Gabbard: Google and Facebook have the power to influence our fair elections
The same place they found most of the GOP candidates in the 2016 election. They came crawling out of the woodwork to take advantage of what they believe is an opportune moment when much of the country is sick and tired of Trump, his policies and his person. Are they the best candidates? Of course not, because the best, whoever they may be, are too smart to want to be POTUS at a time in history and culture like this.
“the best, whoever they may be, are too smart to want to be POTUS at a time in history and culture like this”. Not the “best” but rather undesirable as cowards with no love of the United States of America. We certainly don’t need any more like that!
I pray for President Trump to be strengthened and given help to keep our country protected from evil and harm - this President is working for this as evidenced by his spoken support of life and none for abortion unlimited.
So it seems there are more new progressives registering than new conservatives, even in a state such as Texas. That notion is in sync with what Michael Moore said on MSNBC last evening, namely, that the working-class voter today is no longer what they were way back in the 1970s and 80s. That is, the new working-class voter is young, female, and a person of color, in other words, more progressive than in the past. Moore claims that if a Democratic candidate can inspire the progressive voter, they can defeat Trump. The idea of appealing to the moderate, working-class, Reagan Democrat is nonsensical because such Democrats no longer exist. Moore does believe Democrats also need some White support, but essentially the largely non-White base of the Democratic party, if they come out in large numbers, is sufficient to capture the presidency. I don’t really agree with his interpretation, but it does provide some food for thought.
Did anyone also notice how many of the Democratic candidates were critical of Obamacare and Obama’s immigration policy? Can this be the right approach to solidifying the Democratic base? Somehow I don’t think so.
Anyone taking the advice of Michael Moore is swallowing Kool-Aid. As disgusting as he is, his history needs to be exposed.
Which is precisely why the Dems are not interested in controlling the influx of illegals.Eventually they will equate for more Dem votes .Thats all it ever is with them. They how ever are losing of black supports based on what I hear on the radio when they call in.Therefore the browns are their next target.
I’m not taking Moore’s advice; in fact, I disagree with his premise. I’m listening, however. We should, I think, at least pay attention to those we disagree with politically. Otherwise, we remain in our own little bubble that we created.
Now that Gabbard’s attack on Harris’ prosecution record opened a few eyes, the media is on the attack against Gabbard. The antiwar candidate can’t be permitted to stand. More here:
Opening quote here:
In the race to determine who will serve as Commander in Chief of the most powerful military force in the history of civilization, night two of the CNN Democratic presidential debates saw less than six minutes dedicated to discussing US military policy during the 180-minute event.
Read the whole thing. Harris’ prosecutorial record is worth exploring as well as Gabbard’s anti-war stance.
Not everyone we disagree with are worth paying attention to. When you first become aware that the noise you are hearing is just an annoying racket, shut if off.
It’s your choice. I prefer to listen to everyone first and then tune out by degrees those who don’t make much sense to me.
Tucker: Democrats’ moral superiority over Americans is a turn off for voters.
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy chimed in on the left’s extremism after the CNN debates
Young voters are expected to have a major impact on the 2020 elections
Latest polls here
Looks like this link is updated almost daily and has several different polls linked.
See the following article to understand how Democratic candidates can qualify for the next round of debates in September and October. According to the article which was last updated 8/8/19, nine candidates have already qualified and at least one more was close. The nine are Biden, Sanders, Warren, Harris, Buttigieg, O’Rourke, Booker, Klobuchar and Yang. HuffPost cited Castro as close, but it’s interesting they did not cite that Gabbard is also close. Part of the mission to not talk about Gabbard as she’s being very politically incorrect regarding the “forever” wars. Both have passed the 130k donor threshold and are waiting on poll results. Looking over the rest, we might see Gillibrand, Steyer and Williamson, but I’m really not seeing anyone else get there. The dropouts so far were likely too insignificant to have much influence on the rest of the field.
The contrarian survey, provided exclusively to Secrets, pushes back on some other recent polls showing a surge in Trump’s disapproval rating.
Namely, it found that recent issues portrayed as trouble for Trump haven’t hurt him and that he is growing in support among Africans Americans, Hispanics, independents, and younger voters.
He has that essential ingredient for politics - a Teflon coating.
Plus minorities see they are doing well with the economy and dems are likely to muffle it
I’ve come to the conclusion that the only Democratic candidate who can put up a good fight against Trump, and perhaps even eke out a narrow victory though I wouldn’t bet on it, is Elizabeth Warren. I would have said Joe Biden before the debates and his recent string of gaffes, surpassing even his own norm, but now I think he is not quick enough to battle Trump and may even be suffering from the early stages of dementia. Also, Biden, while a safer candidate than Warren in the view of many Democrats, because he is more moderate, is also more representative of the status quo and about as exciting to many of the electorate as dishwater. Warren, on the other hand, is very smart and has some real ideas regarding the economy and several other issues. Of course some of you may not agree with her liberal, or leftist, politics, but I believe you still must admit she is a thinker and a Harvard elite in the good sense of the term. Yes, Trump will try to belittle her again with the Pocahantas slur, but she can counteract that by focusing on the issues, and if worst comes to worst, can dress up as Pocahantas during the debates together with Trump. And I also think the country is just about ready for a female president and a potentially capable one at that.
Who else is there? Apart from Biden, we have Beto O’Rourke, who looks like he needs to finish grammar school first; Pete Buttigieg, who, while smart, is a non-starter due to his being gay and married to another man (this country is a long way off from electing an openly gay president); Kamala Harris, an African woman, also competent but, in my view, unelectable due to the combination of race and gender (again, we’re just not ready); Bernie Sanders, who, together with Joe Biden, looks like he’s more suited to retirement in South Florida and a good poker game, rather than taking on the daunting challenge of the presidency; Cory Booker, another black man for President so soon after Obama is just not in the cards; and a few others, who have neither the status, life experience, nor charisma, any of which might make them a viable candidate.
Now, what is the reality, given the cowardice of the leaders of the party? Biden and Warren as his running mate.
Kamala Harris is part Jamaican and part Indian.
Interesting observation - we have yet to seriously consider a candidate for President descended from enslaved Africans brought to the US.
Do you think the whole socialist thing is a problem? It’s hyperbole, but it is almost as if we are going to be picking between fascism and socialism in the general election.