Democratic Primaries

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)

3. Few want to acknowledge this, but all of our candidates would, more or less, govern the same way.

Thu Aug 22, 2019, 11:22 PM

Aug 2019

One would be just as limited as another in terms of getting progressive legislation passed. This is part of the reason Inslee wasn't ever going to gain traction. You can't run as a single-issue candidate. It's not like the other candidates are ignoring climate change or going to appoint a climate change denier to run the EPA.

Name recognition is a key driver at this juncture, followed by charisma. And charisma leads to greater media attention, which boosts name recognition.

Honestly, a big reason why I would prefer to see Harris become president is because of her race and sex. Not because I think she'd govern in a radically different way than another potential nominee. Breaking barriers is huge. We need to force more conversations about racism and sexism in this country, because those are demons that continue to plague us. If anyone is still unaware, I highly recommend checking out the 1619 Project from the NY Times.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

32 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why do we talk about candidates' policy positions? [View all] Recursion Aug 2019 OP

This is a good point...I think there is way too much policy in this primary...you should run on a Demsrule86 Aug 2019 #1

I find the elaborate policy proposals and plans dizzying. Promoting and defending them obscures emmaverybo Aug 2019 #5

Well said wasupaloopa Aug 2019 #8

K&R Thanks for posting. Demsrule86 Aug 2019 #2

Few want to acknowledge this, but all of our candidates would, more or less, govern the same way. Garrett78 Aug 2019 #3

Right. They have the same rolodex Recursion Aug 2019 #9

I never get that about presidential elections jberryhill Aug 2019 #4

Politics is always local Lithos Aug 2019 #6

according the the 2nd best rachel on Lawrence o'Donnell JI7 Aug 2019 #7

It's more about giving voters a sense what you will fight for BeyondGeography Aug 2019 #10

I've never understood what "fight" means in this context Recursion Aug 2019 #11

So you don't know why we talk about policy and you don't understand what fighting for people means BeyondGeography Aug 2019 #12

So, can you tell me what "fight" means? Recursion Aug 2019 #13

Ask the author of "This Fight is our Fight" BeyondGeography Aug 2019 #14

So, you can't, then. Got it. Recursion Aug 2019 #15

I support her because she's a most knowledgeable and competent fighter BeyondGeography Aug 2019 #16

So, you can't say what "fight" means, but your diagnosis is that the party has lacked it? Recursion Aug 2019 #17

Oh, and spine, you need a definition for that, too? BeyondGeography Aug 2019 #18

So, is it that she appears angry on TV? Recursion Aug 2019 #19

is that how you win fights with your spouse? rampartc Aug 2019 #27

No, that's my point Recursion Aug 2019 #29

It's like in reality tv cooking contest shows. betsuni Aug 2019 #20

I am always talking about the Senate, especially the big guns who are turning down running Celerity Aug 2019 #21

I heard rumors about Pingree stepping up in maine Recursion Aug 2019 #22

ATM I think Gideon will be our nominee against Collins. Which Pingree btw? Celerity Aug 2019 #23

Hannah was the buzz I heard a while back Recursion Aug 2019 #28

Thanks Celerity, for your informative check list of our senate possibilities. oasis Aug 2019 #24

yw! Celerity Aug 2019 #25

I wonder if Celerity could compose a treatise on any political topic? True Dough Aug 2019 #26

I was tossing it out based off another poster's theory that running a female VP is too risky this Celerity Aug 2019 #30

Thanks for this. This could be an OP, if you'd consider. ancianita Aug 2019 #31

will do Celerity Aug 2019 #32