When in history did we ever say, "We lost our last election

[pnwmom]

Last edited Sun Dec 16, 2018, 12:23 AM - Edit history (2)

with a white guy. This time we better not run another white guy!"

And yet I keep hearing progressives saying that Hillary's loss (despite a 2.9 million popular vote win) means we need to run Mr. Wonder Bread this time. (Or, better yet, two Mr. Wonder Breads on the same ticket.)

[sinkingfeeling]

1. Great point.

[guillaumeb]

2. THAT is a very good point.

Clinton did not lose.

She was the victim of crime.

[mr_lebowski]

3. I just want a candidate who reflect my values, and who will friggin' WIN ...

I don't care if that's a Taoist, Bi-Sexual Hermaphrodite, of Zimbabwean descent, recovering from Heroin Addiction.

And I DAMN sure don't care if it's a man or a woman.

[mahina]

27. this

[lastlib]

43. I'll vote for a f*ckin' TREE STUMP against Individual 1...!! as long as it has a *D* on it.

[Whiskeytide]

4. I don't agree with it, but I can explain it ...

... I think most of us here want the best candidate. It doesn’t really matter to us whether that is or is not a white guy.

But we suspect that to at least some Americans that DOES matter. And they vote. It’s an effort to garner those votes for the democrat, or at least not scare them off from voting for the democratic candidate.

It’s not really anti-progressive as much as it’s an effort to cater to anti-progressives. Maybe that’s the same thing. Ymmv, I guess.

[pnwmom]

7. And the counter to that is that to SOME Americans,

particularly Democrats -- a party dominated by women and minorities -- seeing a more "diverse" face at the top of the ticket does matter.

Going for Mr. Wonder Bread risks taking the votes of the Barack/Hillary voters for granted.

[Whiskeytide]

25. Possibly. But any Barack/Hillary voter ...

... who doesn’t vote for the Dem candidate THIS time around isn’t paying attention. That goes for any progressive. There is a lot at stake. If we can’t figure out how to pull together in the face of this hideous nightmare, American democracy is doomed. It really no longer matters who the candidate might be. Vote for Democrats. Period.

[spooky3]

29. Maybe, but they may also stay home. If voters feel that the Dems are not truly

willing to run the best qualified candidate because s/he is not a white male, they may be demoralized and decide that there really is no difference between the parties. You know this is not the case and I know this is not the case but not every potential voter does. This type of effect deserves to be taken as seriously as a possible effect of nominating the best qualified candidate who happens to not be a white male on racist and sexist potential voters.

[struggle4progress]

5. "We didn't run a traitor who was selling us to the Russians and we lost!

Whatever should we do next time?"

[Takket]

6. answering questions like this...

is exactly why we have a primary process.

I don't know why people get so worked up about who should or should not run. It is a free country. anyone who wants to run, go for it, and if you convince enough of the people you will get nominated.

I could not care less who runs. I do care that the process is open, fair and the people are not tricked into making bad choices due to "fake news".

[EffieBlack]

8. THANK YOU!!!

Every presidential election in our history, the loser was a white man - sometimes more than one.

In the last three general elections - the first and only time white men have run against anyone other than another white man - the white man was beaten by the black man (twice) and woman (once).

Yet, rarely do we hear anyone suggest that white men shouldn't run or that minority and female candidates are surer bets

Yet people still insist that white male candidates should be the default..

[pnwmom]

18. And none of those people ever worry about what would happen to women's votes

if the Republicans ever put the first woman President into office.

Someone like Nikki Haley, for instance.

They seem awfully sure that women and minority Democrats wouldn't be tempted to vote for her . . and that it wouldn't rebrand the GOP for a generation.

[melman]

45. Tempted to vote for Nikki Haley?

WTF

[pnwmom]

46. Yes. Most voters aren't DUers. She comes across as a moderate,

even if she isn't, and if she were running, a female Indian American, a former Governor and Ambassador, we would have a much bigger battle on our hands than with most of them.

[John Fante]

9. Humphrey was the last candidate (either party) to run again after losing the previous election.

He lost to McGovern in the 1972 primary.

HRC came close on two occasions (Clinton vs Obama was the real battle for the presidency; she would have crushed McCain in the GE), but no cigar. It's time to move on. That goes for Kerry, Gore, etc.

[EffieBlack]

10. I think you missed the OPs point

[sheshe2]

11. Ummhmm.

[John Fante]

17. I don't really care for strawman arguments, sorry.

I've seen many posts on here questioning whether she should run again, and not one suggested it's because she's a white woman and that demographic "had its chance".

[EffieBlack]

19. As I said, you missed the point of the OP

which in no way suggested that Hillary should run again.

[spooky3]

30. Are you unaware that there are other non-male and non-white candidates in the mix for 2020?

Quite a few, actually.

Yet, some people have said at DU and elsewhere (e.g., Avenatti) that Dems have to nominate a white male.

[pnwmom]

34. The OP has nothing to do with Hillary specifically, other than that she's one of

thousands of female politicians in the U.S.

[obamanut2012]

44. Th OP literally has nothing to do with HRC

But you know that, I believe.

[pnwmom]

16. I haven't been arguing for HRC, Biden, Sanders, Kerry, or Gore to run.

I am simply disagreeing with those who insist that, because Hillary lost, we must run Mr. Wonder Bread this time around.

[John Fante]

22. Only one early candidate fits that bill: Biden.

And I have my doubts he'll secure the nomination. Bernie is old and white, but he's anything but wonder bread.

[pnwmom]

35. Bernie, Beto, and Joe are the white men who are most frequently touted here

as the best choices to win over the mythical white male swing state voter. But there are others of course.

And I wouldn't necessarily object to one of them being on the ticket. However, I DO object to the claim that the nominee must be a white guy this time around, because Hillary lost the swing states.

[BumRushDaShow]

20. "Humphrey was the last candidate (either party) to run again after losing the previous election."

Except for this guy -

[John Fante]

21. Presidential candidates, not VPs.

[BumRushDaShow]

23. Humphrey had previously been Johnson's VP.

But my comment still stands.

[delisen]

42. Move On, Hell no. It's time to fight and stop placating Putin and Republicans

Too many have accepted and internalized the propaganda of the opposition whether out of convenience, ignorance, or fear.

We moved on in 2000 and it just makes it less likely we move forward and more likely we embolden the Mitch McConnells and the right wing billionaires and let Russian imperialists decide our elections.

We have to face the fact that a number of move-oners are never going to move forward with us and that we have to make the tough decision to not be cowed and stand and fight.

We are not living in last century's politics.

[unblock]

12. The key problem last election was the other side cheated.

That would seem to be the problem to fix.

Our side was ahead in virtually every poll virtually every day of the campaign, raised more money, won the debates, had the better convention, and got more votes overall.

We were able to elect a black man after the disaster that was shrub; we'll be able to elect a woman after the epic disaster that is donnie.

[StevieM]

24. The problem is that the FBI cheated by using our own FBI and State Dept. Inspector General's office.

They were weapons of the GOP. And I am sure that they will have plenty of corrupt government officials ready to swift boat the Democratic nominee in this upcoming election as well.

[sheshe2]

13. Thank you.

[Adrahil]

14. I think we should run the best candidate.

Regardless of race or sex.

[JHan]

26. kick.

[ismnotwasm]

28. Pretty sure we will find a great diversified ticket

I will be highly disappointed in us if we don’t, but I think we will

[mr_lebowski]

31. I won't be ... I'll be happy if we DO, but I won't care if we don't, long as we win

We can fill both Houses of Congress with Diversity.

We can fill State houses with Diversity.

We can promote Diversity with who we nominate for Governorships.

And if we WIN POTUS, we can even appoint diverse people to powerful positions in the Federal Courts, Federal Prosecutors, The Cabinet, etc...

Long as we WIN ... we'll have PLENTY of opportunities to place diverse persons in positions of authority and power.

As such, I don't give a crap what gender/color/religion our POTUS/VPOTUS... are.

We need two people who WILL WIN, and reflect our values.

However, part of reflecting those values, inherently means ... they'll be people who will respect and empower ... minorities and those with less power.

[ismnotwasm]

39. Actually, to clarify, I believe a diversified ticket is a winning strategy.

I try to follow trends from different points of view and from right now, just anecdotal observations, this seem to be the way to the hearts of our different voters. The straight white male ticket just isn’t representative anymore, although bigotries still abound, of course. If we want a strong front, we need diversity. Probably significant diversity.

[mr_lebowski]

41. If that's what will happen to win, that'll be AWESOME :) nt

[TheFarseer]

32. Who is saying that?

Unless you are talking about the same inside the beltway idiots that think we should run The Rock or have Mitt Romney as VP. If you are just trying to crap on progressives, I think a lot of them really like Elizabeth Warren, so just stop it.

[pnwmom]

33. Most of us have run into multiple people here who have been saying it.

As you can see, based on multiple responses to the OP.

For example, one person today was saying that we can't run another woman this time because it would be "politically correct" and "political correctness" is not popular with either the left or the right.

[TheFarseer]

36. Yeah, that's just silly

We need to nominate someone with an agenda that benefits the majority of Americans and has the experience to be credible and the ability to articulate that message in a way that will get folks to the polls-regardless of gender race or anything else.

[pnwmom]

37. I agree. We shouldn't be eliminating whole categories of people

in a desperate attempt to win the swing states that we lost last time.

[TheFarseer]

38. And I though we were going to get in a fight

Hugs

[pnwmom]

40. I think the mistake it's easy for some (not you) to make is assuming

2020 will be a replay of 2016.

What if Trump leaves office under a cloud before then? (As most of us wish.)

Who will be their nominee? I think their strongest potential nominee, who is very well positioned, is Nikki Haley, former Governor and Ambassador, and an Indian American.

Imagine how the parties might re-align if the first female President of the United States turns out to be a Republican, and millions of young women had cast their first vote for President for HER?

And imagine how we'd feel if we'd ruled out nominating another woman because Hillary had lost.

So I think it's way to early to get our hearts set on particular candidates. Everything could change depending on whether Trump is running again.