Warren now the most likely nominee according to some betting markets

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I like her. Who would be her VP? Booker or Harris? Or maybe the former Mass. Gov. Deval Patrick?

First woman POTUS needs a white male. It’s Mayor Pete, who is a white male and diverse. And young and smart and articulate. And a red state politician.

Sorry, but VP is about balancing the ticket and making nervous people calm. Smart, clean cut white make moderate whomstill checks a diversity box and has cup Ute dogs and a funny husband? Lot of boxes checked for a female candidate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:amy klobuchar would be a conservative in any other oecd country. supporting amy klobuchar means you are a closet republican who happens to like gay people.

Then put me on that list.

If Warren makes it, i'm going third party. She's way too progressive. And she thinks money will fall down from the heavens.

no thanks

Then you will get four more years of Trump, and you will deserve it. We can't afford the luxury of a third party candidate this round.

Better four more years of what we have than four years of the socialist revolution.

that's a false dichotomy, first

but second, i'd take the socialist revolution over more trump. i'd take almost anything over more trump, frankly.

Your choice -- not mine.

And I bet most Independents are like me....when a candidate promises to abolish the private insurance held by 180 million Americans, and to offer huge new entitlements to be funded by a more than questionable wealth tax...we think thanks but no thanks.

I am the PP you are responding to - and I don't fricking want a socialist revolution either. But we're not actually getting one and anyone who says we are is either hopelessly naive or just trying to scare you out of voting for a Democrat. I think a public option is the best way to improve healthcare. I cringe every time I hear the candidates talk about abolishing private healthcare. I cringe at a lot of things that are further left than I am - things that realistically they will never actually be able to pass because we just aren't that country.

But I sure as fck am not going to be scared out of voting for a Democrat by some braindead Trump supporter shouting SOCIALISM SOCIALISM SOCIALISM while propping up the military industrial contract, promoting crony capitalism to a sickening degree, and giving billions of dollars to already-rich agricultural barons while denying pennies and a basic safety net to ordinary people.

I believe your hate for Trump is making you ignore very obvious red flags among Dem candidates but, well, crazily enough we have more than a year to go and to see who actually proposed what.

Personally I am dismayed that a great and proven Governor like Hickenlooper is about to leave the race.

I bet you are. He’s about to flip a GOP Senate seat. That has to have you nervous.

CO has been gone for a while we will get back AL and then AZ is the only toss up and besides you need 60 to get anything done

None of Warrens proposals are ever going to come close to passing if she miraculously did become president

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the low-information voter, and there are many, Warren is Hillary 2.0. If she's the front-runner we'll have Trump for another 4 years... or even longer...

For anyone over 40– nope. And BTW, not all 60-70 year old smart white women are the same. Warren did not break into the national scene by saying she wasn’t going to just stay home and break cookies, then fail to overhaul health care, then deal with Monica and the dress.

HRC has very different, much more moderate politics. A real inability to connect with the working class that Warren has shown in spades. And mostly doesn’t have 20 years of pure hatred by half the country, including many independents to overcome.

There is a pete supporting woman i know who refuses to vote for warren because she reminds her of hrc and the old white female managers she's had in her life.

I"ve heard this from a number of mid 40's- mid 50's women who are dems - that they don't like Warren because she reminds them of a micromanaging boss that they've had in the past

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the low-information voter, and there are many, Warren is Hillary 2.0. If she's the front-runner we'll have Trump for another 4 years... or even longer...

For anyone over 40– nope. And BTW, not all 60-70 year old smart white women are the same. Warren did not break into the national scene by saying she wasn’t going to just stay home and break cookies, then fail to overhaul health care, then deal with Monica and the dress.

HRC has very different, much more moderate politics. A real inability to connect with the working class that Warren has shown in spades. And mostly doesn’t have 20 years of pure hatred by half the country, including many independents to overcome.

HRC was an obvious fraud who claimed the mantle of ‘courageous woman’ after rising to the fore via her unwavering support of awful men.

Warren is a more mixed case, as she’s clearly somewhat embraced idpol (e.g. Fauxcohantus) and played nice with the patriarchy (i.e. Harvard), but still gets that the America of recent decades has serious problems. She might not have done enough, but she’s not HRC’s horrible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the low-information voter, and there are many, Warren is Hillary 2.0. If she's the front-runner we'll have Trump for another 4 years... or even longer...

For anyone over 40– nope. And BTW, not all 60-70 year old smart white women are the same. Warren did not break into the national scene by saying she wasn’t going to just stay home and break cookies, then fail to overhaul health care, then deal with Monica and the dress.

HRC has very different, much more moderate politics. A real inability to connect with the working class that Warren has shown in spades. And mostly doesn’t have 20 years of pure hatred by half the country, including many independents to overcome.

There is a pete supporting woman i know who refuses to vote for warren because she reminds her of hrc and the old white female managers she's had in her life.

I"ve heard this from a number of mid 40's- mid 50's women who are dems - that they don't like Warren because she reminds them of a micromanaging boss that they've had in the past

This could be bigger than many imagine. The tendency of older women to treat their younger colleagues with smug sadism has been all too common.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like her. Who would be her VP? Booker or Harris? Or maybe the former Mass. Gov. Deval Patrick?

First woman POTUS needs a white male. It’s Mayor Pete, who is a white male and diverse. And young and smart and articulate. And a red state politician.

Sorry, but VP is about balancing the ticket and making nervous people calm. Smart, clean cut white make moderate whomstill checks a diversity box and has cup Ute dogs and a funny husband? Lot of boxes checked for a female candidate.

I can’t imagine this means much to 95% of voters, especially from Mr Hackneyed Harvard/Rhodie/McKinsey.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:amy klobuchar would be a conservative in any other oecd country. supporting amy klobuchar means you are a closet republican who happens to like gay people.

Then put me on that list.

If Warren makes it, i'm going third party. She's way too progressive. And she thinks money will fall down from the heavens.

no thanks

Then you will get four more years of Trump, and you will deserve it. We can't afford the luxury of a third party candidate this round.

Better four more years of what we have than four years of the socialist revolution.

that's a false dichotomy, first

but second, i'd take the socialist revolution over more trump. i'd take almost anything over more trump, frankly.

Your choice -- not mine.

And I bet most Independents are like me....when a candidate promises to abolish the private insurance held by 180 million Americans, and to offer huge new entitlements to be funded by a more than questionable wealth tax...we think thanks but no thanks.

I am the PP you are responding to - and I don't fricking want a socialist revolution either. But we're not actually getting one and anyone who says we are is either hopelessly naive or just trying to scare you out of voting for a Democrat. I think a public option is the best way to improve healthcare. I cringe every time I hear the candidates talk about abolishing private healthcare. I cringe at a lot of things that are further left than I am - things that realistically they will never actually be able to pass because we just aren't that country.

But I sure as fck am not going to be scared out of voting for a Democrat by some braindead Trump supporter shouting SOCIALISM SOCIALISM SOCIALISM while propping up the military industrial contract, promoting crony capitalism to a sickening degree, and giving billions of dollars to already-rich agricultural barons while denying pennies and a basic safety net to ordinary people.

Socialism, Socialism, Socialism is the GOP game plan for 2020. They will play it whether the nominee is Klobucher or Bernie. Choosing a candidate because Trumpworld might yell Socialism! Is dumb. They are going to yell it no matter what.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like her. Who would be her VP? Booker or Harris? Or maybe the former Mass. Gov. Deval Patrick?

First woman POTUS needs a white male. It’s Mayor Pete, who is a white male and diverse. And young and smart and articulate. And a red state politician.

Sorry, but VP is about balancing the ticket and making nervous people calm. Smart, clean cut white make moderate whomstill checks a diversity box and has cup Ute dogs and a funny husband? Lot of boxes checked for a female candidate.

I actually think for Warren, she needs a black VP more than she needs a male VP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like her. Who would be her VP? Booker or Harris? Or maybe the former Mass. Gov. Deval Patrick?

Pocahontas will be demolished by Trump. Vote for Warren if you want 4 more years of Trump.

She can hold her own. And if you were paying attention, you would know that. And Trump does badly with strong smart women. Hillary made him look awful. It just so happens people hated her enough to vote for him anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the low-information voter, and there are many, Warren is Hillary 2.0. If she's the front-runner we'll have Trump for another 4 years... or even longer...

For anyone over 40– nope. And BTW, not all 60-70 year old smart white women are the same. Warren did not break into the national scene by saying she wasn’t going to just stay home and break cookies, then fail to overhaul health care, then deal with Monica and the dress.

HRC has very different, much more moderate politics. A real inability to connect with the working class that Warren has shown in spades. And mostly doesn’t have 20 years of pure hatred by half the country, including many independents to overcome.

There is a pete supporting woman i know who refuses to vote for warren because she reminds her of hrc and the old white female managers she's had in her life.

I"ve heard this from a number of mid 40's- mid 50's women who are dems - that they don't like Warren because she reminds them of a micromanaging boss that they've had in the past

Oy that hurts to hear. And ties in with exactly what that NY Times piece today about people - like me - who like Warren a lot but are terrified of how other people think of her was getting at.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:amy klobuchar would be a conservative in any other oecd country. supporting amy klobuchar means you are a closet republican who happens to like gay people.

Then put me on that list.

If Warren makes it, i'm going third party. She's way too progressive. And she thinks money will fall down from the heavens.

no thanks

Then you will get four more years of Trump, and you will deserve it. We can't afford the luxury of a third party candidate this round.

Better four more years of what we have than four years of the socialist revolution.

that's a false dichotomy, first

but second, i'd take the socialist revolution over more trump. i'd take almost anything over more trump, frankly.

Your choice -- not mine.

And I bet most Independents are like me....when a candidate promises to abolish the private insurance held by 180 million Americans, and to offer huge new entitlements to be funded by a more than questionable wealth tax...we think thanks but no thanks.

I am the PP you are responding to - and I don't fricking want a socialist revolution either. But we're not actually getting one and anyone who says we are is either hopelessly naive or just trying to scare you out of voting for a Democrat. I think a public option is the best way to improve healthcare. I cringe every time I hear the candidates talk about abolishing private healthcare. I cringe at a lot of things that are further left than I am - things that realistically they will never actually be able to pass because we just aren't that country.

But I sure as fck am not going to be scared out of voting for a Democrat by some braindead Trump supporter shouting SOCIALISM SOCIALISM SOCIALISM while propping up the military industrial contract, promoting crony capitalism to a sickening degree, and giving billions of dollars to already-rich agricultural barons while denying pennies and a basic safety net to ordinary people.

Socialism, Socialism, Socialism is the GOP game plan for 2020. They will play it whether the nominee is Klobucher or Bernie. Choosing a candidate because Trumpworld might yell Socialism! Is dumb. They are going to yell it no matter what.

Yep, exactly. At the same time, choosing someone who is legitimately pushing unpopular plans (like abolishing private healthcare) is also maybe not so smart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Warren is now ahead of Bernie by a nose. Harris is borderline irrelevant after what Gabbard did to her. First primary is almost 6 months away so reading polls is a bit premature IMO.

Biden 30.3%
Warren 18..5%
Bernie 17.5%
Kamala 8.3%

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_pre.38sidential_nomination-6730.html

national polls are garbage this is going to be decided in the first 4 states

Iowa and NH are what you should be focused on

This is a 5 person race. Everyone else should just drop out

Iowa

Biden 25
Warren 16
Harris 14
Sanders 12
Buttegie 7

NH

Biden 22
Sanders 19
Warren 16
Harris 9
Buteegie 8

Buteegie should also drop out. He’s by far the biggest among billionaires and near the top in Manhattan+DC. Doesn’t sound like the makings of a national politician to me.

You get to have that opinion. He impresses the heck out of. Although there are a dozen what male candidates polling lower that need to drop out first.

Well—11. Thanks Hickenlooper. Time to run for Senate

What impresses you about Buttigieg? And where, pray tell, are you registered to vote?

I am registered to vote. And always vote. School board primaries, I vote. He is smart. He is articulate. He is a vet, which would be great for Ds. He tends to be center left and he’s pragmatic. He can clearly articulate complex thoughts without talking down to people. But mostly, he’s smart enough to have a good message. We are decent. We are better than this. He’s not getting down in the mud. He is reclaiming the Christian Left. I’m agnostic. But lapsed Catholic, and it’s about damn time Dems ran a vet who could thoughtful present a vision of a Christian Left.

And honestly, I think a big chunk of America wants decent and is tired of the mud.



He’s too young. He’s too green. Is would be a Golden VP for a woman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Warren is now ahead of Bernie by a nose. Harris is borderline irrelevant after what Gabbard did to her. First primary is almost 6 months away so reading polls is a bit premature IMO.

Biden 30.3%
Warren 18..5%
Bernie 17.5%
Kamala 8.3%

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_pre.38sidential_nomination-6730.html

national polls are garbage this is going to be decided in the first 4 states

Iowa and NH are what you should be focused on

This is a 5 person race. Everyone else should just drop out

Iowa

Biden 25
Warren 16
Harris 14
Sanders 12
Buttegie 7

NH

Biden 22
Sanders 19
Warren 16
Harris 9
Buteegie 8

Buteegie should also drop out. He’s by far the biggest among billionaires and near the top in Manhattan+DC. Doesn’t sound like the makings of a national politician to me.

You get to have that opinion. He impresses the heck out of. Although there are a dozen what male candidates polling lower that need to drop out first.

Well—11. Thanks Hickenlooper. Time to run for Senate

What impresses you about Buttigieg? And where, pray tell, are you registered to vote?

I am registered to vote. And always vote. School board primaries, I vote. He is smart. He is articulate. He is a vet, which would be great for Ds. He tends to be center left and he’s pragmatic. He can clearly articulate complex thoughts without talking down to people. But mostly, he’s smart enough to have a good message. We are decent. We are better than this. He’s not getting down in the mud. He is reclaiming the Christian Left. I’m agnostic. But lapsed Catholic, and it’s about damn time Dems ran a vet who could thoughtful present a vision of a Christian Left.

And honestly, I think a big chunk of America wants decent and is tired of the mud.



He’s too young. He’s too green. Is would be a Golden VP for a woman.

There’s something gloriously “Mayor Pete” in how PP evades simple questions with meaningless fluff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Warren is now ahead of Bernie by a nose. Harris is borderline irrelevant after what Gabbard did to her. First primary is almost 6 months away so reading polls is a bit premature IMO.

Biden 30.3%
Warren 18..5%
Bernie 17.5%
Kamala 8.3%

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_pre.38sidential_nomination-6730.html

national polls are garbage this is going to be decided in the first 4 states

Iowa and NH are what you should be focused on

This is a 5 person race. Everyone else should just drop out

Iowa

Biden 25
Warren 16
Harris 14
Sanders 12
Buttegie 7

NH

Biden 22
Sanders 19
Warren 16
Harris 9
Buteegie 8

Buteegie should also drop out. He’s by far the biggest among billionaires and near the top in Manhattan+DC. Doesn’t sound like the makings of a national politician to me.

You get to have that opinion. He impresses the heck out of. Although there are a dozen what male candidates polling lower that need to drop out first.

Well—11. Thanks Hickenlooper. Time to run for Senate

What impresses you about Buttigieg? And where, pray tell, are you registered to vote?

I am registered to vote. And always vote. School board primaries, I vote. He is smart. He is articulate. He is a vet, which would be great for Ds. He tends to be center left and he’s pragmatic. He can clearly articulate complex thoughts without talking down to people. But mostly, he’s smart enough to have a good message. We are decent. We are better than this. He’s not getting down in the mud. He is reclaiming the Christian Left. I’m agnostic. But lapsed Catholic, and it’s about damn time Dems ran a vet who could thoughtful present a vision of a Christian Left.

And honestly, I think a big chunk of America wants decent and is tired of the mud.



He’s too young. He’s too green. Is would be a Golden VP for a woman.

I'm supporting Pete because it's pragmatic. I thoroughly dislike how much money he's raising from moneyed elite however.

For instance I don't care that he gives chasten oral - hope the two of them give it to each other every day. I am concerned he's figuratively giving it too much to the likes of reed hastings or mark zuckerberg.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the low-information voter, and there are many, Warren is Hillary 2.0. If she's the front-runner we'll have Trump for another 4 years... or even longer...

For anyone over 40– nope. And BTW, not all 60-70 year old smart white women are the same. Warren did not break into the national scene by saying she wasn’t going to just stay home and break cookies, then fail to overhaul health care, then deal with Monica and the dress.

HRC has very different, much more moderate politics. A real inability to connect with the working class that Warren has shown in spades. And mostly doesn’t have 20 years of pure hatred by half the country, including many independents to overcome.

There is a pete supporting woman i know who refuses to vote for warren because she reminds her of hrc and the old white female managers she's had in her life.

I"ve heard this from a number of mid 40's- mid 50's women who are dems - that they don't like Warren because she reminds them of a micromanaging boss that they've had in the past

This could be bigger than many imagine. The tendency of older women to treat their younger colleagues with smug sadism has been all too common.

PP here - by the way the woman i am describing fashions herself as a progressive. When I heard her say this my jaw hit the floor. I think a lot of people are intimidated by warren because she flexes are intellect. People get that pete is hyper intelligent but he doesn't lead with his wonkiness so they feel more comfortable about it when he's talking about reclaiming christian values.