Play Nice 46th President of the United States: Joe Biden 2: Incidit in scyllam cupiens vitare charybdim

[the_interloper]

I think Newsom would be great candidate but he is biding his time to run as the democrat candidate and hoping the republican party fully explodes if trump loses in November.

I fully expect him to be up there for the 2028 nominee

Yeah I think 2028 might be Newsom v De Santis, in some ways would be better if it were this year given the age and mental capacity of the current contenders but here we are I guess.

 

[happy_eagle]

I think Newsom would be great candidate but he is biding his time to run as the democrat candidate and hoping the republican party fully explodes if trump loses in November.

I fully expect him to be up there for the 2028 nominee

Newsom is young (comparatively speaking) and can talk well

But his record as Governor isn't great. He does not have a high favorability rating within California.

 

[GreyCrow]

Yeah I think 2028 might be Newsom v De Santis, in some ways would be better if it were this year given the age and mental capacity of the current contenders but here we are I guess.

Welcome President Newsom

 

[spinynorman]

Newsom is young (comparatively speaking) and can talk well

But his record as Governor isn't great. He does not have a high favorability rating within California.

I think he’s a classic case of Giuliani, DeSantis, Jeb Bush, Kamala Harris etc where we’ll hear this big pumping up of what a strong candidate they are but as soon as people get to see them nationally they see an odious hack politician and that immediately dissipates.

 

[swingdog]

Klobuchar is a better bet.

 

[Blue1980]

Yeah I think 2028 might be Newsom v De Santis, in some ways would be better if it were this year given the age and mental capacity of the current contenders but here we are I guess.

I think De Santis has blown his load, charisma black hole. Don’t know who it will be, but it won’t be him.

 

[happy_eagle]

Klobuchar is a better bet.

As long as she brings back her joke

 

[Chicago1]

I began to get numerous emails from the DSSC (Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee) so decided to unsubscribe from them. It worked. Of course, I never subscribed to them in the first place, but...

I am yet to contribute to any campaign this year. Might be the first time in 20 years or so. I think I'd rather use the money on Menulog instead.

On SM-A135F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[the_interloper]

I think De Santis has blown his load, charisma black hole. Don’t know who it will be, but it won’t be him.

I had heard he was planning on running with Trump as VP and going for it next time, I can’t see they’d work together well though ha ha

 

[CM86]

I think whoever the DNC selects as the presidential candidate since Hillary Clinton is always going to be considered the wrong candidate, because the DNC selected them.

Because the DNC is now 'known' as inherently evil, wrong and destructive. The candidate is the wrong choice by virtue of being selected.


You can't mention Hillary Clinton's name anymore, without everyone involved having some kind of bile reflux.
There is nothing she can do or say, that isn't wrong.
When did the visceral hatred of Hillary begin for the majority of people? When she was chosen by the evil corrupt adrenochrome cabal of the DNC.
When she was the person in opposition to Trump.

When did the visceral hatred of Biden and Kamala begin?
Is it all just natural grass roots reactions to being exposed to facts and information?
Or is it astroturfing?



My opinion is that it's not really a matter of who the candidate is, it's that they're running against Trump.

Newsom, Klobuchar, Sanders etc. None of them are as recognisable to the American public as Clinton and Biden were.
It was only the previous knowledge of these people that helped them combat the now instinctual hatred we have for any DNC selected presidential candidate.


There isn't a person who has gone up against Trump, who people haven't suddenly found a much stronger dislike for. And it always seems partially forced, to me.

 

[Blue1980]

I had heard he was planning on running with Trump as VP and going for it next time, I can’t see they’d work together well though ha ha

Who knows where will be by then. 2028 I could see them trying to get rid of term limits to allow trump to run again. Also, in a way to not allow Obama to run, they will claim it’s only if you haven’t served 2 consecutive terms or some shit.

 

[Blue1980]

I think whoever the DNC selects as the presidential candidate since Hillary Clinton is always going to be considered the wrong candidate, because the DNC selected them.

Because the DNC is now 'known' as inherently evil, wrong and destructive. The candidate is the wrong choice by virtue of being selected.


You can't mention Hillary Clinton's name anymore, without everyone involved having some kind of bile reflux.
There is nothing she can do or say, that isn't wrong.
When did the visceral hatred of Hillary begin for the majority of people? When she was chosen by the evil corrupt adrenochrome cabal of the DNC.
When she was the person in opposition to Trump.

When did the visceral hatred of Biden and Kamala begin?
Is it all just natural grass roots reactions to being exposed to facts and information?
Or is it astroturfing?



My opinion is that it's not really a matter of who the candidate is, it's that they're running against Trump.

Newsom, Klobuchar, Sanders etc. None of them are as recognisable to the American public as Clinton and Biden were.
It was only the previous knowledge of these people that helped them combat the now instinctual hatred we have for any DNC selected presidential candidate.


There isn't a person who has gone up against Trump, who people haven't suddenly found a much stronger dislike for. And it always seems partially forced, to me.

Of course, whoever the dem nominee is the GOP would make them out to be Satan.

If it was Sanders you’d probably have CNNs and MSNBCs of the world piling on Sanders as well for being too progressive and not bowing to the corporate donors like a good traditional corporate democrat such as Biden does.

 

[Spearman]

Of course, whoever the dem nominee is the GOP would make them out to be Satan.

If it was Sanders you’d probably have CNNs and MSNBCs of the world piling on Sanders as well for being too progressive and not bowing to the corporate donors like a good traditional corporate democrat such as Biden does.

Yep, that's what I mean. The conservative media machine is potent and far reaching. A Dem candidate has to be strong enough to absorb and return serve the attacks on any chinks in their armor, or fabricated issues. They also have to be charismatic enough and intelligent enough to capture the imagination of swing voters. Obama had that, Clinton had that. Gore did not, Hills neither. (Hillary I understood, she was not entitled to it, but Gore was a surprise. It would have been a good presidency I think)
Bernie would have gotten hit hard with the socialist thing, tough one to call especially in the States. Klobuchar doesn't seem to have the gravitas. Warren another tough one to call. Could she inspire the way Obama did? The best of the rest are unknown, too prog or too young. There are some good people, who would probably make good POTUSs, but can they win a national campaign?

 

[spinynorman]

I think whoever the DNC selects as the presidential candidate since Hillary Clinton is always going to be considered the wrong candidate, because the DNC selected them.

Because the DNC is now 'known' as inherently evil, wrong and destructive. The candidate is the wrong choice by virtue of being selected.


You can't mention Hillary Clinton's name anymore, without everyone involved having some kind of bile reflux.
There is nothing she can do or say, that isn't wrong.
When did the visceral hatred of Hillary begin for the majority of people? When she was chosen by the evil corrupt adrenochrome cabal of the DNC.
When she was the person in opposition to Trump.

When did the visceral hatred of Biden and Kamala begin?
Is it all just natural grass roots reactions to being exposed to facts and information?
Or is it astroturfing?



My opinion is that it's not really a matter of who the candidate is, it's that they're running against Trump.

Newsom, Klobuchar, Sanders etc. None of them are as recognisable to the American public as Clinton and Biden were.
It was only the previous knowledge of these people that helped them combat the now instinctual hatred we have for any DNC selected presidential candidate.


There isn't a person who has gone up against Trump, who people haven't suddenly found a much stronger dislike for. And it always seems partially forced, to me.

Well the right loathed Hillary in the 1990s, and she was the subject of a lot of misogynistic vitriol. But she was increasingly unpopular in the decades since, hence her original run ending in flames and people going with the lesser known Obama (she’s also a terrible campaigner).

Biden was never that hated but also never that popular - his campaigns for president in 1988 and 2008 were dead on arrival. Being Obama’s VP and being able to claim that continuity ensured 2020 was different, even though his campaign started terribly and it was only when everybody dropped out to stop Sanders that he benefited (and, naturally, this pissed off a lot of the Sanders supporters, especially twice where the DNC clearly worked to ensure his opponent defeated him).

Kamala was also a bad campaigner, hence dropping out before the first primary in 2020 despite being an early touted frontrunner.

I think the division in the US means you can’t see a Reaganesque landslide in the current atmosphere, but you can still have a broadly popular President - Obama was that, and every poll has him more popular than both Biden and Trump. And he was less well known than both Biden and Hillary when he initially ran.

 

[Satan]

Of course, whoever the dem nominee is the GOP would make them out to be Satan.

If it was Sanders you’d probably have CNNs and MSNBCs of the world piling on Sanders as well for being too progressive and not bowing to the corporate donors like a good traditional corporate democrat such as Biden does.

Wash your mouth out with soap

 

[Blue1980]

Yep, that's what I mean. The conservative media machine is potent and far reaching. A Dem candidate has to be strong enough to absorb and return serve the attacks on any chinks in their armor, or fabricated issues. They also have to be charismatic enough and intelligent enough to capture the imagination of swing voters. Obama had that, Clinton had that. Gore did not, Hills neither. (Hillary I understood, she was not entitled to it, but Gore was a surprise. It would have been a good presidency I think)
Bernie would have gotten hit hard with the socialist thing, tough one to call especially in the States. Klobuchar doesn't seem to have the gravitas. Warren another tough one to call. Could she inspire the way Obama did? The best of the rest are unknown, too prog or too young. There are some good people, who would probably make good POTUSs, but can they win a national campaign?

Bernie would have been fine with the attacks from the right, as they claim everyone is a satanic socialist communist anyway.

It’s more that corporate dems would try and sabotage him as well as he would want to end their gravy train of lobbyist money.

 

[Blue1980]

Wash your mouth out with soap

Because I am right?

I am a Sanders fan and not a Biden one.

Just saying CNN and MSNBC are corporate democrat shills.

 

[Spearman]

Bernie would have been fine with the attacks from the right, as they claim everyone is a satanic socialist communist anyway.

It’s more that corporate dems would try and sabotage him as well as he would want to end their gravy train of lobbyist money.

yeah, they spend more time and money attacked progressives than Republicans.

 

[Satan]

Because I am right?

I am a Sanders fan and not a Biden one.

Just saying CNN and MSNBC are corporate democrat shills.

Smh

 

[spinynorman]

It’s more that corporate dems would try and sabotage him as well as he would want to end their gravy train of lobbyist money.

We can see what just happened to Jamaal Bowman. While the redistricting might have been a bigger part of why he actually lost, the fact that the establishment immediately saw he was weakened and threw record money at a primary to defeat him is telling. Cori Bush and Ilhan Omar are yet to face the same (Omar should be fine, Bush a little closer) - anyone who might actually want to make a real difference.

 

[Maggie5]

I think whoever the DNC selects as the presidential candidate since Hillary Clinton is always going to be considered the wrong candidate, because the DNC selected them.

Because the DNC is now 'known' as inherently evil, wrong and destructive. The candidate is the wrong choice by virtue of being selected.


You can't mention Hillary Clinton's name anymore, without everyone involved having some kind of bile reflux.
There is nothing she can do or say, that isn't wrong.
When did the visceral hatred of Hillary begin for the majority of people? When she was chosen by the evil corrupt adrenochrome cabal of the DNC.
When she was the person in opposition to Trump.

When did the visceral hatred of Biden and Kamala begin?
Is it all just natural grass roots reactions to being exposed to facts and information?
Or is it astroturfing?



My opinion is that it's not really a matter of who the candidate is, it's that they're running against Trump.

Newsom, Klobuchar, Sanders etc. None of them are as recognisable to the American public as Clinton and Biden were.
It was only the previous knowledge of these people that helped them combat the now instinctual hatred we have for any DNC selected presidential candidate.


There isn't a person who has gone up against Trump, who people haven't suddenly found a much stronger dislike for. And it always seems partially forced, to me.

The DNC play too nice. They need to take a page or two out of the RNC playbook.

Top of the list would be where is Melania? Next where is Trump's VP? The RNC would be all over this.

Hillary wasn't a bad campaigner, she was too confident. Didn't go to all states thinking she had it in the bag. I actually think she would have made a good President, then again Donald Duck would have been better than Trump. He got her good.

 

[Theseventhhamster]

The US Dems are to the right of where the Liberal party typically are. No idea why they have fans on the nominal left in Australia. Their whole job is to prevent progressive people getting anywhere near power. Absolute shit stains.

 

[GreyCrow]

The US Dems are to the right of where the Liberal party typically are. No idea why they have fans on the nominal left in Australia. Their whole job is to prevent progressive people getting anywhere near power. Absolute shit stains.

Which makes you wonder how brown the jocks Republicans wear

 

[Maggie5]

The US Dems are to the right of where the Liberal party typically are. No idea why they have fans on the nominal left in Australia. Their whole job is to prevent progressive people getting anywhere near power. Absolute shit stains.

Liberal Party care about the poor? Equality? Health care? Pay equity?

Well colour me surprised.

 

[Theseventhhamster]

Liberal Party care about the poor? Equality? Health care? Pay equity?

Well colour me surprised.

You think the Dems care about any of that? There are a handful of progressives in the entire party and they have no power.