|
Well, no one bought it when Elizabeth Warren endorsed Hillary Clinton, no one will buy this either.
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 13:35 |
|
|
Alter Ego posted:Well, no one bought it when Elizabeth Warren endorsed Hillary Clinton, no one will buy this either. Elizabeth Warren only signed a letter urging Hillary to run for President, she never officially endorsed her. She was wearing a running suit in her latest interview! #ReadyforWarren
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
Joementum posted:1. The Vice Presidential pick doesn't matter at all in terms of votes received in the general election.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
Real endorsements, already? Has Clinton even formed an exploratory committee yet? And didn't she learn from last time? Getting people on your bandwagon before they see the other options tends to result in them jumping off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
Nameless_Steve posted:Real endorsements, already? Has Clinton even formed an exploratory committee yet? ...no it doesn't, getting endorsements locked down means that person has a much harder time jumping to the other side than if they'd never endorsed at the beginning. What on earth would make you think it's bad to rack up early endorsements?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 23:45
|
|
|
I don't get the impression that Hillary asked Dean for an endorsement.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
Nameless_Steve posted:Getting people on your bandwagon before they see the other options tends to result in them jumping off. Don't think Hillary lost last time because Howard Dean endorsed her too early. Endorsements themselves are almost always overrated whenever they occur but if this means Dean is not running/actively recruiting an opponent against her, it's a huge win for Hillary if you are looking at it remotely objectively.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 23:51
|
|
|
SpiderHyphenMan posted:What about Palin? There's some evidence that Palin actually helped McCain's final vote tally by turning out more of the base in 2008, but I did leave off a couple of qualifiers from that statement. The Vice Presidential pick doesn't matter if the pick is someone generally perceived as qualified for the office. Palin fails that test, obviously, and Eagleton might be another example, though McGovern was doomed anyway. The other qualifier that I left out is that the VP pick doesn't matter in the post-McGovern primary reform era. Prior to that, the pick was used to bargain at the convention for delegate support. Nixon allowed Thurmond to hand him a list of acceptable names, which is how we got Agnew.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
No good process ever ends with "which is how we got Agnew."
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 00:08
|
|
|
Eschers Basement posted:No good process ever ends with "which is how we got Agnew." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qwk_epMblW4
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
Eschers Basement posted:No good process ever ends with "which is how we got Agnew." "Future people found this headless corpse and brought it to life to act as the vice president"
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 00:17
|
|
|
SpiderHyphenMan posted:What about Palin? Or Leiberman? I know for a fact that Gore choosing him cost him some votes, including mine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
Joementum posted:There's some evidence that Palin actually helped McCain's final vote tally by turning out more of the base in 2008, but I did leave off a couple of qualifiers from that statement. The Vice Presidential pick doesn't matter if the pick is someone generally perceived as qualified for the office. Palin fails that test, obviously, and Eagleton might be another example, though McGovern was doomed anyway. The other qualifier that I left out is that the VP pick doesn't matter in the post-McGovern primary reform era. Prior to that, the pick was used to bargain at the convention for delegate support. Nixon allowed Thurmond to hand him a list of acceptable names, which is how we got Agnew.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
FMguru posted:IIRC Quayle was a such a risible joke that it did cost Bush a point or a point-and-a-half in the final tally. But for the most part VP picks have little effect - a really bad one can cost you slightly, and if a good pick buoys the ticket, that's probably a sign that the top of the ticket is weak and is probably going to lose (I think Bentsen in 1988 was good for Dukakis, but the fact that a VP pick was enough to bump his polls was a sign of how deep a hole his campaign was in). I've always considered those sort of VP strategies akin to a hockey team pulling their goalie near the end of the third period: it's a sign of desperation by a team that knows it's probably already lost, rarely results in any spectacular turn-around, and can make a loss that much more humiliating (if the other sides nails an empty-net goal).
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
DynamicSloth posted:Don't think Hillary lost last time because Howard Dean endorsed her too early. No, but whereas in 2007 endorsing the inevitable Hillary in the first place had no effect, Ted Kennedy's switching his endorsement to Obama was a major event in the race. Not that Dean is that kind of power player, but I still think you should see the whole menu before you order. It's too early for people to be paying attention so it will get less coverage than it would have otherwise. I don't want Hillary to cruise to the nomination. I'm supporting her this time around, but I want her to earn it, and I want a vigorous and lively primary season. When she was down in 2008, she claimed that staying in and drawing out the primaries: gave the Democratic party and liberal ideas exposure and energy; created the campaign infrastructure and volunteer base that was such a boost come Election Day; and made the eventual nominee a better candidate. Was that a position of convenience? Probably, but true nonetheless.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 03:09
|
|
|
It should be noted, Democracy for America (née Dean for America) is still Ready for Warren.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Or Leiberman? I know for a fact that Gore choosing him cost him some votes, including mine. If Gore choosing Lieberman cost him a few votes in Vermont and California, but gained him votes in Palm Beach, that's not a bad tradeoff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 03:53
|
|
|
Joementum posted:It should be noted, Democracy for America (née Dean for America) is still Ready for Warren.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 05:03
|
|
|
I am not able to follow politics as much as I would like, but I get the impression that there is only about a 5% chance of a Warren run in 2016. Although... if Hillary wins in 2016/2020, Warren has basically lost any shot of the presidency by being too old for 2024. That said, I am still thinking around 5% - thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 06:01
|
|
|
OctoberBlues posted:I am not able to follow politics as much as I would like, but I get the impression that there is only about a 5% chance of a Warren run in 2016. Although... if Hillary wins in 2016/2020, Warren has basically lost any shot of the presidency by being too old for 2024. That said, I am still thinking around 5% - thoughts? Biden is her only hope; ain't no way Hillary lets herself get upstaged by a woman who excites the base more than she does.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 06:05
|
|
|
So, what do we change the thread title to if the (R) primary starts and Jeb or Mitt have it locked down from the start? Because right now I don't know if they're really gonna feel like they need any redefining.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 06:30
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:So, what do we change the thread title to if the (R) primary starts and Jeb or Mitt have it locked down from the start? Because right now I don't know if they're really gonna feel like they need any redefining. "Abandon all hope" because Jeb is going to be a shoe-in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 06:53
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:So, what do we change the thread title to if the (R) primary starts and Jeb or Mitt have it locked down from the start? Because right now I don't know if they're really gonna feel like they need any redefining. 2012 was still entertaining even though this was still true.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 06:59
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:"Abandon all hope" because Jeb is going to be a shoe-in. This is gonna be hilarious. ~General Election Debate #1~ Hillary: i was secstate, a senator, i was basically already president until black nicolae carpathia came calling Jeb: im fatbush; i look like bush, but fat
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 07:17
|
|
|
computer parts posted:2012 was still entertaining even though this was still true. Oh, absolutely--and the establishment efforts to stave off a clown-car primary and rally 'round the anointed Guy might push the lunacy to the sidelines a bit this year, but might only encourage Paulist rules-lawyering and discontent from the tea partiers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 07:20
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:This is gonna be hilarious. A republican candidate's biggest challenge (other than painting their policies as not retarded) is being drug around in the primaries. If Jeb clears the field in three to four primaries then he's in a pretty good position. Add in that no one gives a poo poo about secstate outside of polisci nerds and that she's going to be tied to everything related to Obama, gives Jeb a good shot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 07:42
|
|
|
He's not going to be tied to everything Bush?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 07:49
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:He's not going to be tied to everything Bush? You really don't want to see how, "Miss Me Yet?" polls these days.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 07:51
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:You really don't want to see how, "Miss Me Yet?" polls these days.  Raskolnikov38 posted:A republican candidate's biggest challenge (other than painting their policies as not retarded) is being drug around in the primaries. If Jeb clears the field in three to four primaries then he's in a pretty good position. To lose.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 07:52
|
|
|
Also he has the added advantage of it being true when he says "I was not part of my brother's administration."
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 07:52
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:A republican candidate's biggest challenge (other than painting their policies as not retarded) is being drug around in the primaries. If Jeb clears the field in three to four primaries then he's in a pretty good position. Add in that no one gives a poo poo about secstate outside of polisci nerds and that she's going to be tied to everything related to Obama, gives Jeb a good shot. Also, a lot rides on the economy. If late 2016 starts looking like 2001 (or god forbid 2008), Jeb could easily take the presidency. Given that we're already past the mean time between recessions in the post-war era, there's a fairly good chance that if Obama doesn't get a recession in his last two years in office, Hillary will almost certainly have one in her first term. If you want a Democratic president with coattails in 2020, there's slim chance of that right now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 08:01
|
|
|
.
BristolSOF fucked around with this message at 07:12 on Apr 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 08:05
|
|
|
BristolSOF posted:Two questions regarding Hillary's VP pick - Gutierrez or Castro, depending upon what weakness in her narrative she needs to counter. Yes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 08:07
|
|
|
,
BristolSOF fucked around with this message at 07:12 on Apr 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 08:12
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Gutierrez or Castro, depending upon what weakness in her narrative she needs to counter. Gutierrez is from Illinois, and he's known for his speaking skills but lacks any notable power. Julian Castro seems more likely since he's secretary of HUD and obviously has ambitions. What do you think might lead Hillary to pick Gutierrez as her running mate?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 08:13
|
|
|
BristolSOF posted:Noted. Hillary would probably go hard Gutierrez, if she thought she had an actual chance at losing the primary. By the time you get to the convention where that becomes a serious consideration, you've got more problems than just choosing a Veep: You've got rules fuckery to skullfuck you over and you end up with everyone hosed over. Webb's angling for Veep, I think. Hillary, Biden, Emanuel, Warren: Choose two* *H+B does not work. B+E does not work. H+W does not work. E+B does not work. W+B does not work. W+H does not work. If scenario does not work, move on to third tier: Gutierrez, Castro, Webb If scenario does not work, move on to fourth tier: Dean, (Go back to second-tier "does not work") If scenario does not work, move on to fifth tier: Nixon, Sanders, Duckworth, that one guy from New Mexico, random California choice, maybe a black guy? Chamale posted:Gutierrez is from Illinois, and he's known for his speaking skills but lacks any notable power. Julian Castro seems more likely since he's secretary of HUD and obviously has ambitions. What do you think might lead Hillary to pick Gutierrez as her running mate? Actual progressive grassroots opposition to her candidacy combined with a moderate Republican like Romney, Bush, Rauner, or McCain. e: Some explanations of the systems I find to be operating: Hillary will not, can not, accept Veep to someone she feels doesn't "deserve" to be President. Biden cannot, will not, accept Veep to someone he doesn't think would be a better President than him, and thats an extremely narrow list. Emamuel is willing to pull a Lieberman 2008 if it gets him better positioned to become President. No candidate will choose a black male as their first-tier Veep choice, nor will a black male be a first-tier candidate. The race is Hillary's to lose, namely, by being unable to distinguish herself from the perceived Republican frontrunner, and from overcompensating for such. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 08:37 on Dec 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 08:22
|
|
|
,
BristolSOF fucked around with this message at 07:13 on Apr 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 08:29
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Hillary would probably go hard Gutierrez, if she thought she had an actual chance at losing the primary. By the time you get to the convention where that becomes a serious consideration, you've got more problems than just choosing a Veep: You've got rules fuckery to skullfuck you over and you end up with everyone hosed over. I know you'd like to be Hillary's veep, Rahm, but while you were buddy buddy with Hillary up until Obama ran, I question whether she'd not count your ostrich behavior in 2008 as a betrayal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 08:30
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:If scenario does not work, move on to fifth tier: Nixon Governor Jay Nixon of Missouri? That man is 7 billionth tier, the corpse of Osama bin Laden would be a better VP pick than him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 08:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 13:35 |
|
|
Chamale posted:Governor Jay Nixon of Missouri? That man is 7 billionth tier, the corpse of Osama bin Laden would be a better VP pick than him. Yes, unless the situation calls for a white male and Webb is found with a live boy or dead girl, Dean goes Munch, and Emanuel can't be used, in which case Nixon is the last one left alive. ComradeCosmobot posted:I know you'd like to be Hillary's veep, Rahm, but while you were buddy buddy with Hillary up until Obama ran, I question whether she'd not count your ostrich behavior in 2008 as a betrayal. While you keep your friends close, you keep your enemies closer. Which party hosts their convention first in 2015?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 08:40
|
|