The Democratic Bench

[bmags]

If the last 3 elections have shown anything it's that policy doesn't matter and personality is everything. Hell, the last 7 elections show that.

[LittleHurt05]

If the last 3 elections have shown anything it's that policy doesn't matter and personality is everything. Hell, the last 7 elections show that.

 

How did Bush win twice? He has personality?

[caulfield12]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/tru...omepage%2Fstory

 

whoever the Democratic candidate is, they should promise lower taxes, free university tuition, expansion of Social Security and Medicare, no bank/atm/credit card fees...because Trump has already backtracked or lied about almost every single major initiative of his campaign

 

basically, parents will have a harder time explaining to their children why not lie, be a bully or fat shame (Ann Coulter this week) everyone who disagrees with you

[CrimsonWeltall]

How did Bush win twice? He has personality?

 

Relative to Al Gore, oh yeah

 

"You could have a beer with him"

[caulfield12]

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20161112..._lynching_.html

 

OU and Ok State students target freshman African American students at PENN...

 

Probably unaware that Trump studied there, as well as Ivanka.

[caulfield12]

Relative to Al Gore, oh yeah

 

"You could have a beer with him"

 

He was folksy, relatable, like to hang out on his ranch and hunt, average student...drug and alcohol problems.

 

Gore was pretty much the polar opposite, stiff and didactic, invented the internet/environmental movement (in his eyes), totally different type of Ivy League blue blood who was groomed by his father since birth to run for president.

 

Not only that, but the relationship with Tipper turned out to be something of a facade.

Edited November 12, 2016 by caulfield12

[Jerksticks]

He was folksy, relatable, like to hang out on his ranch and hunt, average student...drug and alcohol problems.

 

Gore was pretty much the polar opposite, stiff and didactic, invented the internet/environmental movement (in his eyes), totally different type of Ivy League blue blood who was groomed by his father since birth to run for president.

 

Not only that, but the relationship with Tipper turned out to be something of a facade.

 

Remember the Gore/Tipper kiss? Looked like Al's first kiss and he watched Dumb & Dumber for pointers.

 

I was going to say Cuban is a good idea since he's central and smart enough to realize big govt is rarely good. So he'd have a better chance of winning the white vote and the educated vote. But then I look at Obama, Hillary, Kerry, Gore, Clinton. The only two that won are the guys whose platforms were "I'm a cool guy and I play the sax/shoot hoops." MAYBE the key to a democrat victory is never going to be policy again (because it's usually pretty stupid in general), but energizing all the minorities and young people. So the real tenets moving forward for the DNC will be coolness in some way and make sure to spout out the phrases "climate change", "free tuition" & "diversity". Landslide.

[caulfield12]

Remember the Gore/Tipper kiss? Looked like Al's first kiss and he watched Dumb & Dumber for pointers.

 

I was going to say Cuban is a good idea since he's central and smart enough to realize big govt is rarely good. So he'd have a better chance of winning the white vote and the educated vote. But then I look at Obama, Hillary, Kerry, Gore, Clinton. The only two that won are the guys whose platforms were "I'm a cool guy and I play the sax/shoot hoops." MAYBE the key to a democrat victory is never going to be policy again (because it's usually pretty stupid in general), but energizing all the minorities and young people. So the real tenets moving forward for the DNC will be coolness in some way and make sure to spout out the phrases "climate change", "free tuition" & "diversity". Landslide.

 

There will undoubtedly be a push back if Trump is a disaster...away from such inexperienced billionaire candidates.

 

But yea, people start throwing out names like Tom Hanks, Alec Baldwin, Will Smith, George Clooney, Matt Damon or Ben Affleck, it seems almost anything's possible the next presidential election cycle in 2019-2020.

 

Trump was a huge hit for advertising/ratings, the Dems were the opposite. They basically hid Clinton while Trump had months and months of free attention with a seemingly endless series of debates. They need someone with charisma and firepower and that populist message which turns the Rust Belt back in their favor rather than losing it like the South and most of the West except the coast.

[jasonxctf]

Bloomberg wouldn't get through dem primary.

 

Mark warner

Mark Dayton

 

[iamshack]

Remember the Gore/Tipper kiss? Looked like Al's first kiss and he watched Dumb & Dumber for pointers.

 

I was going to say Cuban is a good idea since he's central and smart enough to realize big govt is rarely good. So he'd have a better chance of winning the white vote and the educated vote. But then I look at Obama, Hillary, Kerry, Gore, Clinton. The only two that won are the guys whose platforms were "I'm a cool guy and I play the sax/shoot hoops." MAYBE the key to a democrat victory is never going to be policy again (because it's usually pretty stupid in general), but energizing all the minorities and young people. So the real tenets moving forward for the DNC will be coolness in some way and make sure to spout out the phrases "climate change", "free tuition" & "diversity". Landslide.

I think it was more like "I can be incredibly inspiring to normal folks" when I want to.

 

Hillary and Gore could just never do that.

[caulfield12]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/wha...omepage%2Fstory

 

Battle for the Soul of the (Democratic) Party

 

 

https://www.facebook.com/mmflint/posts/10153913074756857

Michael Moore five point to do list after election.

 

 

Huge Women's March on Washington scheduled for January 21st, the day after the inauguration...

https://www.yahoo.com/news/protests-spread-...-173145786.html

Edited November 13, 2016 by caulfield12

[bmags]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/modeledbehavio...y/#1377fccc215c

 

More of similar line.

[caulfield12]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/president-elect-...-210448401.html

 

You can be sure that the inclusion of Bannon (and his alleged domestic abuse history) will give women one more easy target in their already growing dislike of the administration.

 

This January 21st Women's March on Washington and the protests in Washington around the previous week's MLK Holiday will be interesting. They've been playing scenes of the protests non-stop here on CCTV News in China. Social media is also filled with images from NYC and Washington.

 

 

http://nypost.com/2016/11/14/sanders-says-...n-lost/?ref=yfp

Sanders refuses to scapegoat Comey for HRC loss

Edited November 14, 2016 by caulfield12

[Jack Parkman]

This is the problem, is that we have no true leftist party in this country. The Cold War has scared too many people of leftist ideas that could work, and because of that we are left with the Dems, who are slightly right of center imo, and we just view them as leftist because the Republicans are so far right it is scary. Biggest example is the imagined "Pension Crisis" It isn't a problem with the public workers, it is a problem with the private workers. Private workers were complacent, thought that "being in control of their own retirement" was a good idea, but in reality they were just going from guaranteed income to going to the casino that is Wall Street. Now that private workers realize their mistake, and are jealous that they lost theirs, they take it out on the public workers instead of fighting back. That is too selfish, while instead they should be organizing themselves to recreate the labor unions of years past. IMO there is no industry that doesn't NEED a labor union anymore. Most employers have unreasonable expectations, because they a) can and b) labor is so easy to come by right now.

 

Labor unions need to be smarter though, there needs to be a minimum standard for productivity that is collectively bargained, and firing bad workers needs to stay an option. It should not be impossible for someone to lose their job for poor behavior/attendance/productivity. It should be harder than "right to work" states which is really "right to fire" For example, you should not be fired for having a confused look on your face. There should have to be quantitative data to get fired. The opponents of labor unions say that those who work in them are lazy, but the reality is that those who DON'T have one are the lazy ones because they take the easy way out: they don't have the stones to organize.

Edited November 18, 2016 by Elgin Slim

[caulfield12]

Yep, you don't here those who had 401k's who managed them well working for large private companies complaining about the public pension programs.

 

You don't hear those same workers complaining about enjoying generous employee match programs of 3-4% in additional savings accumulating "for free."

 

It's mostly those workers who spent above and beyond their means, bought expensive houses that overextended their financial situations...who chose not to save or even take advantage of employer match programs because they believed they could somehow solve those problems later on in life.

 

Just that public/union workers are lazy or entitled. Of course, attacking people for attempting to "keep up with Joneses" isn't as popular. It's like attacking the American Dream of unbounded capitalism and consumerism.

 

 

 

 

[caulfield12]

Yep, you don't here those who had 401k's who managed them well working for large private companies complaining about the public pension programs.

 

You don't hear those same workers complaining about enjoying generous employee match programs of 3-4% in additional savings accumulating "for free."

 

It's mostly those workers who spent above and beyond their means, bought expensive houses that overextended their financial situations...who chose not to save or even take advantage of employer match programs because they believed they could somehow solve those problems later on in life.

 

Just that public/union workers are lazy or entitled. Of course, attacking people for attempting to "keep up with Joneses" isn't as popular. It's like attacking the American Dream of unbounded capitalism and consumerism.

 

 

 

 

[Jerksticks]

This is the problem, is that we have no true leftist party in this country. The Cold War has scared too many people of leftist ideas that could work, and because of that we are left with the Dems, who are slightly right of center imo, and we just view them as leftist because the Republicans are so far right it is scary. Biggest example is the imagined "Pension Crisis" It isn't a problem with the public workers, it is a problem with the private workers. Private workers were complacent, thought that "being in control of their own retirement" was a good idea, but in reality they were just going from guaranteed income to going to the casino that is Wall Street. Now that private workers realize their mistake, and are jealous that they lost theirs, they take it out on the public workers instead of fighting back. That is too selfish, while instead they should be organizing themselves to recreate the labor unions of years past. IMO there is no industry that doesn't NEED a labor union anymore. Most employers have unreasonable expectations, because they a) can and b) labor is so easy to come by right now.

 

Labor unions need to be smarter though, there needs to be a minimum standard for productivity that is collectively bargained, and firing bad workers needs to stay an option. It should not be impossible for someone to lose their job for poor behavior/attendance/productivity. It should be harder than "right to work" states which is really "right to fire" For example, you should not be fired for having a confused look on your face. There should have to be quantitative data to get fired. The opponents of labor unions say that those who work in them are lazy, but the reality is that those who DON'T have one are the lazy ones because they take the easy way out: they don't have the stones to organize.

Jesus

[farmteam]

I heard something about a couple popular guys from Texas (San Antonio, maybe?) that people were excited about. Can't remember the names though.

 

It'd be a gamechanger if Texas was actually in play during an election.

[caulfield12]

I heard something about a couple popular guys from Texas (San Antonio, maybe?) that people were excited about. Can't remember the names though.

 

It'd be a gamechanger if Texas was actually in play during an election.

 

Probably Julian Castro and Tom Perez. Were seen as potential VP picks.

 

Castro has a lot of helium.

Edited November 19, 2016 by caulfield12

[bmags]

He should maybe win office somewhere.

[caulfield12]

He should maybe win office somewhere.

 

That actually might be more of a negative in this new politics...outsidery, much less of an official record to be blasted, not a captive of Washington Swamp=positive.

 

 

http://nation.foxnews.com/2016/11/21/jonah...clinton?ref=yfp

The Fall of the House of Clinton...interesting reading, despite the source

Edited November 21, 2016 by caulfield12

[Chisoxfn]

I heard something about a couple popular guys from Texas (San Antonio, maybe?) that people were excited about. Can't remember the names though.

 

It'd be a gamechanger if Texas was actually in play during an election.

Popovich and Cuban?

[Quin]

Popovich and Cuban?

 

I'd take Pop for President.

 

Let's see ISIS stop his offensive sets.

[caulfield12]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016...mp.html?ref=yfp

 

Dems can't afford to say yes to Trump