# Democrats running for president



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I wonder how many more will be throwing their hat into the ring?









Half of these people I don't recognize. Second row far right I thought what the heck is Tiger Woods running for president. :homer:



> 2020 Democratic presidential candidates: U.S. Sens. Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, Kirsten Gillibrand and Michael Bennet, former Texas congressman Beto O'Rourke, U.S. Reps. Tulsi Gabbard, John Delaney, Eric Swalwell, Tim Ryan, Seth Moulton, and former HUD Secretary Julian Castro, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, former Gov. John Hickenlooper, Gov. Jay Inslee, Andrew Yang, Marianne Williamson, Mayor Wayne Messam, and former Vice President Joe Biden.


Things are looking tough around the world. I would dislike having one of these clowns picking up where Obama left off in his apology tour.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Out of that group there are only about 3-4 that have a chance.

1. Bernie
2. Joe Bieden
3. Warren
4. Klobuchar/Harris

But it is a run for the first two. One promoting free everything and the other leaving off where Obama did. Warren is a wild card but I don't think she will get it with the whole claiming to be NA when it was .0001% or what ever. that will hurt her big time.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

Why would most of them even run other than to ride the gravy train for a while ?


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

> Why would most of them even run other than to ride the gravy train for a while ?


honestly I think it is to get out some of the "policies" or "idea's" of the party. If you think about it if they all the basically the same platform. You are hitting up more and more people, more and more news outlets, more and more press time. It gets a "message" out there.

The thing the Republicans need to worry about is the fact that there isn't one front runner. It is shaping up exactly like last years Republican race.... and how Trump won the nomination. Then he kept the steam rolling and won the presidency. Don't take any of the people lightly. Especially with the "free education" or the "college debt relief". I mean Clinton won an election by pandering the college youth crowd. If someone was telling a person who is looking at $100,000 or more in debt that if they get elected they will wipe out that debt...&#8230; I know I would have been seriously thinking about voting to them. I voted for Clinton over Dole. :beer: But his policy back then I agreed with. :bop: So don't think that the "free" stuff is going to get them many votes.

EDIT:

Lets put it this way. If one of those others would come out and say:

1. Free college we cant do that it would cripple out nation but we will look at lowering costs for education.... (then give a plan)
2. We need to fix our healthcare laws to help bring cheaper drugs to market and lower the actual cost for insurance companies... but keep it private insurance (another good idea)
3. Secure our borders (with out the wall)
4. Call out the antisematic crap going on in the party
5. Call out why the abortion stuff is going crazy now... ie: if they would have let status quo stay with out pushing the envelope we wouldn't be having this discussion.

If one of the others would come up with some of the stuff I mentioned above they would win the election not just the nomination. Because some of them are so out there even moderate or middle ground Dem's think they are nuts. Because there are republicans who would vote Dem if a someone was more middle ground. Klobauchar is kind of middle ground but I personally don't like her track record on things and what not. So that is why I think she will get lost in the mess. Biden has a chance but his "touching" is going to throw many off as well.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

After the first debates......Looks like Biden or Harris.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

I agree those two are the front runners with Bernie behind them.

It will be interesting to see if Harris will have a fall out after RBG mentioned how good Kavanaugh has been for women clerks. Or her "bussing" comments.

Biden has to look out for anything that could pop up in AG report and what not with his son.

Bernie.... well he keeps offering free stuff so he will stay the same.

But Biden out of all of them is the only one I have heard so far not attack the 2A.... well not as much.

It will be interesting.

Like I mentioned in another thread.... if one would break from the pack and not be so far left on some issues and come more center.... they would probably win against Trump.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Just read this article....

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... id=DELLDHP

Biden is trying to break from the pack.... we will just have to see how this plays out. :beer:


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Read the article......I agree with Biden. I would guess I am also center left. Not in favor of Sanders or Warren. To far left. We don't need medicare for all or free college education. To expensive. 
But Biden would be a whole lot better than Trump. Not looking for an argument here, but have to post to keep this place active.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

If it turns out Biden's deals with his son in China and Ukrain are all true and I had to vote Democrat it would be for Biden. I dislike his talk about China is no danger, but the other contenders would destroy this country in the first few years. Biden may be a crook, but he is a half sane crook.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Need to eliminate about half of them. Having debate for 2 nights is ridiculous. Make rules tougher to be able to get in the debate. Even 16 Republicans in 2016 was to many. Talking about giving health care to illegal immigrants before real Americans is dumb.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

If they are not polling in at least double digits they dont have a ghosts chance in hell and shouldnt be in a debate. Even 10% is iffy. Most of these candidates are just having a good time on somebody elses money


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

dakotashooter2 said:


> Most of these candidates are just having a good time on somebody elses money


Isn't that what all politians do?


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Ken...

I agree with the whole debate thing. It needs to be no more than 4. It is hard to express ideas exactly or give rebuttals when you have that many people on stage. You cant have a give and take type discussion to show your idea's or platform.

BL.... That is a good one... and TRUE of all elected officials. uke:

I also read a little snippet today about how Maxine Waters is calling out Trump on his golfing. Because Trump was critical of Obama and his golfing. It is a good little call out and I agree.... wow.. did I just say I agree with Maxine Waters.... LOL But it is one where you don't throw stones when you live in a glass house. Government spending at its finest... LOL :bop:

Edit... changed name... waters not harris&#8230; lol


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

No more then 4 candidates and have an actual debate on what needs to be fixed and how they will do it, why they will do it and how much it will cost.

Chuck, how hard was it to agree with Maxine Waters. I had a hard time reading that. uke:


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

BL...It was very hard to agree with her.

But Trump was critical of Obama and his golfing..... he shouldn't be golfing as much or more. :beer:


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

I just read a snippet about how AOC is looking to go after other Dem's now who voted against or for certain things.... ie: she and her "base" are planning to go after some elected officials in there elections coming up. Basically saying she will want Dem's out that voted a certain way or that are not as "progressive" as her. So with in the party there is fighting.... which is never good. I am not sure if this was in response to Pelosi or not. But it will make some debates interesting if they are asked about this.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

They are starting to splinter. Hopefully the right will get their act together and get stuff done.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Also I just read.... (yes a slow day at work)&#8230;.

That the Dem's that want Mueller to testify have also sent sopenad 12 witnesses to the case.

So let me get this straight.... they haven't heard from the guy who was hired to do the work and interview the witnesses yet or his "take" on the report..... and they are not wanting the witnesses he interviewed to come and testify again???

I am sorry they are shooting themselves in the foot on this one. I understand having Mueller testify and what not. But now it looks like you don't believe him and want to keep digging. When will this stop???

The reason why I put this here in the Dem's running for president is because they should be held accountable or be asked.... why keep dragging this out? why do you want the witnesses testifying.... do you not believe Mueller? Because they are playing right into Trump. they are playing or showing it is more of a "witch hunt"... especially now when he keeps calling all of this a "do over"... that is exactly what it looks like.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

The dumbest part of it is these witnesses testified under oath to Mueller, so do the democrats really think any of those witnesses will change their story?


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

Chuck Smith said:


> BL...It was very hard to agree with her.
> 
> But Trump was critical of Obama and his golfing..... he shouldn't be golfing as much or more. :beer:


But at least Trump gets something accomplished when he is NOT golfing....Not sure that can be said for Barry........ LOL


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

> Several Democrats in Congress, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), have called for Acosta's resignation. But no Senate Republican - who all voted for Acosta's confirmation - has explicitly called on Acosta to resign at this point, although several are awaiting the results of a Justice Department probe into the handling of Epstein's 2008 plea deal before commenting on Acosta's fate.


I also will put this in the Epstien thread. But put it here because this shows you the political climate right now. One side wants swift action and you are "guilty" before any investigation. The other is waiting for results of a probe. Many of the documents of the plea deal haven't been made available yet. So to "rush" to judgement is so wrong.


----------

