john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 14,543
|
Post by john07 on Nov 27, 2020 23:43:41 GMT
I'm going to double down on my big assumption. Feel free to quote me, also. I think it will be former President Donald Trump versus Joe Biden in 2024. I would not put money on Donald Trump still being alive in 2024. I am not yet convinced that Joe Biden will be on the ballot either?
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Nov 29, 2020 15:53:48 GMT
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Nov 29, 2020 15:54:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Nov 29, 2020 16:09:21 GMT
It never ceases to amaze me how important family names are in American politics. A few years ago it helped a lot for Republicans to be a Bush, now it seems you have to be a Trump. And the Democrats are no different - Kennedy,Clinton, now it seems Obama. Yet another dubious characteristic in this so-called democracy.
|
|
|
Post by Daft H'a'porth A'peth A'pith on Nov 29, 2020 19:47:07 GMT
It never ceases to amaze me how important family names are in American politics. A few years ago it helped a lot for Republicans to be a Bush, now it seems you have to be a Trump. And the Democrats are no different - Kennedy,Clinton, now it seems Obama. Yet another dubious characteristic in this so-called democracy.
It's the American's wish for a Royal Family.
|
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,245
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Nov 29, 2020 20:07:16 GMT
It never ceases to amaze me how important family names are in American politics. A few years ago it helped a lot for Republicans to be a Bush, now it seems you have to be a Trump. And the Democrats are no different - Kennedy,Clinton, now it seems Obama. Yet another dubious characteristic in this so-called democracy. To be fair - I mention the Cecils, the Spencer-Churchills, the Chamberlains, the Hoggs, the Sandys family, etc.. Often related to each other.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Nov 29, 2020 20:13:15 GMT
It never ceases to amaze me how important family names are in American politics. A few years ago it helped a lot for Republicans to be a Bush, now it seems you have to be a Trump. And the Democrats are no different - Kennedy,Clinton, now it seems Obama. Yet another dubious characteristic in this so-called democracy. To be fair - I mention the Cecils, the Spencer-Churchills, the Chamberlains, the Hoggs, the Sandys family, etc.. Often related to each other. And the Benns.
|
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,173
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Nov 29, 2020 20:21:09 GMT
It never ceases to amaze me how important family names are in American politics. A few years ago it helped a lot for Republicans to be a Bush, now it seems you have to be a Trump. And the Democrats are no different - Kennedy,Clinton, now it seems Obama. Yet another dubious characteristic in this so-called democracy. To be fair - I mention the Cecils, the Spencer-Churchills, the Chamberlains, the Hoggs, the Sandys family, etc.. Often related to each other. The Foots, the Wedgwood-Benns, the Kinnocks, the Asquiths and Bonham-Carters ... Let's not pretend it's all on one side of the political spectrum.
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Nov 29, 2020 20:31:16 GMT
It never ceases to amaze me how important family names are in American politics. A few years ago it helped a lot for Republicans to be a Bush, now it seems you have to be a Trump. And the Democrats are no different - Kennedy,Clinton, now it seems Obama. Yet another dubious characteristic in this so-called democracy. Romney, as the son of the former Governor of Michigan, falls into that category as well.
|
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,245
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Nov 29, 2020 20:32:39 GMT
To be fair - I mention the Cecils, the Spencer-Churchills, the Chamberlains, the Hoggs, the Sandys family, etc.. Often related to each other. The Foots, the Wedgwood-Benns, the Kinnocks, the Asquiths and Bonham-Carters ... Let's not pretend it's all on one side of the political spectrum. I wasn't - I was pointing to the long standing families going back centuries. The Kinnocks, etc, don't. The Bonham-Carter's slipped my mind.
|
|
|
Post by Richard Cromwell on Nov 29, 2020 21:30:19 GMT
To be fair - I mention the Cecils, the Spencer-Churchills, the Chamberlains, the Hoggs, the Sandys family, etc.. Often related to each other. The Foots, the Wedgwood-Benns, the Kinnocks, the Asquiths and Bonham-Carters ... Let's not pretend it's all on one side of the political spectrum. The Feet!
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,620
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Nov 29, 2020 21:36:26 GMT
The Foots, the Wedgwood-Benns, the Kinnocks, the Asquiths and Bonham-Carters ... Let's not pretend it's all on one side of the political spectrum. The Feet! At the back of my mind there's Footes as well. Wasn't a relative of Victoria Wood a political Foote?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2020 22:03:25 GMT
It never ceases to amaze me how important family names are in American politics. A few years ago it helped a lot for Republicans to be a Bush, now it seems you have to be a Trump. And the Democrats are no different - Kennedy,Clinton, now it seems Obama. Yet another dubious characteristic in this so-called democracy. Worth noting Pierce Bush lost a Congressional primary in Texas and Joe Kennedy III lost in Massachusetts in 2020.
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 14,543
|
Post by john07 on Nov 30, 2020 1:04:49 GMT
To be fair - I mention the Cecils, the Spencer-Churchills, the Chamberlains, the Hoggs, the Sandys family, etc.. Often related to each other. The Foots, the Wedgwood-Benns, the Kinnocks, the Asquiths and Bonham-Carters ... Let's not pretend it's all on one side of the political spectrum. The Feet was not a particularly successful political dynasty. Sir Hugh Foot was a Liberal diplomat who was Governor of Cyprus for three years. His son Paul Foot wrote for Private Eye and was seen a a supporter of the SWP. Dingle Foot was a Liberal who moved to the Labour Party and was MP for Ipswich. John Foot was a Liberal who never made it ultimately the Commons but was made a life peer. Michael Foot was a Labour MP for many years and eventually was selected as a compromise candidate to lead the Labour Party to avoid having Denis Healey or a hard line left winger. Just how four brothers (one generation) from different political parties constitutes a ‘political dynasty’ is a mystery that tells us more about the confusion in mind the original poster than anything else.
|
|
|
Post by grahammurray on Nov 30, 2020 2:00:47 GMT
The Foots, the Wedgwood-Benns, the Kinnocks, the Asquiths and Bonham-Carters ... Let's not pretend it's all on one side of the political spectrum. The Feet was not a particularly successful political dynasty. Sir Hugh Foot was a Liberal diplomat who was Governor of Cyprus for three years. His son Paul Foot wrote for Private Eye and was seen a a supporter of the SWP. Dingle Foot was a Liberal who moved to the Labour Party and was MP for Ipswich. John Foot was a Liberal who never made it ultimately the Commons but was made a life peer. Michael Foot was a Labour MP for many years and eventually was selected as a compromise candidate to lead the Labour Party to avoid having Denis Healey or a hard line left winger. Just how four brothers (one generation) from different political parties constitutes a ‘political dynasty’ is a mystery that tells us more about the confusion in mind the original poster than anything else. Michael began as a Liberal before ending as an illiberal.
|
|
European Lefty
Labour
Can be bribed with salted liquorice
Posts: 5,517
|
Post by European Lefty on Nov 30, 2020 2:03:41 GMT
How clear does Michelle Obama have to be that she's not running before people stop trying to get her to?
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Nov 30, 2020 8:42:27 GMT
How clear does Michelle Obama have to be that she's not running before people stop trying to get her to? Well if Harris hasn't said that she obviously isn't a serious candidate......it's what all real candidates have to say.
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,159
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Nov 30, 2020 9:15:18 GMT
The Feet was not a particularly successful political dynasty. Sir Hugh Foot was a Liberal diplomat who was Governor of Cyprus for three years. His son Paul Foot wrote for Private Eye and was seen a a supporter of the SWP. Dingle Foot was a Liberal who moved to the Labour Party and was MP for Ipswich. John Foot was a Liberal who never made it ultimately the Commons but was made a life peer. Michael Foot was a Labour MP for many years and eventually was selected as a compromise candidate to lead the Labour Party to avoid having Denis Healey or a hard line left winger. Just how four brothers (one generation) from different political parties constitutes a ‘political dynasty’ is a mystery that tells us more about the confusion in mind the original poster than anything else. Michael began as a Liberal before ending as an illiberal. The reason for the lack of ongoing dynasty is partially linked to the fact that Michael Foot's brother died of Huntingdon's, and was certainly why he did not have a family. He always refused to discuss it, I suppose there were a lot more taboos attached to hereditary disease then
|
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,173
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Nov 30, 2020 9:30:28 GMT
At the back of my mind there's Footes as well. Wasn't a relative of Victoria Wood a political Foote? Her brother, Chris Foote Wood.
|
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,173
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Nov 30, 2020 9:33:49 GMT
The Foots, the Wedgwood-Benns, the Kinnocks, the Asquiths and Bonham-Carters ... Let's not pretend it's all on one side of the political spectrum. I wasn't - I was pointing to the long standing families going back centuries. The Kinnocks, etc, don't. The Bonham-Carter's slipped my mind. The left has had much less long for such dynasties to establish themselves, but they are there in the making.
|
|