Democrats are so cringe. And I didn't realize Cory Booker was still in office.
@unplucked_gem
I think those are decent Republican choices. But I think they all have their own viability questions in a national election.
The issue with Noem is akin to what Palin ran into, being a small-state Governor. Certainly the USA lately has preferred Governors because it shows the experience of managing a high-level bureaucracy. But with the advent of social media and the 24-hour news cycle, it is simply too hard for small-state Governors to get a National following. As opposed to a bigger state or a Senator that is on the national news almost daily. I can make the case that Palin was a better candidate than Noem. She was a very elite speaker and was very firm on her stances. But the problem with women in these situations is that they have to really start out polarizing their stances to get the Republican base to support them. They, then cannot centralize to garner middle-of-the-rood voters, or even some voters from the Democrats. Men can do that much easier than women can.
For sure, the USA wants to elect a female and there are more and more choices now. Now with TV and news, the looks matter. It is very true that women see a good-looking guy as more electable. It is not so evident with female candidates. So, I think they really have to rely on messaging a lot more. It is very difficult to do this if you are not in the news a lot prior to running.
Huckabee does have a bit more recognition. But I think it is better to come from a Democratic state. Sort of like Romney. I think it lends a sense of being able to unify folks. For example, Ayotte in New Hampshire or Scott in Vermont. Or even Dewine in Ohio or Youngkin in Virginia.
Now think about it. What would be an example of the opposite. Maybe Shapiro in Pennsylvania. Beshear in Kentucky or Kelly in Kansas could make a case of being unifiers.
Tulsi now has a different issue that would further complicate her chances. She switched parties.
If you disregard John Tyler because he was kicked out of his party while in office. He did not switch parties, he just claimed no party at that point.
Then skip Teddy Roosevelt because he switched parties to run out of spite because he no longer supported Taft — even though he, more or less, handpicked him. Who else has switched parties and then made a great run for President.
Even Reagan “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party, they left me” and Hillary “Goldwater Girl” Clinton switched parties before they began their careers in politics.
So, I think Tulsi actually would have had a better chance as a Democrat. A lot of Republicans actually like(d) her and would have been okay with her. But now she would have a very uphill battle gathering Democratic support. People do not like ‘traitors’ — and Democrats would see her that way.
The other issue Tulsi would have is the same thing Vance would have — being aligned with Trump. If things do not go well and are not going well toward mid-terms or 3rd year, the folks will become very disillusioned. They will then have the same problem Harris had trying to separate from the current administration and not isolating the base at the same time.
As far as women candidates, I have always thought Condoleezza Rice could have been a good candidate that may have drawn in folks from the opposite party. The issue would be the Bush and Iraq issues. But, I think it would take someone like that.
Apparently, Trump asked her in 2016 to be his VP but she was not interested in politics.
I think a female that is not a true politician would have a better chance.
Vance is a very good speaker and very smart and a great diplomatic politician that does not get rattled. He will face the same thing most VPs face — making a name for themselves in a tough position that allows for that.
DeSantis is elite as a Governor — no doubt about that. But he simply is not charismatic. I think if he does not improve on that somehow, then his political career has peaked.
As far as Democrats that might have or should have run, I do not think you have to be too ‘versed on the Left’ to have some idea of how well you think some of them might do and who you think might be better.
All politicians have issues. The Democrats are no different.
Sanders, Clinton, Obama, Shapiro, Newsom, Phillips, Harris, Warren, etc. can all make good cases. The issue is most of them isolate too many folks.
Sanders is now old, but is a known radical socialist that is interested in promoting an agenda that a lot of folks simply would never support. Same with Warren.
Clinton’s time may have passed. But for sure she has the background and could centralize enough. Just would need to adjust her attitude for more unification.
Newsom and Hochul would be very good candidates if they were to simply centralize enough to ‘trick’ folks into believing it. If they were to fix enough things in their state and be able to proclaim that they have vastly improved things, they could make a good case.
I think Shapiro would be a very viable candidate because he is almost seen that way now and his state does not have some of the issues the others do on that level.
But I think Susan Rice would have been a good candidate for the same reasons the other Rice would have been. Her issue of course would be trying to distance herself from some of the radical Obama issues.
Again, I think a female that is not a true politician would have a better chance.
AOC is now old enough to run. I also think she is very articulate and has a decent grasp on the topics that she talks about. It may be partly because I did not expect it and maybe she talks mostly about things she knows about or has a passion for.
She has time to adjust her stances to a more centralized path to maybe draw in some middling voters.
I may not agree with her politics, but she is very charismatic and has good support.
People understand that younger people tend to moderate somewhat as they age. So, I could see her making a good case in 3 years time.
But in the next 2-3 years some of these folks have a great chance to distinguish themselves, Because I could very easily see the pendulum swinging back.
With Trump’s success, I would not be surprised if other businessmen might not step up. I think Cuban has expressed interest, for example.
But I agree, at this point both sides are very limited on choices. So, I think it is time for the younger folks to step up.
@Raiders22
"AOC is now old enough to run. I also think she is very articulate and has a decent grasp on the topics that she talks about. It may be partly because I did not expect it and maybe she talks mostly about things she knows about or has a passion for."
She isn't very sharp at all. She has her moments, but just got embarrassed in a NPR interview.
It's tough watching the democrats tonight just getting roasted. Trump was right, they won't acknowledge anything positive for humans because of Trump. It's sad to see half of these people that run this country not be able to acknowledge good in this world because Trump has acknowledged it. But hey, they got little signs that say Musk Steals. Even some of their own are looking around thinking these people looking at their phones are terrible humans on display for the world to see. What a shame for these people. Just getting roasted for all to see. At least the dude at the beginning got kicked out for his own good so he didn't have to be a part of the people that can't clap when it comes to unification. Seems like they all just agreed to not clap once and it's sad to see from Democrats.
@THEMUGG
Yes, she has slip-ups. But all do -- especially if it is not a topic they know well.
But I think she has made great strides. Some of her off the cuff speeches are good. When she sticks to the issues she is passionate about she is very articulate and gets her points across well.
Just because I do not think her views are correct does not mean she is not good at expressing them.
I am not saying folks should 'be taking climate change advice from a bartender'. I am just saying I guess I was surprised at how well she is doing.
I really think if Harris had been able to do it the way AOC does, then Harris would have seemed far more competent.
Here's the crazy thing that helps you understand why Democrats are off their rockers. Dems cheered when Trump mentioned how much money the US is sending to Ukraine but then stayed completely quite when Trump mentioned a letter from Ukraine wanting peace talks. Weather that letter was true or not, that was the moment for the Dems to stand and cheer because that is what they claim they want. But the cheers showed they just want more funding from the US TO FIGHT A WAR! Think about that. 
They don't want peace, they want money to move.
@THEMUGG
There were in a few I saw on the Dems side that saw this and they looked around probably with befuddlement at their own side (It was at this moment, that he knew he fucked up in choosing a side). Trump knew they wouldn't clap for anything and set them up. I'd be embarrassed if I was a democrat that stayed quite at this moment. It was their chance to show unification and they chose to choose party over people. I guess they are not what they claim in that they are for the people. They are only for themselves, their individual selves and their own power.
They are war mongers. It's a scam.
this shows you who they really are
@Raiders22
Newsom and Hochul would be very good candidates if they were to...
Hochul won't be considered for anything, even her own job she has now after the way she fumbled the ball in this recent fiasco. Her own Lt. Governor won't even back her anymore. This wildcat strike of corrections officers with the NY prisons is a complete debacle to say the least. They don't even want more pay or benefits, it's all about the job safety and not having to work 4OT shifts back to back. Those shifts are true double shifts, double 8 hour shifts = 16 hour days(or nights) and then do 4 of those in a row. you go home and sleep for 6 hours and do another 16 hour day. For Hochul to fire these CO's because the strike was unsanctioned just shows how out of reality this Cuomo appointed reject really is. These prisons are Max prisons where all the worst scum on the planet are, she needs to spend a 75 hour work week in Dannemora for a life reality check. When the convicts have more rights than the guards do to control them, then the shithead governor that changed the law needs to call it a career and disappear into the horizon like Joe Biden is doing right now. She won't make another election, this was too big a bridge to burn
Raiders and I both live in this state. I don't technically. My primary residence is in Oregon but I still have a place in the Bay. Newsom is a garbage candidate. The party would reach new levels of idiocy if they ran him. Personally, I have disliked the dude for two decades, from when he was first mayor of SF. He was the party darling though. It wad pretty clear that the game plan was to install him as Governor of Cali, then have him run for President. So what happens? This dipshit screws his homie's wife. What a dummy!? So the party had to pivot. They brought Jerry Brown back as governor. Made Gavin lieutenant governor first. Then he became governor. What happened in that time? The state went to shit. His former city went to shit. Now if he tries to run, it's like, "C'mon, bro. Your city crapped out. Your state crapped out. And you have a sex scandal in your past." Bro messed up so bad that his wife changed parties. Dated DJTJ for sone years.
Side note: I always though Kimberly Guilfoyle was fugly. She looks real bad post plastic surgery. I hope DJTJ moved on.
yeah, I don't know squat about Newsom but I do believe everything you both have posted about him in the past. I was just posting about Hochul, if she takes a stance on anything outside of western NY it surprises everyone. Not saying western NY hasn't suffered economically but that's due to NYS legislation for the last 40 or more years 
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
