Is it time for Democrats to get behind Tulsi?

[Jermayn]

Mike Bloomberg and Elizabeth Warren's recent dropout from the presidential race has left Democrats in a tough spot. The party that touts "diversity is our strength" the loudest now gets to chose between two old rich white guys out of what began as the most diverse field of candidates to ever seek the parties nomination. However, there's still one last hope for the Democratic party to nominate someone who would reflect the diversity that they claim to cherish so much. Tulsi Gabbard is young, a woman of color, and a war veteran, but many laugh at the idea of making her the nominee. She's also the least likely to be torn to shreds by Trump on the debate stage. It's no secret the DNC is looking to block Bernie by throwing it's support behind Joe Biden, but I believe they've made a fatal mistake. They should be getting behind Tulsi instead.

 

[tampasteve]

It is too late for anyone except Biden or Sanders, the field is set and too many delegates are committed. She may have not officially conceded the campaign, but she cannot get enough delegates at this point based on her poling positions and support from the party executives. Her best chance is to hope for landing the running mate spot with whoever wins. I could see her running with Biden as a fairly strong ticket.

 

[athenken]

With it being this late in the race it would be too little, too late for anyone to throw support behind her. I would say she does to sound the sanest of anyone on that side of the aisle, but she ultimately would never have been elected even if she did get the nomination. Mostly because she is a woman. One of the big reasons McCain did not win against Obama is that he picked Palin as his running mate. Really bad idea for a Republican with a conservative base to pick a woman as a running mate.

 

[Silmarien]

Mike Bloomberg and Elizabeth Warren's recent dropout from the presidential race has left Democrats in a tough spot. The party that touts "diversity is our strength" the loudest now gets to chose between two old rich white guys out of what began as the most diverse field of candidates to ever seek the parties nomination. However, there's still one last hope for the Democratic party to nominate someone who would reflect the diversity that they claim to cherish so much. Tulsi Gabbard is young, a woman of color, and a war veteran, but many laugh at the idea of making her the nominee. She's also the least likely to be torn to shreds by Trump on the debate stage. It's no secret the DNC is looking to block Bernie by throwing it's support behind Joe Biden, but I believe they've made a fatal mistake. They should be getting behind Tulsi instead.

The one last hope for the Democratic party is the candidate who voted against impeachment? How could she possibly win the general election if the only people who trust her already have Trump as their candidate?

 

[Albion]

Mostly because she is a woman. One of the big reasons McCain did not win against Obama is that he picked Palin as his running mate. Really bad idea for a Republican with a conservative base to pick a woman as a running mate.

No, McCain was looking like a probable loser on the eve of his choice of a running mate and he needed to pull some rabbit out of his hat. Palin was a woman (a presumed strength) and a governor (always considered an asset in a candidate) and young. Voila.

Palin was not the cause of McCain's defeat, nor was the Democrats' customary savaging of Republican women.

 

[athenken]

No, McCain was looking like a probable loser on the eve of his choice of a running mate and he needed to pull some rabbit out of his hat. Palin was a woman (a presumed strength) and a governor (always considered an asset in a candidate) and young. Voila.

Palin was not the cause of McCain's defeat, nor was the Democrats' customary savaging of Republican women.

I didn't say it was THE reason, it was one of the reasons.

 

[Queller]

With it being this late in the race it would be too little, too late for anyone to throw support behind her. I would say she does to sound the sanest of anyone on that side of the aisle, but she ultimately would never have been elected even if she did get the nomination. Mostly because she is a woman. One of the big reasons McCain did not win against Obama is that he picked Palin as his running mate. Really bad idea for a Republican with a conservative base to pick a woman as a running mate.

I disagree. If McCain had picked a strong, articulate woman as his running mate (say Olympia Snow or Kay Bailey Hutchinson) he would have stood a much better chance. He picked Palin to pander to the far-right of the party and she was a disaster and most probably cost him the moderate and independent voters that he needed to win the election.

 

[Albion]

I disagree. If McCain had picked a strong, articulate woman as his running mate (say Olympia Snow or Kay Bailey Hutchinson) he would have stood a much better chance. He picked Palin to pander to the far-right of the party and she was a disaster and most probably cost him the moderate and independent voters that he needed to win the election.

Yes, there probably were other choices, but Olympia Snow and Kay Bailey Hutchinson could not have made the appeal to young voters which was part of the reasoning. Nor was either of them the dynamic speaker that McCain needed in order to offset his own lock of charisma.

We should not forget, either, that it was McCain, not Palin, who was the greater weight on the ticket and contributed to it losing the election. People today forget this fact, partially because McCain became a venerated saint to liberal Democrats the minute that Trump and he became rivals. Those people had never had a good word to say about McCain prior to the Trump era.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Yes, there probably were other choices, but Olympia Snow and Kay Bailey Hutchinson could not have made the appeal to young voters which was part of the reasoning. Nor was either of them the dynamic speaker that McCain needed in order to offset his own lock of charisma.

We should not forget, either, that it was McCain, not Palin, who was the greater weight on the ticket and contributed to it losing the election. People today forget this fact, partially because McCain became a venerated saint to liberal Democrats the minute that Trump and he became rivals. Those people had never had a good word to say about McCain prior to the Trump era.

It would never have mattered who McCain picked as running mate, he was never getting my vote.

 

[grasping the after wind]

I didn't say it was THE reason, it was one of the reasons.

I think he would have lost by more without Palin. She probably brought in a few conservative voters that saw McCain as a Rhino and would otherwise have skipped the election altogether. McCain campaigned like he was intending to vote for Obama.

 

[Albion]

McCain campaigned like he was intending to vote for Obama.

and basically gave up on his campaign weeks before election day.

 

[Queller]

Yes, there probably were other choices, but Olympia Snow and Kay Bailey Hutchinson could not have made the appeal to young voters which was part of the reasoning. Nor was either of them the dynamic speaker that McCain needed in order to offset his own lock of charisma.

You think Palin is/was a dynamic speaker?

We should not forget, either, that it was McCain, not Palin, who was the greater weight on the ticket and contributed to it losing the election. People today forget this fact, partially because McCain became a venerated saint to liberal Democrats the minute that Trump and he became rivals. Those people had never had a good word to say about McCain prior to the Trump era.

I don't agree at all. McCain was long respected by Democrats (and Republicans) as someone willing to work across the aisle if he felt that was in the best interests of the country. He was never one to toe the party line just because it was the party line.

 

[Albion]

BRAIN FREEZE?: What Democrats Said About McCain That They Now Want You to Forget — Remember These?

 

[Queller]

BRAIN FREEZE?: What Democrats Said About McCain That They Now Want You to Forget — Remember These?

ROFL. You want to compare what is said during an election battle vs what is said afterwards? Let's talk about what people like Lindsey Graham had to say about Donald Trump when they were fighting for the nomination versus what Graham says about Trump now.

None of the quotes in the linked article come close to attacking John McCain the man. Do they attack his policies? Absolutely. What else would you expect? But they never came close to saying things about McCain that Donald Trump has. If you actually watched the debates between Obama and McCain you could tell that despite differences in political ideology, Obama respected John McCain as a person. You certainly can't say the same about Trump's opinion of McCain.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

McCain was running as a pro-war candidate running in a country that had become war weary. The electorate, in the last three elections, rejected the avowed pro-war candidate in favor of one who called for bringing the troops home - and bringing the troops home is still so hard to do...

...because of the deep state. That's what needs to be dealt with.

 

[Sketcher]

It is too late for anyone except Biden or Sanders, the field is set and too many delegates are committed. She may have not officially conceded the campaign, but she cannot get enough delegates at this point based on her poling positions and support from the party executives. Her best chance is to hope for landing the running mate spot with whoever wins. I could see her running with Biden as a fairly strong ticket.

They're too far apart on key issues. I doubt that will happen.