Who will become the face of the Democratic Party in 2020?

Jump to Last Post 1-7 of 7 discussions (70 posts)
  1. Ken Burgess profile image92
    Ken Burgessposted 6 weeks ago

    A serious question, posed more to those who identify as Democrats.  I would really like to know who you believe will come forth with a message of unification, prosperity, and a positive outlook toward the future... someone mainstream Americans could believe in.

    1. Ken Burgess profile image92
      Ken Burgessposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      I would like to think someone would come forth who presents a platform, a political agenda that people could get behind.

      Something more than 'vote for me if you hate Trump', or 'vote for me because I will protect abortion/illegal immigrants/choose-your-minority-group'.

      I believe that many mainstream Americans will have grown tired of Trump by 2020.  Don't mistake me, I don't think they are falling for CNN's alternate reality reporting, I don't think the majority are gullible enough to believe any of the Russian tripe, or the Racist rants, I just don't think that impacts the majority... you have to be on the far left to lend any of that garbage credibility, or waste any of your time worrying about it.

      But I do think the majority will be tired of the constant battling and bickering, the constant tweeting and ego-stroking, to be willing to consider someone who comes along and presents a more mild mannered, thoughtful, and intelligent persona.

      It could be someone of Hispanic descent, it could be someone with little political background/experience, but it has to be someone with charisma, and a positive message that people will be drawn to.

      Yes Trump took mud-slinging and hard-hitting to new levels no one living had seen in American politics, and that was what worked for that moment in time in America.  I believe America will be looking for something different in 2020... but I have yet to see anyone who will be in the running in 2020 that I think can deliver it for the Democrats.

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the … 0-ranked-3

      1. PrettyPanther profile image84
        PrettyPantherposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        It is interesting that Beto O'Rourke is not mentioned in the article, or did I miss it?

        I personally have no preconceived notion of who would best serve as President or who might rise to the top. There are several I could get behind, but sometimes how they handle themselves during the rigors of campaigning can be revealing and change my opinion. Also, a candidate's ability to select excellent staff and run an efficient, well-oiled campaign can be indicative of leadership ability and good decision making..

        Let's face it, the policy differences won't be that dramatic among most of them, so I will be looking for character, poise, intelligence, compassion, common sense, vigor, and ability to lead and inspire.

        Those qualities will be revealed as we learn more about them. I do like my Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley, but I would not describe him as charismatic.

        Senator Jeff Merkley, a Quiet Stalwart of the Left, Has a Breakout Moment at the Border

        1. Ken Burgess profile image92
          Ken Burgessposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this



          I have not seen him mentioned in any of the recent potential Dem candidate articles I have read, or Gillum for that matter.

          I know both were heavily funded by billionaires that hoped their charisma and D.C. outsider qualities could fast track them to the 2020 Presidential election... but as they both lost their elections I'm skeptical that they can get the backing to take a shot at it.



          I fully support that, and to my mind that is not Clinton or Biden or any of the lifer D.C. politicians the DNC seems to want to wheel out again for another go at it.

          I would at least like an option to consider, an alternative to contemplate, not some archaic corrupt politician that has nothing to offer us but more divisiveness and lies.

          1. PrettyPanther profile image84
            PrettyPantherposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            I think everyone desires that, except for those who profit from the corruption and divisiveness.

        2. Sharlee01 profile image89
          Sharlee01posted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

          "Let's face it, the policy differences won't be that dramatic among most of them, so I will be looking for character, poise, intelligence, compassion, common sense, vigor, and ability to lead and inspire."

          I found this statement interesting. You did not mention an interest in what a candidate offered in the way of agenda?

          1. PrettyPanther profile image84
            PrettyPantherposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

            Yes, their agenda matters, but generally speaking, Democratic candidates' agendas are usually not that far apart from each other. That is why I said, "Let's face it, the policy differences won't be that dramatic. " When it was Obama versus Clinton, for example, the policy differences were minimal. The differences were greater with Bernie versus Clinton, but still pretty close in most major areas.

      2. Credence2 profile image82
        Credence2posted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

        What gets me about you, Ken, is that if we don't all buy into the conservative, right wing dogma, we are thus being deceived by the entirety  of mass media?

        Since you are not on the receiving end of Trump's race baiting and rants, it is irrelevant to you, but that perspective is not held univerasally and that will hurt Trump in the future.

        You are right that a more congenial candidate will need to replace Trump if anything in Washington is ever to be accomplished. Someone who can work both sides of the isle and master the art of compromise in a way beyond mere "lip service" is desperately needed.

        Political realities change like the weather, out of relative nowhere came Jimmy Carter or Barack Obama. I know which direction I want to see the Dems move in, as to who will take up mantle could well be a surprise to us all.

        Trump has hurt the Republican Party and the Brand. Both style and substance are important in the real political world.

    2. crankalicious profile image92
      crankaliciousposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      Ken,

      An excellent question. I'd like to think that the Democrats could find somebody who was fiscally conservative, but socially liberal, and could appeal to working class white males in some way (rather than alienating them by attempting to corral the Latino vote and the female vote).

      Do I think the current Democratic Party can pull this off? I do not. I have zero faith that the current powers-that-be have any clue. Now, what is the cause of this? As you point out: money. I'm not sure we're ever going to get the politicians we want because they're all bought and paid for by somebody. There are a few, I think, like Bernie Sanders, who try to keep their support dollars clean, but it's tough for them to break through the system.

      I strongly suspect that, like Trump, somebody will emerge from outside the Democratic Party system who we haven't heard of yet.

      1. PrettyPanther profile image84
        PrettyPantherposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        I think there is a grave misconception that an outsider can change the system. Short of a revolution, change must come from within. Campaign finance reform is a must. If we don't find a way to get big money out of politics, nothing of great substance will change. We must demand our legislators, who work for us, do something about money in politics.

        1. wilderness profile image98
          wildernessposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          Good luck with that!  When those same legislators are there specifically for the money rather than for the country or its people, you're going to have a tough row to how to get the money out of politics.

          1. crankalicious profile image92
            crankaliciousposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            I agree. An almost impossible task. However, wouldn't it be something both Democrats and Republicans could agree on? Somehow limit money in politics?

            Or is that a infringement on free speech?

    3. Credence2 profile image82
      Credence2posted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

      Well, Ken, that depends on what you believe is mainstream. Your concept of "mainstream" does not mesh with mine. Trump for me is an abomination, but for you and other conservatives, he is "mainstream"?

      Trump anything other than unification and prosperity, what we see that is passing as "prosperity" is just "smoke and mirrors" for now.

      I am tired of the "establishment" Dems that are part of the machine I.e, Clinton or Biden. I support people like Liz Warren or Beto O'Rourke.

      1. Ken Burgess profile image92
        Ken Burgessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

        Follow the money Credence.  Liz Warren and Beto O'Rourke are just puppets of those pulling the strings.

        I believe you have gone so far down the rabbit hole proffered to you by the likes of CNN and MSNBC that any type of factual evidence that goes against their tripe and propaganda you would brush off as 'alt-right' or 'Trumpian'.   

        You have succumbed to the 'if they ain't with us, they're against us' mindset, but that's OK, because I see what is occurring in other countries, as well as track what is going on in this one (I don't rely on our MSM which keeps us blind to most things).

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RncVMTQswYA

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDNq4yxEesc

        Revolution is coming, to several countries, which foreshadow what will occur here, only here in America the population is armed to the teeth.

    4. crowsnest profile image60
      crowsnestposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

      I don't identify as a Democrat, but I think Democrats would be smart to get behind Beto. I don't believe Warren has a chance at this point to defeat Trump in 2020.

      1. Credence2 profile image82
        Credence2posted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

        Crowsnest, I stick with Warren as the balance between the 'old guard' i.e., Clinton and Biden and the new populist Left that I prefer the party to move in, i.e Bernie Sanders. She has the experience, speaking out for progressive values over many years and has been tested. Having impeccable credentials and an uncompromising style, that is what is needed to play hard ball in the Era of Trump. Beto has the right stuff, but I need more heft at this moment to defeat the Rightwinger and all his minions.

    5. paradigmsearch profile image87
      paradigmsearchposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

      In all seriousness, find out who President Obama approves/likes. Whoever he endorses, that's the person.

      I don't identify with any political party, but I'm hoping a sincere response is ok anyway. smile

      1. Ken Burgess profile image92
        Ken Burgessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

        I don't think Obama has much say in the matter, to tell the truth.

        I think Billionaires who will fund the campaign efforts, people like Soros and Steyer who are incredibly active in American politics and pour hundreds of millions into elections are the ones who will decide.

        1. PrettyPanther profile image84
          PrettyPantherposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

          Which billionaires decided on Trump?

          1. Ken Burgess profile image92
            Ken Burgessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

            Trump did of course, he was largely self funded, with some grass roots donations, until the RNC had no choice but to get behind (to the degree that they did) his nomination and allow him access to the troth.

            1. PrettyPanther profile image84
              PrettyPantherposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

              Okay, so you acknowledge that the people still can choose their own presidential candidate, despite the wishes of big money donors?

              1. Ken Burgess profile image92
                Ken Burgessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

                If you will acknowledge that politicians like Gillum and O'Rourke would not achieve more than town/county level recognition without someone like Soros, funding their campaigns with millions of dollars.

                And when you dance with the devil, and take his treasure, he owns your soul (or in this situation, all the big decisions you make politically).

                If so, then I can agree people still can choose their own presidential candidate, from the ones who are funded and able to run.

                1. crankalicious profile image92
                  crankaliciousposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Isn't that how our system works on both sides? You're either taking money from Soros or from the Koch brothers, right?

                  1. Ken Burgess profile image92
                    Ken Burgessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

                    And in Trump's case, he took money from neither, both Koch and Soros directed funding to those running against his campaign.

                    It was a rare occurrence in our more recent National history for sure, I don't expect it will be repeated in our lifetimes.  Where someone who has enough wealth funds his own campaign, and has the personality and wit to garner enough votes to get elected.

                    He is a legitimate outsider, he is not beholden to either Soros or Koch, or any lobbying party.  He is not beholden to either party, or anyone in them.

                2. PrettyPanther profile image84
                  PrettyPantherposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

                  It works that way on both sides.  That's why we need campaign finance reform, unless you believe buying candidates is a form of free speech.

  2. abwilliams profile image30
    abwilliamsposted 6 weeks ago

    I guess the Dems, which seem to be well represented here at HP, can’t think of a single one Ken.
    At this point, I do not think the Dems need to find a candidate who can deliver, they’ll just need to find someone willing to be the face of the Democratic Party and the Party will take it from there, they’ll deliver!

    Maybe you will get some feedback now.

    1. PrettyPanther profile image84
      PrettyPantherposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      My four-paragraph response does not constitute feedback? That's a new one.

    2. Valeant profile image97
      Valeantposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

      Actually, the Dems here like myself, have just chosen to block the far-right conspiracy theorists like Ken that refuse to accept the mounting evidence of Trump's crimes committed to get elected.  So these posts just don't show up on our feed.

      1. Ken Burgess profile image92
        Ken Burgessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

        Wow... I'm a far right conspiracy theorist?

        Shows how tight those blinders have gotten on far-left progressives  when they are labeling me with that.

        As I told Credence in this thread, you have fully bought into "if you aren't with us, then you are against us" mantra, if you don't buy into the 'progressive' propaganda, then you are the enemy.  The current 'Dems' of today don't respect any opinion, or any person, not onboard with their group-think.

        If we had Clinton as President right now, and had continued on track with TPP, the Paris Accord, taxation of those who could not afford ACA insurance, etc. then this would be us (only worse):

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovmLNM-HN5E

        Maybe we would have been better off with that after all.

        1. JAKE Earthshine profile image80
          JAKE Earthshineposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

          In case you haven't noticed Ken, there are many 'alt-right wing conspiracy theorists' on HubPages and they will jeopardize this sites very existence because this type of delusional, non-fact based craziness is no longer tolerated by the masses:

        2. Valeant profile image97
          Valeantposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

          The 'if you aren't with us, you're against us' mantra is being spewed daily from the White House.  Talk about having blinders on to be able to ignore that message.  This is not a president for the people, but a president for his base only.  So, pardon us Dems if we are tired of the regurgitation of White House propaganda and lying we see here at Hubpages.

          If we're comparing France to the US, considering it's a Democratic policy to tax the rich at higher rates, perhaps it would have been a large group of millionaires out in the streets rioting.  In case you haven't noticed, now that Trump's policies are taking hold, the stock market is having its worst year since the 2008 crash, farmers needed a 12 billion dollar bailout thanks to tariffs, unemployment numbers that had been going down since Obama was president have finally gone as low as they are going to, to prove that point - job gains are down on average 13% per month since Obama left office.

          So, in actual reality, the stability and constant growth in the markets you see under a Democratic president are now gone thanks to the stable genius.

          1. wilderness profile image98
            wildernessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

            "This is not a president for the people, but a president for his base only.  "

            Sounds like you're trying to say that because Trump does not embrace the failed policies and agendas of the left he isn't for "the people".  You insist he follow your wants and desires rather than his own or that of anyone else; in that manner only can he be "for the people".

            Yes?

            1. Valeant profile image97
              Valeantposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

              Not trying to say that at all, actually.  And how does stability in the markets and constant growth equate to failed policies exactly?  How does tripling the stock market equate exactly?  How does a net decline in the undocumented immigrant population by one million, including the deportation of criminals as a priority equate to failed policies.

              The only failure here is to do some independent research to know that the propaganda you're being fed is lies and that the problems of this country are borne of both parties, not just the party Trump is not a part of.

              Your reply exacerbates why many of us lend no credence to what you guys are saying.  It's all just a blame game for your party.  When you can take some ownership of the problems, considering you had control of all three branches of government for two years, that'd be great.  Hate crimes up.  Gas prices up.  Deficit up.  Damage the environment way up.  Health care costs up.  Own it.

              1. wilderness profile image98
                wildernessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

                "Not trying to say that at all, actually."

                Then what are you saying when you complain he is only for his base rather than "the people"?

            2. PrettyPanther profile image84
              PrettyPantherposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

              It's interesting what you choose to address from Valeant's post. Trump has never been the people's President; the majority of voters didn't want him, and even more disapprove of him after watching his incompetence for two years.

              His policies are taking effect, and as Valeant pointed out, the improving Obama economy is now a declining Trump economy.

              I'm not too worried, though, as I expect him to be gone after the 2020  election, if not sooner. "Individual 1" is a short-timer.

              1. wilderness profile image98
                wildernessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

                My comment was along the lines of massive partisanship; "If you aren't doing what I think should be done you aren't for the people at all.  Only when one embraces the left (or the right, depending on who is speaking) are you for 'the people'."

              2. Ken Burgess profile image92
                Ken Burgessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this



                It is a sentiment I would be likely to agree with except for a couple things.

                First, if all they have to bring out to replace Trump is Clinton or Biden or any of the other lifelong corrupt D.C. hacks, then no... clearly if the DNC thinks people will want that type of politician they fail to understand what people saw in the likes of Bernie and Trump, and will lose again, even to Trump.

                Secondly, if these fools (Pelosi, Waters, etc.) do spend the next two years dragging America through more investigations, impeachment proceedings, and just being as idiotic and obstructionist as they can be, then Trump is a lock to be re-elected.

                And I really think, as ignorant as you feel Trump is, Pelosi, Waters and the rest of those imbeciles will prove up to the challenge of being even more idiotic than Trump, making him look good in comparison.

                1. crankalicious profile image92
                  crankaliciousposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Ken, I kind of think you're a kook on a lot of things and imagine you in a tin foil hat, but I generally agree with the above statement. People are clamoring for people who will tell the truth and buck the system and if the Dems just offer up somebody safe, born of party politics, they are likely to lose.

                  Unless Trump is in jail, which seems increasingly likely.

                  1. Ken Burgess profile image92
                    Ken Burgessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

                    I would say that anyone who thinks I am a "kook" or wearing a "tinfoil hat" merely doesn't have the perception, experiences, and/or capability to see the bigger picture(s).

                    I understand that those who cannot grasp the larger implications of the occurrences around us, or who have a very limited scope of experience and wisdom, would have difficulty with some of the larger more in depth analysis and discussions I engage in.

                    And as arrogant and condescending as that may appear, it is not intended to be.  There are people far more intelligent and with greater knowledge of these matters than I, I do not mean to suggest otherwise.  But equally there are those that are that much less informed and well traveled.

                    Today's issues revolve around whether or not we are going to continue with nation states. Whether America will actually be ruled by the Constitution, by the Bill of Rights, or whether it is going to be superseded by International Law (the UN, WB, IMF), unelected and unresponsive aristocratic elites.

                    What is in store for America we can see transpiring in the EU, where unelected officials control the EU, and could care less about the wants or needs of the various 'national' populations.  We can see hundreds of thousands rioting against this type of rule in France, been going on for weeks now, not that our own media gives it much attention.

                    This is the bottom line of the difference between 'conservatism' and 'progressive' movements today... whether those who are choosing sides understand it or not... we are in a battle between globalists and nationalists, between open borders and controlled borders, between keeping what you earn or the government controlling everything and anything in your life.

                    These general but encompassing differences, may be masked by smaller more specific issues be they LGBTQ or Abortion, ultimately they are not the major issues, they are just wedge issues used to push people into supporting what will ultimately be either their enslavement to an unstoppable, uncontrollable International force lorded over by the infinitely wealthy and powerful... or the continued existence of America as a Sovereign state.

                2. PrettyPanther profile image84
                  PrettyPantherposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

                  "First, if all they have to bring out to replace Trump is Clinton or Biden or any of the other lifelong corrupt D.C. hacks, then no... clearly if the DNC thinks people will want that type of politician they fail to understand what people saw in the likes of Bernie and Trump, and will lose again, even to Trump. "

                  Well, let's not forget that, ultimately, the voters choose the candidate who rises to the top. (Trump, anyone?) And if there is one good result from the Trump presidency, it's that it energized the opposition. If younger voters and women turn out in greater numbers like they did in the midterms, then the chances of ending up with Biden are pretty slim.

                  "Secondly, if these fools (Pelosi, Waters, etc.) do spend the next two years dragging America through more investigations, impeachment proceedings, and just being as idiotic and obstructionist as they can be, then Trump is a lock to be re-elected."

                  I hate to break it to you, but most voters wanted a check on Trump, and that was a big factor in the success of Dems in the midterms. I can almost guarantee there will be no impeachment proceedings unless the Republicans are on board. As for investigations, the people spoke and elections have consequences. We expect our legislators to hold this corrupt administration accountable.

                  "And I really think, as ignorant as you feel Trump is, Pelosi, Waters and the rest of those imbeciles will prove up to the challenge of being even more idiotic than Trump, making him look good in comparison."

                  We'll see, won't we? One of the three will be gone by 2020 and I don't think it will be Pelosi or Waters. Pelosi is smart and skilled in the machinations of politics, just like wily old Mitch McConnell. I'm not saying I like it that wily political savvy is a necessary quality for a party leader but, right now, all many of us Americans want is to rid ourselves of this embarrassing, corrupt, incompetent administration.

          2. Ken Burgess profile image92
            Ken Burgessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this



            See, this (above) right here is what I call propaganda, it falls under the 'tell a lie often enough and it becomes the truth'.

            You may actually be brainwashed into believing that to be true, but it is demonstratively false, the ACA (obamacare) tax alone proves this.  The ACA did nothing if not make it easier for insurance and big pharma corporations get richer at middle and lower income persons expense.

            And how exactly is taxing those who could not afford to pay for health insurance for NOT having health insurance actually a tax on the rich?

            Hmmm... the rich can afford their own private insurance, so they don't need to deal with the ACA at all, they don't need to worry about preconditions, and they don't need to worry about paying a tax for not having insurance.

            Boy those Democrats sure showed the Republicans how to stick it to the rich with that ACA... mmm hmmm... man the Insurance and Medical Industries never made so much money, they are richer than ever... but those poor working stiffs got shafted with Insurance that covered nothing AND a new Tax!!!



            There is a provable correlation between Trump taking office and the economy going into overdrive. But I know no amount of facts will dissuade you from your propaganda fed delusions.  For everyone else, it is clear that nothing, not the stock market, not hiring, was energized until Obama was out and it was clear Clinton wasn't following in his footsteps.

            Wages have gone up, unemployment is down.  What will impact that now are the trade wars, the Democratic House, the international efforts to stem Trump's efforts and progress, etc.

            But if you think this booming economy is bad... you have no clue what is going on in the rest of the world.  Not only are they rioting in France and Germany, but China's stock market has fallen to HALF where it was a year ago, compared to any other nation, we are exceptionally well off economically.

            Only those with blinders on do not realize our economy is doing better than it has in decades, and far better than any other nation in the world right now.

  3. abwilliams profile image30
    abwilliamsposted 6 weeks ago

    For some reason, it did not show up in my feed until now PP, my apologies.

    1. PrettyPanther profile image84
      PrettyPantherposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      No worries. I was a bit perplexed. smile

  4. abwilliams profile image30
    abwilliamsposted 6 weeks ago

    Carry on. smile

  5. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image97
    Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 weeks ago

    https://hubstatic.com/14318884.jpg

    Found the face.

    1. Ken Burgess profile image92
      Ken Burgessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

      Yeah, he was THE major supporter of O'Rourke and Gillum.

      I watch what is going on now in France, and I wonder if that is exactly where America would have been (or worse) if Clinton had won, with the ACA taxes, additional taxes placed on fuel for the Paris Accord agreement, the regulations left in place from Obama that were forcing companies to flee the country, the TPP, etc. etc.

      https://www.wsj.com/video/frances-yello … 8377C.html

      Instead of having record low unemployment, wage increases, and lower than ever gas prices (paid just $2.03 for gas the other day) we would be heading fast into another recession, brought on by criminally negligent and corrupt politicians with the worst of them in the White House.

      We dodged that bullet, but who knows how long this upswing can last now that the Democrats have gained control of the House.

  6. Onusonus profile image77
    Onusonusposted 5 weeks ago

    I heard Creepy Joe is about all they can muster at the moment.
    https://www.insideedition.com/sites/default/files/styles/931x523/public/images/2015-02/9746.jpg?itok=iKBHsDd_

    1. Ken Burgess profile image92
      Ken Burgessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

      Its incredible how someone like that can show his perversions right in public and get away with it.



      https://hubstatic.com/14320419.jpg

      1. Onusonus profile image77
        Onusonusposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

        Well it is the same party that made Hillary their front runner during the last election cycle.

        But lets not forget that the Republicans are the party of old white men. lol

        1. Credence2 profile image82
          Credence2posted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

          "But lets not forget that the Republicans are the party of old white men"

          Right, LET'S NOT........

          1. Onusonus profile image77
            Onusonusposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

            Democrats always seem to miss the irony in that one.

      2. crankalicious profile image92
        crankaliciousposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

        I find it beyond amazing that President Trump talks about grabbing pu**y, walks in on teenagers as they undress during pageants, has evidently had sex with at least one porn star and one Playboy playmate while married, and paid both of those women to keep quiet (and I won't even mention getting urinated on in Russia), but he's the hero and Joe Biden is the one with the problem? What precisely has Joe Biden ever been accused of and or prosecuted for?

  7. hard sun profile image90
    hard sunposted 3 weeks ago

    Has anyone mentioned Jay Inslee? He was a pioneer in thinking like the "Green New Deal" proposed by Ocasio-Cortez.  Also, Washington State seems in decent shape. I just visited last year, and the area I grew up is booming.

    Also, I hate to say this because it's identity politics at its core, but I think Dems must have a white man to win as President the next go around. I just think a decent portion of Americans see any liberal who is not a white man as a representation of an ideology as opposed to someone to vote for or truly help the country. Yes, it's racism and misogyny, but it's also the extremism coming from the left that seems to advocate nothing but a minority or woman will do.

    Of course, O'rourk is running well in Democratic polling also. I'm not as big on him as some are, just from watching a couple short speeches, but I still don't know too much about him.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)