Dump Biden.

PVW said:

Granted I don't know Obama personally, but she's never come across to me as someone with any interest in running for office. So unlike, say, her husband who has always seemed very politically ambitious (or the examples of Stockton and Grant, who held high government office even if not elected), her denials of interest align with what I understand as her temperament and personality. I could see her being on a local school board maybe; beyond that just doesn't align with my impression of her.

I agree with all of this. But these are fairly desperate times and the idea of DeSantis, or god forbid, Trump steamrolling Biden or another tired name from the 2020 Dem field is a pretty grim prospect. So that, and the kids are older, and perhaps she's outraged enough by the SCOTUS, and maybe there's a chance that this stuff supersedes her disinterest in politics. IDK, maybe 5-10% chance? I guess you're saying 0%. 

If she was politically minded and ever expressed any interest in running for office, she would be the overwhelming favorite right now.  

Smedley said:

I agree with all of this. But these are fairly desperate times and the idea of DeSantis, or god forbid, Trump steamrolling Biden or another tired name from the 2020 Dem field is a pretty grim prospect. So that, and the kids are older, and perhaps she's outraged enough by the SCOTUS, and maybe there's a chance that this stuff supersedes her disinterest in politics. IDK, maybe 5-10% chance? I guess you're saying 0%. 

If she was politically minded and ever expressed any interest in running for office, she would be the overwhelming favorite right now.  

And then another question -- would she even be a good president? I'm not sure someone who doesn't even want the job would actually do well at it. You've commented how you believe Biden's age (or rather, physical and mental challenges brought on by his age) have been an impairment to his effectiveness on the job. Disinterest or even outright resentment toward the job would also be a significant impediment.

I suppose one response might be "better an ineffective president than Trump or Desantis." Still, not exactly a strong pro-Obama argument. And would someone dragged resentfully into the race even be a good campaigner? If not, that would cut against the whole point of drafting her in the first place.

FWIW, if an Obama ever gets back into high office, what I'd like to see is a Chief Justice Barack Obama.

PVW said:

Smedley said:

I agree with all of this. But these are fairly desperate times and the idea of DeSantis, or god forbid, Trump steamrolling Biden or another tired name from the 2020 Dem field is a pretty grim prospect. So that, and the kids are older, and perhaps she's outraged enough by the SCOTUS, and maybe there's a chance that this stuff supersedes her disinterest in politics. IDK, maybe 5-10% chance? I guess you're saying 0%. 

If she was politically minded and ever expressed any interest in running for office, she would be the overwhelming favorite right now.  

And then another question -- would she even be a good president? I'm not sure someone who doesn't even want the job would actually do well at it. You've commented how you believe Biden's age (or rather, physical and mental challenges brought on by his age) have been an impairment to his effectiveness on the job. Disinterest or even outright resentment toward the job would also be a significant impediment.

I suppose one response might be "better an ineffective president than Trump or Desantis." Still, not exactly a strong pro-Obama argument. And would someone dragged resentfully into the race even be a good campaigner? If not, that would cut against the whole point of drafting her in the first place.

Prob not worth discussing further -- as I've said it's a long shot, it's not like I'm saying it will happen. Just part of a broader discussion of moving past Biden, on this recently revived thread. Who's interesting to you for '24? 

I do think she'd obviously need to commit fully to do this, and if she doesn't have it in her she won't do it. If anyone knows what the job entails, she does, so I think the notion of her going through with running but then being a disinterested and/or resentful president is kind of a weird notion.

nohero said:

ml1 said:

it's kind of a captain obvious sort of thing. People don't decide to pursue a course of action until they decide to do so. A person is not a job-seeker until they decide it's time to look for a new job. 

Actually, in the age of “big data” the algorithms know that you’re ready for a new job before you do. 

some of the algorithms are smart.  Some of them are really dumb. FB has taken to serving me up a whole host of right wing racist and anti-LGBTQ content and ads. I think it's because of some of the FB groups I read.

Smedley said:

Who's interesting to you for '24?

I'm a political junkie enough to be in the MOL politics forum, but not enough to have much knowledge of people active in politics who aren't yet on the national radar, so that means I'm mostly thinking of people who were candidates in 2020, or who were potential candidates.

I think a contested primary would not be great, so I take the question to be premised on Biden deciding not to run.

I'm still kinda liking Newsom.

Though I liked Warren last time out, she's just not a good campaigner (age not withstanding). She comes off as a lecturer too often.

None of the candidates from 2020 thrill me much. I can't quite figure out Buttigieg. He's a great communicator but I can't figure out his ideology. And his Fox appearances worry me. He seems to not understand what they are.

Booker puzzles me. When he let's himself go, he's a great and passionate speaker. Moved me to tears once. I think he held himself back in 2020.

I actually think Klobuchar would make a decent president, but I don't think she would win.

drummerboy said:

I'm still kinda liking Newsom.

Though I liked Warren last time out, she's just not a good campaigner (age not withstanding). She comes off as a lecturer too often.

None of the candidates from 2020 thrill me much. I can't quite figure out Buttigieg. He's a great communicator but I can't figure out his ideology. And his Fox appearances worry me.

Booker puzzles me. When he let's himself go, he's a great and passionate speaker. Moved me to tears once. I think he held himself back in 2020.

I actually think Klobuchar would make a decent president, but I don't think she would win.

I can’t believe you can sell Newsom on a national level — he has turned CA into hobo amp and his Covid behavior speak volumes.

Buttigieg is must still be on paternity leave it would appear — not much of a newsmaker. He would make an impression in the veep role — looks good in formal wear.

Thank goodness Warren is aging out, along with Bernie.

Booker is a puzzlement.

what's the Republican solution to homelessness?

would love to hear it.

It’s hilarious this woman can find superlatives in the negative for each and every democrat… but the cat has her tongue in a 200 PSI grip, when it comes to the American taliban.

Deplorable 

mtierney said:

drummerboy said:

I'm still kinda liking Newsom.

Though I liked Warren last time out, she's just not a good campaigner (age not withstanding). She comes off as a lecturer too often.

None of the candidates from 2020 thrill me much. I can't quite figure out Buttigieg. He's a great communicator but I can't figure out his ideology. And his Fox appearances worry me.

Booker puzzles me. When he let's himself go, he's a great and passionate speaker. Moved me to tears once. I think he held himself back in 2020.

I actually think Klobuchar would make a decent president, but I don't think she would win.

I can’t believe you can sell Newsom on a national level — he has turned CA into hobo amp and his Covid behavior speak volumes.

Buttigieg is must still be on paternity leave it would appear — not much of a newsmaker. He would make an impression in the veep role — looks good in formal wear.

Thank goodness Warren is aging out, along with Bernie.

Booker is a puzzlement.

You realize trump is 3 years older than Warren…I don’t recall you saying he’s aging out.

Smedley said:

You realize trump is 3 years older than Warren…I don’t recall you saying he’s aging out.

Don't mind her; she's just a hyper-partisan. There's no substance to anything she says.

Jaytee said:

It’s hilarious this woman can find superlatives in the negative for each and every democrat… but the cat has her tongue in a 200 PSI grip, when it comes to the American taliban.

Translation required.

Jaycee used lower case “d” !

Hmmmm

mtierney said:

I can’t believe you can sell Newsom on a national level — he has turned CA into hobo amp 

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=HoBo%20Amp

HOBO AMP
A startup, dedicated, original, entertaining, loud, fast rock group that you either love or are jealous of. Give 'em a chance, man! These guys flat out rock! They're practicing all the time so that you can party more! Check out their CD, and don't forget your mosh gear (there, you've been warned). Out.Lets go see HoBo Amp this Saturday!by Remo January 6, 2004

PVW said:

Smedley said:

You realize trump is 3 years older than Warren…I don’t recall you saying he’s aging out.

Don't mind her; she's just a hyper-partisan. There's no substance to anything she says.

She is a hyper-partisan for sure. I do believe there's some substance to what she says, at times. However as she has shown on a long-term basis, her typical m.o. is just to instigate and then deflect, rather than actually engage on topics. It is for this reason, not her hyper-partisanship, that I leave it to others to engage. 98% of the time I hold to this but I sometimes I can't resist a zinger.    

Smedley said:

She is a hyper-partisan for sure. I do believe there's some substance to what she says, at times. However as she has shown on a long-term basis, her typical m.o. is just to instigate and then deflect, rather than actually engage on topics. It is for this reason, not her hyper-partisanship, that I leave it to others to engage. 98% of the time I hold to this but I sometimes I can't resist a zinger.    

I think maybe she does actually believe the anti-immigration stuff. And that abortion should be illegal. Though even on these, if there was some way it would harm Democrats, I think she'd be ok taking the opposite position.

From the excitement generated by auto correct in my last post, I do believe you folks are at a loss for words promoting Your Leader for another four years, meandering about in global affairs.

Hobo Camps was the name given to the homeless, lost souls during the Great Depression. They existed along Lower Broadway and the Bowery. Nobody  shot up anyone — couldn’t afford the bullets, much less a gun. But knives were easy to come by. 

I have vivid recollections of the plight of the lost, the homeless, the drunk. My Uncle John lived in the area off and on. His wife and two kids lived in Manhattan, but they had finally  had enough, and kicked him to the curb.

 
When Bellvue Hospital   called the telephone number he carried with him, they got my Mother  in Brooklyn. My mom and I took the subway into the city more than once. My uncle died the way he lived.

There were no agencies focused on helping — charities and churches soup kitchens did exist and kept many to live another day. There were drunk tanks to sleep it off. They didn’t have sleeping bags or pop up tents to sleep in — just cardboard and a doorway. The hospital stays were to dry a drunk out and release. Some, with  DTs, might go to a state hospital.

Remember this was before Social Security was in place.

Sorry for the digression.

mtierney said:

There were no agencies focused on helping — charities and churches soup kitchens did exist and kept many to live another day. There were drunk tanks to sleep it off. They didn’t have sleeping bags or pop up tents to sleep in — just cardboard and a doorway. The hospital stays were to dry a drunk out and release. Some, with  DTs, might go to a state hospital.

Remember this was before Social Security was in place.

Sorry for the digression.

It's not a digression, it's a preview of what the long-term GOP vision is.

mtierney said:

From the excitement generated by auto correct in my last post, I do believe you folks are at a loss for words promoting Your Leader for another four years, meandering about in global affairs.

As usual, you don't read what is written by various people here.  Numerous people have indicated that they are supportive of what Biden is trying to accomplish while also stating that they would like somebody other than Biden to run in 2024.  It's not that complicated.

And, while we are at it,

Do you believe that a woman should be allowed to end a pregnancy in cases of rape, incest or medical problems?

Do you believe global warming is an issue and, if so, what should we do about it?

These are really simple questions.  Surely you can manage a straight answer.

tjohn said:

These are really simple questions.  Surely you can manage a straight answer.

Aborting a child is a simple question?

Global warming is a simple question?

I am waiting for some really tough questions,  if you believe these are simple.

mtierney said:

Aborting a child is a simple question?

Global warming is a simple question?

I am waiting for some really tough questions,  if you believe these are simple.

No, not abortion in general, specifically abortion in cases of rape, incest or medical emergency.  Are you cruel enough to force a woman to carry a baby born of rape or incest to term?

And global warming is a simple question.  Do you think it is real?  It's not an ethical dilemma.  Do you think human-caused global warming is real?

In any case, these are simple questions in the sense that you can respond with a simple yes or now.

Or maybe you need to consult Fox News for guidance.  Pretty clearly you haven't consulted a priest.

mtierney said:

Aborting a child is a simple question?

Global warming is a simple question?

I am waiting for some really tough questions,  if you believe these are simple.

Survey says?

If Biden decided not to run again, I'm still a fan of Cory Booker and Elizabeth Warren, I have always liked Sherrod Brown who I felt decided not to run when Joe Biden threw his hat in the ring. Senator Brown is 69 so younger, but I guess we really need him in the Senate. He is right out of a Frank Capra movie. I suggested him when we were all tossing out our picks last election.

Someone who has caught my eye for several years is Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, age 50, smooth and tough.  And Democrats, if we don't elect a woman soon, well I can't think of a good threat and maybe that's the reason we don't elect one.

I thought Warren was a great campaigner, a real happy warrior and every female I knew was crazy about her.

But after all is considered, my heart is still with Cory Booker.

I'd vote for Booker.  He has done a pretty good job representing NJ's interests and, in places where he hasn't been as progressive as I would like (pharmacare) that has often been a reflection of those interests (how many constituents in the pharmaceutical industry).  Plus, he has AMAZING folks working for him in his constituent outreach office.  

If you want to really understand the word "contrast" try calling Booker's office about an issue and then calling Menendez's office.

I think there has been pushback on progressivism since the last election, and progressive candidates will face headwinds in 2024. It's still way early, and of course much can change. But I think 2020 was progressives' year. If a progressive candidate couldn't at least win the Democratic nomination in 2020, it's tough to see how a progressive candidate wins the presidency in 2024.  

Smedley said:

 If a progressive candidate couldn't at least win the Democratic nomination in 2020, it's tough to see how a progressive candidate wins the presidency in 2024.  

Wasn't the entire rationale for nominating Biden, a guy who was, at best, most people's 5th choice, that 2020 was a special circumstance and we had to choose Biden because only an old centrist white guy could beat Trump?

I don't really know what progressives chances are in 2024, but trying to argue the 2020 primaries were a referendum on progressivism seems a little perverse.

While I consider myself "Progressive" I do not think that ideology itself matters that much to voters. Perhaps "image"  for want of a better term, matters more 

GoSlugs said:

Smedley said:

 If a progressive candidate couldn't at least win the Democratic nomination in 2020, it's tough to see how a progressive candidate wins the presidency in 2024.  

Wasn't the entire rationale for nominating Biden, a guy who was, at best, most people's 5th choice, that 2020 was a special circumstance and we had to choose Biden because only an old centrist white guy could beat Trump?

I don't really know what progressives chances are in 2024, but trying to argue the 2020 primaries were a referendum on progressivism seems a little perverse.

well Biden being nominated was the choice of the voters. It wasn’t like the progressives (Sanders and Warren, most notably) exited early to clear the way for this to happen. They competed vigorously and only bowed out only when it was clear they would not get the nomination. 

I’m not arguing the 2020 primaries were a referendum on progressivism any more than any year’s primaries are a referendum on any political movement. I’m just saying that at this time, 2024 is shaping up to be a more challenging year for progressive candidates than 2020 was.

Is progressivism a style or a set of policy positions, in your meaning here? For instance, Biden sold himself as someone who could work with Republicans, and so a "moderate." But also he was skeptical of Medicare For All, and so a "moderate."

I'm not sure if you're saying "someone who doesn't claim to work across the aisle" will have less success, or if you're saying "someone who talks up Medicare For All" will have less success. Or if you mean both, and are saying "Joe Biden, but younger, will have the most success"