Author Topic: Democrat 2020 presidential nominee?  (Read 1147 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline wilber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5466
Re: Democrat 2020 presidential nominee?
« Reply #15 on: November 21, 2018, 10:22:39 pm »
No. Basically you are saying we should find a woman. How is that advantageous in any way, shape or form unless you're looking for sex?
Don't name me A woman and say "well, she seems capable". I could do the same with dozens of men.
What's wrong with finding the PERSON who is most likely to win and most likely to be able to govern effectively?

I’ve no doubt there are women more qualified than some so called “electable” men. Trump turned out to be electable. How’s that working out?
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline kimmy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3912
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Democrat 2020 presidential nominee?
« Reply #16 on: November 22, 2018, 02:14:02 am »
What is with this idea of putting people up there on the basis of their identity group? And if you're going to do it at least do it in a way which benefits you.
A woman would excite mostly one segment of the population - college educated women. And they are already heavily incentivized to vote Democrat. If you want to win the damn thing you want to select someone who will appeal to groups who are not already firmly in your corner.

Spends most of his time complaining about identity politics...  suggests choosing a candidate that will appeal to white male voters.

 -k
Masked for your safety.
Winner Winner x 3 View List

Offline MH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7704
Re: Democrat 2020 presidential nominee?
« Reply #17 on: November 22, 2018, 05:49:58 am »
Spends most of his time complaining about identity politics...  suggests choosing a candidate that will appeal to white male voters.

 -k

Kind of makes sense though.

It's not fair but a middle-aged white male seems to represent a non-identity choice.  If they do that, they can placate their base by having him say the 'right things'.  Remember Bill Clinton as the first 'black president' ?   :D

Offline cybercoma

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2720
Re: Democrat 2020 presidential nominee?
« Reply #18 on: November 22, 2018, 07:10:27 am »
Kind of makes sense though.

It's not fair but a middle-aged white male seems to represent a non-identity choice.  If they do that, they can placate their base by having him say the 'right things'.  Remember Bill Clinton as the first 'black president' ?   :D
Everyone has an identity. The difference is that some people's identities are used against them. For example, Argus wouldn't hire people with foreign-sounding names because they might not speak English well enough for him.

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Democrat 2020 presidential nominee?
« Reply #19 on: November 22, 2018, 11:39:11 am »
I see you like to use Trump lingo to try and make your case, which of course is predictable. A lot of non white countries that are what you and Donny refer to as shitholes remain so because boring ,racist dumb white guys have moved in, stolen the resources, and then **** off. Apparently you haven't traveled far from your block.

My description of the third world vastly pre-dates Trump. And is based on reality.
Yours is based on unicorn farts and rainbows. And on your racist assumption that whatever is wrong with a non-white country it must be the fault of some white country somewhere, sometime in the past.

Hey, Ireland was conquered by the UK and subjected to brutal suppression for centuries. How come it's such a great country now? Meanwhile, Turkey wasn't conquered, and it's a shithole.
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Democrat 2020 presidential nominee?
« Reply #20 on: November 22, 2018, 11:40:24 am »
I’ve no doubt there are women more qualified than some so called “electable” men.

Really? Why do you have no doubt?  Is it based upon the vast history and spendiferous achievements of female politicians?
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Democrat 2020 presidential nominee?
« Reply #21 on: November 22, 2018, 11:47:52 am »
Spends most of his time complaining about identity politics...  suggests choosing a candidate that will appeal to white male voters.

 -k

First, Wilber's suggestion was based on pure identity politics. Do you deny it?

My primary reply was 'What's wrong with selecting the right person".

Yes, I certainly did mention electoral strategy, that you choose someone who will appeal to a broader group of people beyond those already committed to your party.  That would be a moderate white male with a strong military background. That is at least sound politics. Wilber's suggestion is not only identity politics it's DUMB identity politics, done for nothing more than virtue signalling.

The Democrats swept Vermont. Except for the governor. They got stomped there by a Republican. I'm curious as to whether that would have happened if the Democrats hadn't chosen to virtue signal by putting up a transgender candidate. I'm willing to bet that at the very, very least the vote would have been a hell of a lot closer with someone more mainstream.

"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Democrat 2020 presidential nominee?
« Reply #22 on: November 22, 2018, 11:49:07 am »
Everyone has an identity. The difference is that some people's identities are used against them. For example, Argus wouldn't hire people with foreign-sounding names because they might not speak English well enough for him.

Given time to do interviews I would. I don't know if you've ever had a job that was busy and where you had to get secondary jobs done fast, but when you do, you go for quick results.
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline wilber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5466
Re: Democrat 2020 presidential nominee?
« Reply #23 on: November 22, 2018, 12:37:00 pm »
Really? Why do you have no doubt?  Is it based upon the vast history and spendiferous achievements of female politicians?

You only have to look at their qualifications compared to some of the rubes who are in office. Men have had the political world to themselves and centuries to screw things up, time to give some ladies a turn.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline segnosaur

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 567
Re: Democrat 2020 presidential nominee?
« Reply #24 on: November 22, 2018, 01:21:10 pm »
You only have to look at their qualifications compared to some of the rubes who are in office. Men have had the political world to themselves and centuries to screw things up, time to give some ladies a turn.
I agree that there should be qualified people elected to office. And I agree that there are many women who are much more qualified than some of the current crop of elected politicians.

The problem is, people don't always vote for 'qualifications'.

Look at Clinton... massively more qualified than Trump, in terms of government experience, knowledge, integrity. Yet the U.S. is currently run by Stubby McBonespurs, an individual who had never held elected political office, who had no government experience, and who's history of running businesses seemed to have more failures than successes. Yet voters took a look at the bigotry he was spouting and said "Yeah give me some of that".

Being the most qualified is of no benefit if you get rejected by the voters, and I don't think its too out of line to recognize that women are at a political disadvantage (unfair as it is). I remember seen the results of a poll that showed that roughly 1 in 10 people would never consider voting for a woman. (I tried to dig up the article but it seems to be lost in a google-mess of midterm results.)

Offline Omni

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8026
Re: Democrat 2020 presidential nominee?
« Reply #25 on: November 22, 2018, 01:33:11 pm »
I agree that there should be qualified people elected to office. And I agree that there are many women who are much more qualified than some of the current crop of elected politicians.

The problem is, people don't always vote for 'qualifications'.

Look at Clinton... massively more qualified than Trump, in terms of government experience, knowledge, integrity. Yet the U.S. is currently run by Stubby McBonespurs, an individual who had never held elected political office, who had no government experience, and who's history of running businesses seemed to have more failures than successes. Yet voters took a look at the bigotry he was spouting and said "Yeah give me some of that".

Being the most qualified is of no benefit if you get rejected by the voters, and I don't think its too out of line to recognize that women are at a political disadvantage (unfair as it is). I remember seen the results of a poll that showed that roughly 1 in 10 people would never consider voting for a woman. (I tried to dig up the article but it seems to be lost in a google-mess of midterm results.)

Except that in the last federal somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 million more voters cast ballots for Hillary, but it was that goofy EC thingy that put old Boney BS in office. They should dump the EC and let the ballots speak. I do agree though I think there still is a mentality that wants to keep women hunkered down in either the kitchen or the bedroom.

Offline segnosaur

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 567
Re: Democrat 2020 presidential nominee?
« Reply #26 on: November 22, 2018, 01:44:25 pm »
Except that in the last federal somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 million more voters cast ballots for Hillary..
Yes, which is a good thing. And, there were also a record number of women who won seats in the house, also a good thing.

The U.S. is improving, but it still has a little ways to go before both genders are treated equally when it comes to politics.
Quote
but it was that goofy EC thingy that put old Boney BS in office.
I agree that Hillary's loss was partly due to the way the electoral college works. But, a candidate has to get elected under whatever system is in place at the time.

Had Hillary been a man, maybe she may have won a couple more of the battleground states. (Granted you can't tell for sure without a crystal ball, but the margins of victory were very slim in some states that Trump won.)
Quote
They should dump the EC and let the ballots speak.
I agree that would probably be a good thing.

The problem is, they need to convince enough states to get rid of the electoral college, and many of the small states (who currently have more influence despite their lower population) will probably not want to give up their power.

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Democrat 2020 presidential nominee?
« Reply #27 on: November 22, 2018, 02:09:27 pm »
You only have to look at their qualifications compared to some of the rubes who are in office. Men have had the political world to themselves and centuries to screw things up, time to give some ladies a turn.

They've screwed things up? How? We are at the pinnacle of human achievement living in the wealthiest, freeist society in the history of the world.

I'm trying to think of a single female politician of any note in Canadian history and failing. Every premier I can think of has been a disaster, as has every female party leader. Help me out here.

Politics is a ruthless, cutthroat profession. Even internal advantage seems to be gained by harsh, strategic decisions, garnering support from various important people, sucking up, doing favours. This is not something women are very good at, generally. The ones that succeed, that play this shitty game, seem to be people so venal and self serving they basically have no morals or ethics (Kathleen Wynne being one example of that breed). I have met and worked for some good, smart, solidly knowledgeable women with great people skills in my time. A couple of Directors General I worked for were among the best I've seen. So I'm not suggesting women can't function capably in leadership roles. But the nasty politics of it goes against their nature, moreso than it does men. Most women instinctively seek compromise, which is a good thing IMO, but they tend to be crushed by men who go for the throat. And while I've met powerful women I liked and admired I've yet to meet one with the charisma to carry a room.



« Last Edit: November 22, 2018, 02:21:23 pm by SirJohn »
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Democrat 2020 presidential nominee?
« Reply #28 on: November 22, 2018, 02:10:40 pm »
I agree that there should be qualified people elected to office. And I agree that there are many women who are much more qualified than some of the current crop of elected politicians.

The problem is, people don't always vote for 'qualifications'.

Look at Clinton... massively more qualified than Trump, in terms of government experience, knowledge, integrity.

Yet she was far from a paragon of virtue, and she made Stephen Harper seem charismatic by comparison.
If the Democrats put a woman in as candidate it will almost certainly be Elizabeth Warren, and that gives us a very good chance of another four years for Trump.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2018, 02:13:09 pm by SirJohn »
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2936
Re: Democrat 2020 presidential nominee?
« Reply #29 on: November 22, 2018, 04:13:53 pm »
I'm curious as to whether that would have happened if the Democrats hadn't chosen to virtue signal by putting up a transgender candidate.

Yes, because putting up a trangender, or gay, woman, Muslim, etc. is all about virtue signaling. I am not a bigot, an old white straight male however is the only acceptable choice that doesn't represent virtual signaling.