It is currently: May 10, '24, 2:01 am |
VaderBomb wrote:If that schmuck gets two terms then America is officially one of the stupidest countries on Earth.
VaderBomb wrote:If that schmuck gets two terms then America is officially one of the stupidest countries on Earth.
Hanley! wrote:It's weird though, because while you're completely right in terms of Presidents historically being voted in for a second term, it feels like the basis of Trump's appeal was that he was 'the devil you don't know'. People were voting for a radical change and a shake up of the system. Which they've seen. Anyone who chooses to vote for him again out of a sense of stability is twice the idiot of those who voted for him the first time.
AkydefGoldberg wrote:I'd say so as I haven't seen a Democrat candidate as a viable threat to him and as aforementioned, the President normally gets re-elected and he might just eek over the winning line which will say just as much about how the nation feels about him. I thought he wouldn't survive his first term but it seems Republicans wouldn't impeach their guy or the Democrats aren't strong enough to do so either.
America has become a laughing stock in his time, but then I think about Brexit and the utter fucking mess that it is and realise our MPs are hardly shining lights.
We're all screwed.
Hanley! wrote:There definitely are threats to Trump. Even a weak democrat would be a threat, considering he's the least popular American president in history (which is another reason why previous trends may not apply to him). But if Sanders - for example - was to become the nominee, he'd probably blow Trump away. He's the most popular politician in the country, and he has the same anti-establishment appeal that Trump does.
Hanley! wrote:Beto O'Rourke is an interesting option, but he couldn't even win in Texas, and more importantly he didn't seem to have the kind of fight in him that's needed in the current political climate. If you can't fire a cheap shot or two in a race against Ted freaking Cruz of all people, then you might not be cut out for politics. Democrats have allowed themselves to be bullied by Republicans for too long, and have allowed the right to shape the narrative. I'm not sure O'Rourke is the right person to fight back. He could be an interesting VP candidate for someone though.
Hanley! wrote:When I said "even in Texas" I meant even in his own state as opposed to nationwide. I know it's a red state, though demographically Texas is trending towards becoming a blue state sooner rather than later. I do think that Cruz was beatable though, and it's easier to beat the right with someone from the far-left than someone who's centrist, which is what the Democrats don't seem to understand. Beto was good on the issues and accomplished a lot considering where he came from, but I feel like he would have had a real shot at the win if he was more of a fighter. I watched some of the debate and Beto seemed too polite to land any meaningful blows. Right now only one party is playing by the rules. I just think the Democrats need candidates who are willing to get a little dirty.
This is all from someone who's looking at this stuff from the outside though, so I appreciate you guys know more about your own country's politics than I do. My main point is just that I don't think you should write off Bernie in favour of a more right-leaning Democrat that's not going to get shit done, and that's where the majority of the field are at.
20 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest