Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

[TimP]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

Boston Globe today has two front page pieces in why Liz Warren should run.

Can't the Dems find a middle ground governor?

While I believe that Elizabeth Warren is the best possible candidate for the job due to her experience and positions, I doubt the NWO and the Israel lobby will allow it. And honestly, who really cares about "middle ground?" Why does a Democrat need to pander to knuckledraggers? John Kerry would have trounced Dumbya if he had tacked farther to the left instead of trying for "middle ground."

 

[joecct]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

By middle ground are you saying Warren is too far left and Hillary is too far right (at least, for a Dem)? I can see that reaction, particularly from someone at least a little right-leaning. That Warren appears to me perfectly reasonable likely indicates she seems like a loony liberal to you.

I would love for her to run, if only so that the consumer-protection issues she cares about will get a fair hearing in the primaries. The Clinton machine is about cutting deals to get power (they embody "the art of the possible" -- and Rover before you say it yes, that is certainly an important part of the equation, since purists sit home while compromisers govern) and their donors are not going to want to hear about consumer protection. But that is certainly something that should at least be discussed, if not highlighted, for Dems. It sure isn't going to come from the right.

Kep

Given our current experience with a Party Theoretician, I want somebody who's actually run something before running the country. A novice US Senator does not count as neither does the spouse of a former president.

Sure we may get somebody who steps in it (Jimmy, B43 to name a couple), but in the large view former governors have done a pretty good job of being President.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

Kep

Given our current experience with a Party Theoretician, I want somebody who's actually run something before running the country. A novice US Senator does not count as neither does the spouse of a former president.

Sure we may get somebody who steps in it (Jimmy, B43 to name a couple), but in the large view former governors have done a pretty good job of being President.

There may be some truth to that. It's not as if any of these people actually "run" anything other than the political organization -- few of the general ideas and none of the actual implementation comes from a president or even a governor. There are similarities between the kinds of political offices governors and presidents run, but don't mistake any of that for having any sort of non-political expertise. That's why the idea of running a company in the private sector is completely laughable as a pre-req for running for president.

The above is why I think Warren would be a terrible president. I want her to run to air the issues. She has no capacity of actually governing, because governing is about holding coalitions together, calling in favors, twisting arms, all the stuff that goes on when the cameras are off -- things that politicians like LBJ and Nixon were great at. Ike is an interesting example since, though he hated the job and was frustrated by it, was able to succeed since THE most politically demanding job that has ever been was allied commander during WW2.

Hillary would probably be a highly effective president -- talk about a born politician. The problem there would be the flight path, not the pilot.

 

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

Do you really think she's going to win an election by double digits?

Her opponents' name recognition is pretty low. I'll bet 50% of the country has no idea who Chris Christie is and 90% have no idea who Ted Cruz is. This is unfathomable to those of us who watch this stuff every day, but most of the country doesn't care about politics until the primaries. They know that Jeb is Dubya's brother, they know Hillary, and maybe they remember who Romney is.

No Kep, don't be ridiculous. The problem for the right is people's impressions of Hillary are pretty much set. Christie, Cruz, etc are going to get pounded into oblivion by the Clinton Machine. In the meantime, the best known GOP candidate is...Bush's brother, who people think has the exact same views as his idiot older sibling (and maybe he does).

Its like saying you don't want a 2 goal lead late in the 3rd. Yes, there's instances of teams losing those games but hell, who wouldn't rather be up in that situation?

 

[joecct]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

No Kep, don't be ridiculous. The problem for the right is people's impressions of Hillary are pretty much set. Christie, Cruz, etc are going to get pounded into oblivion by the Clinton Machine. In the meantime, the best known GOP candidate is...Bush's brother, who people think has the exact same views as his idiot older sibling (and maybe he does).

Its like saying you don't want a 2 goal lead late in the 3rd. Yes, there's instances of teams losing those games but hell, who wouldn't rather be up in that situation?

Which is why Jeb is in trouble.

Not only would he have to run against the Democratic nominee, he's going to have to run against his brother. Not good.

Kasich??

 

[LynahFan]

Its like saying you don't want a 2 goal lead late in the 3rd. Yes, there's instances of teams losing those games but hell, who wouldn't rather be up in that situation?

Ask Hopkins Lacrosse. Saturday, they were leading by 2 at home with 2:30 left, were 2 men up, and had the ball in the offensive zone - and lost.

So you're saying there's a chance!

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

No Kep, don't be ridiculous. The problem for the right is people's impressions of Hillary are pretty much set. Christie, Cruz, etc are going to get pounded into oblivion by the Clinton Machine. In the meantime, the best known GOP candidate is...Bush's brother, who people think has the exact same views as his idiot older sibling (and maybe he does).

Its like saying you don't want a 2 goal lead late in the 3rd. Yes, there's instances of teams losing those games but hell, who wouldn't rather be up in that situation?

It's nothing like the 2-goal lead example. That's an actual advantage. The polling data right now has no meaning -- literally none at all. It merely reflects where Hillary has been on the national radar for the last 20 years. (By the same token, there's nothing bad in Hillary's data, either.)

This is the last meaningful data will we receive until around August 2016. It's a 2-goal lead, but it's at about the 4 minute mark of the first period. Great to have, yes. But don't get carried away.

The election is about who can get their people to the polls. There are no actual undecideds -- pretty much everyone has a general sense of their alignment with either of the two parties, and the hyperbole and dirty pool of the campaign will cement those allegiances. There are no crossovers, there are only stay-at-homes. The team with the fewest stay-at-homes wins. So the only purpose of a candidate is who will get more butts off the couch and to the polls.

 

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

Gotta disagree strongly with you Kep. A candidate's initial impression going into the campaign in huge, and if they are extremely well known and in positive terrority that's a great place to be. If you're a blank slate, basically the entire GOP field except Bush, you have to define yourself before someone else does. That takes time, money, effort, and one slip up and it all comes crashing down (Romney with the 47% remark for example).

I don't think we've seen anything like Hillary since Ike in regards to her name recognition and general favorability. Maybe Reagan in 1980 as he'd run several times before and was an sorta well known actor before becoming California's governor. Not sure his ratings going into that campaign however.

joecct, agreed about Bush. His brother is an albatross that won't go away. When W doesn't campaign for him, Jeb is going to have to answer why despite the obvious, much like McCain and Romney had to. In the meantime, Bill Clinton, the most popular politician in America right now, is going to hitting the trail for Hillary when he's not interviewing interns to staff up the White House.

 

[joecct]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

The question that needs to be asked and, frankly hammered on from now until doomsday:

What is on Mrs. Clinton's resume?

Where's the beef?

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

Gotta disagree strongly with you Kep. A candidate's initial impression going into the campaign in huge, and if they are extremely well known and in positive terrority that's a great place to be. If you're a blank slate, basically the entire GOP field except Bush, you have to define yourself before someone else does. That takes time, money, effort, and one slip up and it all comes crashing down (Romney with the 47% remark for example).

I don't think this is true anymore. The great example of a candidate letting the other party define him was Dukakis, who blew a double-digit lead because he allowed Atwater et al. smear him. But that was 25 years ago, and the political alignments in this country were far more fluid. Romney is the classic example of why it doesn't matter anymore. He ran a terrible campaign including the 47% self-inflicted gunshot wound that reinforced everything the Dems tried to define him as, and on election day it didn't matter since the results were exactly what would have been assumed if you just started from the premise that R and D support has calcified at 45/45, and then went to systemic state trends for the refinements.

I don't think we've seen anything like Hillary since Ike in regards to her name recognition and general favorability. Maybe Reagan in 1980 as he'd run several times before and was an sorta well known actor before becoming California's governor.

Nixon in 1968 was also a thoroughly known quantity with 100% name recognition after having been on the national ticket 3 of the prior 4 elections. If the GOP nominates Jeb, a Bush will have been on their national ticket in 80, 84, 88, 92, 00, 04, and 16 -- 7 times out of 10. (This alone is reason to disband the entire family.) He's probably most similar to Ted Kennedy in 1976 -- nobody knew what Ted was exactly, but everybody knew what a Kennedy was.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

The question that needs to be asked and, frankly hammered on from now until doomsday:

What is on Mrs. Clinton's resume?

Where's the beef?

From everything my wife tells me, she was actually a highly effective and dedicated senator. And of course she was a very good secretary of state. I don't have any questions about whether she's up to being president. My sole objection is why I should turn the Democratic nomination over to someone whose economic and foreign policy orientation is indistinguishable from a moderate Republican.

She'd be great on civil rights, and that's certainly important. Ironically, she can make much more progress on race than Obama. She'd be as weak on civil liberties as Obama. She'd be awful on financial reform. Hawks would love her (except for the complete kooks like JPod and Jennifer Rubin). She'd probably be quite strong in dealing with Israel and the Arabs. Putin couldn't snow her like he did Dubya or freak her out like he does Obama. She's got that Thatcherite ironsides thing going on and she knows how to deploy it for full advantage.

One thing in Hillary's favor is she would have the backbone to stand up to the 3% numbskulls. Obama seems to feel at least like he has to let them do their little brownshirt dance with Cliven Bundy and his Hitler Youth. Hillary would deal with them like Ronnie buried PATCO. She knows a Neofascist when she sees one.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

He's probably most similar to Ted Kennedy in 1976 -- nobody knew what Ted was exactly, but everybody knew what a Kennedy was.

To be fair, Jeb most likely has fewer skeletons in his closet. However, much like when Ted couldn't give a convincing answer to the basic interview question of why he wanted the job, I suspect Jeb's main reason for wanting to be POTUS is, "I'm a Bush, it's my destiny." The deer-in-the-headlights BS answer didn't work for Teddy, and it won't work for Jebbers either.

 

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

The biggest benefit of Clinton in office would be in the not very exciting subject of the budget. Much like her husband, she'd resist gimmicky tax cuts and make the right choices as to what to fund. Beyond that I imagine women's rights would get a bump up to a whole new level. To the extend that she'd try to do something transformational that's going to have to come out in her campaign. Liberalism is at an interesting point. Having acheived re-regulation, higher taxes on the rich and expanded health care coverage, I'm not sure what the next territory to claim is, unless they adopt energy independence/climate change legislation which I don't see happening.

 

[Priceless]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

Yeah, we live in a liberal paradise. Nothing left to do now.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

The biggest benefit of Clinton in office would be in the not very exciting subject of the budget. Much like her husband, she'd resist gimmicky tax cuts and make the right choices as to what to fund. Beyond that I imagine women's rights would get a bump up to a whole new level. To the extend that she'd try to do something transformational that's going to have to come out in her campaign. Liberalism is at an interesting point. Having acheived re-regulation, higher taxes on the rich and expanded health care coverage, I'm not sure what the next territory to claim is, unless they adopt energy independence/climate change legislation which I don't see happening.

We're still trying to claw back to where we were in 1980. The left has mostly been stuck with the job of undoing the damage of Reaganomics, deregulation, gutting the EPA, and flooding the campaign system with donor money. Even Obamacare was just a re-warmed Heritage approach concocted by the right to forestall a real liberal health care system. Bill staunched the bloodflow from Reagan's irresponsibility and Obama staunched the bloodflow from Dubya's stupidity. Liberalism isn't even on the table when you talk about a Hillary term -- she is more of the same damage control, left-over from the days when Democrats had all they could handle just barring the door from the monsters. We should be more ambitious now. Aim for Sweden and maybe we'll get Denmark. Aim for Canada and we'll be stuck with another decade of Texas.

 

[joecct]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

From everything my wife tells me, she was actually a highly effective and dedicated senator. And of course she was a very good secretary of state. I don't have any questions about whether she's up to being president. My sole objection is why I should turn the Democratic nomination over to someone whose economic and foreign policy orientation is indistinguishable from a moderate Republican.

She'd be great on civil rights, and that's certainly important. Ironically, she can make much more progress on race than Obama. She'd be as weak on civil liberties as Obama. She'd be awful on financial reform. Hawks would love her (except for the complete kooks like JPod and Jennifer Rubin). She'd probably be quite strong in dealing with Israel and the Arabs. Putin couldn't snow her like he did Dubya or freak her out like he does Obama. She's got that Thatcherite ironsides thing going on and she knows how to deploy it for full advantage.

One thing in Hillary's favor is she would have the backbone to stand up to the 3% numbskulls. Obama seems to feel at least like he has to let them do their little brownshirt dance with Cliven Bundy and his Hitler Youth. Hillary would deal with them like Ronnie buried PATCO. She knows a Neofascist when she sees one.

Largely suppositions on what you THINK she'd do. She has a 4 yr resume as Sec State and an 8 yr run as a US Senator. Governor? No. Mayor? No. Any signs of skill in political horse trading? No.

Remember we had a 3+ year Senator with no executive experience at all get anointed by the Democratic party and its supporters as the "Messiah" that would improve the US's stature with the world and make everything beer and skittles. Reality bites.

I want Mrs. Clinton in a knock down primary fight. I want to see if she can survive the ugly crucible of primary politics. Can she think on her feet? We don't know these things? You guess she's going to be a whiz bang President. I have extreme doubts. I do know that if she runs effectively unopposed, there is no way she can get my vote.

 

[French Rage]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

Ted Cruz announces his candidacy on the 5th anniversary of the ACA at a school where students are forcing to attend his speech or else they receive a fine.

 

[joecct]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

Ted Cruz announces his candidacy on the 5th anniversary of the ACA at a school where students are forcing to attend his speech or else they receive a fine.

There is mandatory attendance at every convocation at Liberty. They don't care if it's a US Senator or some ward healer from Chicago. You have to check in or be fined.

The school has a whole bunch of fines. You can look them up on the web site.

Nobody is forced to go to LU. The cost of attendance is pretty low, especially if you had a decent GPA/SAT scores. And the women just won the ACHA Division 1 title.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

Largely suppositions on what you THINK she'd do.

That's all any of us have.

She has a 4 yr resume as Sec State and an 8 yr run as a US Senator. Governor? No. Mayor? No. Any signs of skill in political horse trading? No.

As I said, much of this is overrated as useful pre-req. We want to believe we can look at data points to predict a president's success because the president is important, but we really can't. A governor of a big, heterogeneous state (CA, NY) maybe useful. SML or HML -- maybe useful. Other than that? There's just nothing very comparable. Not that it helps, but I'll bet Pope is another pretty good pre-req. Francis in '16!

Remember we had a 3+ year Senator with no executive experience at all get anointed by the Democratic party and its supporters as the "Messiah" that would improve the US's stature with the world and make everything beer and skittles. Reality bites.

Lots of silliness here. The Messiah stuff is your side's projection. You're the ones looking for the Second Coming, not us. Obama said inspirational things that got us in a lather, but Ronnie did the same for you. But moving on from that, Obama's been a good president. Not great; not transformative, but a success despite being seemingly the only adult in the entire DC metro area. And the idea of our foreign stature was a specifically bad choice, as Obama has restored American credibility to about as a high a level as one could hope. Under Dubya America was the world's laughingstock, because the American right is the world's laughingstock. After 21 years we are used to them (and of course we've paid the price for them) so they aren't so amusing to us anymore, but to the rest of the world the Newt / Palin / Cruz party is a Jerry Lewis movie. (Remember, they think Jerry Lewis is funny.)

I want Mrs. Clinton in a knock down primary fight.

So do I. Not so much because I think that's any sort of magical testing chamber where character is revealed. I think that's a bunch of whooey. I want her to go through a vicious primary because she's going to face the most unprincipled and heinous general election campaign of any modern candidate, and she needs to be a stone cold killer by then. At the end of the day, she'll be 100% better for the country than whatever moral cripple survives the GOP nomination, so if she wins the nomination she has to win the general. This is probably as important as '00, and the country really got screwed that time. We can't afford to have it happen again.

 

[Spartanforlife4]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

Will the Republicans support him? I mean, he actually was born in a different country, to a white mom and a minority father, so he obviously can't be a true American. I bet he's just seeking office so his Canuck extremist friends in Alberta can try to decimate the world.