My early choice for President in 2020? Pete Buttigieg

I had to double-check that he made the age requirement though.

I like Mayor Pete, but I think he needs to run for Congress first. I think he'd have a good shot at defeating Walorski in our district. Give him some time to learn the ropes of Washington. The problem that has happened over the past 10 yrs is that we want to over accelerate people's political careers, if they have one at all (Trump) to go straight to the White House. Dont get me wrong, I think the guy has a bright future, I just think we should hold off on the Presidency for now.

Then you have no record to attack. Six of our last seven presidents had zero experience in Washington. Obama had the most, with less than one term as a Senator. He knew if he waited four or eight more years, he'd be seen as just another insider.

After Trump, we are going to see a lot of inexperienced people run for president. It's just the nature of our times.

just look at how experience suddenly mattered when it came to GEorgia 6th with ossoff and handel.

serious consideration from the beginning. Trump's a clown - but he'd been a household name for over three decades and was thought to be a great businessman by many people. Of his six predecessors, four had been Governors; one had been a US Senator; and the other was the incumbent Vice President (who had also been a US congressman; the Ambassador to the UN; the Envoy to China; and the Director of the CIA).

Neither was Reagan. He was thought to be far too right wing and stupid, even crazy. Jimmy Carter was "Jimmy Who?" And in 2008, many people did not think the country was ready to elect a black man, especially one with a middle name "Hussein."

And don't forget Ross Perot, the Trump of his day, but much less known to start, was a serious contender until he showed he wasn't by dropping out then dropping back in.

If Trump with his manifest unsuitability for the job could win, I am having a hard time figuring out what could make someone unqualified in people's eyes.

Democrats seem to spend a lot of time trying to figure who other people would vote for, and not enough time figuring out who best represents their own values.

You have to win in your home state to be credible, in my opinion.

Then, I'm 100% behind Kirsten Gillibrand.

doesnt seem likely.

I love Kirsten too. But so far I haven't seen the charisma needed.

"There is no education in the second kick of a mule."

He needs some seasoning first. He should run for Congress.

Trump may be acceptable to some, but someone with "Butt" in their name probably isn't.

Lynn who made famous you can't vote for someone who's name you can't pronounce


As Mr. Bush and his entourage traveled by bus across the state, the singers stirred them - as well as audiences - with such other hymns as ''The Man from Galilee'' as well as ''Coal Miner's Daughter.''

At one stop, Miss Lynn said Mr. Dukakis was simply not her kind of politician. Thickening her Kentucky drawl, she added: ''Why, I can't even pronounce his name!'' The crowd roared with glee.

At another stop, the three sisters sang, ''Stand By Your Man.''

Their man - George Bush, a country and western aficionado -beamed.

Maybe we should work on internalizing that it's not 1988 anymore.

Unless we see a Buttigieg/Vilsack ticket. In which case it's a guaranteed win!

on their name, their personal habits and everything they ever said or done, even the most innocent thing will become sinister in his hands. Let's not turn somebody down because they are gay, have a funny name or lack experience. It doesn't matter. Trump will use it, and if he doesn't have good enough dirt, he will just make it up. If George Washington ran for.Preisdent today, Trump would call him Lying George and claim George was golfing in Florida while his troops shivered at Valley Forge.

That name is a definite liability. Besides, he needs a lot more experience and exposure if he is ever going to be taken seriously as a presidential candidate. But that name - ouch!

.

His first name is slang for a penis and his last name goes without saying.

The RW media, will especially have a field day with it, as they placate their 13-year-old mentality viewers.


The jokes will write themselves. I'm sure everything he's heard throughout his life will be used again.

.

...maybe it's time for people to grow up a little bit, and realize that we shouldn't be disqualifying good leaders on the basis of stupid shit like their weird name.

We elected a guy whose middle name was Hussein after 911. Probably shouldn't worry about names.

something is irrelevant and when something appeals to puerile humor!

IOW, imagine if the POTUS right now, with all the same realities, were named Donald J. Buttigieg. :-P

Is Adam Schiff.

And I'm not kidding!

Or do you think we have moved past that as a country?

75% of the country would vote for an LGBT candidate as of 2015. http://www.gallup.com/poll/183713/socialist-presidential-candidates-least-appealing.aspx

That probably has gone up a few points since then. The folks who wouldn't would probably not vote for anDemocrat anyway.

In 1978, according to that same poll, only 26 percent said they would vote for a gay candidate for president (bisexual/transgender were not included in the initial question). By 1999, the number was up to 59 percent, and in 2012, the number was 68 percent. Now, as you note, it is up to 75 percent.

Like Gavin Newsom, who has been ahead of the curve on LGBT equality and the legalization of cannabis, two areas where the east coast beltway Dems have seemed to track 5 years behind public opinion.

running as a Democrat even by 2020. Gays couldn't even serve openly until 2010. There is one openly bisexual governor (Oregon) and she was installed after her predecessor had a scandal, she has since won her own term. There is one openly lesbian Senator who did win in an open race. That is it for state wide wins by openly gay politicians in all of US history. I just don't see it happening for quite some time.

I wish I could disagree with you.

75% of folks say they would vote for a gay man or a lesbian.

I am guessing, I think with a fair amount of justification, that the 25% who wouldn't are part of the 35% of this country who support Trump and thus would never vote Democratic anyway.

That number, 75% is about the bare minimum for a person being a member of a demographic that I think should consider running. One of the things i always said to supporters of a socialist that recently ran was that 50% of the country said they would not vote for a socialist and 48% would. Nominating someone from a demographic with those numbers is simply begging to lose.

75% is winnable considering what I wrote in my 2nd paragraph. Buttigieg has a huge amount of charisma and is clearly brilliant. I think he has a strong shot at maximizing whatever the possible Democratic vote is.

in this regard. I think many of those 75% would vote for a lesbian but not a gay male. I might be wrong on that, but I don't think so.

Millennials are an even bigger generation and they are driving massive amounts of cultural change, on everything from LGBT equality to marijuana legalization.

He's worked hard and well in the Senate and his humor would be a great change of pace.

they would have answered a resounding no. But now if Trump could win, anybody could win.

midterms...a losing strategy.

That's a hurdle he needs to get over before even thinking seriously about running.

I have no idea, frankly, how it's pronounced.

Harris and Newsom, too.