Politics Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoMuskies

Taps sign

---

For me personally, it isn't strategic. I just think Trump is bad.

Okay, I don’t know if this is a real quote or not, but if it is it’s actually kind of funny.

https://x.com/freyjatarte/status/184...FGm9k6sJcfsiaQ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xville

Funny. You can’t help yourself. He was referring to your party’s way of “electing” their candidate. You could have had a proper candidate, instead went with the dei moron who can’t form a coherent sentence.

This shouldn’t even be a race. The dem candidate should be winning every state outside of the Deep South, but your party “elected” someone worse than trump. Think about that for a moment.

---

Whoever they would have realistically nominated you would have said the same thing about. I seriously doubt if they nominated Newsom, Buttigieg, or Shapiro you would be signing their praises.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STL_XUfan

Whoever they would have realistically nominated you would have said the same thing about. I seriously doubt if they nominated Newsom, Buttigieg, or Shapiro you would be signing their praises.

---

Perhaps, but it's simple logic. The person that gets the most votes in a primary is probably going to be the "most electable" candidate. To just not have one, and on top of not having one and then selecting a person that never performed well in any previous primaries, is just bad strategy.

I think the thought process was "Well, it wouldn't be fair to her if we nominated someone else or had a primary that someone else might win, so we'll just go with her."

She's not the most electable candidate. She's actually pretty far from it. Yet, that's who they nominated. THAT SHOULD MAKE ANYONE WHO WANTS TRUMP TO LOSE THE ELECTION REALLY MAD!!! A Democrat governor from what is normally a red state would probably be so far ahead right now that there'd almost be no point in even voting. But, instead, it's Kamala Harris.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STL_XUfan

Whoever they would have realistically nominated you would have said the same thing about. I seriously doubt if they nominated Newsom, Buttigieg, or Shapiro you would be signing their praises.

---

With Newsom and Petey you are right, but I like Shapiro. I would have voted for him ten times over Trump. Although I don't agree with him on everything, he's the kind of politician I like...pragmatic, able to reach across the aisle and get stuff done.

He would have been a good VP pick.

Dems need to push really hard for both Shapiro and Beshear in '28. They'd win with either candidate and don't think it'd be all that close unless the Republicans actually come up with decent candidates themselves

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xubrew

For me personally, it isn't strategic. I just think Trump is bad.

---

I personally believe that you only think that because it's true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xubrew

Perhaps, but it's simple logic. The person that gets the most votes in a primary is probably going to be the "most electable" candidate. To just not have one, and on top of not having one and then selecting a person that never performed well in any previous primaries, is just bad strategy.

I think the thought process was "Well, it wouldn't be fair to her if we nominated someone else or had a primary that someone else might win, so we'll just go with her."

She's not the most electable candidate. She's actually pretty far from it. Yet, that's who they nominated. THAT SHOULD MAKE ANYONE WHO WANTS TRUMP TO LOSE THE ELECTION REALLY MAD!!! A Democrat governor from what is normally a red state would probably be so far ahead right now that there'd almost be no point in even voting. But, instead, it's Kamala Harris.

---

Living in KY, I would have voted for Beshear is a heartbeat!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulxu

Does it make you proud our country could elect a twice impeached, convicted felon out on parole, sexual abuser, denounced as a danger and unfit by people who worked for him (including his VP), charity scam artist, under federal and state indictments, to be our leader?

It is certainly a historical first that those are the facts of a leading party's presidential candidate. Hard to imagine he might be elected again.

---

Does it make you proud your party elected a candidate going outside the democratic process?

It is certainly a historical first that those are the facts of a leading party's presidential candidate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STL_XUfan

Whoever they would have realistically nominated you would have said the same thing about. I seriously doubt if they nominated Newsom, Buttigieg, or Shapiro you would be signing their praises.

---

The problem is the democrats didn’t push Biden out sooner. The signs for him to do that were apparent. If he stepped down before the primary, there would be a good chance Harris would not be the candidate.

Since democrats are big into identity politics, there is no way Harris would not be the candidate when Joe stepped down (after primary). It would be political suicide for the party. Think about it, throwing the first female minority VP to the curb at that point? Again, not going to happen.

Like ville, I would have definitely consider Shapiro over Trump if those are my two choices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 94GRAD

Living in KY, I would have voted for Beshear is a heartbeat!

---

A lot of people would have. The "most electable" candidates are Democrats from red states or Republicans from blue states that have actually run for office in those states and won.