Is This How You Feel?

From a Politico article:

What I heard from the voters I talked to was mounting angst and indecision. That Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are too far to the left. That Biden is too old. That Pete Buttigieg is too young. That Tom Steyer has too much money. I heard them yearn for a candidate who was just right, squarely in the middle, in the middle of the age range, and of the political spectrum, and of the country itself.

Does this express how you feel?

The excerpt is from an article about Amy Klobuchar, who is running a distant 6th in the polls.

Personally, I like Amy (I like Pete, too). She’s vibrant, outspoken, mature (but not old), and has a fiery spirit that would allow her to stand toe-to-toe with the insults and misogyny remarks she’d undoubtedly get in a debate with Trump.

For me, her “politics” are agreeable/compatible so I could see voting for her.

Regrettably, she’ll most likely never get on the ballot. Even if she happened to move up in the polls, there are still far too many people in this country who are unable to accept a woman president (which is why I have strong doubts that Elizabeth will make the cut). And that’s unfortunate when you consider there are women leaders in other countries who have done quite well (certainly far better than the current U.S. leader!).

Sadly, we’re not there yet.

However, as the saying goes … “You never know.” Besides, a LOT can happen between now and November …

34 thoughts on “Is This How You Feel?

  1. A lot certainly can happen Nan. I’ve warmed up to the thought of Amy as President. I think she’d make a good one. I’m like you though, I just don’t know if our misogynist country is ready yet. We’re way passed due. If she doesn’t make it to the top, I do think a VP slot would be great for her. A Biden/Klobuchar ticket might be pretty good. Look, beating you know who is THE most important thing. We can’t forget that. Whatever that looks like? I’m in!

    Liked by 2 people

  2. I don’t know a lot about Klobuchar, and I haven’t put too much energy into “choosing” a candidate — Oregon votes late in the primary process, and the top priority is just to get Trump out.

    I do have reservations about most of the major candidates (though in Buttigieg’s case it’s more that he strikes me as too religious and too unpopular with black voters), but no candidate is perfect.

    I don’t see why being a woman is such an obstacle, when Hillary won the popular vote by three million, and countries like Germany, the UK, Israel, Norway, Brazil, etc. have elected women leaders. Are we really so far behind all those places?

    That being said, Obama is pretty much “just right, squarely in the middle, in the middle of the age range, and of the political spectrum, and of the country itself” — and if he were eligible to run again, I don’t think we’d even be having a primary contest. He’d get the nomination again easily.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Yes … that part about Oregon puts us somewhat at a disadvantage. *sigh*

      True, Hillary did well but I wonder if part of that was name recognition.

      I agree with you about Obama. He may have had his faults and failures but he had the charisma to win the POTUS title. And yes, he could probably do it again.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. I agree, Sanders is too old and doesn’t always make a lot of sense (In a way it’s like talking to your Uncle Fred who’s 85 and dribbles when he eats but we love him anyway, because), Biden is someone I see as damaged, in some way (and also too old), Elizabeth Warren I don’t think has a chance, although you never know. Hell, Hillary won the last time, why not Elizabeth?
    And Hillary was a lot more gracious about having it taken away from her than Trump was, as the dubious winner. Above all else, she has class.

    And I do not like to think what would happen if and when Trump is either voted out of office or they vote to remove him. I think it’s going to be incredibly ugly. They might even have to burn down the White House to get the rat out.

    We won’t know until we get there, in any direction.

    Liked by 8 people

    • Yes … there’s always a chance we could get a woman president. Hope springs eternal.

      Something I look at beyond the political position of these candidates is how well they would fare in a debate with Trump. As I mentioned, I think Amy has the fire to stand her ground. I do not think Elizabeth would do well. She’d have the policies down pat, but I think Trump would eat her for breakfast in a verbal dispute. Biden would stumble all over himself. Pete could probably hold his own.

      Anyway, as you said … we won’t know for sure about any of it until we get there.

      Liked by 2 people

    • All our candidates have flaws. None has even remotely as many or as bad flaws as Trump.

      Elections are always a contest between two flawed individuals, not a judgment on one flawed individual in isolation.

      The kind of person who would vote for Trump, in most cases, doesn’t care about flaws and virtues, but just wants somebody who will hurt all the people he hates. The kind of person who does care about flaws and virtues would, I think, vote for almost anyone else over Trump.

      And yes, the reaction of some Trumpanzees if/when trump loses the election will be ugly. Many of them are violent, angry, stupid, and heavily armed. But it’s got to be done. We can’t allow the whole country to be held hostage at gunpoint indefinitely.

      As for getting Trump out if he refuses to recognize the election result, remember that (a) most of the military take their oaths to the constitution quite seriously, (b) much of the rank-and-file of the military is black or Hispanic, and (c) much of the upper military leadership is pretty pissed off at Trump because of various acts and remarks of his that have offended them. The Trumpanzees like to think the military would side with them in a real conflict. There are reasons to doubt that.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. “… there are still far too many people in this country who are unable to accept a woman president…”

    There seems to be people who feel like that all over the globe, but they are growing less and less by the hour. Here in Finland we have had a woman president Tarja Halonen. She was fairly popular and a socialist who ran two terms and still takes part in discussion about human rights issues. Now we have the youngest premier in the world Sanna Marin (34), who happens to be a woman and a socialist, who has made clear that she wants to fight against the climate change.

    The thing is, that opposition to women in politics usually comes from conservatism. People who are against women politicians do not have any rational reasons to hold that view. They simply resent the idea, because it is new. Yet, it was already in the 1980’s when a conservative woman politician Margaret Thacher became the premier of UK. Today, the extremely populist right-wing parties around Europe are being led by women, or hold women in high places of their hierarchy, even though it is among the voters of those parties, that one finds the most misogynist attitudes. There is a strange contradiction there, but because I do not expect anything rational from them, I am not that surpriced about the obvious lack of consistency. They are generally the sort of people who have a very limited, or somehow impaired perspective on the world, wich is why they so often heavily rely on conservatism and traditional values rather than reason. The tragedy of conservatism is that it deems things to be good and reliable, because they have “worked” in the past and have gotten us this far, but because everything changes all the time, that wich was good on those terms few decades ago, no longer is. The conservative is therefore only repeating what the previous generation did and held as valuable, not something that has always been good. If a person has no morals based on empathy, then that person becomes dependant on some set of rules to tell them what is good.

    It seems like a person might be too much a woman, but not too much a man to become the president of the US, wich is weird from looking at the situation from the outside. On the other hand, the first woman in Space Valentina Tereshkova was sent there by the Soviets already in 1963, but the US managed to sent first woman into space only 20 years later. Was sending a woman too much for the US technology for all that time, or was it about people in those days being impaired by their attitudes? Since then, the US has remedied that and the attitudes have changed, at least in NASA and no harm has followed, but instead new generations of women who do not have to be limited by misogynia in that sense have grown. Perhaps, it was time they voted.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Great thoughts and perspective!

      I really enjoy your comments, ratutakyy. They carry a lot of weight coming from someone not directly affected by all that’s going on in the states. (BTW, I hope/think you recognize how lucky you are that you live elsewhere at this particular point in time! 🙂)

      Liked by 3 people

    • “The tragedy of conservatism is that it deems things to be good and reliable, because they have “worked” in the past and have gotten us this far, but because everything changes all the time, that which was good on those terms few decades ago, no longer is. The conservative is therefore only repeating what the previous generation did and held as valuable, not something that has always been good. If a person has no morals based on empathy, then that person becomes dependant on some set of rules to tell them what is good.”

      This is an excellent point.

      Where I live, I find it’s the older generation, that is so entrenched in conservatism. So maybe attrition is always the key in the long run.

      I also think we have more of an uphill battle in the US, due to our country being so much more religious, which is the other side of the coin of conservatism.

      Liked by 2 people

      • I agree, Mary. The “old fogies” just don’t want to face the fact that “the times they are a-changing.” I’m no spring chicken by any stretch of the imagination, but I made up my mind long ago that I will NOT let myself get dragged down into the pits of old thinking.

        Time and life move on … why people want to cling to what used-to-be is simply mind-boggling to me. That was then. This is now. And we are living in the NOW!

        Liked by 2 people

  5. I think Elizabeth Warren could hold her own with Trump, she seems to know her own mind well enough. It is time a woman was in the Presidency and I think she has the stature for it. Her policies might be a little misguided in parts but at least they show she cares about the people and not her own bank balance,Perhaps she could partner with Amy Klobuchar and make a formidable duo. No fear of her causing any wars and I think she;’d bring all the old allies to the fold.
    Hugs

    Liked by 2 people

    • Elizabeth has her good points, I agree. And policy-wise, she very much knows her stuff. But in a toe-to-toe match with tRumpsky? I just think she’d be too restrained. However, having said that, I wouldn’t mind seeing it come to pass and her prove me wrong. 🙂

      Totally agree that the combination of her and Amy would be WOW!

      Liked by 2 people

  6. I don’t have a say, but Klobuchar was my favourite right from the start.

    My only gripe with the field in general is that none seem to have the fury to, on Day 1, sign an E.O that undo’s EVERYTHING that orange stain did. Literally, everything, and then stand before the cameras and say, “The nightmare is over.”

    Liked by 3 people

    • I thought I heard — somewhere along the way — that one of the candidates asserted they WOULD do that … ?? Maybe not the “nightmare” remark (which I LOVE), but they’d undo the EO’s.

      Liked by 1 person

    • John, I’m a little surprised (naive perhaps?) by how well you and other non-Americans follow our federal politics. Is this normal? PLEASE tell me the rest of the world—that is the sane, independent-thinking free world—doesn’t take our arrogant self-absorption seriously! Do you? Do they? 😮 🤔

      Like

        • I assume you mean W. Bush, not H.W. Nonetheless, sorry for that. As a once charter founder of the League of Nations (United Nations), we deserve no world accolades anymore than Russia, China, North Korea, Israel, or countries like Iran. “Permanent seats” with veto power at the U.N. Security Council certainly doesn’t represent our historical merits for war crimes nor presently, e.g. the criminal assassination of Qasem Soleimani, no matter what any tyrant has done. If I’m wrong, then WHY have we not assassinated Bashar al-Assad of Syria!?

          That’s a rhetorical by the way.

          Liked by 1 person

  7. I think the electorate has changed since 2016, when Hilary actually won. Remember the Women’s March after trump’s election? Think of all the Democratic women from trump land who are now in Congress (and under fire and need money for re-election, folks). Suburban women, including Republicans, are fighting mad.

    I keep reading more and more articles about Amy’s electability (eg, David Leonhardt in The New York Times). Tonight’s the night. If she is as strong in this debate as she was last time, she will do well in Iowa, where many people haven’t made up their minds yet.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Yes!! I also thought she was strong in the last debate, but she didn’t seem to get much feedback on this, which I thought rather strange. But that’s politics for you. And the pundits.

      Like

  8. I probably shouldn’t comment here on the post or Presidential candidates and their campaigns/debates, etc. For the last 15-20 years I’ve completely stopped watching or listening to ANY federal campaign propaganda and rhetoric from both our dominate parties. Even a candidate like the late John McCain—who had an unusually high moral, ethical, military and political standard of principles (for Americans!)—when he ran against Obama, can get horribly caught up in winning at all costs, the means justifies the end sort of mindset of dirty (corrupt?) campaigning!

    Therefore Nan, during every 10-16 month Presidential campaign I tune out everything except ProCon.org’s website when the time comes to begin comparing candidates. IMHO and peace of mind, that’s all I need. 😉

    https://2020election.procon.org/

    Liked by 1 person

  9. I am more concerned about the plausibility of those folks at the center and left of, who may vote for a Demo, finding common ground to enthusiastically support one candidate. I am so skeptical.
    I am afraid that DT will win again because democrat voters cannot unite, which explained some of what happened last time. I mean it’s like we sit around bitching at each other over which road to take to the same goal.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. I mean it’s like we sit around bitching at each other over which road to take to the same goal.

    Good point! However, under the current circumstances, I tend to think the road is quite clear for most of us — GET RID OF TRUMP!

    Liked by 1 person

  11. I agree. I think Amy is the best bet for the democratic line up, and would be more likely to bring people together. I don’t understand why she is not more of a front runner in the party.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I think part of her not being a front runner is her “unknown-ness” in that she’s never really been in the pubic eye before now. Along with the fact that Biden and Sanders are well-known — and Warren is making herself known. As has been discussed before, too many voters have no clue on the issues and simply vote for a familiar face.

      Also … $$$$$. Unfortunately our electoral candidates are often chosen more for their “dollar value” than they are for their platforms; that is, how much money they have available to put themselves in front of the voting public.

      Nevertheless … as many have said, it’s not November yet and much can happen between now and then.

      Like

Don't Be Shy -- Tell Us What You Think!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.