|
I believe Ohio's date is now March 8 (First Tuesday after First Monday), as HB 194, the bill that would have changed it as mentioned on Frontloading HQ was repealed back in May, such that the referendum never actually needed to go to a vote. Not sure why Frontloading doesn't reflect this.
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2012 21:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 09:00 |
|
|
TheBuilder posted:Sec. Clinton is the obvious early call. She seemed to be far away from the campaign most of this year... That's because she can't legally campaign on Obama's behalf.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2012 21:36
|
|
|
sullat posted:Cabinet level appointees are exempt from the Hatch Act. Ah you appear to be correct.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2012 22:44
|
|
|
jeffersonlives posted:Most of the smart folks seem to think that the economy is going to boom over the next four years just as a rebound. 2016 could very well be a Democratic romp in that case. It's not out of the question by any means, but it's a big if that primarily depends on whether Europe stays afloat or if Greece finally brings it down.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2012 23:48
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:While Warren isn't charismatic and is typically awkward, she has this intelligence that everyone around her seems to recognize. That's exactly why the party elite would probably never nominate her for president. Warren could eke out a win against Brown's "PROFESSOR Warren" because she ran in Massachusetts. It'd be a death knell in most other states.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2012 06:49
|
|
|
sullat posted:John C. Calhoun was JQ Adam's VP and Jackson's VP. He was also kind of a terrible person, but that's probably a coincidence. George Clinton was VP for Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. More telling is that no VP has been VP for three terms.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2012 17:05
|
|
|
Joementum posted:It'll definitely be interesting to watch, but she was the only Senate candidate in a contested race this year to say that the correct policy on Afghanistan was to get out immediately. Foreign policy tends to be very difficult to judge from campaign literature though. Rand Paul, for instance, has turned out to be much less favorable to the military than I'd assumed from his campaign. On the other hand, her campaign site is still up. quote:To me, it is a moral imperative to support and defend Israel, and I am committed to ensuring its long-term security by maintaining its qualitative military edge. Israel must be able to defend itself from the serious threats it faces from terrorist organizations to hostile states, including Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, and others.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2012 18:06
|
|
|
raito posted:He can serve as the Vice-President if he so chooses to run and win. He could also serve as the President in the event that the President dies. You can be sure that there'd be a Supreme Court case about that pretty quickly though. Something about the "intent" of the 22nd Amendment not permitting a crazy end-run around it by "running for VP and having the President immediately resign".
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2012 21:50
|
|
|
Typo posted:Is this really surprising? Of course not. But it does suggest that she's not going to be any more progressive on the middle east than her peers.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2012 22:24
|
|
|
The only thing that would not be fun in a Biden race would be the incessant chattering of practically everyone about Biden being a gaffemaker. It might not even matter if Christie says "I intend to ban all abortions" if a Biden gaffe like "back in chains" ends up being all that's on voters' lips.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2013 23:14
|
|
|
jeffersonlives posted:A lot of Biden's "gaffes" aren't actually gaffes, he likes to push buttons. His biggest problem is actually message discipline, not gaffes. Sure they aren't. But that doesn't mean it's what the public at large will hear/believe.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2013 23:27
|
|
|
Joementum posted:"Purely on results, no one tops President George W. Bush when it comes to saving lives," Jennifer Rubin today, a bonus quote I'm throwing into this post for fun, referring to Bush's post-Presidency philanthropy. Her article does not mention his during-Presidency score on that matter. Rubin isn't the only one who's made this claim this year. But how seriously can you take a "liberal democrat" on Fox News? quote:For Africans, that vision traces back to the early years of his presidency. In his 2003 State of the Union Address, Bush introduced the "President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief" (PEPFAR.) Hmm, maybe Bush has saved more lives... I mean, the Carter Center, has only almost eliminated a disease that plagued 3.5 million individuals (dracunculiasis) and averted 1.6 million more cases of poor vision caused by onchocerciasis (1m) and trachoma (600k), but I guess they're not as sexy as HIV so they don't count. So good job Bush!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2013 14:31
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Any idea on who Biden's VP pick might be, if ever? I imagine that would matter as much as McCain's did, given their ages. That's probably going to be shaped by the electoral battleground in 2016, so it's really difficult to say. But I wouldn't be surprised if someone at least gives lip-service to a younger, more dynamic female, if only for the "Well, suppose Biden can't run in 2020" argument, especially if Hillary runs and loses again. So... Gillibrand? But that's different from saying that Gillibrand would work from a political perspective (depends how much help/hurt her brand of liberalism would give Biden) So in short, what Adar said, but with a faint hand-waving argument that Gillibrand might end up in the running. EDIT: vvv also true. I was thinking about that when I made the suggestion. Like I said, I agree largely with Adar that it's pretty much tea-leaves at the moment. ComradeCosmobot fucked around with this message at 22:49 on Aug 28, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2013 22:46
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:gently caress me. Of all the people to choose. I thought he was going to drop this after all the outcry. You should have been disabused of that idea when the very first thing Obama did after the outcry was to force a House Committee to cancel testimony by Greenwald about Snowden just so that Obama could stand up and give a "full-throated defense" of Summers in a special meeting with Congressional Democrats. ComradeCosmobot fucked around with this message at 19:06 on Aug 29, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2013 19:04
|
|
|
The X-man cometh posted:If the President has to give a "full throated defense" to his own party, there's a pretty good chance Summers won't get through, depending on whether the banks pressure the GOP on his behalf. Don't count on it. All indications point to Reid whipping the party in line behind a Summers nomination. Immediately after Obama's defense on July 31, Reid was quoted as saying "Whoever the president selects, this caucus will be for that person, no matter who it is."
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2013 23:50
|
|
|
evilwaldo posted:Considering the fact that Congress has to up the debt ceiling again and pass a budget there will probably be some sort of compromise that gets him through. Where is the horse that Senate Dems are getting in such a deal? "Vote for Summers and... Obama won't veto a debt ceiling increase?"
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2013 13:37
|
|
|
If the right-wing rag, the Washington Examiner is correct, you'll never guess who might be jumping back in the ring for 2016...
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2013 01:18
|
|
|
ChampRamp posted:Has skipping Iowa ever turned out to be a good idea? It is when Tom Harkin is running.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:So the whole democratic party is going to get behind someone who voted for the Iraq War and who is to the right of Obama on pretty much everything without any kind of pushback from "the left." If that even exists.... Man 2: "Well I believe I'll vote for a
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2014 18:57
|
|
|
CapitanAmerica posted:If you think Putin out maneuvered Obama on any issue you really have no clue what you are talking about. The only weakness Obama showed was not bombing the gently caress out of the Syrian regime over that chemical attack when Putin offered his bullshit peace deal. You mean the time where he was raring to go, but couldn't convince the Brits to go and almost had Congress rebelling against him? No, I think we made the right choice there, because Syria was already a complete sectarian shitfest and there was literally nothing good (other than demonstrating that we're willing to use force against users of chemical weapons) that could come from us taking action then. We could not realistically have done meaningful damage to an extent where we could extract any sort of concessions without basically turning Syria into even more of a basket case than it is already. ComradeCosmobot fucked around with this message at 09:36 on Jan 26, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2014 09:33
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:The fact that being "strong" on the issue would have been a shitshow that further painted America as thirsty for war does not change the fact that backing down made him look weak. It was a no-win situation that Obama made the best of. Personally I'm quite glad that Bush wasn't in the seat for this one since looking weak, while the lesser of two evils in this case, was unacceptable for his administration, but this is the reality of nation-state interactions. I'll give you that on the strong/weak side of traditional nation-state interactions, Obama ended up being weak. But I think we both agree that we (on the whole) are the better for it given the alternative of involving ourselves in an inevitably bloody sectarian conflict with already-minimal chance of succeeding at our goals vis-a-vis the Syrian government, whatever they may have been.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2014 10:00
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:Yeah so. Get in. If Nixon can turn it around in 8 years surely a rich man can turn it around in 4!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2014 18:27
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:Mitt responds how there's little consideration for the small business out there, and how he thinks most leftist policies are meant to squeeze the big players, but end up soaking little guys. Oddly enough, Mitt is probably correct on this point, but his reasoning is no doubt flawed (it's not due to liberalism so much as corporatism and corporate lobbying making sure that the big guys get carve-outs and exceptions from the law)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2014 04:26
|
|
|
joeburz posted:I don't care if he gets allowed to do this, but I feel like it should be an existing stipulation to presidential office runs in every state. None of this back-up plan poo poo, lay it on the line. If I recall correctly that's not possible and Kentucky is merely bringing itself in line with a Federal court case which held that states aren't allowed to add additional restrictions on eligibility for Federal elections beyond residence in a state (including "you can't run for two offices at once")
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Allen West has some suggestions for 2016. Wait, Allen. Now you're telling me that we HAVEN'T already elected the first Muslim president? I guess two years out of office and you really can lose touch with your core constituency.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 15:19
|
|
|
made of bees posted:Pretty sure that's what the (Oh, wait...) is supposed to mean. Ah, I missed that when I read it. I was worried about West for a moment there. Good to see he hasn't actually let us down.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 22:27
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:As evidenced by his wing of the party getting choked out by the establishment wing this primary season, I guess. They can still spin it as a victory that they unseated a 91-year old rep, I guess. They also secured effective control of the Texas government until 2018.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:As evidenced by his wing of the party getting choked out by the establishment wing this primary season, I guess. They can still spin it as a victory that they unseated a 91-year old rep, I guess. I forgot to mention: There's a good chance the Tea Party favorite will be the Republican to lose to Jerry Brown in the fall. 
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
Kalman posted:That's actually pretty reasonable, given she's from Minnesota. But Medtronic isn't based in Minnesota any more (pending shareholder approval) 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
Kalman posted:Doesn't really matter, they're still a huge employer there (9k people or so?) and for all practical purposes they're still headquartered there - the Dublin thing is primarily for tax purposes.  It's indicative of the sort of corporatist Democrat Klobuchar very well may be if she's beholden to a company that's playing such shenanigans in order to avoid paying taxes.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2014 02:28
|
|
|
Kalman posted:So, a normal Democrat? Basically, yes. But it's true her support for repealing the device tax may not necessarily be indicative of support for the foreign tax repatriation holiday because, let's be honest, everyone on Capitol Hill wants to see that happen.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2014 02:36
|
|
|
FMguru posted:It's interesting to note that the R's have lost the popular vote in five of the last six elections, and they haven't even started the process of looking at themselves and seeing what needs changing. Fine by me. Why change when you've held enough power in Congress to block anything from passing that you don't like for all but 6 years of the same 22 year period? EDIT: Yes, the Dems held the House for the entirety of Reagan + Bush, but the Southern Dems basically ensures that Reagan could always cobble together a conservative majority. ComradeCosmobot fucked around with this message at 02:50 on Jul 18, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Jesus, even for Bachman that's amazing. They think they're people with rights, and all I'm trying to do is make the laws say that they are subhuman deviants with no rights. Why can't you see how intolerant they are? Ah yes, the old "No, it is you, the person who does not tolerate intolerance, who is the real bigot" argument.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:So it's August 2014 and already Hillary is tacking right of Obama on foreign policy. She's also had some words to say recently about out greatest ally Israel! From the I/P thread: http://www.timesofisrael.com/hillary-clinton-blasts-unfair-world-reaction-over-gaza-cites-anti-semitism-as-factor/ posted:Asked if the Israeli response was disproportionate, she replied: “Israel was attacked by rockets from Gaza. Israel has a right to defend itself. The steps Hamas has taken to embed rockets and command-and-control facilities and tunnel entrances in civilian areas, this makes a response by Israel difficult. Of course Israel, just like the United States, or any other democratic country, should do everything they can possibly do to limit civilian casualties. We see this enormous international reaction against Israel. This reaction is uncalled for and unfair.” Needless to say I don't think we have to worry about Hillary getting criticized for "second-guessing Netanyahu" on Hamas. Or as poster oldswitcheroo put it: oldswitcheroo posted:"I'm not sure it's possible to blame the guy shooting an artillery shell at a child for that child's death"
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Has there ever been a State of the Union rebuttal that didn't result in the person giving it having to take at least 3 steps back in their political ambitions? I'm pretty sure no one has ever rebutted the State of the Union so spectacularly that it got them recognition and that best case scenario is everyone completely erases it from their memory by the end of the week. It seems like something no one should want, but every year people are maneuvering to get. That's probably why the R's gave it to someone they knew had no immediate presidential ambitions this year (not to mention that choosing the highest ranking female member among their ranks helped fight against the "war against women" narrative).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Let's quickly check in with the Bill Kristol. Good to see people are still angry over a 1991 opera EDIT: Giuliani's statement is quoted in the page and practically begs for a quote shoutout on its own: "Equally, all of us have as strong a First Amendment right to ... warn people that this work is both a distortion of history and helped, in some ways, to foster a three decade long feckless policy of creating a moral equivalency between the Palestinian Authority, a corrupt terrorist organization, and the state of Israel, a democracy ruled by law." ComradeCosmobot fucked around with this message at 02:29 on Oct 21, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 09:00 |
|
|
comes along bort posted:Preliminary congrats to president White Guy. Just as 2012 was the year of "Anyone but Romney" for the Republicans, 2016 will be the year of "Anyone but Hillary" for the Democrats. It will go just as badly for the Democrats as that went for Republicans. 52/47. Congratulations to President-elect Jeb Bush.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2014 21:31
|
|
