(11-17-2018, 07:01 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Is Mike Pence Making His Move?
from Daily Kos

As many have noted, Trump seems thoroughly disinterested in even performing the basics of the job as President since the midterm shellacking by Democrats. Reports are that he has become even more isolated and angry, perhaps driven by having to finally confront a reality different from his own version of it.

Trump’s anger may be fueled by worry about what will happen to himself and his family now that Democrats have subpoena power in the House. In addition, it is clear that the Mueller investigation is closing in, perhaps more imminently on Don Jr. than Trump himself right now, but closing in nonetheless. So too are the other investigations into the apparent fraud at the Trump Foundation and the conspiracy to silence women before the election that are currently being pursued in New York, with the latter probably making his domestic life more difficult.

Moreover, the protection racket that Trump has surrounded himself with over the years has taken some enormous hits. Michael Cohen has left the fold and is apparently singing, as are principals with the National Enquirer. Manafort my still be resolute, but Gates, who probably knows everything Manafort knew, is talking. Roger Stone’s operation is increasingly under pressure and there are signs that some in that camp are beginning to fold. There even seems to be a small but growing concern within the Federalist Society that Trump’s shredding of the rule of law has gone too far.

As bad as all that is, there are little hints that the power players in the Republican party may be thinking they have gotten as much out of Trump as they could get. The legislative agenda is dead. They got massacred in the suburbs and only picked up a maximum of two Senate seats in what was the one of most friendly maps in history in last week’s midterms. The next two years portend investigations in multiple areas that will expose massive corruption not only with Trump and his family personally as well within his administration but also with various businesses that have been beneficiaries of that corruption. Those businesses are significant sectors of the party’s donor class.

Additionally, the conservative wing of the party, which is now about all that’s left, may be happy with the last two years of accomplishment but it has never really trusted Trump. With the Democrats now having power in the House, there is a genuine fear that Trump will compromise with the Democrats and squeeze the Republicans in the Senate in order to get a legislative win for himself for 2020. That was surely compounded by Trump’s abandonment of House Republicans before the election and his willingness to consider an infrastructure plan after it.

The party doesn’t need Trump to continue to eliminate regulation and pack the courts with Federalist Society hacks, which is probably about all that can be accomplished in the next two years unless Trump capitulates to Democrats. In fact, there is already someone itching to take that role.

Even in just the few days since the midterms, Mike Pence is using Trump’s disengagement to become a far more forceful figure than we’ve seen before. The Vice President has been active meeting foreign leaders over the last two years but he is now taking that role to a higher level. Pence will be filling in for Trump at both the APEC, ASEAN, and East Asia summits in Asia, the three most important meetings for that region. Pence made the most forceful statement to date from a US official condemning the state-sanctioned violence against the Rohingya minority in Myanmar directly to Aung San Suu Kyi. I doubt that is something we would have heard from Trump, considering his infatuation with authoritarian regimes and inherent racism.

Pence has often strayed off the Trump reservation in order to advance his own interests but has always managed to stay in Trump’s good graces. It is an open secret that Pence and his team have expressed the desire to be prepared for the 2020 election in case Trump did not survive and it appears that Pence has set up his own political operation to prepare for that potentiality. There are some who are already talking like that is a possibility. Jan Brewer, former Arizona governor, recently talked about Pence saying, “We really, really appreciate him leading our party in that respect. His mission is maybe a little bit different than the president, and he is not under attack 24/7 like the president is.” That sounds remarkably like an endorsement.

Back in early September, there was an anonymous op-ed in the NY Times that declared there were people within the Trump administration that were working to “thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations”. At least some in the White House believed that the source of that op-ed was the Vice President’s office. Now the latest rumor is that Chief of Staff John Kelly is once again headed out the door and one of the most mentioned replacements is none other than Pence’s current Chief of Staff, Nick Ayers.

With Trump seemingly focused on simply surviving and reportedly also suffering from serious mental deterioration, it appears that Pence will more and more become the de-facto, behind the scenes leader of this administration. And if things deteriorate so badly that Republicans actually turn on Trump and impeach him, Pence will then be well-prepared to take over in a relatively smooth transition. Unfortunately, the country will have only swapped an autocrat for a theocrat.


My NOTE however: according to his horoscope score of 8-7, he's easier to beat! That would be the big plus! Even Elizabeth Warren might have a chance (although as I say in my video, those would be two candidates with the charisma of a wooden indian-- go Pocahontas!)

(11-18-2018, 06:08 PM)Marypoza Wrote: Eric the GreenIs Mike Pence Making His Move?
from Daily Kos

As many have noted, Trump seems thoroughly disinterested in even performing the basics of the job as President since the midterm shellacking by Democrats. Reports are that he has become even more isolated and angry, perhaps driven by having to finally confront a reality different from his own version of it.

Trump’s anger may be fueled by worry about what will happen to himself and his family now that Democrats have subpoena power in the House. In addition, it is clear that the Mueller investigation is closing in, perhaps more imminently on Don Jr. than Trump himself right now, but closing in nonetheless. So too are the other investigations into the apparent fraud at the Trump Foundation and the conspiracy to silence women before the election that are currently being pursued in New York, with the latter probably making his domestic life more difficult.

Moreover, the protection racket that Trump has surrounded himself with over the years has taken some enormous hits. Michael Cohen has left the fold and is apparently singing, as are principals with the National Enquirer. Manafort my still be resolute, but Gates, who probably knows everything Manafort knew, is talking. Roger Stone’s operation is increasingly under pressure and there are signs that some in that camp are beginning to fold. There even seems to be a small but growing concern within the Federalist Society that Trump’s shredding of the rule of law has gone too far.

As bad as all that is, there are little hints that the power players in the Republican party may be thinking they have gotten as much out of Trump as they could get. The legislative agenda is dead. They got massacred in the suburbs and only picked up a maximum of two Senate seats in what was the one of most friendly maps in history in last week’s midterms. The next two years portend investigations in multiple areas that will expose massive corruption not only with Trump and his family personally as well within his administration but also with various businesses that have been beneficiaries of that corruption. Those businesses are significant sectors of the party’s donor class.

Additionally, the conservative wing of the party, which is now about all that’s left, may be happy with the last two years of accomplishment but it has never really trusted Trump. With the Democrats now having power in the House, there is a genuine fear that Trump will compromise with the Democrats and squeeze the Republicans in the Senate in order to get a legislative win for himself for 2020. That was surely compounded by Trump’s abandonment of House Republicans before the election and his willingness to consider an infrastructure plan after it.

The party doesn’t need Trump to continue to eliminate regulation and pack the courts with Federalist Society hacks, which is probably about all that can be accomplished in the next two years unless Trump capitulates to Democrats. In fact, there is already someone itching to take that role.

Even in just the few days since the midterms, Mike Pence is using Trump’s disengagement to become a far more forceful figure than we’ve seen before. The Vice President has been active meeting foreign leaders over the last two years but he is now taking that role to a higher level. Pence will be filling in for Trump at both the APEC, ASEAN, and East Asia summits in Asia, the three most important meetings for that region. Pence made the most forceful statement to date from a US official condemning the state-sanctioned violence against the Rohingya minority in Myanmar directly to Aung San Suu Kyi. I doubt that is something we would have heard from Trump, considering his infatuation with authoritarian regimes and inherent racism.

Pence has often strayed off the Trump reservation in order to advance his own interests but has always managed to stay in Trump’s good graces. It is an open secret that Pence and his team have expressed the desire to be prepared for the 2020 election in case Trump did not survive and it appears that Pence has set up his own political operation to prepare for that potentiality. There are some who are already talking like that is a possibility. Jan Brewer, former Arizona governor, recently talked about Pence saying, “We really, really appreciate him leading our party in that respect. His mission is maybe a little bit different than the president, and he is not under attack 24/7 like the president is.” That sounds remarkably like an endorsement.

Back in early September, there was an anonymous op-ed in the NY Times that declared there were people within the Trump administration that were working to “thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations”. At least some in the White House believed that the source of that op-ed was the Vice President’s office. Now the latest rumor is that Chief of Staff John Kelly is once again headed out the door and one of the most mentioned replacements is none other than Pence’s current Chief of Staff, Nick Ayers.

With Trump seemingly focused on simply surviving and reportedly also suffering from serious mental deterioration, it appears that Pence will more and more become the de-facto, behind the scenes leader of this administration. And if things deteriorate so badly that Republicans actually turn on Trump and impeach him, Pence will then be well-prepared to take over in a relatively smooth transition. Unfortunately, the country will have only swapped an autocrat for a theocrat.


My NOTE however: according to his horoscope score of 8-7, he's easier to beat! That would be the big plus! Even Elizabeth Warren might have a chance (although as I say in my video, those would be two candidates with the charisma of a wooden indian-- go Pocahontas!)

--   if both Pence & the Donald can be taken out, then the Silents would finally get their Prez & she'd be female. Not that l care much 4 Miz Nancy bcuz l don't, but l think it would be nice if the Silents got a Prez b4 they left this Earth

(11-18-2018, 06:08 PM)Marypoza Wrote: --   if both Pence & the Donald can be taken out, then the Silents would finally get their Prez & she'd be female. Not that l care much 4 Miz Nancy bcuz l don't, but l think it would be nice if the Silents got a Prez b4 they left this Earth

(11-19-2018, 03:41 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(11-18-2018, 06:08 PM)Marypoza Wrote: --   if both Pence & the Donald can be taken out, then the Silents would finally get their Prez & she'd be female. Not that l care much 4 Miz Nancy bcuz l don't, but l think it would be nice if the Silents got a Prez b4 they left this Earth

Pelosi gets a bad rap, but it's understandable why.  She's all strategy and tactics, when the Dems sorely need inspiration above all else.  Think of her as Eisenhower as Supreme Allied Commander, and then think about Winston Churchill.  Churchill was a walking-talking basket case, and a drunk to boot, but he inspired the Brits to fight-on against all odds.  If that had been left to Ike, the Brits would have sued for peace.  On the other hand, without Ike, the war would have been lost, so both talent sets are needed.

The Dems need a Churchill, and Bernie's the best they have.  Since he can't lead the House, a great tactician might be a good alternative for now.  I still don't see another septuagenarian in the role as  Speaker -- or President for that matter.  Bernie may be a great inspiration; he can't be the leader.  I guess he'll have to be happy as this era's Benjamin Franklin.  Pelosi will play the role of Moses, and hand-off to an Aaron, when one is finally found.

(11-18-2018, 07:13 PM)GeekyCynic Wrote:

(11-18-2018, 06:08 PM)Marypoza Wrote: Eric the GreenIs Mike Pence Making His Move?
from Daily Kos

As many have noted, Trump seems thoroughly disinterested in even performing the basics of the job as President since the midterm shellacking by Democrats. Reports are that he has become even more isolated and angry, perhaps driven by having to finally confront a reality different from his own version of it.

Trump’s anger may be fueled by worry about what will happen to himself and his family now that Democrats have subpoena power in the House. In addition, it is clear that the Mueller investigation is closing in, perhaps more imminently on Don Jr. than Trump himself right now, but closing in nonetheless. So too are the other investigations into the apparent fraud at the Trump Foundation and the conspiracy to silence women before the election that are currently being pursued in New York, with the latter probably making his domestic life more difficult.

Moreover, the protection racket that Trump has surrounded himself with over the years has taken some enormous hits. Michael Cohen has left the fold and is apparently singing, as are principals with the National Enquirer. Manafort my still be resolute, but Gates, who probably knows everything Manafort knew, is talking. Roger Stone’s operation is increasingly under pressure and there are signs that some in that camp are beginning to fold. There even seems to be a small but growing concern within the Federalist Society that Trump’s shredding of the rule of law has gone too far.

As bad as all that is, there are little hints that the power players in the Republican party may be thinking they have gotten as much out of Trump as they could get. The legislative agenda is dead. They got massacred in the suburbs and only picked up a maximum of two Senate seats in what was the one of most friendly maps in history in last week’s midterms. The next two years portend investigations in multiple areas that will expose massive corruption not only with Trump and his family personally as well within his administration but also with various businesses that have been beneficiaries of that corruption. Those businesses are significant sectors of the party’s donor class.

Additionally, the conservative wing of the party, which is now about all that’s left, may be happy with the last two years of accomplishment but it has never really trusted Trump. With the Democrats now having power in the House, there is a genuine fear that Trump will compromise with the Democrats and squeeze the Republicans in the Senate in order to get a legislative win for himself for 2020. That was surely compounded by Trump’s abandonment of House Republicans before the election and his willingness to consider an infrastructure plan after it.

The party doesn’t need Trump to continue to eliminate regulation and pack the courts with Federalist Society hacks, which is probably about all that can be accomplished in the next two years unless Trump capitulates to Democrats. In fact, there is already someone itching to take that role.

Even in just the few days since the midterms, Mike Pence is using Trump’s disengagement to become a far more forceful figure than we’ve seen before. The Vice President has been active meeting foreign leaders over the last two years but he is now taking that role to a higher level. Pence will be filling in for Trump at both the APEC, ASEAN, and East Asia summits in Asia, the three most important meetings for that region. Pence made the most forceful statement to date from a US official condemning the state-sanctioned violence against the Rohingya minority in Myanmar directly to Aung San Suu Kyi. I doubt that is something we would have heard from Trump, considering his infatuation with authoritarian regimes and inherent racism.

Pence has often strayed off the Trump reservation in order to advance his own interests but has always managed to stay in Trump’s good graces. It is an open secret that Pence and his team have expressed the desire to be prepared for the 2020 election in case Trump did not survive and it appears that Pence has set up his own political operation to prepare for that potentiality. There are some who are already talking like that is a possibility. Jan Brewer, former Arizona governor, recently talked about Pence saying, “We really, really appreciate him leading our party in that respect. His mission is maybe a little bit different than the president, and he is not under attack 24/7 like the president is.” That sounds remarkably like an endorsement.

Back in early September, there was an anonymous op-ed in the NY Times that declared there were people within the Trump administration that were working to “thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations”. At least some in the White House believed that the source of that op-ed was the Vice President’s office. Now the latest rumor is that Chief of Staff John Kelly is once again headed out the door and one of the most mentioned replacements is none other than Pence’s current Chief of Staff, Nick Ayers.

With Trump seemingly focused on simply surviving and reportedly also suffering from serious mental deterioration, it appears that Pence will more and more become the de-facto, behind the scenes leader of this administration. And if things deteriorate so badly that Republicans actually turn on Trump and impeach him, Pence will then be well-prepared to take over in a relatively smooth transition. Unfortunately, the country will have only swapped an autocrat for a theocrat.


My NOTE however: according to his horoscope score of 8-7, he's easier to beat! That would be the big plus! Even Elizabeth Warren might have a chance (although as I say in my video, those would be two candidates with the charisma of a wooden indian-- go Pocahontas!)

--   if both Pence & the Donald can be taken out, then the Silents would finally get their Prez & she'd be female. Not that l care much 4 Miz Nancy bcuz l don't, but l think it would be nice if the Silents got a Prez b4 they left this Earth

Now is not the time for a Silent President. Their time for their leadership has passed.

1. The cult of tradition. “One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements.”
   
2. The rejection of modernism. “The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”
   
3. The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.”
   
4. Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”
   
5. Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”
   
6. Appeal to social frustration. “One of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.”
   
7. The obsession with a plot. “The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia.”
   
8. The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”
   
9. Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. “For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.”
   
10. Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.”
    
11. Everybody is educated to become a hero. “In Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death.”
    
12. Machismo and weaponry. “Machismo implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”
    
13. Selective populism. “There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.”
    
14. Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”
    

(11-20-2018, 12:36 AM)Marypoza Wrote: -- well Benjamin Franklin was GC during the Revolution. Bernie can be our GC. The don't have 2 b Prez

(12-16-2018, 07:14 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: The Des Moines Register has a poll  of Democrats on their preferences in the primary.  At this point, I will leave ot to you to sort out who has any advantage as a Democratic front-runner.

What Democrats want:

90% -- someone who will restore good relations with longtime US allies
90% -- someone with a strong moral compass
87% -- someone who understands policy and politics
89% -- someone who will unite the country
90% -- someone who respects decorum
93% -- someone who will tell the truth even if I don't agree
81% -- someone who represents the future of the Democratic party
1% -- don't know

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2018/12/16/iowa-poll-caucuses-2020-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-beto-orourke-elizabeth-warren-register-cnn-democrat/2312541002/

Iowa Democrats clearly want someone as different from Donald Trump on substantive issues and personal character as is possible.

(12-16-2018, 08:39 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(12-16-2018, 07:14 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: The Des Moines Register has a poll  of Democrats on their preferences in the primary.  At this point, I will leave ot to you to sort out who has any advantage as a Democratic front-runner.

What Democrats want:

90% -- someone who will restore good relations with longtime US allies
90% -- someone with a strong moral compass
87% -- someone who understands policy and politics
89% -- someone who will unite the country
90% -- someone who respects decorum
93% -- someone who will tell the truth even if I don't agree
81% -- someone who represents the future of the Democratic party
1% -- don't know

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2018/12/16/iowa-poll-caucuses-2020-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-beto-orourke-elizabeth-warren-register-cnn-democrat/2312541002/

Iowa Democrats clearly want someone as different from Donald Trump on substantive issues and personal character as is possible.

I understand the motivation to pursue the ideal anti-Trump, but really?  The last person we need leading the country is Plaster Saint 3.0. Jimmy Carter is a wonderful human being.  He set a great moral standard, but he was a terrible president.  BHO had zero scandals.  He didn't get much done either.  We need a dynamic visionary and charismatic leader who can set goals and get the people behind them.  I have no idea who that might be: maybe Beto O'Rourke.  But one thing's for sure, saints and crank-turners need not apply.  I think we've had plenty of each, and neither type cancels-out scumbags, of which we have also had our fill.

(12-16-2018, 08:39 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(12-16-2018, 07:14 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: The Des Moines Register has a poll  of Democrats on their preferences in the primary.  At this point, I will leave ot to you to sort out who has any advantage as a Democratic front-runner.

What Democrats want:

90% -- someone who will restore good relations with longtime US allies
90% -- someone with a strong moral compass
87% -- someone who understands policy and politics
89% -- someone who will unite the country
90% -- someone who respects decorum
93% -- someone who will tell the truth even if I don't agree
81% -- someone who represents the future of the Democratic party
1% -- don't know

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2018/12/16/iowa-poll-caucuses-2020-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-beto-orourke-elizabeth-warren-register-cnn-democrat/2312541002/

Iowa Democrats clearly want someone as different from Donald Trump on substantive issues and personal character as is possible.

I understand the motivation to pursue the ideal anti-Trump, but really?  The last person we need leading the country is Plaster Saint 3.0. Jimmy Carter is a wonderful human being.  He set a great moral standard, but he was a terrible president.  BHO had zero scandals.  He didn't get much done either.  We need a dynamic visionary and charismatic leader who can set goals and get the people behind them.  I have no idea who that might be: maybe Beto O'Rourke.  But one thing's for sure, saints and crank-turners need not apply.  I think we've had plenty of each, and neither type cancels-out scumbags, of which we have also had our fill.

(12-17-2018, 12:05 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(12-16-2018, 08:39 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(12-16-2018, 07:14 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: The Des Moines Register has a poll  of Democrats on their preferences in the primary.  At this point, I will leave ot to you to sort out who has any advantage as a Democratic front-runner.

What Democrats want:

90% -- someone who will restore good relations with longtime US allies
90% -- someone with a strong moral compass
87% -- someone who understands policy and politics
89% -- someone who will unite the country
90% -- someone who respects decorum
93% -- someone who will tell the truth even if I don't agree
81% -- someone who represents the future of the Democratic party
1% -- don't know

Iowa Democrats clearly want someone as different from Donald Trump on substantive issues and personal character as is possible.

I understand the motivation to pursue the ideal anti-Trump, but really?  The last person we need leading the country is Plaster Saint 3.0. Jimmy Carter is a wonderful human being.  He set a great moral standard, but he was a terrible president.  BHO had zero scandals.  He didn't get much done either.  We need a dynamic visionary and charismatic leader who can set goals and get the people behind them.  I have no idea who that might be: maybe Beto O'Rourke.  But one thing's for sure, saints and crank-turners need not apply.  I think we've had plenty of each, and neither type cancels-out scumbags, of which we have also had our fill.

Only skilled candidates EVER get elected USA president. That's a fact. According to the horoscope scores, which reveal inherent tendencies in people according to the maxim "as above, so below," as it relates to compatibility with what Americans want in a president, Beto O' Rourke will prove unworthy. The best choices are Mitch Landrieu and Terry McAuliffe to meet these goals reported in this post. There is some momentum for Sherrod Brown; he might have a decent chance. Biden and Sanders, I wouldn't bet on them; they might win if Trump runs again even though his popularity has plummeted well below what it is now. As of now, a 43% approval rating would be good enough base for Trump, with his superior persuasive powers, to barely seal another election in his favor-- unless Landrieu, Mc Auliffe or Brown are nominated.

(12-17-2018, 10:14 AM)David Horn Wrote: Yes, it takes a person skilled at RUNNING for President to be ELECTED President.  That said, the real skill set needed is BEING President, and getting the job is not the same as doing it, as Trump has shown in spades.  I don't see any of the names on your preferred list being the one, though Mitch Landrieu is probably the best of those listed.  What we really need is a Winston Churchill or FDR, and leaders of that caliber are always in short supply.  At the moment, I don't see any.  Beto O'Rourke may be one, but he's too untested for us to evaluate him, and Amy Klobuchar seems to have the chops but may be unelectable.

pbrower2a Wrote:What Democrats want:

90% -- someone who will restore good relations with longtime US allies
90% -- someone with a strong moral compass
87% -- someone who understands policy and politics
89% -- someone who will unite the country
90% -- someone who respects decorum
93% -- someone who will tell the truth even if I don't agree
81% -- someone who represents the future of the Democratic party
1% -- don't know

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2018/12/16/iowa-poll-caucuses-2020-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-beto-orourke-elizabeth-warren-register-cnn-democrat/2312541002/

Iowa Democrats clearly want someone as different from Donald Trump on substantive issues and personal character as is possible.

(12-17-2018, 10:14 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(12-17-2018, 12:05 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(12-16-2018, 08:39 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(12-16-2018, 07:14 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: The Des Moines Register has a poll  of Democrats on their preferences in the primary.  At this point, I will leave ot to you to sort out who has any advantage as a Democratic front-runner.

What Democrats want:

90% -- someone who will restore good relations with longtime US allies
90% -- someone with a strong moral compass
87% -- someone who understands policy and politics
89% -- someone who will unite the country
90% -- someone who respects decorum
93% -- someone who will tell the truth even if I don't agree
81% -- someone who represents the future of the Democratic party
1% -- don't know

Iowa Democrats clearly want someone as different from Donald Trump on substantive issues and personal character as is possible.

I understand the motivation to pursue the ideal anti-Trump, but really?  The last person we need leading the country is Plaster Saint 3.0. Jimmy Carter is a wonderful human being.  He set a great moral standard, but he was a terrible president.  BHO had zero scandals.  He didn't get much done either.  We need a dynamic visionary and charismatic leader who can set goals and get the people behind them.  I have no idea who that might be: maybe Beto O'Rourke.  But one thing's for sure, saints and crank-turners need not apply.  I think we've had plenty of each, and neither type cancels-out scumbags, of which we have also had our fill.

Only skilled candidates EVER get elected USA president. That's a fact. According to the horoscope scores, which reveal inherent tendencies in people according to the maxim "as above, so below," as it relates to compatibility with what Americans want in a president, Beto O' Rourke will prove unworthy. The best choices are Mitch Landrieu and Terry McAuliffe to meet these goals reported in this post. There is some momentum for Sherrod Brown; he might have a decent chance. Biden and Sanders, I wouldn't bet on them; they might win if Trump runs again even though his popularity has plummeted well below what it is now. As of now, a 43% approval rating would be good enough base for Trump, with his superior persuasive powers, to barely seal another election in his favor-- unless Landrieu, Mc Auliffe or Brown are nominated.

Yes, it takes a person skilled at RUNNING for President to be ELECTED President.  That said, the real skill set needed is BEING President, and getting the job is not the same as doing it, as Trump has shown in spades.  I don't see any of the names on your preferred list being the one, though Mitch Landrieu is probably the best of those listed.  What we really need is a Winston Churchill or FDR, and leaders of that caliber are always in short supply.  At the moment, I don't see any.  Beto O'Rourke may be one, but he's too untested for us to evaluate him, and Amy Klobuchar seems to have the chops but may be unelectable.

(12-17-2018, 08:40 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Well, you said before that McAuliffe had been a competent governor of your state, and that is certainly true. I don't think any of the potential candidates can be known for sure to be a potential Churchill or FDR. Any of them would have to grow into the role, it appears. My scoring method is not too reliable about who has the best skills at BEING president, because the number of examples to look at is small, and people disagree about who should be counted among them. I can guess, according to the astrological traditions, but that would not be the empirical method that seems to work very consistently. There could be an indicator of who each person thinks would be a best president, according to the list of presidents (s)he draws up. As for what is needed in a nominee, the Iowa poll confirmed that the people want someone who can beat Trump. That was confirmed on the PBS Newshour tonight. 

Eric Wrote:As you know, I recommend the system I have developed as a good indicator of just who that is. Mostly that can be confirmed by any good observer of the candidates, but Beto O'Rourke seems so far to appear to us as much better than his score indicates. That score says he would go down in flames, even against a crippled Trump. Some are now wondering about him, since he ran as a progressive but his record is less than that. So how consistent, courageous and honest is he, really? Does he have the level of strength needed, and does he give the impression of powerful leadership qualities that Americans vote for, as well as just some charm, idealism, youth, good looks and smooth talk? As you say, he is untested. They say he's like Bobby Kennedy, but RFK's score also suggests that he actually might not have been elected had he lived. Even Humphrey had a better score than RFK too. And there's probably an element of destiny at work as to who actually gets elected. They say character is destiny, but who knows, sometimes larger forces are at work.