• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Democratic Party: President / Vice-President Slate

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
Not bad. :thumbsup:
Warren is a winner all around. However, I have yet to look at Buttigieg thoroughly.

The real question (for you in particular — but also for many others like you) is, after you don’t get your primary pick, :( will you try to undermine the USA once again by voting for tRump one more time? o_O
^ a really dumb post ... :rolleyes:
 

Daemon Sophic

Avatar in flux
Oh, you rascal.....if you guys present us with another unholy
choice between 2 evils, it won't be me undermining Ameristan.
What is your obsession with hawk after hawk?
Try a peacenik this time....not another corrupt same old same old.
OK.
Follow-up question.
Which of the remaining 10 Democratic candidates for 2020 presidency do you consider to be a war-hawk, and why?
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
I don't know yet/I don't know yet.

BTW, is there anyone running with the name "Anyonebuttrump"?
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
If you guys ran Andrew Yang for Prez, he'd get my vote.
Based upon preliminary info (so my choice is not cast in
concrete quite yet), he looks far better than his competition.

I'd have to seriously think if Gabbard got the nomination, but Biden, Sander, or Warren - PFFT.

Let's face it, Gabbard has what it takes to win (or at least come damn close):

1) She's hot. (Yeah, basic, but it always helps.)
2) Intelligent.
3) Talks far better than Trump.
4) Is active in the military, and anti-war hawk.
5) Immediately negates all possible Trump roasting -- he'll have to talk on issues, that's Gabbard's game.
6) Can appeal to moderate voters because she's center-left...
7) Has many years experience as a Congresswoman which will help her get things done.
8) Insanely good disposition -- something lacking in all other candidates.
9) Young, but not too young. Health issues won't likely ever be a problem with her. For all the rest of the candidates this is a big issue.
 
Last edited:

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
OK.
Follow-up question.
Which of the remaining 10 Democratic candidates for 2020 presidency do you consider to be a war-hawk, and why?
I prefer to not examine primary candidates in detail,
but one of their current leaders, Warren, is hawkish
regarding Israel. I'd prefer Bernie or Yang.

You aren't going to "undermine the USA once again"
by giving us a Hillary clone, are you?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I'd have to seriously think if Gabbard got the nomination, but Biden, Sander, or Warren - PFFT.

Let's face it, Gabbard has what it takes to win (or at least come damn close):

1) She's hot. (Yeah, basic, but it always helps.)
2) Intelligent.
3) Talks far better than Trump.
4) Is active in the military, and anti-war hawk.
5) Immediately negates all possible Trump roasting -- he'll have to talk on issues, that's Gabbard's game.
6) Can appeal to moderate voters because she's center-left...
7) Has many years experience as a Congresswoman which will help her get things done.
8) Insanely good disposition -- something lacking in all other candidates.
9) Young, but not too young. Health issues won't likely ever be a problem with her. For all the rest of the candidates this is a big issue.
I haven't heard her, & don't know what she looks like.
I hope to keep it that way.
(I've heard Yang, & wish I hadn't.)
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
The choice for VP is usually someone who will balance the ticket and may not be chosen from the other candidates but someone outside. Barbara Abrams comes to mind. Warren played it smart, running for senate when she knew she planned a presidential run. I wish some of these primary candidates would have run for the Senate where they're needed.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I don't think Warren is a 'Hillary clone', as she waited 'till the last minute before endorsing her. I think she was for Sanders.
Clonish enuf...hawk, corrupt, old school big government handout type.
Will she embrace the pantsuit?
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I'd have to seriously think if Gabbard got the nomination, but Biden, Sander, or Warren - PFFT.

Let's face it, Gabbard has what it takes to win (or at least come damn close):

1) She's hot. (Yeah, basic, but it always helps.)
2) Intelligent.
3) Talks far better than Trump.
4) Is active in the military, and anti-war hawk.
5) Immediately negates all possible Trump roasting -- he'll have to talk on issues, that's Gabbard's game.
6) Can appeal to moderate voters because she's center-left...
7) Has many years experience as a Congresswoman which will help her get things done.
8) Insanely good disposition -- something lacking in all other candidates.
9) Young, but not too young. Health issues won't likely ever be a problem with her. For all the rest of the candidates this is a big issue.
10) Polls at 1%.
 

Daemon Sophic

Avatar in flux
I prefer to not examine primary candidates in detail,
but one of their current leaders, Warren, is hawkish
regarding Israel. I'd prefer Bernie or Yang.

You aren't going to "undermine the USA once again"
by giving us a Hillary clone, are you?
Funny boy....Hillary’s skills and outlook would have made the economic and geopolitical environment of the US as well as the whole planet much more stable and less prone to war than the senile lying whack-a-mole that is our current POTUS tRump.
.....and you know that, but you have yet to admit it. Its OK. You were conned, right along with millions of other in 2016.

That said, Warren is far from Hillary, in that Warren is much more against the “too big to fail” crap that came from the last plutocratic disaster that resulted in the 2007-2008 recession. Hillary was too right-wing, and for the aristocracy.
Meanwhile Warren was the single loudest and most reasoned voice in the legislature, trying to hold the banking elitists accountable for their own blunders, rather than having we the people pay for their mistakes.
elizabeth-warren-2020-womens-t-shirt.jpg



P.S. - Elizabeth Warren urges Israeli-Palestinian peace – to Iranian state media

Sounds pretty peacenik to me. :shrug::)
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Funny boy....Hillary’s skills and outlook would have made the economic and geopolitical environment of the US as well as the whole planet much more stable and less prone to war than the...
Yes, many of you believed that.
But she had a record...voting to start & continue wars, corruption, enmity with Iran, etc.
You're convince she'd be great in office.
But of course, but this greatness can be imagined because she never faced the job.
Not being big on faith, I never had your level of certainty.
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
Clonish enuf...hawk, corrupt, old school big government handout type.
Will she embrace the pantsuit?

Warren has been our senator for several years and know her well, she is none of the things you accuse her of.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts has been one of the fiercest critics of the proposed trade pact with Asian nations. (Photo: Susan Walsh/AP)

Warren and other critics of the Asian trade pact have seized on a series of complaints in their efforts to stop Congress from giving Obama so-called fast-track authority, which would enable him to put the final deal before Congress on an up-or-down vote, without endless amendments. (Obama, by the way, would be the first president in decades to be denied that authority — and by lawmakers in his own party, no less.)

Why Obama is happy to fight Elizabeth Warren on the trade deal
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Warren has been our senator for several years and know her well, she is none of the things you accuse her of.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts has been one of the fiercest critics of the proposed trade pact with Asian nations. (Photo: Susan Walsh/AP)

Warren and other critics of the Asian trade pact have seized on a series of complaints in their efforts to stop Congress from giving Obama so-called fast-track authority, which would enable him to put the final deal before Congress on an up-or-down vote, without endless amendments. (Obama, by the way, would be the first president in decades to be denied that authority — and by lawmakers in his own party, no less.)

Why Obama is happy to fight Elizabeth Warren on the trade deal
Oh, there are worse options than her.
But she still doesn't measure up.
 
Top