• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2020 Democratic Presidential Nominees

I wonder if he has a warehouse to store my shit and piss as well. Or if he eats it daily as his regular diet.
 
RJ’s “analysis” re age is not much improved over the “a team from the [region] hasn’t won in a [field type] in an even year.”
 
RJKarl said:
I wonder if he has a warehouse to store my shit and piss as well. Or if he eats it daily as his regular diet.
Click to expand...

jury is still out on whether rj is better at humor or statistical analysis

dead heat
 
Seems like just another thread derailed by the usual suspects as they worry more about attacking RJ for nonsensical reasons, than actually posting at the topic on hand. Typical.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
60 plus means more baby-boomer leadership.

no thanks
Click to expand...

Focusing on his identity. Never mind that his progressive agenda is massively popular with millennials and 50% of young people have more favorable views of socialism than capitalism.
 
MHBDemon said:
Focusing on his identity. Never mind that his progressive agenda is massively popular with millennials and 50% of young people have more favorable views of socialism than capitalism.
Click to expand...

who cares. age is part of everyone's identity. it's time for the TNG crew to take over.
 
MHBDemon said:
RJ’s “analysis” re age is not much improved over the “a team from the [region] hasn’t won in a [field type] in an even year.”
Click to expand...

You're so right. There's no sense using ACTUAL results rather than theories.
 
MHB once again accuses RJ of being "in the tank" when he brings up the ACTUAL numbers.

My bad ACTUAL long-term stats don't matter and are only usuable when they prove what you want them to show. you have a "theory".
 
Kind of the opposite of what you all are saying, but in my circles some felt Bernie was the better person/personality but his ideology was too far left. Like people would say, yeah he’s a really genuine guy and I like him but I don’t agree with his more radical policy ideas, so they supported Hillary. These people also liked Obama and saw Hillary as a continuation of his admin.
 
ProfessorDeac said:
Kind of the opposite of what you all are saying, but in my circles some felt Bernie was the better person/personality but his ideology was too far left. Like people would say, yeah he’s a really genuine guy and I like him but I don’t agree with his more radical policy ideas, so they supported Hillary. These people also liked Obama and saw Hillary as a continuation of his admin.
Click to expand...

And were these people affluent?
 
MHBDemon said:
And were these people affluent?
Click to expand...

Hillary won the vote across all income levels in the 2016 primary.

Bernie did win a majority of rural white counties though. Hillary won 67% of those counties in 2008 and 40% in 2016. I’d be genuinely interested to hear from mdmh and MHB on what they think contributed to that discrepancy.
 
The thing about RJs repeated commenting on Bernie’s age is that he’s not wrong. I am simply uncomfortable putting an octogenarian in the White House. He’d be 83 at the end of his first term. Someone that old shouldn’t be in charge of the US government....FFS I don’t think 73 year olds should be ladened with that responsibility. If he is the only one running that actually has plans for climate change and single payer health and student loan debt, etc. then he will win my vote, but I am starting off from the stand point that his age is a negative and he will have to work to overcome that for me and probably a lot of voters.

I love Bernie, I love what he did to bring progressivism to the forefront of American Politics. In 2000, 2004, 2008 guys like him were barely at the periphery of the Democratic Party spectrum and now his ideas are mainstream, but age is important and 80 is old.
 
There probably should be an age limit at the upper end for President just like there is at the lower end. On my phone so can’t link the stuff I want, but mental capacity begins to decline around 45-55, and accelerates exponentially as you continue to age. Electing anyone over the age of 65 is borderline negligent from the American people, all other factors not taken into account. Obviously any Democrat that is found worthy to be the candidate will be highly intelligent and capable, but I’d much rather them also be younger so we can get the full advantage of their capabilities.
 
I hope the best candidate isn't also the oldest candidate, but I also dont believe the best candidate is disqualified for being too old.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
I hope the best candidate isn't also the oldest candidate, but I also dont believe the best candidate is disqualified for being too old.
Click to expand...

I don’t see why they shouldn’t be. If you’re a primary candidate over the age of 60, the best you will ever be is the first few months of the Presidency. There is nowhere to go but down. And Americans should not be looking to nominate a candidate born in the 1940’s or 1950’s to be President for the 2020’s. It just doesn’t make sense.
 
AsesinoDeTortugas said:
I don’t see why they shouldn’t be. If you’re a primary candidate over the age of 60, the best you will ever be is the first few months of the Presidency. There is nowhere to go but down. And Americans should not be looking to nominate a candidate born in the 1940’s or 1950’s to be President for the 2020’s. It just doesn’t make sense.
Click to expand...

Add gerontology to the list of areas of expertise on the boards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top