KillingtonZone.com

OK all you prognosticators and Trump complainers. Here's your chance to weigh in on who will be running in 2020:

My 4 choices, in no order, are:

Kaine, fresh off a fairly strong run as VP.
McCaskill, a Midwestern senator that has been making the talk show rounds and doing a good job of it.
Gore, Nixon made it on round 2, why can't Al?
Warren, big name recognition and she could scoop up the Bernie voters.

Way too soon to even think about it but I'd expect Elizabeth Warren to spend the next few years laying the groundwork for a run. Corey Booker will probably raise his profile as will Julian Castro. McCaskill will be viewed as too close to Hillary. Kaine may suffer the same fate. The party will be looking for newer, younger faces so expect a lot of new faces on the usual political talk shows.

They really need to get Pelosi out of power and start to rebuild. The guy running against her seems okay from what I know.

2020 might be too soon for him but look for Seth Moulton's name in the future.

What about the republicans? With the republicans about to take office it seems premature to talk about, but I'd like to see Charlie Baker take a more national role as well.

You're all assuming Der Fuehrer will allow elections after declaring himself the ruler of the universe.

Don't forget he can't harm you unless you invite him in.

I don't think it will matter for two reasons.

1. I fully expect Trump to be a two term President. He is taking over a country that is on fairly solid footing financially. It certainly isn't like 2008 with the nation on the brink of disaster. I don't see that changing in four years. He would have to do something massively unpopular such as get us into another full scale war. I don't believe he will do that.

2. 4 years is not enough time to fix the damage Clinton has done. There would need to be a massive shift at the local levels to gain enough votes to challenge a Republican. That will likely take 8 years or more.

Doubling down on identity politics is unlikely to yield big results for the D's...Warren has very little draw outside the pockets of deep blue and is certainly despised by most if not all of red america...
Booker is a viable possibility if he can manage to tow the fine line between identity politics and building a broader coalition, no small feat...castro is a spanish version of the current agitator in chief and a non starter for many...the rest are clintonistas and likely non starters as well...It's most likely that a new face will need to emerge from the weeds if the D's are to have any shot in 2020...barring absolute catastrophe the incumbent has very strong advantage that will be difficult to overcome...we've had like 2 one term presidents in the last 50 yrs...


The D's got a lot more to worry about than 2020 right now starting with finding a new DNC chair to replace the shyster that replaced the previous shyster...Ellison would be a VERY poor choice so I assume he's a lock...

After that they are going to need to seriously attempt to find some kind of inroads to state and local politics where the R's have a huge advantage...2020 will also bring the next census and redistricting for house of representatives will occur thereafter...Unless the D's are able to make huge gains at the state level ( virtually impossible right now) the house of representatives will remain R for a long time...


The possibility of voter ID laws and much tighter border control also do not bode well for the D's and their GOTV machine upon which they rely so heavily...

In short identity politics has relegated the D's to a one trick pony that falls flat w everyone outside their sphere of influence...

deadheadskier wrote:4 years is not enough time to fix the damage Clinton has done.

It's crazy how this is lost by many. All these folks protesting Trump and burning/looting their own neighborhoods and they seem to overlook the omnipresence of the Clinton's in all their anger.

XtremeJibber2001 wrote:

deadheadskier wrote:4 years is not enough time to fix the damage Clinton has done.

It's crazy how this is lost by many. All these folks protesting Trump and burning/looting their own neighborhoods and they seem to overlook the omnipresence of the Clinton's in all their anger.

this damage was created by obama and furthered by clinton and the D's et al...his identity politics scorched earth approach is what led to this backlash...The cooperation of the MSM in the facilitation of this attempted coup is what led to the blindsiding of the masses and left them with no recourse other then feeble protest which as XJ mentioned are simply attacks on their own interests...

Sanctuary cities and threats of violence are only serving to isolate the D's from the rest of the country...Do these morons even think through their actions or is knee jerk stupidity the holy grail for them?

it should be pretty easy to see that this whole sanctuary city, let's invite every illegal and criminal element in the country to relocate to these bastions of freedom aka crime and poverty infested $hitholes is a losing proposition ...That the fed will cut off funding to them doesn't seem to register w the likes of rahm and the cadre of idiot minions like him...The rest of red america already despises these $hitholes and seeing them double down on all that makes them so despicable and ensuring their descent into even deeper crime and poverty won't cause them to shed a tear...quite the opposite in fact...the bonus is that the limousine liberals living in these cities will be the first and foremost victims of their own ideology...let the good times roll...

Bubba wrote:Way too soon to even think about it but I'd expect Elizabeth Warren to spend the next few years laying the groundwork for a run. Corey Booker will probably raise his profile as will Julian Castro. McCaskill will be viewed as too close to Hillary. Kaine may suffer the same fate. The party will be looking for newer, younger faces so expect a lot of new faces on the usual political talk shows.

Corey Booker would be a good medium between Clinton and Sanders

thedev wrote:

Bubba wrote:Way too soon to even think about it but I'd expect Elizabeth Warren to spend the next few years laying the groundwork for a run. Corey Booker will probably raise his profile as will Julian Castro. McCaskill will be viewed as too close to Hillary. Kaine may suffer the same fate. The party will be looking for newer, younger faces so expect a lot of new faces on the usual political talk shows.

Corey Booker would be a good medium between Clinton and Sanders

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... n-boy.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... er/278992/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cory_Booker" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

freeski wrote:They really need to get Pelosi out of power and start to rebuild. The guy running against her seems okay from what I know.

Agreed... Pelosi is awful.

boston_e wrote:

freeski wrote:They really need to get Pelosi out of power and start to rebuild. The guy running against her seems okay from what I know.

Agreed... Pelosi is awful.

pelosi's day has come and gone, but she was a very powerful speaker who was able to ram thru the obama agenda, particularly the ACA...That set the course to where we are now...Soooo w/o pelosi ( and reid) what exactly would obama have accomplished?

http://www.hermancain.com/democrat-cong ... ocrats-are" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Democrat Congressman Tim Ryan: Democrats are 'not even a national party at this point'

For the last 8 years, Democrats have taken great satisfaction in referring to the GOP as a "small, regional, party." Despite big mid-term wins, Dems believed they'd crushed their opponents once and for all. Obama was popular, people were just going to love ObamaCare, and the country was moving left on social issues. Then Donald Trump happened.

Now, Democrats have a historically low number of office holders. As Ohio Representative Tim Ryan says in the clip below, Dems are "at the smallest number of Democratic members of our caucus since 1929," and currently boast "the smallest number of democratic office holders in the state and federal level since just after the civil war."

Ryan is currently working to unseat Nancy Pelosi as House minority leader because he's worried about the future of his party. As he puts it:

“We’re at the point now where we are not even a national party at this point. We have some support on the coast, but we lost the support of Middle America.”

He's partially correct. A quick look at the election map will confirm that Democrats are basically anathema to most of the nation. But he's wrong when he says they "lost support." What they really did was "arrogantly drive support away."

Democrats, for all their proclamations to the contrary, wanted this. They've made it crystal clear that they despise the values, beliefs, and traditions of red state America. From booing God at their convention to Hillary's "basket of deplorables" rhetoric, they spent years making it perfectly clear that they had no interest in representing "flyover country."

The Dems displayed genuine contempt for "Middle America" and middle Americans responded in kind.

The problem facing Ryan, and others like him, is that it's going to be very difficult to put that horse back in the barn. They've fashioned themselves into the party of secularism, socialism, and globalism. Their base is a gaggle of die-hard true believers.

They can pay lip service to the idea that they've seen the error of their ways, but if the party changes course, they'll lose the radical left - which is pretty much the only thing keeping them afloat.

Let us not forget Chelsea Clinton