The Democrat Utopia

For those of you who may know about this guy - is he a good candidate in 2020 for the Dems?

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/03/21/mitch-landrieu-2020-democrats-473648

Mitch Landrieu isn’t, for the moment, getting ready to run for president. But that’s not stopping the Democrat who led the rebuilding of New Orleans from speaking out against institutional racism and what he calls the “nightmare loop” that links Donald Trump to David Duke.

With a media tour for his new book, “In the Shadow of Statues” (out Tuesday), and after headlining this month’s media-fest Gridiron Dinner in Washington, Landrieu knows he’s kept people talking. Monday night on “The Daily Show,” he smiled through a long burst of applause when Trevor Noah pitched him on 2020. Ridiculous as he and everyone around him knows it is to think about a New Orleans mayor making a serious bid for the White House, they also see the unique profile he’d have in a huge Democratic field concentrated on the coasts — the white Southern liberal who loves wrestling and musical theater, and looks like he could blend right in at a Trump rally.
Click to expand...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TGHusker said:
For those of you who may know about this guy - is he a good candidate in 2020 for the Dems?

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/03/21/mitch-landrieu-2020-democrats-473648
Click to expand...




Elections are about who the most people would prefer to have a beer with, so, sure.

Obama had that quality. Bush had it. Clinton had it. I don't see how in the hell Trump has it but then I think about Hillary and I understand. She was incapable of making herself look like a normal person. Trump is not normal at all and never has been, but he's better at playing pretend than she was.

 
Moiraine said:
Elections are about who the most people would prefer to have a beer with, so, sure.

Obama had that quality. Bush had it. Clinton had it. I don't see how in the hell Trump has it but then I think about Hillary and I understand. She was incapable of making herself look like a normal person. Trump is not normal at all and never has been, but he's better at playing pretend than she was.
Click to expand...


Yep, the bar was substantially lower the last election. I really think Trump benefitted tremendously from playing the "something new vs. the same old politicians" card.

But your point is a good one. I'm completely convinced charisma in the eyes of the voting pubic is the most important factor in electing presidents.

 
Clifford Franklin said:
Yep, the bar was substantially lower the last election. I really think Trump benefitted tremendously from playing the "something new vs. the same old politicians" card.

But your point is a good one. I'm completely convinced charisma in the eyes of the voting pubic is the most important factor in electing presidents.
Click to expand...
It’s sad, but charisma is the most important characteristic to get elected. The problem is that Trump has “charisma” but “charisma” that appeals to a very ugly version of society. 

Now, charisma is important because it can be a very important part of being an effective leader in tough times. It just needs to be backed up by good intellect. 

 
Why is this the Dem utopia? Finland tried a pilot program and then didn't refund it. Since the report on the project isn't out yet, there's no evidence for or against UBI that I'm seeing.

 
Landlord said:
Out of curiosity, which women in politics do seem like normal people?
Click to expand...




Warren, Harris, Duckworth off the top of my head. There aren't many women in politics. I even like watching Condoleezza Rice speak. Much moreso than Clinton.

You're not going to get anywhere arguing that Clinton is anything close to personable or that it's not possible for a female politician to be personable. In case that's the plan. It is a lot more challenging for a woman to do so, though. If they're too serious they're judged as cold. If they're not serious enough they're judged incapable if the job. But Clinton is especially bad at being relatable.

 
Moiraine said:
Warren, Harris, Duckworth off the top of my head. There aren't many women in politics. I even like watching Condoleezza Rice speak. Much moreso than Clinton.

You're not going to get anywhere arguing that Clinton is anything close to personable or that it's not possible for a female politician to be personable. In case that's the plan. It is a lot more challenging for a woman to do so, though. If they're too serious they're judged as cold. If they're not serious enough they're judged incapable if the job. But Clinton is especially bad at being relatable.
Click to expand...
I saw Rice speak to a large forum here is Tulsa a number of years ago.  What a brilliant, elegant/classy, thoughtful speaker she was.  I was very impressed with her.  She had every opportunity to rip Obama's foreign policies but did not go there. 

Speaking of Utopia

Bernie has one  - a job for everyone

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/384554-sanders-to-announce-proposal-to-guarantee-jobs-to-all-americans

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's undeniable that there's a double standard when it comes to women, power, and ambition. The sexism Hlllary Clinton faced was both blatant and ingrained. She may well have been the best-qualified candidate in our lifetime — certainly moreso than Trump, Obama, or her husband.

And I don't really want to have a beer with my President. Frankly I'd feel more comfortable with a huge nerd and policy wonk as President, and have my beer with Bill Murray instead. 

But there was something about Hillary -- maybe something unfair -- that went beyond the personable. The Clinton's have always been political animals -- every move a political calculation, every "human" moment seemingly rehearsed. From her carpet-bagging move to New York in 2000 you knew she was running for President, and she surrounded herself with a machine that believed she was entitled to it. She sold herself as midwestern and middle-class, but she ran in elite circles and was always the candidate of the status quo.

In the end, what did Clinton in wasn't that she was the first woman nominee, it was that she was the next John Kerry.

The Democrats have to do better, and they shouldn't be gun shy about a female candidate as long as she's not an entitled standard-bearer of tired Democratic cliches.  

 
TGHusker said:
I saw Rice speak to a large forum here is Tulsa a number of years ago.  What a brilliant, elegant/classy, thoughtful speaker she was.  I was very impressed with her.  She had every opportunity to rip Obama's foreign policies but did not go there. 

Speaking of Utopia

Bernie has one  - a job for everyone

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/384554-sanders-to-announce-proposal-to-guarantee-jobs-to-all-americans
Click to expand...
I've started another thread for the federal jobs guarantee: 




 
Guy Chamberlin said:
It's undeniable that there's a double standard when it comes to women, power, and ambition. The sexism Hlllary Clinton faced was both blatant and ingrained. She may well have been the best-qualified candidate in our lifetime — certainly moreso than Trump, Obama, or her husband.

And I don't really want to have a beer with my President. Frankly I'd feel more comfortable with a huge nerd and policy wonk as President, and have my beer with Bill Murray instead. 

But there was something about Hillary -- maybe something unfair -- that went beyond the personable. The Clinton's have always been political animals -- every move a political calculation, every "human" moment seemingly rehearsed. From her carpet-bagging move to New York in 2000 you knew she was running for President, and she surrounded herself with a machine that believed she was entitled to it. She sold herself as midwestern and middle-class, but she ran in elite circles and was always the candidate of the status quo.

In the end, what did Clinton in wasn't that she was the first woman nominee, it was that she was the next John Kerry.

The Democrats have to do better, and they shouldn't be gun shy about a female candidate as long as she's not an entitled standard-bearer of tired Democratic cliches.  
Click to expand...
Guy, you hit it with the bold.  She like Trump was an opportunist - yes Trump more so. But her move to NY, etc all set her up as 'president in waiting'. 

However, I never found her vast experience being that great.  I never bought into the hyperbole  of her being the most experienced candidate (didn't Obama say 'ever').  In my life time GHW Bush, LBJ, are 2 that quickly come to mind.  There have been long term governors, Senators also.  Her husband was the Governor of Ark -- not her, He was the President, not her.  How many short term senators become SOS without that connection?  Our current first lady will have the same white house experience Hillary had while she was first lady and that won't make her qualified as SOS. 

Speaking of female candidates - Sen Harris from Ca seems like to me to be the best choice for the Dems.  Warren is tooooo old.   

 
Back
Top