General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis line-up of future Presidents would make some heads explode. All over the place.
It makes me smile to see this bumper sticker. I just might have to make some of those (I can, you know

gopiscrap
(24,402 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)DavidDvorkin
(20,218 posts)Hillary is looking more and more like a candidate, but what makes the others likely candidates?
Mira
(22,542 posts)more as a hopeful blueprint of more women being aspirants, and maybe winners.
I hope I live long enough to see what we women could do at the helm.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I think we elect on merit, rather than deny due to genetics. However, I do understand how the small-minded may believe that denying a candidate due to genetics, marriage, or heritage is in fact, a democracy...
The stupid is dead... long live the stupid.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)TeeYiYi
(8,028 posts)TYY
left on green only
(1,484 posts)The first time I read it all I could think of for Michelle was Michelle Bachman
TeeYiYi
(8,028 posts)TYY
calimary
(86,762 posts)Michelle Obama has two "L's".
madinmaryland
(65,461 posts)
LuvNewcastle
(17,228 posts)progressoid
(51,487 posts)
earthside
(6,960 posts)The presidency isn't a family institution ... we rejected aristocracy 237 years ago.
(That's small 'd' democrats as in believers of the sovereignty of the people.)
lancer78
(1,495 posts)Citizens United has allowed a de facto "Nobility" to arise in America. It took 232 years but the aristocrats have won the American revolution. Fat Tony and the Rapist, as well as the other conservative Justices, are the destroyers of America.
alfredo
(60,190 posts)Citizens United, estate tax Repeal, and trickle down.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)The new upcoming generation

Wendy Davis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendy_Davis_%28politician%29
Kirsten Gillibrand http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirsten_Gillibrand
Alison Lundergan Grimes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alison_Lundergan_Grimes
Cory Booker http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cory_Booker
Julian Castro http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Castro
Joaquin Castro https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joaqu%C3%ADn_Castro
I wish I was 30 years younger so that I would be able to see 'more' of what happens in the distant future

Mira
(22,542 posts)yes to wishing I were younger for that reason and a few additional ones.
DireStrike
(6,452 posts)Booker is pretty centrist, isn't he? Grimes would have to beat turtleface first. Dunno about the rest.
tomg
(2,574 posts)House she was a blue dog ( and it was one of the reasons I was strongly opposed to her initial appointment). I have to admit, I have been very pleasantly surprised by her actions in the senate, and, I believe, she is most closely allied with the Progressive Caucus.
totodeinhere
(13,626 posts)disqualify her from becoming president. The same applies to Booker. It might be wishful thinking to assume that only progressives will become future presidents.
chillfactor
(7,694 posts)I am much too old to be around when all of the excitement breaks out..unless I live to be 100....
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)Mira
(22,542 posts)with a smile on your face.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Would that be under or above the amendment that denies candidacy solely due to genetics...?
Six of one, half a dozen of the other (insert distinction without a difference here)
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)idwiyo
(5,113 posts)X_Digger
(18,585 posts)Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)to a governing throne across the pond in Great Britain.
I can see you are not nearly as serious and pragmatic as she is.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)It wouldn't even be a sense of royal entitlement if the families were truly entitled to rule by birth either, simply superior noble blood being allowed it's proper place by birth rite.
I swoon to think of the lavish crowns and jewelry; the pomp and beauty of royal weddings that would make the British figuerheads look like trailer park peasants in comparison!
Well done, something, finally, worth fighting for.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)off of someone else's fantasy life.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)It's just a silly bumper sticker.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)humor-less people to expose themselves as such.
It's fascinating really. Michelle, Sasha, Malia and Chelsea are never going to run for President. It's a joke, a joke aimed at pissing off misogynistic right wingers who might read it.
It's not a call for these folks to actually be President, or some advocacy for dynasties or other such nonsense.
Mira
(22,542 posts)and I thank you for speaking for me so eloquently.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Some people take themselves so seriously they cannot get over themselves.
I know what happened here. A lot of the folks who don't like Hillary have latched on to the whole "Dynasties are bad for Democracy" meme as part of what they intend to use in their arsenal of arguments against her and so they are thinking that way already whenever they see Hillary's name.
Then the bumper sticker listed the other folks, which to most normal people really makes it an obvious joke, but these folks are so anti-Hillary they can't get their minds into joke mode after seeing her name. It's like waving a red cape in front of a bull and then expecting that bull to behave rationally right afterwards. It's not going to happen, the bull is just going to try to lash out.
That's what we have here. These folks who lashed out against you and your OP lost it for a silly bumper sticker whose intent flew a billion miles over their heads because of their single-minded anti-Hillary agenda.
chillfactor
(7,694 posts)sheesh..it is just a silly bumper sticker for god's sake!
BootinUp
(49,969 posts)Notafraidtoo
(402 posts)Calm down people this isn't serious, all these people attacking this wow.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Kinda what I was thinking.
However, it *is* Monday... and light-hardhearted humor can be sooo difficult for the more-cynical-than-thou crowd to see as anything *but* a monarchy.
alfredo
(60,190 posts)TDale313
(7,822 posts)alfredo
(60,190 posts)MissMillie
(39,257 posts)She's great!
alfredo
(60,190 posts)It may be hard to find anyone who wants the job.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)I am beginning to have my doubts
tblue37
(66,644 posts)Just because someone is rich and famous or has a connection to someone who held high office, that does not make them a suitable president--or anything else. Each person should have to earn the position himself or herself.
I also hate the idea of one Bush after another taking such positions.
Shemp Howard
(889 posts)Here's my question for all: Would Chelsea Clinton or Michelle Obama make a good President?
If you answered "yes" for either person, then you are seriously part of the problem with this country. For you really have no idea what either one of them stands for. Yet you are willing to cast a vote based on their names alone.
The only proper answer to my question is: "Maybe. It depends on what their positions on the major issues are."
Wilms
(26,795 posts)No wonder this country is in such sad shape.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)That is one of the reasons that I oppose nominating Hillary for 2016.
We had enough of a dynasty with Bush II. Never, never, never again.
We need to move forward, not try to relive the past. That is what a Hillary presidency would mean. I know a lot of us liked Bill Clinton when he was president, but we need someone for our time, not a Clinton wife. No to dynasties.
That's Roman Empireish. No thanks.
Brother Buzz
(38,706 posts)Chelsea Clinton would never relinquish her Chief Justice seat on the Supreme Court.
Response to Mira (Original post)
Post removed
BluegrassStateBlues
(881 posts)greyl
(23,005 posts)This thread is about making right-wing heads explode, correct?
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)DevonRex
(22,541 posts)Who do we have?
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)Looks like SEVEN females (?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Hispanic_Caucus#Membership
Membership
Officers
Chair: Rubén Hinojosa (TX-15) (D)
1st Vice Chair Ben Ray Luján (NM-3) (D)
2nd Vice Chair Linda Sanchez (CA-38) (D) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linda_S%C3%A1nchez
Whip Michelle Luján Grisham (NM-1) (D) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Luj%C3%A1n_Grisham
Other Membership
Current
Xavier Becerra (CA-31) (D)
Tony Cardenas (CA-29) (D)
Joaquin Castro (TX-20) (D)
Jim Costa (CA-20) (D)
Henry Cuellar (TX-28) (D)
Pete Gallego (TX-23) (D)
Joe Garcia (FL-26) (D)
Raúl Grijalva (AZ-07) (D)
Luis V. Gutierrez (IL-04) (D)
Senator Bob Menéndez (NJ-D)
Grace Napolitano (CA-38) (D) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Napolitano
Gloria Negrete McLeod (CA-35) (D) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Negrete_McLeod
Ed Pastor (AZ-04) (D)
Pedro Pierluisi (PR-At large) (D)
Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34) (D) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucille_Roybal-Allard
Raul Ruiz (CA-36) (D)
Gregorio Sablan (MP-At large) (D)
Loretta Sánchez (CA-46) (D) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loretta_Sanchez
José Serrano (NY-16) (D)
Albio Sires (NJ-13) (D)
Nydia Velázquez (NY-12) (D) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nydia_Vel%C3%A1zquez
Juan Vargas (CA-51) (D)
Filemon Vela, Jr. (TX-34) (D)
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)Harlingen, TX. Now lives in Brownsville. Looks pretty good. Of course I'm impartial to The Valley. Solid Democrats there. I'd love to go back someday. Can you guys wrest the state away from the nuts?
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)-snip-
For the past 22 years, Filemon has been married to his lovely and accomplished wife, Judge Rose Vela.[11] Rose was a Republican justice on Texas 13th Court of Appeals from 2007 to 2012.
-snip-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filemon_Vela,_Jr.
I would love to hear the political discussions that take place at the dinner table in that house

DevonRex
(22,541 posts)Or did he run as a Democrat because only Democrats get elected in The Valley?
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)She'll pull in a lot of votes from TX, AZ, CO, NM, UT and CA. We know her name already. That's a plus!
redgreenandblue
(2,111 posts)DevonRex
(22,541 posts)So no dynasty there. And Chelsea doesn't seem inclined either. It's all for fun.
BluegrassStateBlues
(881 posts)Just to give them further palpitations.

longship
(40,416 posts)So! The US Presidency is passed on by blood. I am not dumb. I really thought the USA resolved this on July 4, 1776.
Enough of this rubbish!
If that's what people want, so be it. Try this on for size:
2016: Bush
2020: Bush
2024: Bush
2028: Bush
2032: Bush
2036: Bush
... Etc.
After all, if your parent or your spouse was a president, you've earned the right to that office.
What the OP suggests is counter to democratic principles on which our country was founded.
Mira
(22,542 posts)It was to get you to laugh while some seeds of thought get sown.
One thing I notice about the Republicans I am in contact with is their inability to recognize beauty in things and their inability to enjoy clever humor. Let's not become like them.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)It was about political dynasties. I think we need a whole lot less cult of personality, and a whole lot more government of, by, and FOR the people.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)The target is misogynistic right wingers who will recognize all of these people as not only Liberals/Democrats (or family members of Liberals/Democrats) who they hate but female Liberals/Democrats.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)To focus on these select individuals and at these select dates. They ignored QUALIFIED females in order to showcase women -- or, in this case pre-teens, who's only qualification is their right of birth, suggesting that that's how women earn it.
That's sexist as hell.
But, of course, the sticker isn't intended to be sexist -- that part is unintentional. Rather, it's a joke intended to troll people. But it's insulting to women in general and to liberalism as a movement. Liberals don't select people because their daddy's were famous and had a cool cult of personality thing going for them, we select our candidates because they were the best for the job.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)What is a more likely possibility to you. That the bumper sticker is a simplistic joke aimed at your average right winger who might see it on the roadway, or that it is a complex conspiracy aimed at overturning the democratic order of the country and replacing it with a hereditary monarchy from the Clinton and Obama families to include two adults who show little desire to run for political office and two children.
I suggest you think that over.

Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)That's all that ever needed to be said. I only responded to the people suddenly claiming that it was somehow more than that, that it was a message of women's empowerment of some such nonsense. Well, two can play the spin game.
On a more serious note, I don't think jokes or messages like this help us though. Not a big deal obviously, but we should try not to even give the appearance of choosing style and connections over substance. Leave the dynasty garbage to the GOP and elect the best we can from our more than capable pool of candidates. Hillary, whether you support her or not, is objectively qualified -- the only thing missing from her resume is a governorship, and I think she has that covered as first lady of a state, a nation, Senator, and Sec State.
Which is not to say she deserves our automatic support -- she's too corporatist for my taste -- but there is no doubt she's qualified. She might be the MOST qualified candidate in a long time.
But none of the women were anything but spouses or children of a male president. So maybe it undermines the point.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)Apparently "My daddy was President" is a statement of female independence and empowerment. Or so we are now being asked to believe.
The best and only defense of this is to say, "Lighten up, it's just a joke."
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Neither passed on by blood, not (and here's the tricky part for the pea-brains) denied by blood.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Really?
This would make the right gnash their teeth and wail like banshees.
Talk about your negative Nancys.
This is funny!! And cute!!
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)No one actually expect to nominate all of these people. It's an obvious joke meant to get a rise out of misogynistic right wingers.
The fact that some here felt the need to get upset about it and respond as if it's real says a lot about those who got upset.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Some people refuse to have a good time. I'm disappointed, not that it matters.
Now that I know it causes such a reaction on the left, I can only imagine how the right might react.
I live in a red state so, I'm getting one. I'll get 50. I'm giggling imagining the pinched hard faces of my tea party neighbors. They used to peel off my African Americans for Obama sticker once a week.
I'm going to sneak some of these on their bumpers over the Palin stickers. I hope they don't notice.
muriel_volestrangler
(103,951 posts)and doesn't list a single woman outside those 2 families. It only lists one politician. The obvious link is "member of the 2 families", not "female Democrat". If there had been one politician other than Hillary - Elizabeth Warren, or Wendy Davis, say - it would indeed be 'obvious' that it's about misogyny. But without that, it does look more like a wish for dynasties.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)specifically, misogynistic right wingers. They do not know who Barbara Lee is, for instance. They may not even know who Debbie Wasserman Schultz is.
But the object of their hatred? The Obama and Clinton families? Oh they know who THEY are.
muriel_volestrangler
(103,951 posts)You could put Nancy Pelosi in, if you want a woman those kind of people hate, but outside the families.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)You are not going to get it until you put yourself in the shoes of those at whom it is aimed.
muriel_volestrangler
(103,951 posts)Aren't you making the point? It's about "The Obama and Clinton families", not women
I also added that Nancy Pelosi could have been put in, as a woman that would be better known to (and hated by) misogynistic RWers than the Obama daughters, if this was about misogyny. But since you see it as "the Obama and Clinton families", I think you have successfully put how those it's aimed at see it - a hatred of anyone called Obama or Clinton, not of women.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Address the title. We might as well address Rodney Dangerfield's signature "I tell ya I don't get no respect"
In some cultures, I am guessing that is a faux pas and possibly offensive. It's not aimed at them.
muriel_volestrangler
(103,951 posts)Let us know when you want us to stop thinking, or talking to you, the next time. I suspect it will be right after you've made a point you'd rather wasn't examined at all.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)
Orsino
(37,428 posts)One of which is DU's royalist tendency, which could use a good ribbing like this.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)The Bush twins deserve to be President before the Obamas.
Mira
(22,542 posts)Maybe in their late 50s or so. Too late I bet for Jennie Eisenhower.
(just between us, I'm sorry I posted this thing. It deserved a good laugh, and after that a continuation of whatever hopefully worthwhile thing the reader was doing - GEEZ)
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)try to get you to laugh and when you don't, you get money and other prizes because they are absolutely humor-less, stick in the muds.
One of them is still trying to get me to analyze and re-analyze the bumper sticker!
SoCalDem
(103,856 posts)I like my presidents one at a time.. And since we are not a monarchy, we need to stop the speculation that leadership is genetic..
The Bushes showed us that
I'd love to see Hillary being a doting Grandma, while she serves on various boards & gives speeches & writes books.
It's time for a young generation who were reared with high tech, to take over.. The future is theirs..
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)Retrograde
(11,157 posts)If we're going to go for dynasties, let's go all the way
bvar22
(39,909 posts)They called them "Royalists" and "Tories" back in 1776.
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)And Chelsea, hurry up and have an heir--I mean a baby.
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)