2020 Dem nominee MUST BE a woman

[ghostsinthemachine]

Last edited Wed Dec 6, 2017, 05:45 PM - Edit history (1)

The Al Franken take down illustrates that more than ever. All you have to do is make the accusation, without providing any proof whatsoever, that you were sexually assaulted.
In Franken's case, he had no proof that he didn't (Republicans are great at having to prove a negative) do whatever he was accused of, even though there are photos of him doing nothing. Those photos are proof he molested someone? No.
Anyway, every man will get the same treatment. Biden? He won't be able to stand it. A woman is less likely to he charged with sexual crimes.

[Chasstev365]

1. Yeah, that worked so well in 2016!

[LexVegas]

3. She beat 2 men. nt

[Bucky]

7. but she was beaten BY fifty-seven men

their names are on the bottom

[Skittles]

8. you forgot Putin

[Bucky]

10. but you...

[R B Garr]

17. LOL, thank you!

Perfect response.

[lunamagica]

27. And Comey

[LexVegas]

9. You are right. nt

[TCJ70]

2. Yes, our strategy and decisions should always be based on potential smear campaigns...

...that makes sense.

[Cattledog]

4. What? So, if the best candidate is male sorry?

That's crazy.

[Dawson Leery]

5. NOT Gillerbrand.

She is willing to bend to the GOP's tune.

[Dream Girl]

18. She is totally calculating. Will not get my vote in primary at least.

[Dawson Leery]

23. I expect many Rethugs to cross over and vote for her.

She has shown her hand that she is willing to bend to the GOP's demands.

She will fail as a GE candidate.

[Bettie]

6. And a woman can and will be more easily smeared

in other ways.

We need to stop backing down on everything.

[Baconator]

11. Better to stick with tried and true...

... but that's an influencing and not deciding factor for me.

[MaryMagdaline]

12. God no

Male who doesn't assault women. Can't win with a woman. America hates women.

[nini]

13. I want our best qualified - I don't care about sex, age, religion

I want the best qualified.

Whoever comes after the trumpster is going to have a major shitstorm to clean up. We need our best in there.

[question everything]

30. Well said. Am tired of "identity politcs"

Did not help us much.

[Deb]

14. I'm sure other people are aware of the continued indignity Millennials expressed

the last time that message was sent.

[BannonsLiver]

15. Harris and Gillibrand have already disqualified themselves from my personal primary.

I will not support or reward weakness.

[Bibluca]

16. Remember Pizzagate?

That's where they falsely linked HRC to that pizza place, the one where they imagined pedophilia happening in the basement.

That got a lot of traction for a while. Right wingers are still bringing that up, and some still say they believe it.

The point is that anyone can be smeared. The key to winning an election, unfortunately, is that the person needs to be likable, to deflect the smear. Trump won despite being disliked, but only because people believed wrongly that HRC was less likable. People found it easier to reject the truth about Trump, than to accept the positives of HRC.

[NewJeffCT]

32. Good points and Welcome to DU

Democrats win when their candidate is more charismatic

Reagan was the most charismatic Republican since Teddy Roosevelt and he beat bland and boring Jimmy Carter and smart and experienced Mondale.

George HW Bush was not charismatic, but he still beat out Dukakis in that department. Dukakis was smart and capable, but was epically bad in the charisma department.

1992 and 1996, we have charismatic Bill Clinton beating out bland Bush and weird Perot and then grouchy Dole.

In 2000, we had Bush Jr with "down home" charm while Al Gore was the out of touch elitist and stiff

In 2004, Bush Jr beat out flip flopping elitist John Kerry

In 2008 and 2012, we had charismatic Barack Obama beat out grouchy John McCain and out of touch elitist Mitt Romney

In 2016, Hillary was eminently qualified, smart and very capable. However, Trump had that smarmy con-man's charisma and knew how to play the media like a fiddle...

[djg21]

19. It needs to be . . .

someone from a battleground state or red state who can deliver additional electoral college votes. Enough with candidates from NY, New England or California. It’s simple math — the Dems will pick up those States no matter who runs. Gillibrand would be a great VP nominee, who can run for President in 2028. Kamala Harris would be a good choice for AG once we have elected a Democrat as President. Warren should stay in the Senate.

Maybe John Hickenlooper who is term limited as Governor of Colorado, or Sen. Sherrod Brown from Ohio would make decent Presidential candidates? Who else is out there from a State that could be in playin 2020.

[Bucky]

20. I think it's possible to find a man who hasn't groped any women without their consent

Biden does suffer from an earned problem with lurking over women when he's bored. I supported him in '88 and '08, but I don't think he should contend for the nomination this go-round. People are going to want a new face. I don't think her gender is even close to a defining issue. I care more about a candidate's policies, character, intentions, and experience--their choices in life--than about the accident of their births.

I like Kamala Harris and I'd gladly vote for her and support her in the primaries. Kristen Gillibrand is a little too technocratic for me, but I'd be wildly enthusiastic for her if she was nominated. I haven't yet given up hope that Elizabeth Warren runs. I'd swoon. If she'd run last year, she'd be president right now. But I have no patience for arguments that who we nominate should depend on what they are. I don't have time for shallow people.

[jalan48]

21. LOL @ "MUST BE"

[bdamomma]

22. 2018 is first

nt

[demmiblue]

26. ...

[StevieM]

25. Your point is not a bad one but don't forget the sexism and misogyny that a female candidate

will have to deal with. It is easier to sell a fake email scandal, or a fake pretending-to-be-Native American scandal, against a woman. The GOP lies and smears seem to go further against women.

Why do you think the Benghazi lies went further against HRC than they did against Obama? Partly because the GOP put in more effort to that part of the lie, I admit, but I don't think it had as much potential against Obama. Ideally it should have had more potential against Obama, dishonest though all forms of the story were, since he was the POTUS. They took it further against HRC because of her gender IMO.

I am not saying that we shouldn't nominate a woman. I am saying that we should nominate whoever is best equipped to rebuff the GOP lies and smears.

[question everything]

28. If you are making a statement, at least get the name right. It is Franken

Yes, will be flagged as a typo, instead of Franklin but this is it.

[Dem2]

29. No

Best person for the job.

[lunamagica]

31. Believe it or not, I supported Hillary because she was trhe best and most qualified candidate

in my lifetime. Her being a woman was the cherry on top. A watermelon sized cherry, and I would have loved to have the first woman president, but with Hillary, she was the best candidate who happened to be a woman.

I will again support the best qualified in 2020, be it an man or a woman

[enough]

33. By 2020, the Republicans will have a strategy to use accusations of sexual misconduct against women.

Stories of misbehavior in youth. Stories of secret abortions. Stories of illicit affairs. They will find a way. Slut-shaming raised to a high art.