Who is looking for the perfect candidate for 2020?

[guillaumeb]

We have all seen the various articles explaining why candidate "X" is flawed, and unworthy of our vote.

And when we read about candidate "A", and "B", and on and on, it soon becomes apparent that the perfect candidate does not actually exist.*

*(Mainly because I am not running.)

So when we are evaluating the candidates, cane we at least keep in mind that not one of the current candidates is without flaws.

Not one candidate will be the perfect progressive on every issue.

Not one candidate will have a past record with no embarrassing moments.

But when evaluating anyone, can we look at the entire record, and even if there are imperfections, as long as they do not indicate a pattern of misbehavior, can we accept the imperfections?


And I am not saying that criminal behavior should be excused. That is the GOP standard, but it should not be ours.

[Sherman A1]

1. Not me

I have found my preference and we will see how things work out.

[guillaumeb]

5. My preference is better than your preference.

Or so it seems to me.

[Sherman A1]

10. Perhaps that is the case, but between now and some actual

Primaries or caucuses I will keep the cable Infotainment switched off as they go through the list of names in full horse race mode to fill airtime between ads for drugs we never knew we needed.

[guillaumeb]

13. Brilliant response.

I loved the subtle way you framed the ending.

[DonViejo]

12. But my candidate is waaaay better than both of yours.

[guillaumeb]

14. True. eom

[Ferrets are Cool]

2. From what I am seeing lately....they MUST be "perfect"

or we must kick them out of the Democratic Party.
Or so it seems.

[guillaumeb]

6. So we are doomed?

Like Diogenes, looking for the honest man.

[mcar]

3. Agree

I would rather see supporters tell us why they support their candidate, rather than running good Democrats down.

[guillaumeb]

7. Agreed.

I was inspired by the post about Elizabeth Warren. And the heritage claim. My view is that she is such a strong candidate that even if she were confused about a family story, it is a non-issue.

[stonecutter357]

4. Embarrassing moments ? I'm 51 and Dyslexic lol !

I know embarrassing moments .

[guillaumeb]

9. 51 and dyslexic?

Or 15 and dyslexic?


Yes, we all have issues. Mine are tiny and trivial.

[Hekate]

8. Must be Jesus incarnate: heal the sick, feed the hungry, walk on water. But no association ...

...with sinners, ever. People who have sinned -- must never ever have been in contact with my Jesus candidate. Otherwise we will gather in a circle and throw rocks at him until he is good and dead.

Do I ned this? -->

[guillaumeb]

11. And Jesus asked that He be spared from His fate.

Acknowledgment that expecting perfection is nonsense.

Patterns of repeated behavior are different.

[Hekate]

23. Non-candidate Jesus hung out with fallen women, publicans, and sinners. I'm sure some of them....

...used some rough language, too. So I would never vote for him.

My candidate Jesus would have to be pure in thought, word, and deed from the time of birth, and neither deviate from those standards nor associate with those who do/did at any point in his life.

As a result, he would look a lot like Mike Pence, but that's another story.

Analogies are fun but I'm going to stop now.

[OilemFirchen]

30. He was, of course, executed.

Thanks to a holier-than-thou "friend" with an ulterior motive.

So yeah, pretty much like nowadays.

[delisen]

16. Jesus was into that forgiveness stuff. Cannot see him getting to the primary

[guillaumeb]

18. And He had no birth certificate. eom

[delisen]

20. lol nt

[riverine]

15. Too bad there is only one Barack Obama

As close to perfect as any Democrat in 50 years.

[guillaumeb]

19. Welcome to DU, and the discussion.

Obama had the advantage of coming after Bush and before Trump. But that said, he was a good President.

[ecstatic]

38. +1000.nt

[guillaumeb]

22. It is getting tiresome to read all of the articles "explaining" about every candidate. eom

[crazycatlady]

21. no candidate is perfect

However, I want someone who
1) Can beat Donald Trump in a landslide (ie Obama 2008)
2) Does not have skeletons in his/her closet that would cause people to call for a resignation from public office (this includes things they did while in school)
3) Has charisma and can connect with people. I think this was Hillary Clinton's biggest weakness (as with John Kerry and Al Gore).

[guillaumeb]

24. I agree, in part.

I expect every candidate to have done something stupid, but as long as the "something stupid" does not demonstrate a pattern, and is not illegal, and has not continued, we should judge on the overall record.


As to charisma, Trump also has it, but it is all negative charisma.

[crazycatlady]

25. I will give Trump credit for charisma

It takes balls for a real estate tycoon born in a gold-plated penthouse to convince a coal miner in West Virginia that he's their guy. He not only convinced them of that, but they rallied behind him to become some of his most vocal supporters. He doesn't give a shit about them, but he was able to use his charisma to redirect their anger at brown people. The same could be said with evangelicals-- he's a thrice married serial adulterer, yet convinced them that he's the second coming of Christ.

Face it, in my voting lifetime, all of the presidents who have assumed office (2 under questionable circumstances) had charisma. (W is not the most charismatic guy, but light years ahead of Gore and Kerry in this regard.) Even the most ridiculously unqualified candidate to run for VP on a major ticket had charisma.

I can remember a conversation with my grandmother (turns 93 this weekend) in the wake of 2004. She said in order to win, a presidential candidate needs to have charisma.

[guillaumeb]

28. Great observations.

Trump is also a con man, and a con man needs people who want to believe the con.

[Ferrets are Cool]

40. I will very politely disagree to a degree...

he didn't have to "convince" them of anything. All he had to do was have an R behind his name. The repugs HATE Democrats so much they would vote for a crocodile before voting for a D.

[crazycatlady]

42. he did his fair share of convincing during the primaries

When he first got in, I thought he was a joke candidate. But he prevailed in a very crowded field.

[Glamrock]

27. I am.

And then I choose the candidates that come closest. And then I vote for the candidate who wins the primary. I thought we all did that.

But I get your point and agree.


Om edit: I guess I'm just having with ya

[guillaumeb]

29. We all are.

And, after failing to find any, we vote for the best available candidate.

[Glamrock]

34. Yep yep

Sorry to waste yer time g. But that was my first thought when I read your post title. Can't say I disagree with anything you said. Unfortunately, people are stubborn. And vindictive. If my candidate isn't the winner, I'm voting against the person that did win! It's ridiculous. But unfortunately, it's the way it is. Happened last election, 2008, 2004, 2000.... I don't see it changing. But I hope we never hit the 25% we saw in '08. That was insane.

[guillaumeb]

36. Never a waste of time Glamrock.

2016 was particularly bad that way. In my view, the Jill Stein/Gary Johnson voters are delusional at best.

[Glamrock]

41. The Stein/Johnson folks are completely delusional.

But I personally don't worry about them. They're numbers are miniscule at best. I realize Stein got a few more votes than Hillary lost by in some important states. But those crazy assholes were never going to vote Dem anyway. Those people are absolute caricatures of liberalism. They're loons. My issues are with half the population that stayed home. Had 15% done they're civic duty, I would not have sat through 700 "goddamn that Stein/Sarandon/Bernie" threads since '16. Big picture people. Thousands voted against Hillary and Trump. 10 of millions stayed home. Fuck the greens. I could give two shits less. It's the 10's of millions that we need to appeal to, dig?

[guillaumeb]

44. Yes, the 41% of non-voters.

And how to reach them is another matter.

[marylandblue]

31. Trump knows how to attack vulnerabilities, so

I am looking for a candidate who can defend themself and punch back. It's a lot harder than it seems. So far, only Nancy Pelosi has successfully countered Trump, but she isn't running.

[guillaumeb]

33. A good observation, and Pelosi is excellent at it.

As is AOC, but she needs more time and experience. She has potential.


But imagine a media that focused on the actual issues instead of treating politics like a reality television program.

[marylandblue]

37. That media never really existed, but candidates who know how to use the media do

Roosevelt knew how to use radio, Reagan knew how to use TV, and Trump knows how to use Twitter. O'Rourke is experimenting with podcasts, but I am not sure he has it down yet.

On edit: I just looked a twitter feeds for several candidates. Pete Buttigieg is the only one that can use twitter like Trump.

[Blue_true]

32. Every one will have flaws, some having flaws that are much worse than other candidates. nt

[guillaumeb]

35. Agreed.

And my goal is to vote for the best available flawed candidate.

[Blue_true]

39. Same here. nt

[pansypoo53219]

43. i now only care for WHO IS GONNA WIN. i knew bill was a winner. lurch?

hillary i did not see at all. i only watch the MEDIA. they control everything. they pimped W + the moron. i knew the media liked obama. so i felt good supporting him.