|
You really don't want Warren in leadership because then she couldn't be Warren. She has no interest in foreign affairs and has run away from multiple interviewers who started asking about that, which is not something you can do if you are running for President. You also don't want her to become a formal member of the leadership in the Senate because then she'd have to give up her committee spots and spend her days scheduling cloture motions. What she wants, and what her fans should want for her, is to sit on the banking or finance committees long enough to become ranking member or chair and push her agenda on the issues she cares about.
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 07:36 |
|
|
Wheeee posted:Elizabeth Warren confirming that the people you want in leadership are the people who don't want it. She'd be completely handcuffed and muzzled by the restraints that come with the Oval Office. Want to be an outspoken crusader for the little guy? Tough, you have to suck wealthy donor dick to get elected. Want to stake out principled positions on issues? Too goddamn bad, you might offend some voting demographic somewhere and jeopardize your reelection chances. She wouldn't be any more effective than Obama--in fact, she might be worse, because she doesn't have Obama's charisma, ability to work a rope line, or ability to troll Republicans so thoroughly just by existing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
Scrub-Niggurath posted:I really want to see some Saudi owned car dealership refuse to sell to women because of his religious beliefs that disallow women drivers, just so we can watch cirque du soleil levels of mental gymnastics from Indiana Republicans Women are a protected class, so the 14th amendment would trump this law. One of the insidious things about these state-level RFRAs is that there are no (or few) existing discrimination protections for the LGBT community, so these laws basically codify that, yes, you are in fact allowed to discriminate against gays.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 20:13
|
|
|
mdemone posted:I hope she never does. I don't know if you have seen Warren campaign/schmooze/speechify, but she's only average in all of the aspects that would be amplified in a national fishbowl. This. I think the people trying to draft her are unclear about how the positions they want her in spend their time. Majority/Minority Leader spends most of their day working the caucus and the minutia of legislative procedure. Reid spends more energy facing down McConnell than getting anything he personally wants to advance done. Same with President, most of Obama's job is administering the bureaucracy that makes up The Government TM and dealing with international affairs, not proposing laws and shepherding them through Congress. The best way to advance what Warren stands for would be to send in another dozen senators just like her, not have her spend her day playing the game instead of developing policy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
Not to mention the in fighting would hurt Dem chances of retaining the White House because 2008 will not be repeated.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
I look forward to Barack Obama being remembered as the high water mark for 'Leftist' Presidents for the rest of my days. Even a Hillary Presidency will probably lean further to the right on foreign policy and economics with less interest in advancing social issues, and much as I hate to say it if she gets two terms then we're downright due another Republican President. Not to mention the Republicans will probably retain the House throughout or only lose it to a pack of complete "centrist" Blue Dog types.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
That's not to say there shouldn't be a full-throated left-of-Hillary challenger candidate in the Democratic primary. There should! That's very healthy for the party, even if it's someone who won't beat Hillary.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
There's now an official campaign website: http://www.donaldjtrump.com/
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
Joementum posted:There's now an official campaign website: http://www.donaldjtrump.com/ He's still going to withdraw the moment it's no longer profitable for him to appear to be running.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:He's still going to withdraw the moment it's no longer profitable for him to appear to be running. You are assuming a level of business acumen that trump clearly does not possess.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:You are assuming a level of business acumen that trump clearly does not possess. He seemed to possess that acumen the last six times (or whatever) he dropped out in previous races before having to spend his own money.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
Dolash posted:I look forward to Barack Obama being remembered as the high water mark for 'Leftist' Presidents for the rest of my days. Even a Hillary Presidency will probably lean further to the right on foreign policy and economics with less interest in advancing social issues, and much as I hate to say it if she gets two terms then we're downright due another Republican President. Not to mention the Republicans will probably retain the House throughout or only lose it to a pack of complete "centrist" Blue Dog types. I'm no great fan of Hillary Clinton, but she's always been very much on the left end comparatively when it comes to social issues and the environment. She may be a Third Way corporate-aligned Democrat, but she would be an effective defender of environmental and social policy. She's very experienced in the legislature and foreign policy both, so despite always being hawkish I think she'd be able to be competent and that means something to me these days. Really, the biggest thing I count against her (since it relates to my primary voting issue) is her strong advocacy of charter schools, I hate the "serious people" consensus on education reform and the Clintons have always been big backers of that. That's a fight I don't think is gonna be won in the presidential elections though, but I'll definitely loudly complain and volunteer for the first person to speak against them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
Hillary is a hard sell, there's been thirty years of sabotaging her chances (whether by her own actions or spin) with lots of ammo to shoot her direction. I don't think we've met or seen the next president, yet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
echronorian posted:Hillary is a hard sell, there's been thirty years of sabotaging her chances (whether by her own actions or spin) with lots of ammo to shoot her direction. I don't think we've met or seen the next president, yet. That ammo has all been shot though. Repeatedly. Sometimes for decades. To no effect. She may be a hard sell to you, but polling doesn't support that she's a hard sell nationally.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 21:37
|
|
|
Barring some major poo poo going down that leads to a Republican winning the general, Hillary is the next POTUS. She may not be the Leftist hero that America needs, but she is the ambition-fueled sociopath that America deserves.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
echronorian posted:I don't think we've met or seen the next president, yet. Can you clarify what you mean by this? Because you can't be suggesting that the next POTUS will be a political unknown 18 months out from the election.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:That ammo has all been shot though. Repeatedly. Sometimes for decades. To no effect. She may be a hard sell to you, but polling doesn't support that she's a hard sell nationally. I wasn't aware of that. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
Joementum posted:There's now an official campaign website: http://www.donaldjtrump.com/ God please I just want to see that fucker debate
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:Barring some major poo poo going down that leads to a Republican winning the general, Hillary is the next POTUS. i too anticipate the inauguration of the first American president to have sat on the board of directors at Wal-Mart
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Can you clarify what you mean by this? Because you can't be suggesting that the next POTUS will be a political unknown 18 months out from the election. I re read my post and I chalk it up to exhaustion. Sorry for the poo poo post.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
Slate Action posted:He seemed to possess that acumen the last six times (or whatever) he dropped out in previous races before having to spend his own money. And on the other hand is a series of bankrupt casinos.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:That ammo has all been shot though. Repeatedly. Sometimes for decades. To no effect. She may be a hard sell to you, but polling doesn't support that she's a hard sell nationally. Yeah, I mean she isn't a guarantee, but she is the safest bet you could make at the moment, and it's hard to believe that some big scandal is going to sink her as though she hasn't been under scrutiny for decades. I think it's way more likely that any non-Bush GOP candidate is going to get bit by a scandal than her.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
Karnegal posted:Yeah, I mean she isn't a guarantee, but she is the safest bet you could make at the moment, and it's hard to believe that some big scandal is going to sink her as though she hasn't been under scrutiny for decades. I think it's way more likely that any non-Bush GOP candidate is going to get bit by a scandal than her. Stuff like "Landing under fire in Bosnia" while actually being greeted by a bunch of school children is going to come back big time to bite her.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
Mitt Romney posted:Stuff like "Landing under fire in Bosnia" while actually being greeted by a bunch of school children is going to come back big time to bite her. The forums keep getting worse  Look at this, a post from 2008 didn't make it through until now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
Supreme Court nominees are pretty much the only thing makes me want to vote for her. I don't see much in the way of other reasons to recommend her.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 22:42
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Supreme Court nominees are pretty much the only thing makes me want to vote for her. I don't see much in the way of other reasons to recommend her. She's guaranteed to not be worse than whoever the Republicans end up nominating, so...
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
Juvenalian.Satyr posted:I'm no great fan of Hillary Clinton, but she's always been very much on the left end comparatively when it comes to social issues and the environment. She may be a Third Way corporate-aligned Democrat, but she would be an effective defender of environmental and social policy. You have to be willing to aggressively take on corporate interests to move the needle at all on environmental matters, though. Hillary can probably be trusted to hold the status quo the Third Way democrats have carved out and maintain their alliances with those corporate entities who are willing to oppose the petrochemical lobby on energy policy, but I wouldn't look for any significant improvement under her watch. Though I'll willingly eat my hat if she manages to revive the early-Obama energy agenda and actually get some of it passed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Supreme Court nominees are pretty much the only thing makes me want to vote for her. I don't see much in the way of other reasons to recommend her. The main reason to vote for Hillary is that right now her opponents are Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, and Donald Trump. Oh and I guess Rubio.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
The minute Bernie Sanders launches a 3rd party bid I'm devoting every waking second of my off-work hours to campaigning for him and trying to destroy Hillary. All the upside of that Supreme Court thing without having to let a Clinton back into the White House.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
VH4Ever posted:The minute Bernie Sanders launches a 3rd party bid I'm devoting every waking second of my off-work hours to campaigning for him and trying to destroy Hillary. All the upside of that Supreme Court thing without having to let a Clinton back into the White House. He's said if he does it he'll go through the Dem primary. Still an honest to god no bullshit socialist means I'll probably register D just to vote in the primary if he runs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
Bernie has a 0.000000000001% chance of winning if he's the Democratic nominee, but a third party run would guarantee that not only does he have no chance, but nobody will pay attention to his campaign either. Also, prediction: Hillary will campaign and governor to the left of her previous positions because the party has moved left since the mid-aughts. SirKibbles posted:He's said if he does it he'll go through the Dem primary. Actually, he still says he hasn't decided yet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
So is this really the best the Democrats can do? Biden and Hillary? Oh, and maybe Martin O'Malley/real life Carcetti? Is the party really that pathetic aside from Liz or has the Clinton machine just bullied/beaten down anyone who considers running against Hillary?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
VH4Ever posted:So is this really the best the Democrats can do? Biden and Hillary? Oh, and maybe Martin O'Malley/real life Carcetti? Is the party really that pathetic aside from Liz or has the Clinton machine just bullied/beaten down anyone who considers running against Hillary? claude pepper's ghost for America formin' PAC now
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 23:07
|
|
|
VH4Ever posted:The minute Bernie Sanders launches a 3rd party bid I'm devoting every waking second of my off-work hours to campaigning for him and trying to destroy Hillary. All the upside of that Supreme Court thing without having to let a Clinton back into the White House. Other than the fact that you're not going to get 270 electoral votes for a self avowed socialist, sure. VH4Ever posted:So is this really the best the Democrats can do? Biden and Hillary? Oh, and maybe Martin O'Malley/real life Carcetti? Is the party really that pathetic aside from Liz or has the Clinton machine just bullied/beaten down anyone who considers running against Hillary? You seem not to notice that America is not a left wing country, the electorate isn't either. Presidents need to be able to win a majority, or get close enough anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
Hillary's positions are not substantially different from any of the Democrats who could even theoretically challenge her. They weren't in 2008 either.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
Meanwhile, NH Libertarians have decided to band together for collective action because (as always) they are idiots.quote:Sick of the string of centrist GOP-ers who’ve dominated the state’s primary in recent years — including John McCain (twice) and Mitt Romney — conservatives and libertarians are hoping to defy the conventional wisdom that the Granite State is moderate-friendly turf between the evangelical-dominated Iowa caucuses and socially conservative South Carolina. If the candidates want to win New Hampshire, I hope they've studied up on municipal parking meter regulations. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:
No see, polling proves there's a silent majority of leftists that just don't vote because something something the two party system.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Also, prediction: Hillary will campaign and governor to the left of her previous positions because the party has moved left since the mid-aughts. Also it'll be fairly easy having Congress as a foil.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
Joementum posted:There's now an official campaign website: http://www.donaldjtrump.com/ The Donaldj 2016
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 00:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 07:36 |
|
|
Wheeee posted:Barring some major poo poo going down that leads to a Republican winning the general, Hillary is the next POTUS. John Madden's secret account discovered
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 00:11
|
|