HillGAF is so shook they are denying their own existence.
I'm sure that the Democratic party will unite behind a true man of the people like Zuckerberg, don't worry liberals
HillGAF is so shook they are denying their own existence.
People don't want folks with bad experience and critical errors in judgement. We saw that last time.
Zuckerberg, Turner and anyone else who's eligible should get up there if they have good policies and rhetoric that is looking to help Americans. Dummies and politicians who fail their way up the ladder need to get the boot.
I can very much see Bernie as a Ronald Reagan figure on the left.
I do think his age is an insurmountable barrier, though. Trump and Reagan demonstrate just how dangerous it is to have someone in terminal decline in the presidency.
"supposedly"? like how nina turner is supposedly this wunderkind true progressive candidate
Crooked Hillary? Emails? etc.
People have short memories.
Nah, I'm pretty sure on both. Thanks for branding Nina as such... I couldn't have done it better myself.
the actual brand here is "loser", which is not distinct enough from Clinton to be anything new
The primary ended a year ago. Move on.
"Imaginary Hillgaf" what in the world are you talking about? Are you seriously contending that Hillary Clinton didn't have a group of seriously devoted supporters on neogaf? She absolutely did and still does. Most of them are all the same regulars. That's what Hillgaf means. Heck, most of them self identified with the term during the primaries. I seriously do not get what you're trying to say here.No, you continuing your dumb little routine of going into threads for the sole purpose of calling out imaginary HillGAF is what elicits a response from me.
Continue to act like you're the victim here in all of this if you want, I guess
No thanks, I'll take a DC outsider with the fighting spirit, the smarts, and the principles that resonate with progressives, the young, and the independents. That person is Nina Turner.
barring winning a state legislature seat in a D+1000 district and then losing her bid for Secretary of State, what exactly has Nina Turner done? She should win an election or something if she wants to be a politician.Ah so you were just talking baseless shit... got it. Want to attack Lincoln next?
Don't you have somewhere better to be, like trying to find the real reasons why the Switch isn't doing as well as it actually is?
Nope, I'm just going by the facts.
https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2017/3/8/14848636/hillary-clinton-tv-ads
Ah so you were just talking baseless shit... got it. Want to attack Lincoln next?
I've been meaning to pick up on this for a while. I think it quite unfair to blame Blair for labours shift in the late 90s / 2000s. For one thing, many of the people in blairs cabinet were previously of the hard left - the fact was labour as a whole moved towards blairism as a change of philosophy. The guy was wildly popular, and he reshaped the party. You're not going to convince me that a cabinet with short, straw, brown, blunkett, johnson, Cooke et all didn't represent a broad spectrum across the party.
I also think the requirement that you be of the class that went from Trump to Obama is nonsense. Obama wasn't. Neither was Trump. You need authenticy more than anything, not a birthplace in Iowa. Bernie has that despite living a totally different life to those people, and I think there are several prospective 2020 candidates that can also do it.
(I think you are woefully underestimating the field to be honest. In 2004 no-one would have thought that Obama would be the nominee. The front runner very rarely wins in the Democratic Party, and there are a whole bunch of people who might catch fire and win in 2020).
Sit the fuck down, Mr. Turner.
Bernie should just endorse a candidate. He is too fucking old, point blank.
Nobody thinks he's a good national candidate.I think Sherrod Brown could be a good pick. Plus he might deliver Ohio.
Don't you have somewhere better to be, like trying to find the real reasons why the Switch isn't doing as well as it actually is?
I'm inclined to agree, but that doesn't solve the problem, which is: who can he reasonably endorse?
I'm inclined to agree, but that doesn't solve the problem, which is: who can he reasonably endorse?
Do you ever get tired of being wrong? I'm just asking.
"Imaginary Hillgaf" what in the world are you talking about? Are you seriously contending that Hillary Clinton didn't have a group of seriously devoted supporters on neogaf? She absolutely did and still does. Most of them are all the same regulars. That's what Hillgaf means. Heck, most of them self identified with the term during the primaries. I seriously do not get what you're trying to say here.
Anyway, I don't have a victim complex. I'm pointing out your poor choice of priorities.
The primary is not a problem. BernGAF and HillGAF are still a thing because they represent the ideological divide in the Dems that won't be resolved until one side has a decisive electoral victory.
Saying that such divide is "imaginary" because the primary ended a year ago is a mistake imo.
The poster isn't wrong. After a few months Trump is already deforming into an elder orange blob. Having someone young and fit standing across from him is a stark contrast.
He's dumber than I thought if he runs 2020.
This is kind of rich given he was one of the few people on this site to correctly call the Presidential election.
Keith Ellison if he runsI'm inclined to agree, but that doesn't solve the problem, which is: who can he reasonably endorse?
Uh, plenty of people do?Nobody thinks he's a good national candidate.
Nobody thinks he's a good national candidate.
This is kind of rich given he was one of the few people on this site to correctly call the Presidential election.
Yeah, I'm sure someone who originally started as a blue dog in a district from upstate NY clearly would not know how to talk to someone like that.I don't think you need to be of the same class, although I think it gives you a useful shortcut. You're quite right Trump is *definitely* not of their class, and if anything that can be a weakness. However, you're quite right about needing authenticity, and the trouble is: who among the Democrats has that? The frontrunners are all very nice and such, but even the best of them is an Ed Miliband - great policy ideas, probably appeal to the base, but they don't understand. Not really. Can you imagine Gillibrand trying to hold a conversation with an old automobile worker who hasn't seen a wage rise in a decade, is angry and upset, and wants a something to blame and someone to fix it? What's she got to tell them? Nothing. It's radio silence.
Keith Ellison if he runs
otherwise, probably someone from the left side of the party even if they really aren't his person, like Brown or Warren. I don't think even think he's that close to Warren but she's clearly one of the closer contenders in his orbit
I don't think you need to be of the same class, although I think it gives you a useful shortcut. You're quite right Trump is *definitely* not of their class, and if anything that can be a weakness. However, you're quite right about needing authenticity, and the trouble is: who among the Democrats has that? The frontrunners are all very nice and such, but even the best of them is an Ed Miliband - great policy ideas, probably appeal to the base, but they don't understand. Not really. Can you imagine Gillibrand trying to hold a conversation with an old automobile worker who hasn't seen a wage rise in a decade, is angry and upset, and wants a something to blame and someone to fix it? What's she got to tell them? Nothing. It's radio silence..
I really like Keith, but his faith gives him a hell of a handicap.
My impression right now is that neither Brown nor Warren are running, though.
My impression right now is that neither Brown nor Warren are running, though.
Nobody thinks he's a good national candidate.
Yeah, I'm sure someone who originally started as a blue dog in a district from upstate NY clearly would not know how to talk to someone like that.
But if Bernie Sanders runs again, he'll be hard to beat. And as far as one can tell, he's doing everyone you would do to set yourself up to run again
Yeah, I'm sure someone who originally started as a blue dog in a district from upstate NY clearly would not know how to talk to someone like that.
Pretty much. She's from a wealthy district mostly consisting of NY retirees and businesspeople.
TV ads are far from the only source of outreach in an election.
For instance, maybe the media should have covered Clinton's actual policy ideas, instead of e-mails.
It's certainly not as simplistic as "Trump talked policy and Hillary talked personal attacks."