Best possible scenario for the Dems.
Yang or Gabbard (or one of 3 or 4 other lesser knowns) win the primary process with around 15% of the vote in the primaries. Trump beats the DNC preferred frontrunners, IMO.
Replies to: Best possible scenario for the Dems.
Chris has pronounced Gabbard a "kook."
Since we all know why he has done this, I thought a juxtaposition of her "kookiness" with some of Chris's proposals would be a fine mind exercise:
Gabbard - No Trump campaign-Russia election conspiracy and possible false flag in Syria.
Chris - Russia-Trump campaign conspiracy and let's eliminate mosquitoes and alligators.
Sharper folks here probably caught a bit of irony: Gabbard is a kook for believing there was a false flag in Syria but Chris is not a kook for believing the disproved Russiagate conspiracy.
I now look forward to an appeal to expertise to validate that Gabbard is indeed a kook.
I'm curious if she has to declare ownership of Kamala Harris on her tax returns.
(no message)
She’s a wide-eyed loon
Cute, but about as presidential as Hank the Tank.
You can’t run your own foreign policy from the House. She’s as flakey as her arch anti-gay dad.
As to the rest of your post...those who are on the side of the mosquito are menaces to their species.
More of a blue-footed booby...
(no message)
Well-reasoned, as usual. BTW, is your pick, Biden, "flaky?"
Webster defines "flaky" as: "markedly odd or unconventional : offbeat, wacky"
Hmmmm...
Whoops, and I forgot about the giant mirror to solve global warming.
(no message)
Is this a reference to something?
Because surely you don’t think that’s what geo-engineering is. Maybe you do. Who cares.
I look forward to your description of the less pie-in-the-sky description!
Man will always contrive solutions to the crises he creates. This is the bit where you reference Pinker. An "Appeal to Pinker," if you will. I'm going to Wikipedia as we speak to add it as a special corollary to the Appeal to Authority fallacy.
Yang and Gabbard won’t make the cut, although I like them both.
Yang is much brighter than Gabbard, but lacks command presence. Gabbard is jockeying for a VP slot.
You may be correct that the front runners cannot beat Trump, but there is a ton of runway left to go. The Democrats are still feeling their way around the course, not sure to hit Driver and play for birdie, or lay up and make par or bogey.
Per my posts months ago, Biden has lost a step. Not a knock, but age is showing. He also has a lengthy political record, which will be dissected. Puts him on defense and he lacks the acuity to counterpunch. Just not sure that he has the fight in him that propelled him for 40 + years. If Biden has not yet taken command of the conversation, not sure he ever will.
Bernie is sharp. Has plenty of fight. As does Warren. She is strong and bold and fearless. Don’t count her out.
I go back ‘n forth daily regarding whether the path is moderate center left, or bold and progressive. Contrary to so many friends and family, my gut is the turnout math favors turning the page and going bold and progressive. Not sure the white union worker is necessarily the difference maker. I think the math is changing quicker than we would gather.
Silly me also believes that voters who voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012, yet for Trump in 2016, will vote for the Democrat candidate, after seeing all the noise and corruption and outrage surrounding Trump’s administration. They may even opt for a progressive Democrat (Warren) preaching Medicare for all, as the better choice, but putting a check on their vote, by voting for the GOP candidate for the House or Senate.
Too early to know which direction things will break. Would not be surprised if forthcoming world or national events chart the course for us.
Yang should make the first cut. Who knws what happens after that...
(no message)
Isn’t one circumcision enough for you?
(no message)
The mohel, the better!
(no message)
Beating Trump should be like a 240 yd par 4 on an executive course.
If you don't get greedy and go for eagle, you should win.
So thought the Republican primary field in 2015-16. So thought Hillary.
Trump is formidable because he has no conscience or decency and will sell heroin to a heroin addict.
He has a diehard base in a deeply divided nation. And the economy is still healthy.
Yes. Trump’s base is a minority of the electorate, but every one of them will turn out and vote for him.
Trump will look to kill his opponent at any cost.
If the opponent is only signed up to play the executive course you describe, he/she will lose.
Hillary was a deeply flawed candidate at a time when Trump's message resonated.
Your failure (and your party's) to grasp this is why he'll win again. That is my point. He should be easy to beat, but the SJW candidates will lose, again. Don't say I didn't warn ya.
From The wide variety you’d accept, it’s clear that you stand for nothing & that’s why you’ll lose.
(no message)
"Strong and bold and fearless." That sounds like one of Jim's movie reviews.
"I laughed, I cried!"