Who will run against Trump in 2020? - Page 28 - Politics and Economics

Here's the real key to the 2018 midterms and the 2020 election... Do people like those of us in this thread get off our ass and DO something? I plan on volunteering leading up to both... If everyone who follows politics as closely as us, and feels as strongly as we do, gets out and volunteers in swing districts and swing states, any Democrat without a major scandal should beat Trump easily.

If people who feel as strongly as we do decide that voting is all they need to do, we better run a ticket of Oprah/The Rock.

For people looking to help out in swing districts I recommend visiting swingleft.org and finding a group near you to help out. I went to a meeting a few months ago and we started with about 10 people and now are up to over 50 people after 2 meetings from our swing left group alone (there are a few groups in our area)

02-13-2018 , 04:06 PM

#677

SenorKeeed

mew mew mew

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 37,478

Quote:

Originally Posted by w00t

Spoiler:

02-13-2018 , 05:06 PM

#678

JoltinJake

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 5,236

Quote:

Originally Posted by eyebooger

Kirsten Gillibrand Pledges To Stop Accepting Donations From Corporate PACs

This is about as blatant an "I'm running in 2020" move as you can get.

Gillibrand is really growing on me. I still think she's going to have a hard time standing out in a crowded field. But man, she's been sharp as hell lately and unafraid to make bold moves.

02-13-2018 , 05:23 PM

#679

eyebooger

Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 58,718

What's confusing about Gillibrand is that she came into office in 2008 as a Blue Dog. Now she's the most anti-Trump person in the senate.

Is this a genuine change or just political opportunism?

02-13-2018 , 05:32 PM

#680

Pwn_Master

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 8,766

She spent 8 years of her career primarily representing Philip Morris. Even her law firm was like, uh, this is morally dubious, you don't have to do it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/27/ny...illibrand.html

But I guess she thought it was an opportunity to advance her career. Her political career path similarly reeks of opportunism. She is going to be a hard No for me, dawg.

02-13-2018 , 05:48 PM

#681

JoltinJake

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 5,236

Yeah, I think I've posted before that she reminds me of Hillary in that it's hard to tell if she has genuine values or if she's just moving with the wind.

Either way, I'm glad she's doing the right thing now, whether or not it's for the right reasons. Putting aside her chances, it's a good thing for the party.

02-13-2018 , 05:54 PM

#682

recondite7

old hand

Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 1,971

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeC2012

I did a little research and found that Truman actually won (in a very close one, of course) with sub-40% approval. Carter and GHWB were also high 30s though, and they got got.

GHWB would have likely won though if not for Ross Perot.

02-13-2018 , 06:03 PM

#683

All-In Flynn

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 10,923

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoltinJake

Yeah, I think I've posted before that she reminds me of Hillary in that it's hard to tell if she has genuine values or if she's just moving with the wind.

I don't know much about Gillibrand, but LOL that is absolutely not 'hard to tell' about Clinton.

Spoiler:

02-14-2018 , 02:39 AM

#684

AllTheCheese

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 11,898

Gillibrand refusing corporate PAC money is big. I really don't care if she is motivated by political calculation. Just take the W, bros.

02-14-2018 , 03:00 AM

#685

spaceman Bryce

anything you guys want

Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 20,646

I think just on resume,Cory Booker is very impressive. Played football at Stanford, became a rhodes scholar, went to Yale law school, served as mayor of newark and as united states senator. That's an intelligent man.

02-14-2018 , 03:18 AM

#686

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,096

Quote:

Originally Posted by cuserounder

Here's the real key to the 2018 midterms and the 2020 election... Do people like those of us in this thread get off our ass and DO something? I plan on volunteering leading up to both.

You writing op eds or even letters to the editor is probably at least 100 times more likely to swing an election than being a face in the crowd volunteer.

02-14-2018 , 03:24 AM

#687

Paul D

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 14,689

Who reads papers anymore? Let alone op eds? Even online op eds are kind of becoming a thing to avoid.

02-14-2018 , 03:25 AM

#688

AllTheCheese

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 11,898

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Sklansky

You writing op eds or even letters to the editor is probably at least 100 times more likely to swing an election than being a face in the crowd volunteer.

lol

02-14-2018 , 09:44 AM

#689

+rep_lol

banned

Join Date: Sep 2013 Posts: 14,900

Quote:

Originally Posted by spaceman Bryce

**** corey booker

"I cant call him a liar, i wont condemn his soul"

**** right off with all your big pharma money tyvm

02-14-2018 , 10:37 AM

#690

ScreaminAsian

For President

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 33,333

Quote:

Originally Posted by spaceman Bryce

played football is a -1

02-14-2018 , 10:38 AM

#691

ScreaminAsian

For President

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 33,333

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Sklansky

You writing op eds or even letters to the editor is probably at least 100 times more likely to swing an election than being a face in the crowd volunteer.

lol maybe if there were 50 people in the country

02-14-2018 , 10:54 AM

#692

Neoliberal

stranger

Join Date: Feb 2018 Posts: 7

Imagine being upset at a politician for advocating on behalf of their constituents

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

02-14-2018 , 10:58 AM

#693

dth123451

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2012 Posts: 15,502

Cory Booker's rage is so obviously manufactured. **** that guy.

It really shouldn't be that hard to find a single credible liberal who DGAF about offending the Clinton/Third Way crowd, who is under 75, who will bring some heat. The Democratic base has had enough of the Chuck/Nancy/Feinstein kumbaya BS. Find someone with some damn passion.

02-14-2018 , 11:10 AM

#694

eyebooger

Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 58,718

Speaking of Booker, he has now jumped on the "no corporate PACs" bandwagon.

02-14-2018 , 11:48 AM

#695

Neoliberal

stranger

Join Date: Feb 2018 Posts: 7

Quote:

Originally Posted by dth123451

Offending the Third Way crowd... So you mean offending the majority of the electorate? Because that's what you'd be doing.

Running a Warren or someone similar would be a mistake.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

02-14-2018 , 12:20 PM

#696

microbet

Solar Powered

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 56,713

Checking out Booker's voting record he's not that bad. When half the Dems go along with the Rs (Fienstein and Schumer usually in this crowd), Booker ususally isn't.

02-14-2018 , 01:02 PM

#697

dinopoker

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 9,437

Booker is a good candidate. Probably the odds on favorite if Winfrey is not in there.

02-14-2018 , 01:12 PM

#698

dth123451

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2012 Posts: 15,502

On the plus side, a Booker nomination would send all the right wing lawn mowers into Elon Musk Tesla level orbit.

02-14-2018 , 03:07 PM

#699

AllTheCheese

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 11,898

Quote:

Originally Posted by eyebooger

Speaking of Booker, he has now jumped on the "no corporate PACs" bandwagon.

Again great news. Democrats on every level should stop taking corporate PAC money. It's the right thing to do and it's good politics. Democrats will always be a distant second in their ability to deliver for corporations, so why play that game? It's better to be able to credibly attack them for doing the bidding of their donors.