|
Maybe this is too simplistic, but wouldn't basically any white candidate for Team D lock up Ohio? Going from that it seems like the Republicans have a huge task in winning Virginia, Florida and Nevada/Colorado.
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 01:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 07:19 |
|
|
menino posted:Maybe this is too simplistic, but wouldn't basically any white candidate for Team D lock up Ohio? Going from that it seems like the Republicans have a huge task in winning Virginia, Florida and Nevada/Colorado. Tell that to president kerry.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 01:55
|
|
|
There's even a decently progressive white male Democratic Senator from Ohio. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvmKstQMIEo
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 02:00
|
|
|
Joementum posted:There's even a decently progressive white male Democratic Senator from Ohio. He's light years better than either of my senators.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Everything they have both done in public life makes it clear that Schweitzer is better than Clinton on pretty much every issue so unless you think he's been bullshitting since 2005 when he became governor and for the 8 years he was governor, I'm gonna have to disagree with you. And just because someone is a blue state senator doesn't mean they are worth anything. Look at my state of NJ for example. If anything they are more likely to come out of a corrupt political machine. Has Clinton been shilling as hard for coal as Schweitzer has?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Has Clinton been shilling as hard for coal as Schweitzer has? He's for cap and trade and I'm not sure she is... At least he's for it now. Granted that they are both pretty bad on climate change. mcmagic fucked around with this message at 02:23 on Jan 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
Hillary will also clean house in the Midwest. Ohio, PA, and Michigan would be solidly out of play for Republicans. She probably will make North Carolina go back to being uncompetitive but Florida should also be easier to win.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Tell that to president kerry. 2004 != 2016
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 02:30
|
|
|
Ironically enough the only candidate I can think of who would put KY into play is Clinton. They loving love the Big Dog down there and HRC cleaned house in the '08 primary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 02:57
|
|
|
I grew up in Kentucky and used to canvass down there - there is a reason that Hillary trounced Obama in Kentucky in 2008 and it's deeply related to how well "Uncommitted" performed in 2012. Where did that "Big Dog" thing come from anyway? I feel like it sprung into existence around 2012 and I can't recall it ever being a thing before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:I grew up in Kentucky and used to canvass down there - there is a reason that Hillary trounced Obama in Kentucky in 2008 and it's deeply related to how well "Uncommitted" performed in 2012.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
If Hillary does end up getting the nomination, I can't even imagine how amazing Bill's DNC speech will be.  And politics aside, I kind of want to live in a world where we get Bill Clinton, First Husband.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 03:15
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:Where did that "Big Dog" thing come from anyway? I feel like it sprung into existence around 2012 and I can't recall it ever being a thing before. It's from the 2000 election. First mention is by Joan Walsh at Salon followed shortly (and obviously) by MoDo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
Slate Action posted:If Hillary does end up getting the nomination, I can't even imagine how amazing Bill's DNC speech will be. Obama's speech too. It will be a hell of a contrast to be able to put him up there when the last Republican President has been disappeared since he left office.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 03:18
|
|
|
I have this weird hope that Obama's last speech leaving office will be him nodding, clearing his throat and going, "You try working with these loving clowns." before dropping the mic and walking calmly to Marine One with Michelle and the kids.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 03:24
|
|
|
Joementum posted:It's from the 2000 election. First mention is by Joan Walsh at Salon followed shortly (and obviously) by MoDo. I thought it was referring HRC's interview where she called him "a hard dog to keep on the porch". http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/aug/02/clinton.usa
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
dusty posted:I thought it was referring HRC's interview where she called him "a hard dog to keep on the porch". That's actually a reference to a George HW Bush campaign speech from August, 1992.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 04:27
|
|
|
Joementum posted:That's actually a reference to a George HW Bush campaign speech from August, 1992. Dammit - trumped by 7 years 
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 05:33
|
|
|
A lot of people keep saying things like "there's no better candidate", "we can't get someone that ISN'T a corporatist", "well it's not like we'll find someone who was against the war", all sort of what-are-the-alternatives sort of stuff being said, but... Isn't Elizabeth Warren running? Isn't she, like, better than Clinton in basically every way? I could understand, maybe, people saying they would be supporting Clinton because they thought she had a better chance in the general, but Warren is one of the few people I feel like I might actually like if she were elected. Mind you, I'm mostly opposed to Clinton for many of her actual policies, which I find insultingly bad (ban video games and criminalize flag burning! Get rid of those pesky laws reigning in police and three letter agencies so they can do whatever they want more easily!). She's always struck me as the sort of Democrat who is a Democrat solely because they believe they will be more successful with a (D) next to their name instead of an (R), but their actual opinions could comfortably be found in either party. I just... haven't ever seen a reason to like her, most of all. What has she ever actually accomplished that would indicate hope for a Clinton presidency? But Warren has opposed the wars, is at least open to drug reform and rescheduling, wants to raise taxes on the wealthy, and other good things right? And wasn't she was somehow polling at 8% in that poll listed earlier, despite most people outside of MA probably having no idea who she is?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 05:38
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:A lot of people keep saying things like "there's no better candidate", "we can't get someone that ISN'T a corporatist", "well it's not like we'll find someone who was against the war", all sort of what-are-the-alternatives sort of stuff being said, but... No, she isn't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
quote:Isn't Elizabeth Warren running? No, there are no signs that she is that I'm aware of. She is in a position of remarkable power to make progress on her main political goals right now as a Senator, has no chance to win the Presidential election, and faces the same Catch-22 situations Obama does if she actually won in some fantasy world. quote:Isn't she, like, better than Clinton in basically every way? She is better on a major issue that is important to us here, but she can't win the election and has shown no distinction as a leader outside of that particular area. Clinton is a more distinguished leader.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
FuriousxGeorge posted:No, there are no signs that she is that I'm aware of. It's not just that there are no signs she's running, she's announced that she isn't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 05:44
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:It's not just that there are no signs she's running, she's announced that she isn't. It's not just that she's announced that she isn't (this would be the default position of any non-joke candidate) it's that she signed on to a letter with every other Democratic women in the senate backing Hillary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 05:50
|
|
|
Howard Dean's going to bring that 2003 magic back, I can feel it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 06:18
|
|
|
Dean actually got asked about running on the last Real Time and he was like "ehheheheheh never say never, but, uh, yeah I don't see that happening" or whatever. He strikes me as a guy who's pretty much done with the pain of elected politics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 07:01
|
|
|
What was 'Hillarycare' anyway? Is there a brief rundown so I could compare it to the PPACA?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 07:12
|
|
|
The Entire Universe posted:What was 'Hillarycare' anyway? Is there a brief rundown so I could compare it to the PPACA? It was a watered-down sort of universal healthcare. Not single-payer, but HMOs and other managed-care organizations would've been much more regulated to make sure proper service levels were met. All employers would've been mandated to provide coverage options. By still allowing multiple private insurance providers in the game, the regulatory costs would've been massive, and this was one of the rallying cries against it. Every so often, some Democrat puts up legislation that re-authorizes Medicare, only it takes out the words "age 65 or over" or whatever the magic phrase is, and would basically turn the US into a single-payer nation. Nothing ever comes of it. skaboomizzy fucked around with this message at 07:25 on Jan 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 07:22
|
|
|
Elizabeth Warren is never running, and if you think she is, you're naive/dumb. Plus, she does more good in the Senate than on a quixotic presidential campaign.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 07:56
|
|
|
The only conceivable leftist who might be running from a "real" political position of any relevance would be Sanders, who's openly flirted with the idea but even he has more or less admitted it would just be to draw attention and get conversations started about certain topics. Of course, he wouldn't be running as a democrat, either, so it wouldn't be a primary challenge.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 08:09
|
|
|
Maybe this time the Draft Gore movement will get somewhere. Also I don't think John Edwards has ruled anything out as of yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 09:11
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:Maybe this time the Draft Gore movement will get somewhere. And maybe Herman Cain will run again too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 10:21
|
|
|
The Entire Universe posted:What was 'Hillarycare' anyway? Is there a brief rundown so I could compare it to the PPACA? PPACA is virtually a copy of the then-GOP alternative to Hillarycare. HEART Act I think it was? I can't look it up now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 11:25
|
|
|
Arrowsmith posted:PPACA is virtually a copy of the then-GOP alternative to Hillarycare. HEART Act I think it was? I can't look it up now. No, it isn't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
After Obama the thing I want absolutely most out of the next nominee is someone with some god drat fight in them who will call out the horrors we've been witnessing for the last 6 years for what they are. I really bought Obama's 08 pitch about being able to bring opposition on board and it turned out to be the wrongest I've ever been about anything in politics. I knew Republicans were scum back then but I never thought they'd actually aggressively sabotage their country for YEARS on end. I'm not saying Hillary is or isn't this person, but another 2008 idea that seems hilariously stupid in hindsight is that Hillary carries baggage in the sense that Republicans already hate her. They will hate anybody we put up with a white-hot frothing rage, there is nothing to gain by picking somebody they don't pre-hate. It's all they have, their entire platform and identity. The people who loving hate Democrats beyond all reason or comprehension.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
Breaking on NYTimes, Christie knew about lane closings, according to the Port Authority. That should pretty much eliminate him from 2016.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
It's just so weird because that's what you'd have to assume, because how in the hell could he have not. Then on the other hand how could he be so dumb to just straight up lie when it was an impossible story to bury and the truth was certain to come out. I guess if you assume the truth would sink you anyway, go for the hail mary?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
Gimme the smoking gun. I'm at half-mast here Wildstein, help a brother out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
enbot posted:It's just so weird because that's what you'd have to assume, because how in the hell could he have not. Then on the other hand how could he be so dumb to just straight up lie when it was an impossible story to bury and the truth was certain to come out. I guess if you assume the truth would sink you anyway, go for the hail mary? It's a common trait among powerful people - they honestly think they can bluff their way out of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
So the field is not something like Paul, Cruz, Bush (lol), Walker, and probably some of the book tour clowns?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 07:19 |
|
|
Rygar201 posted:So the field is not something like Paul, Cruz, Bush (lol), Walker, and probably some of the book tour clowns? Ryan, Rubio, Jindal, ~~Mitt~~.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 22:05
|
|