This is bizarrely true even in America and coming from India where women are subjugated but we've had women heads of state I find strange . Day of the election I was bummed took a ride to a bar struck up a convo with cabbie few min later he goes what did she expect women just got the right to vote a hundred years back they can't be president yet ... I was like hum.... Blacks were behind them we got Obama ... Awkward sentences and silence followed ... Was surprising .
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
New Yorker: 13 women who should think about running for president in 2020
- Thread starter ElectricBlanketFire
- Start date
- Status
This is bizarrely true even in America and coming from India where women are subjugated but we've had women heads of state I find strange . Day of the election I was bummed took a ride to a bar struck up a convo with cabbie few min later he goes what did she expect women just got the right to vote a hundred years back they can't be president yet ... I was like hum.... Blacks were behind them we got Obama ... Awkward sentences and silence followed ... Was surprising .
VendettaRed07
Member
She played her cards right honestly. She bet long term winning the favorable side of the base by doing that
Now if she runs in 2020 I imagine Bernie throws his full support behind her and endorses her right away to thank her for her loyalty. His endorsement would be massive in the first two states
Don't know if she can win but she's got a better chance than I think other on gaf think (or want to believe she does)
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Yes please.
Black men actually received the right to vote 50 years before women.
BlackSalad
Member
I am sad to see Kyrsten Sinema is excluded from the list, while she has to prove her worth in the US congress I fully believe she is up to the task.
She is a representative from Arizona and the first openly bisexual member of congress. Despite her sexual preferences, she has continually dominated elections in Arizona. The fact that she overcame this super conservative (but slowly converting liberal) state is astonishing. Her work really has influence with both parties
She is a representative from Arizona and the first openly bisexual member of congress. Despite her sexual preferences, she has continually dominated elections in Arizona. The fact that she overcame this super conservative (but slowly converting liberal) state is astonishing. Her work really has influence with both parties
maquiladora
Member
Take #3 off that list.
Some good names there tho.
Some good names there tho.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
I hear this opinion in GAF a lot. Why do so many feel this way? Is it just extremely common for an elected president to serve two terms or is there more to it?
I think in general is pretty hard to unseat an incumbent if the economy isn't a smoldering crater, and I don't see that happening. People fear change, and after 4 years of Trump, people will get used to him unless there's a huge scandal or something.
andythinkpad
Member
I don't know how successful they will be, but the rich people are definitely thinking about running. Why go through the lobbying middleman when you can do it yourself?
It would have to be a huge scandal to even hurt Trump. Like they have hard evidence of him killing someone or being a pedophile or something along those lines. Him dodging his taxes or anything will just have people calling him smart for working the corrupt system.
Poor GRIMES
Banned
Why? I'm not too optimistic about 2020 either but I think it's easily doable with the right candidate.
Trump barely even won despite Hilary's massive amount of baggage and "scandals". And he won with swing voters that voted for Obama twice.
Then there were millenials who were split between not voting at all or voting 3rd party. The dems just need a candidate that their base can unite around and a healthy primary with more than a few contenders.
I'm honestly more worried about voter supression in 2020 than I am about Trump himself.
legacyzero
Banned
A debate and election season with Elizabeth Warren would be so goddamn amazing. It would be like melding Bernie and Biden with some extra spices.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
Surprised no one's mentioned Klobuchar in here: she's incredibly successful in Minnesota elections and the sort of candidate that fits in with what went wrong in the blue wall this time around. She also seems pretty decently left, though a quick Wikipedia scan shows she's kind of shitty on privacy rights.
Duckworth also fits in here, but idk much about her. First-term Illinois minority senators have a pretty good track record at winning presidential elections though.
Duckworth also fits in here, but idk much about her. First-term Illinois minority senators have a pretty good track record at winning presidential elections though.
Trump's propaganda machine is unpresidented; Obama creates tens of thousands of jobs monthly and people don't give a shit but trump saves 700 Carrier jobs and he's the second coming of Christ
TestOfTide
Banned
You forgot to post your thoughts on my personal pick, Kamala Harris.
Also the article doesn't mention her, but what about Catherine Cortez-Masto?
Except Trump is entering office with worse favorables than Bush entered office with. And Bush only won reelection due to his response to 9/11.
Alcoremortis
Member
I kinda want Tammy Duckworth to run because I would pay real money to watch her tear into Trump on his comments about how he understands what it's like to be in the military because he went to high school.
Her takedown of Braulio Castillo remains the most beautiful thing I've ever seen on C-SPAN.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnfIyM2PZts
Plus, she's as real as Trump is fake.
Her takedown of Braulio Castillo remains the most beautiful thing I've ever seen on C-SPAN.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnfIyM2PZts
Plus, she's as real as Trump is fake.
A Link to the Past
Banned
Seriously, she'd run against Trump and be accused of being too inexperienced.
I'm sure Trump wouldn't have issue taking the US to war or using ground troops and if he does, re-election is basically guaranteed.
I don't know, with over 50% of white women voting for Trump i'm not even sure a woman candidate is viable, but then I wouldn't have anticipated a guy with Hussain as his middle name to win either so who knows.
TestOfTide
Banned
First off, I'm pretty sure that Hillary was the first Democrat in decades to win among college educated white women.
Second, going into war would NOT make Trump popular considering one of his main platform policies was a pro-isolationist foreign policy. He would instantly lose any support from leftists who considered him an "anti war" candidate.
Also why are you guys claiming that Harris has no experience? She was DA of San Francisco and then was State Attorney General of California for 2 terms. And both of those positions were positions she was elected to.
Muppet of a Man
Member
Can we please field the best candidate based on their policy directives/platform, character/charisma, genuineness, and experience? Let's not go down the path of demographics as a starting point. Let's use these other factors as the primary qualifiers. Because they are the things that really matter. I want someone who actually makes progress on fixing our social and economic problems, regardless of their demographic makeup. If the best candidate happens to be a black woman based on these criteria above, she should be the candidate. If it's an Asian man, hispanic woman, or Jewish man, that person should be.
Let's start from the person who best represents getting us the world We'd like to have and start from there.
This seems to be a bigger problem for the Democrats at the moment than for the Republicans. They chose someone who exactly fits their worldview. We need that on our side rather than just qualifying on shallow factors like demographics.
I feel like the list the New Yorker put together is just a list of woman Democratic politicians. But their views vary significantly. Like I'd love to vote for Warren because of her focus on economic justice, but never for Gabbard, who is a hawk.
TyphoonStruggle
Member
If anything Gabbard is anti Hawkish. Thats a big reason why she supported Bernie over Hillary. Shes a soldier who wants to save soldiers' lives.
Don't listen to GAF. GAF is so pro establishment Democrat it's sad.
The reason GAF is against her is because she takes Trump positions like the anti-islamic rhetoric. Additionally she is has been found to be creating charities designed to support her re-election, in many ways her positions are those of a republican lite.
Sorry but wilful blindness is not becoming, especially when you're accusing others of pushing a position.
ElectricBlanketFire
Member
You are GAF.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
This forum went from "Trump can't win Trump can't win Trump can't win" to "Trump will never lose" real quick. Try to have some perspective and balance next time and you won't yo-yo around like this.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Plausible and qualified:
Reasonable, but unlikely:
Give me a break:
It's like Obama being elected and then Trump being elected made people think that experience doesn't matter at all and anyone remotely charismatic should immediately run for president.
Reasonable, but unlikely:
Give me a break:
It's like Obama being elected and then Trump being elected made people think that experience doesn't matter at all and anyone remotely charismatic should immediately run for president.
GrizzleBoy
Banned
Is this list in order of hand size?
We need to know.
Also, unless any of these people ever publicly admitted to being a sexual predator, have run proven corrupt businesses specifically designed to steal desperate peoples money and are pathological liar that can promise everyone gold plated unicorns if elected president, I can't see any of them deserving the presidency in the eyes of the US voting system.
TestOfTide
Banned
Gabbard is a Pro-Putin piece of shit who supports the Assad Regime and who is very socially conservative.
But thanks for proving that a lot of you "so-called-progressives" care more about attacking democrats than actual progressivism.
I agree. I think it would be a different ballgame. Trump having his ego stroked as president would not shy away from being brazen. I'd guess he'd say something he shouldn't in the heat of the moment.
God Dayumm
Banned
Purity tests are now OK as long as they are not against YASS QUEEN
Sickboy007
Member
How is she hawkish? Is it just 'cause she's a veteran, because her voting record shows she's the exact opposite.
TestOfTide
Banned
Except it was you so-called-progressives who kept claiming that Hillary is too moderate, yet here you guys are propping up literally the most conservative democrat in congress.
Tulsi Gabbard has not shown in any way whatsoever that she cares about progressivism.
She is pro-war in her own ways, such as her constant support of the Putin and Assad Regimes when they constantly bomb hospitals in Aleppo.
And she was one of the Democrats who failed to sign the letter condemning white supremacist Stephen Bannon.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
Woah wait Duckworth also has four years in the House and her military experience. Same with Baldwin, who would be into her second term when the primaries start.
That's more than FDR or Carter and as much as Kennedy.
Sickboy007
Member
'care more about attacking Democrats' ---> 'she's a piece of shit'
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Other than "supported Sanders" what is this appeal for Gabbard? Only thing I know about her is that she likes to go on Fox News and complain about Obama not saying "Radical Islam" in speeches.
TestOfTide
Banned
You know EXACTLY what I mean. You guys only like Tulsi because she attacks what you think of as the "democratic establishment".
You guys attacked Hillary for not being in favor of gay marriage until 2013, yet here you are supporting a woman who was very Anti-LGBTQ and only stated approval of Gay Marriage in 2015, three years after Hillary.
It's that a lot of so-called-progressives don't care about actual progress so much as they care about attacking "neoliberalism".
The Lamonster
Member
Gavin Newsom?
I love her and would like to see her run but I don't think she'd make it through the primaries. There are a lot of great women in Congress now and Hillary opened the gate for them. Would love to see all these talented and skilled women (Harris, Warren, Duckworth, etc) lead the way.
Claire McCaskill is my senator and I love her to death but I don't think she ever has the intentions to run for President and she isn't the furthest to the left, as the base currently likes. She should just keep doing her thing in the Senate.
TestOfTide
Banned
I like Warren, but talking with the wide political spectrum I think it would be too easy for the GOP to paint her as the next Hillary Clinton.
They'll do that with any women if she got the nod.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked