• 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

1) because he is trying to circumvent the political process because he can afford to
2) because he has expressed that one of the reasons he wants to run is to prevent his taxes being raise
3) it takes a special kind of arrogant to look at the political landscape and think, “I’m what this country needs” and people don’t like that

Pretty straightforward actually.

This. And another fiscal conservative/social liberal type in Mike Bloomberg may run, and if he does, it'll be as a Dem in the primary, and I doubt he'll base that decision on anything AOC is doing/proposing.
 
1) because he is trying to circumvent the political process because he can afford to
2) because he has expressed that one of the reasons he wants to run is to prevent his taxes being raise
3) it takes a special kind of arrogant to look at the political landscape and think, “I’m what this country needs” and people don’t like that

Pretty straightforward actually.

Isn't that what every politician in the history of our country has more or less thought? How's that different than Bernie, or Warren, Or Harris, or Beto? Schultz has done more for Americans than any of those people, why shouldn't he think that.
 
1. His Both Sides Bullshit
2. Running as an independent increases the odds Satan gets Re-elected
3. Rich guy with no governmental experience thinks he can be a savior despite current debacle
4. Rich guy refuses to go through the primary process
5. Rich guy thinks he can buy the office
6. Rich guy just cares about protecting his personal fortune
7. Rich guy wants to stop any progress towards programs that will help the poor including Medicare 4 All and free college

33% of republicans want a republican to challenge trump in 2020. Assuming that doesn't happen that's a yuge opportunity to siphon votes off from the right. almost a 100% chance democrats nominate a highly progressive candidate, that's a big opportunity to take enough votes from the center left to get elected.
 

So, his main reasons for running are: 1) The government better not take anymore of my money! 2) I don't like universal healthcare (see reason #1), and 3) a newly-elected Congresswoman who's not yet thirty and has very little actual power in one chamber of Congress is saying she wants to raise his taxes? And in response, he's going to spend a fortune to run as an independent, siphon off votes from the Democrat and probably help Trump to win, and then he'll let Trump and the GOP cut his taxes even more. #MAGA!
 
Last edited:
Isn't that what every politician in the history of our country has more or less thought? How's that different than Bernie, or Warren, Or Harris, or Beto? Schultz has done more for Americans than any of those people, why shouldn't he think that.

Sorry, I should have been more specific. Yes, there's a certain amount of narcissism that is required for a politician to run for President, but I am talking about the special sort of narcissism that a non-politician billionaire has to have in 2019 to believe that the American people would want someone like him to be President.

And fuck no he hasn't done more for the American people than Harris, Beto, Bernie, etc. That's a ridiculous assertion.
 
He’s done plenty for Americans. That’s fine and he should be lauded for that. But franchising coffee shops doesn’t make someone a good politician. Hell our basketball coach is one of the greatest college basketball players of all time and can’t coach for shit.

I’d like my president to show some evidence of public service beyond lining his pockets.
 
While she may turn out to be a complete lightweight, cracks me up how many people feel threatened by AOC.

It's OK to have politicians with radically different policies. Doesn't mean that the country is going to adopt them lock, stock and barrel, but new perspectives are a good thing.
 
Last edited:
It’s crazy how someone nobody had heard of 6 months ago is now a dominant voice in politics. It’s a good thing and I hope it leads more people to run for office.
 
1. His Both Sides Bullshit
2. Running as an independent increases the odds Satan gets Re-elected
3. Rich guy with no governmental experience thinks he can be a savior despite current debacle
4. Rich guy refuses to go through the primary process
5. Rich guy thinks he can buy the office
6. Rich guy just cares about protecting his personal fortune
7. Rich guy wants to stop any progress towards programs that will help the poor including Medicare 4 All and free college

The last time an independent candidate got enough votes in November to impact an election, he helped defeat an incumbent republican President.
 
1. His Both Sides Bullshit
2. Running as an independent increases the odds Satan gets Re-elected
3. Rich guy with no governmental experience thinks he can be a savior despite current debacle
4. Rich guy refuses to go through the primary process
5. Rich guy thinks he can buy the office
6. Rich guy just cares about protecting his personal fortune
7. Rich guy wants to stop any progress towards programs that will help the poor including Medicare 4 All and free college

 
It’s crazy how someone nobody had heard of 6 months ago is now a dominant voice in politics. It’s a good thing and I hope it leads more people to run for office.

I think it’s the era we live in, ability to have instant access to things. Twitter, streaming, instagram, etc... she knows how to use them unlike the geriatric fucks that most of our politicians are. Everything she wants to say can be quick clipped and been seen by me in 60 seconds today, in the meantime I’ll wait for Chuck Shumers letter to arrive in 7-10 business days.
 
The last time an independent candidate got enough votes in November to impact an election, he helped defeat an incumbent republican President.

Because he was a Republican. Nader and Stein screwed Democrats.
 
I think it’s the era we live in, ability to have instant access to things. Twitter, streaming, instagram, etc... she knows how to use them unlike the geriatric fucks that most of our politicians are. Everything she wants to say can be quick clipped and been seen by me in 60 seconds today, in the meantime I’ll wait for Chuck Shumers letter to arrive in 7-10 business days.

Also OWGs don’t know how to connect to young folks or people of color. Just look at the demographics of the GOP. They know that their hold on power has a sunset on the horizon, and they just want to go as slowly as possible towards that horizon. I think it’s fundamentally what scared them most about Obama. He was able to communicate with the voting blocs they can’t touch. It’s like gasoline on the fire that will burn down their house of cards.
 
Schultz is "socially liberal" as much as an old rich white prick can be, so he's not going to peel off moderate Republicans. Schultz aim is to split the Dem vote in case they nominate a leftist, he has already said as much - "Break Glass in Case Of eBerngency"
 
Sorry, I should have been more specific. Yes, there's a certain amount of narcissism that is required for a politician to run for President, but I am talking about the special sort of narcissism that a non-politician billionaire has to have in 2019 to believe that the American people would want someone like him to be President.

And fuck no he hasn't done more for the American people than Harris, Beto, Bernie, etc. That's a ridiculous assertion.

He has provided jobs to hundreds of thousands of people with jobs and fair income, put thousands of people through college for free, gave tens of thousands of people access to health care that they would not be able to have in similar levels of employment, given more money than you will make in your lifetime to help with PTSD and veterans, and worked to provide better opportunities for the youth in american communities. What has Bernie done but pine for socialism while buying second vacation homes?
 
1. The bare minimum of a fair wage is a living wage for someone working full time. Ive known a few adults who worked at Starbucks and its virtually impossible for a barista to earn a living wage there without working 60 hours a week, which they wont let you do, or being a manager.

2. That amount of concentrated wealth accumulation is immoral and a drag on the economy.
 
Back
Top