Who would make a good next POTUS?

[Hayabusa Rider]

Your concerns are duly noted, as usual.

I'm not concerned about what you think of my positions. I do note that you will attack people who support positive and visible action, the sort of thing that motivates people just to get digs in.

Well Dems are also applauding this kind of action and wanting responsible and visible actions, signs of leadership in a party who isolates itself from having to do something that voters understand. The leadership needs to come to the people. You have other ideas. I want Dems to win, you attack with "Dirty Democrats" which doesn't even make sense as a poor straw man. If I were against Dems winning I'd adopt your position and defend the perceived indifference, and that does exist, and it has nothing to do with "dirty". Your lack of concern is evident, as usual.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

So jhnnn was correct then.

No, but I figured you would find a way to belittle the actions of others who take action to positively represent the Dem party, just like him.

 

[Jhhnn]

No, but I figured you would find a way to belittle the actions of others who take action to positively represent the Dem party, just like him.

I haven't belittled Merkley.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I haven't belittled Merkley.

Now that's a funny thing. When people like his actions and have called for more of these sorts of things, approving of Merkley, you seem to think those supporters are to be belittled. It has been you who has given excuses and when someone grows balls you know you can't attack him, but you will go after those who strongly approve.

You attack because you must even while you remain silent about the one taking action, Merkley. Attack us and you attack him. Wouldn't that be a fine mess then.

A fun thing for me is that more Dems are adopting my sentiments, wanting more than passive and insipid responses to get out the vote because I and they want the Reps to lose in midterms. Your responses suggest that is secondary to the defense of those who will not be seen.

I'm not a Democrat, but I have more passion for their winning by legit means than others crying "Dirty Dems", which you have no factual basis to do. Being ineffectual is not the same as dirty.

Go after Merkley and those like him by attacking their supporters. That's fine, because that makes your ineffectual party open to real reform even if you oppose us.

 

[Jhhnn]

Now that's a funny thing. When people like his actions and have called for more of these sorts of things, approving of Merkley, you seem to think those supporters are to be belittled. It has been you who has given excuses and when someone grows balls you know you can't attack him, but you will go after those who strongly approve.

You attack because you must even while you remain silent about the one taking action, Merkley. Attack us and you attack him. Wouldn't that be a fine mess then.

A fun thing for me is that more Dems are adopting my sentiments, wanting more than passive and insipid responses to get out the vote because I and they want the Reps to lose in midterms. Your responses suggest that is secondary to the defense of those who will not be seen.

I'm not a Democrat, but I have more passion for their winning by legit means than others crying "Dirty Dems", which you have no factual basis to do. Being ineffectual is not the same as dirty.

Go after Merkley and those like him by attacking their supporters. That's fine, because that makes your ineffectual party open to real reform even if you oppose us.

It was you who attacked Democrats in general claiming that we don't support Merkley's actions. You're still doing it, too.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

It was you who attacked Democrats in general claiming that we don't support Merkley's actions. You're still doing it, too.

I'm attacking some Dems because they embrace and defend inaction. The basic tenets of "we're helpless so don't ask us to do anything" and "Everyone else is to blame" isn't holding up anymore.

Perhaps you aren't a Dem but there's nothing you won't embrace in defense of those who sit around, tweet, and shake their heads.

If leaders do get out, do make visible attempts to do the right thing, hell maybe get arrested for peaceful protests, and Dems win? Someone will likely ask. "Wait, why didn't we do this before?" At that point perhaps eyes will not only cast on the Republicans but at the leaders who weakly stood against them and their sycophants.

A Day of Judgement sorely needed.

 

[dainthomas]

Dems have a low midterm turnout. It's probably because all they have are Word documents about their platforms. Leaders? Yeah, ah, no.

Here's an interesting thing and disproves the "we're helpless waifs, outnumbered so we can't do anything" mentality of some.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/390499-dem-senator-barred-entry-to-immigration-detention-facility

I don't know much about Jeff Merkley, but I'll find out more. Why? Because he's off his ass doing something instead of crying in his beer.

This is great and more of this needs to be done. Sadly I expect presumed Dem supporters to somehow deflect or minimize his actions.

Maybe it's time to put away memos for publications and telling us how great you are, Dem leaders, and do what this guy is. Hmm. Maybe Presidential material. The man is showing potential as a leader, not a bureaucratic functionary.

I voted for him in the last election precisely because he doesn't sit around on his @SS doing nothing. Other dems should take note.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I voted for him in the last election precisely because he doesn't sit around on his @SS doing nothing. Other dems should take note.

There's another huge internet presence with strong overall political leanings and they are overwhelming in opposition of Trump with notable exceptions. While the status quo and circling of wagons was very strong there is now a sense of urgency developing, or so that is my perception. Jeff Merkley is being highly praised for stance against detention centers backed with his own personal actions. "Other Senators should" is going around in more than occasional posts. "Let us know when you do this again (referring to Merkly getting out) and we'll march with you".

I made no secret that I voted for Bernie in the primary yet I am not a socialist. Why then? Two main reasons. His support of the most ordinary kind of people and those who need a level playing field, and he got out and marched with MLK protesters when he was nobody. A little white guy marching in support of the Civil Rights movement in real peril of physical harm or arrest.

That is principle backed up by a strong spine. It was an act to admire. Dammit, we need a new generation of people with intelligence, principle and fire.

 

[Jhhnn]

I'm attacking some Dems because they embrace and defend inaction. The basic tenets of "we're helpless so don't ask us to do anything" and "Everyone else is to blame" isn't holding up anymore.

Perhaps you aren't a Dem but there's nothing you won't embrace in defense of those who sit around, tweet, and shake their heads.

If leaders do get out, do make visible attempts to do the right thing, hell maybe get arrested for peaceful protests, and Dems win? Someone will likely ask. "Wait, why didn't we do this before?" At that point perhaps eyes will not only cast on the Republicans but at the leaders who weakly stood against them and their sycophants.

A Day of Judgement sorely needed.

Your kind of bullshit is why 40% don't vote. I mean, the Dems aren't worthy of your vote because ... reasons & shit. The GOP sucks desperately but don't vote them out because Dems won't do anything anyway.

It's a helluva way to build enthusiasm, right?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Your kind of bullshit is why 40% don't vote. I mean, the Dems aren't worthy of your vote because ... reasons & shit. The GOP sucks desperately but don't vote them out because Dems won't do anything anyway.

It's a helluva way to build enthusiasm, right?

It's an interesting case of begging the question here dear readers. He starts with a declaration without substantiation, nothing of substance, then constructs a straw man, poorly at that. "The Dems aren't worthy of your vote because of..." well nothing he can cite because I've said people need to get out and vote for the Dems. "Worthy" is irrelevant to the more important "necessary" and it is not I who say worthy is a criteria in voting this election. That would be his straw man that can't even produce a cogent premise. Despite direct statements that we need to get out the vote, and motivate others to do so, he invents "but don't vote them out". I'll leave it to you to see who speaks truly and who lies on that issue.

Eventually he finishes his begging the question by citing his demonstrably false contentions to complete the attack, which is based on "This is true because I say it is".

Funny thing isn't it? I mean that in order to defend the status quo he lies with a bald face to support a fantasy of his own making. "Don't vote them out". My that's a delusion if ever there was one.

 

[Muse]

Almost anybody not named Trump, Ryan or Pence.

 

[ivwshane]

No, but I figured you would find a way to belittle the actions of others who take action to positively represent the Dem party, just like him.

Can you point out where in my post or jhhnns post where we belittle his work?

 

[ivwshane]

I'm attacking some Dems because they embrace and defend inaction. The basic tenets of "we're helpless so don't ask us to do anything" and "Everyone else is to blame" isn't holding up anymore.

Perhaps you aren't a Dem but there's nothing you won't embrace in defense of those who sit around, tweet, and shake their heads.

If leaders do get out, do make visible attempts to do the right thing, hell maybe get arrested for peaceful protests, and Dems win? Someone will likely ask. "Wait, why didn't we do this before?" At that point perhaps eyes will not only cast on the Republicans but at the leaders who weakly stood against them and their sycophants.

A Day of Judgement sorely needed.

Are you high right now? Drunk? Or impaired in some way because you are completely making shit up.

I'll note that when I pointed out, your boy sanders, has a record with very little to show for it (ie hasn't actually done anything) and pointed to hillarys record of action and accomplishments, you attacked me and her.

Your delusion and hypocrisy is on full display here.

I'm hoping its because you forgot to take some meds.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Can you point out where in my post or jhhnns post where we belittle his work?

You wouldn't dare and I've said as much. You can attack his supporters as he has done with willful acts of deception and diversion. Now you can adopt his tactics and join him, you can refuse to participate in that way or remain silent, but pick a Way.

 

[Jhhnn]

It's an interesting case of begging the question here dear readers. He starts with a declaration without substantiation, nothing of substance, then constructs a straw man, poorly at that. "The Dems aren't worthy of your vote because of..." well nothing he can cite because I've said people need to get out and vote for the Dems. "Worthy" is irrelevant to the more important "necessary" and it is not I who say worthy is a criteria in voting this election. That would be his straw man that can't even produce a cogent premise. Despite direct statements that we need to get out the vote, and motivate others to do so, he invents "but don't vote them out". I'll leave it to you to see who speaks truly and who lies on that issue.

Eventually he finishes his begging the question by citing his demonstrably false contentions to complete the attack, which is based on "This is true because I say it is".

Funny thing isn't it? I mean that in order to defend the status quo he lies with a bald face to support a fantasy of his own making. "Don't vote them out". My that's a delusion if ever there was one.

Your concerns are duly noted once again. Which Dems were you attacking here & what did they say to warrant it?

I'm attacking some Dems because they embrace and defend inaction.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Are you high right now? Drunk? Or impaired in some way because you are completely making shit up.

I'll note that when I pointed out, your boy sanders, has a record with very little to show for it (ie hasn't actually done anything) and pointed to hillarys record of action and accomplishments, you attacked me and her.

Your delusion and hypocrisy is on full display here.

I'm hoping its because you forgot to take some meds.

You are angriest and most aggressive when you are challenged and have no good response. If I crushed your soul because I said Hillary was wanting and I didn't care for her that is your burden. I also recall you being upset because people didn't think and do as you insisted, and belittled those who wanted leadership and not just a platform. You could have saved a lot of money on campaigns by using mass mailings in an attractive envelope.

Yet you aren't interested in winning the election it would seem, not nearly as much as defending Hillary and attacking Bernie. Hillary lost. Get over it, or be prepared to lose in November, unless that's a desire you aren't aware of? If we poor voters aren't up to your lofty bullet points, you can look down on us again as you watch Trump consolidate power.

What is on display is the inability of some to get over their petty rejections and deal with the current situation, clinging to losing candidates and strategy like a worn blankie.

Feel free to lash out, no one can stop you, but your immaturity and self-absorbed nature is evident. I can dislike some candidates and approaches while supporting resistance to acts intended to bring down our way of life. For you that is hypocrisy, but you are becoming ever more obsolete in thinking. The nation is more important than Party, politician or us individually. Deal or ignore it.

 

[ivwshane]

Lol. Apparently pointing out your hypocrisy is a trigger for you.

Carry on attacking straw men.

You are angriest and most aggressive when you are challenged and have no good response. If I crushed your soul because I said Hillary was wanting and I didn't care for her that is your burden. I also recall you being upset because people didn't think and do as you insisted, and belittled those who wanted leadership and not just a platform. You could have saved a lot of money on campaigns by using mass mailings in an attractive envelope.

Yet you aren't interested in winning the election it would seem, not nearly as much as defending Hillary and attacking Bernie. Hillary lost. Get over it, or be prepared to lose in November, unless that's a desire you aren't aware of? If we poor voters aren't up to your lofty bullet points, you can look down on us again as you watch Trump consolidate power.

What is on display is the inability of some to get over their petty rejections and deal with the current situation, clinging to losing candidates and strategy like a worn blankie.

Feel free to lash out, no one can stop you, but your immaturity and self-absorbed nature is evident. I can dislike some candidates and approaches while supporting resistance to acts intended to bring down our way of life. For you that is hypocrisy, but you are becoming ever more obsolete in thinking. The nation is more important than Party, politician or us individually. Deal or ignore it.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

It's amusing to occasionally come back to the sewer just to note that the usual suspects have no clue what is happening up here on the surface. The economy is literally booming to twenty year highs. Absolutely no one with any sense wants to return to the Obama economy. Between this and the revelations of the FBI working hand in cloven hoof with Hillary's DNC smear machine and planting spies (excuse me, informants; those are totally different somehow) in the Trump campaign, it will make very little difference who the Dems put up in 2020 unless they manage to somehow derail Trump's agenda. I suspect 2020 will be either Michelle Obama or Oprah, either of which (or both) will go down in flames. The average Joe doesn't pay attention to politics except for a few months before elections, but he damn sure notices the economy.

2024 will be Dwayne Johnson's year. At this point, both parties should be courting him. Neither party will, because politicians absolutely suck at learning the correct lessons from anything.

Holy shit how did I miss this post? You now remind me of spidey. You remember spidey? Yeah you remember spidey. Remember how he used to argue how great things were under Bush because of the average unemployment? Not the catastrophic freefall he left under? Yeah that's what you're doing here.

I was hoping the reason you left was to maybe reevaluate your ability to understand information and rationalize your positions. Guess not. Was it a nice crack house?

 

[dank69]

I'm attacking some Dems because they embrace and defend inaction. The basic tenets of "we're helpless so don't ask us to do anything" and "Everyone else is to blame" isn't holding up anymore.

Perhaps you aren't a Dem but there's nothing you won't embrace in defense of those who sit around, tweet, and shake their heads.

If leaders do get out, do make visible attempts to do the right thing, hell maybe get arrested for peaceful protests, and Dems win? Someone will likely ask. "Wait, why didn't we do this before?" At that point perhaps eyes will not only cast on the Republicans but at the leaders who weakly stood against them and their sycophants.

A Day of Judgement sorely needed.

I am one of the few Dems that embraces and defends inaction. Dems just lost their supermajority in CA despite the booming economy there. Fuck you America.

 

[fskimospy]

Holy shit how did I miss this post? You now remind me of spidey. You remember spidey? Yeah you remember spidey. Remember how he used to argue how great things were under Bush because of the average unemployment? Not the catastrophic freefall he left under? Yeah that's what you're doing here.

I was hoping the reason you left was to maybe reevaluate your ability to understand information and rationalize your positions. Guess not. Was it a nice crack house?

Werepossum has really gone off the deep end recently. The economy is continuing on an almost identical trajectory to what it was doing under Obama and yet he's decided now it's in an unprecedented boom and no one would want to go back to Obama's terrible economy. lol. He's also apparently bought into the Alex Jones style conspiracy theories about the FBI. The man is not mentally well.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Werepossum has really gone off the deep end recently. The economy is continuing on an almost identical trajectory to what it was doing under Obama and yet he's decided now it's in an unprecedented boom and no one would want to go back to Obama's terrible economy. lol. He's also apparently bought into the Alex Jones style conspiracy theories about the FBI. The man is not mentally well.

I had hope for him. He had the ability to be rational. Reminded me of Matt1970. He was usually pretty level on things until Obama's name came up. Then off the rails he went.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Based on the success of the current President I think we are pretty limited on choices. Personally, I think that Drew Carey would be the right choice for the Democratic nomination. Who better to challenge a reality show host than a game show host. Trump would stand no chance at all in the 50+ age demographic. This, I'm afraid, is where our politics is now at.

 

[Thebobo]

Did I mention ______ ____ ?

 

[dank69]

I figure there's a better than even chance that president Pence will be running in 2020. Just sayin'.

Realizing that straight white middle aged men have won 44 out of 45 times we could try Sherrod Brown, Mitch Landrieu or Chris Murphy. Lots of the others mentioned so far are really too old for us to ask them for 2 terms, which is what we want.

Can't really think of anything bad to say about Murphy at this point.

 

[a777pilot]

In the spirit of the OP....Nikki Haley.

Let's get this thread back on track.