpack said:

 

I'm not so sure about that. Booker's pretty liberal.

 

 

 

Democrats ready to double down on identity politics in 2020

 

Fire up the Democratic war room. It’s time to get serious about the game plan for both the midterms and the 2020 POTUS race. And if they need any help, Julian Zelizer, a history and public affairs professor at Princeton, is offering up a general strategy guide for them. He doesn’t want the left to fall into the “trap” of wondering why they lost so badly in 2016. Everyone is telling them that they veered too far to the left and lost middle America. But Zelizer argues the opposite. It’s time to go all in on identity politics. Surely that will work this time! (CNN)

 

{snip}

 

Having gotten the requisite sarcasm out of the way, I do seriously have to wonder what these people are thinking. Clearly I hope that they follow the course that Zelizer is charting, but that’s only because there’s a common theme in conservative social media circles which crops up every time one of these identity politics campaigns hits the news cycle. “That’s How You Got Trump. That’s How You’ll Get More Trump.”

 

What makes this all the more hilarious is that so many liberals seem to be completely, or even willfully blind to the inherent hypocrisy in these campaigns. It’s currently very much in vogue on the left to refer to Republicans and conservatives as “tribalist.” It’s a thinly veiled reference to their belief that Trump wants to divide the nation in some racist fashion or something. But the reality is that identity politics is designed from the ground up to separate everyone off into their own easily recognizable pigeonholes and band together to express outrage whenever anything supposedly offends one of these warring groups.

 

Granted, the GOP fails on this score in many ways also, but shouldn’t the ultimate goal of equality be the lack of any need for “diversity” because everyone is being treated equally? While we still have a ways to go before it’s achieved, I thought the original idea was that the melting pot would eventually produce a colorblind society where nobody cares which demographic group you fit into. With true equality that’s no longer an issue.

But instead, modern liberals seek to split everyone up into potentially warring camps rather than working to solve the challenges which face all Americans. If that’s their plan for 2020 they may once again be in for an unpleasant surprise.