|
Didn't he have his own money scandal? Some dark money thing? I mean he's probably marginally better than Webb, at least.
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2015 15:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 13:05 |
|
|
Oh so he is basically Western Conference Jim Webb.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
Joementum posted:The article I posted this morning on the Clintons' finances is by David Sirota, who's not exactly a conservative sympathizer. Yeah, it's a bit weird to see the "right-wing conspiracy" line invoked to describe questions raised by Chait and Sirota, who (while hardly flawless journalists) are not exactly frothing right-wingers or even anti-Clintonite.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
Mr Jaunts posted:Except those questions weren't raised by them, they originated with the "Clinton Cash" guy. Other news outlets reported on this same issue a few days ago. Right, but the fact that it's proliferated beyond that - rightly or wrongly - lends it credibility.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Brown hinted at a run this year, and he'd probably be in if Hillary wasn't. The Democratic field would look a lot like the Republican one does now with a bunch of candidates trying to determine how much support they'll get in the primary. No way Beshear would have even attempted a run with Obergefell pending.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
Joementum posted:It's an issue where politicians have shown ease at changing their position when necessary. Mitt Romney even changed his mind several times! Given the brief that Kentucky filed this year? I don't think that turnaround would have been viable.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
Whoops, double post.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Ah. I didn't know that, actually. Disappointing. Still, like the piece says, a man of his time and all that. I think he probably believed in what he was doing with the Civil Rights movement, at least to some extent. But clearly he was at least a little bit racist. I really dislike the phrase "man of his time" when applied in cases like these, especially since LBJ shared his time with people like Martin Luther King, Jr. and John Lewis. He was a man of his station, but to say "well those were the times" seems unnecessarily broad. Max posted:I remember that election very well, since it was the first presidential election where I was old enough to vote, and yeah, he seems to be forgotten by most but at the time he was a real possibility. At least, he was around my friends at school. Then the scandal happened and whelp. The scandal came out a while after he quit - when he dropped out he was still trying to wrangle attorney general from Obama in exchange for an endorsement.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:When he was confronted over the interview where Randy said he's A-OK with drone-striking domestic shoplifters, he ignored it. Isn't Rand also pro-drone now?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:Only in New Hampshire. They love protest/outsider candidates. That's a generous read.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Hillary had the black vote on lock in 2008. Then she lost NH and they abandoned ship to someone more favorable. Iowa, not NH, though you're right to point to Obama needing to cross a perceived viability threshold to swing the black vote (though Clinton's strategy did her no favors in that department).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2015 23:35
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:If she enacts progressive change and policy because of poll numbers does that make her evil? Because it feels like an incredibly bad faith argument against someone to say they are only doing what you want for personal reasons. On the other hand, it's entirely valid to look at that kind of shift as undermining the likelihood that an officeholder will prioritize the issue to the extent that a voter prefers/requires or even a candidate espouses.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2015 00:05
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:This argument could be made for every candidate ever because times change and politicians will never not change with them. In fact; the reason why the modern Republican party is dying is that they refuse to change the message when before they just stopped talking about it and then quietly pushed it through then when in office. Yes, which is why "flip-flopping" and the perceived legitimacy of conversions/evolutions is pretty important to a candidate's prospects.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2015 00:17
|
|
|
Feather posted:So how much is the Hillary campaign paying you, anyway? They really aren't.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2015 00:56
|
|
|
The X-man cometh posted:I'll take a crack at it. Assuming a compliant Senate, it would probably be something like Warren at Treasury, Feingold at State, Preet Bharara for Attorney General, Raul Grijalva for Homeland Security, some Midwestern governor for Agriculture, etc. This seems entirely realistic and not unfounded fantasy. Isn't Feingold running for Senate this year anyway?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:That's not true, though. Hillary and Obama were splitting the black vote in December 2007, before Iowa. It wasn't necessarily overwhelming in December 2007, but as Obama established greater perceived viability the vote split more. Iowa was considered the tipping point. Also, the Iowa caucuses were on January 3, 2008.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 13:05 |
|
|
Joementum posted:Some interesting names on the "Hillblazers" ( Hahaha oh man, Lynn Forester de Rothschild.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2015 01:23
|
|
)