The Democratic Candidates

Lerxst1992 · May 2019

F Me In The Brain said:

I guess we can agree to disagree
(I also would question the statement that just being "easily expected to outlive his 4 year term" is good enough - for me, that isn't.)
I am happy to wear the discrimination badge of horror if it means that I am using all available facts to draw reasonable conclusions when comparing two (or more) candidates
Isn't that what we all try to do?

Still voting for Old Joe over Old Grand Wizard Donny if it comes to it

If he is in good health at 78 I'd expect him to make it to 82 was my point. Some are sharp as a tack at 85 and others incoherent at 58. Let's judge his performance is my point.

If Biden were to run against someone two years younger whose diet consists of big macs, endless KFC buckets and minimal exercise I'd say in effect Biden is the "younger option."

More importantly let's see how savvy his political skills are. I'd say Warren is sharp on policy but trump gouged her when she released her DNA test and her rebuttal was very weak. This is the type of thing I am hoping Sloppy Joe is good at.

Lerxst1992 · May 2019

njnancy said:

show previous quotes

benjs said:

Lerxst1992 said:

F Me In The Brain said:

Eh. You are making it about an attack on Joe for his age but it is a question about the soundness of a decision to elect anyone that is 78 to the position.
Joe could sound perfect today (instead of how he sounded on China) and I would make the same question.

If Biden appears healthy at 78 he would be expected to easily outlive his 4 year term. Voters would then have the opportunity to decide again if he is healthy enough for the job. I sense at 82 voters would be significantly wary but I'd hope they judge him on how he campaigns and his experience.

I also sense Biden is interested in one term.

Not sure I am familiar with the concept of judging a candidate by his age yet it not be discrimination

Did you see my comment above? I tried to express why I feel judging a candidate by his age is not discrimination, and I'm curious to hear your thoughts.

I understand what you and Brett are saying. Age is part of the whole equation that you use when you are vetting what youse guys want in your number one candidate. I don't use age as part of my decision process, but that doesn't make your decision process invalid. Perhaps if you can get Brett to lay off the one foot in the grave comments it will help. (not holding my breath) But I do understand what you are saying. No pun intended but you are concerned there might be a Weekend at Bernie's situation on Inauguration Day, or others might factor that in and choose the evil one.

I don't believe you are being prejudiced. Just prudent. Because we disagree doesn't make either of us wrong.

Now, I know that mostly everyone on here does not think this way. But perhaps this conversation about how we perceive factors in decision making can help some of you understand that there are people in American who, when evaluating what they want in a President, find being a female to be a disqualifying factor. Proof is in the pictures of the 45 Presidents and Vice Presidents. Perhaps the age discussion might be able to shed a different light on that topic, Or maybe not, but I hope it does.

This discussion has actually been mostly civil and has created understanding for some of us. We all be thinking with our different brain, have different priorities and concerns but most importantly are putting a lot of thought into this process.

I think that I can have a negative knee jerk response to anything that seems to be dismissing a segment of society because of how I feel about women & other groups being basically shut out of places of power. In the future, I will check if my emotional thinking is overtaking my intellectual thinking. I'll try, at least.

I have no illusions, especially after the backlash to Obama, which seemed like such a wonderful step forward, that America is ready to embrace a woman as Commander in Chief. I hope I'm wrong, but look at the horrible course (in)correction America took after Obama. We can be such a forward thinking country but too much too fast freaks out a portion of the country, I think that is obvious to most of us. I mean, freaking Donald Trump is President. While many people were feeling great about social progress, other people's heads were exploding. We are a complicated group of citizens.

Anyway, this has been a good conversation and will continue to be. It made me think outside my self and that changed my view of other's thinking, to a certain degree. I like that. I like when people stand by their beliefs and can debate without demeaning, but with the intent of raising understanding. That's the best stuff that happens here.

I agree evaluating a candidate's cognitive function is an important factor but concluding whether they are "sharp" based on their age is leaning towards discrimination.

Which is fine because that's what ppl do.

But if alot of democratic voters start judging Sloppy Joe strictly by the number next to his name...

My argument is that is precisely how and why Democrats lose to Republicans on presidential elections.

Almost textbook. (Hope I remember why when my old brain argument gets challenged

)

njnancy · May 2019

Lerxst1992 said:

show previous quotes

njnancy said:

benjs said:

Lerxst1992 said:

F Me In The Brain said:

Eh. You are making it about an attack on Joe for his age but it is a question about the soundness of a decision to elect anyone that is 78 to the position.
Joe could sound perfect today (instead of how he sounded on China) and I would make the same question.

If Biden appears healthy at 78 he would be expected to easily outlive his 4 year term. Voters would then have the opportunity to decide again if he is healthy enough for the job. I sense at 82 voters would be significantly wary but I'd hope they judge him on how he campaigns and his experience.

I also sense Biden is interested in one term.

Not sure I am familiar with the concept of judging a candidate by his age yet it not be discrimination

Did you see my comment above? I tried to express why I feel judging a candidate by his age is not discrimination, and I'm curious to hear your thoughts.

I understand what you and Brett are saying. Age is part of the whole equation that you use when you are vetting what youse guys want in your number one candidate. I don't use age as part of my decision process, but that doesn't make your decision process invalid. Perhaps if you can get Brett to lay off the one foot in the grave comments it will help. (not holding my breath) But I do understand what you are saying. No pun intended but you are concerned there might be a Weekend at Bernie's situation on Inauguration Day, or others might factor that in and choose the evil one.

I don't believe you are being prejudiced. Just prudent. Because we disagree doesn't make either of us wrong.

Now, I know that mostly everyone on here does not think this way. But perhaps this conversation about how we perceive factors in decision making can help some of you understand that there are people in American who, when evaluating what they want in a President, find being a female to be a disqualifying factor. Proof is in the pictures of the 45 Presidents and Vice Presidents. Perhaps the age discussion might be able to shed a different light on that topic, Or maybe not, but I hope it does.

This discussion has actually been mostly civil and has created understanding for some of us. We all be thinking with our different brain, have different priorities and concerns but most importantly are putting a lot of thought into this process.

I think that I can have a negative knee jerk response to anything that seems to be dismissing a segment of society because of how I feel about women & other groups being basically shut out of places of power. In the future, I will check if my emotional thinking is overtaking my intellectual thinking. I'll try, at least.

I have no illusions, especially after the backlash to Obama, which seemed like such a wonderful step forward, that America is ready to embrace a woman as Commander in Chief. I hope I'm wrong, but look at the horrible course (in)correction America took after Obama. We can be such a forward thinking country but too much too fast freaks out a portion of the country, I think that is obvious to most of us. I mean, freaking Donald Trump is President. While many people were feeling great about social progress, other people's heads were exploding. We are a complicated group of citizens.

Anyway, this has been a good conversation and will continue to be. It made me think outside my self and that changed my view of other's thinking, to a certain degree. I like that. I like when people stand by their beliefs and can debate without demeaning, but with the intent of raising understanding. That's the best stuff that happens here.

I agree evaluating a candidate's cognitive function is an important factor but concluding whether they are "sharp" based on their age is leaning towards discrimination.

Which is fine because that's what ppl do.

But if alot of democratic voters start judging Sloppy Joe strictly by the number next to his name...

My argument is that is precisely how and why Democrats lose to Republicans on presidential elections.

Almost textbook. (Hope I remember why when my old brain argument gets challenged )

Oh, I agree that Dems do more damage to themselves than the Repubs do to them.

Whether it be purity tests for policy initiatives or saying that there needs to be a fresh new, young face - we shoot ourselves in the foot and help to damage our potential nominees before they get to the general.

Biden is the candidate that Trump is THE most afraid of running against and his insane tweeting can attest to that. Now he has Rudy pestering the Ukranians about stuff that has already had its run through the news back in the Obama presidency (

). Accusations against his son and ousting a corrupt prosecutor and salacious shit about his kid's romantic life. (I thought we were against PC culture?)

Trump is actively colluding with a foreign country to get dirt on a political opponent - and he's getting away with it, AGAIN. The NYT has already started their articles reminiscent of their email stories that were fed to them by information from Trump associates. Great newspaper, stupid decisions sometimes.

Can Biden make it through a primary where we eat our own? We'll see.

And, as an aside, I was all in for Beto as Senator for Texas. Very impressive. But I just do not see him as ready for primetime and find him to be more hype than substance. (Another Dem voter shiny object).

Lerxst1992 · May 2019

Yes, Trump is already colluding with foreign nationals!

I like 20+ choices. It forces the candidates like Beto or Gillibrand to stand out and get noticed and will force Biden to be on his game (hopefully)

Ledbetterman10 · May 2019

https://youtu.be/EngzvMC0jzE

Meltdown99 · May 2019

From the video of Biden...if he's the nominee good luck...

Sorry, he is 78 his mind is not getting sharper...

If he is POTUS he will need to be waken from his naps...lol

mrussel1 · May 2019

Meltdown99 said:

From the video of Biden...if he's the nominee good luck...

Sorry, he is 78 his mind is not getting sharper...

If he is POTUS he will need to be waken from his naps...lol

Well fortunate for every candidate, we get to make decisions on more information than a one minute cherry picked video.

my2hands · May 2019

mrussel1 said:

show previous quotes

Meltdown99 said:

From the video of Biden...if he's the nominee good luck...

Sorry, he is 78 his mind is not getting sharper...

If he is POTUS he will need to be waken from his naps...lol

Well fortunate for every candidate, we get to make decisions on more information than a one minute cherry picked video.

You're not the average voter

Meltdown99 · May 2019

mrussel1 said:

show previous quotes

Meltdown99 said:

From the video of Biden...if he's the nominee good luck...

Sorry, he is 78 his mind is not getting sharper...

If he is POTUS he will need to be waken from his naps...lol

Well fortunate for every candidate, we get to make decisions on more information than a one minute cherry picked video.

You had a very successful youthful POTUS a few years back...may I suggest you guys take that route again.

Spiritual_Chaos · May 2019

Yuck for Biden.

Warren

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORKuZXo_sLk

mrussel1 · May 2019

my2hands said:

show previous quotes

mrussel1 said:

Meltdown99 said:

From the video of Biden...if he's the nominee good luck...

Sorry, he is 78 his mind is not getting sharper...

If he is POTUS he will need to be waken from his naps...lol

Well fortunate for every candidate, we get to make decisions on more information than a one minute cherry picked video.

You're not the average voter

Except the average voter isn't tuned in right now regardless.

njnancy · May 2019

mrussel1 said:

show previous quotes

my2hands said:

mrussel1 said:

Meltdown99 said:

From the video of Biden...if he's the nominee good luck...

Sorry, he is 78 his mind is not getting sharper...

If he is POTUS he will need to be waken from his naps...lol

Well fortunate for every candidate, we get to make decisions on more information than a one minute cherry picked video.

You're not the average voter

Except the average voter isn't tuned in right now regardless.

Most voters will tune in around Labor Day 2020.

F Me In The Brain · May 2019

I would think most voters already know what they want. Trump or NotTrump.
The percentage who do not already know will make the difference.

Lerxst1992 · May 2019

F Me In The Brain said:

I would think most voters already know what they want. Trump or NotTrump.
The percentage who do not already know will make the difference.

54% voted not trump last time and that % will probably be similar this time.

Trump & gop know this and will try to get reelected with the same 2 step strategy as last time:

1. Make sure a moderate is running on the libertarian ticket

2. Destroy the reputation of the Dem nominee so at least 1-2% of dem voters dont vote or vote 3rd party

OnWis97 · May 2019

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Yuck for Biden. Warren

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORKuZXo_sLk

I agree.

That said, I would rather Biden get the nomination. Warren is probably the best candidate. But so was Hillary.

mrussel1 · May 2019

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Yuck for Biden. Warren

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORKuZXo_sLk

The new object of your affection?

F Me In The Brain · May 2019

Lerxst1992 said:

show previous quotes

F Me In The Brain said:

I would think most voters already know what they want. Trump or NotTrump.
The percentage who do not already know will make the difference.

54% voted not trump last time and that % will probably be similar this time.

Trump & gop know this and will try to get reelected with the same 2 step strategy as last time:

1. Make sure a moderate is running on the libertarian ticket

2. Destroy the reputation of the Dem nominee so at least 1-2% of dem voters dont vote or vote 3rd party

Does the 54% include any 3rd/4th/write in options from last election?

mrussel1 · May 2019

For those of you that support free tuition, I encourage you to read this article. If you can't see it, I'm happy to paste the text. It's an excellent analysis from a UVA professor who has studied the issue. It better encapsulates the criticism I have levied against it, regarding lack of means testing AND rewarding high earners. It also does a great job of supporting Mayor Pete's well founded criticism as well. I've always believed that the policy, as espoused by Warren and Sanders, is truly a vote attraction strategy for 20 and 30 year olds.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/free-tuition-is-the-opposite-of-progressive-policymaking/2019/05/03/4767edc8-6c1b-11e9-a66d-a82d3f3d96d5_story.html?utm_term=.b19a01d96701

Lerxst1992 · May 2019

F Me In The Brain said:

show previous quotes

Lerxst1992 said:

F Me In The Brain said:

I would think most voters already know what they want. Trump or NotTrump.
The percentage who do not already know will make the difference.

54% voted not trump last time and that % will probably be similar this time.

Trump & gop know this and will try to get reelected with the same 2 step strategy as last time:

1. Make sure a moderate is running on the libertarian ticket

2. Destroy the reputation of the Dem nominee so at least 1-2% of dem voters dont vote or vote 3rd party

Does the 54% include any 3rd/4th/write in options from last election?

Yes. Trump got 46% off the vote. He will probably get about the same this time.

F Me In The Brain · May 2019

Lerxst1992 said:

show previous quotes

F Me In The Brain said:

Lerxst1992 said:

F Me In The Brain said:

I would think most voters already know what they want. Trump or NotTrump.
The percentage who do not already know will make the difference.

54% voted not trump last time and that % will probably be similar this time.

Trump & gop know this and will try to get reelected with the same 2 step strategy as last time:

1. Make sure a moderate is running on the libertarian ticket

2. Destroy the reputation of the Dem nominee so at least 1-2% of dem voters dont vote or vote 3rd party

Does the 54% include any 3rd/4th/write in options from last election?

Yes. Trump got 46% off the vote. He will probably get about the same this time.

Hopefully more people find themselves in the NotTrump camp who did not vote last time...and everyone choosing NotTrump realizes that our system is fucked in the bung and that the only way that NotTrump works is to vote for Geriatric Joe or whomever gets the nod from the Dems. I was fooled once, voting 3rd party in protest, but not again.

#MakeItCount

The Democratic Candidates

Comments

Quick Links

Categories