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.
No, I'm smart enough to know that a novice is a bad idea in a top national spot, even if we didn't already have the example of Trump as the consummate ignoramus.
Sadly, at this point in our politics, what he claims to think is irrelevant.
I don't want another rookie President. Even if that rookie has good intentions.
You disappointed me Enigma - normally I enjoy reading your posts.
It’s just dangerous to even consider voting for someone other than the dem nominee—unless, of course, you are happy with Individual 1.
It’s like, have we learned nothing? One thing I’ll give republicans credit for is they make impactful votes. Democrats still vote for hopes and dreams. That’s why I-1 is president. People didn’t love HRC.
Ridiculous.
Last edited by Cali Doll; 02-05-2019 at 05:54 PM..
Sadly, at this point in our politics, what he claims to think is irrelevant.
I don't want another rookie President. Even if that rookie has good intentions.
You disappointed me Enigma - normally I enjoy reading your posts.
Sorry my open-mindedness and desire to get all the information has disappointed you. But you only joined in January--can't have enjoyed reading my posts for too long.
How can anyone determine who they will vote for almost 2 years before the actual election? Tell me, because I really don't know. I've always voted Dem. But if the Dems go extreme left, all bets are off. Leaving my options open.
You do understand that we do not even know who is running yet, nevermind who will be the nominee.
Go back and review the Democratic primaries of 1992. Clinton emerged as a star late in the game. Why everyone needs to decide who to elect president the minute the other one is inaugurated is beyond me. I'm being honest. I find it puzzling.
We should go Brit and have 6-week election cycles. That's it. We now have 4-year election cycles--I'm burned out. And besides, right now I like Sherrod Brown, Beto O'Rourke and Amy Klobuchar--that's it. I've been told by my progressive relatives that they are too white and too male and too old. So really? I'll wait.
Sorry my open-mindedness and desire to get all the information has disappointed you. But you only joined in January--can't have enjoyed reading my posts for too long.
How can anyone determine who they will vote for almost 2 years before the actual election? Tell me, because I really don't know. I've always voted Dem. But if the Dems go extreme left, all bets are off. Leaving my options open.
You do understand that we do not even know who is running yet, nevermind who will be the nominee.
Go back and review the Democratic primaries of 1992. Clinton emerged as a star late in the game. Why everyone needs to decide who to elect president the minute the other one is inaugurated is beyond me. I'm being honest. I find it puzzling.
We should go Brit and have 6-week election cycles. That's it. We now have 4-year election cycles--I'm burned out. And besides, right now I like Sherrod Brown, Beto O'Rourke and Amy Klobuchar--that's it. I've been told by my progressive relatives that they are too white and too male and too old. So really? I'll wait.
For me, there isn’t one democrat running who makes me want Individual 1 over them. That’s it, for me.
lol - Schultz sure has the LWLTs on here scared to death. President Trump is my first choice but I would consider Schultz if President Trump decides not to run.
It's curious that 3/4 people who say they lean Republican would vote Schultz, but none of the Democrats would. Not what I was expecting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buckeye77
lol - Schultz sure has the LWLTs on here scared to death. President Trump is my first choice but I would consider Schultz if President Trump decides not to run.
I'm not sure what LWLT means but you seem to be reaching based on one poll.
It's curious that 3/4 people who say they lean Republican would vote Schultz, but none of the Democrats would. Not what I was expecting.
Shultz is contemplating running as an independent for the same reason that Trump ran first as a third-party candidate and eventually as an R - neither one could win the D nomination, and they know/knew it.
They are both laboring under the delusion that being rich qualifies them to be president, an attitude that does not fly with the D rank-and-file.* Neither is popular in the cities where they have long lived and worked. Shultz sold the Seattle NBA team, the Sonics, to Oklahoma City. He has NOT been forgiven!
*(Bloomberg MIGHT be able to overcome this feeling, but he has shown political leadership. Shultz is just professionally rich.)
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.
