Support NeoGAF

[hobblygobbly]

I don't understand how being old is an issue, Konrad Adenauer was chancellor of (West) Germany from 1949 to 1963, when he left office he was 87 years old, an important political figure in a crucial time to shape Germany's future.

If you're fit and able what's the problem?

 

[kirblar]

I don't understand how being old is an issue, Karl Adenauer was chancellor of Germany from 1949 to 1963, when he left office he was 87 years old, an important political figure in a crucial time to shape Germany's future.

If you're fit and able what's the problem?

Because your body can collapse very quickly and it's an incredibly stressful job.

 

[Timeaisis]

'he is too old'

do you prefer old man sanders or a second trump term?

He will be 78 in 2020. If he served 2 terms, he'll be 86 by the end. That is quite old. Reagan, who was 70 when he was elected, was already showing signs of not being able to keep up with his responsibilities when he ended his second term at 78. Everyone is different, surely, but I don't understand the obsession with banking on an already-old Sanders. I don't want a second trump term, but surely dems can find someone else to put up?

 

[KoopaTheCasual]

No thanks.

Kamala Harris is the obvious hopeful, and checks all the boxes for all wings of the Democratic Party to rally behind.

Not pushing for her would be a huge mistake.

 

[BoogieWoogie]

Wouldn't mind Schiff or Heck either.

Heck would be amazing for the taglines alone:

"Give 'Em Heck in 2020"

 

[fantomena]

We could always try running someone that isn't Sanders

Well you tried Hillary, didn't work out so well.

Spoiler

I know what you mean

 

[Blueblur1]

What are people's thoughts on Keith Ellison?

 

[Tarydax]

I don't understand how being old is an issue, Konrad Adenauer was chancellor of Germany from 1949 to 1963, when he left office he was 87 years old, an important political figure in a crucial time to shape Germany's future.

If you're fit and able what's the problem?

Ronald Reagan and John McCain would like to have a word with you.

 

[reelbigtink]

I'd rather have Golden Joe but honestly I'll vote for whoever the Democrats put up there

 

[Barzul]

I see a lot of age discrimination in this thread.

So are you saying it isn't a valid concern? We already had one older president suffer from Alzheimer's in Reagan and Trumps mental capacity is still being debated. Why risk it for one of the most important jobs on earth? It's a valid concern imo, he's no Spring chicken.

 

[jdstorm]

I don't understand how being old is an issue, Konrad Adenauer was chancellor of Germany from 1949 to 1963, when he left office he was 87 years old, an important political figure in a crucial time to shape Germany's future.

If you're fit and able what's the problem?

An 80 year old in 2020 was born in 1940. They were over 60 when facebook first started becoming a thing. Do you honestly think someone who was past retirement age for the dawn of the modern internet is best suited to navigate a country into its digital future?

 

[Maledict]

I mean, I agree, but... who is this person? None of the younger Democrats are especially close to Sanders. The Democrats have the same problem as Labour does in the UK - the party became an ideological monoculture and slowly strangled out any alternative kind of thought. All the younger candidates tend to be very clearly Clintonites ideologically, just as most of the younger Labour candidates ended up being Blairites (or Brownites) ideologically. When the mood for change arrived, in Labour, it had to pick up one of the few remaining 'fossils' of an older ideology, since everything new had been squeezed out. You see the same problem with the Democrats - there is no young Bernie.

Almost the entire Democratic field of candidates is pretty poor. All of them represent the liberal intelligentsia, come from excellent universities/law schools, live in relatively urban areas, and represent a totally different class to the type of voter that went Obama -> Trump.

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).

 

[Widdle Puppy]

Is it his turn like it was Hillary's? Or is she gonna run again?

 

[The Greek Freak]

He's too old but better that than some gutless centrist.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

It's ok to have a president who isn't a senior citizen. They usually work better

 

[djkimothy]

LOL. please no.

Need a fresh face.

 

[paskowitz]

Personally, I'd like to see an "outsider" on the ticket. A socially liberal business exec like (not saying exactly) Marc Benioff (Salesforce CEO) or Cheryl Sandberg (Facebook COO) paired with a political veteran with IDGAF attitude like Al Franken.

IMO this greatly dulls Trump's big "marketing" advantages (doesn't matter if it is true, he sells it), his business "acumen" and his "tell it like it is" attitude.

 

[SolarPowered]

Too old, but if the other candidates can't measure up to him I'll have no problem voting for him again.

 

[Foffy]

I like Sanders.

If he is really the Democrats' answer in 2020, if Trump isn't impeached, he's getting reelected.

People will cave just on agism.

 

[ThatStupidLion]

saying hell be hard to beat is dumb. people wont like it if he skews too socialist and it'll be another lay up for trump unfortunately.

bernie would need to change some of his ideas quite a bit. I think they should find a younger more democratic moderate guy, and let bernie VP for him

 

[Krakatoa]

If they want to give another 4 years to Trump, Sure then put in Sanders. People had issues with Hillary's age. What makes you think it will change for Bernie?

The Dems need a new face to fight Trump.

 

[Widdle Puppy]

Wasn't Trump supposed to pivot in order to have any chance of winning? Sanders doesn't need to change a thing about his views and send better put up someone fairly extreme if they want to win.

 

[Skellig Gra]

I don't understand how being old is an issue, Konrad Adenauer was chancellor of (West) Germany from 1949 to 1963, when he left office he was 87 years old, an important political figure in a crucial time to shape Germany's future.

If you're fit and able what's the problem?

Completely different style of government so it's not an applicable example.

 

[Koomaster]

When your party is so down in the dumps it turns to Sanders. Bernie Sanders always and will only care about one thing, Bernie Sanders. I don't feel age is an issue here, I think character is the issue. I don't want Sanders representing me or the democratic party any longer. Didn't he just switch to being a Dem for the primaries and then switch again once it was all over?

Realistically I think he should retire from politics now to stop pulling focus towards himself as he will never ever ever ever be president. He is nothing but garbage. I'd rather deal with more Trump/Pence than vote for this man. Same goes for Zuckerberg. The democratic party needs to pull itself together and stop acting foolish with these horrible ideas for candidates.

 

[Father_Brain]

I would prefer to see someone younger and better at communicating an intersectional platform, but I also don't know who that would be. Anyway, I'll withhold judgment until the 2020 field takes clearer shape.

 

[Easy_D]

Can't Bernie have a mentor type role for the *actual* candidate instead?

 

[Euron]

Even if he were 10-15 years younger, his candidacy still wouldn't be a good idea. Democrats need youth, especially when trying to appeal to younger voters. Trump will be over 70, we don't want to hand Republicans what should be a clear advantage for Democrats.

 

[KingSnake]

I mean, I agree, but... who is this person? None of the younger Democrats are especially close to Sanders. The Democrats have the same problem as Labour does in the UK - the party became an ideological monoculture and slowly strangled out any alternative kind of thought. All the younger candidates tend to be very clearly Clintonites ideologically, just as most of the younger Labour candidates ended up being Blairites (or Brownites) ideologically. When the mood for change arrived, in Labour, it had to pick up one of the few remaining 'fossils' of an older ideology, since everything new had been squeezed out. You see the same problem with the Democrats - there is no young Bernie.

Almost the entire Democratic field of candidates is pretty poor. All of them represent the liberal intelligentsia, come from excellent universities/law schools, live in relatively urban areas, and represent a totally different class to the type of voter that went Obama -> Trump.

One could argue that if no "heir" grows in your thinking school, you're a pretty poor leader. Why can Sanders and Corbyn inspire young people to vote them but can't grow some young leaders on their watch? Maybe they're too individualist.

 

[Mathieran]

If Bernie does run again he would would probably have a better advantage than last year. Before the primaries he was largely unknown to the average American, and it took him a while into the primaries before he started gaining momentum.

I could be remembering things wrong but he didn't stand much of a chance in the first couple primaries due to being unknown. Things might have gone differently if people knew who he was early on.

 

[SKINNER!]

Trump 2020 confirmed

If The Democrats do not start prepping up an ideal candidate that opposes Trump from now and build up a strong support within 3 years then yes, Trump 2020 is definitely confirmed. Biden already has the appeal thanks to being VP. And we knew he was interested in the presidency until he voluntarily stepped down to let Hillary become the democrat candidate. If he's still interested in being a president then now is the time to say. If he isn't then Democrats gonna find the person that's interested from now otherwise it'll be a one horse race with Trump "campaigning" to be President after 2020...which is what he's already doing.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

One could argue that is no "heir" grows in your thinking school, you're a pretty poor leader. Why can Sanders and Corbyn inspire young people to vote them but can't grow some young leaders in their watch? Maybe they're too individualist.

This is something people should be thinking more about.

 

[Netherscourge]

Examining the 2016 election, I'd say all the Democrats need is a sane, tough-talking, middle-Liberal to step forward and factually insult Trump all campaign long.

That'll pretty much guarantee victory with this country's voter base - because it worked for Trump, aside from the factual stuff..

So, Joe Biden. He's the "foot up your ass" Democrat needed to end this Trump-era.

 

[Gutek]

Too old + now has the FBI investigation baggage on him. Thanks, but no.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

If The Democrats do not start prepping up an ideal candidate that opposes Trump from now and build up a strong support within 3 years then yes, Trump 2020 is definitely confirmed. Biden already has the appeal thanks to being VP. And we knew he was interested in the presidency until he voluntarily stepped down to let Hillary become the democrat candidate. If he's still interested in being a president then now is the time to say. If he isn't then Democrats gonna find the person that's interested from now otherwise it'll be a one hose race with Trump "campaigning" to be President after 2020...which is what he's already doing.

They don't have to find their person right now at this very minute.

Obama went from a new senator from Illinois, to making a really great speech at the 2004 DNC, to quietly biding his time for 4 years and making a risky bid for the Democrat candidate in 2008, against a very popular "obvious candidate" Clinton.

Not prepping a candidate for 4 years might actually be to their advantage since it gives the GOP less time to pull a Hillary and bring down a respectable, popular candidate just from brute force stories over a period of time.

 

[Goodstyle]

A geriatric socialist with an oppo file as thick as a tree and is under FBI scrutiny? Ya, that's gonna be a no from me dog.

 

[OléGunner]

I think ya'll Americans need to get behind Kamala Harris.
She seems a great candidate for 2020 imo but this is fucked up to say, but I dunno if America is ready for another Prez of colour after Obama.

The racial divisions in USA are incredibly deep.

Bernie would be awesome but like others have said dude will be 80 in 2020 which is just too far gone.

 

[kirblar]

They don't have to find their person right now at this very minute.

Obama went from a new senator from Illinois, to making a really great speech at the 2004 DNC, to quietly biding his time for 4 years and making a risky bid for the Democrat candidate in 2008, against a very popular "obvious candidate" Clinton.

All while telling the press he wasn't running in '05, '06, and much of '07.

 

[A Human Becoming]

No thanks.

Kamala Harris is the obvious hopeful, and checks all the boxes for all wings of the Democratic Party to rally behind.

Not pushing for her would be a huge mistake.

Kamala Harris would be viewed as an elite, coastal liberal out of touch with the Rust Belt.

I wish it would be Kamala Harris, but I don't think she would appeal to the people Democrats need to win over the most in 2020.

 

[Bronx-Man]

I love Bernie, but putting a 80 year old in the most stressful job on Earth does not seem like a good idea.

Dude had his run and he's still got 3 years to mentor any younger dem socialists that wanna take a run at the Presidency. He's not Luke Skywalker, he's Yoda.

 

[Melon Husk]

Baby boomers are running outta viable candidates. Time for Gen X candidate, seriously, it's [CURRENT YEAR].

 

[Deleted member 231381]

One could argue that if no "heir" grows in your thinking school, you're a pretty poor leader. Why can Sanders and Corbyn inspire young people to vote them but can't grow some young leaders in their watch? Maybe they're too individualist.

This is missing the point of what I said. For example, if you take Corbyn as an example, there are no young Corbyns because slowly, over the course of the late '90s and early '00s, Blair managed to gain full control of the NEC, the committee which approves candidates for Labour shortlists. These shortlists tended to select candidates from backgrounds and previous employments that produced Blairite politicians - lots of well-to-do professionals, lots of former political advisors and lobbyists. Candidates similar to Corbyn were actively selected against, seen as Bennite relics. So, potential young Corbyns were strangled in the crib. You can see a similar process with the Democrats. Any kind of party favouritism was typically shown to candidates ideologically similar to Bill Clinton, so you just ended up with slightly different 'flavours' of Clintonism rather than any distinctively different chains of thought.

This is very slowly changing - in the UK, about three-quarters of the newly elected Labour MPs are 'Corbynite'; many of the more promising performances in US swing states have been Berniecrats where they've broken through the established party hierarchy. But it is a slow process. I'm not sure the Democrats will be ready by 2020 sans Sanders.

 

[Red Blaster]

'sanders is actually a conniving megalomaniac' is the funniest headcanon that weirdo dems have come up with

 

[Night Angel]

That would certainly spell another 4 years of Trump.

Bernie will be too old and he's said too many crazy things to be a serious candidate. He already lost to a person who lost to an internet memelord.

If the Dems have no one better, we'll have to pray the House and Senate get shook up because that's all that'll change.

 

[The Albatross]

I think Vox is right that he's the front-runner today, but not in 3 years. People always seem to forget that front-runners 3 or 4 years before an election are almost never front-runners when that election comes up. In 2012, Bernie Sanders was a relatively unknown independent senator from Vermont. In 2004, Barack Obama was a relatively unknown junior senator from Illinois. Donald Trump was a TV gameshow host in 2013. There is one notable exception that I can think of, and it's Hillary Clinton, who was the 2016 front-runner since she stepped down from being Sec. of State.

He's probably too old, but he's still only 4 or so years older than Trump.

4 years isn't much when you're in your prime, but when you're around the average male lifespan, 4 years is fairly significant.

 

[Oni Jazar]

I don't understand those who say if Bernie ran Trump would win 2020. That makes no sense. #NeverHillary may have been a thing but #NeverBern wasn't. Sure people didn't like how the democratic party was divided by BernieBros but with Hillary now out of the picture I could easily see the party unite behind Bern.

Those saying "NO" outright need to prepare for the possibility. It's the infighting that killed dems last time (among a million other things). You're creating a self fulfilling prophecy.

 

[KingSnake]

This is missing the point of what I said. For example, if you take Corbyn as an example, there are no young Corbyns because slowly, over the course of the late '90s and early '00s, Blair managed to gain full control of the NEC, the committee which approves candidates for Labour shortlists. These shortlists tended to select candidates from backgrounds and previous employments that produced Blairite politicians - lots of well-to-do professionals, lots of former political advisors and lobbyists. Candidates similar to Corbyn were actively selected against, seen as Bennite relics. So, potential young Corbyns were strangled in the crib. You can see a similar process with the Democrats. Any kind of party favouritism was typically shown to candidates ideologically similar to Bill Clinton, so you just ended up with slightly different 'flavours' of Clintonism rather than any distinctively different chains of thought.

I think you are missing the point. Why aren't Corbyn and Sanders themselves raising some young leaders under their supervision and promoting the same ideology? I refuse to believe they can't really find any suitable candidates among those young people they inspire to vote for them.

Why haven't them do so in the many years since they are in politics?

 

[UnemployedVillain]

Kamala Harris would be viewed as an elite, coastal liberal out of touch with the Rust Belt.

I wish it would be Kamala Harris, but I don't think she would appeal to the people Democrats need to win over the most in 2020.

Fucking midwest

'sanders is actually a conniving megalomaniac' is the funniest headcanon that weirdo dems have come up with

Who are you even quoting?

 

[SKINNER!]

They don't have to find their person right now at this very minute.

Obama went from a new senator from Illinois, to making a really great speech at the 2004 DNC, to quietly biding his time for 4 years and making a risky bid for the Democrat candidate in 2008, against a very popular "obvious candidate" Clinton.

Sure! Of course they don't HAVE to right now. But it wouldn't hurt them? Let's be frank here, Trump has been in the public eye for over 10 years whether it was on The Apprentice, WWE, whatever. He already built that support and image of a "successful" business man who can fix things and make everything great. He even teased about running for presidency during the 2012 election raising hope/interest from his supporters before deciding to drop out when he probably realised that he couldn't beat Obama (or maybe Romney was the better candidate at the time...who knows). My point is, they gotta build up the support from now. You just said that Obama gave a great speech in 2004. That probably helped in enabling to secure his candidacy in 2008. That's 4 years in the making.

Democrats gotta play the long game man. Chess shit. Don't announce that he's running now...sure! But put a lot of support into someone that will carry the party forward. Right now it's all "Bernie or Bust" which is counter-productive.

 

[Smellycat]

Isn't he under investigation for fraud?

 

[Damaniel]

If Bernie wants to find a 'successor' who has the right combination of policies and charisma then fine, but Bernie himself will be too old. I'd rather not have a President who - in an actuarial sense - is unlikely to be able to serve out at least one entire term.