I could not recite the names of all of these candidates if I ever had to. It has gotten beyond silly. Let’s hope some of these people start dropping away soon. No, I don’t have any in mind, partly because of the conditions I stated in my first sentence.
The problem with this many candidates is the lengths many of them will have to go to to get noticed. There’s only so much funding to go around and it’s starting to line up behind the more viable candidates. Hopefully the field will be down to a reasonable number soon. Otherwise some of these nitwits will be promising us a million bucks each and the ability to fly like Superman.
Well, at last count there were 24 – which is one less than were on the Republican primary ballot in 2015 at the first primary election. So, not so very much more crowded than historically.
I saw a claim that there were “only about 5 real candidates” – care to elaborate which 5 you think are “real”? I bet 10 Democrats would create 10 different lists!
@OldCoal and @martens, I agree. This is about positioning the party as much as it is people running themselves up the flagpole, so to speak.
We’re already seeing some polarization taking place, I think:
1. The “leftists” – the people I think of as actual liberals, and none of them are “socialists” offering “free stuff” — that’s just ignorant on Ariail’s part: Warren, Harris, Sanders. Pretty much all in the FDR/New Deal tradition, with incremental progressive movement. A subsection of them are pushing hard on voters’ rights
2. The “young white guy” – Beto, Mayor Pete, and their ilk: socially liberal, but very (too) willing to compromise — I suspect this is old politics in a new package for the most part, and they’d be willing to go along with the powers that be or cave to the GOP hard-liners. (Mayor Pete reminds me of a gay Romney, if you look at his history.) As white guys, they’re “safer” candidates, but have a veneer of progressivism. “Hey, I know he bulldozed people’s homes who got screwed over by mortgage companies, but look, he’s gay!”
3. The old Democrats: Joe “I’m the adult in the race” Biden. Entitled old-party hacks, centrist Republicans in Democratic clothing (remembering that Obama’s positions weren’t far from George H. W. Bush). Relative to current positioning, Joe is precisely where Jeb Bush was at this time in 2015, and I wouldn’t weep to see him get hammered in Iowa and New Hampshire, but he probably won’t.
Robert, I would like you to post a link to one Democratic candidate that has said they want open borders. This challenge also goes out to all the trump supporters. I will be waiting.
“Simplism” to such an extent as to bring about distortion, misunderstanding, and error is Ariail’s sole forte. His sole goal is to feed the fire, not contain it, much less extinguish it. That’s not objective journalism; that’s provocative disinformation intended to obscure the truth. Shame on him.
As the toddler in chief throws a temper tantrum today saying there will be no infrastructure improvements until ALL investigations are stopped. I’ll take anyone in your can of sardines Mr. Ariail over this idiot.
Ariail should be willing to give up his “free stuff” – don’t drive on public roads, don’t call the police or fire department, pay for your own water outside of municipal sources, don’t accept any public education, don’t go to the library, etc.
Education, healthcare, food, housing need to be supported. Amazing that the alleged “family values” “Christians” care more for the rich than the poor, the opposite of what Jesus would do.
The ingredients list would never pass the FDA test, even as it’s now being run. Not one Democrat (nor Bernie) advocates “open borders”. And of course, “Socialism” is an entirely different beast from “Communism” on one side and “Democratic Socialism” on the other. I agree that the rest of it’s fairly on point:
Green New Deal: Yup. We want to have a discussion about how to cope with the current state of denial about climate change. It’s not a policy, it’s a talking point.
Higher taxes: Yup: On the excessively rich. And on corporations that currently pay little or no tax… or even get credits against taxes that exceed the amount they might have paid.
Medicare for All: Only a GOPist can imagine that not providing health care for citizens is a good thing. We’re the last of the “advanced” nations to adopt such an idea and our health outcomes show that contrary to what the GOP (and health corporations) trumpet, we are not doing it right!
Free Stuff: Well, no. But stuff we want from the taxes we pay as opposed to stuff that just makes the excessively rich even more excessive. Things like the insane (literally) amount of military spending. How about, instead, we see to it that no US citizen graduates from college with more debt than 1/4 the full price of a house in the community where they went to school. And make the interest be no more than the annual amount of inflation.
Identity politics: Yup. Politics based on the people who actually live here. I fail to see how this is in any way a bad thing. Seriously. Are you a white, male, assterisk? Vote for GOPist candidate. Are you hispanic? Vote for someone who speaks your language. Totally OK.
The Republicans have been playing the “white, male (only, not women) identity” card for years. It’s time we REALLY called them on it, our politicians talking around it.
The real scare, and danger, is that Republicans started with 16 jerks, and we ended up with the worst of ‘em. Of course, Dems still have to reach a lot deeper in the barrel to find anything as slimy and corrupt as Bonespurs.
Darsan54 Premium Member almost 5 years ago
Don’t worry. The field will be winnowed down soon.
Say What Now‽ Premium Member almost 5 years ago
Don’t open that if you don’t want an educated and healthy population!
wiatr almost 5 years ago
I could not recite the names of all of these candidates if I ever had to. It has gotten beyond silly. Let’s hope some of these people start dropping away soon. No, I don’t have any in mind, partly because of the conditions I stated in my first sentence.
DaBoogadie almost 5 years ago
It’s good to have choices. Limiting the number of those choices…bad, very bad.
guyjen2004 Premium Member almost 5 years ago
The problem with this many candidates is the lengths many of them will have to go to to get noticed. There’s only so much funding to go around and it’s starting to line up behind the more viable candidates. Hopefully the field will be down to a reasonable number soon. Otherwise some of these nitwits will be promising us a million bucks each and the ability to fly like Superman.
mourdac Premium Member almost 5 years ago
Do not, under any circumstances, open the ’Con alternative without a hazmat suit.
Stephen Runnels Premium Member almost 5 years ago
The sad part is that Ariail most likely believes the nonsense he gets from Limbaugh and foxnews personalities.
wirepunchr almost 5 years ago
It looks like the can got relabeled from 2016. Hopefully the results will be different.
rossevrymn almost 5 years ago
Short on material, are we?
Alberta Oil Premium Member almost 5 years ago
The length some will go to.. for a brief moment in front of a camera…
Coopersdad almost 5 years ago
Any Democrat is better than the turd in the White House!!!
Radish the wordsmith almost 5 years ago
Only socialist tax cuts for billionaires are allowed under republican rule.
john_chubb almost 5 years ago
Well, at last count there were 24 – which is one less than were on the Republican primary ballot in 2015 at the first primary election. So, not so very much more crowded than historically.
I saw a claim that there were “only about 5 real candidates” – care to elaborate which 5 you think are “real”? I bet 10 Democrats would create 10 different lists!
VadimUzdensky1 almost 5 years ago
Free Stuff. I have a problem with the word ´stuff´. Education, Transportation, and Healthcare are human rights, not stuff.
Motivemagus almost 5 years ago
@OldCoal and @martens, I agree. This is about positioning the party as much as it is people running themselves up the flagpole, so to speak.
We’re already seeing some polarization taking place, I think:
1. The “leftists” – the people I think of as actual liberals, and none of them are “socialists” offering “free stuff” — that’s just ignorant on Ariail’s part: Warren, Harris, Sanders. Pretty much all in the FDR/New Deal tradition, with incremental progressive movement. A subsection of them are pushing hard on voters’ rights
2. The “young white guy” – Beto, Mayor Pete, and their ilk: socially liberal, but very (too) willing to compromise — I suspect this is old politics in a new package for the most part, and they’d be willing to go along with the powers that be or cave to the GOP hard-liners. (Mayor Pete reminds me of a gay Romney, if you look at his history.) As white guys, they’re “safer” candidates, but have a veneer of progressivism. “Hey, I know he bulldozed people’s homes who got screwed over by mortgage companies, but look, he’s gay!”
3. The old Democrats: Joe “I’m the adult in the race” Biden. Entitled old-party hacks, centrist Republicans in Democratic clothing (remembering that Obama’s positions weren’t far from George H. W. Bush). Relative to current positioning, Joe is precisely where Jeb Bush was at this time in 2015, and I wouldn’t weep to see him get hammered in Iowa and New Hampshire, but he probably won’t.
quixotic3 almost 5 years ago
…any one of which would be infinitely better than the dotard.
streetbeater almost 5 years ago
Ariail is supposed to be a centrist. I guess he decided to show his true colors.
I suppose the Republicans crowd in ’12 was better, Bob. After all, look at what floated to the top.
Mr. Blawt almost 5 years ago
Socialism = benefits for the middle class
green new deal = lowering pollution to help our environment
higher taxes = for billionaires who pay little or nothing
open borders = no more killing children in cages
medicare for all = healthcare as a right
free stuff = a society that respects more than CEOs and Corporations getting free stuff
Identity politics = equality
Sounds good to me, just don’t let the whiny conservative write your label for you.
walkingmancomics almost 5 years ago
“Socialism”— like the government paying farmers who can’t sell their produce because of tariffs imposed by the government?
Kurtass Premium Member almost 5 years ago
Robert, I would like you to post a link to one Democratic candidate that has said they want open borders. This challenge also goes out to all the trump supporters. I will be waiting.
cocavan11 almost 5 years ago
“Simplism” to such an extent as to bring about distortion, misunderstanding, and error is Ariail’s sole forte. His sole goal is to feed the fire, not contain it, much less extinguish it. That’s not objective journalism; that’s provocative disinformation intended to obscure the truth. Shame on him.
Bryan Farht almost 5 years ago
It’s just the FREEDOM of choice. Is that no longer allowed?
Union Man almost 5 years ago
As the toddler in chief throws a temper tantrum today saying there will be no infrastructure improvements until ALL investigations are stopped. I’ll take anyone in your can of sardines Mr. Ariail over this idiot.
AndrewSihler almost 5 years ago
“Platitudes”??!! From where I sit, Publican rhetoric consists of nothing but platitudes. Well, also straw men.
Scoutmaster77 almost 5 years ago
False labeling…
Nantucket Premium Member almost 5 years ago
Ariail should be willing to give up his “free stuff” – don’t drive on public roads, don’t call the police or fire department, pay for your own water outside of municipal sources, don’t accept any public education, don’t go to the library, etc.
Education, healthcare, food, housing need to be supported. Amazing that the alleged “family values” “Christians” care more for the rich than the poor, the opposite of what Jesus would do.
Concretionist almost 5 years ago
The ingredients list would never pass the FDA test, even as it’s now being run. Not one Democrat (nor Bernie) advocates “open borders”. And of course, “Socialism” is an entirely different beast from “Communism” on one side and “Democratic Socialism” on the other. I agree that the rest of it’s fairly on point:
Green New Deal: Yup. We want to have a discussion about how to cope with the current state of denial about climate change. It’s not a policy, it’s a talking point.
Higher taxes: Yup: On the excessively rich. And on corporations that currently pay little or no tax… or even get credits against taxes that exceed the amount they might have paid.
Medicare for All: Only a GOPist can imagine that not providing health care for citizens is a good thing. We’re the last of the “advanced” nations to adopt such an idea and our health outcomes show that contrary to what the GOP (and health corporations) trumpet, we are not doing it right!
Free Stuff: Well, no. But stuff we want from the taxes we pay as opposed to stuff that just makes the excessively rich even more excessive. Things like the insane (literally) amount of military spending. How about, instead, we see to it that no US citizen graduates from college with more debt than 1/4 the full price of a house in the community where they went to school. And make the interest be no more than the annual amount of inflation.
Identity politics: Yup. Politics based on the people who actually live here. I fail to see how this is in any way a bad thing. Seriously. Are you a white, male, assterisk? Vote for GOPist candidate. Are you hispanic? Vote for someone who speaks your language. Totally OK.
edward thomas Premium Member almost 5 years ago
The Republicans have been playing the “white, male (only, not women) identity” card for years. It’s time we REALLY called them on it, our politicians talking around it.
Durak Premium Member almost 5 years ago
Wow, an awful lot of work for a rock stupid message.
Dtroutma almost 5 years ago
The real scare, and danger, is that Republicans started with 16 jerks, and we ended up with the worst of ‘em. Of course, Dems still have to reach a lot deeper in the barrel to find anything as slimy and corrupt as Bonespurs.