Cuomo 2028?

[Anonymous]

Putting aside his sexual harassment - just no.
(1) he was a lousy governor, and badly mismanaged the early stages of the Covid crisis. He was also renowned for petty, vindictive behavior. By the time he resigned he was widely unpopular in NY.
(2). He’s from NY - probably the only state in the Union less popular with moderate voters than California.

[Anonymous]

Very weird that innocuous posts are being deleted. Where'd the post on asexual Democrat men go? Kind of ironic that one hit a nerve here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Very weird that innocuous posts are being deleted. Where'd the post on asexual Democrat men go? Kind of ironic that one hit a nerve here.

I reported it because it was...weird. And super offensive. It wasn't innocuous. It was gross and bordered on misandry. Hell. It was misandry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. Absolutely not. He wasn't "Me Tooed."He was rightfully shooed out because he harassed women. There are no shortage of good candidates. We don't need to go with the another bad actor

OP here. Yes, I know he's a bad guy from the moral standpoint. I am not talking about that. I am talking about whether or not he can win.

And I'm saying who cares? We will just end up with another corrupt sexist in office. Seriously. Eff that guy when there are tons of other winners.

[phone] will be a repeat of 2020 and 2024 when the incumbent party is at a huge disadvantage due to the sitting president being very unpopular. The incumbent party never wins in this situation. Dems need to take advantage of this 2028 election gift with an elite candidate who is capable of winning a second term in 2032. Cuomo isn't that elite candidate just as much as Biden wasn't that elite candidate.

Who is the MOST elite candidate at the moment? I agree with you that we don’t even know the name of our next Obama yet (or we barely know it) and the right person could emerge from a fair primary. But, hypothetically, if we knew the DNC would decide, and they’d take you advice, and it had to happen today, who are the types of people who would make your short list?

I've always been a fan of multi-term state governors being on the short list of potential POTUS candidates. They have the most relevant experience. Dems have a few of those from swing states (being from a swing state adds some mustard to a candidate's resume but it isn't a must have). I would have thought redneck Clinton had no chance on the big stage until he actually got on the big stage. It's impossible to tell if a candidate has the necessary likability and presidential leadership prowess until they are campaigning. Primary debates can be very effective in separating the cream of the crop from the also-rans (primary debates serve an actual purpose unlike general election debates that have only served the purpose of embarrassing the country in recent elections).

Yeah, I didn’t think you’d be willing to say a name. It’s slim pickins on the blue team these days

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very weird that innocuous posts are being deleted. Where'd the post on asexual Democrat men go? Kind of ironic that one hit a nerve here.

I reported it because it was...weird. And super offensive. It wasn't innocuous. It was gross and bordered on misandry. Hell. It was misandry.

Lame. There was a lot if good advice in there. Why did Clinton, Obama, Biden, Trump, Berlusconi, and maybe Andrew Cuomo or Gavin Newsom win? While people like Mondale, Dukakis, Romney, Walz, and Buttigieg lose? Sorry your tender sensibilities were offended. My advice could have helped us beat Trump’s successor. But now only YOU know the advice, and you’re too swueamish to share it. Ah well. A lost opportunity for Democratic victory.

[Anonymous]

Dems need to run Jesus for President. He would win. And Jesus is aligned with the party platform. He also would take in the Republican defectors. Good with money, natural leader, clean slate, righteous judge.

[Anonymous]

tl;dr of the gross post: maybe Cuomo’s pierced nipples aren’t liabilities. Maybe they are assets!

[Anonymous]

Jesus is a good idea. Dems have become the party of anti-Christian atheism. This isn’t a winning position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. Absolutely not. He wasn't "Me Tooed."He was rightfully shooed out because he harassed women. There are no shortage of good candidates. We don't need to go with the another bad actor

OP here. Yes, I know he's a bad guy from the moral standpoint. I am not talking about that. I am talking about whether or not he can win.

I really think that you must be either drunk or crazy to suggest that his despicable behavior would not be a major factor for his ineligibility!

[Anonymous]

No-one cares. Clinton, Biden, and Trump all did much worse. Clinton’s philandering, infidelity, alleged assaults, and oval office antics were legendary. And yet a LOT of dcurbanmom types at the time wanted to vote for him and sleep with him.

The salient point about Cuomo is not some office scandal, OP’s point is that Cuomo is more manly than almost any other Democratic politician (the bar isn’t that high lately)

[Anonymous]

The fact that we are still talking about manly is g
So disappointing. No one voted for Trump because he's manly. He is a fat, orange faced blob that NO ONE would want to sleep with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:tl;dr of the gross post: maybe Cuomo’s pierced nipples aren’t liabilities. Maybe they are assets!

There's nothing "gross" about the obvious truth that a stark proportion of male Democrat frontrunners are strangely asexual. Think Buttigieg, Booker, Sanders, Walz, Fetterman etc. Tim Kaine came off as low T too. And then you have the nerdy, high-pitched, pencil-necked Democrat shills like Colbert, John Oliver, John Stewart etc.

You can get mad at the truth or be offended because a lot of your husbands are also asexual to effete. Democrats have a male voter problem though and the males steering the party aren't helping. Nor is the fact that more virile Democrat male politicians like Adams are on the outs with the party. It all reinforces the perception that men with normal sexuality and healthy levels of testosterone don't fit into the party.

Cuomo for all his faults actually comes off as a man who has had a sex life, wouldn't run screaming or giggle nervously at a naked woman, and is otherwise a fully realized male. He's not the equivalent of just a brain with a sloganeering mouth attached, as many of the aforementioned male Democrats come off. He seems flesh and blood in a very masculine way. Democrats could really use that in a male frontrunner.

Then again, I'm speaking as someone who likes to win. A lot of you like to double down on stupidity and pretend that being too dense to pivot and stop losing is a virtue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact that we are still talking about manly is g
So disappointing. No one voted for Trump because he's manly. He is a fat, orange faced blob that NO ONE would want to sleep with.

And you're wrong about this. The number of online commentary and IRL statements from men both young and old says otherwise. He might not be masculine to you, but his brash, dominant, libidinous persona codes alpha to the majority of people. The idea that a mean man who you don't want to sleep with isn't masculine is reductive and foolish. It doesn't work that way. For instance, bald Mussolini wasn't a looker and he was a fascist murderer, but his status as a masculine icon is secure to this day whether or not you like it.

Regardless of leftist attempts to indoctrinate the population that traditional masculinity is toxic, it remains the dominant conception of masculinity in America and the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. Absolutely not. He wasn't "Me Tooed."He was rightfully shooed out because he harassed women. There are no shortage of good candidates. We don't need to go with the another bad actor

OP here. Yes, I know he's a bad guy from the moral standpoint. I am not talking about that. I am talking about whether or not he can win.

And I'm saying who cares? We will just end up with another corrupt sexist in office. Seriously. Eff that guy when there are tons of other winners.

[phone] will be a repeat of 2020 and 2024 when the incumbent party is at a huge disadvantage due to the sitting president being very unpopular. The incumbent party never wins in this situation. Dems need to take advantage of this 2028 election gift with an elite candidate who is capable of winning a second term in 2032. Cuomo isn't that elite candidate just as much as Biden wasn't that elite candidate.

Who is the MOST elite candidate at the moment? I agree with you that we don’t even know the name of our next Obama yet (or we barely know it) and the right person could emerge from a fair primary. But, hypothetically, if we knew the DNC would decide, and they’d take you advice, and it had to happen today, who are the types of people who would make your short list?

I've always been a fan of multi-term state governors being on the short list of potential POTUS candidates. They have the most relevant experience. Dems have a few of those from swing states (being from a swing state adds some mustard to a candidate's resume but it isn't a must have). I would have thought redneck Clinton had no chance on the big stage until he actually got on the big stage. It's impossible to tell if a candidate has the necessary likability and presidential leadership prowess until they are campaigning. Primary debates can be very effective in separating the cream of the crop from the also-rans (primary debates serve an actual purpose unlike general election debates that have only served the purpose of embarrassing the country in recent elections).

Yeah, I didn’t think you’d be willing to say a name. It’s slim pickins on the blue team these days

Thanks to Trump being the sitting POTUS, we'll have another easy election victory in 2028 just like we had in 2020. We just need someone that has the talent and fitness to still be viable in 2032 so we don't get Bidened again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Jesus is a good idea. Dems have become the party of anti-Christian atheism. This isn’t a winning position.

If you read the Bible and somehow end up a voting republican, you are following some pretty crap false prophets