Elections Corey Booker drops out. (Practically)

waiguoren said:
The Iowa Caucuses are still almost five months away. There is plenty of time for the dynamics of the race to change.

Imagine January debates with four candidates: Sanders/Biden/Elizabeth/Buttigieg. Anyone stand out?

If Buttigieg wins the nomination, I will offer you a high-stakes bet that Buttigieg defeats Trump. I don't think it will even be competitive, Mr. Solid.
Click to expand...
Pete and Trump in a debate would be an utter bloodbath. Will be hard for him to win the nomination to say the least.
 
andnowweknow said:
You conveniently glossed over the fact none of the current dems are even remotely as irritating to the right as Hillary.
Click to expand...

That's not a factor in 2020.

Many right-wing voters bit their tongues in the voting booth in 2016, to support the 'lesser of two evils.'

Trump will have converted all those voters to do so again, enthusiastically, and a significant percentage of right wingers that took 2016 off.

And you're leaving out all the Democrat voters who now have good jobs (lowest unemployment numbers in 50 years), and are sick of how the media has become propaganda (not as huge of a factor as it has been in recent elections), and how insanely woke the Democrats Candidates have become.

And Trump has a BIG advantage in 2020 that he didn't have in 2016, he's going to have a GIANT fundraising advantage over whoever the Democrats nominate.
 
andnowweknow said:
Pete and Trump in a debate would be an utter bloodbath.
Click to expand...
I agree, Mr. andnowweknow.

andnowweknow said:
Will be hard for him to win the nomination to say the least.
Click to expand...
His position is not bad. If Harris collapses, the state of the race simplifies to a 38-year-old articulate and moderate war veteran versus three septuagenarians.
 
GearSolidMetal said:
Based on which of Mayor Pete's debate performances?
Click to expand...
Not based on any of Buttigieg's debate performances. It's very hard to stand out from the crowd in a field of 20.

With Trump and Buttigieg the only two on the stage, we would have a sloppy speaker against an articulate speaker, a draft dodger vs. a war veteran, a septuagenarian vs. a 38-year-old, a top student vs a middling student, and a policy "wonk" vs. a man mostly lacking detailed policy knowledge. It's the contrast that would really stand out on TV, and I think apolitical voters would be impressed.
 
waiguoren said:
I agree, Mr. andnowweknow.


His position is not bad. If Harris collapses, the state of the race simplifies to a 38-year-old articulate and moderate war veteran versus three septuagenarians.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure Harris will implode so maybe I just haven't thought through the field thinning dynamics enough. The cut of you job is strong here.
 
SIRGAY HARITONOB! said:
I'd rather drop some change in the bucket of the guy playing drums on the corner tbh.
Click to expand...

Too Rolling Stoned said:
Defunding planned parenthood, religious liberty, deporting illegals, humanitarian policies with regard to the middle east, not paying for tranny surgeries in the military, requiring people who receive welfare to pass drug tests, booming economy, and more Im forgetting. The orange man is all win and fulfilling his promises, even with direct opposition from Democrats, pretty impressive.
Click to expand...

andnowweknow said:
Ok. But they were literally just partisan bombs that have zero staying power as long term policy. He actually had a TON of money for his wall and he totally blew it by being a terrible negotiator. He had an amazing opportunity to be a breath of fresh air in politics. But he's literally the swampiest swamp thing to ever inhabit the office. He doesn't believe in or give two shots about any of that stuff you mentioned.
Click to expand...

We found the new account for AnalBloodandThunder
 
andnowweknow said:
Pretty sure Harris will implode so maybe I just haven't thought through the field thinning dynamics enough. The cut of you job is strong here.
Click to expand...
Autocorrecting "jib".

1*C--jAJb7AWMpOFzX3bju_g.gif
 
andnowweknow said:
You conveniently glossed over the fact none of the current dems are even remotely as irritating to the right as Hillary.
Click to expand...

Sure they are. The open socialists, especially.

Trump's base isn't going anywhere. It's the centrists and independents both sides have to win over. A Dem trying to win over Trump's base, would be like Trump trying to win over California.
 
andnowweknow said:
TS is gonna go vote for the bullshitter to end all bullshitters in 2020 in Trump but picks at Corey Booker's honesty as indicative of the man...who as politicians go is about as good spirited and innocuous as it gets.
Click to expand...

Kiss his ass some more..... *smooch*
 
waiguoren said:
Not based on any of Buttigieg's debate performances. It's very hard to stand out from the crowd in a field of 20.

With Trump and Buttigieg the only two on the stage, we would have a sloppy speaker against an articulate speaker, a draft dodger vs. a war veteran, a septuagenarian vs. a 38-year-old, a top student vs a middling student, and a policy "wonk" vs. a man mostly lacking detailed policy knowledge. It's the contrast that would really stand out on TV, and I think apolitical voters would be impressed.
Click to expand...
So you don’t think Bill Clinton or joe Biden should be President for dodging the draft either right? Or was not going taking a stand? I can’t keep up.
 
HereticBD said:
Sure they are. The open socialists, especially.

Trump's base isn't going anywhere. It's the centrists and independents both sides have to win over. A Dem trying to win over Trump's base, would be like Trump trying to win over California.
Click to expand...
they are 100% and you arguing otherwise is stupid, even for you.
 
waiguoren said:
Not based on any of Buttigieg's debate performances. It's very hard to stand out from the crowd in a field of 20.
Click to expand...

Obama did.

waiguoren said:
With Trump and Buttigieg the only two on the stage, we would have a sloppy speaker against an articulate speaker, a draft dodger vs. a war veteran, a septuagenarian vs. a 38-year-old, a top student vs a middling student, and a policy "wonk" vs. a man mostly lacking detailed policy knowledge. It's the contrast that would really stand out on TV, and I think apolitical voters would be impressed.
Click to expand...

Yeah, his resume is better than Trump's, but if 2016 proved anything its that resumes are irrelevant.

Mayor Pete actually has one of the better resumes of all of the candidates. That has had zero relevancy in the debates.

Mayor Pete doesn't seem to do well in debates, when he's only one of ten or eight people onstage. Its doubtful he would do better being one of two people onstage, under the bright lights, with thousands in attendance and millions watching at home, and being asked tough questions.
 
Fawlty said:
I don't think anybody donating to Booker would be upset if he fell short of the goal and put that into a senate campaign. That sounds like something that people who don't even like Booker would complain about, for no real reason.

Also, listen to long interviews with him, like on Pod Save. He's an impressive thinker, a Rhodes Scholar for good reason. Wish he had done better up to now.
Click to expand...


And he's a huge Star Trek fan. I would definitely vote for him if I could. POTUS is not the right thing for him, he deserves a dignified position.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

panem-et-circenses
Elections Ron DeSantis drops out of Republican presidential race: how do you grade his campaign?
5 6 7
Replies
136
Views
4K
rearnakedchoke
rearnakedchoke

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,087
Messages
55,466,756
Members
174,786
Latest member
plasterby

Share this page

Back
Top