Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think they should get the MOST Politically Correct person- a gay, illegal muslim that is a transgender, as well as transexual and a transvestite to boot!
just remembered this. I still feel Republicans should be worried if they choose her. She seems willing to compromise and she is beautiful. America loves the beautiful
Ehh... When was the last time a Congressman/Congresswoman actually won the nomination? It seems that candidates need a more prestigious title to have a chance in the primaries. She is someone to watch, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgiaTransplant
2008.
From the context of Dequindre's post, I believe that the question is referring specifically to members of the House of Representatives, as Senators would have the "more prestigious title" of "Senator".
In that case, it's a question with a complicated answer. Consider the following:
- The highest office to which John W. Davis had been elected prior to his nomination by the Democrats in 1924 was in the House (but he hadn't been in that seat for 11 years). He had since served as Ambassador to the UK, so he would have been formally addressed as "Ambassador Davis" (even though he left that position in 1921).
- James Garfield was a sitting House member when he won the GOP's Presidential nomination in 1880, but months prior to that, he had been elected to the Senate (though he never served there, because his term wasn't to begin until March 1881, by which time he had already won the Presidential election). So he was Senator-elect Garfield at the time of his nomination.
I don't see any others after a cursory glance through the election history. It seems to support the notion that mere Congressmen (or Congresswomen) do not win major party nominations for President.
So unless I missed someone (which is certainly possible), the answer seems to be 1880 (but for the GOP), or never, depending on your point of view.
Identity politics will continue to destroy the Democrat party.
"Young & Hot" doesn't put food on the table unless you are a prostitute.
If they don't find someone who will address the concerns of the working & middle class in the USA, then they are destined to be nothing more than they are now. i.e. A regional fringe party.
A regional fringe party that received more of the vote than the Republican party this last election?
I won't deny that they collectively made mistakes during the 2016 election cycle, but they're certainly not a fringe party.
She can't run. Residents of American Samoa are not natural born citizens, they are US nationals. America Samoa is the only US territory that does not have birthright US citizenship. Congress has concerns about the Territorial Senate currently being comprised of tribal chieftains rather than a directly elected body.
Secondly, Gabbard is a Russian apologist and a fan of Assad. That's a red flag for me.
I think they should get the MOST Politically Correct person- a gay, illegal muslim that is a transgender, as well as transexual and a transvestite to boot!
Yes, someone as oddball as the Republican President , Mr, Trump!
Someone who is a champion for the Rust Belt working class, not the Acela Belt.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
