Kirsten Gillibrand -2020

Morganna said:

ml1 said:

it's not a compromise if the centrist doesn't stand for anything.  

I believe a centrist can stand for something. Is there a politician that you consider centrist that you feel stands for nothing?

My definition of a centrist is someone who might have liberal social values but be fiscally conservative.

Or someone who has conservative social values but might have more liberal economic policies. A politician like Joe Manchin from West Virginia represents people with a very different experience than someone like me who grew up in the city. So he might not be as liberal. But if I want to see a Democrat beat that guy in the Oval Office, I don't want to risk backing a candidate who only represents me. 

I think we are molded by our experiences, friends and family. They rarely turn out purists.

This is so important.  The Democratic Party has lost ground because they lost sight of the fact that a conservative Democrat is better than a moderate Republican.  So, now, the Democrats have completely lost control.

Sherrod Brown and Elizabeth Warren.  I need to see more of Kamala Harris in the Senate, but she seems promising as well.  Most of the rest of them are standard issue neo-liberals like Hillary Clinton without the "baggage."  

The Democratic Party really needs someone to excite the liberal base, and young voters.  Let's face it, the centrists in the party are going to come out to vote against Trump and the GOP in '18 and '20.  The elections are going to hinge on turnout, and if young people and progressives don't turn out in big numbers, nothing will change.  Centrist candidates aren't going to excite the non-voters from 2016. 

In the words of Jim Hightower "There's nothing in the middle of the road but yellow stripes and dead armadillos."

tjohn said:

Morganna said:

ml1 said:

it's not a compromise if the centrist doesn't stand for anything.  

I believe a centrist can stand for something. Is there a politician that you consider centrist that you feel stands for nothing?

My definition of a centrist is someone who might have liberal social values but be fiscally conservative.

Or someone who has conservative social values but might have more liberal economic policies. A politician like Joe Manchin from West Virginia represents people with a very different experience than someone like me who grew up in the city. So he might not be as liberal. But if I want to see a Democrat beat that guy in the Oval Office, I don't want to risk backing a candidate who only represents me. 

I think we are molded by our experiences, friends and family. They rarely turn out purists.

This is so important.  The Democratic Party has lost ground because they lost sight of the fact that a conservative Democrat is better than a moderate Republican.  So, now, the Democrats have completely lost control.

I'm wondering if the GOP will consider a more moderate candidate like Kasich. If he snagged that nomination he could attract the centrists on the Dem side. He had little time during the debates and the primary schedule gives the advantages to the  conservative states who never even heard his message. Now he is often on cable particularly MSNBC . He is a fiscal conservative who balanced the budget under Clinton. He has experience as a senator, a representative and a governor. More easy going on social issues, I'm not calling him a liberal but compared to some of the others he seems reasonable. He also has that Ohio, regular guy appeal and he is from PA. It would be a sane choice for Republicans and could be an option for those who are done with extremes.

the notion of Kasich as a "moderate" is mostly PR.  He's not insane.  But he's very, very conservative. 

ml1 said:

the notion of Kasich as a "moderate" is mostly PR.  He's not insane.  But he's very, very conservative. 

And just looked up and heard Stephanie Ruhle ask him if he is running and he said "I don't know" which in politics translates as "I'd like to."

the issue with just about every potential Republican POTUS is that as long as the Congress remains very conservative, none of them are so ideologically different that they wouldn't sign almost any bill sent to them.  Congress would push any of them to the right.  As would the GOP primary voting base.

Trump is already running for re-election. If he does not change his mind no one else has a chance of getting the nomination.

But if we want to fantasize the person to challenge him would be Tillerson. 

ml1 said:

the issue with just about every potential Republican POTUS is that as long as the Congress remains very conservative, none of them are so ideologically different that they wouldn't sign almost any bill sent to them.  Congress would push any of them to the right.  As would the GOP primary voting base.

Unless the primaries were held either on the same day or a few days apart. The Republican in deep red states are not the same Rs in the blue or purple states.

A couple of Republicans that I know admitted they really would have preferred Kasich when pressed. I asked about Rubio, and Bush as well. I thought those 3 were the best choices of the 16.

And on a "where are they now" topic, whatever happened to Carly Fiorina, who ran in the primaries and then was picked as Cruz's running mate, even though he did not get the nomination.

White women won't vote for her. 

Morganna said:

ml1 said:

the issue with just about every potential Republican POTUS is that as long as the Congress remains very conservative, none of them are so ideologically different that they wouldn't sign almost any bill sent to them.  Congress would push any of them to the right.  As would the GOP primary voting base.

Unless the primaries were held either on the same day or a few days apart. The Republican in deep red states are not the same Rs in the blue or purple states.

A couple of Republicans that I know admitted they really would have preferred Kasich when pressed. I asked about Rubio, and Bush as well. I thought those 3 were the best choices of the 16.

And on a "where are they now" topic, whatever happened to Carly Fiorina, who ran in the primaries and then was picked as Cruz's running mate, even though he did not get the nomination.

the GOP primary voters are the same in every state.  How else do you explain notorious nut job Steve Lonegan winning primaries in NJ?

or this whack job winning a U.S. Senate GOP primary in reliably blue Delaware?

She's not a witch.

ml1 said:

or this whack job winning a U.S. Senate GOP primary in reliably blue Delaware?

ml1 said:

Sherrod Brown and Elizabeth Warren.  I need to see more of Kamala Harris in the Senate, but she seems promising as well.  Most of the rest of them are standard issue neo-liberals like Hillary Clinton without the "baggage."  

The Democratic Party really needs someone to excite the liberal base, and young voters.  Let's face it, the centrists in the party are going to come out to vote against Trump and the GOP in '18 and '20.  The elections are going to hinge on turnout, and if young people and progressives don't turn out in big numbers, nothing will change.  Centrist candidates aren't going to excite the non-voters from 2016. 

In the words of Jim Hightower "There's nothing in the middle of the road but yellow stripes and dead armadillos."

i like both Brown and Warren but i don't see them exciting young voters.  I like a Kamala Harris/Joe Kennedy III ticket in 2020.  

i think both candidates will appeal to the young voters; Kennedy will energize the liberal base.