She absolutely will not run against Trump because of the fact that he will not hesitate to bring up her gangbang problem.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

You're so negative. What you call a gangbang problem, I call a gangbang opportunity.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

If you think the Democrats base today is the same as the Democrat base was when Hillary was nominated or even November 2015, you are playing the wrong game and should stick to Triathlon for your kicks.


The Bernie crowd rightfully believed the nomination game was rigged in Hillary’s favor even if their belief Bernie would have won the nomination without the DNC helping her out is pure fantasy. And like Trump’s base would have if the 2016 nomination was stolen from him, they simply got bigger, louder and more influential since they didn’t get their way. That anger and rage will play out in this primary. How can you deny this fact?


The Bernie crowd has moved beyond Bernie, but their low common denominator has become very disproportionately loud in the party machinery. Look at the Democratic primary field in 2015 against the names is being thrown around today or the behavior historically tame politicians have been displaying recently and tell me that low common denominator isn’t already well represented. One only need look at California, Oregon and Washington to see that the patients have taken control of the asylum and will have a huge say in the primaries.

Gangbang problem? Do tell.

i worry more about whether Booker, Warren and Harris have enough appeal to win away from the secure Dem states. No bonus points for winning Ca, NJ or other Dem locks by a bigger margin.....we need someone who can both get the base out and win the independents in the purple states, and i think that will be a stretch for either of those 3. Not sure any of them would really unite the country either. Not necessarily because of the policies they would have, just how they are viewed before they even start.

but i understand what you mean.....Clinton won the closed primary in my state (PA) by loads despite Sanders seeming like he energized the base more.

Throw Kasich on the ticket and really hear the screams. Might be the most attractive vote for independents


I'm unenrolled and voted for Kasich last time, would vote for him again if on the ballot. The problem with both parties is they've swung so far to the extremes that there is no one that appeals to people in the middle like me.

---

"You can never win or lose if you don't run the race." - Richard Butler

What do democrats run on, we need more government in our lives?


I agree, I hate more government.

However, under Trump, he is launching a trade war against many countries and looking at large scale subsidies to keep businesses running, which is exactly the opposite of that the GOP has traditionally stood for. In addition, the U.S deficit increased to $780 billion in 2018, which is a staggering $113 billion more than 2017 and the highest level in 6 years.

So given that under the current Republicans, they are doing exactly what you fear the Democrats would do, why would you vote Republican?

So when did this tendency change? I must have missed the primaries in which the base goes for the radical candidate. Can you point to those primaries?

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

I guess we'll see. My handicapping record is pretty good, so much so campaign manager for my state's republican governor and senate candidates. Who beyond here comes to you for political advice?

We'll see what? You said that the Democrats tend to vote for the radical in primaries, which didn't happen the last time (Presidential) primaries were held. So when did this tendency start?

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

You aren't alone. I know a lot of republicans that would have voted for anyone but Trump, yet we were stuck with him and Hillary.

My fear is Trump will run again, the democrats will give us no good alternative, and those of us in the middle right will have no one to vote for again.

---

"...the street finds its own uses for things"

So, as a republican you would like a republican like Kasich to run on the democratic ticket? This just doesnt make any sense.

That's okay, cause I would like Bloomberg to beat Trump in GOP primaries ;).

Somebody proposed that Kasich could turn democrat, and I stated that I'd vote for him against Trump if he did. Not sure how that doesn't make sense...I would prefer just about any republican besides Trump.

Bloomberg at least was a republican at some point.

Kasich is pretty republican on most of his positions, and in no way is he a democrat.

He has strong republican beliefs in abortions, for profit prisons, capital punishment, drug policy, taxation, immigration (birth right) charter schools. He has been moderate on social issues (LGPT, gun control, and health care). Kasich is just your fathers GOP party, not your great great grandfathers which is todays GOP party.

Peace through strength has been the official policy of the United States since 1793. Expenditures might not grow as quickly as they have in the past but make no mistake: the defense industry runs this country.

Economic protectionism isn't a GOP policy. It's a national security policy. In case you haven't noticed, a new Cold War has started and this time China is the antagonist. Trump is the perfect fall guy for any of the negative repercussions given his natural inclinations toward China. If Clinton had been elected we would have gone the same route but taken her entire first term and several staged "failed negotiations" and carefully worded speeches. With Trump we got protectionism with a few tweets. Same place, faster train.

The U.S. is the most internalized developed economy on earth. It's also the largest economy on earth. It's also one of the most resource self-sufficient economies on earth. The U.S. really doesn't have a reason to give a crap about the rest of the world... but, after World War II, it did. The U.S. insured freedom of navigation (the historical exception, not the rule) and opened up its market to the world so that Europe and Japan could rebuild and many undeveloped countries could develop. That arrangement stopped working for the U.S. in the early 1990s. Given surging U.S. oil production and waning demand, the U.S. lost its last reason to care about global trade in the last two years and given China's rapid militarization the U.S. gained a huge reason to disengage from China and throw a wrench into global trade.

Rise or die Powell's policies are not an accident. There is no alternative to the dollar for global trade settlement:

• Euro: put your money in a European bank, risk a bail-in which is ECB/EU policy (Cypriot account holders got a 50% haircut). Rates are likely to be zero to negative for the foreseeable future.
• Yen: managed currency, BOJ will always do whatever it takes to prevent it from appreciating
• Renminbi/Yuan: capital controls, opaque legal system that overwhelmingly favors domestic companies
• Everyone else: too small
• Local currency hedging: expensive
• Crypto: LMAO

Fiscal deficits + rising interest rates (which are also quite high relative to its piers) = surging U.S. dollar. Without the dollar trade becomes difficult. Not impossible, but difficult... and expensive. Price of trade rises > QD of trade falls. QD falls, China's exports fall.


Regarding Europe, our security relationship with them has shifted. It is now transactional. Before you say something stupid and propose increased trade between Europe and China, they both have the same problem: they are economies (I'm referring to Germany here) built on exports without the demographics necessary to consume their own current output.


Poland gets it: "We'd like to build you a shiny new base to replace that decaying piece of crap in Germany. We'll even install A/C units!"
England gets it: "We would like to integrate our new carriers with your Navy. Also, we're leaving the EU so we'd like deeper cooperation amongst our intelligence agencies. BTW how about a free trade agreement? Maybe work us into the USMCA? All the capital we previously supplied Europe with would help your biggest trading partner, Mexico, who will literally never be a military threat to you."
Japan gets it: "We would like to invest $500 billion into U.S. manufacturing over the next decade. Also, we would like to buy more U.S. weapons and increase military cooperation."


Germany doesn't get it: "We could buy LNG from you in repayment for defending us but, instead, we're going to hook a pipe up to Russia."
China has nothing to offer
Russia has become irrelevant (it has the GDP of Texas and one of the fastest shrinking populations on earth).

No, I think "gangbang" is just a drinking game.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

I agree that China is an issue, but if you are concerned about them, you would also not start fights with our freaking allies. If the EU, Canada, Japan, SK, etc all worked together we could hurt China without them being about to hurt us much in return. Instead trump decides to fight everyone at once, which is just stupid if you think there is a cold war with China. Right now trump is so unpopular, other governments have every reason to do the opposite of what trump wants, because it would make them more popular.

We would not be in the same place with Clinton, since she would be smart enough to get our allies on our side.

Seriously, is Canada a national security problem?

I looked it up the other day and Russia has the same GDP as Canada. I was shocked.

---

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Yup. Canada, Texas, and Russia all have similar GDPs. Russia’s working age population will decline so much over the next decade that their military will shrink drastically and they will have a hard time maintaining their oil industry at its current level.

Our allies aren’t going anywhere. They will still be our allies after Trump is long gone. They have no choice honestly.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

Hickenlooper is getting into the race next week. This shaping up to be an entertaining primary. I hope the Democrat party will give me a candidate I can vote for and he seems like one I would consider.

I'm not a native Coloradan, but lived here throughout Hickeloopers stint as Governor. As an independent voter he would get my vote before any of the other hopefuls. He does like to move cautiously on big time socio-political changes, I don't think we would see him cramming and personal agenda item down our throats. And for my part works well with Republicans.

---

--------------------------
The secret of a long life is you try not to shorten it.
-Nobody

Gillibrand all the way based on her voting record and actions. And yes I’m aware she hasn’t announced that she will run but I hope she will.

Tho I can see the GOP ripping her apart saying she an elitist or whatever bs they like to use ..

Bernie had his moment in the spotlight, but ppl have moved on. What he did do though was demonstrate that he understood (and to an extent empathise) with the issues experienced by the Midwest - and really their vote was vital to Trump winning.

The democrats will need to find someone who is similarly in touch to win the election.

Just my two cents