He’s been pretty good to the Democrats lately. He keeps vetoing good bills from Ohio’s Republicans.Originally Posted by Zincwarrior
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wky...5-77ed0ad6d426
“COLUMBUS – Ohio Gov. John Kasich on Wednesday vetoed a GOP-backed proposal to force prosecutors to prove a shooter acted in self-defense.”
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I wouldn't be surprised if it was Kasich.
With liberty and justice for all...must be 18, void where prohibited, some restrictions may apply, not available in all states.
I never did like Kasich, and that veto is a good example of why. His reasoning on that particular veto is that of a simpleton. I keep hoping Ohio will finally get rid of the "duty to retreat" and this burden of proof travesty in case I ever have to move back there. That will never happen with him in power.
They over-rode his veto.
Which makes it an even dumber reason to turn against your own party.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by Josh Runkle; 01-18-2019 at 07:53 PM.
If Mueller had something we would have heard by now. As it is, Mueller's team has called the BuzzFeed story on Cohen "not accurate." So that's gone too.
And am I the only one who is disgusted by the "investigation" into Trump? Last I checked, law enforcement is supposed to investigate crimes, not people. And before you say, collusion, that's not a crime listed in any federal statute.
I’ve been using RCP as a source of polling data for a number of years.
This week they have Biden first with 27%, then Bernie with 19%, then Beto at 9.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...tion-6730.html
The rest of the field is 5% or below.
Biden gives them a known ‘Presidential’ candidate and ‘Experience’, obviously. A Biden/Beto ticket would be interesting; but as Diverse as the D’s like to portray themselves, I don’t know two men is a winning ticket.
Bernie? I dunno.
Beto is an unknown nationally, in my view.
D’s lost key swing states in 2016: FL, PA, etc.
One way to look at it would be to select a candidate with strong ties to one of those States. I figure a D is a lock win for CA, NY, etc. so the difference will be even more on the swing states, now that Trump is a known quantity.
One problem I perceived for the Dems in 2016 was they didn’t seem to run ‘for’ something as much as they ran ‘against’ Trump.
I’ll have to go look at the D Platform, but it’s hard to see how it becomes even more Progressive than what they have now, assuming the Party mobs left, if AOC is any bellwether of things to come.
Last edited by RJ; 01-20-2019 at 06:23 PM.
The Biden popularity really surprises me- he was useful as an older, experienced politician when paired with a presidential candidate who wasn’t, but the gaffes, the inappropriate touching, Northeastern liberalism, his advanced age, and his demographics seem to add up to someone who won’t appeal to either the Democrat base or the broader voting public. Even if he picks a younger, more dynamic VP, I see him losing to Trump. I genuinely believe that Warren, despite the genetic testing missteps and her apparent awkwardness on social media, is more electable.
For the talk of presidential campaigns, I’m very curious to see the eventual VP nominee.
They didn't run a campaign at all.
They tried to run a coronation.
Well, yeah, when you put it like that lol...
Idk about Warren. Maybe? She has a bit too much ‘nasty’ in her (her word, not mine) for my liking. Perhaps if she works on her electability. The ‘Pocahontas’ thing is going to hurt.
Agreed, and I expect that will change.
I don’t see the D candidate ignoring WI this time. And the D get out the vote campaign will get a big push to the AOC crowd.
Question for y’all: when Trump gets impeached in 3 to 5 months (my guess) will that help or hurt the D candidates?
