PDA

View Full Version : Hickenlooper expected to announce run for president next week.....



MMC
03-02-2019, 01:58 PM
John Hickenlooper has scheduled an event in Denver on March 7 where he is expected to join the throng of Democrats vying for the White House in 2020.


The former Democratic governor of Colorado, who has been mulling a run for months, received a permit to hold an event billed as a “celebration” in Denver’s Civic Center Park, the Colorado Sun reports (https://coloradosun.com/2019/02/28/john-hickenlooper-presidential-bid-announcement/). Sources close to Hickenlooper said Thursday that Hickenlooper would be announcing a run sometime during the first week of March.....snip~


https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...ected-to-announce-run-for-president-next-week (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/john-hickenlooper-expected-to-announce-run-for-president-next-week)


LMAO.....another Clown for the Clown Car. The Demos are going to really have one big circus. What say ye?

Green Arrow
03-02-2019, 04:27 PM
I say this was a natural outcome after the same thing happened on the GOP side in 2016. Every few decades, the parties go through a realignment of sorts. Trump pretty much forced the GOP into a realignment in 2016, and AOC and the younger generations of Democrats are forcing a realignment for the Democrats in 2020. Where it all ends up is impossible to predict, but I could see it leading to a viable and competitive third party. The GOP is moving in a more far-right direction and the Democrats are moving far-left, which could create an opening for the moderates in both parties to split off and form an Independent Party (or whatever they call it) that could compete with the other two.

I wouldn’t consider that a likely conclusion, but it is still a possibility.

Tahuyaman
03-02-2019, 04:59 PM
The GOP is not shifting to the far right. Not even close. The assertion that they are is not based on anything resembling reality.

If anything the GOP is going to shift slightly to the liberal side in an attempt to attract the voters who are being forced out of the Democrat party.

Peter1469
03-02-2019, 05:33 PM
I say this was a natural outcome after the same thing happened on the GOP side in 2016. Every few decades, the parties go through a realignment of sorts. Trump pretty much forced the GOP into a realignment in 2016, and AOC and the younger generations of Democrats are forcing a realignment for the Democrats in 2020. Where it all ends up is impossible to predict, but I could see it leading to a viable and competitive third party. The GOP is moving in a more far-right direction and the Democrats are moving far-left, which could create an opening for the moderates in both parties to split off and form an Independent Party (or whatever they call it) that could compete with the other two.

I wouldn’t consider that a likely conclusion, but it is still a possibility.
The GOP is center, flirting with the left.

donttread
03-03-2019, 10:41 AM
John Hickenlooper has scheduled an event in Denver on March 7 where he is expected to join the throng of Democrats vying for the White House in 2020.


The former Democratic governor of Colorado, who has been mulling a run for months, received a permit to hold an event billed as a “celebration” in Denver’s Civic Center Park, the Colorado Sun reports (https://coloradosun.com/2019/02/28/john-hickenlooper-presidential-bid-announcement/). Sources close to Hickenlooper said Thursday that Hickenlooper would be announcing a run sometime during the first week of March.....snip~


https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...ected-to-announce-run-for-president-next-week (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/john-hickenlooper-expected-to-announce-run-for-president-next-week)


LMAO.....another Clown for the Clown Car. The Demos are going to really have one big circus. What say ye?

These primaries should be something.

Tahuyaman
03-03-2019, 11:58 AM
The GOP is center, flirting with the left.They're more than just flirting. They have gradually, but steadily moved away from conservatism since the very late 80's.

MMC
03-03-2019, 12:00 PM
These primaries should be something.

https://media.giphy.com/media/RHiD0K65NxxLO/giphy.gif

Tahuyaman
03-03-2019, 12:15 PM
These primaries should be something.

There's the risk that watching them will make one dumber. When you watch, you will need to do so with the mind-set as you would if you went to watch a zany comedy, like Dumb and Dumber.

Peter1469
03-03-2019, 12:46 PM
They're more than just flirting. They have gradually, but steadily moved away from conservatism since the very late 80's.

Bush the Elder led the way.

Tahuyaman
03-03-2019, 12:49 PM
Bush the Elder led the way.
Absolutely. That's why I said from the "very late 80's".

It is inexplicable how anyone can make this odd claim that the GOP is shifting to the right, far or otherwise . Especially someone who thinks of himself as being well informed.

donttread
03-03-2019, 08:08 PM
They're more than just flirting. They have gradually, but steadily moved away from conservatism since the very late 80's.

Social or fiscal? Because it's been at least that long, possibly longer since there were enough fiscal conservatives in DC to field a baseball team.

Tahuyaman
03-03-2019, 08:14 PM
Social or fiscal? Because it's been at least that long, possibly longer since there were enough fiscal conservatives in DC to field a baseball team.


Both.

donttread
03-03-2019, 09:00 PM
Both.

Well as a fiscal conservatism , Reagan was an offender not a hero. The debt more than doubled under his regime. Through 1913 we had less than 3 billion in debt. Then the Sixteen amendment and POOF 25 billion by 1919. But then there were periods of surplus. And so it continued, war and depression caused increased debt but they were followed by surpluses as times got better. Until the mid 50's or so when the surpluses all but ended . And now the the last two presidents regimes are the worst offenders by amount and both top 5 by percentage increase of the debt. But Trump is on a good pace to possibly break Obama's records.
Fiscal conservatism in federal government is all but dead. And now no one is even trying to limit the deficits! I believe the debt when Bushbama took charge was around 6 trillion. Think about that. 18 years later it's more than 2 and a half times that!

Tahuyaman
03-03-2019, 09:10 PM
Well as a fiscal conservatism , Reagan was an offender not a hero. The debt more than doubled under his regime. Through 1913 we had less than 3 billion in debt. Then the Sixteen amendment and POOF 25 billion by 1919. But then there were periods of surplus. And so it continued, war and depression caused increased debt but they were followed by surpluses as times got better. Until the mid 50's or so when the surpluses all but ended . And now the the last two presidents regimes are the worst offenders by amount and both top 5 by percentage increase of the debt. But Trump is on a good pace to possibly break Obama's records.
Fiscal conservatism in federal government is all but dead. And now no one is even trying to limit the deficits! I believe the debt when Bushbama took charge was around 6 trillion. Think about that. 18 years later it's more than 2 and a half times that!
Reagan never had a conservative majority to keep spending down.

Peter1469
03-04-2019, 05:19 AM
Reagan never had a conservative majority to keep spending down.

He did get the dems to vow to cut spending. But the dems lied.

MMC
03-04-2019, 09:12 AM
He did get the dems to vow to cut spending. But the dems lied.

Demos did the same with Poppy Bush.

donttread
03-04-2019, 06:36 PM
Reagan never had a conservative majority to keep spending down.

LOL. Because that's what the repubs do when they have a majority? No it's not.

Tahuyaman
03-04-2019, 06:50 PM
LOL. Because that's what the repubs do when they have a majority? No it's not.
Did Reagan ever have a conservative majority to work with?

donttread
03-05-2019, 06:55 AM
Did Reagan ever have a conservative majority to work with?

You do make a good point. We talk about what happens under a particular regime blaming or extolling the president , but congress is an important factor. Of course we get this from candidates themselves whom like all politicians make promises and take credit but project blame on to others.
However, the thing is that we hire these people to collectively manage the country and they have collectively sucked at it for decades. So when will we hold them collectively accountable?
Bottom line , these people we elect can't even balance a budget once in awhile much less run a country.

Common
03-05-2019, 07:04 AM
Wow this democratic field is going to be huge, they are going to have to make a lot of rule changes to exclude many of them from debates

Common
03-05-2019, 07:07 AM
You do make a good point. We talk about what happens under a particular regime blaming or extolling the president , but congress is an important factor. Of course we get this from candidates themselves whom like all politicians make promises and take credit but project blame on to others.
However, the thing is that we hire these people to collectively manage the country and they have collectively sucked at it for decades. So when will we hold them collectively accountable?
Bottom line , these people we elect can't even balance a budget once in awhile much less run a country.

When nothing gets done its always congress that did nothing, republicans in congress are known for doing nothing, getting nothing done, not sticking together and just all around sucking

One of the best things to happen to the GOP is Paul Ryan, Gowdie, Flake and Corker are gone and god rest his soul no insult intended John McCain isnt in congress gumming up the works

The democrats are better organized, they stick together better and they have more gumption and fortitude than the GOP and until that changes republicans are going to just keep losing ground

Green Arrow
03-05-2019, 10:12 AM
Wow this democratic field is going to be huge, they are going to have to make a lot of rule changes to exclude many of them from debates

Yeah, the whole “undercard debate” idea they came up with for the 2016 GOP primaries was neat, but ultimately it’s probably not worth the cost and logistics. If I recall correctly, Carly Fiorina was the only undercard to graduate to the main stage and even then she still flamed out relatively quickly.

Then again, I think the 2016 undercard debates did bring in more ratings, so they might ultimately decide to keep it for the 2020 field. We shall see.

Tahuyaman
03-05-2019, 10:28 AM
Wow this democratic field is going to be huge, they are going to have to make a lot of rule changes to exclude many of them from debates
It's going to be interesting to see how they handle that. Three nights of debates maybe evey month?

Hoosier8
03-05-2019, 10:29 AM
It's going to be interesting to see how they handle that. Three nights of debates maybe evey month?

The DNC has limited debate to 20 and two tiers.

Tahuyaman
03-05-2019, 10:33 AM
The DNC has limited debate to 20 and two tiers.
The details are bound to tick off some.
https://www.npr.org/2019/02/14/694841980/initial-democratic-primary-debates-will-accommodate-up-to-20-candidates

Given the historically large number of Democrats expected to run for president in 2020, the Democratic National Committee is preparing to host the first two primary debates, with each debate split into two consecutive nights to accommodate up to a maximum of 20 candidates.