Other than the tedious HRC speculation, who is there out there who appears to be thinking about a run. I’ve liked what I have seen from the Gov. from MD., O’Malley. In fact, I like it a lot.
I guess Brian Schweitzer has decided to run in the Joe Lieberman primary, but other than those three, I have heard no rumblings. You?
Granted, my head is so far up my ass with day to day stuff like trying to walk on ice with a bad knee, so I haven’t really been looking.
Comparing Schweitzer to Leiberpuke is seriously offensive to Schweitzer. He’s an odd duck but he is not going to be endorsing whatever dickwad the GOP puts up.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
I’d say the David Sirota primary, myself.
Interesting discussion on Chris Hayes, Karen Finney saying that the reason Priorities USA so ostentatiously announced they’re sitting out 2014 is to goose Democratic donors into action. So give if you can.
We’re not really going to do this, are we?
I’m ignoring talk about 2016. I have enough other problems to contend with that 2016 is too far away for me to think about.
Actually I’d like to import the short Canadian campaign season here.
scott (the other one)
I like O’Malley’s positions, but I thought he was terrible on camera back in 2012, the only time I’ve heard him speak.
I’m kinda hoping Kirsten Gillibrand.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
I’ll just say it. Hear me now and believe me later: John Edwards. The Comeback Kid.
@Jeffro: Two or three times a week, at least, for the next two years, then every day for the next year. And when we get to the end, we’re gonna start all over again.
I’m looking forward to seeing what kind of pie fights will come up from the Olympics, too.
“trying to walk on ice”
A lot of that around here. Worst in 30+ years.
I too think O’Malley is quite awesome. And very electable. Would not surprise me much if he was our next President.
Still hoping for Hillary run though.
Whether anything comes from O’Malley running, it’s nice to see that not every D politician is on board with the coronation of Hillary.
I kind of wish Kirsten Gillibrand was ready for a presidential run.
Edited to Add: And I see I’m not the only one. I have this secret hope that Hillary will decide she’s not up for a run, annoints Gillibrand her successor, and passes her warchest and all her infrastructure off to Kirsten.
Howard Beale IV
It’s time for a new Party: The Skunk Party.
Anybody but Hillary plz. kthxbai.
@jharp: I have some cleats (baby crampons) that I bought at the Grand Canyon in winter. I would use them if there were ice on the ground here.
I’m kinda furious that Priorities USA is backing off and waiting for 2016. We need them now. BAH!
O’Malley would be terribly hurt by the catastrophic roll out of ACA in MD. Just a monumental failure. I like the man a lot, but that cockup is real baggage.
Bob Costas enunciating Pussy Riot.
That’s worth the Olympic bullshit right there.
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Not going to happen. Edwards has burned too many bridges and turned himself into an unsympathetic tabloid sideshow. Not to mention that one of the few ways Democrats could alienate the women’s vote would be to nominate a guy who cheated on his wife while she had cancer.
But sure, go ahead, make your case. This could be amusing.
Culture of Truth
Kirsten Gillibrand is not going to run. Elizabeth Warren is not going to run. John Edwards is not going to run.
O’Malley is probably going to run.
Schweizter is already running.
Nominee with be either Clinton or Biden. Media will whine about a dynasty.
I don’t like HRC because she’s running the same ‘inevitable – I’m ENTITLED to be President’ routine that bugged the shyt ouf of me in 2007.
If she wants the nomination, run and WIN it….period.
@rikyrah: What has Clinton done that is problematic? So far she seems to be putting together a team. That seems pretty normal to me. FWIW I am keep of intrigued by O’Malley right now, but I intend to wait until there are some actual declared candidates to start seriously sorting them out.
Sorry for the OT but this CrazyMax headline cought my attention:
Talk about delusional. Why would liberals be concerned about a tiny group of people without any constituency.
O’Malley is a nonstarter. Big Maryland Dem money is already committed to Hillary! and anyway, they roll their eyes when Bob’s name comes up.
Any love for Klobuchar? Gillibrand. O’Malley. I’d gladly vote for any of them. Hillary too. I don’t have a preferred candidate yet. Too early.
@wvng: By 2016 enough people will be actually benefiting from the ACA, no one will care or remember the website glitches.
For Dems other than HRC, 2016 is all about positive press and other targets. O’Malley as exhibit A. He is Carecetti from the Wire, not that’s that’s a bad thing, but Hillary is a better Carcetti than O’Malley. So he’ll get some notice but he has no hope of winning.
A question for our side is will we have pizza men and Alaska govs trying to use the primary as a vehicle for a private sector gig. We have no Fox/talk radio/Regnery welfare circuit thereby inhibiting some of the hucksterism that goes on on the GOP side, but there’s still gain to be to made from running and losing as long as you do it nice. See Biden.
From 1988 to 2008 (Edwards was opportunistic in the extreme) Dem primaries had a left wing candidate who voiced and mobilized dissent from the center. Is there someone running to protest the center this time? On that score, Jerry Brown (1992) is getting many well deserved last laughs.
@Elmo: Who’s Bob? Isn’t governor O’Malley’s first name Martin?
The Fat Kate Middleton
Sherrod Brown. Attended a Demo fundraising dinner here in Iowa, and everybody at my table loved Sherrod.
Honest question: have the dems ever nominated someone who list an earlier primary? I know the GOP usually picks the guy who is next in line (which is why my money is on Huckabee in that race), but have the Dems ever done that?
The line I remember is that democrats want to fall in love, while republicans fall in line
@The Fat Kate Middleton:
Yes! Me likey. Populist midwesterner with no obvious taint.
ETA: I already heard my first Clenis story on the local Fox news last night – something about the Big Dog and Elizabeth Hurley. The 90s called and want their narrative back.
@The Fat Kate Middleton: Brown would awesome; I tend to doubt he would run, but I have been wrong before.
@The Fat Kate Middleton: I agree that Brown is fantastic. But hasn’t he said he’s not interested?
The Fat Kate Middleton
[email protected]Omnes Omnibus: I really think he could pull it off – his wife is great, too.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@JGabriel: I guess my snark font isn’t working
@Betty Cracker: Elizabeth Warren signed a letter endorsing Hillary, but people don’t seem to care.
Brown is one of those pols I send money too even though Im not a constituent.
@Culture of Truth:
While pimping JEB.
The Fat Kate Middleton
@Betty Cracker: Maybe … but it’s 2014, after all. Lots of time for persuasion.
Schweitzer is running as a populist. Pretty far from Lieberdouche.
@angler: Interesting points. Can you elaborate any or all of them? Thanks.
Not understanding all the butthurt over Hillary. She’d crush the GOP. Nobody else on our team can do that. Damn Purity Progs all want a pony glued to a unicorn…..take HRC and her 8 yrs of remodeling the SCOTUS and STFU.
Even though he’ll be 66 in 2016, just to witness the heads of the teanuts explode, would like to see Gary Locke announce that he’s running.
I’d like to see somebody place Economic Inequality at the center of their campaign. Which just about places me in the Not-Hilary camp, although I’m willing to give her a chance to prove she’s gotten beyond the DLC.
@Punchy: I’ll happily vote for her if she is the candidate. I don’t feel that I need to jump on a bandwagon today. FWIW I think any candidate who comes out on top of the democratic primary should be able to handily defeat the troll that the GOP process shits out. As a result, I am interested finding the best candidate, not just the first one to present herself. Note: HRC may well turn out to be the best candidate in my view and get my vote in the primary.
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Heh. I thought it was probably snark but wasn’t 100% sure – when in doubt, I treat it seriously, just on the off chance. So it was less your snark font not working than my snark meter being a little off.
Me. I’m going to run as a more ruthless Chris Christie. Or as a more demure Hillary Clinton, I haven’t decided yet. Shoot, maybe slightly to the right of Colonel Phillip Green. My focus group is still working on it, can I get back to you?
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
There’s that number again.
“About six-in-ten (58%) Americans expressed an unfavorable view of Putin compared with 27% who saw him favorably, according to a new Washington Post/ABC News survey.”
Of course they do. Because they’re crazy.
@Punchy: I’m not a progressive and not a purity troll, I’m not keen on Hillary because I don’t want a rerun of the 90s. As to her remaking the Supreme Court, or anything else, what has she done to suggest that she will be anything but a risk adverse, triangulating, type? Because that honestly seems to be her default
Culture of Truth:
Warren’s not going to run, I agree. Gillibrand won’t run against Clinton, but if Clinton bows out then Gillibrand probably jumps in.
The Fat Kate Middleton
@Punchy: Can’t argue with that, despite my mentions of Sherrod. But, damn …
As I’ve said before, Hilary would expand the Democratic lead with women to (around) 15% and there’s no effin way the GOP candidate would be competitive. Also she’d have strong coat tails. And by 2016 the white vote will be down to 69-70% of the total vote meaning the 2010 based GOP gerrymandering will be squishy as all hell. Thus a landslide route in 2016, with her at the top of the ticket, is well within the realm of possibility.
ETA: Most if not all of the above is true for any woman getting the nomination.
@J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford:
Crazy fascists love authoritarian shitheels like Putin.
Gillibrand is an amazing on-screen presence, but confess from the other coast I don’t know much of her. FWIW I don’t think we have anybody to toss into the fray for ’16, from here.
The Fat Kate Middleton:
Brown would be a good candidate. I’d like to see a Democratic woman president, but I could support Brown without any hesitancy in the unlikely event that there aren’t any female candidates in the 2016 primary.
Mark Warner, John Hickenlooper, Is there some reason Jeanne Shaheen isn’t mentioned? She’s been a governor and now a Senator and from an important state, Maria Cantwell, Tim Kaine who I happen to really like, Mark Udall, Deval Patrick(except the media will say “another black guy??”), Oregon governor Kitzhaber, either of the Oregon senators for different reasons and Ky Governor Steve Beshear.
Al Gore won seven primaries in 1988 but did not get the nomination. He was finally nominated in 2000. Is that the sort of thing you mean?
Another Al (Smith) was the nominee in 1928, after having unsuccessfully put his name in contention in 1924 (not fair to call it a primary).
Per HRC: do not want anyone, from any party, who would be 69 years old when taking the presidential oath of office.
We all have lines over which we will not cross, and that is one of mine.
I think Howard Dean is either maneuvering for a cabinet position in a Clinton administration or considering a run.
Any reasonably good Democrat who can beat a GOP is fine with me.If it’s HRC, fine. Sherrod Brown would be good.
I do want a good primary opponent against HRC, since the worst thing about her in 2008 was the campaign people she chose, and her ‘not all that bright nor well informed’ electoral tactics (which were a function of some of her loser advisers). So, if it’s Hillary Clinton, she needs to run with a better campaign, is all.
Udall is in a tight re-election campaign and may very well get turfed out if Colorado Dems don’t wake up and bestir themselves to vote.
That’s pretty much my biggest concern with HRC — and Warren too, since she’s not much younger. Though, of course, I’d vote for either if nominated.
@NotMax: Age and age related health issues are a couple of my major concerns about either Clinton or Biden.
@Cervantes: yeah, the Gore example works, and thanks for the pointer. The GOP is more inclined to take that route – W is the only nominee since Goldwater that wasn’t in his second run or an incumbent through strange circumstances. But the Dems seem to shy away from that approach
Jim, Foolish Literalist
I”m not counting any chickens, but here’s some good news
My dream ticket would be Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. But that is a dream, since in the real world, the ‘dream ticket’ needs to get itself elected.
Also not sure about foreign policy experience on that ticket. Checked Wiki and Sanders isn’t on any national security committee. And Warren is brand new.
But, then what was Obama’s national security cred before he was elected? In my book he gets a NP in civil liberties and national security (due to excessive Bushiness) but a P with honors in old fashioned diplomacy for a mediocre P overall. Which compared to the previous guy, is doing pretty good.
And to people who drone on about how being in one’s late sixties or even into the seventies not being what it used to be, well, the rigors of the presidency aren’t what they used to be either.
@NotMax: Depends on what you want to do with your presidency? Harding played poker, fooled around with chicks he picked up, and drank a lot. And he died.
Bush kept his body in excellent physical shape, and served during very stressful times, and did well, and I think, physically, he could still serve with robust health. Except, the little problem what goes on, or does go on, inside his head, would be a problem (actually, it would be nightmare).
In moderation due to naughty words. Try again:
Depends on what you want to do with your presidency? Harding played p * k * r with his buddies, fooled around with chicks he picked up, and drank a lot. And he died in office.
Bush II kept his body in excellent physical shape, and served during very stressful times, and did well in terms of his health, and I think, physically, he could still serve with robust health. Except, the business of what goes on, or does go on, inside his head, would be a problem (actually, it would be nightmare).
Biden is the only one who could run who would INSTANTLY receive my unwavering support.
O’Malley seems like a fine fellow.
The rest, meh.
Fuck 2016. Get out NOW and help your local House rep stay in office if Dem, and get his/her ass thrown out if GOP. Nothing else matters.
You mean the Schweitzer who publicly bad mouths President Obama?
You mean the Schweitzer who opposes the ACA?
You mean the Schweitzer who opposes a ban on assault weapons?
You mean the Schweitzer who said this?….
You mean the Schweitzer who said this?…
Schweitzer is even worse than Lieberman. He pretends to be a Democrat and have Democratic ideals, but he is just another Herman Cain: a simplistic, ignorant, self-serving, populist fraudster. He has carefully cultivated folksy ways, but a nasty, dangerous streak a mile wide. He is our equivalent of Huckabee. He is a disaster.
Thoughts on Napolitano?
@KG: Taking the UC gig is a pretty shitty way to position for a run. It’s not like CA is a swing state.
At a loss at what speculating on death has to do with what I was attempting to address.
Harding died of congestive heart failure, which most historians agree would have occurred whether he had been in office or not.
Bush, for all his faults (and they are legion), was not in his seventies.
@Ash Can: Fucking-a-right.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@The Fat Kate Middleton: I love Brown, but I’ll be surprised if he’ll consider it. I hope I’m wrong. My issue with HRC is that she’s always been such a hawk.
@NotMax: I was saying that evaluation of the effect of age on fitness for service should be done on an individual basis. Sweeping generalizations aren’t very useful when talking about a unique individual.
I also think any Democratic VP nominee would be very qualified to serve.
@Mandalay: The last two quotes aren’t really objectionable. Maybe he wasn’t very pc but it’s true that many Americans are ignorant about the ME and geopolitics (national interests) boils down to bad guys and allies. And we’re thought of in the same way.
I don’t know of any seat in all of WA that could possibly swing. In theory Sheriff Green River could go, but he didn’t with the full force of anti-Bush voting and the internet against him. If you’ve got video of him with a goat or badmouthing Microsoft I’ll be happy to get it played.
It is hardly a “sweeping generalization” to state that stamina and acuity decrease with advancing age. The rate and extent of the decrease, of course, varies with the individual, but to deny its existence or its inevitability is folly.
There aren’t a lot of 70-year-olds competing in the Olympics.
Are you serious? You really think it would be OK to have someone who thinks about the Middle East in those terms to run for president as a Democrat?
Schweitzer isn’t just a moron. He’s a dangerous moron.
@Betty Cracker: Any love for Klobuchar?
Absolutely none. I would drink molten lead sooner than vote for her in a primary.
She consistently has one of the worst DW-nominate scores among Dems even though she represents one of the states with the most favorable Partisan Voting Index.
@NotMax: The next president has to compete in the Olympics? I did not know that. What sport?
@Mandalay: I don’t think most Americans would argue with bad guys and allies. Who would most Americans call the good guys in the ME, except for maybe Israel (which will piss off the internet left)?
@Mandalay: Political realism posits that there no good guys or bad guys in international relations; there are allies and opponents. And those can change.
Now that’s just being silly.
Metaphors, they’re not just for English class anymore.
@Culture of Truth:
I heard the same thing exactly 8 years ago about either Clinton or Edwards.
@Mandalay: I didn’t say that. Schweitzer’s saying that’s how many Americans feel about the ME. Maybe that’s how he feels too but I don’t think that’s the proper context. He was trying to use his experience working in the ME as a reason to vote for him. I think his denigrating Obama killed any shot of him winning the nomination.
I am pleased to see that you disagree with Schweitzer’s analysis.
Lyndon Johnson, Adlai Stephenson, and William Jennings Bryant all come to mind as well, but that dates it a bit. Still looking for a link, but I believe Walter Mondale ran in the primaries before 1984.
I’m for Al Franken to declare that it’s his decade again.
@Mandalay: No, I question his phrasing. I suggest that he trying to voice that political realist view. I don’t fully subscribe to it myself. I tend toward Wilsonian idealism tempered by realist limitations.
Mondale was Carter’s Veep and won in a weak field. I don’t remember any previous runs.
He was asked here when he came a coupla months ago and he said unequivocally “no.” Not coy, either, not “who ME? I’m HONORED” He just said “no.”
I agree it would be fun, so maybe he’ll reconsider. Here’s how he would open his SOTU:
Then he could twirl around, maybe show us the hand-stitched lining :)
@Kay: I think that Brown is one of the few senators who does not see him/herself as a potential president. This, of course, is one of the best reasons to consider him. I agree, though, that he has definitively ruled out a run.
@MikeJ: Middle Eastern Americans have been giving Democrats a nice chunk of votes—and pre-Bush they were Republican-leaning. I’d hate to throw out the votes by nominating someone who talks like Schweitzer, even if I weren’t PC and didn’t have the experience of meeting several Muslims while doing Dem doorknocking and didn’t weekly deal with my Egyptian pharmacist and my Moroccan convenience store clerk.
O/T Enjoy The Big Lipinski.
Ted and Hellen
Hillvita for president.
Christ, what a joke.
Villago Delenda Est
Oh, hell, go for it. Kahless the Unforgettable (TOS version, not the watered down TNG guy)
Hey how about my lad, US Sen Jeff Merkley! Serious lib, lives in the poor wht burbs I grew up in. Pushed harry reid on Sen Reform as a frosh, HE is a Comer! Take a look Dem America!
@Ted and Hellen: Good god. You have achieved complete incoherence. Well done.
I still miss Phil Hartman from SNL.
Villago Delenda Est
I tend to agree, but I think Merkley is more likely for 2020 or 2024, he needs to make more splashes along the lines he’s already made.
Based on what I know of his office’s interference with the Portland Harbor Superfund site cleanup on behalf of the Lower Willamette Group, I’d be a little cautious about crowning Merkley the people’s champion just yet.
@billB: Hey, I mentioned both Ore senators AND the governor even thought I heard the O-care rollout’been a disaster. Wyden’s got some healthcare ideas and Merkeley’s got the NSA stuff.
@Mandalay: Schweitzer’s trying to get some attention for his dark horse race. His energy shtick is to get the US energy independent so that we don’t have to deal with oil nation dictators. There is nothing wrong with that line of thinking. He shouldn’t have dissed Obama but that does not make him worse than Lieberprick, or maybe you’ve forgotten how bad Lieberprick was.
I’m way more interested in 2014. I think the possibility of Grimes beating Mitch McConnell is more interesting right now than to trying figure out who could beat HRC in the primaries.
@Anoniminous: Ditto. After an unbroken string of white men as President, we finally got a person of color in the White House. And likewise, it’s about fricking time we got a woman.
I’m sorry, but white men are NOT our base. People of color, women, LGBT, youth – that’s our base. And while its not the sole criteria – it IS important that our party’s leadership does in fact reflect in a meaningful way, our base.
I supported Obama over Hillary. he was the better candidate. But I also think she’s qualified too. And in part for political reasons – because this is politics we are talking about – I want a woman as our candidate in 2016. I want a critical part of our coalition, of our base – to finally see themselves at the very top. And after that, I want a gay Democrat as our candidate. Or maybe a first generation Latino or Asian Pacific Islander. Etc etc.
I want the future of this country to see that the Democratic Party has no glass ceiling – and that we are not the party of the old white men. Because I want to crush the Republicans into dust.
@Goblue72: Do you want to win? Or do you want your perfect ideological candidate?
@NotMax: Jerry Brown is 75 years old, Governor of the largest state in the country, successfully pushed through a tax increase via voter initiative, brought California’s completely messed up budget finally into fiscal health, and is running for a second term.
Old people can still do shit in this day & age.
@Omnes Omnibus: can’t tell if that’s agreeing or not?
@Omnes Omnibus: I want to win and that’s why I’m not really interested in any of the white men being offered. They aren’t any better than HRC by any material margin, and with much shorter coattails as they are not women.
Running a woman as our candidate IS about winning.
@Goblue72: It was asking a question. You may recall the “?” after the sentence.
@Omnes Omnibus: I thought T&H did that months ago.
@BillinGlendaleCA: I am chastened.
(a) there will always be exceptions or outliers (see mention of rate and extent in my comment above)
(b) daily demands of the office of any governor a far cry from the office of the president
(c) Republicans fading into irrelevance in the California legislature as much a factor (perhaps more of one) in righting the economic ship of state
(d) what relevance the size of a state’s population has eludes me
@NotMax: The size of the state’s population factors into the Electoral College vote. OTOH, can you see CA going GOP anytime in the near future?
The Democratic President who has done the most for liberal policies since the likes of LBJ and FDR and all he gets is a “mediocre”? The guy who has been kneecapped by the Left while fighting off the Right.
SMH. And some wonder why Obots give ya’ll the side eye.
Come January 2016, the Democratic Party can kiss my ass.
mike in dc
Hmm. Clinton-Castro would be a great ticket for making wingnut heads explode(and, in principle anyway, running up the score).
The one clear benefit of a Dean presidency is that the 50-state strategy would become more firmly entrenched and we’d actually stop losing mid-terms so badly, maybe even win a few ala 2006.
On the other side, what I’d love to see would be Paul Ryan/Rand Paul. A veritable double rainbow of Randian sociopathy.
I don’t see JEB getting the nomination. He won’t disavow his brother, and everyone else running will. Plus he’s more or less DOA in the general.
You seemed smarter than a PUMA.
@mai naem: Deval Patrick keeps telling us Massholes that he promised his wife he’d never run for any office again. More realistically, when he ran for governor, he did play up the “just like Barack Obama, only local” comparisons. If he jumps in for 2016, every media hack already has at least one “we had the Black Man, now we need a White Woman, for balance” story in their files. Patrick needs to wait until 2020, at least.
I’m also getting the impression that O’Malley and Schweitzer are both running for the 2016 VP ticket — either one could argue they’d add from-the-left credibility, while positioning themselves for 2020. I think Gillibrand believes “voters” won’t go for a dual-double-XX ticket, so she’s waiting to see if Hillary backs out; if HRC doesn’t run, Gillibrand has the “time for a woman” advantage, and if she does, Gillibrand’s more than young enough to run in 2020 or 2024.
Another VP and/or 2020 contender — Kamala Harris. She’s not nationwide-ready just yet, but again, she’s young enough to wait if she wants the job.
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q):
Global history would indicate that the first female American president is not gonna be no sissy-pants peacenik, I’m afraid.
Argument in HRC’s favor, her tenure as Secretary of State seems to have given her a taste for jaw-jaw over war-war. She knows perfectly well how much the average American does not want any more big-swinging-dick global “adventures” right now, and I believe her reputation is such that the usual international suspects are not gonna think she’ll fall for booga-booga stories from the CIA or the emirates, either.
@Ted and Hellen: You really think she’s Evita, given your rep around here, you should be telling us how much you’re looking forward to HRC’s inauguration, and her second inauguration too.
But I think you’re just trolling and/or playing the ‘gay men hate thinking about vage’ shtick.
@Elmo: Who is Bob?
Right now, I’m leaning heavily towards O’Malley for five reasons:
1) He really worked hard to get Prop 6 (gay marriage equality) through the Maryland Legislature, and he then campaigned hard to get it passed. He was all over the ads supporting gay marriage. It was a close vote in Maryland, and he may have helped make the difference. In contrast, Clinton didn’t start supporting gay marriage until March 2013. I’m glad she’s come around, but she waited longer than she should have, and it was classic Clintonian waiting. Even Baucus and Portman came out for gay marriage before she did. In any event, O’Malley delivered for gay rights in a way Clinton hasn’t ever really delivered a policy victory;
2) O’Malley eliminated the death penalty for all future offenders in Maryland. Again, that’s a major, liberal accomplishment that he played a significant role in delivering.
3) He raised state taxes to cover Maryland’s budget shortfall, rather than just cutting services;
4) He’s mayor Carcetti, and I love both Baltimore and Maryland;
5) In contrast, despite many, many years in public life, I don’t have any satisfactory answer to these questions regarding Clinton: “What have been Hillary Clinton’s major, signature accomplishments in her long career in public life?. . . What stamp did she put on national policy in her time as Senator from New York? What were her defining and singular achievements as secretary-of-state?” The best answer I can give for her: her time as Secretary of State was largely uneventful. That’s actually a significant achievement–avoiding war and keeping the peace are underrated.
So, on balance, I prefer O’Malley. However, of course, if Clinton runs and wins the nomination, I’d definitely still vote for her. I just would prefer someone else. I’d also love to have a woman as President; I just wish it could be someone like Warren. Finally, from a regional perspective, I do wish we had someone with real swing-state, Mid-west credentials. If only Granholm was eligible!
Totally true, but not germane to my point. Would Brown be only half as good a governor if he governed a state half the population size?
You desribed him pretty well. I cannot believe he’s that ignorant. WTF?
Well, remember that the question was: “have the dems ever nominated someone who l[o]st an earlier primary [season]?”
Does Lyndon Johnson meet the criterion? He was nominated once, in 1964. In 1960 he lost on the ballot at the convention but had not participated in any of the primaries.
Does Adlai Stevenson meet the criterion? No, because he did not run prior to ’52. And in ’52, he won the nomination without really running for it. Kefauver had won most of the primaries but was denied the nomination. Adlai won the nomination again in ’56.
Mondale does not meet the criterion, either, as he had not run prior to ’84.
As for William Jennings Bryan, he won the nomination each and every time he sought it, so he can’t meet the criterion. Plus, Bryan is just too far back — in his day, there were no primaries to speak of.
@Rarely Posts: Thanks, that was helpful to me. Well, your points 1-3 were. Never heard of Carcetti: some TV thing?
And as for Clinton, her accomplishments at State were discussed here. (Many words, short discussion.) And when someone asked for “evidence of [her] wanting to work well with political opponents,” some was provided here.
@NotMax: because governing one of the tiny backwater states – like say Montana – is not nearly the same complexity and challenge as governing an enormous state like California.
Carcetti is a character in The Wire.
I suspect the point was this: at age 75, it’s impressive that Brown is succeeding in California — as opposed to, say, Maine, which, being smaller, is arguably easier to govern.
Perhaps you agree that scale matters at least a bit, as indicated by your own “(b) daily demands of the office of any governor a far cry from the office of the president.” (And yes, I know you’re not only referring to scale here but scope as well.)
Anyway, I suspect that was the original point. I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with it.
@Steeplejack: Thanks. Have not watched that show. But maybe if O’Malley declares, I’ll get a chance to!
@KG: Yeah, but Scalia and Kennedy will probably retire in the next 6 years. You could replace either one of them with the safest, cuddliest, most milquetoast-y Dem you could think of- and quite a few moderate Republicans, too- and you’re still pretty much COMPLETELY remaking the Court.
Consistently give ground to conservatives while gaining nothing in return, as did her husband.
@Rarely Posts: “The best answer I can give for her: her time as Secretary of State was largely uneventful. That’s actually a significant achievement–avoiding war and keeping the peace are underrated.”
There was also an article going around the other day that mentioned that her travels and events were focused much more on engaging average people in foreign countries, and raising international women-and-children issues. That’s easy to overlook, and it can sound more “feel good” than “Actual Accomplishment”. And maybe it is! But a lot of foreign policy seems to be Important Old Men in Important Suits Meeting In Important rooms, and it’s not like that’s really much different than a smoke-filled back room picking the President. Her populist touches on foreign policy were cool.
Here are some things her husband achieved: ended 12 miserable years of seemingly endless Republican misrule in the White House (never forget this); raised taxes on the 1% to balance the budget while lowering taxes on the poorest families; increased the minimum wage by 20%; put more money into education, Head Start, housing, food support; funded more scientific research; helped to bring gay rights further into policy debate; required a waiting period for handgun purchases; appointed Ginsburg and elevated Sotomayor; undid a military coup in Haiti; and recognized Sinn Fein so that it could help bring peace to Northern Ireland.
I could go on, but anyway, in all of this, he was bitterly opposed by “conservatives” — recall that the Republicans had the House from ’95 onwards.
Oh look Mr. “I just can’t help but like Khris KristieKreme”. Mr. “Rand Paul has some good ideas”. Mr. I voted for G Dubya Bush twice…once in the middle of the Iraq quagmire…oh and I am anti war anti drone” Cole.
Mr…”Griftwald is my hero” Cole is now back to expressing political opinions again.
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: SUSA has McConnell four points down.
I’ve followed O’Malley since he was mayor of Baltimore and climbed in the snow-shovel truck himself for a full shift. He’s usually better on TV than he was last summer, probably got some nerves going. He gives a decent but not spectacular speech. His lt. gov. who is running for his spot (O’Malley is term limited) is a terrible speaker. I’ve been to a couple of concerts his band gave at a local Irish bar, they don’t mess with the old standards too badly and he’s a decent singer but not spectacular.
He’ll be hurt by the healthcare.gov rollout debacle (MD had one of the worst websites) but they reacted fairly well once the site got off the ground so he may cite it as proof of his political agility. He’s solid on diversity rights, inclusion, environment, regulation, forcing polluters to pay, a whole bunch of issues.
The whole time he’s been running, though, I get the feeling that he’s running for VP. He’d be great as the token young white guy on Hillary’s ticket.
How smart is he?
Unless she decides otherwise, HRC will be the nominee in 2016. All the others mentioned might be VP material. O’Malley strikes me as inspiring as lint.
Average folks can imagine Hillary as President. She has the necessary gravitas. She will help run up the score, since somewhere between 80 and 90% of the electorate already knows who they’ll be voting for. Added bonus :exploding wingnut heads!
I’d pair her with Julian Castro or Wendy Davis for added fun!