• 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

Hillary, the unlikeable candidate who received more votes than any President in history other than Obama and who would be President if our electoral system wasn't trash.

I don't understand why people think EW is unlikeable, but the misogyny runs deeps with mouthbreathers like Pinocha.

People want their female presidential candidate to look like Audrey Hepburn, be as smart as Stephen Hawking, demure like Jackie O, and still defer to men for “the important things” like actually being president.
 
The fact that Warren thought it was a good idea to take an ancestry.com DNA test in response to Trump’s trolling is disqualifying.

Agreed. But it doesn’t make her unlikable.
 
Some of these liberal female commenters just seem to be working from the false narrative that male presidential candidates are judged solely on their policy positions and that women aren't afforded the same courtesy.

Yep.
 
Hillary, the unlikeable candidate who received more votes than any President in history other than Obama and who would be President if our electoral system wasn't trash.

I don't understand why people think EW is unlikeable, but the misogyny runs deeps with mouthbreathers like Pinocha.

I like Warren because she is the best advocate in congress for the American consumer. But at the same time, I don't think she's a strong general election candidate for the Dems because she is easily painted as a NE liberal school marm. To more easily win battleground states in the south and midwest, I've always thought it helpful not to have our nominee be from the NE. And I still believe that is true for 2020. And sure, I think ADT is correct with his assessment above, and there is a ton of sexism at play. So it will take an exceptional female Dem candidate to navigate successfully those waters. I don't think Klobuchar has the personal charisma to pull it off as the presidential nominee, though maybe as the experienced hand veep for a more charismatic guy like Beto. Harris may be the right person to pull it off next year or some election thereafter.
 
The fact that Warren thought it was a good idea to take an ancestry.com DNA test in response to Trump’s trolling is disqualifying.

That's a fucking ridiculous take -- it was one error of judgment while douchebag in chief makes several worse errors daily. Different standards men here are of course ok with.
 
I like Warren because she is the best advocate in congress for the American consumer. But at the same time, I don't think she's a strong general election candidate for the Dems because she is easily painted as a NE liberal school marm. To more easily win battleground states in the south and midwest, I've always thought it helpful not to have our nominee be from the NE. And I still believe that is true for 2020. And sure, I think ADT is correct with his assessment above, and there is a ton of sexism at play. So it will take an exceptional female Dem candidate to navigate successfully those waters. I don't think Klobuchar has the personal charisma to pull it off as the presidential nominee, though maybe as the experienced hand veep for a more charismatic guy like Beto. Harris may be the right person to pull it off next year or some election thereafter.

I don't disagree with you, but it doesn't make her unlikeable. And I agree it will take an exceptional female candidate -- in fact, a perfect, mistake free one, which is a sad indictment of the different standard and some of the men on this board.
 
Candidate "likeability' is very subjective, and guestimating how likeable a candidate is to others is mostly just projecting.
 
The fact that Warren thought it was a good idea to take an ancestry.com DNA test in response to Trump’s trolling is disqualifying.

This is sadly true. It just heightens the probability that she will get mired in the mud just like Hillary and makes her a weak candidate.
 
I don't disagree with you, but it doesn't make her unlikeable. And I agree it will take an exceptional female candidate -- in fact, a perfect, mistake free one, which is a sad indictment of the different standard and some of the men on this board.

Agree on both counts. And the same was true with Obama being our 1st person of color as president. He had to appear as being overly calm at all times and never respond in anger to crap thrown his way. That said, and just thinking out loud, I don't necessarily think the same is necessarily true for a Pub female or African-American nominee. It wasn't that true for Margaret Thatcher, and I'm thinking it wouldn't be quite as difficult finesse for a Nikki Haley or a Colin Powell, though I'm not so sure as to why that could be.
 
Candidate "likeability' is very subjective, and guestimating how likeable a candidate is to others is mostly just projecting.

Yeah, but hardly anybody likes Hillary, even most of the people who voted for her don't like her and a lot of people don't show up when they're asked to vote for someone they don't like.
 
Wait - you think that's a false narrative? I assumed Biff was being tongue in cheek here.

Of course it is. Presidential elections are popularity contests. Have been as long as I can remember.
 
Wait - you think that's a false narrative? I assumed Biff was being tongue in cheek here.

Not at all. Male candidates are dismissed all the the time for reasons that have next to nothing to do with policy positions.

Were Joe Biden and Barack Obama widely divergent presidential candidates in 2008 ? Did 12 other republican presidential candidates (male and female) from 2016 have a better grasp of policy than the eventual nominee ?

I mean this loser lost the nomination to Michael Dukakis:

WSIU_Paul_Simon_doc_0.jpg
 
Yes, but you're missing the double standard in play with respect to the popularity contest, which is the point.
 
Yes, but you're missing the double standard in play with respect to the popularity contest, which is the point.

How so ? And even if it is a double standard that doesn't mean the dems should just hold their nose and nominate a woman who is going to lose the general (again). And I'll point out again that male candidates are discarded all of the time with a roll of the eyes and a chuckle.
 
Back
Top