|
Alter Ego posted:I'd argue that it wouldn't apply to just Democrats. ANY politician worth their salt should be looking at the Obama model if they want to win a Presidential election. One qualification I'd have with this, while agreeing that any candidate that completely ignores the Obama model is acting foolishly, is that we don't know yet if the Obama model needs an Obama in it to work. In other words, I don't think it's yet clear whether a candidate who doesn't have the same/similar personal charisma and campaigning skills of the Big O himself would be able to use the same model as successfully, or indeed at all. This is parallel to what Joementum said about not yet knowing whether the Obama coalition will persist, or is too Obama-centric to continue to function in 2014/16.
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2012 20:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 14:35 |
|
|
Emden posted:Why is it so vital that Chris Christie not be fat? Because apparently every single thread these days has to derail into weight/image issues. Serious answer: while certainly not the only factor, appearance does matter for public features seeking to appeal to a large electorate. Among those who's votes he needs, there are enough who consider weight an issue that he would be well served to hit the treadmill and get a better diet. That's not to say that all reasons why someone might not vote for an overweight man are equal, or indeed necessarily even legitimate, but they do exist and, unlike say issues of race or gender, are ones he could, conceivably, do something about. Also seriously, dude's headed for cardiac arrest sooner or later if he doesn't get into better shape.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2012 23:06
|
|
|
MoraleHazard posted:Speaking as someone who's politics lean right I don't really see a strong candidate in the Republican party at the moment; though I won't rule out Rand Paul (provided he's not as cuckoo as dad). Rubio, perhaps, but I'm skeptical unless the GOP ditches the anti-hispanic rhetoric. I don't see any right-wingers getting excited over another Bush and people like Huckabee and Santorum only appeal to a small subset and that's folks who's religious and social priorities are paramount. Rubio as candidate would indicate that the GOP had decided to go with tokenism rather than actually doing anything about the party's significant and well-deserved problems with Hispanics. He's the poster boy for "but we've got one too, why aren't you loving people voting for us?" This of course presumes the GOP hasn't found a to square the circle of finding a way to genuinely appeal to minorities without alienating the party's base, which I continue to maintain is their existential, and likely unsolvable, dilemma of the moment.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2012 23:11
|
|
|
point of return posted:Didn't Hillary's 2008 campaign people(like Mark Penn) not actually know how delegates were apportioned? Penn has been quoted by others as thinking that Democratic primaries are winner-take-all rather than proportional, though he himself denies having said it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2012 01:39
|
|
|
Joementum posted:It's not out of the question. Ryan shored up the Romney campaign with the social conservatives who were doubting it in the summer and also with the conservative punditocracy. He's loved by everyone from the Breitbart crew to David Brooks and that counts for a lot on the right. Ryan's future will depend a lot on whether he can maintain that status during the coming budget negotiations in the next year, since he's the House Budget chairman again. Ever since his budget proposal I've viewed Ryan as a mostly-empty suit who doesn't nearly deserve the praise he's given for being a Serious Policy Guy TM and that he was kept well away from the lime lights during the campaign has only reinforced that suspicion. If anything, I'd like to think that both the GOP primary and subsequent disaster that was Romney's general run would have convinced the party that they need someone with at least some substance*, and it will be interesting to see if Ryan's actually got any sand in the coming session. *Ahahahahaha no of course not, they haven't learned a goddamn thing
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2012 02:35
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:So, the overarching lesson of the 20th century racial rights struggle is that "you cannot trust white liberals to have your back when the poo poo gets tough, you have to constantly put pressure on them through minority-led movements or you have to get your own people in." Phil Ochs's wisdom proves timeless, yet again
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2012 02:55
|
|
|
Krinkle posted:What makes Jindal establishment? How do you perform exorcisms and get to be the establishment? Because even with that he still manages to be utterly boring.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2012 20:31
|
|
|
Dreylad posted:What are the chances the Democrats go full Citizens United like the Republicans did and have 2500 debates before primary season? And have candidates who have no real chance of winning stay in the fight long after they should have withdrawn? I'd rate it as very unlikely if Hillary is in the running, and just pretty unlikely otherwise. It suspect we're not going to see such a uniquely dysfunctional field of also-rans, lunatics, and Mitt Romney, again any time soon. Even if the Democrats had equivalents of Sky Admiral Bachmann et al waiting, I'd like to think they'd also seen just how poorly served was the GOP's eventual nominee by such a throw-down drag-out primary.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2012 21:21
|
|
|
Houston Euler posted:I'm not sure how she could ever return to politics. She has trouble with verbal communication. I seem to have forgotten remind me, who exactly was the chief executive between Clinton and Obama?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2013 05:01
|
|
|
Houston Euler posted:There's "is our children learning", and there's having trouble uttering complete sentences on a permanent basis. Are you claiming Bush II didn't have trouble uttering complete sentences on a permanent basis? Because I've seen some pretty compelling evidence to the contrary. Seriously I get your point but I'll be dead in the cold, cold earth before I miss a chance to savage the capacities of that profoundly moronic boy prince.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2013 01:41
|
|
|
monoceros4 posted:That reminds me: many years ago I remember coming across some before-after footage put together for Bush Jr., purporting to show that his verbal fluency had deteriorated markedly since he was Governor. I'm sure the clips shown were picked for best effect but the difference was pretty striking. (I like to think they probably needed to have Bush tranq'ed to the point of ataxia for public appearances sometimes.) I too remember seeing something like this, put forward to advance the argument that Bush wasn't entirely the subliterate cretin he appeared to be but rather intentionally played down his own abilities to not seem over-educated (or put more bluntly, not like the northeastern blueblood he actually is). As to the clip itself, I too don't remember enough to be able to locate it now.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2013 02:28
|
|
|
Trast posted:And then various republicans rush to Fox News to say Clinton was deranged and faking her grief over the deaths of people she'd worked with personally. I'm waiting to see if any right-wing commentators or interviewees describe her as "hysterical." That'd be the best/worst.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2013 22:39
|
|
|
greatn posted:Why? No one except the extremely informed gives a gently caress about fracking. If you're going to preemptively attack Cuomo do it on an issue Iowans actually care about. Nationally it might only have limited appeal, but I've been hearing about the issue pretty much non-stop since moving to Albany three years ago; up here, as well as in PA, fracking is very much A Thing people care about.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2013 22:00
|
|
|
withak posted:Pausing for a drink of water during a speech is fine. The problem here was a combination of there not being a glass of water within reach during a high-profile speech being broadcasted on national TV and the speaker apparently thinking that he could quickly slip off and grab a drink between sentences without the audience noticing. Amateur hour all around. A couple of years ago we had Professor Timothy Snyder up at the university I work at giving a talk in support of his then-newly released book Bloodlands: Europe between Hitler and Stalin (which is excellent and I recommend to all). In addition to the interesting things he said about the subject to hand, he also gave us all some valuable advice and that is this: Yale has never hired anyone that drank from a bottle during their interview, as they view that as infantile; always ask for a glass. Good advice, wouldn't you say Senator? 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2013 02:46
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Chait also highlights a line from the article that I missed: Gingrich actually gave Santorum a history lecture on why he should be on the top of the ticket. That's lucky, since it seems vanishingly unlikely that we'll see the last of him anytime soon. But seriously, the 2012 GOP primary season continues to amaze with continuing revelations of hilariously poorly-thought-out ideas and actions. How those idiots ever thought they had a chance eludes me.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2013 17:55
|
|
|
Guys, it's career idiot provocateur and shitposter vilepilot you're replying to.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2013 17:23
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:Speaking of Rand Paul, he's putting some time in Iowa tomorrow appearing on a public radio program. Public radio? Prepare for the freep demographic to write him off as a total RINO (if they haven't already for some previous minor deviation, I lose track).
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2013 20:45
|
|
|
Whelp, looks like we're all way off base, boys. Someone who totally deserves to weigh in on this and shouldn't be automatically laughed out of any room he inhabits knows how 2016 will play out:quote:Mitt Romney's top political strategist predicted Wednesday that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would not win the Democratic Party's 2016 presidential primary if she were to choose to run. Why's that? Well, she's old. Old, you see. Did I mention she's old? Because she is. Old, that is. Old, old, old, the oldest old to old an old. Furthermore, Stevens also thinks she'd be less appealing than the new generation of up-and-coming Republicans who are hip and fresh or whatever you kids say these days: quote:"On our side, we have Paul Ryan, Nikki Haley, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, Susana Martinez and more. Who has the best opportunity to win that generational battle?" 
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2013 20:02
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:I mean, his conclusions are all wrong but: Oh I don't disagree, but Stevens was basically just using that to preface the "she's stodgy, old, and out of touch, totally unlike the kickin' rad young Republicans!" lines that followed. I mean yeah he's correct that a challenger from the left would have actual ammo to use against Hillary, but barring another dark horse who exactly has the prominence within what's left of the Democratic left to make the attempt? I can't think of anyone (though in wistful-fantasyland there's a certain angry independent senator who comes to mind). Similarly, the whole argument strikes me as more an attempt to sow the seeds of a bloody 2016 Democratic primary fight, hoping for the eventual nominee to come staggering out as battered as Mitt was this time around.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2013 20:18
|
|
|
FMguru posted:Clinton/Gillibrand or Clinton/Warren would be hilarious The levels of misogyny in the attack ads, both dogwhistle and blatant, would be staggering.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2013 22:41
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:I hear someone is just biden his time. Cuom on, he's not the only possibility.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:So it looks like Drudge has a new golden boy, he doesn't choose complimentary photos for just anyone. I suspect that would result in this finally coming to pass.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2013 18:30
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:That last one is correct - Booth's heart was in the right place: in the path of a Union bullet in a burning barn in Virginia. The apple doesn't fall far from the lynching tree.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2013 21:40
|
|
|
Joementum posted:He's running. "I firmly believe that red-blooded Americans will look deep into their hearts, examine my record, and proudly exclaim 'enh, we'd like someone a little bit better but I guess we'll settle for him if there's no one else.'"
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
Livingtrope posted:Has Rick Perry done anything to suggest that he isn't a buffoon? Supposedly he's a very slick operator at the state level, despite the relative weakness of the Governorship in Texas compared to other states. In this argument, to the strength of which I can't attest as I don't know Texas politics beyond the very superficial level ("is generally horrible"), his main problem is he and his team have not, and perhaps can not, find a way to scale that to national campaigning. And also he was tripping balls on pain pills during that debate which surely didn't help.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 21:33
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:Man. I looked up why Perry was on meds and it was for back surgery that used stem cells. Have evangelicals dropped their opposition to them or is he a massive hypocrite? It was adult, not embryonic, stem cells they used (Perry's own, from what I read), so they can use that dodge. Failing that, "The only moral X is my X."
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2013 20:24
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:You could make the argument that the way Perry projects his political persona (whew), he comes perilously close to coming across as just as much of a whacko Puritan as Santorum. Sure, but with Perry it's more obvious that he's an empty suit just playing to evangelical crazies, whereas Santorum's got the glassy-eyed thousand yard stare of a true believer.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2013 20:57
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:Rick Perry, Peter King, John Bolton, Rick Santorum, Ted Cruz, Newt Gingrich, Rand Paul, how could this possibly be better? I know Rand is there, but I'm not sure he can provide exactly the same levels of political comedy as his father did, nor do I think his followers are as raving a pack of loonies as the original Paulsheviks. He'll need to ramp up the crazy pretty hard if he wants a chance to run with the big dogs. I agree with Adar that, at early stage, Christie's the closest thing they've got to a plausibly electable candidate, with Perry running a distant second.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2013 22:14
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Adar is right to mention Christie, but Scott Walker is perhaps even more dangerous, and yes, he's running. And I believe America is just silly enough to gives the Bush family a third shot. I have to wonder, though, if Jeb is willing to toss his hat in. He can probably make a play at being the only Serious Candidatetm in a room full of lightweights (insert Christie joke here) and loonies, but even with the incredible tendency of the American public towards selective amnesia I have to think he still has brand damage he'd have to overcome that might make running more trouble than it's worth.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2013 22:56
|
|
|
SombreroAgnew posted:Yes, that works much better. He still posts from time to time but he's been unusually quiet since (I think) reregging after the Mitt Romney tox thread banfest.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2013 20:35
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Oh dear God: Does that bother you?...I just want you to think big, Chris, for Christsakes.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2013 01:13
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:Who is giving money to Allen West? Palin supporters? At least with Palin you get some good comedy, but with West I don't see the appeal. I mean, he's certainly less electable than her. Other Jack Bauer wannabes would be my guess, and also perhaps some tokenists.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2013 18:44
|
|
|
Acrophyte posted:Losing. Not just once. Repeatedly and embarrassingly. I agree, but conversely he's not going to jump ship without a pretty solid guarantee of a future elsewhere. The GOP being dead weight isn't enough if he judges his chances would be even worse (as it'd be hard to avoid being tarred a turncoat and difficult to woo constituencies that previously had been antagonistic) as a Dem or independent.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2013 17:32
|
|
|
This week on RP TV, our panel of experts debate the biggest issue of our time: Which is a greater threat to liberty, the FDA or the Civil Rights Act?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2013 23:20
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Peace Gold Love, loving seriously? This is the moral vanguard of America. The dude who puts gold as critical as peace and love? No, but he's also refused to take any tests that would rule out being a leprechaun, so we've got options.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2013 00:34
|
|
|
The Entire Universe posted:Fat/Phlegm 2016. Obnoxious/Incoherent 2016
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2013 21:29
|
|
|
Kem Rixen posted:Menino messed up player names all the time, but then again it was Menino, and he had trouble with names and words all the time. Well, as far as we can tell he's messing them up. Not for nothing is his nickname "mumbles."
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2013 19:18
|
|
|
Adar posted:I'm just gonna say what I've said ITT for a year and will probably say for two more: A sitting veep who has spent eight years perpetually campaigning, has the organization of Candidate Obama fully behind him, and has been a key part of the most polarizing administration of the modern era is not a dog to "Skim Hillary" Cuomo. I'd say this is the key element, and not necessarily one Biden is guaranteed to hold. While it's inarguable that Obama was one of the best presidential campaigners we've seen in decades and had a very slick and modern organization behind him, it's not yet been shown that that organization is one that will outlast his own presidency. In other words, the organization of Candidate Obama may not really exist except in rump form once Obama leaves office. Not to say that it's necessarily got a 2016 expiration date on it, but I'm not yet convinced it can or will transform from "fantastic organization to get Obama elected" into "equally fantastic organization to get some other Democrat elected." EDIT: Arg, you edited in "yes, yes he will" while I was typing. I'm not so certain, myself.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2013 20:26
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:This would be a hilarious turn of events. The Dems mostly vote against and the GOP votes for him with enough Dems to confirm. (not hilarious in a good way) Gallows humor is still humor, and we'd mostly all prefer laughing to crying. Uncontrollably. Until we pass out.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2013 00:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 14:35 |
|
|
Waterbed posted:He's also got the highest chance of an R win, period. If the people putting in money can get him onto the big ticket without too much of a scuffle in the primaries, he could potentially flip NJ, and even if he's a loudmouth he's got the least disgusting policies while still being electable, which would win him a good chunk of moderate vote. He's also the only possible candidate I can think of that could serve the party as a symbolic move away from the teabagger hardliners, if he/his campaign is adroit enough to flip his cooperation with Obama in the aftermath of Sandy from albatross to asset. This presumes of course those maniacs can be re-leashed, and that their former masters wish so to do.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2013 20:29
|
|