So many interesting ideas being thrown about for who should run in 2020.
Any of you have any ideas?
and follow up, do you think we stand a chance against the trumpetmouth swarms who still idolize their dear leader?
I need hope...pullllleeeeeeeze.....
Whoever it is I hope they are young and a woman its about time America joins the 21st century
Stephen, America is in the 21st century; it has yet to join the community of nations.
gotta love THAT answer, Stephen!!
(ey, where are the emoticons on this website? do we have to know someone to get to post emoticons or what is that about, lol)
JeanMarie, don’t look to others for hope.
While you are making your own hope, you will learn you are its most reliable source.
I want Elizabeth Warren to run.
I heard Elizabeth Warren is willing to run as president. That would be great. The political atmosphere isn't ready for her, or any woman to run as president for that matter. Again her as VP, with Kerry as President would make a good ticket.
Perhaps Hillary Clinton set back the opportunity for a woman to run as President. She was a terrible candidate - as a pro-war (and all the intricacies of them) along with her ties to Wall Street resulted in many 'liberals/progressives staying home during the election.
Others know more about the statistics than I.
Debbie Wassermann Schultz - Chair of the Democratic Party fucked the liberal wing of the Democratic Party.
Fascism rules both the R's, and D's.
Many misunderstand Fascism as Nazism.
Fascism strictly means that corporations control government.
Had the D's promoted Bernie Sanders the world would be a better place.
The D's have too many ties to Wall Street to allow someone such as Sanders to run on the primary ticket.
love that! Yeah, i have always liked Warren, her stance on consumer protection and credit card crapola is 5star.
not sure she can drum up the passions that Dems require... Dems gotta fall in "Love" with their candidate...
like they say, with regards to candidates:
"republicans fall in line, dems fall in love"
John Kerry on the Democratic side.
Warren as a VP would make a good team along with
Bob Corker on the Republican side as long as he doesn't pick Mike Pence (who is about the creepiest person in politic I can think of). Makes me worry about Indiana.
If anyones read the book what's wrong with Kansas - Pence seems to show Indiana is worse.
For people in that area that take offense at this - you have already prone yourselves.
A VP for Corker - difficult.
Corker on the Republican side.
Ning can be a POS.
John Kerry as President with Elizabeth Warren as a VP running mate on the Democratic ticket.
Bob Corker with Rand Paul on the Republican ticket.
Chris, John Kerry had some fire in his belly in the 1970s.
His many years in the Senate extinguished the fire.
I would turn your ticket around, Warren for pres and Kerry for veep.
Warren doesn't want to run as President.
Kerry did a good job as Secretary of State - much better than Hillary who supported the war in Iraq and in spite of the Joint Chiefs of Staff objection somehow talked President Obama into intervening in Libya. That and those choices and decisions further armed ISIS.
Perhaps Hillary Clinton should run as a Republican. Bill Clinton's crack down on crime and increased prison population movement along with NAFTA seemed to increase instability. Intervention even economically because of NAFTA may be causing Mexicans (due to U.S. subsidies for Corn) to migrate to the U.S. Policies in Central and South America in the 1980's and more recently effectively destabilized many countries. Iran Contra? The First 9/11/1973 in Chile.
I don't know what liberal, or conservative means within the Republican or Democratic parties anymore.
Does it mean anything anymore when wall street and big money lobbyists have so much control over the government and elections?
Look up the definition of Fascism. It simply means corporate control of government.
One of the things many in congress pretend to complain about is "Special Interests."
Every citizen has some kind of interest they care about.
Is money speech? I'd argue "Yes."
Interesting to watch Brett Kavanaugh's hearing for SCOTUS. If the Senate didn't change the rules on a whim for a simple majority vote to approve a Supreme Court Justice such that a 66% majority was required for SCOTUS the POTUS would present a more centrist appointee.
I'm hearing that D's and independents don't like their perception about Kamanaugh's stand on Roe V.S. Wade - or (perhaps) any type of birth control measures for that matter.
That's what the alleged sexual abuse in Kavanaugh's teen years are about and why the Democrats are challenging him. Perhaps justifiably so. Maybe they should ask Kavanaugh "If a college student at a party impregnated another student should there be remedies other than a forced marriage (likely ending in divorce), and unwed mother, and/or child support for the father.
That's what all of the sexual allegations against Kavanaugh are about.
The R's held up President Obama's ability to recommend a SCOTUS nomination. Will the Senate get it's rules in order?
Changing Senate rules to a simple majority vote for SCOTUS hurt the country and validity of the senate.
I feel sorry for Kavanaugh and Ford. Neither would have had to go through this if a 2/3'rds majority was required to appoint a SCOTUS POTUS would have selected a different candidate.
I've watched the senate hearings about Kavanaugh.
This is funny.
If able to open and see it - you'll get a kick out of it especially if you watched the 'real senate' hearings.
That SNL video WAS totally hilarious and SPOT ON!! i did bust a gut when i saw that! too funny!
so accurate. just reeeeally captured it all... mmmHmm.