Page 31 of 32 FirstFirst ... 2129303132 LastLast
Results 601 to 620 of 627
  1. #601
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Here is the list of candidates and where we stand...

    Announced they are running (11)
    • Senator Kamala Harris
    • Senator Bernie Sanders
    • Former Rep. Beto O’Rourke
    • Senator Elizabeth Warren
    • Senator Amy Klobuchar
    • Senator Cory Booker
    • Former Sec. Julian Castro
    • Gov. Jay Inslee
    • Former Gov. John Hickenlooper
    • Rep. Tulsi Gabbard
    • Former Rep. John Delaney


    Announced exploratory committee (2)
    • Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
    • Mayor Pete Buttigieg


    Awaiting decisions from: (10)
    • Former Vice President Joe Biden
    • Sen. Michael Bennet
    • Rep. Eric Swalwell
    • Former Gov. Terry McAuliffe
    • Former Sec. John Kerry
    • Rep. Seth Moulton
    • Rep. Tim Ryan
    • Gov. Steve Bullock
    • Mayor Bill De Blasio
    • Former Georgia House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams


    Two others who say they are running (2)
    • Businessman Andrew Yang
    • Spiritual author Marianne Williamson
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  2. #602
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    Here is the list of candidates and where we stand...

    Announced they are running (11)
    • Senator Kamala Harris
    • Senator Bernie Sanders
    • Former Rep. Beto OíRourke
    • Senator Elizabeth Warren
    • Senator Amy Klobuchar
    • Senator Cory Booker
    • Former Sec. Julian Castro
    • Gov. Jay Inslee
    • Former Gov. John Hickenlooper
    • Rep. Tulsi Gabbard
    • Former Rep. John Delaney


    Announced exploratory committee (2)
    • Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
    • Mayor Pete Buttigieg


    Awaiting decisions from: (10)
    • Former Vice President Joe Biden
    • Sen. Michael Bennet
    • Rep. Eric Swalwell
    • Former Gov. Terry McAuliffe
    • Former Sec. John Kerry
    • Rep. Seth Moulton
    • Rep. Tim Ryan
    • Gov. Steve Bullock
    • Mayor Bill De Blasio
    • Former Georgia House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams


    Two others who say they are running (2)
    • Businessman Andrew Yang
    • Spiritual author Marianne Williamson
    Seems to me the only person left that really impacts the race would be Biden. I don't see any of the others making much of a splash in the crowded field.

  3. #603
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Well, Iím more thinking of someone on the polarizing far left (I would put Warren, Bernie and others in that camp) as opposed to a more centrist candidate. But I agree, the Democrats chose to run one of their most polarizing candidates possible last time ó not really due to policy, but public perception ó and I think it cost them.

    A calm, return to normal centrist gives the Dems a lay-up to take the WH and the Senate. A vocal leftish progressive is an unnecessary three point shot IMO which does not get them any more ground and just makes the job more difficult. Again, JMHO.
    I would agree that a far left candidate cannot be elected president except that this requires an assumption of continuity between present and past that I am not sure is valid anymore. Positions are being taken now that were politically unthinkable in the recent past and the pace of this change is mind boggling. What are the limits of it? If I canít explain how a person holding such positions was elected senator how can I say that the person could not be elected president? I wonder if this is how the old-timers viewed it in 1963 when Nelson Rockefeller divorced and remarried Ė shocked and appalled, and wondering how such things could be accepted by the voting public.

  4. #604
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by swood1000 View Post
    I would agree that a far left candidate cannot be elected president except that this requires an assumption of continuity between present and past that I am not sure is valid anymore. Positions are being taken now that were politically unthinkable in the recent past and the pace of this change is mind boggling. What are the limits of it? If I canít explain how a person holding such positions was elected senator how can I say that the person could not be elected president? I wonder if this is how the old-timers viewed it in 1963 when Nelson Rockefeller divorced and remarried Ė shocked and appalled, and wondering how such things could be accepted by the voting public.
    True, it doesn't seem that long ago that the biggest scandal of the day was whether the President wore a jacket in the Oval Office or not. . . .

    We are truly in a clockwork turned orange.
    1991 -- 1992 -- 2001 -- 2010 -- 2015

  5. #605
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    True, it doesn't seem that long ago that the biggest scandal of the day was whether the President wore a jacket in the Oval Office or not. . . .

    We are truly in a clockwork turned orange.
    Itís as if certain norms were enforced by previous generations and as those generations passed away the politicians didnít realize that advocating the violation of traditional norms would no longer be punished by the voters. Then suddenly the realization was made that hey, all those cannons that we thought were aimed down at us are really just logs made to look like cannons. The army that used to be up there is gone. Everything goes. Weíll see. I donít think that army has completely moved out.

  6. #606
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    I'd tell ya, but then I'd have to kill ya
    Quote Originally Posted by swood1000 View Post
    It’s as if certain norms were enforced by previous generations and as those generations passed away the politicians didn’t realize that advocating the violation of traditional norms would no longer be punished by the voters. Then suddenly the realization was made that hey, all those cannons that we thought were aimed down at us are really just logs made to look like cannons. The army that used to be up there is gone. Everything goes. We’ll see. I don’t think that army has completely moved out.
    I think history is a pendulum. But it doesn't always swing at the same speed.

  7. #607
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Gillibrand is officially in.
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

  8. #608
    I don't know how he'll fair as a candidate but Cory Booker is a whole lot cooler this week than he was last week in my book...

    In all seriousness, if he emerges as "among the front runners", it will be interesting to see how the nation/media reflect on an unmarried Senator dating a well-known actress. There was a time when being an unmarried was more of a liability than being a cheat. Arguably still is for some folks. If he becomes the candidate, I can absolutely see certain media outlets flashing up pictures of Gail from Sin City and saying, "Does this reflect the type of family values we want in our President?"

    At the very least, I hope the internet does it's duty and photoshops Elizabeth Warren's husband in Gail's gear...

  9. #609
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    I'd tell ya, but then I'd have to kill ya
    Quote Originally Posted by bundabergdevil View Post
    I don't know how he'll fair as a candidate but Cory Booker is a whole lot cooler this week than he was last week in my book...

    In all seriousness, if he emerges as "among the front runners", it will be interesting to see how the nation/media reflect on an unmarried Senator dating a well-known actress. There was a time when being an unmarried was more of a liability than being a cheat. Arguably still is for some folks. If he becomes the candidate, I can absolutely see certain media outlets flashing up pictures of Gail from Sin City and saying, "Does this reflect the type of family values we want in our President?"

    At the very least, I hope the internet does it's duty and photoshops Elizabeth Warren's husband in Gail's gear...
    Do I really need to link old pictures of the current first lady to rebut this?

  10. #610
    Quote Originally Posted by dudog84 View Post
    Do I really need to link old pictures of the current first lady to rebut this?
    Just to be clear, I'm not making that argument. In the spirit of the thread, I was just noting that I think that some parties will try to turn Cory's self-professed "boo" into an issue or narrative. He's unmarried and dating a Hollywood liberal activist actress. That ticks a lot of negative boxes for some folks so I suspect the relationship will be used as fodder to help define him as an extreme coastal liberal elite. To be sure, Trump's opponents tried to use his track record with women, including his current wife's modelling career, against him to paint him as misogynist and anti-woman. Interestingly, Dawson was an ardent Sanders supporter last go around so she's got some statements in the public that I'm sure will resurface...

    On the Democratic side, we should expect to see a lot of new mud flung to see what sticks as defining narratives ---- Beto's a hacker and wrote about child murder as a teen; Warren and her Native American ancestry; Klobuchar and her staff abuse; Gillibrand and Sanders handling of inappropriate behavior of their staffers; Harris and her relationship with married men, etc, etc, etc...whether they're good or even factual narratives doesn't really matter, it just matters if they stick (politically speaking.

  11. #611
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    I'd tell ya, but then I'd have to kill ya
    Quote Originally Posted by bundabergdevil View Post
    Just to be clear, I'm not making that argument. In the spirit of the thread, I was just noting that I think that some parties will try to turn Cory's self-professed "boo" into an issue or narrative. He's unmarried and dating a Hollywood liberal activist actress. That ticks a lot of negative boxes for some folks so I suspect the relationship will be used as fodder to help define him as an extreme coastal liberal elite. To be sure, Trump's opponents tried to use his track record with women, including his current wife's modelling career, against him to paint him as misogynist and anti-woman. Interestingly, Dawson was an ardent Sanders supporter last go around so she's got some statements in the public that I'm sure will resurface...

    On the Democratic side, we should expect to see a lot of new mud flung to see what sticks as defining narratives ---- Beto's a hacker and wrote about child murder as a teen; Warren and her Native American ancestry; Klobuchar and her staff abuse; Gillibrand and Sanders handling of inappropriate behavior of their staffers; Harris and her relationship with married men, etc, etc, etc...whether they're good or even factual narratives doesn't really matter, it just matters if they stick (politically speaking.
    I think I hate hypocrites even more than liars (please understand that I am in NO WAY accusing you of being either, I get your argument). One of the biggest problems in this country is that among many if my guy/girl does it, it's ok...if your guy/girl does it, he/she is beelzebub. Morals are case dependent. Situational ethics.

    And I'm not even saying old pix of Melania or Rosario are disqualifying. Big whoop.

  12. #612
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    Here is the list of candidates and where we stand...

    Announced they are running (11)
    • Senator Kamala Harris
    • Senator Bernie Sanders
    • Former Rep. Beto O’Rourke
    • Senator Elizabeth Warren
    • Senator Amy Klobuchar
    • Senator Cory Booker
    • Former Sec. Julian Castro
    • Gov. Jay Inslee
    • Former Gov. John Hickenlooper
    • Rep. Tulsi Gabbard
    • Former Rep. John Delaney


    Announced exploratory committee (2)
    • Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
    • Mayor Pete Buttigieg


    Awaiting decisions from: (10)
    • Former Vice President Joe Biden
    • Sen. Michael Bennet
    • Rep. Eric Swalwell
    • Former Gov. Terry McAuliffe
    • Former Sec. John Kerry
    • Rep. Seth Moulton
    • Rep. Tim Ryan
    • Gov. Steve Bullock
    • Mayor Bill De Blasio
    • Former Georgia House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams


    Two others who say they are running (2)
    • Businessman Andrew Yang
    • Spiritual author Marianne Williamson
    Why do Andrew Yang and Marianne Williamson get "secondary status" they're both running... I don't know much about Williamson, and (((redacted for policy debate))).

    Still, I'm excited to see him in the democratic debates as he'll bring a fringe idea to the eyes of the public.

    Anyway, I'm calling out your bias towards Yang and Williamson in the friendliest of possible ways. Just wanted to see if you had any reason to put them separate from the other candidates.
    Last edited by JasonEvans; Yesterday at 10:28 AM.

  13. #613
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by Skitzle View Post
    Why do Andrew Yang and Marianne Williamson get "secondary status" they're both running... I don't know much about Williamson, and while I believe in UBI, I don't think Andrew Yang's incarnation of it will be beneficial to the country given all the other secondary problems we face (Debt, Education Quality, Healthcare).

    Still, I'm excited to see him in the democratic debates as he'll bring a fringe idea to the eyes of the public.

    Anyway, I'm calling out your bias towards Yang and Williamson in the friendliest of possible ways. Just wanted to see if you had any reason to put them separate from the other candidates.
    First of all, it was not my bias. I copied a list from an email CNN sent out. But, the reason they are separate is that they simply do not have the public profile of the other candidates. You will note that every other candidate listed there has successfully run for elected office before. Everyone one of them has an established fund raising network, contacts within the political world, and experience convincing people to vote for them. There are plenty of lists out there that don't even include Yang and Williamson. The most recent Morning Consult poll of voters in Iowa, NH, Nev, and SC didn't even including them in the list of candidates, merely including a category for "someone else" (which many voters probably interpreted as Oprah, Michelle O, or George Clooney).
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  14. #614
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    First of all, it was not my bias. I copied a list from an email CNN sent out. But, the reason they are separate is that they simply do not have the public profile of the other candidates. You will note that every other candidate listed there has successfully run for elected office before. Everyone one of them has an established fund raising network, contacts within the political world, and experience convincing people to vote for them. There are plenty of lists out there that don't even include Yang and Williamson. The most recent Morning Consult poll of voters in Iowa, NH, Nev, and SC didn't even including them in the list of candidates, merely including a category for "someone else" (which many voters probably interpreted as Oprah, Michelle O, or George Clooney).
    Always remember: The Professor and Mary Anne were just "and the rest" to start before hitting their stride.

    (Okay, that has little relevance. I just like Gilligan's Island and found that odd).
    1991 -- 1992 -- 2001 -- 2010 -- 2015

  15. #615
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North of Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by bundabergdevil View Post
    I don't know how he'll fair as a candidate but Cory Booker is a whole lot cooler this week than he was last week in my book...

    In all seriousness, if he emerges as "among the front runners", it will be interesting to see how the nation/media reflect on an unmarried Senator dating a well-known actress. There was a time when being an unmarried was more of a liability than being a cheat. Arguably still is for some folks. If he becomes the candidate, I can absolutely see certain media outlets flashing up pictures of Gail from Sin City and saying, "Does this reflect the type of family values we want in our President?"

    At the very least, I hope the internet does it's duty and photoshops Elizabeth Warren's husband in Gail's gear...
    I hate to rumor monger as I know it is forbidden here, but there were fairly prominent rumors that Booker is gay (I mentioned who Booker is dating to my Ivy-educated, socially tolerant, pop-culture expert wife and her immediate response was "I thought he was gay"). So though this brings into play Dawson's past political history, it also dispels another story line. I would like to think that in current times neither of these would be an issue that would influence how people vote, but a frightening number of people will make one or both an issue, particularly if he gets the nomination. Though I think that many of those who would care about these things wouldn't vote for him anyway.

  16. #616
    Quote Originally Posted by CrazyNotCrazie View Post
    I hate to rumor monger as I know it is forbidden here, but there were fairly prominent rumors that Booker is gay (I mentioned who Booker is dating to my Ivy-educated, socially tolerant, pop-culture expert wife and her immediate response was "I thought he was gay"). So though this brings into play Dawson's past political history, it also dispels another story line. I would like to think that in current times neither of these would be an issue that would influence how people vote, but a frightening number of people will make one or both an issue, particularly if he gets the nomination. Though I think that many of those who would care about these things wouldn't vote for him anyway.
    IMO, his honesty should be an issue.

  17. #617
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North of Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffrey View Post
    IMO, his honesty should be an issue.
    Way to step out on a limb there - I think that applies to pretty much every candidate. Though it seems like most American voters only care about honesty when it comes to hearing their partisan version of the truth.

  18. #618
    Quote Originally Posted by CrazyNotCrazie View Post
    Way to step out on a limb there - I think that applies to pretty much every candidate.
    Jumping up and down on your rumor limb is not necessary. My statement should be sufficient and it's not an issue most candidates will face.

  19. #619
    Quote Originally Posted by CrazyNotCrazie View Post
    I hate to rumor monger as I know it is forbidden here, but there were fairly prominent rumors that Booker is gay (I mentioned who Booker is dating to my Ivy-educated, socially tolerant, pop-culture expert wife and her immediate response was "I thought he was gay"). So though this brings into play Dawson's past political history, it also dispels another story line. I would like to think that in current times neither of these would be an issue that would influence how people vote, but a frightening number of people will make one or both an issue, particularly if he gets the nomination. Though I think that many of those who would care about these things wouldn't vote for him anyway.
    Leaving aside the acknowledged rumor-mongering and related responses, I am curious why the political history of Dawson is something that should not be an issue, but "a frightening number of people" might make an issue anyway. I don't know anything about her political history, but assuming (1) Booker looks likely to win the nomination and/or election, and (2) he and Dawson are still together, why would it be frightening for her political history be relevant? It seems likely that, even if her politics and his differ, she could still influence his thinking. And should she ultimately be First Lady, her politics would arguably become even more relevant, as she would presumably take on a directly political role. Again, not arguing the merits of any of his or her views, but I don't understand why the relevance of her politics would be frightening.

    Or did you simply mean that you would hope no one would disagree with her politics? I can see that reading of the bolded statements above, but it seems like pure PPB to me, hence my confusion.

  20. #620
    Quote Originally Posted by CrazyNotCrazie View Post
    I hate to rumor monger [so I won't!]
    Seems like a better way to handle that.

Similar Threads

  1. 2020 Duke men's basketball recruiting
    By Duke95 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 239
    Last Post: 03-13-2019, 11:10 AM
  2. One n dones and returning players. 2018-2020
    By proelitedota in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-18-2017, 10:03 AM
  3. Coming to the 2020 Olympics: 3-on-3 basketball!
    By JasonEvans in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-09-2017, 11:44 AM
  4. Cutcliffe Extended Through 2020-21
    By BD80 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-01-2017, 04:46 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •