|
Pohl posted:Biden will never be President. He will probably run, because that is what he does. He runs for President every drat cycle, but the American people have no interest in him, and the establishment doesn't want him as a candidate. My head knows you're right, but my heart...she still dreams
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 22:31 |
|
|
Dolash posted:Those issues are probably why whoever wins the Democratic primary (Hillary) will pick a considerably younger, more vibrant VP to help keep a connection with the younger demographics that latched on to Obama. Not to mention it's good politics to promote the next generation of your party in order to prepare for that generation's ascendance. Exactly. Just ask Presidents McCain and Romney.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 00:22
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:Once again, that's 11 dimension chess crap. Why wouldn't you run a decent candidate and allow him the chance to pass more bullshit? If he has vulnerabilities, attack now or risk seeing new voting limits come 2016. But running Buono and refusing to give her any institutional support made losing to Christie so much more respectable than giving it their best shot and losing would have been! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
One thing differentiating them is the fact Hillary is a woman
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
And Biden has considerably more experience in government, though that's mostly a huge liability die to it being legislative back during a time when the Congress actually passed legislation. Oh those heady days. Actually, Hillary taking State was very canny. Biden's foreign policy experience is one of his major trump cards traditionally and she effectively nullified that with her tenure at State. That is before SHE KILLED ALL THOSE INNOCENT PEOPLE AT BENGH- oh ha ha ha 2016 is going to be so loving awful.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 00:58
|
|
|
comes along bort posted:Exactly. Just ask Presidents McCain and Romney. Palin would have been a good choice if she wasn't insane and incompetent.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 01:18
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:Palin would have been a good choice if she wasn't insane and incompetent. Yes, with those two small concerns out of the way, she was great.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 01:22
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:Once again, that's 11 dimension chess crap. Why wouldn't you run a decent candidate and allow him the chance to pass more bullshit? If he has vulnerabilities, attack now or risk seeing new voting limits come 2016. I don't think it's 11 dimension chess; I think it's a whole bunch of Dems saying "gently caress no, I'm not running. What if I lose? I can run down the line and not have the albatross of a loss hanging around my neck. Besides, it's better for me personally to have Scott Walker to rail against, to raise my public profile." We tend to forget, I think, that for all the perfectly valid reasons why a party should do something, that party is still made up of individuals, many of whom are politicians. It's easy to say "they should run someone;" who're they gonna run? Why would that person not have their reservations? "The recall made Walker look artificially strong" is a different beast than saying "the recall made Walker look strong enough to beat me." It sucks, and it doesn't make anything better, but still, I think it's worth remembering that sometimes it's not institutional stupidity, it's a whole lot of feet of clay.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:Yes, with those two small concerns out of the way, she was great. I am serious. Picking up Palin seemed, at the time, like a good idea for McCain's campaign. If it hadn't turned out that she was a lunatic, it would have done him a lot of good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:I am serious. Picking up Palin seemed, at the time, like a good idea for McCain's campaign. If it hadn't turned out that she was a lunatic, it would have done him a lot of good. The fact that McCain's campaign didn't know she was a lunatic was the real problem.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 01:30
|
|
|
Pretty much. Romney and McCain were already in dire straits; their VP choices only helped both of them, despite any long-term implications (and McCain owes us so, so very much for inflicting Palin on the nation). Palin was a short term 'calculation'--the McCain campaign pretty much assumed she'd be a poseable action figure for them to use under the traditional "do what your told and your career gets a boost" model. Needless to say, there wasn't a bigger intelligence failure since 2003. Ryan wasn't a bad pick given the field. Romney did his homework. But Ryan was/is an empty suit, and Biden stomped all over that. The ridiculous photo ops and overinflated reputation didn't help. The problem with picking a "younger" VP is exactly what Palin and Ryan showcased, however: they both were horrible whenever it came to them opening their mouths. Granted, that's not something strictly limited to younger politicians but older ones are typically more canny from experience and the winnowing of public exposure. Biden will probably make some effort at running, but I don't see a replication of the 2008 primary dust-up with him playing the part of Obama. OAquinas fucked around with this message at 01:45 on Feb 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 01:40
|
|
|
The smartest thing Hillary could ever do would be to pick the mayor of San Antonio Castro to be her running mate, they'd be untouchable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
Pook Good Mook posted:The smartest thing Hillary could ever do would be to pick the mayor of San Antonio Castro to be her running mate, they'd be untouchable.  Let him be our governor and fix some things first!
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 02:08
|
|
|
duz posted:
A successful VP going to governor of one of the largest states in the US is pretty great credentials.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 02:09
|
|
|
computer parts posted:A successful VP going to governor of one of the largest states in the US is pretty great credentials. It's too soon for a Democrat to win the Governorship in Texas anyway, no matter how successful a mayor he is. There just isn't the grassroots organizing or voter rolls in place and frankly there still aren't enough Hispanics to overcome the structural disadvantage and fact that there are just too many Republicans in Texas. He really would be better off running after 4 or 8 years of VP experience. Or he could just run for President at that point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
Dr.Zeppelin posted:But running Buono and refusing to give her any institutional support made losing to Christie so much more respectable than giving it their best shot and losing would have been! They didn't choose to run a subpar candidate, they couldn't find anyone better who was willing to run. That happens sometimes, to both sides. Hell Obama probably would have lost his senate election (or at least had a close, competitive race) if the GOP had been able to get its preferred candidate instead of having to parachute in Alan Keyes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 03:21
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:They didn't choose to run a subpar candidate, they couldn't find anyone better who was willing to run. That happens sometimes, to both sides. Hell Obama probably would have lost his senate election (or at least had a close, competitive race) if the GOP had been able to get its preferred candidate instead of having to parachute in Alan Keyes. Thank god Ditka got cold feet!
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
There's always a Mayor or State Rep that will make the jump in. At least have a justifiable reason to dump some money in there so AFP has to spend more money there and not in Florida or Pennsylvania where the Dems should be favored. Florida alone is important enough to orient a war of attrition strategy around, if only to finally have a non-maniacal Secretary of State in charge of their voting during a Presidential election. And speaking of Hillary: I want her to be the nominee if only because a helluvalot more decent Dem candidates will jump in to House and Senate races in swing and even red states if she's on the ballot. Let's face it: an ambitious senate candidate in Kentucky or Ohio or Missouri would be much better off sharing the ballot with her than any other possibility. We saw what she did in blue collar areas in the 2008 primaries. Elizabeth Warren isnt going to get that, as much as you may want. Hillary can fake it. Warren is still a Harvard and Massachusetts Academic. De Nomolos fucked around with this message at 03:40 on Feb 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
Nice Davis posted:Thank god Ditka got cold feet! In 1998 Fitzegerald narrowly beaten Carol Mosley Braun, who at the time was a highly unpopular Democratic incumbent. Obama would have easily beaten Ditka or (more pertinently) a scandal-free Jack Ryan and De Nomolos posted:There's always a Mayor or State Rep that will make the jump in. At least have a justifiable reason to dump some money in there so AFP has to spend more money there and not in Florida or Pennsylvania where the Dems should be favored. Hillary's "blue collar appeal" had more to do with the fact that she was running against a black candidate than anything else. That said, the point about downballot races is reasonable- I think it's quite likely Democrats in conservative districts and states wouldn't have gotten wiped in 2010 to the same extent in a hypothetical Hillary presidency, even if the overall course of events had been similar. Warren's best shot comes with a Hillary loss in the 2016 general. The puts her in a nice position for the 2020 primaries, because she can call on the classic Reagan 1980 "look where going with the electable centrist candidate got us last time" strategy in the primaries and of course we still wouldn't have had a female President by then, unless the victorious Republican nominee was Susana Martinez (Kelly Ayotte???)
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 04:24
|
|
|
I remember when they picked Palin, I about shat myself. I thought it was the first savvy move they had made since I still think the best thing from '08 is that Jennifer Granholm literally entered into combat with Biden in the guise of Palin. ~VP Debate Prep~  "And, that's why, and all due respect, but that's why McCain-Palin, and I mean this literally, literally, not figuratively, amounts to poo poo on a shingle that will make everyone poor." MODERATOR: Thank you Senator. Governor Palin?  "Well what the Senator up there in the Washington may not be understanding is that people all over America with the strong desire for freedom and prayin' in the schools, is that when tax burdens come down on the small businesses, what you've got is a situation where freedom can't operate. Even Vladimir Putin, comin' over from Russia there, he's sure lookin at us, you know!" *winks* MODERATOR: Senator, your response?  "S-she doesn't really talk like that does she?"
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 04:31
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:We saw what she did in blue collar areas in the 2008 primaries. e:fb
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 06:35
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:There's always a Mayor or State Rep that will make the jump in. At least have a justifiable reason to dump some money in there so AFP has to spend more money there and not in Florida or Pennsylvania where the Dems should be favored.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 08:47
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:
 My sister went to middle school with Granholm's daughter and was good friends with her even after they moved to Lansing. I was hoping both times it happened that she might get tapped for a SCOTUS spot because she is too awesome to fade into obscurity so soon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 13:39
|
|
|
Watching an episode of Bill Maher's show, Mary Matalin told Granholm that we don't need more women in politics with absolute sincerity. You could see the "is this real life" thoughts going through Granholm's mind as everyone waited to see if she was going to pick up a chair and beat Matalin senseless.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 18:35
|
|
|
joeburz posted:Watching an episode of Bill Maher's show, Mary Matalin told Granholm that we don't need more women in politics with absolute sincerity. You could see the "is this real life" thoughts going through Granholm's mind as everyone waited to see if she was going to pick up a chair and beat Matalin senseless. Was that the one where she was totally blitzed/drunk? Because that was surreal. Also: there is a very real school of thought in the hardline rightwing that women's suffrage was a Bad Idea. It's probably right after direct election of Senators on their to-undo list.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 18:40
|
|
|
joeburz posted:Watching an episode of Bill Maher's show, Mary Matalin told Granholm that we don't need more women in politics with absolute sincerity. You could see the "is this real life" thoughts going through Granholm's mind as everyone waited to see if she was going to pick up a chair and beat Matalin senseless. Have a link for this? I would love to see it. Edit: Nevermind, found it. To me, Gov. Granholm is trying really hard to be the adult in the room, and killing it. Nth Doctor fucked around with this message at 18:53 on Feb 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
The Clinton Library just dumped a set of previously withheld documents that should keep Drudge busy for a while.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 19:41
|
|
|
Someone is hammering it. Site appears to be broke at the moment. e: nvm, there it goes
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
Nth Doctor posted:Have a link for this? I would love to see it. Holy gently caress Matalin was loving plastered there. "I was in the rrrrooom .... befffore you would eeeven wear.... pants."
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
Supposedly she got hurt earlier in the day and was on pain pills.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
comes along bort posted:Supposedly she got hurt earlier in the day and was on pain pills. I love those excuses. "I was tired! I took a pain pill! I was sick! I was distracted!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
Zenzirouj posted:I love those excuses. "I was tired! I took a pain pill! I was sick! I was distracted!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:I remember when they picked Palin, I about shat myself. I thought it was the first savvy move they had made since Ummm no, there was almost no chance the republicans were going to win in 2008. Maybe you forgot the economy exploding and uh President Bush? Besides the fact that vice president picks aren't going to swing you 100 EC votes no matter how good they are. enbot fucked around with this message at 00:01 on Mar 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 23:55
|
|
|
enbot posted:Ummm no, there was almost no chance the republicans were going to win in 2008. Maybe you forgot the economy exploding and uh President Bush? Besides the fact that vice president picks aren't going to swing you 100 EC votes no matter how good they are. That's weird of you to claim. Without the serendipitous combination of the greatest data mining project in history and the two strongest Dem candidates in modern history joining forces everything could have been different.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:That's weird of you to claim. Without the serendipitous combination of the greatest data mining project in history and the two strongest Dem candidates in modern history joining forces everything could have been different. Unless you also conjure up a magical anti establishment candidate out of thin air for the GOP to run in 2008 Marx himself would have won. McCain got the boost he got because, you know, he was the nudge nudge pale one. On policy the GOP was pre Tea Party hard line establishment big spender sit by and watch the economy burn nitwits, they would have needed an actual biblical miracle to compete in 2008.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 04:10
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:That's weird of you to claim. Without the serendipitous combination of the greatest data mining project in history and the two strongest Dem candidates in modern history joining forces everything could have been different. Are you loving around? Knowing what we know now about the economy, the GOP had one shot at victory in 2008 and it was a John Edwards personal issues election. Even without that things were looking dire for them, especially with Obama as candidate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:
Restricting votes to landowners/"taxpayers"(using the highly disingenuous 47% stat) is pretty high up there too. This is where you hear them cry about "skin in the game" because poor people don't have a stake in how the US is governed  . That fits right in with taking away women's votes though as it hits them (and minorities!) the hardest.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2014 16:03
|
|
|
Not 2016 as such, but I thought thread regulars would like to know that Mark Penn has f(l)ailed upward to a new position: running corporate strategy at Microsoft.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
Petey posted:Not 2016 as such, but I thought thread regulars would like to know that Mark Penn has f(l)ailed upward to a new position: running corporate strategy at Microsoft. Maybe this is some payola gig from now until the 2016 machines ramp up when he'll get transferred over for a discount.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 22:31 |
|
|
ReindeerF posted:Man, Microsoft is like a giant welfare program financed by lovely legacy enterprise software and the X-Box. What a great gig. Can I have a big name MS job too? I can even gently caress things up and try not to change the direction of the company. I know at one point they were estimated to be making more from Android royalties than they were from Xbox, so I doubt it's that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2014 17:35
|
|