The value of our long Presidential campaigns is up for debate but it certainly has a way of forcing out those who can't sustain initial support.

I initially thought Kamala Harris was the odds on favorite. Her far left positions weren't any further out there than the others. I suggested Trump give her the name Cruela de Harris because it fit so well. Attractive but probably has a blade on her......and not for defensive purposes.

Turns out, maybe not so much. Of course none of us are part of the inner circle but I read 3 or 4 different articles that all said she gets too easily distracted and wouldn't stay focused. Refused to go after Biden after her initial attack against him. Is that because she didn't want to or didn't realize that was the hand to play at that moment? Who knows what the real truth is but clearly she wasn't able to "read the map" and adjust accordingly.

Is that the best talent to demonstrate competency for the Office? Seems to have worked so far given we're all still here and the economy is chugging along.

Within another month, we'll be done to only a few. I stii predict Biden drops out. He makes no sense when he talks sometimes (like Trump many would say) but he lacks Trump's presence. Besides, I think this impeachment thing is going to bring out skeletons he'd rather stay hidden.

Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders? As crazy as it sounds, having one socialist up against another, can't be any crazier than Donald J Trump wiping the Republican field  4 years ago.

I'm a betting man, but right now, I wouldn't place a bet on who the Democratic challenger will be. I think Warren, but I thought Harris and look how that turned out.

I agree, Bloomberg seems the nominee.
Cool.
Srinath.

T And T Garage wrote on 12/04/19 at 07:34:21:


Bernie and Tulsi are going to get railroaded. Warren isn't too far behind on that same path. The democratic part is run by wall street and IT sector, they don't want any one who isn't a DINO. Both sides are run by big $, and that's just how the big $ likes it. Like Ron Paul of the 07-08 campaign, breaks records in small donor numbers and loses anyway. Biden and Bloomberg will be left standing, Maybe Buttegieg.
Cool.
Srinath.

Two Bloombergs, one Bernie and I think one grandpa Joe

I'm surprised about the Bloombergs picks.

I don't see the appeal of Bloomberg.

Why would we want another New York billionaire?...

Fool me once....  

oldNslow wrote on 12/04/19 at 10:55:25:


Something to be said for that. Bob Dole had zero chance. No one else wanted to be the sacrificial lamb.

Web....if you sort through some articles, Real Clear Politics, is a good site, listing current stories/articles, together ( as in side by side ) you can view any given topic/subject, with input from opposing views, publications....

It is great, to see how interpretations, have become more important, than the actual occurrence, of a news story, or topic. You can weigh any evidence, and decide accordingly.....

Anyway....lots of articles about the real power/monied democrat donors worried over the current crop.
From what I find, reading these articles, and we even heard President Obama chime in on it last week, they are worried the popularity of the Warrens/Sanders, won't carry over to a general population vote, favorably.  
With Warren tanking, that lends lots of credence to this thinking....
It will be Joe, or Pete.....which, if given lots of publicity, he could resonate with lots of disenfranchised voters who are looking for a "nice guy"

His homosexuality will dissuade some, but I think his "faith" will represent a bigger hurdle for him, as he will have to explain that apparent conflict.....WHICH, I think is a moot point, as not a single believer.......could cast that first stone, honestly.....

Nor did Jesus, when he had opportunities to judge, and didn't.