Is Pete Buttigieg emerging as the most likely challenger to Trump?

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

1 hour ago, Uvuvwevwevwe Onyetenyevwe Ugwemuhwem Osas said:

Obama was one of the poorest US presidents in all of US history.
He was president only 4 years ago.  Hillary's 2016 campaign spent twice as much as Trump.
You are spouting nonsense.  I don't know if you are a leftist but leftist think everything is about money.
Money is not the cause of everything.  Money is not the solution for everything.
Ross Perot lost in 1992 despite having the most money of all candidates.
Bloomberg will lose despite having the most money of all candidates.

Firstly I was commenting on the US political system and how you need an enormous amount of funding to even attempt to become your party's representative. which I think narrows the field down of credible candidates which makes the system somewhat flawed.

Secondly apparently I must be "leftist" to suggest this. Why is this?? I'm a Brit so dont really care how your system works, I was just making a comment CHILL! I'm no liberal, I voted for Boris not that I need to share that with anyone, and for that matter I have no problem with liberals or accepting an alternative view, something you clearly have a problem with hence the name calling!

Thirdly "I'm spouting nonsense" that you need to be an extremely wealthy individual to even contemplate running for office. Really???

You cite Obama as one of the poorest president ever, he has a personal fortune of $70M! He was personally worth $1.3M BEFORE he took office.

https://wealthygorilla.com/barack-obama-net-worth/

Show me examples of working class men who have made it to the White House since the war or ever for that matter. ALL of your examples above are super rich! Your system doesn't allow it and that was my point! I have NEVER stated the person with the most money wins an election that was intimated by another poster.

So who is "spouting nonsense"?

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

17 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Just a simple question: What does US presidential election have to do with geopolitics?  US president has very little power.  Now congress's actions on the other hand.......

Probably has to do with the US President being active in politics within the geographical region of the United States...just a guess though.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

 

“Obama was one of the poorest US presidents in all of US history.
He was president only 4 years...”

 

Did I miss something, like the last four years of the Obama circus?

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

https://twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/1229960406367703046 

 

Hoo boy ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/02/18/fix-primaries-let-elites-decide/

 

 

 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

I think that Buttplug has his head up his ass...pun intended.

[SERWIN + 749]

5 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I think that Buttplug has his head up his ass...pun intended.

Probably more than just his head.... A lot more!!

[Guillaume Albasini + 851]

In former elections choosing a moderate candidate was a good strategy for both sides. The goal was to seduce the independents in the middle of the political spectrum, the swinging electors voting sometimes for the Democrats and sometimes for the Republicans.

But today it's different. With the increasing polarization of US politics the better strategy now is to fully mobilize his own side rather than trying to seduce the moderates of the opposing side.

Trump won the 2016 election because he was able attract a fringe of the right that would have rather abstain than cast a ballot for a Jeb Bush or a Mitt Romney.  But given the level of polarization most moderate republicans ended nevertheless voting for him rather than for Hillary.

Hillary was a casting error for the Democrats. She was an old fashioned candidate trying to seduce the independents and the moderate republicans but failing in doing so even against  a repulsive republican nominee such as Trump. And she failed also to fully mobilize the more radical left seduced by Sanders.

Sanders could have won against Trump but Hillary just lost.

 

Given that US politics are even more polarized today than four years ago  a moderate like Biden, Buttigieg or Bloomberg is probably not the better candidate for defeating Trump.  If they want to  kick Trump out of the White House, the Dems should rather bet on Sanders or Warren. 

Now Sanders seems to have a clear lead over Warren but among the moderate candidates  there isn't a real challenger emerging.

 

 

 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Running on a ‘socialist’ platform, in the US, is a dangerous gambit.

The big question in everybody’s mind is, “How do you possibly intend to pay for all your ideas, without negatively impacting your average citizen/voter?”

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

9 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Running on a ‘socialist’ platform, in the US, is a dangerous gambit.

The big question in everybody’s mind is, “How do you possibly intend to pay for all your ideas, without negatively impacting your average citizen/voter?”

Is that a big question?

Its fairly obvious to me you cant.

Bernie's climate change program would cost $16.3 trillion!

Edited February 20, 2020 by Rob Plant

[Uvuvwevwevwe Onyetenyevwe Ugwemuhwem Osas + 96]

On 2/19/2020 at 10:57 AM, Rob Plant said:

You cite Obama as one of the poorest president ever, he has a personal fortune of $70M! He was personally worth $1.3M BEFORE he took office.

$1.3 million is peanuts.  You are very ignorant about US politics.

On 2/19/2020 at 10:57 AM, Rob Plant said:

Show me examples of working class men who have made it to the White House since the war or ever for that matter. ALL of your examples above are super rich! Your system doesn't allow it and that was my point! I have NEVER stated the person with the most money wins an election that was intimated by another poster.

So who is "spouting nonsense"?

You think $1.3 million is super rich because they only pay you $1000/month in your troll center.
There are currently 18.6 million millionaires in the US.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2019/10/22/the-number-of-millionaires-has-boomedheres-where-your-net-worth-ranks-compared-to-others/#5c6470be576f

Working class people do not have the intelligence, knowledge, nor skills to become politicians.
Almost all politicians are lawyers, not working class people.
Name a few countries that elected a "working class" person as president.  There are none.
The only examples I can think of are socialist/communist countries and those countries are poor.

Edit: Venezuela elected a former bus driver to president.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/08/03/how-nicolas-maduro-went-from-a-bus-driver-to-venezuelan-president/
Viva la working class!!

Edited February 20, 2020 by Uvuvwevwevwe Onyetenyevwe Ugwemuhwem Osas

[TomTom + 183]

On 2/5/2020 at 7:36 PM, Tom Kirkman said:

The banner ad at the top of the web page amused me.

Interesting Tom - thanks for sharing your political preferences... you know this banner uses your cookies to optimize banner ads for you right? 

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

1 hour ago, Uvuvwevwevwe Onyetenyevwe Ugwemuhwem Osas said:

$1.3 million is peanuts.  You are very ignorant about US politics.

You think $1.3 million is super rich because they only pay you $1000/month in your troll center.
There are currently 18.6 million millionaires in the US.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2019/10/22/the-number-of-millionaires-has-boomedheres-where-your-net-worth-ranks-compared-to-others/#5c6470be576f

Working class people do not have the intelligence, knowledge, nor skills to become politicians.
Almost all politicians are lawyers, not working class people.
Name a few countries that elected a "working class" person as president.  There are none.
The only examples I can think of are socialist/communist countries and those countries are poor.

Edit: Venezuela elected a former bus driver to president.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/08/03/how-nicolas-maduro-went-from-a-bus-driver-to-venezuelan-president/
Viva la working class!!

WOW I thought I spelled out my response last time so anyone could understand the point I was making, obviously I was wrong. 

I will state it again and see if you can understand this time.

My point is that in America you need to have a level of finances to be able to run for political office, if you are an ordinary working man that isnt possible. This is not the case in other political systems around the globe.

To most people in America $1.3M is NOT peanuts, and makes my point exactly.

To say "working class people do not have the intelligence" to become politicians is an unbelievable stupid response. Intelligence is NOT education or being born into a privileged background! 

To answer this point regarding your personal attack on me where you state "You think $1.3 million is super rich because they only pay you $1000/month in your troll center."

1. I am a part owner and the sales director of a $35M dollar business that made $7.2M EBITDA last year, a business that started from nothing. I have been very fortunate in my career to work with very talented people and we all have a very strong work ethic. (Rasmus will know I am a sales director as I have messaged him privately in the past and my e-mail states my title).

2. I am no troll! This is the only site I participate in including all social media. I dont like personal attacks on anyone on this site as I'm sure the moderators will concur with. It appears that the same cannot be said about you.

3.Your political knowledge is clearly very limited. James Callaghan served as British PM and was from a working class background as were many from his party. In fact in UK history he remains the only politician to hold the 4 great offices of state. There are numerous others but how about you look yourself, it will educate you. so your statement "Name a few countries that elected a "working class" person as president.  There are none." clearly shows your ignorance on the matter.

4 You state "The only examples I can think of are socialist/communist countries and those countries are poor. The UK is one of the richest countries in the world and has been for centuries.

I would ask if you are going to reply to this not to use personal slurs or accusations when you know nothing about me. Please feel free to argue logically about what I have stated, but I wish you luck with that as this is all fact and a part of history already.

My advice would be to do some more reading/research before slinging mud!

Edited February 20, 2020 by Rob Plant

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

30 minutes ago, TomTom said:

Interesting Tom - thanks for sharing your political preferences... you know this banner uses your cookies to optimize banner ads for you right? 

Interesting.  I normally clean my cookies daily with Ccleaner.  Although 8kun has had a bit of amusement lately poking fun at the Democratic contenders.  So that must be the cue for my optimized banner ads here. 

I'll have to actually start paying attention ro the banner ads here, to see what AI thinks my interests are.  Not expecting any Flat Earth banner ads though - I would happily click on a Flat Earth banner ad just for the sheer amusement of the wacky disinformation.

[specinho + 470]

On 2/17/2020 at 1:12 AM, Dan Warnick said:

I'm not sure, but I think the photo is anatomically correct.

we really can't tell....... the furrr might be a little too fluffy....

For those of us who are interested to know how to differentiate a male and a female mice, here's something for your tea break......... https://www.wikihow.com/Tell-if-a-Mouse-Is-Male-or-Female

On 2/19/2020 at 7:49 AM, Dan Warnick said:

On climate change and the environment

• Warren introduced a bill last year that would require public companies to disclose information about how climate change might impact their business. She has a 99% lifetime score, based on her voting record, from the League of Conservation Voters.

So good........ Our businesses are surely going to be affected as usual....... It's time to ask for more subsidies........

On 2/17/2020 at 1:34 PM, ronwagn said:

Polling shows Bernie and Petie well ahead of Pocahontas. Bloomberg is in the rear so far, but has promised to spend a billion dollars to win. 

shall the billion is spent on those in need, he might stand a chance to sway the majority of fence sitters and voters................. or no?

[Uvuvwevwevwe Onyetenyevwe Ugwemuhwem Osas + 96]

2 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

3.Your political knowledge is clearly very limited. James Callaghan served as British PM and was from a working class background as were many from his party. In fact in UK history he remains the only politician to hold the 4 great offices of state. There are numerous others but how about you look yourself, it will educate you. so your statement "Name a few countries that elected a "working class" person as president.  There are none." clearly shows your ignorance on the matter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Callaghan

Wikipedia says James Callaghan started his career as a tax collector at 17 and then become a union leader.
Government bureaucrats are NOT the working class.  They are the government class! No physical labor!
If tax collection = working class, then likewise, lawyer = working class, which means almost all US politicians are part of the working class!!  See how stupid this is?

I know what you did ......
you googled "labor party" and this guy's name popped up.
You assumed he was part of the "working class" because his political party has the word "labor" in it.

Quick.  Post another wall of text to convince us all you are not a paid troll because that's what normal people do.

Edited February 20, 2020 by Uvuvwevwevwe Onyetenyevwe Ugwemuhwem Osas

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

I don’t need a wall of text and no I didn’t google anything it’s in the history books, you’d know that if you read some!

you on the other hand continue to lose the argument by presenting your opinion and nothing to back it up and then resort to continual name calling that shows you have nothing credible to add.

i just factually refuted all of your nonsense that you keep spouting

stick to reading Wikipedia as that’s a great source of facts NOT

I’m starting to feel sorry for you now.

 

[Bob D + 562]

6 hours ago, Uvuvwevwevwe Onyetenyevwe Ugwemuhwem Osas said:

 

Working class people do not have the intelligence, knowledge, nor skills to become politicians.
 

Is that you Mr Bloomberg?

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

15 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

stick to reading Wikipedia as that’s a great source of facts NOT

3 hours ago, Uvuvwevwevwe Onyetenyevwe Ugwemuhwem Osas said:

I know what you did ......
you googled "labor party" and this guy's name popped up.
You assumed he was part of the "working class" because his political party has the word "labor" in it.

no I didn’t I read credible web sites like this

https://www.gov.uk/government/history/past-prime-ministers/james-callaghan

Read the second paragraph where it states “ he grew up in poverty during the depression. Unable to afford the tuition fees for university “

hey you just might learn some facts if you change your source material

regards 

your friendly troll😁

 

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

4 hours ago, Uvuvwevwevwe Onyetenyevwe Ugwemuhwem Osas said:

You assumed he was part of the "working class" because his political party has the word "labor" in it.

Haha missed this first time

This is comedy gold I nearly pis*ed myself laughing

You do realise the Labour Party was set up to represent the common working class man don’t you?

Still laughing😂

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

10 hours ago, Uvuvwevwevwe Onyetenyevwe Ugwemuhwem Osas said:

You think $1.3 million is super rich because they only pay you $1000/month in your troll center.

Rob Plant is not a troll.  

Please don't call someone a troll, unless it is obvious to all that someone is only trying to piss off everyone with deliberately inflamatory nonsense.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

16 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Rob Plant is not a troll.  

Please don't call someone a troll, unless it is obvious to all that someone is only trying to piss off everyone with deliberately inflamatory nonsense.

 

[John Foote + 1,135]

14 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Running on a ‘socialist’ platform, in the US, is a dangerous gambit.

The big question in everybody’s mind is, “How do you possibly intend to pay for all your ideas, without negatively impacting your average citizen/voter?”

I certainly don't want Bernie, but I am torn on whether it's winnable for the Dems to have a truly left-leaning candidate or not.

If Bernie somehow gets elected, he won't have a Congress that will pass squat. Even if the senate flipped, and it won't pass what he wants. 

An odd fact of Bernie supporters in 2016, many stayed home, many voted for Trump because they were determined not to have more of the same, viewing Hillary as far worse. And then some voted the Green Party or what ever. I personally know Bernie fans who voted Trump. Were shocked he was elected, a couple horrified by his actions, but still glad Hillary didn't win. They won't vote for Trump again, but since I live in Texas my presidential vote truly doesn't matter, the state will go Republican for another decade or so. By 2030 the California refugees will change the equation. Although some switch over. So who knows.

In our modern hyper-polarized politics, it's exciting a core to get them out to vote that wins elections and even more so for the primaries. Trump might be the best of all times at invigorating a core. Bernie will get folks out to vote who wouldn't otherwise. The question is would Bernie cause moderate Dems to sit on their hands and not vote? If the moderates will come out and vote for Bernie, he could very well win.

I sort remember '72 and McGovern. Nixon and his bag of tricksters had quite a few people working to get McGovern nominated, believing at our core the USA is too centralist for such a thing, and Nixon was right. I suspect Bernie would bring out the opposition even more than fear of HIllary did, and average semi-engaged Democrats would stay home. The never Trumpers would of course vote, but that won't win an election, just keep it from being a landslide. I suspect Congress will remain deadlocked. House can pass, but Senate won't, so very little fundamental change legislatively. Which by default increases power in the Executive branch. The circus will continue.

 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

9 hours ago, specinho said:

we really can't tell....... the furrr might be a little too fluffy....

For those of us who are interested to know how to differentiate a male and a female mice, here's something for your tea break......... https://www.wikihow.com/Tell-if-a-Mouse-Is-Male-or-Female

So good........ Our businesses are surely going to be affected as usual....... It's time to ask for more subsidies........

shall the billion is spent on those in need, he might stand a chance to sway the majority of fence sitters and voters................. or no?

He says he has a great record on his philanthropic efforts but I have not seen any figures or recipients. Donating more would to get votes would be fruitless. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

39 minutes ago, John Foote said:

I certainly don't want Bernie, but I am torn on whether it's winnable for the Dems to have a truly left-leaning candidate or not.

If Bernie somehow gets elected, he won't have a Congress that will pass squat. Even if the senate flipped, and it won't pass what he wants. 

An odd fact of Bernie supporters in 2016, many stayed home, many voted for Trump because they were determined not to have more of the same, viewing Hillary as far worse. And then some voted the Green Party or what ever. I personally know Bernie fans who voted Trump. Were shocked he was elected, a couple horrified by his actions, but still glad Hillary didn't win. They won't vote for Trump again, but since I live in Texas my presidential vote truly doesn't matter, the state will go Republican for another decade or so. By 2030 the California refugees will change the equation. Although some switch over. So who knows.

In our modern hyper-polarized politics, it's exciting a core to get them out to vote that wins elections and even more so for the primaries. Trump might be the best of all times at invigorating a core. Bernie will get folks out to vote who wouldn't otherwise. The question is would Bernie cause moderate Dems to sit on their hands and not vote? If the moderates will come out and vote for Bernie, he could very well win.

I sort remember '72 and McGovern. Nixon and his bag of tricksters had quite a few people working to get McGovern nominated, believing at our core the USA is too centralist for such a thing, and Nixon was right. I suspect Bernie would bring out the opposition even more than fear of HIllary did, and average semi-engaged Democrats would stay home. The never Trumpers would of course vote, but that won't win an election, just keep it from being a landslide. I suspect Congress will remain deadlocked. House can pass, but Senate won't, so very little fundamental change legislatively. Which by default increases power in the Executive branch. The circus will continue.

 

I expect a lot of Democrats to vote for Trump. All of the candidates have leftist ideas. None are moderates. I hope that the House gets flipped, but that will depend on the presidential candidates and how the race goes. 

[Boat + 1,324]

On 2/19/2020 at 2:57 AM, Rob Plant said:

Firstly I was commenting on the US political system and how you need an enormous amount of funding to even attempt to become your party's representative. which I think narrows the field down of credible candidates which makes the system somewhat flawed.

Secondly apparently I must be "leftist" to suggest this. Why is this?? I'm a Brit so dont really care how your system works, I was just making a comment CHILL! I'm no liberal, I voted for Boris not that I need to share that with anyone, and for that matter I have no problem with liberals or accepting an alternative view, something you clearly have a problem with hence the name calling!

Thirdly "I'm spouting nonsense" that you need to be an extremely wealthy individual to even contemplate running for office. Really???

You cite Obama as one of the poorest president ever, he has a personal fortune of $70M! He was personally worth $1.3M BEFORE he took office.

https://wealthygorilla.com/barack-obama-net-worth/

Show me examples of working class men who have made it to the White House since the war or ever for that matter. ALL of your examples above are super rich! Your system doesn't allow it and that was my point! I have NEVER stated the person with the most money wins an election that was intimated by another poster.

So who is "spouting nonsense"?

There are a couple of exceptions I think. Military guys winning a big battle got a couple elected. I will check later. Fun facts. But the biggest thing is getting your parties machine behind you. That comes with millions of volunteers, money, events etc.