How would Ron Reagan Jr do as the 2020 Democratic Presidential Nominee against Trump?

[nkpolitics1212]

Would Ron Jr. win back the Reagan Democrats/ now called Trump Democrats?

[JHan]

1. stop. lol. lol.

Come on now. What's this, your hundredth thread?

It's like spamming at this point.

[Hekate]

14. More like a thousand

And it is a strange obsession

[FarPoint]

30. We have such dysfunction here...

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. Where are you coming up with all these people? Stop it, it's getting silly.

[Warpy]

3. Not well. His FFRF ad would sink him

because it would be all over cable news.

It wouldn't matter that his name is Reagan and he's got some of his dad's mannerisms. It wouldn't be enough.

[brush]

20. The FFRF ad is unfortunate as his positions are mostly progressive

And his name is Reagan.

Too bad, probably can't overcome that ad.

[Warpy]

22. What's unfortunate is the intolerance that overreaction to that ad demonstrates

However, don't forget that he is a government outsider, too.

We're going to need a wonk well versed in the workings of government to clean up after this bunch of lunatics and incompetents.

[brush]

46. Oh, I like him as a candidate. Just no sure, even with his name being Reagan...

that he can overcome the ad.

[tazkcmo]

52. Then why do you like him as a candidate?

On the one hand you offer him up then on the other you admit he'd probably lose? Doesn't compute.

[brush]

56. What doesn't compute? I like his consistenly progressive and vocal positions over the years

What's this "doesn't compute" and me being demanded to admit something?

I didn't "offer him up" as I'm not the originator of the OP.

I merely made a comment to the OP saying I like him and his positions, as I do other potential candidates.

Have you even listened to him at all?

And furthermore, I even said it's doubtful that he could overcome that ad.

Go pick nits with someone else.

[tazkcmo]

57. nit pick.

You call it nit picking but I call it contradictory speech. No problem. Won't respond in the future whjen you make your next obscure nomination.

[brush]

58. I see comprehension is a problem.

[Brainstormy]

28. The FFRF position is exactly why I'd vote for him. n/t

[brush]

47. I like him too but that ad will be hard to counter.

[Brainstormy]

63. LOL. Because being a secular humanist

is not progressive?

[brush]

67. I don't get your post. What do you mean?

In my post I said his views are progressive.

[Brainstormy]

69. I was amused by the "most of his positions are progressive"

part of your post. In the opinion of a great many people, atheism, secular humanism, even agnosticism, is far more "progressive" than being in thrall to iron age fairy tales.

[brush]

70. Oh, ok. The few times I've seen him he came off as progressive but I don't ...

know all of his views. You apparently know more of his positions.

I didn't know his view on religion at all.

[Generic Other]

33. I'd vote for him

Not afraid of burning in hell either.

[tblue37]

73. ??What does "FFRF" stand for? nt

[Grammy23]

75. Freedom From Religion Foundation.

[tblue37]

77. Thanks. It's hard to. keep up with all these initialisms IMHO. YMMV

[elleng]

4. Atheists won't go anywhere.

[bathroommonkey76]

5. He's a percentage point behind Martin O'Malley's personality.

When will you start asking us about D-list liberal celebrities?

[L. Coyote]

6. So, you assume Trump can make it through next week? That's optimistic.

You realize the #TrumpRussia hearing are starting.

[StevieM]

8. I would be shocked if Trump did not last all four years.

He is already committing impeachable offenses right out in the open.

He gets away with everything.

The only way we are going to get rid of this guy is to vote him out.

[coco22]

10. Be prepared to be shocked..

[NewJeffCT]

15. same here

if Democrats had the majority in both houses, it would be a different story. Heck, even just controlling one house would be big.

[Alice11111]

62. Big deal. Look at who is conducting the hearings...

Sorry, there will be a lot of CYA, and let's get the tax cuts through before we let him fall.

[StevieM]

7. Come on. We should not nominate someone because their name is Reagan. In fact, that should be

a major strike against them.

[Warren DeMontague]

9. Nixon got any Grandkids? Maybe there's an Eisenhower kid running around somewhere?

I agree, this whole thing is silly.

Too many people seem to think we need some gimmick, some magic special sauce to win elections. We don't. We need competent and brave leadership.

Right now I think Elizabeth Warren is probably our best bet, but it's way too early.

[StevieM]

23. I like Elizabeth Warren too. And also Jay Inslee, the governor of Washington. (eom)

[Warren DeMontague]

24. Yes to both.

I'd like to see us expand our national leadership circle to the West Coast, bigtime. It's overdue. I like Newsom and Harris, too.

[Generic Other]

34. Can we win with this team?

Hell ya. Or maybe Al Franken. Patty Murray. We have some homegrown talent.

[Yupster]

43. Julie Nixon married David Eisenhower

Do they have kids or grandkids?

A Nixon and an Eisenhower in one candidate.

Talk about a Democratic dream, candidate.

[brush]

48. Maybe not. This Reagan is a progressive and has been vocal about it for years.

Having the name Reagan might make some normally repug voters take a second look at him.

[GoCubsGo]

11. Can we please get through 2018 first?

[crazycatlady]

12. Reagan Democrats are a dying breed

The YOUNGEST Reagan voters (turned 18 in 1984) are turning 51 this year.

Rather than looking at those voters, look at the ones that are not old enough to remember Reagan. Next year, the youngest voters will be born in 2000. We now have voters too young to remember 9/11.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. Please make more 2020 hypothetical match ups.

[L. Coyote]

19. Surely, there are other reality show hosts, or billionaires? Don't forget Sarah Palin.

Because we know it won't be Trump. He's only campaigning because he can keep the money when he doesn't run.

[crazycatlady]

64. Well we can run a Kardashian/Jenner

[treestar]

37. Let's run Soros/Buffet

since rich business men are all the rage.

[YOHABLO]

16. There are plenty of well prepared Kennedy's lurking about. How 'bout one of them?

[CK_John]

17. He didn't look very good on msnbc about a week ago.

[pbmus]

18. LMAO...

[LeftInTX]

21. How about Fred Astaire/Ginger Rogers?

[Mendocino]

25. Rocky/Bullwinkel

Last edited Sun Mar 19, 2017, 10:27 AM - Edit history (1)

Thelma/Louise

Laverne/Shirley

Butch/Sundance

Beavis/Butthead

[Generic Other]

35. Those are Libertarians

Come on!

[Yupster]

44. Geeze is Beavis 35 already?

Time sure flies by.

[Mendocino]

45. Well manchild dt hasn't

moved beyond being a spoiled 7 year old miscreant, so Beavis couldn't be much worse.

[Blanks]

53. Mickey Mouse Donald Duck. Solid ticket. Eom

[tazkcmo]

55. Switch those around and then you've got a ticket!

It's widely known that Ginger was the policy wonk in that duo! Widely known in the room I'm in right now, anyway!

[Alice11111]

59. Your reality is big compared to DTs. I would certainly

Prefer DD. He would do less harm...just squak a bit.

[democratisphere]

26. Definitely not presidential material.

Great cheerleader with Elizabeth Warren in a support position.

[Ruby the Liberal]

27. I'm starting to crush on Adam Schiff from CA

An atheist will not win national office in 4 years.

No idea what Schiff's about overall, but he certainly has been impressive in his strategic positioning the last few weeks.

[left-of-center2012]

29. Why would Trump Democrats vote for a liberal?

And one who is a loud and proud atheist?

[caroldansen]

31. Why don't you think he's a Republican at heart? His father was!

[Alice11111]

60. Because he's a Democrat, for one reason

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. These threads lighten the mood around here.

[Generic Other]

38. Is there a DUer we could nominate?

We have some feisty folks.

[LeftInTX]

39. I was thinking the same thing

[FSogol]

41. If nominated I will not run, if elected I will not serve.

[Alice11111]

61. I won't run, but I would serve. I think most people here

are more qualified than DT or his cabinet. At least, we know what is going on in the world.

I'm not saying I or anyone rlse here is qualified to be President, but more qualified and knowledgeable than dt, Ivanka (who wasn't registered to vote) jared, price, ....

[FSogol]

40. No, these threads lower the intelligence around here.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. If it makes the OP happy we can take the hit.

We are so smart our collective I Q can absorb the blow.

I would ask the OP why he think people who liked Ronald Reagan's politics would like Ronald Reagan Jr.'s politics when they aren't remotely similar.

[brush]

50. How about this, many who voted for trump didn't really know his politics

Many buyers' remorse trump voters may take a look at Ron Reagan because his name is Reagan and not really care about his politics either?

I know it's farfetched but I watched and listened to Ron Reagan over the years and he's been consistently progressive and vocal about it.

Atheism will be an even higher hurdle to get over though.

[dalton99a]

36. You're assuming people who voted against his senile father will vote for him

[DrDan]

49. thanks . . . I needed that

[guillaumeb]

51. In the spirit:

So if Amy Carter was the GOP nominee, we would have a Carter vs Reagan rematch?

[Alice11111]

54. No. I like him as a jounalist, but we need a certain winner

Even if it is Oprah. She will be the first to admit she isn't qualified, but if it takes a celebrity to win, so be it. She is smart enough to get Obama to lead the teansition team and get smart people around her.

No more chances. We are going to win next time, though there may not be anything left of any real government or standing among nations by then.

[MrScorpio]

65. You are funny

[DemocratSinceBirth]

66. I like a Mark Cuban/Lebron James ticket.

[Bucky]

68. He'd bring over the Castro-haters in Florida

Although a Mark Cuban/Joachim Castro ticket might make half the addled minds in Miami explode.

[lame54]

71. Lose...

no admitted atheist is gonna get the job

[tblue37]

72. He would not be interested in running. nt

[0rganism]

74. 2020? can we just put that aside until AFTER 2018?

ffs, we have big problems to deal with now and a must-win congressional election in 2018 or else 2020 is just going to be a big flopping disappointment all around. how about focusing on optimal candidates for governorships and house races?

[radical noodle]

76. Very badly, I'm afraid.. n/t

[DinahMoeHum]

78. Please. If he's not interested, he ain't running. Let it go.

LET. IT. GO.

[PoliticAverse]

79. He wouldn't be the nominee. He'd lose in the primaries. n/t