And the Winner is - Bernie Sanders!
It's official.
The new front runner of the approximately 200 year old democratic party is a Socialist! We can almost smell the fear within the DNC. The race now gets interesting! As for the New Hampshire vote: Pete Buttigieg was a close second with Amy Klobuchar a surprising third. A fourth place finish for Liz Warren in the state of New Hampshire is probably going to be fatal for her campaign. Joe Biden who finished 5th couldn't wait to get out of Dodge. For him it's on to Nevada and his supposed "black firewall" in South Carolina. However, h is political campaign days are numbered and my question remains unanswered - what about those polls that showed Biden with that solid lead over the other democratic candidates? How convenient that was for the leftist media that wanted Biden as the moderate choice.
The democratic front runner:
"With 85% of the vote counted late Tuesday, Sanders had won the New Hampshire primary with some 26% of the vote, beating second-place Pete Buttigieg, who took 24%. The state was long seen as a Sanders stronghold, but at fewer than 5,000 votes, the margin was unexpectedly slender. Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar was the surprise of the night, surging into a strong third place with 20% of the vote."
https://news.yahoo.com/hampshire-win-bernie-sanders-democrats-054756462.html
For Andrew Yang last night was the end of his campaign as he announced that he was dropping out of the race.
I guess that means that each of us won't be getting $1,000 bucks.
Meanwhile Bernie's dream rival is waiting in the wings. Michael Bloomberg is now in the hunt. Bloomberg would normally become the media choice for the moderate candidate but a strange thing happened recently. An audio tape now reveals Bloomberg's own words on his "stop & frisk" policy.
Next on the menu will be Nevada a state where unions have tremendous influence in elections.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Tags
Who is online
66 visitors
For your approval: Bernie Sanders the Socialist who leads the democratic party
Rules of civility apply
He's well layered there. Was he in New England or Siberia?
Trump uses AF1 to go to his resorts to play golf so what is your point?
Actually it would be interesting to see a race between the Honeymooner in Russia socialist against the so-called Putin's buddy. Maybe America should allow and count the votes of Russian citizens as well.
I'm sorry to see that Bloomberg may have f*cked himself with his own mouth. Don't know now if it will be a true contest of how much money is needed to buy votes between Bloomberg's hundred million and Sheldon Adelson's hundred million. The really coincidental thing for me these days is that I just finished reading for the second time John Grisham's novel The Brethren part of which is devoted to story about a Congressman who gets elected POTUS because he has absolutely astronomical monetary support whereas the vice-president opponent runs out of funding.
Yup, it would have been interesting.
If the average progressive listens to the Bloomberg tape they'll have a real hard decision to make, but I know they'll do it!
Nah, he'll apologize and his followers will still follow him blindly.
He gets passes that others don't from that group.
It will be hard to swallow, but they'll eat shit in order to try and beat Trump. (I believe they already have!)
Where the heck is Badfish? He was right Bernie the Socialist is the frontrunner.
Pete Buttigieg is the 'official' front runner. He has 23 delegates to Sanders' 21.
Did he really win Iowa?
Agreed. I saw CNN makes this "Sanders is the frontrunner" claim last night, and I was like "yeah . . . I don't think so. Not yet anyway."
Exactly. With only two states in so far, it is too early to really know who the front runner is until results from more states are in.
Exactly. Polls. 'Nuff said.
This could effect all the elections in 2020:
"Another frontline freshman, Phillips of Minnesota, is backing his home-state senator, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.). Asked if a Sanders nomination would give him heartburn, Phillips joked: “You mean heart-Bernie?”
“I’m not going to disparage, I’m not going to prognosticate. But yes, I’m concerned about someone who, in the six states that really matter in this election, could change the outcome of an election that we should win,” Phillips told The Hill. “It causes concern if it is not a candidate who can generate the independent and even moderate Republican support we’re going to need to replace Donald Trump."
And Phillips agreed with Peters's prediction that a Sanders nomination would create a detrimental “down-ballot effect” for congressional Democrats.
One vulnerable Democrat put it this way: “There is a fear in the caucus that if it’s not a ‘B’ or a ‘K’ at the top of the ticket — Biden, Buttigieg, Bloomberg or Klobuchar — we’re in real trouble.”
Biden: Gotta run!
It was a sad day for the democratic party. There will almost certainly be another attempt by the devious DNC to stop Sanders.
Orville Redenbacher popcorn futures have just gone up precipitously .....
Mike Bloomberg will be trying to save his campaign after a Sanders supporter released a tape that makes Bloomberg look anti-black. As in (RACIST)
I'll take the extra butter & salt variety
This Just In:
The New York Times has finally, at long last, decided to cover the story of the guy who tried to kill Republicans:
I've been saying it for awhile now. We need more serious minivan control but of course only common sense measures.
Congress can call it the Grocery Getter Control law .... the GGC
The good thing about this is he can be in two places at once. Larry David can double for him as he does a better Sanders than Bernie does.
Feel the double Bern!!
Biden's toast... Warren's done....
who does Trump turn his attention to next? I'm sure he's happy with either Sanders or Buttegig.
Did you hear his latest talk from SC?
He's rambling even worse than usual.
The guy is beyond toast ..... he's toast based carbon dust .....
Him calling a woman a 'lying dog faced pony soldier'? Seriously wtf.
I seen it on CBS and the stupid cow Gayle kings comment on it was that the people seemed to enjoy it, they were laughing...laughing at a senile old man. No wonder they make him use a teleprompter at his rally's.
Yeah, they all would be flipping out if Trump said something like that. Flipping out big time.
The disconnect involved is striking.
Like Trump said last night - If we did like them, seeking to vote in the other party's primary for the weakest candidate - we would have a hard time deciding who was weakest!
Another Trumpism!
Van Jones: "People are depressed" by primary process, just want "somebody to vote for against Trump"
http:// hill.cm/UtZIi7h
It's so sad
"A majority of Americans surveyed in a new poll said they would not vote for a socialist candidate for president, with the most opposition coming from Republican voters.
Asked whether they would vote for their party nominee who was a “generally well-qualified person for president who happened to be socialist,” just 45 percent said yes and 53 percent said no, according to the Gallup poll released Tuesday.
The acceptance for a socialist nominee is 2 percentage points lower in the recent poll than when Gallup asked the same question in June 2015."
Just 45%? Just 45% is how you would describe the percentage garnered for something you expected better results on. "how'd you do son? Not good. I just got a 45." Or, Kansas only shot 45% from the free throw line tonight. This is how I read the above:
Asked whether they would vote for their party nominee who was a “generally well-qualified person for president who happened to be socialist,” 45 percent of these crazy fuckers said yes.
Trump's record breaking turnout:
Exactly what you would expect from [removed members.]
That's it John, keep insulting them, make sure every one of them gets out and votes!
I object to the deletion of that comment.
I will flag every example of the acronym "TDS" I see on this forum unless the comment is restored.
People don't seem to recognize that the Democratic Party is divided. Obama was a unifying politician on charisma and appeal but Obama was too much of a Reagan Democrat. The grassroots movement in the Democratic Party (and the Republican Party) are working to change politics underpinned by the Reagan ideology. And there aren't any candidates in the current cycle that appears capable of unifying the Democratic Party. No matter who wins the Democratic nomination, large blocks of Democratic voters aren't going to be happy.
Trump divided the Republican Party with a grassroots support base. It's only now that the Republican Party is beginning to coalesce. The repudiation of Mitt Romney for his impeachment vote would seem to be a clear indication that Republicans are ready to turn the page.
Democrats are concerned that Bernie Sanders will divide the Democratic Party. Too late, the party is already divided. And the current candidates trying to claim they are defenders of party values won't unify the party. That's why the overarching Democratic priority has been to defeat Trump as a unifying theme. Democrats are drifting just as Republicans drifted; the anchor of the past isn't going to hold.
If Sanders does succeed at winning the Democratic nomination, Republicans (and Democrats) may well be shocked at how much Sanders has in common with Trump. Neither are globalists. Both are advocates for jobs and small business. Both are trying to speak to the heartland. The battle between Sanders and Trump will be over the role of government. Sanders may be arguing for more government action but, keep in mind, that Trump isn't a small government Republican. Both will argue for a government role, the difference will be over how large that role will be. IMO a match up between Sanders and Trump is what the country needs. I don't think Democrats are going to be able to save Reagan ideology.
Grassroots politics is a messy business. Forcing career politicians with overactive egos to follow the grassroots lead will naturally be divisive. What is happening may be disconcerting but it is healthy.
True. However, Trump is also a hero for big business, financial markets, uber-weatlhy individuals, etc. Bernie would be their enemy. Trump is pandering to the religious and to base conservative principles. Sanders is hard-left liberal. Trump will avoid taxation where possible, Sanders leads with taxation.
Both will continue to increase the national debt of course but Sanders would make Trump look like an amateur in that regard.
Hard to imagine hard left liberals running to the Trump camp if Bernie does not get the D nomination.
Yeah, by Bernie's use of the term. In actuality, the new front runner of the D party is a social democrat - a statist - a big government tax and spend liberal (and emphatically a fiscal liberal) who wants a highly regulated capitalist engine to fund (via taxation and some expropriation) the most extreme public services ever proposed by a candidate for PotUS.
Correct labels aside, it is quite amazing that an I caucusing with the Ds and on the far left would wind up leading the pack while Biden fades into the sunset. Looks bad for our nation since this indicates that too many people are viewing government as their agent of prosperity.
What happened in 2016 to the GoP is playing out this year for the Dems. The moderate wing of the party can't coalesce around one candidate fast enough to kick out the fringe early front runner. Then when Trump became the nominee the whole party got behind him. I don't think the DNC can do this. Those "Bernie Bros" largely either stayed home or voted for someone else in 2016 and I expect something like this to happen again, especially if it goes to a brokered convention.
In my opinion Biden and Bloomberg should drop out and Buttigieg and Klobuchar should run on the same ticket as Pres/Vice Pres. Then the party can decide whether it wants to be moderate or progressive.
Biden seems to be fading away (as with Warren). Bloomberg is on the rise. Buttigieg and Klobuchar are now quite interesting to watch.
At this point, who knows what will eventually happen in the D primaries? Maybe Bloomberg as the D nominee with Pete or Amy as running mate?
Obama had almost no experience and was largely unknown yet he won the general election. He was probably helped by the 'first Black president' historical event. Amy would have the 'first woman president' and Pete would have the 'first gay president'. So in that regard historical breakthroughs might help them. They too could rise as unknowns. On the downside, both Buttigieg and Klobuchar lack Obama's charisma.
He was on the rise. How does he deal with that tape? How do progressives deal with it?
How did conservatives, especially "christian" conservatives deal with Trump's pussy grabbing tape...they ignored it and/or excused it away...progressives could do the same.
Every experienced person has something in their past. People make mistakes, use the wrong language, etc. Bloomberg is not the only politician who has made mistakes. People get over it. Note also that Bloomberg admits his mistake.
Remember Trumps pussy grabbing, etc. He wound up winning the general. People ultimately focus on what is relevant to them and tend to focus on what a politician says now.
Yup, they could vote strictly on policy, but if you hear that tape and you (the progressive) have been crusading against the mere hint of "racism" since college, it's a lot to swallow. Isn't it?
That's the way I vote. However, for people who are so offended by words like that, it will be interesting to watch.
First how do you know I am a progressive, don't assume. Conservatives have been crusading on the Bible, christian values, family values for decades, yet they swallowed Trumps very obvious anti-family, anti-christian, anti-Bible actions and words. Did not seem very hard for them to do, and to continue doing since Trump continues to act and speak against those very values.
Was it an actual "Mistake", or just an adjustment for "Political" Reasons.
Don't forget, at the time, IT WASN'T a "MISTAKE", according to what he Actually DID !
Have you EVER in your life said …… " I'd DO HER/HIM " when with friends ?
Trump changed parties for political reasons, he thought it would be easier to win over Republicans than Democrats. Trump used to be pro-choice, changed that for political reasons. Trump will say anything to win over people he is speaking to, he has contradicted himself so many times, even in a matter of minutes.
Vic, do you disagree with what Bloomberg said?
So has "Bloomberg".... a couple of times.
AND...….
…………..."Bloomberg" actually followed a "Law", then " Cries " that he shouldn't have done that.... after the fact !
Which "Law" did Trump "Change".....when he Changed parties before becoming someone that could actually do that change ?
Your point ?
Not during an interview, on camera in front of millions. Just a tad different.
Does it actually matter.
He still "Cried" for "Political reasons, over something he believed in …….. AND DID ...… before he Shouldn't Have .
S.Carolina will be the test for Biden. I don't know how long Warren can last, but it can't be too much longer - maybe Super Tuesday?
He seems to be polling well, but he hasn't debated. We'll see. I don't see the Progressives wanting to be anywhere near him.
Perhaps. I think Buttigieg could bring in a lot of progressive voters that Bloomberg and the other moderates might not. Which is why I think a Buttigieg-Klobuchar ticket (at this moment) would work best.
Nothing boring about the current dynamics.
I have to agree … yet after a win in NH and a close second in Iowa hasn't the devotion of the Sanders supporter doubled - who brings them into the fold after the convention? I wonder what the younger Sanders supporters will do … is an openly gay, well educated [for the most part] moderate candidate giving them enough to gain their support - I do not know what Klobuchar brings to the table for 'progressives' .. I only recently started paying attention to her campaign....
Are Sanders supporters actually 'progressives'?
Hi Colour,
I don't think that middle America is ready for a gay president.
As for Sander supporters, I put them (for the most part) in the same category as I do Trump supporters (for the most part), which is loyal to the end. I don't know if they can be converted. Maybe the only reason is that they dislike Trump more.
No. They are social democrats.
That is your rational, that Trump was amongst "friends" so it was OK? This was an interview with a TV person, not a friend, and it was being recorded. I have NEVER said "I'd do her/him", I don't think like that. I say someone is good looking or "hot", or other terms, but never say I'd do them. But that is beside the point, isn't it, just your way of deflecting from Trump's obvious lack of morals.
I believe you.
"just your way of deflecting from Trump's obvious lack of morals. "
Something the "Media" finds from 10 or so years ago, doesn't take up my day.
I'm riding "Shotgun" in the "Present" right now.
Is Trump so bad that you're still "Riding coach" right now ?
From your post 17.1.7: Was it an actual "Mistake", or just an adjustment for "Political" Reasons.
Don't forget, at the time, IT WASN'T a "MISTAKE", according to what he Actually DID !
You brought up a person changing their mind for political reasons, I responded in kind. Never said Trump changed any law to become a Republican, you do realize he was a private citizen when he changed parties. So Bloomberg followed a law that he now believes was wrong. Laws are changed over time when our culture or societal views change.
That's the million dollar question isn't it?
Buttigieg is the only moderate that can speak to the younger crowd without coming off condescending.
Nothing for progressives except the first woman Vice President. She could be a moderate draw for those moderates that are queasy with Pete being gay. It could set her up as the first woman President. The only issue with the two of them are they do nothing for communities of color, but then neither do Sanders, Warren or Bloomberg.
Leaders can "Change" a "Law, anytime they want ….. or …… like some of the "Lefty" states do, MAKE A LAW to defy "Federal Law" !
Apparently ..... it's not hard to "Change" what a leader doesn't like, QUICKLY !
#Subjectmatters.
Subjective:
2: of or relating to the essential being of that which has substance, qualities, attributes, or relations
First let me say that I happened to be in favor of the "stop & frisk" policy because I thought it saved lives. I would never have said what he said. I know where the crime is coming from (and ya it is a cultural problem), but to put it that way leaves the crazy crusaders with a real shot at him. There is no need to use the words. Even the minority officers know what the problem is. There is no need to alienate them by using those words.
As for saying "throw them against a wall' - that was just plain wrong!
Present day Trump repeatedly shows his lack of values and ethics, continuing his pattern, don't have to look back.
If you don't care about what media finds from years ago, then you don't care Warren checked Indian on her college application or
Sanders honeymooned in Russian decades ago, do you.
What do riding shotgun and riding coach has to do with anything.
How so ?
"What do riding shotgun and riding coach has to do with anything."
One's actually "In Charge", the other "Just sits and Hopes".
"Riding shotgun" means you are in the passenger seat, not the driver's seat, so you are not in charge. Still can't relate to "riding in coach", only time I heard that is flying.
Trump consistently calls people names, like a child, and I would hope you would scold a child who calls people names. Shows lack of values, as well as immaturity.
Trump swears in public, while he is at rallies, in interviews, no one I know thinks that is OK for anyone let alone a president to do. Shows lack of values.
Trump has been proven to lie over and over...proven lies, that shows lack of ethics.
Trump committed adultery in recent years, he has admitted he paid off a porn star while married to Melania, of course first he lied about it.
I could go on and on, there are so many examples of Trump's lack of values and ethics, happens pretty much on a daily basis.
Don't we tell our "Kiddies" :
"Sticks and Stones will break your bones, but names will NEVER hurt you" ?
Are we "Lying" to our Kiddies ?
I'll take "Good American positive POLITICAL Policy", over trying to find every personal human imperfection in the policy makers past, any day of the week.
I totally agree with your first paragraph. I think there is a reality to situations and while you should be working to change the conditions that breed such behaviors, you also have to be real about where the issue lies. It's odd that "stop & frisk" was found unconstitutional, but it is the same thing that the TSA does every day, but they pretend not to by stopping people like me and grannies.
At this point, that is just hear say. But if he said that, yes that would be wrong.
Well, democratic socialist to be exact, but so would I. The thing is Charlie, you wouldn't vote for any of them. Please correct me if I am wrong.
That phrase is meant to soothe children after they have been called names, not to encourage them to call names. Did you/would you encourage your child to call people names?
Trump, even though he acts childish is not a child, he is an adult and president.
You were talking to someone who doesnt care about any of that
You are correct.
At one time many people said America wasn't ready for a black president, of course middle America probably wasn't and still isn't.
I agree about Sanders supporters, they might cut off their nose to spite their face and not vote for the Democrat nominee if it isn't Sanders.
Hi Perrie …. just curious, why does your name come up as misspelt?
I have compared Sander's supporters to Trump supporters .. I think it is an accurate comparison..
Social democrats huh? Interesting, I know Bernie has his own definition for what socialism is.
Good seeing you .. hope all is well
I am surprised. I applaud your non-partisan thinking.
The white in this visual represents Trumps perfections, and the black represents his imperfections
No ! It's to give them a bit of "Toughness" !
"Did you/would you encourage your child to call people names? "
Trump isn't encouraging kids to call people names. Name Calling has been going on for hundreds and hundreds of years, before Trump was even born.
I agree, it is all about defeating Trump .. think that is all Biden has in his arsenal … he keeps repeating .. 'defeat Trump'
It is February of 2020 .. not much time left to breath energy into the party of (D) .. interestingly enough, moderates are popping out of the woodwork - now if only someone could unite the moderates in this nation. … what a beautiful day that would be : )
Peace
That is why I asked you to tell me if I was wrong.
I could vote for any of the ones that you would. I'm actually glad that Klobuchar is finally getting noticed. And as a NYer, I know what Bloomberg can do. I like Buttigieg, but I am worried that you are the exception and not the rule. I am not sure where you live, but if you are somewhere in the midwest, what do your friends and family think?
btw, your answer took me by surprise. I too applaud your non-partisan viewpoint.
In your "logic" the president is not suppose to set any example, no one should look up to the president or expect him/her to adhere to a higher standard because they represent America, that is what you are implying.
So Trump doesn't need to act like an adult, you are fine with him acting like a child.
Just because something has been going on for hundreds of years doesn't mean it is OK. Rape has been going on for hundreds of years, is it OK for someone to do it now? Murder has been going on for hundreds of years, is it OK for someone to murder now? Child abuse has been going on for hundreds of years, is it OK to do it now?
You are twisting yourself in knots trying to justify Trumps lack of values, ethics and his immaturity.
And you never answered the question: Would you allow your children to call people names?
Honestly, I think that is why we are where we are today.
This worries me greatly.
I do not even think Biden has the minority vote either... the individual that gets the minority vote I do believe will be the next president...
I am paying closer attention to Klobuchar
… a moderate is what I am looking for .. socially aware and climate conscious .. fiscally conservative with foreign affairs knowledge - I am big on foreign affairs ... I have a list of other requirements .. but it seems to be a dream to think the person with the qualities I seek would upend their lives and run for president .. but alas, I continue to dream
You had your chance in 2016. Jim Webb. I was going to vote for him over Trump. A lot of conservatives/independents I knew were.
He got torpedoed by the Hillary DNC machine prior to The Sanders sinking.
Hillary and the DNC did more to give you what we have today than any other single thing and the jury is still out if they are going to do it again.
He did until the last poll numbers came out and he dropped 10 points. You are correct minority voters carry a lot of weight.
It seems more people are now. Policy wise all the moderates are fairly close to each other, so much so that it's not a big deal which one gets the nomination. It's will they be able to mend the gaps in the party to win against Trump and if that's done will they be able to get on with business or will they face more partisan pissing matches? It's anyone's guess as to who can do that right now.
No, the fractured Republican Party got eaten by what was the Tea Party (Populists) . We see the same thing going on today in the Democratic Party - There are so many center left candidates that Social Democrats (more Populists) can push them out by getting behind their one candidate.
Here I am, stuck in the middle with you…
Agreed! It is all speculation of course, but I predict a disaster when the convention rolls around
There was a group out at the gun club that liked Webb - he could not get any recognition in the debates, he never had a chance to get his message out there …
Montana's Governor Steve Bullock, this go round, was never heard because of debate rules / requirements .. the primary process is like a beauty pageant of name recognition and money.... think peeps like Buttigieg have to get big money backing ..... no name recognition..
This sticks out, and something that keeps going around in my head … hasn't things gone beyond just party mending in order to beat Trump. Going to need the Independents and the minority vote - have to bring the Obama voter turned Trump voter back to the fold so to speak......
There are a lot of moving parts! Still have Bloomberg lurking - I do not see his candidacy as a good thing
So you are OK with another 4 years of Trump? By not voting or voting against the Democrat nominee you are voting for Trump, even if you don't actually vote for him.
Lol that would be Stealers Wheel ...... I’ve got the album.
He said it:
"National media outlets latched onto that portion of the discussion, in which Bloomberg said one method to deal with the issue is to “throw them up against the wall and frisk them,” referring to the controversial stop-and-frisk tactics New York City implemented during Bloomberg’s tenure."
The only question from this point on is if black democratic voters react in kind or continue to do as they are told by democrats!
The Greatest Bernie Speech.....EVER:
FREE !
Free Free Free, Free, Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free !
FREE !
Free Free Free Freeeeeee………. FREE !
Free Free....FREE.....Free Free Free Free Free.
FREE !
It's kind of a nightmare for the party at this point. The guy they wanted to anoint, Hillary-style, (i.e. Biden) looks more and more like an angry "get offa my lawn" dementia-having old man and his support is sliding as a result.
Who does that leave us with?
Sanders - a self proclaimed socialist who only joined the party a few years ago so he could run for president.
Pete - a nice guy who has only been mayor of a small midwestern town. There's no reason to think he has the slightest clue about how to be president.
Bloomberg - He was a Democrat and left the party in 2001 only to rejoin in 2018. Why? Like Bernie, so he could run for president. He has some liberal ideas, but is every bit as entitled an uninterested in working with others as Trump is. Their personalities are a lot more similar than Democrats want to face.
Warren - Just like Hillary Clinton but even less appealing. She couldn't even crack the top 3 in New Hampshire, a state right next to her own. Do we really expect her to do better elsewhere?
Everybody else that most of the country has never heard of and the Democratic Party has shown little interest in promoting.
It's not a good situation.
Does anyone that sits in the oval office have the 'slightest clue about how to be president.' [?] ... it seems to be an on the job training position - each day is different,,
I think that's true, of course. I tend to feel better about someone who has had similar experience, e.g. state governors. Or if their experience is limited to being in Congress, they have some history of getting things accomplished, especially with people who tend to oppose them politically. Working effectively with other people is a big part of that job.
Being mayor doesn't exclude a person from consideration, but I think I'm going to feel better about a guy who has been mayor of a big city like New York, LA, or Chicago as opposed to a town of about 100K people.
South Bend Indiana is the home of Notre Dame University. It is not your average "small town".
Notre Dame is more like a suburb of South Bend and has its own zip code and is designated Notre Dame, Indiana...........
He did put decorative lights under the bridge. He’s ready to be President.
Not totally but, if you look at the map, South Bend city limits and Notre Dame are separate.
Thanks for the response, I can see where you are coming from .. for me I am looking for the 'Dark Horse' .. whatever that means .. I want a president that is going to let this nation heal, mend the divide [at least a wee bit] - I do not want a president with some radical agenda [experience or no experience]
And yet ….. DC is a city of extreme partisanship at this time - I am hopeful, but I think whomever is in the oval office is going to have a battle with congress if they desire to take on the big issues, such as immigration ..
Pete has more government experience as mayor than Trump did and in 3 years still has no clue "how to be president". So that's not a great metric to use.
It's still a good metric. Trump being elected doesn't change that.
Senator Amy Klobuchar (my pic at this early point) was 4th in IA and 3rd in NH. While not huge - is significant. The first turn in this race will be Super Tuesday. After that we should have a clear picture where the party is going. I, for one, hope Sanders starts losing momentum while a more moderate candidate rises.
And you base that on what?
Her stance on the issues. It's not moderate it's leftist.
Yeah, I'm excited about her strong showing so far.