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.
We shall see, I think one thing we tend to notice with elections is that the candidate who announces intentions to run too early doesn't win. Probably due to our short attention spans and our predilection for new shiny things.
The takeaway seems to be that Beto O'Rourke is a dynamic personality who donors see has having great fundraising potential, so people are holding off on endorsing candidates until they know whether or not Beto is running.
We shall see, I think one thing we tend to notice with elections is that the candidate who announces intentions to run too early doesn't win. Probably due to our short attention spans and our predilection for new shiny things.
The takeaway seems to be that Beto O'Rourke is a dynamic personality who donors see has having great fundraising potential, so people are holding off on endorsing candidates until they know whether or not Beto is running.
Whatever your opinion, you can’t dismiss anyone these days. I thought Trump would be good for a laugh or two before he got blown out of the primaries. Look where we are now.
Not a single word in the article about actual policies. Its all about the money.
The entire article was about which candidates the big political donors are choosing to back early. Bottom line, most of the Ds have similar stances. The differences are minor between them. Some are more left and some are more moderate.
Every Presidential election of the 21st century, beginning in 2000, has been personality driven. The personal charisma of the candidates has been more important that policy in every one of them.
The candidate's personality has always been important, but it's taken over now. I think it really began with Nixon. Every winner since Nixon has had increasingly more personal attractiveness than the opposing candidate.
The electorate swings back and forth from a liberal charmer to a conservative charmer.
Nixon himself worked on his charm, and was much more charming in 1968 than he was in 1960, when he ran as a policy wonk. John Kennedy was a policy wonk, too, but was a lot more charming and glamorous.
When Nixon came back in 1968, he was a lot more polished, smoother, and a lot friendlier appearing, than when he was in Congress.
In this age of selfies, when everyone wants as much attention as they can get from strangers, I expect our candidates will all have more flamboyant personalities than they have now for a long time to come.
It's what gets the voters to come to the rallies, what gets them to the polls, and what the public concentrates on once they're elected. The days of the politicians who are solid policy makers with little personal appeal are long gone.
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.
