|
I figure Clinton runs because nobody in Washington could turn down such a great shot at becoming President. Is there any chance Deval Patrick goes for John Kerry's Senate seat?
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2012 02:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 13:16 |
|
|
marchantia posted:Dems are notably lacking any Latino candidates from what I can see...interesting. Still waiting for some moderate democrat from texas to come gently caress up the electoral math something fierce. The middle of the decade had some decent prospects but Bill Richardson fell apart and Ken Salazar is not a national level campaigner.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2012 03:15
|
|
|
TyroneGoldstein posted:it basically states that commercial banks Canton gauge in speculative trading that's for pride Terry.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2012 05:47
|
|
|
Assuming Biden is not running, I don't think the average Obama bundler or supporter has much animus after seeing Hillary leading the State Dept. and Bill's White House staff filling out a good portion of the executive branch. The anti-Hillary candidate will be a doomed challenger from the left who might get lucky and become VP.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2012 06:33
|
|
|
Y-Hat posted:Yes he is. Also they're not married. That's fine for you and me, but that might not fly in Middle America. - Does not associate with Sandra Lee Policy stuff that is nice but won't go anywhere: - For gun control - Against death penalty
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2012 10:22
|
|
|
Apparently he was facing foreclosure. It doesn't help, but it probably isn't a disqualifier. There were also some plane tickets he billed to the state but he can easily pay it back and make that issue go away.mr. unhsib posted:I honestly don't think Michelle has presidential ambitions. I could see her going for Illinois governor though.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2012 21:50
|
|
|
HereticMIND posted:As a Marylander, I don't know what to feel when I see Gov. O'Malley's name on the list for potential candidates for the Democratic ticket. I don't think O'Malley has a real chance unless Biden and Clinton retire and he gets the Clinton endorsement.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2012 05:05
|
|
|
point of return posted:Isn't 30% enough depending on the competition, since the Republican primaries are winner-takes-all?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2012 08:26
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:Boy, I hope that Christie goes scorched earth with the extremist wing of the GOP. He's the least reprehensible Republican right now.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2012 04:04
|
|
|
e: Barack Obama campaigned on and called DOMA unconstitutional from the Oval Office in 2009. The Democratic Party platform moved forward on marriage, to match his position, both times he ran for President. The evolution stuff was dumb but it never had a singular effect even slightly equivalent to a veto.notthegoatseguy posted:I really don't see vetoing a same-sex marriage bill as a political deal breaker unless you're running as a Democrat in a primary. While approval for same-sex marriage is trending up, the most common type of support is something like Biden spoke about : they're "comfortable" with it. They probably aren't going to be a huge pro-gay plank of the DNC in 2016 (I'd be extremely surprised if they put support for ENDA in, for example, something Obama has been keeping at arm's length as DADT repeal took affect and same-sex marriage is being fought in the courts and state level politics) UltimoDragonQuest fucked around with this message at 22:43 on Nov 22, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2012 22:40
|
|
|
For Americans Elect 2016? The Democratic Party has a poo poo ton of donors etc. who will not tolerate an ex-Republican on the ticket. e: Now that he isn't a Republican is it ok for the media to speculate that he's gay? I'm gonna go email NPR to ask.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2012 05:54
|
|
|
jeffersonlives posted:Like Hillary Clinton?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2012 06:23
|
|
|
Two primaries for every region allows more fluidity in the campaign. February: Pennsylvania, half of Northeast. March: New York, other half of Northeast.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2013 02:02
|
|
|
naysayer posted:Women probably generally aren't as good a choice for the executive office as men are. They still don't have the capacity for as much sway as men do, at least when interacting with a lot of countries in the second and third world. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2013 08:04
|
|
|
I believe the HI44 founder was a big Perot supporter or something other than a loyal Dem who really really loved Hillary.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2013 02:01
|
|
|
serewit posted:Lucky, all I can remember is the breathless media coverage of the PUMAs long after the point where it was obvious Obama had won the primary.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2013 02:19
|
|
|
I wonder if that was placed by Napolitano or someone trying to puff up the weak shortlist of women if Hillary doesn't run.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2013 23:51
|
|
|
I forgot about Gillibrand. Am I missing something about Klobuchar? Senator from Minnesota doesn't seem like a particularly good place to run from other than being next to Iowa.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2013 00:06
|
|
|
monoceros4 posted:Screw that, I want him on the Supreme Court, so even if a Republican got elected President down the road they'd still have to deal with a Clinton in Washington.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2013 05:44
|
|
|
Vivek posted:exactly what the GOP is looking for right now...religious to the point of not believing in evolution...kind of Sarah Palin-y...has no political experience 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2013 04:10
|
|
|
Majestic posted:Well that's certainly a thing. I guess I don't know who this Christian Heinze character is but it doesn't do wonders for my confidence in his analysis. I think he's too high on Jindal and too low on Pence and Santorum. I just don't like Jindal. I don't think the GOP primary voters will immediately settle for less and here is room for someone with a more conservative record than Rubio. They shouldn't win, but they'll have their moment in the sun and it's not impossible. e: I also think he's wrong about Christie moving left in the future. I think the state legislature will keep sending him bills his has to veto to win a Presidential primary. UltimoDragonQuest fucked around with this message at 09:01 on Feb 18, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2013 08:57
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:They are pretty much College Republican/Breitards who happen to be gay and feel like talking about it once a year or so before they go back to supporting candidates who demagogue them.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2013 01:28
|
|
|
Abel Wingnut posted:Who is that? Should I be worried about the electoral college shenanigans in Michigan and Pennsylvania? These are very blue states so there's minimal chance of flipping in 2016 and only getting a 60% instead of 100% victory like there was in Virginia.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2013 00:15
|
|
|
Obama would have won because the campaign would have adapted to the different system of allocation.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2013 03:11
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Well the 14 year old girls who loved the movie will be able to vote for her! Elite liberal beer, or crazy right wing Coors?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2013 00:46
|
|
|
Why have so many debates? Do they generate money or is it just free ad time in swing states?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2013 21:26
|
|
|
Joementum posted:They're cheap programming that gets a lot of eyeballs for cable news.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2013 21:44
|
|
|
If the spending limits aren't a big problem what's the point of moving up the convention? Dodging the worst part of hurricane season?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2013 03:54
|
|
|
DynamicSloth posted:Good luck raising a candidate's age as an election issue without seriously offending the largest voting block in the country.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2013 05:39
|
|
|
Holding office for a while gives you too much time to create a sensible record which is anathema to primary voters.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2013 07:01
|
|
|
I don't think Hillary Clinton is in a weaker position today than in 2007. She doesn't have an obvious weakness like the Iraq War vote and Biden/second person in national polls winning Iowa isn't going to bring in a huge wave of support by proving his viability.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2013 22:31
|
|
|
That sounds about right. Terrible Clinton strategy is a more likely problem than the circumstances of the race being as bad as 2007.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2013 22:51
|
|
|
Devour posted:That said, I hope Joe Biden has the decency to not run in 2016. He's been running for president for 25 years and has failed miserably every time.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2013 23:55
|
|
|
Holding on to that Senate seat is worth more than improving the chances of winning 18 electoral votes.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2013 02:18
|
|
|
Her mother looked good at 88 for a 2007 campaign ad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSlmpIFr2wQ The Insect Court posted:Yes, it is Hillary's if she wants it, barring some huge scandal(of the for real type, not the "KENYAN USURPER LAUGHS AS AMERICANS DIE" Fox News chyron type). That doesn't mean she'll "clear the field", politicians are not known for their accurate self-assessments and so there will be people who think they can knock her off. There's also a lot to gain running for the nomination even if you know you've got one in a million odds, it's a massive amount of publicity and can conceivably be leveraged into a spot into the new administration or pole position next time around.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2013 07:44
|
|
|
She's not going to magically win Arkansas but she still has really good numbers with women. [PDF] Crosstabs Favorable among women Fav-Un-Haven't Heard enough Clinton 59-32-8 Biden 39-38-23
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2013 05:46
|
|
|
jeffersonlives posted:Eh. Pawlenty's place in the race if it developed into anything was always going to be as the evangelical candidate, and Portman tossed that away when he decided to accept his son's sexual orientation.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2013 00:20
|
|
|
ufarn posted:I wasn't really following the 2008 primary much, but can one party's primary affect the other party's similarly to how it can push its own candidates to the right or left like we saw with Romney? e: Everyone viable is indebted to Wall Street and the primary is mostly deciding which person or whose pet issue you like most. If it's O'Malley vs. Cuomo, I'd back the one who talks about appointing judges as a priority. UltimoDragonQuest fucked around with this message at 01:28 on Jun 5, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2013 01:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 13:16 |
|
|
DynamicSloth posted:Three things... What? How? Why? Basically they decided Mitt couldn't generate necessary GOP enthusiasm and running against Mr. Burns would be easy. e: Also they thought he was weird, which is totally a dogwhistle for Mormon and they should be ashamed!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2013 08:25
|
|