The politics of 2024 and who do you think will be best for us

[Donica]

Not sure I like any of the recent presidential candidates, but the race for California Senator is taking off, as Sen. Dianne Feinstein is expected to retire at the end of her term in 2024. So far, there are 3 Democratic candidates entering the race to take Feinstein's place in 2024. Rep. Adam Shiff, Rep. Katie Porter, and Rep. Barbar Lee, all 3 Democrats. I'm sure there will be others not as pleasing. Let's put another Democrat in the Senate.

[awkward-yet-sweet]

2 hours ago, Ivy said:

At the risk of sounding "Woke", this seems like a bad reason for not wanting women to run for office.

 

Not a reason for not wanting women to run...it just means that the majority who do are the kind I find very unacceptable.  

 

A few women who have raised large families could be quite helpful at returning this nation to sound fiscal principles.  But those are exactly the type of women who have other things to do and wouldn't consider running.

[Ivy]

1 hour ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

A few women who have raised large families could be quite helpful at returning this nation to sound fiscal principles.  But those are exactly the type of women who have other things to do and wouldn't consider running.

Perhaps.  I've raised 8 kids and there's no way I'd run for anything.

[awkward-yet-sweet]

It seems like the bitterest irony is that the people who probably should be running the show would never think of running or would want to.  Sometimes I favor the concept of choosing politicians by lottery instead of election.  Then normal people might have a chance. 

 

On a side note, my husband was asked to run for sheriff a couple of years ago.  He declined, but ended up managing the campaign of our current sheriff.  I'd love to see my husband in political office someday...like a state senator or something.  But I know he'd say it would be safer being handed a live cobra in a sack.  🙄

[Willow]

Good morning 

 

many of my comments are out there to spark continuing conversation and are never meant to insult or hurt anyone, including an all female ticket.  I seriously doubt that would have a chance but what if it did?

 

@Marcie Jensen I was trying to avoid naming names. But here goes at the risk of getting blasted.  First, vp Kamala Harris.  She has not shone any presidential moments in my opinion and has done nothing with her alleged assignments.  The other would be e speaker Nancy Pelosi.  If there was ever a more divisive speaker of the house I can’t imagine who it would have been.  Insulted Trump at the State of the Union address,  Changed her position on legislation that she had backed when proposed by a Democrat but decided it was a terrible idea when proposed by a Republican.  Argued against allowing Presidential decrees while backing Obama’s.  Yes there are others on both sides of the aisle with similar behavior and they all need to go.  The whole point of term limits and maximum age is to get fresh ideas and give others a chance,  she is one who is past her prime.

 

There I said it and I expect I will be blasted for it.  But it is my opinion which I am permitted and I will defend your right to have a different opinion.  In fact I already did defend your rights as I am a veteran.

[Willow]

Marcie I guess I didn’t connect the dots.  You listed not people but key positions in government I was referring to that.

[Marcie Jensen]

23 minutes ago, Willow said:

Good morning 

 

many of my comments are out there to spark continuing conversation and are never meant to insult or hurt anyone, including an all female ticket.  I seriously doubt that would have a chance but what if it did?

 

@Marcie Jensen I was trying to avoid naming names. But here goes at the risk of getting blasted.  First, vp Kamala Harris.  She has not shone any presidential moments in my opinion and has done nothing with her alleged assignments.  The other would be e speaker Nancy Pelosi.  If there was ever a more divisive speaker of the house I can’t imagine who it would have been.  Insulted Trump at the State of the Union address,  Changed her position on legislation that she had backed when proposed by a Democrat but decided it was a terrible idea when proposed by a Republican.  Argued against allowing Presidential decrees while backing Obama’s.  Yes there are others on both sides of the aisle with similar behavior and they all need to go.  The whole point of term limits and maximum age is to get fresh ideas and give others a chance,  she is one who is past her prime.

 

There I said it and I expect I will be blasted for it.  But it is my opinion which I am permitted and I will defend your right to have a different opinion.  In fact I already did defend your right, others on both sides of thre aisles as I am a veteran.

Good heavens, Willow! I agree with you about Ms. Harris and Ms. Pelosi, and for exactly the same reasons. There are, as you point out others on both sides of the aisle that are similar in behavior. No question of it.

 

I guess that I too failed to connect the dots. I was trying to say that this country has numerous examples of women who have risen to positions of power in government at all levels, so accepting an all woman ticket shouldn't be an issue. Frankly, everything you have said in this thread makes sense and I fully agree with.

 

Also, neither you, nor anyone else should be blasted for expressing their opinion. For any reason. From one veteran to another, thank you for serving and the sacrifices you made when you served.

[Willow]

Thank you Marcie.  I must admit I didn’t make many sacrifices.  4 years USAF. First one was all training. Then 18 months in info China and finally just over a year in Alexandria Va.  I was a special electronics technician.  Authorized civilian clothing while in Indo China.  Treated as permanent party as soon as I left basic.  But I did give of myself and received a letter of commendation from our commanding general for a job well done.  None of this is in my jacket because it was all TS at the time.  I am still restricted on certain places I can’t go or have to report.

 

and thank you for your service.

[Marcie Jensen]

My pleasure, Willow. Most of my time was spent in civvies, too. I was what is now called a "Clandestine Case Officer" (used to be a different title, but someone senior needed a bullet on their fitness report) and held that same security clearance. My specialty was the Middle East. And like you, there are places I can't go.  And by joining, serving and still being restricted in where you can travel, you ARE sacrificing to this day, IMHO.

 

Also, thank you for starting this thread. The discussion is meaningful and important. Let's hope it continues for a long time!

[Ivy]

 

Nikki Haley was mentioned.

 

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/2024-republicans-race-bottom-already-underway-rcna71466

 

"Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R) on Thursday criticized the so-called Don’t Say Gay measure signed into law by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) last year, saying it doesn’t go “far enough.” ... “Basically, what it said was you shouldn’t be able to talk about gender before third grade,” Haley said at a town hall in Exeter, N.H., according to Fox News. “I’m sorry, I don’t think that goes far enough.”

 

"The South Carolinian is basically telling GOP primary voters not to be too impressed by the Floridian’s notorious anti-LGBTQ measure — because she’d go in an even more reactionary direction."

 

Nope.

 

[Marcie Jensen]

I am NOT endorsing any candidate at this point; it's far too early. But we need to remember that news organizations have an agenda too. We also need to remember to look at the entirety of a person's remarks and the context in which they are spoken. The MSNBC article reminded me of what one of my professors in seminary used to say. It was "Exegete the entire passage and never take a verse in isolation.'" With that, and that alone, here is the rest of the quote that MSNBC did not include along with the context. (Being cynical about the media, I took the trouble to find and read a transcript of Ms. Haley's remarks.)

 

Context: she was discussing parental rights in educating their children and contrasting it with her own experience in school.

 

Quote's final part: “When I was in school you didn’t have sex ed until seventh grade. And even then, your parents had to sign whether you could take the class,” she added. “That’s a decision for parents to make,”

 

This puts a bit of a different spin on things as she was talking about sex ed in general as opposed to singling out any particular group. It's also interesting that just before these remarks she was addressing the need for the GOP to get younger in its leadership and become more inclusive. 

 

Again, I'm NOT endorsing any candidate or party. I don't belong to either, nor will I after the last election cycle. I don't trust the media, frankly, to be objective and can only stress the need to find out the totality of what's being said as opposed to what's being reported.

[Willow]

As I was saying earlier in this thread.  Since at least the 60s the media has controlled what people hear from a candidate and about a candidate.  If you read her history as a politician you will see that she managed to stop a lot of the anti transgender rhetoric in South Carolina.  It certainly was too soon to change it all but she stopped things like the bathroom bill, forced the DMV to take your picture regardless of how you were dressed as long as you could still be recognized.  And started allowing doctors and hospitals to treat us.

 

Not saying she’ll get nominated or that politicians don’t change their platform as it suits them but for a republican she pretty moderate.  Perhaps she can at least influence the Republican Platform.

 

regarding sex Ed. I don’t think that belongs in elementary school.  However, I know that girls had private classes about things unique to them including periods and related changes even when I was that young centuries ago. LOL.  Boys generally nothing until we were high school seniors.  And then it was about STDs.  Am I old fashioned in that regard?  Maybe I am.  But the media needs to stay out of controlling our election.

[Marcie Jensen]

I don't think you're being old fashioned at all, Willow. I don't believe children as young as 5 or 6 (kindergarten) need, or understand, sex ed. At my age there are things I don't want to know. LOL And, I agree with you in everything you've said about the media and politics. 

 

My point was (I hoped) to point out why folks need to look at the entire content rather than the sound bite and sensationalism the media so loves. Guess I wasn't clear. Apologies.

[Ivy]

19 minutes ago, Marcie Jensen said:

I don't believe children as young as 5 or 6 (kindergarten) need, or understand, sex ed.

Probably not.

But pretending transgender people don't exist doesn't make it so.

I think younger kids can understand gender on some level without it being a "sex ed" thing.  When I was that age I saw gender roles and such, but there was no interest in physical sex.  A "man in a dress" was just that - a curiosity perhaps.

[Marcie Jensen]

17 minutes ago, Ivy said:

 

But pretending transgender people don't exist doesn't make it so.

Granted. But, the CONTEXT of Ms. Haley's remarks were made in regard to sex ed only. Nothing more and nothing else. She said nothing about transgender people one way or the other, and frankly, her record as governor was pretty trans-friendly. Especially for a republican in a deep red state.

 

That said, I doubt she will the GOP nomination due to how the primary system is rigged, and it's sad for a whole bunch of reasons. 

[Ivy]

This is true, I went back and checked. .Taken out of context and to some extent misrepresented.

And when she was governor, her policies were nothing like what's happening now.

[Willow]

I can’t really add anything to @Ivy or @Marcie Jensen s’ recent comments as I agree with both.  Neither major party is really a party of the majority anymore.  They are both parties of the elite and the rest of us choose based on who we like least and vote for the other.  And I’ve said it before the media doesn’t write up everything that might change peoples mind they too pick one side or the other and choose what they say accordingly.  
 

look at the tv news.  Do any of then report unbiased political news.  I think it’s pretty evident they don’t.  One in particular has gone ult right and the others generally go left until after the election.  Then it doesn’t matter who you are, you gets lots of negative press by all.

[Willow]

I see that the concerns regarding Transgender rights being trampled in the next election are being discussed on other platforms.  Nikki Haley is being talked about on at least one.  Pro, the things she did for us in SC, con that’s was a number of years ago and she may change her stripes to have any chance of winning.  I haven’t heard much about Desantos other than he could be a lot like Trump.

 

at least both Republicans and Democrats are agreeing on one thing anybody but Trump and anybody but Biden. The Biden numbers are worse than the Trump numbers.  That was according to a media report so who knows the truth.

[Willow]

I’m a little behind on the news.

 

Who is Vivek Ramaswamy, 37?  Is he our next threat if elected president?  From what little I know, he seems to be against everything, I didn’t see anything we was FOR.  But I admit I didn’t go searching yet.  What he is against in broad brush strokes was easy.  

 

 

[Marcie Jensen]

All I've heard is that he's an entrepreneur who has written two books: "Woke, inc." and "Nation of Victims." He co-founded Strive Asset management. He's pretty vague about his positions on issues, but seems to favor a meritocracy in all aspects of life, both public and private. Two days ago he wrote an op-ed piece for the Wall Street Journal about why he's running for president, but again it's pretty vague. Here's a link to the WSJ article:

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-im-running-for-president-c4a8ea7

[awkward-yet-sweet]

I've never heard of Vivek Ramaswamy.  He can run if he wants, but I doubt he'd end up with more than 1 or 2% of the vote since he isn't a household name. 

 

We know Trump will run, but I don't think he's going to get the Republican nomination.  The problem with that is he'll likely decide to run with some new party, and he'll split the vote like Teddy Roosevelt or Ross Perot.  That was how we got Woodrow Wilson and Bill Clinton (ick on both counts), and it'll mean another 4 years of Biden.  Stick a fork in it at that point.

[Willow]

If the January 6th committee would get Justice moving or Georgia would get charges filed, or New York even, we might not have to worry about Trump.  However, I think he still has just enough ptfe slathered all over everything that he won’t get convicted of anything.  In case someone doesn’t know ptfe is generic for DuPonts Teflon. (Which they stopped producing when their patent ran out.)

 

@Marcie Jensen thanks for the WSJ reference.

 

Willow

[Willow]

Well it’s like I thought, nothing new, just another way to promote MAGAISMs, and take yet another swipe at us.  

[Marcie Jensen]

3 hours ago, Willow said:

Well it’s like I thought, nothing new, just another way to promote MAGAISMs, and take yet another swipe at us.  

I agree. I think that sums it up nicely.

[Charlize]

I will simply say that i seriously doubt i will support any republican.  Conservative has changed to be applied in social matters. The party of Lincoln, trying to hold a nation together is now finding support in dividing groups rather than unification.

 

Hugs,

 

Charlize