I created the above graphic to express my perception of the overall mood of the Balloon Juice collective on the topic of Hillary Clinton as the 2016 Democratic Party nominee. We’re a big tent that includes HRC-haters, HRC-lovers and HRC-indifferents, but with few exceptions, we’re Democrats who will support our party’s nominee. I like that about us.
Open thread!
mikej
Mark me down as indifferent. I just can’t work up the level of hatred that many here can. I also don’t buy the excuse that since her opponents are mentally I’ll we have to hold her to a higher standard
mikefromArlington
Nader 2016!
Alex
Can’t wait for Anne Laurie – the person whom John provided with an ongoing platform to inflict her inane nattering about animalism on all of us – to chime in with further thoughts on the serial misogyny that pervades this blog and its moderator.
Marcion
Meh.
samiam
By “we” you are referring to the latest spew from vvr0ng way Cole. He doesn’t fool me for a second. Given half a chance the 2 time G Dubya voter will vote for Jeb Bush….especially if that is what Griftwald tells him to do.
Iowa Old Lady
I was thinking the other day about what form misogynistic language will take with HRC. It’s tricky because most women know that sometimes you’re an overemotional, weak little thing and sometimes you’re a ball buster.
I’m not saying any criticism of HRC here is part of that, but I’m still figuring out if I’m being sensitive.
Amir Khalid
No matter what stories the American news media decides to spread about her, I will not be a most-reluctant voter for Hillary next year. You can have my word on that.
aimai
That sort of sums up my feelings except that I think that HRC comes in for some weird kind of mental trick whereby the very viciousness of the attacks on her seem to make people crazily blame her for them. From the get go she and Clinton himself were attacked with every form of venom (and then some) known to the right wing and yet they were never loved and supported for that but rather people sort of held them accountable for it. They took crap that previous presidents never had to take, and that only Obama and Michelle have taken since in this quantity, and yet somehow instead of hating the haters I find people acting like some other democratic policitian could have prevented these attacks.
If you read The Hunting of the President or pay the slightest attention to right wing movers and shakers you will grasp that
No one we nominate is going to be above attacks, smears, insults, and degradation. We either stand with them or we fall with them. That’s as true for Elizabeth Warren (god save her) as HRC.
SenyorDave
I would vote for HRC over any Republican, but I really don’t see much about her I like. She has Bill’s negatives, and not many of his positives. Plus I question her judgment, based on how she campaigned in 2007 (and her choice of campaign managers). The e-mail thing sounds like just another self-inflicted wound.
I am growing to truly loathe the Democratic party apparatus. Any group that could put a dimwit like DWS in a position of power must be incompetent.
Bobby B.
I represent a small but vocal minority who cannot always be trusted to act rationally. Bring back Sha Na Na!
scav
I don’t know — I somehow think there might also be a contingent here all in favor of outright Bible-snatching, especially if melded with whatever the Koran-snatcher yelled as he ran off from the guy with a match. We could even work up multidenominational relay teams or icon-biathalons with kitchen strainers thrown into the mix. Animal companion issues more likely to be a step too far for many.
Baud
I don’t know. Bush’s directive that his donors hold off on their really big contributions showed courageous leadership. He seems to be a man of the people. I might have to switch sides.
samiam
I’m not a Hilary fan at all but she will still be 10x better (at a minimum) than anything from the other side.
Baud
@aimai:
This.
Nicole
@mikefromArlington:
Now that’s just rubbing salt in Betty’s wounds.
Baud
@Amir Khalid:
So much for all our voter fraud efforts.
Amir Khalid
@Bobby B.:
I remember their TV show from the 1970s. It was very popular here.
Sherparick
I would pretty much vote for Attilia the Hun or a Yellow Dog on the Democratic Ticket, for the following reason: “The Supreme Court and Ruth Ginsburg turns 82 on March 15” and 4 other Supreme court justices are approaching 80 (Breyer, Scalia, and Kennedy). Between Citizens United, the evisceration of the Voting Rights Act, and Obamacare litigation how much more evidence do we need that we can’t let any likely current Republican President (Scott Walker, Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz?) appoint Supreme Court Justices.
Cervantes
@aimai:
From this vantage point, how do you explain WJC’s approval ratings after impeachment?
oldster
Yup, your cartoon pretty much sums up this old man’s feelings.
Supreme Court.
Those two words alone are enough to get me to vote for any Democrat ahead of any Republican.
Another relevant word: Obamacare.
After even one HRC term, it will be a permanent feature of the American landscape, doing good in perpetuity. If a Republican gets in, they will try to sabotage it in every way possible.
So those are a couple of spine-stiffening thoughts that will get me to vote D. But I admit that my spine may need occasional stiffening, given the nonsense we can expect from the Clintonistas.
Baud
@Sherparick:
This.
shortstop
@scav: I was also wondering about the bible snatching as a perceived negative in this crowd. Besides, as liberals we believe in working hard and buying our own bibles, not freeloading off of other people’s bible-buying labor.
shortstop
@Baud: No kidding. Amir doesn’t know what we can do here in Chicago. I voted twice in his name just a couple of weeks ago.
ETA: I fully expect this comment to show up somewhere as “a Demonrat admission of voter fraud.”
Kent
I like Hillary well enough. Must be exhausting to live under the microscope that she has to put up with day in and day out. Doesn’t surprise me that she retrenches to positions of personal privacy like with this email thing. Especially when every thing “Clinton” seems to eventually leak out somehow.
What I do find more tiresome than Clinton herself are many of her supporters and the professional handlers that surround the Clintons. It seems that is the curse of both the Bush and Clinton clans. They surround themselves with way too many Doug Stamper types. The Bush clan has far more of them obviously but the Clintons are not immune.
And I have to wonder if the Democratic bench is really so weak that no one else is out there except for a few old tired white guys like Biden and Webb. Where is the next Obama?
Woodrowfan
still better than any republican.
shortstop
The problem is that Obama raised the bar. Now we know what it’s like to actually feel excited and hopeful about a presidential candidate. How you gonna keep us down on the farm now?
Betty Cracker
@aimai:
I’ve noticed that too. Suppose one fine day Michelle Obama decides to run for president. Will people say, “OMG, not another Obama! I can’t take another eight years of wingnut race-baiting and Benghazi-mongering!”
I hope we wouldn’t be that dumb. Now, pointing out specific mistakes HRC herself made, e.g., hiring Mark Penn, is fair game. But holding the anti-Clinton media frenzy and wingnut craziness where the Clintons are concerned against HRC is just allowing the right to control the narrative.
Violet
Where do Hillary enthusiasts hang out? I don’t seem to see many of them online. Did see a “Ready for Hillary” bumper sticker on a car in my neighborhood but the guy moved so the car isn’t around anymore.
Betty Cracker
@Kent:
Kay nailed it the other day — we allowed our state organizations to wither, and we will pay for that big time.
Chief
I don’t think that I will vote for Hillary in the Primary – depending. But, I will vote, in the general election for the Democratic nominee
.
scav
@shortstop: Freeware downloads, Guttenburg, digital or reused post-consumer religious texts always an option. Recycle, Reuse, Reduce, Return, RunFast.
MattF
@aimai: Back in the Bill-days I knew a White House reporter, and asked him where the anti-Clinton crazy in the press corps came from. He just shrugged. It does seem that the current crazy is more plainly partisan than it was before, but we shall see.
aimai
@Cervantes: I don’t forget that his approval rating skyrocketed after the impeachment, and that he remains very popular for an ex president and tha tpeople swooned over his performance at Obama’s nomination party. But there is this exteme antipathy towards him–first as a hick/outsider and then as a slick double dealer that lots of professional dems-watchers take. Remember “clinton fatigue?” This was supposed to be a real thing and people have seamlessly attached it to Hilary despite the fact that her own public record of public service is pretty damned good. She worked hard as a Senator and worked twice as hard as a Secretary of State. She has never displayed anything but a pretty selfless record of hard work for women around the world and in both those jobs. She’s not a grandstander and she’s not a faker–she’s in it for the public service. And yet I see people bitching and moaning about her over and over again. She comes in for way more attacks than I think are merited.
Pogonip
@Alex: I’d venture to say all the readers are animalists.
Kent
@Betty Cracker:
I know the state organizations have withered here in the South. But everywhere? We don’t want another Southern Democrat anyway and I’m speaking as a Texan. Surely there are plenty of interesting Democrats from progressive states.
Iowa Old Lady
@Violet: Anecdotal but I see both Dems and Rs at the Y, and the Dem woman all say of course they’d vote for HRC. Then they add, she’s qualified.
The teachers I know also tend to be HRC fans. They were in 2008 too.
I’m shuddering at the possibility that anti-HRC feeling turns into some new horrible version of PUMA.
Aurona
She is not the first woman President I would like to see – that would be Warren – but I will vote for the democratic nominee come November next year. Supreme Court changes everything and fer gawds sake take back the senate, too.
Betty Cracker
@Kent: You’d think so, but I’m hard pressed to name one who is ready for a presidential run.
Sherparick
Meanwhile, a far bigger scandal then the State Department and HRC’s perhaps imperfect attempts to maintain some confidentiality in her official correspondence while complying with the Government’s Record Keeping Burdens, check out the Ferguson report from the Justice Department.
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-pigment-tax-by-bloggersrus.html
By the way, when people talk about racial privilege, and why blue collar whites really do have a self-interest in voting for people dedicated to preserve the current racial hierarchy in America as divinely ordained, it is because of set ups like Ferguson, where they get jobs and get out jail free cards and where their black neighbors don’t.
Betty Cracker
@Iowa Old Lady:
A prediction: It will. Another prediction: It will be even smaller and more pathetic than the original PUMAs were.
John Cole +0
@Violet:
She hasn’t officially declared yet so it’s kind of hard to get behind a shadow movement.
raven
@MattF: More crazy than “The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy”?
dedc79
The Republican Party would have to undergo a successful exorcism before I’d feel liberated to teach the democrats a lesson.
We don’t have elections in America. An election is a choice between candidates. We have no choices. We have to vote for the person with the D after their name.
Josie
The whole point of this shit throwing is to give us “Clinton fatigue,” to wear us out before the race even starts. They are scared to death of her and her ability to win this next election and they want to knock her out of it early and dishearten us so that we won’t work for her and won’t vote. I think they are underestimating the women of this country (and those who love them).
germy shoemangler
My wife gets ReadyForHillary emails every day.
She used to get a ton from Debbie Wasserman Schultz as well, but she doesn’t see those any more. Someone here said that both Hillary AND Obama don’t care much for her. This made me glad.
Does Hillary have Elizabeth Warren’s support?
raven
@Sherparick: There’s a thread for that.
Violet
@John Cole +0: Sure but that doesn’t mean that certain political blogs or other places online wouldn’t be filled with strong supporters of Hillary running. Or strongly against. Or “Don’t like her very much but will vote for her” like here.
Baud
@germy shoemangler:
Yes. Warren supports Hillary.
Amir Khalid
@aimai:
If there’s a good objection to Hillary as a candidate I think it’s a lack of confidence in her as a campaigner. She was elected to the US Senate from a safe state, New York, rather than from Arkansas or her native Illinois. She lost a primary campaign, in which she was the favourite, to the less well-known Barack Obama. The 2016 nomination is hers to lose for sure, and so is the election proper, but I think I see a fear that she might make enough unforced errors to actually lose.
raven
@Amir Khalid: She’ll also bomb the fucking shit out of the first thing that moves just to prove she’ll do it.
burnspbesq
Looks like the Troy Polamalu Era may be over. Let’s all be nice to Cole during his period of mourning.
Baud
@Violet:
Very few liberal blogs supported Obama after he became president. The M.O. of most blogs is to be anti-establishment.
PurpleGirl
@Sherparick: I’ve used the SC appointment as THE reason to vote for a Democrat for many years. I’m surprised by the number of people to whom I have to explain it. Either they don’t care, don’t think or are just dumb. It makes me crazy.
burnspbesq
@samiam:
That, pretty much.
dedc79
@Amir Khalid: I was in undergrad at Cornell when she was running to replace Moynhihan. A very large group of students (who typically couldn’t be convinced to turn out for anything that didn’t involve kegs), professors and ithaca locals turned out in freezing cold weather to hear her speak. We waited in the cold well past the time she was supposed to show up only to have her deliver one of the most tepid and uninspired speeches I’ve ever heard a politician give (and that’s saying a lot). I voted for her anyway, of course, but at the time I kind of felt like voting for Moynihan’s corpse instead.
askew
That kind of belittles the legitimate concerns over Hillary’s secrecy about government emails and other policy/political skills. But, whatever. At least the last part is accurate. If she is the nominee, we’ll vote for her.
burnspbesq
@Kent:
Her name is Kirsten Gillibrand.
different-church-lady
How you gonna have a decent brawl without a big space and a lot of people, right?
Amir Khalid
Also, if you’d vote for Hillary in the presidential election proper, why would you not vote for her in a primary as well? I keep seeing here comments to this effect; I don’t understand the thinking.
Mandalay
I’m tired of this claim that there are “HRC-haters” here. I haven’t seen any.
It’s entirely possible to be very critical of certain aspects of her conduct (or anyone else come to that) without others needing to invoke the “hater” label. I have a very low opinion of what Hillary Clinton has done with respect to her SoS email. But that doesn’t mean I hate her in any way at all.
I also have a very low opinion of President Obama’s position on whistleblowers. But that certainly doesn’t mean I hate him – he is a great man, and the finest politician I have ever seen.
Hatred is a really strong emotion, and specific criticism of Clinton shouldn’t result in accusations of hatred. So why not drop this “hater” tag altogether? It may be good for mouse clicks, but it’s really not honest, and is counterproductive for discussion.
Baud
@Amir Khalid:
In the primary, she’d be running against other Democrats. In the general, she is running against the Republican nominee.
different-church-lady
@aimai: Not exactly concise, but a very accurate description of Cole’s three “SHE BRINGS THIS ON HERSELF!” rants.
Gin & Tonic
@dedc79: Since Moynihan wasn’t dead at the time, voting for his corpse would have required some extra work on your part.
gene108
I am always in awe of your artistic skill Betty. You convey your feeling and point very well, even if it is not the most technically sophisticated of graphics.
Iowa Old Lady
@Amir Khalid: I can see that. You’re always just making a choice. I’d have voted for HRC in 2008 if she were the nominee, but I chose Obama in the caucuses, even though I didn’t think he’d ever win.
Mike G
@scav:
“Dude, you have no Koran”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HX5-ulcdXc
Belafon
So, not much different than Republicans in that regard, though I think they are much better than Democrats at being enthusiastic about their choice no matter how awful he is.
Botsplainer
I’m saving my vote for Dr. St. President Jill Stein.
Either that or for Rand Paul. He hates war and the Fed and centralized Federal executive power any NSA collection of white supremacist violence conspirator people data.
jeffreyw
I’m pretty sure Hillary stole my remote, nothing else makes sense.
MattF
@burnspbesq: I agree that Gillibrand is impressive.
shortstop
@dedc79: Ah, but you really can’t compare her speaking ability back in the day (I heard her then and was similarly unimpressed) to now. She has improved considerably in that regard.
askew
@aimai:
The difference being the Obamas have done nothing to justify 99% of the shit they get tossed their way and they have gotten significantly less support from the Dem establishment than the Clintons did. Most of the venom the Obamas get is due to their skin color unfortunately. And while I don’t think Michelle has really done anything worthy of criticism during her First Lady tenure, there are plenty of reasonable criticism of Obama that never gets discussed because it devolves into racism almost immediately. That is true on the left and right unfortunately.
The Clintons do bring on a lot of the criticism they get. Bill did cheat on Hillary repeatedly and then lie about it causing a mess for other Dems to fix. Hillary did decide to hide her emails in a personal server and not follow WH directives on email, That was her choice. She is paying for it now. Where it gets out of hand is when the GOP takes legitimate criticism like hiding emails or lying about stuff which the Clintons do all the time and turns it into Vince Foster murder or Benghazi nuttiness.
Hayes had a great segment on this last night. They really are their own worst enemies.
On the other hand, it gets old hearing the Clinton defenders dismissing any criticism of them with screams about Vince Foster, etc. There are real worries about the Clintons that should be addressed and that can’t be done because their supporters won’t take any criticism of them seriously.
Karen in GA
I too hope she has a primary challenge.
Open thread? Iggy loves and loses.
@Amir Khalid: I’ll vote for her if it’s either her or a Republican; but if someone can offer up a better Democrat during the primaries, I’d much prefer that.
shortstop
@Mike G: Did he really? That’s hilarious.
PurpleGirl
@Amir Khalid: When she first ran for the Senate in NY after Bill’s retirement, I was looking to vote for Nita Lowey for the Senate. Lowey had been a rep from Westchester for a number of years, good Democrat, etc. Then the state officials went for Clinton and Lowey vanished. I was upset and saw HRC as a Carpetbagger, kind of like Robert Kennedy. How do we in NYS develop Democratic talent if a big name can move into the state and knock the local talent off the radar? But I did vote for her in the general election… she’s got the D after her name, after all.
gene108
@Mandalay:
Because the Clintons get raked over the coals for stuff other Democrats do.
For example, Joe Biden is popular amongst liberal-ish Democrats. He voted for the AUMF. He voted (or maybe pushed hard, my recollection is a bit fuzzy on this) for the current bankruptcy laws that favor big business over the creditors.
Yet people do not trust Hillary because of her vote for the AUMF, in 2002. EDIT: People also feel she is a pro-corporate stooge.
Bill Clinton got killed over NAFTA, from the Left.
How many trade deals has Obama done? Doesn’t even register as a blip on the radar screen from the Left.
What else would you call people, who hold one person accountable for an action, while excusing others of doing the same thing other than “haters”?
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@raven:
That’s my objection as well, but it won’t stop me voting for her. My point being that we’d best not forget that. She’s always been hawkish and she’ll have to prove that girls aren’t sissies.
Amir Khalid
@Baud:
Yes, I know that. But does it make sense to go all Anyone But Hillary in the primaries, then do a 180-degree turn and vote for her in the election? I mean, what if she actually is the best candidate in the Democratic primaries? Wouldn’t tepid support for her at that stage risk weakening her in the main event?
Nicole
Bill and Barack have spoiled us Democrats, being as they were both brilliant campaigners. Al Gore and John Kerry would both have made good presidents, but they were terrible at campaigning. Hillary is not a good campaigner. I thought she was a good Senator and I thought she was a good SoS, so I have no reason to think she wouldn’t make a decent President, but she’s a terrible campaigner.
The wisest money any campaign could spend would be on speech and diction coaches for candidates. Well, and a good acting coach. Even when what candidates are saying is valuable and right, often the way they say it makes you zone out (unlike, again, Bill and Barack, who are blessed with voices that are pleasant to listen to, and who know how to make what they say sound interesting). That’s what really worries me about Hillary as a nominee. I’m worried that to the general public the only interesting thing about her will be the manufactured scandals.
But yeah, I’ll vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is.
sparrow
@Alex: Oooh, are you gonna be an Anne Laurie troll? I haven’t seen one of those before.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@Botsplainer: I’m sure Baby Doc’s fixing all the snow travel issues in central and western KY today. I just know he is.
scav
@Mike G: Ahh, thank you. !!
And, as it’s an open thread, AlJ take has a free speech take on another other gathering shitstorm. Ferguson police violated African-Americans’ free speech rights
dedc79
@Gin & Tonic: minor technicality
MattF
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q): Also, to be honest about it, a good number of non-conservative American voters are hawks and regard Clinton’s hawkishness as a feature, not a bug.
shortstop
@Amir Khalid: I believe the reasoning behind it is that supporting a more progressive candidate in the primary will Send a Message that Hillary must consider her liberal base after she’s elected in the general. Not convinced that’s how it works, as it seems to me the most effective time to force a president leftward is after she’s safely elected president. See Roosevelt, Franklin, “Make me do it” quote.
wasabi gasp
1. Will alter topography because girls aren’t sissies.
What else?
aimai
@Amir Khalid: Hello! New York wasn’t a “safe state” for a stranger. She campaigned hard and long for that seat and the fix was by no means in at all. She ran a “listening tour” (and got roundly attacked by the media for it) but she impressed the shit out of the people she listened to in all the counties. She’s an incredibly hard worker.
Baud
@Amir Khalid:
Most people who supported Hillary in 2008 voted for Obama in the general election. Primaries can be divisive (see 1980) but what other choice is there.
Tripod
Meh.
More importantly, who is going to be regurgitating Joe Trippi’s talking points this time ’round?
aimai
@askew: No, theya ren’t their own worst enemies. You’d have to be utterly blind to the way the Republican party and Fox news do business to believe that most of these scandals are other than entirely manufactured and always were. Clinton was accused of destroying public property before turning the white house over to Bush. Remember that? HRC was accused of massive fake scandals over the white house travel bureau as well as the christmas card list. All totally fake.
Iowa Old Lady
@Nicole: Bill Clinton disappeared from my TV for a while after he left office, and then in 2008, he turned up in an interview somewhere, maybe TDS. After years of listening to W, his persuasiveness was stunning. I sat up on the couch and said, “Now I remember why I voted for this guy.”
So yeah, he’s good, and he had contrast working in his favor, while HRC may not because Obama is good too.
Botsplainer
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q):
There have been people stuck on I-65 around Elizabethtown since last night – hundreds of strandees, many of them over a dozen hours in, single degree temps coming in. National Guard got called out to facilitate evac.
It wasn’t as if they weren’t told since yesterday morning to stay off the roads by the afternoon.
Patricia Kayden
I don’t hate or love her. Secretary Clinton is a very ambitious, competent and intelligent politician. I’ll gladly cast my vote for her in November 2016 and look forward to another Democratic President. The alternative (i.e., a Rand Paul or Chris Christie presidency) is unimaginable in its sheer horror.
askew
@gene108:
NAFTA is worse than any other trade deal Obama has done. His trade deals had some labor protections in them and some were even endorsed by labor unions. Not so with NAFTA. There is a reason that Bill gets more crap for his NAFTA decision.
As for Biden, I have the same concerns about his votes that I do with Hillary only difference is I trust Biden more than I do Hillary. I don’t want either one for president though.
shortstop
@aimai: Absolutely right. She hit every single town, village and township in that state and listened to their concerns about roads, schools and other unsexy topics. Her opponent, whose name escapes me now (although I can picture his arrogant smirk) barely left Manhattan. She won that election on sheer plod.*
*Feeling rather Gerard Manley Hopkins today.
Gex
@Josie: And in this case the “they” is “even the liberal New York Times.”
Josie
@Gex: Yup.
different-church-lady
@Baud:
But not a single one of them admitted it on the internet.
KG
Personally, I’m resigning myself to either sitting out the presidential election or voting third party.
And before anyone starts bitching about me throwing my vote away:
1. Fuck you it’s my vote and I can cast it for whomever I choose to or not
2. I live in california, the only way the Dem doesn’t carry our 50+ electoral votes is the old dead girl/live boy (or in Hillary’s case it might be dead boy/live girl), so my one vote isn’t swinging the election
Amir Khalid
@aimai:
My understanding was that New York reliably elected Democrats to the US Senate. And it must have helped her that Rudy Giuliani had to quit that race on the Republican side, and she got to run against Rep. Rick Lazio.
Cacti
@samiam:
It will be for Rand Paul.
Gex
@PurpleGirl: All the libertarians I know hate the gutting of the 4th and 5th Amendments but vote GOP for their tax cuts anyhow. People are stupid and get exactly what they ask for, which sadly is a little Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito-y for me.
askew
@Betty Cracker:
There are plenty of people ready for a presidential run. O’Malley, Patrick, Shaheen, Malloy could all run. Hillary sucks up all the media attention and oxygen in the party so there is no way for any of these people to build a national audience. The Clintons are an albatross keeping the party from being able to move on.
gene108
@askew:
And how much of Obama’s personal dirt is left safely buried because Congress can no longer appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate the White House?
Imagine how much “dirt” on the Clintons would not have come out, without the work of Ken Starr and tens of millions of dollars of tax payer money to dig through every damn thing about the Clintons past and present.
EDIT: Did Hillary really have to have her work records at the Rose Law firm be subject to subpoena? Did a 15-20 year old business deal, Whitewater, need to have two Special Prosecutors investigate it and several years and millions of dollars to find out every detail about the deal?
Imagine Michelle Obama’s work records being the subject of a subpoena or U of C Hospital employees having to testify under oath, in Washington DC, in a very public forum, covered wall-to-wall by the media, as to why Michelle got a big raise / promotion at the same time her husband became a U.S. Senator. Was U of C Hospital doing this based on her work record or to curry favor with a Senator? Spend a few million dollars investigating it and having the media cover it front-and-center for a few months and I bet the Obama’s image would take a hit, whether or not any wrong doing occurred.
“No Drama” Obama benefits from not having a Special Prosecutor embedded in his business, unlike Bill and Hillary.
Without acknowledging that significant difference between Bill and Barack’s Presidencies, people make apples to oranges comparisons between the two.
Davis X. Machina
Our parents got to vote for Humphrey — civil rights, sure, but a machine politician down to his toenails too. Tainted by association with Johnson, and Johnson’s war. A happy warrior, a not-flawless campaigner (see his 1960 campaign) — but we’re still talking about him.
Hillary’s our Humphrey. And there’s always a Nixon in the wings.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@Botsplainer: I read it was bad. So I hope the Guard gets everyone out of the cold before it gets really nasty (-5F predicted overnight here, which isn’t the worst ever – -25F- but that was 30 years ago).
If the snow hit as late there as it did here, some folks may have been lulled thinking the prediction was wrong. Which was no less stupid, as the maps weren’t ambiguous about the size of the storm; it just moved more slowly than predicted.
askew
@Amir Khalid:
Because there are better alternatives running in the primary. They will likely lose to Hillary but better to vote for the best candidate and then vote for the one who got the nomination in the general. Voting for the most electable candidate in the primary is a recipe for disaster. That’s how we ended up with Kerry.
MazeDancer
There is certainly “Obama Derangement”. A syndrome among many of the wing nut persuasion.
But there is no such thing as Obama Fatigue among most Democrats. We love him. We want to see him on camera as “Our President” for many years to come. We love being proud of Our President. We wish he could run again.
Clinton Fatigue, on the other hand, is real among many Democrats. Genuine, left leaning, politically active Democrats. We just don’t want the Big Dog back in the White House having 24/7 press corps access. We don’t want wacky Clinton thinking and drama. As much as I want a woman in the White House, I am tired, tired, tired of Clinton World.
This “tired” does not include the sad fact that there is Clinton Derangement Syndrome, aka trolls. The Clintons cannot be responsible for that. This thread, alone, brought out a few more trolls than usual.
The thing about Obama Derangement Syndrome is that is doesn’t cause trolls to come trash up Balloon Juice as much. They enjoy the wing nut sites with higher levels of hate too much to bother.
More trolls is not going to be more fun for the next ten years.
Mandalay
@gene108:
It’s not “the Clintons” under discussion, it’s Hillary Clinton, and she is clearly running for president. Therefore she invites and deserves far more scrutiny than any other Democrat right now, so don’t distort the argument with irrelevant stuff about NAFTA and Joe Biden.
I think it’s a fiction and a nonsense that BJ is infested with Clinton haters, but I am happy to be corrected if you can produce BJ links that show otherwise.
Cacti
The problem for our blog host vis a vis Hillary Clinton, is that he never outgrew his finally tuned, right wing, Pavlovian indignation response toward all things Clinton.
As for the NYT, need I remind anyone that this is the employer of Maureen Dowd, who won a Pulitzer for a year of “political commentary” about Bill’s dong?
Origuy
It looks like Rick Perry has an email problem, too.
IOKIYAR
mikej
A month from now, the Republicans are going to say that Hillary went to the moon in 1968 to plant fake rocks in advance of Armstrong’s landing.
The story will be dutifully front paged here with the addendum, “we’ll see if she actually broke any laws or not, but either way she should have seen this coming. It’s her fault that it’s even possible for this to be an issue.”
MattF
@Davis X. Machina: Humphrey: 1) stayed loyal to Johnson despite Vietnam 2) was running against tricky Dicky Nixon, 3) was completely overshadowed on the left by real icons: Bobby Kennedy and Gene McCarthy, 4) was deeply damaged by the events in Chicago. I don’t see the parallel with Clinton.
Botsplainer
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q):
I don’t know how long a car can idle for intermittent warm ups before a tank goes dry. I imagine a number are on fumes by now – by the time anybody realized they needed to buddy breathe the gasoline, a lot got wasted.
Cacti
@Mandalay:
I’d say the easiest example would be you citing Judicial Watch, a right wing org. founded in 1994 for the specific purpose of filing lawsuits against the Clinton administration.
Patrick
@Origuy:
Didn’t Sarah Palin do the same thing as governor of Alaska?
Karen in GA
@shortstop: Rick Lazio. I remember him walking over to her and attempting to loom over her during a debate while demanding that she sign some pledge or other.
ETA: Actually, no, maybe he didn’t get close enough to loom over her — it’s just that the sheer arrogance of it makes me think of it like that.
gvg
Actually one of the critisisms I remember about her time as a Senator was that she hadn’t introduced any significant legislation. Obama had though. In Illinois he had gotten passed some laws about cops filming their interogations which cops initially were against but after the fact said it had protected them against accusations. In the US Senate he had done some work on non proliferation of nuclear material with I think it was Chuck Hagle.
Hillary had not done much until she was SOS. Until then I did not really consider her qualified compared to Obama though I didn’t see others agreeing. Which brings up the other problem we often have with her-she is too hawkish compared to our views and Obama was much more comfortable for us. I have seen pundits make a good case IMO that she has always had to worry about people thinking a woman would not be tough enough and therefore has overcompensated. She has been conditioned by constant attacks, which also leads to her avoiding controversial positions even when it’s nessesary. Pundit that I recall also indicated all Dems of her approximate generation had a simular attitude. I really wish we had a younger candidate. Sorry that that is ageist.
she is not a good manager.
I do remember the attacks on Bill and her right from the start were uncalled for and nuts. I saw an impeach ‘clinton sign a few days after the first election before he had been sworn in. Did not even have a clue what the cause was for that. Now I know in was a religious fanatic but then it was new. The attacks on Hillary in those years IMO had no substance and seriously offended me into total Democrat. Most of the attacks were based on her appearance or not being a housewife then. She was not a glamerous good looker even then, but to me she was an ordinary middle aged woman who had managed to stay “nice” looking better than most women her age such as my mother the teacher. Really, those attacks seemed to me to be an insult to my nonhousewife mother and I despise Rush from that. I still think that kind of attack will come out again and it will motivate a lot of women.
Until she actually had elected office herself, I didn’t really have any problems with her. Then I have some and just like if its a man, I am going to criticize if I don’t like it.
That said I also remember realizing how important Bill’s veto was to keeping my rights safe and how ironic that a lying adulterous guy was so important in protecting women’s rights at that time-Newts congress put up a lot of anti womens laws too. That was when I realized that a flawed person who voted and legislated your way was more important than being a nice person.
So, either a better candidate will come along or they won’t. I don’t have any control over that. However Hillary or someone else…it will help a lot if we get either chamber of Congress back, or even just have more Dems because the GOP is fighting with itself, so we have some influence even as a minority party. It will also help if we take back any positions in the states and the Census is REALLY important.
Florida’s dem organization still appears dead. I really wish it wasn’t.
gene108
@Josie:
Seems to be working
Jim, Foolish Literalist
I’d be happy to support someone else. Who? Sherrod Brown and Elizabeth Warren aren’t running, and damn me to an eternity of listening to David Brooks speak at the Aspen Institute, in a seat between Maureen Dowd and Tom Friedman, and Cokie Roberts and David Gregory standing between me and the bar that offers nothing to drink but oaky chardonnay, but I’m not sure how strong they would be in a general election. Martin O’Malley for all his great record can’t even build a following in the left blogosphere, and if anyone saw his flat-footed stammering appearances as an Obama surrogate in 2012 shouldn’t be surprised by that.
Davis X. Machina
@MattF: Dump the Hump!
SatanicPanic
Hillary’s alright. People are too picky- most presidents are fairly lame placeholders anyway. Barack Obama set the bar really high, if he hadn’t come along in 2008 we’d have all been saying what a good prez Hillary has been. I’m not super excited by Hillary, but 8 more years of a Democratic president at a time when the executive branch is getting stronger? Hell yeah I’m excited about that.
Baud
@MazeDancer:
Most Democrats support Obama. Last I saw, most Democrats think highly of the Clintons. Both Obama and the Clintons have had their share of vocal detractors. The one thing I know for sure is that Obama won’t be running against Clinton in 2016, so comparing them seems like an exercise in futility.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Karen in GA: my recollection is he walked over to her podium, put his pledge on it and tried to force a pen in her hand. She handled him like a very patient teacher trying to get the weird, obnoxious know-it-all kid to shut up and go back to his desk
Baud
@SatanicPanic:
Another this to you.
catclub
@shortstop:
Actually, see Roosevelt, Teddy (1912) and his impact on what Wilson did. Most of the progressive changes that Teddy ran on were implemented by Wilson within his first term.
Cacti
@SatanicPanic:
Most importantly: By November 2016, Ginsburg will be almost 83, Scalia and Kennedy will both be 80. Breyer will be 78.
The next POTUS could end up replacing 3 or 4 SCOTUS Justices.
gene108
@Origuy:
Yeah, but Rick Perry is not a credible candidate for President, so it does not matter what he does and what he does should not be held up to any serious level of scrutiny.
Tree With Water
“We’re a big tent that includes HRC-haters, HRC-lovers and HRC-indifferents, but with few exceptions, we’re Democrats who will support our party’s nominee. I like that about us”.
Hate? I submit a fair minded person can glance at Hillary’s unabashed support for the catastrophic Bush-Gore War and conclude she’s patently unfair for the presidency- and hatred has nothing to do with it.
gogol's wife
@Woodrowfan:
Yep. By a long way.
Cacti
@Tree With Water:
I will assume then that you didn’t cast a ballot for Kerry/Edwards in 2004.
gogol's wife
@shortstop:
I know, that’s what has me so depressed. Along with the fact that I am living in an apocalypse movie.
NotMax
Living in a state which is a guaranteed D, one has the luxury of voting third party. Didn’t need to vote for Bill either time, won’t vote for Hillary should she actually be on the ballot.
askew
@aimai:
And your response ignored all of their legitimate scandals which is what Clinton supporters always do. Bill did cheat and lie and get caught doing both. Hillary did get caught in multiple lies and she did circumvent the WH’s directives on emails and set-up a private email server for her government work. That happened. Just because the GOP lobs crazy attacks at her doesn’t mean that all scandals regarding Clinton are BS. And the reason they open themselves up to so many more scandals than other Dems is that they have been caught lying, cheating and bending the rules multiple times. They created this distrust of themselves that made the crazy attacks that much easier. They are their own worst enemies.
SatanicPanic
@Baud: thanks! always nice to get a this
catclub
@Botsplainer:
I think it is days.
SatanicPanic
@Tree With Water: Bush-Gore War– errr, what?
Tree With Water
@Cacti: I voted for Kerry-Edwards. It’s the only vote I’ve cast in my life of which I’m ashamed.
gene108
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
The gutter of Maryland public employees pensions? That O’Malley?
gogol's wife
@jeffreyw:
But does she have my husband’s cell phone?
gogol's wife
@shortstop:
She gave a great speech at the last Dem convention.
kc
@aimai:
Yes, yes, yes. It’s bizarre.
max
I need a ‘Room Temperature for Hillary’ sticker.
max
[‘HOTT for More Supreme Court Liberals.’]
Botsplainer
@NotMax:
That Third Party vote isn’t a luxury. The SCOTUS 5 were comfortable fucking with the process with a 500K Gore lead. Without St Ralph’s vanity campaign, at least half of his 2,000,000 wind up in the Gore column. Would SCOTUS be as inclined to go that hard against the PV? I can’t see O’Connor or Rehnquist doing that.
Third party votes have consequences.
Alex
@sparrow: Eh I don’t have the effort or desire to keep at it. But, Anne took an insanely cheap potshot at Cole in one of the other threads, which I found not only unfair but singularly ungrateful.
She periodically posts an interesting link around here, but – whenever she deigns to articulate her political and/or religious opinions – she beclowns herself. If anything, I’d like to remind the crowd as much as I can that she supported the tenth-rate fraud John Edwards in 2008. Self-discrediting, as far as I am concerned.
Emma
@Patricia Kayden: Yep. Every time I want to throw a hissy fit about the quality of the Democratic nominee, I remind myself: Supreme Court. Supreme Court. SUPREME COURT. And the urge passes.
gene108
@askew:
What did that exactly have to do with the faithful execution of his duties as President?
FDR, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and more than likely Bush, Sr all had affairs.
Should every President have a Special Prosecutor to investigate their personal lives, spending millions in tax payer money?
rea
@askew: Hillary did decide to hide her emails in a personal server and not follow WH directives
Well, no, not really. Those directives didn’t take effect until after she left office. Kerry is the first Secretary of State to use government e-mail.
Baud
@Emma:
Yep. That’s a disease that lasts 35 years.
Cacti
@Tree With Water:
Unclean!
Unclean, you are!
Jim, Foolish Literalist
A couple months ago I went looking for some of me old pals from the Great MyDD wars of ’08 (remember the strike?). There’s a PUMA blog where they mostly hate on Obama, but they may be switching to promoting Hillary. I look through the Eschaton threads from time to time. The old PUMAs seem to have drifted off and left the field to the Nobly Disappointed.
NotMax
@Botspaliner
Is there something about “guaranteed D” state that eludes you? I don’t live in
Anita Bryant landFlorida, and was not giving suggestions but rather stating the situation as it applies to me when it comes to presidential ballots.Botsplainer
@catclub:
I’m figuring you run it about 20 minutes an hour, starting it maybe 3 times each hour, charging electronics, etc. temp was in the teens last night.
gogol's wife
@Cacti:
Wow, I still have a Kerry-Edwards sticker proudly on my car. They would have been light years better than another GWB term.
Emma
@askew: Bill Clinton cheating on his wife is their own damn business. Nothing in rises to the level of a Presidential crime. It is quite likely that others had done it and the press hushed it up. The whole “he cheated and lied about it” was thrown into the vortex when the Whitewater probe came up empty.
The mail regulations seem to have been put in place later. If so, there’s no there there.
Mandalay
@Karen in GA:
No, you were right with your initial recollection: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOySqutXC90
Lazio gave the perfect presentation on how to lose an election in 30 seconds.
gogol's wife
@NotMax:
The vote total overall can have an effect, irrespective of the electoral college. Democrats should vote for the Democratic candidate for president, no matter what state they’re in. I voted for Clinton the second time, with nose firmly held.
SatanicPanic
@gogol’s wife: And even though it’s kind of sad to say, John Edwards is a better person than Dick Cheney. A MUCH better person. It’s not even close.
NotMax
@gogol’s wife
Respectfully, Homey don’t do lockstep.
Patrick
@Emma:
I assume you had no problem then with Romney not releasing his tax returns.
Botsplainer
@NotMax:
Not talking guaranteed D.
You could live in Texas and cast a useless D vote; that D vote instead of a Nader vote helps in terms of convincing SCOTUS to stay out of it because of the optics of going against the manifest weight of the popular vote by issuing a dodgy opinion.
Dipshit’s “both sides” vanity campaign had consequences. He helped in creating a climate that peeled off independent support as well as the direct effect on Election Day itself.
shortstop
Oh, Betty, I’m an idiot. It was niggling at the back of my brain…Romancing the Stone!
Ripley
ReadyForHillary, If I Have To, I Guess, But I Don’t Have To Like It
Too long for a bumper sticker?
Betty Cracker
@shortstop: Ding-ding-ding! I recently saw it for the first time since high school, I think — it was free on Netflix or Amazon Prime.
NotMax
@gogol’s wife
Should add that in the election you cited Bob Dole had no chance whatsoever of winning, and Bob Dole knew it.
Also too, sometimes votes are necessary in order to keep a third party listed on the ballot, so in that case I will agree with you that totals matter.
Full disclosure: Not having my own vote matter a whit in Clinton’s victories here freed me to vote for the Natural Law Party both times.
Also too, when I ran for office here it was as Independent on the ballot.
Mandalay
@Emma:
Gotcha…
– Congress decides whether to award themselves a pay raise – outrageous!!!
– Police departments investigate complaints against themselves – outrageous!!!
– Hillary Clinton decides which of her SoS emails the State Department is permitted to see – nothing to see here, move along!!!
Even assuming that Clinton’s conduct was impeccable throughout, what she did was inherently wrong. Arguing that no regulations were in place doesn’t change that.
NotMax
@shortstop
Had a friend who worked in a video rental shop (remember those?) who once mentioned that in the adult room was a movie named Romancing the Bone, and never saw any reason to disbelieve him.
Elizabelle
@NotMax: Homey might think about that should a Republican be elected to the White House in 2016.
We are politically engaged commenters. What do you think people who are sporadic voters will make of your — “uh, it’s no big deal, I can be a special unicorn since I live in a safe blue state?” Do you think they’ll understand the nuance there?
As Democrats, we have a huge problem with people who won’t or don’t vote.
We have a populace who still tell pollsters Republicans are better at handling the economy and foreign affairs, although there is no reasonable evidence for that. (Unless you’re a war contractor or vampire squid, in case you’re delirious at the prospect of a GOP executive branch.)
Nader voters got people killed. It is as simple as that. Those special snowflakes opened the door for the worst administration in US history.
ETA: Please don’t think that couldn’t happen again. We live in Citizens United World. And if a GOP president gets to appoint Supreme Court justices, that’s over for our lifetime.
Amir Khalid
@Ripley:
There seem to be quite a few here who would put that sticker on their car bumpers. (I can’t, of course.)
shortstop
@gogol’s wife: I don’t think there’s any call for full-scale depression…especially when you’re still proudly sporting a Kerry-Edwards sticker. A little perspective, please. ;)
Jim, Foolish Literalist
EvenTheLiberalMSNBC just told me the great email controversy is going to “dog John Kerry”.
Steeplejack (tablet)
@gene108:
She’s like the Grandma Moses of on-line art.
catclub
@NotMax: Two guys go to Europe: Bromancing the Rhone
Baud
@Elizabelle:
This. (I’m handing them out like candy!)
don
All of this is a distraction. The problem with Hillary is she voted for the war in Iraq, push for the bombing in Libya and pushed to escalate our involvement with the civil war in Syria. She is a pro war candidate that approaches a neocon view of the world. This is a huge problem.
JaneE
I registered to vote when I was 21, minimum age back then. For about a decade I actually voted for candidates I liked, thought they were the right people for the job, some Republican and some Democratic. After that it was more a choice of the least bad candidate, usually Democrats, but a few Republicans too. For the last decade or so , it has mainly been a choice between someone who I absolutely did not want to win, and the other guy. When CA went to a top-two primary, I stopped voting in congressional elections, because the choice was between two right-wingers, neither of whom should be elected dogcatcher, much less congressmen.
I expect the Democrats to nominate someone who would have been a fairly moderate Republican when I started voting, Hillary or not. I would like to live long enough to see a really progressive Democrat nominated, but I doubt that it will happen.
NotMax
@Elizabelle
And exactly how would my having strictly adhered to a party line have altered things if (FSM forbid) a Republican is elected?
Again, was never giving suggestions, merely stating what is. Here.
HelloRochester
I’m over the Baby Boomer pols who love the smell of their own farts. The DLC ruined the Dem brand but we, I guess, won’t be able to get them to retire until we get Hilary at the top of the ticket win or lose. I can hold my nose but please let’s agree this is the last at bat.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Can my four Ireland-born grandparents still get me citizenship (which was at least family lore back in the nineties)?
lol
@Betty Cracker:
The Senate has been turning over more often the past couple decades for a number of reasons so the top tier is running for that instead of Governor. And more recently, the Obama administration has drawn away a lot of the talent that would be left. I don’t know that the bench is any better or worse than it has been historically.
Mid-terms are just *bad* for Democrats and it’s primarily because of turnout. Great candidates ran great campaigns and still lost because the same voters who turned out and voted for shitty Democrats in Presidential years stayed home in a mid-term year. We need to focus on expanding access to voting because that works and fighting Republican efforts to restrict it. That’s going to pay off more than some nebulous “find better candidates” strategy that operates purely in hindsight. For example, in retrospect, Braley was an *awful* candidate but how many people were saying that at the start of 2013?
SatanicPanic
@JaneE:
Barack Obama!
srv
@Betty Cracker: PUMA’a turn into PUMA haters?
A vertiable Pumaggedon.
Laertes
Whatever. The other guys will nominate a republican, so, sure, I’ll vote for her. Not gonna be real excited about it since she’s got a neocon’s foreign policy instincts and she’ll staff the white house with a bunch of hippie-punching douchebags. But, sure, she’s better than whatever gob of warm sputum the GOP will spit up.
TriassicSands
If only we had a choice.
@Tree With Water:
Patience. If you’re young or even middle aged, you’ll probably have many opportunities to cast much worse votes than Kerry-Edwards — and not feel like you had any choice.
We live in the Era of Lesser Evil Elections.
askew
@NotMax:
I worked at a video store in HS and had to dust the shelves every night I worked after close including the adult section and I can attest that movie did exist because I laughed every time I saw the case.
Violet
I think Hillary, if she wins, will be a one term president. Some combination of her lack of political skills, voters tiring of having a Democrat in the top job, media that loves scandals, Bill’s inability to keep his dick in his pants and his closeness with some skeevy types, Hillary’s age and a number of other things. I think she’ll be one and done.
NotMax
Guess I should mention, in the spirit of things on the thread, that Obama is the first candidate I voted for for president who won.
Voting age was still 21 in ’68, and just missed out on that one, but it was nonetheless a l-o-n-g dry spell without satisfaction.
Elizabelle
@Baud: Thank you. I am happy with my “this.”
askew
@rea:
The WH stated in 2009 that all admin employees were to use government email exclusively. This has nothing to do with the regs. It was Hillary’s boss who made that decision and she ignored it and is now making them deal with the fallout from her stupidity.
As for Bill’s cheating it became a public issue when he held press conferences and interviews and lied about it. That’s the problem with the Clintons. They lie and they get caught. Had they come out and said it was none of your business what I do with my sex life, then it wouldn’t be a public issue. It was the lying to voters that made it a problem.
slag
Too hawkish; too ready to surround herself with the political idiocracy (polidiocracy?); too craven overall. But hell, I’ll do that crawling over broken glass to vote for her thing if it comes to that.
different-church-lady
@SatanicPanic: Obama is a republican. The internets keep telling me so.
Patricia Kayden
@Mandalay: So we shouldn’t vote for her in November 2016 and risk a Republican Presidency because you believe that what she did was wrong?
I don’t get all this hand wringing about Secretary Clinton. If Progressives want a different candidate, work hard to make that happen. At least T-Baggers get up and vote and make a lot of noise in their primaries. Democrats who are unhappy with Clinton should be just as vocal. But I hope we’re not going to damage her so that she cannot run since right now I don’t see any other Democratic potential candidates lining up to run.
Turgidson
@shortstop:
It’s being pasted into some GOP state attorney general’s brief on the topic as we speak.
Violet
@Patricia Kayden:
They aren’t because she’s the giant not-yet-candidate sucking all the air out of the room. It’s not like no one would run should Hillary not run. They’re there but they don’t want to piss off the Clintons or fail spectacularly or whatever.
askew
@Violet:
Yep and let’s not forget how vindictive the Clintons are to Democrats who cross them. Republicans not so much, but Democrats absolutely.
O’Malley, Webb, Schweitzer are looking to run and I kind of think Biden might too. I am for O’Malley thought I doubt he can beat Hillary.
SRW1
@Amir Khalid:
.
Hillary’s predecessor as senator fron NY was Da’Tomato, I mean Alphonse D’Amato, as staunch a Republican as they came at the time.
mai naem mobile
I find this utterly depressing on so many levels. Ive never liked WJC – since the 1992 primary but I recognize his political talents. I like Hillary more than Bill because I think (but who the hell knows) shes more liberal. I’m one of the ones.who believed Bill on the Monica lie until he admitted it because i didn’t think he would do something so stupid. I don’t think theres anything in these emails – probably some stupld embarrassing shit with her dissing some Dem. pols, maybe even the Obamas. I think she should just release the whole lot except for classified shit.Now,not a month from now, so that this story is over by the summer. Part of me thinks the GOP is going after he because she’ll be an awesome unbeatable candidate. Part of me plain does not want to deal with this shit for possibly 10 years. BTW, how come the Clinton Charity Foundation is all oogabooga big furriner money big furriner money but HW Bush sitting at Carlyle For Profit during GWs regime was a big nothingburger?
Amir Khalid
@SRW1:
I stand corrected,
Cacti
@Violet:
So, it’s Hillary’s fault that no one else has the courage to throw their hat in the ring?
That’s just…what’s the word I’m looking for here…oh yeah…stupid.
NotMax
@Amir Khalid
Well, Jake Javits. Or is that ancient history peering back to a time when there were R’s with more than a lizard brain?
shortstop
@askew: Given that O’Malley nets between 0 and 2 percent on every Dem straw poll thus far, I’m thinking no, he can’t beat Hillary.
I forgot about Schweitzer. Bwa ha ha ha ha ha.
Elizabelle
Problem with Hillary, and the centrist Democrats, and the glibertarian, corporate-owned media.
She’s a leader for the 1990s and beholden to Wall Street, which desperately needs reigning in; the centrists are serving up what hasn’t appealed to Democratic voters — why not just be a Republican? — Mark Warner very nearly had his head handed to him in Virginia; and the media are wired for Republicans.
We’re Obots. We saw the mood earlier in 2008 — who in 2007 thought Obama would be elected?
I think Hillary’s running is flat out dangerous. Why are we in this trap?
It’s not about her. It’s about us.
DougJ
I’d feel more comfortable with a competitive primary.
Tree With Water
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: This story has the potential to dog entire political parties (all two of them) and profoundly impact our entire political system, which is why the GOP is proceeding so carefully in exploiting it. The vital necessity of accessible, relevant, and shared information between voters of a functioning democracy represents the only viable threat to the republican party’s ability to hold and maintain its electoral power (the same holds true of the democratic party, of course, but to a far lesser degree). The GOP stands to be shattered into a thousand pieces (if and) when people draw a bead on the racketeering practices that enable it to rig the system in which they live, work, and die.
shortstop
@Turgidson: It’s hard to pass up such ironclad evidence of ACORN rising from the ashes. I somehow feel Bill Ayers and a New Black Panther or two (that is, the entire NBP party) have something to do with this as well.
Elizabelle
@Cacti: I think people remember Jimmy Carter in 1980; Ted Kennedy weakened him and we all ended up with 8 years of Ronald Reagan, 4 years of GHWBush.
You can be apprehensive about Hillary without wanting to give a real opening to Republicans. Their candidates are appalling. The shabbiest things you ever saw. And they start out with 47% floor of support just for being Republicans. Their voters vote.
SatanicPanic
@Cacti:
She’s a terrible candidate and she’s too popular for anyone to run against her!
Cacti
Anyhoo…if Clinton haters that vote D are looking for the primary challenger that could knock her off her inevitability pedestal for a second time…
It’s Mark Dayton from Minnesota.
Emma
@Patrick: Nonsequitur much? NOTHING says we have a right to access the email of the Secretary of State. In fact, it probably be a diplomatic and political disaster if we did. IF she followed the rules as they existed during her tenure and turned over the archives to State, that’s done it for me.
I don’t actually give much of a rat’s ass about a candidate’s tax return. Do you really think his accountants would file a tax return spelling out where all his stashes are? What I want to know is where he is getting his political cash from. Including his own. IF that is in a tax return, I want to see it. If not, no.
shortstop
@SatanicPanic: Also, the portions are too small!
Baud
@Elizabelle:
Seriously? It’s because, Balloon Juice aside, liberals have collectively sucked big donkey balls since Obama was elected. We make old white guys in tri-cornered hats look like Machiavelli. I keep reading that we can “do better” than Hillary, and nothing in the past 6 years convinces me that it’s true. It’s not like her running in 2016 is a big surprise to anyone.
Kay
@lol:
Yeah, I’m sorry to hear you say that because the “midterm turnout” problem doesn’t explain the weakness of Democrats at the state level even when they get elected, which is increasingly rarely.
John Kasich has done more to reform criminal justice (sentencing) in Ohio than Ted Strickland ever did.
Who is the governor of Missouri and why is the federal government having to intervene on civil rights there? What was he up to?
If Democrats want to be the federal party, the last line of defense on most of the law that affects most of the people (which is state law) they can do that, but that’s not the plan of a Party that wants to grow.
mai naem mobile
FYWP. Had a really long comment. Bottom line i find this really depressing. Nobody around Hillary -Nobody – fucking saw a problem with this???? WTF??? Do the Clintons talk to anybody outside their yes men circle? What did they learn from WJCs 8 years? Nothing apparently. Yes, ofcourse ill vote for her because the other side is batshit crazier than than offspring resulting from a Victoria Jackson and Judge Roy Moore mating.
Cacti
Mark Dayton would also be an ideal candidate to match up against Scott Wanker in a general election.
Governor of the state next door to Wisconsin, whose record for job creation and growth has dusted the ALEC-written, Koch-funded economic policies of the Wisconsin GOP.
Baud
@Cacti:
Interesting. I haven’t heard is name mentioned at all until now.
Matt McIrvin
@KG: If the choice is between sitting it out or voting third party… go vote third party. Or just leave the President space blank.
There’s almost certainly other stuff worthy of your vote that is up for election in 2016, besides the Presidency. Especially in California, land of krazy ballot initiatives.
Emma
@Mandalay: Gotcha? Adulthood has escaped you, I see.
– Congress decides whether to award themselves a pay raise – outrageous!!! No, it’s not outrageous. It’s politically tonedeaf and idiotic.
– Police departments investigate complaints against themselves – outrageous!!! IF the law allows it, we’re screwed. Try getting your ass out there and changing it. It does seem that the DOJ can take steps though.
– Hillary Clinton decides which of her SoS emails the State Department is permitted to see – nothing to see here, move along!!! That’s the story, Now I want the proof.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Emma: the interest in Romney’s returns was, for me, that they would have spelled out, with whopping big numbers, just how skewed toward rich people the tax code already is, and the entire rationale for Romney’s campaign was that people like him were overtaxed.
Cacti
@Baud:
I’ve not seen that he’s expressed interest in running. But I think he could give Hillary a very difficult time if he did.
I think O’Malley and Warren are good people, but surefire losers.
piratedan
tend to agree that the nomination is Hillary’s to lose, at this point no one else appears to have the desire to build a network of staff and donors to run againsst her. Will those folks pop out of the woodwork should she decide that she wwould rather not be suject to the sscrutiny of another campaign and more than likely a hostile congress and senate? Can’t say, but I sure as hell would find that challenge daunting, especially after watching what took place during the Obama years and how the media and the money is currently wired for the GOP.
Are there others out there, sure you have O’Malley who appears to not be able to express himself well in public. Warren, who is apparently happy being a senator for now. Gillibrand, who I like but how happy will everyone be knowing that one of her best buds is DWS, who everyone appears to loathe? As folks have said, the bench doesn’t appear to be deep, and the farm system could use some tending to.
Just think we as blog lurkers have to do a better job of getting more involved ourselves locally to help make a difference. Obviously we all care enough to spend our time here, perhaps we need to turn our caring into action.
In counterpoint, the couch and the comfy chair in the office do have a siren song that the sing as well…..
SatanicPanic
@Baud: It’s not like her running in 2016 is a big surprise to anyone.– lol no kidding. seriously Hillary haters, you had six whole years to find someone viable (who wants to run) and you didn’t
Baud
@Cacti:
Well, everyone looks like a surefire loser right now. I tend to be in the camp that says a primary would be beneficial to the nominee, despite the risk of schism. We should know in the next few months. Anyone seriously considering running will have to announce soon.
Cacti
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I was interested in seeing whether Romney took the Swiss tax cheat amnesty.
I think that was the most likely reason he never released more than 2-years of returns.
Tree With Water
@SatanicPanic: Anyone that had Obama pegged as a ‘progressive’ in 2008 was seriously naive. For crying out loud, after spending a year denying he would, he endorsed the FISA legislation a week after officially gaining the nomination. “Break the law, no problem, your back is covered”.
shortstop
@Cacti: It seems very likely that he did.
Rarely Posts
@aimai:
Maybe Liberals dislike the Clintons because they have not done a good job pursuing liberal policy objectives? It’s true that both Bill and Hillary have received a lot of unfair treatment from the press, but too often their reaction to unfair treatment is to move to the center rather than personally running a tighter ship (no affairs, strict compliance with law and ethics guidelines, etc.). So, of course liberals aren’t enthusiastic about defending them, particularly when the attacks against them have some merit (e.g., Clinton probably did violate the Federal Records Act by failing to contemporaneously maintain her electronic mail in government files or on government servers—not the end of the world, but probably a violation of the law).
First, on substance: the Clinton Administration did not have too many liberal policy victories, and Bill signed a lot of conservative legislation. Moreover, the major liberal victories (such as increased taxes and a balanced budget) were destroyed by the Bush II Administration. As to Hillary Clinton, she bungled the Health Care plan rollout in the 1990s. And can anyone name a single, major liberal policy that she has successfully enacted or developed? One reason I have Clinton fatigue is that I’ve been hearing about them for decades, but what have they done for us? Now, Hillary deserves significant credit for not having many disasters occur under her watch as Secretary of State—that’s an accomplishment. But that’s about it. She has not been a major leading voice on liberal issues whether foreign policy (she voted for the AUMF, etc.) or economic policy (compare her work to Warren’s work on the bankruptcy bill or the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau) or civil rights or environmental issues, etc. She is an advocate for feminist issues (which are very important), but even there, she rarely stakes out particularly liberal positions. She basically is a centrist, status quo Democrat.
Second, on style: both Clintons have tended to move to the center in the hopes of neutralizing attacks against them. This strategy does not really work. Bill Clinton, in particular, had a tendency to punch down and to his “left.” He’s famous for his “Sister Souljah” moment, in which he elevated someone who almost no one knew about and then attacked her, so that he could seem centrist. And Hillary made the decision to surround herself with a lot of people from Bill’s Administration and election team (including Mark Penn), so of course people draw comparisons between the two.
At the end of the day, I’ll vote for her in the general election. Heck, I’ll probably donate money to her campaign. But I hate getting mailers asking for money from someone much richer than myself, who eschews liberal positions to be more “electable,” and who shoots herself in the foot by failing to comply fully with the letter of the law (here, the Federal Records Act) and thus creating scandals. Even if I donate the full amount allowed under federal law, it won’t undo this completely unnecessary self-inflicted wound. Being a good Democrat should not foreclose me from expressing my view that she should have done a better job complying the Federal Records Act—particularly since she hasn’t even announced her candidacy yet!
Tripod
Her candidate skill set is on par with Kerry or Gore, i.e. not in the same league as Bill Clinton or Obama. Democrats will be banking that there has been enough of a demographic shift to carry her through where previous plodders failed.
KG
@Matt McIrvin: oh, if it wasn’t clear, I jus meant not voting for prez, I’d still vote down ballot (I think that’s what I did in ’04, but I honestly don’t remember). I know I’ve left some lines blank in the past either because I didn’t know enough about the nominees or couldn’t stand either of them. Typically, I’ll mark a third party in that spot but the top two system doesn’t allow for that anymore
Citizen Alan
@Botsplainer:
So does picking Joe Lieberman as your running mate. Nader would never have been an issue in Florida if Gore had picked Bob Graham as his Veep instead an awful DINO Senator from a blue state chosen solely for his high-profile public undermining of Gore’s former boss.
mai naem mobile
@Cacti: I thought Mark Dayton had a major depression issue??? I know depression doesn’t have the stigma it did in Eagletons days but I doubt Americans are ready for that. I would like to seen his state pal Al Franken – don’t laugh. I’m serious, with Jeanne Shaheen.
Cacti
@Tripod:
I don’t see either side having a “rock star” sort of candidate with high personal charisma in the wings for 2016.
I think it’s going to be a battle of grinders.
hoodie
I don’t have any huge problems with Hillary doing the job or dealing with the mud that the GOP will inevitably sling at any dem candidate, but the thing you worry about with her is that she isn’t likely to generate a lot of enthusiasm in what is already a kind of unenergetic dem voter pool. Yeah, we’ve been spoiled by Obama, but that level of skill in motivating voters may be what it takes to beat the opposition these days, especially since there may be a golden opportunity to retake the Senate in 2016. She’s not getting off to the best of starts, and not having serious competition does not appears to be helping. She seems to be the kind of player who raises her game when she has a good opponent (e.g., she almost came back against Obama), but sucks in practice.
Citizen Alan
@Patrick:
At this point, I would not have a problem with a Dem not releasing his or her tax returns until after the GOP nominee did, since that’s the bar they’ve now set.
rikyrah
@SenyorDave:
say it over and over and over again.
GregB
@Citizen Alan:
Yep, that was what I thought. Florida would have been in the bag with Bob Graham.
Keith G
I don’t know Hilary personally but what I know of her as a person, I like. I am NOT looking to vote for a goddess or a savior. I’m hoping to vote for someone who can lead and build a stronger Democratic Party.
I’m a leftist. Hillary is not (neither is Obama). That doesn’t mean I hate her. It means I can deal with her ideological negatives as we move toward a better chance to achieve the things I think we need to achieve.
I believe that all people are more than the sum of what we know of them and that goes both for the saints and the creeps and all in between.
Hillary will run and she will do good and she will make mistakes. Hillary might well become president and she will do well and she will make mistakes. God damn the human condition and the frailties therein.
raven
Sounds like a lot of marooned people on the highway in Kentucky.
Betty Cracker
@Tripod:
She’s also a woman. I think sometimes we forget what a huge fucking deal that would be to have a woman at the top of the ticket.
Davis X. Machina
@Citizen Alan: Lieberman and Graham both deliver Florida — the former for his ability to deliver Long Island South (Florida from Miami to the Cape), the Bubbe Belt.
It worked, too. The FL state legislature and the federal judiciary together were needed to reverse the result.
burnspbesq
Far too many people around here (and elsewhere) seem to be burdened by the mistaken impression that the Democrats are an actual, organized political party.
JPL
What this site needs is a Jeb Bush post.
Germy Shoemangler
@Citizen Alan: I’ve always wondered what was the reasoning behind Gore’s choice of Lieberman. There were so many other veeps he could have picked. Why Joe?
I like Elizabeth Warren. I learned she had a meeting with Hillary. I would hope these meetings continue, and Hillary takes her advice. The fact that Warren supports her (I learned here) makes me more comfortable than I was with HC.
Timurid
What scares me is that the Democrats have no Plan B. None.
Even if there’s no big scandal, Hillary’s of an age where Bad Things can happen at any time. What if she goes to the doctor one day and finds out she has cancer, Parkinson’s, etc.? Would Warren or anyone else who has ruled themselves out decide to take one for the team and run? Or would the Dems just be totally screwed?
Patrick
@Citizen Alan:
Oh, I agree totally. There is so many precedents that have been set. The Dems can now invite any foreign leader it wants to refute a Republican President. And it doesn’t have notify the GOP President in advance. It can and must filibuster anything possible.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
That’s what I think, and we forget that blog-readers, much less commenters, are a pretty small group. I don’t know what Emily’s List membership is, but they’re pretty excited about Hillary.
I agree with those who say her biggest problem is her inner circle, both because of stuff like this email folderol, and there are a lot of people around her, her husband first and foremost, who are still bitter about ’08 and still want to treat Obama like a lucky upstart who jumped the line. Someone needs to sit her, and Bubba, down and explain that there are a lot of Obama democrats out here, and she (they) need to stay focused on the real enemy.
Davis X. Machina
@Rarely Posts:
Politically, the landscape in 1991-1996 is unrecognizable today.
There were still Hollingses and Heflins in the South. And Nunns and Bumperses.
The Blue Dog caucus was founded in 1994.
Clinton was working against an uphill lie. His record on legislation is more or less what you’d expect it to be.
ruemara
I avoided all those threads because I don’t like Hillary as a politician, think the email scandal is bull and think it’s dumb to be caught up in this but I will work to get her elected if she’s the nominee. But I wish there were more choices.
Davis X. Machina
The typical blog poster was for Hillary in 2008, because Obama was a trimmer, and against Hillary and for Someone Else in 2016, because Hillary is a trimmer.
The takeaway — no one rises that high up the totem pole unless they’re a trimmer.
Citizen Alan
@Elizabelle:
Whereas Al Gore’s own running mate played absolutely no role in either the iraq Debacle or in covering for the Republicans afterwards (to the point of speaking at the GOP convention in 2008 and arguing in favor of even an even worse administration to follow W). Nader’s a jackass, true. But the willful obstinate refusal of Democrats to this day to consider exactly WHY people would choose a jackass over Gore after years of triangulation followed by an inept and pusillanimous campaign is frankly frightening to me. Because it indicates that Democrats have learned NOTHING from the 2000 election except to embrace hippie-bashing.
For the record, I voted for Nader in 2000 (in a ruby red state where a vote for Gore wouldn’t have mattered). The final deciding factor was Gore coming out in favor of the death penalty (either in an interview or a debate, don’t remember which) because of its “deterrent effect” which every educated person knows the death penalty doesn’t actually have. I believe my exact words after hearing that statement were something like “Fuck you, you cowardly swine,” after which I went to double-check whether Nader was on the ballot in Mississippi.
Doug r
@aimai: sort of a real life Leslie Knope you’re saying
Jim, Foolish Literalist
So I assume you also voted against Clinton?
tsquared2001
@Baud: There is a reason for that – because it is insane. I’ve voted for Mark Dayton when he ran for state auditor, for US Senate and now two times for governor but anybody who looks at Dayton and sees a President is smoking some high quality shit.
SatanicPanic
@Tree With Water: Anyone who doesn’t have Obama pegged as a progressive in 2015 is an ass. Sure, we could define progressive as “agrees with us 100% on everything, including issues no one cares about” but then we’ve just disqualified every last president of the USA as a progressive and where does that leave us? Somewhere in the same bin as people who still identify as communists in 2015.
ETA- and you know what? progressive is a stupid label anyway. I’m a liberal and a left-winger
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@tsquared2001: he was very unpopular in Minnesota at the end of his Senate term, wasn’t he? I was surprised to see him run for office again, even mores to see him win
Baud
@tsquared2001:
So you’re saying he appeals to the Democratic base? ;-)
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@raven: Yup, seems 65 is still closed in both directions with at least 200 semis in that group. 75 had truckers stopped in Scott County becuase of bad roads farther north in KY. Quite the mess.
M.Q is returning on a flight from Denver and may have more traffic issues at CVG that in CO or Nebraska.
Betty Cracker
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Has either Clinton really dissed Obama since the 2008 race? I haven’t seen it. If either harbors malice toward Obama, they’ve been smart enough to bite their tongues as far as I know.
Waynski
@Mandalay:
Agreed. Let the rethugs be the haters. It’s pretty much their brand and I’m happy to concede it to them. We should be above that.
rikyrah
@askew:
so true.
Citizen Alan
@Cacti:
Which is hilarious if you think (as I do) that the only reason Bill got the nomination in 1992 was because all the Dem heavy hitters (especially Mario Cuomo) were afraid to run against George H. W. Bush and the 92% approval rating he briefly carried after the Gulf War.
Karmus
Just want to give the graphic and concept my thumbs-up, fwtw.
Tripod
Only eleven states elect governors during presidential elections – 4R 7D. The rest break 27R 11D 1I.
Off year election dynamics go a LONG way to explain what’s happening in the states.
Mike E
@raven:
Not blue? Color me surprised!
Suzanne
@aimai: Agree with you 110%. I can understand ambivalence toward her—hell, I have some myself—but the sheer amount of shit that she takes from people who ostensibly agree with her is more indicative of someone who is just completely wretched in every way. She was a good SoS, and a decent Senator.
The other thing I don’t get is how many people pile on her for running a shitty campaign. Really? THAT is an epic flaw that makes her completely unsuitable for office? Campaigning isn’t the same as actually leading. And even if it was, plenty of good people have lost campaigns, then gone on to win later.
And I do think the attacks on her looks, clothes, and age are sexist.
srv
It’s too bad Nader is too old to run.
jeffreyw
Wait, I found my remote. I may vote Hillary now that she’s off the hook for that.
Rick Taylor
I don’t care about the Clinton scandals, but Hillary Clinton’s hawkish positions make me nervous. I might have forgiven her for voting for then authorization for the Iraq war, insane as it was, but she’s continued pulling the administration to the right, pushing for intervention in Lybia and Syria. The last thing we need is a Democratic President getting the nation mired in an insane war. But yes, of course I’ll vote for her if she’s the nominee. At least she’s publicly backed the administration, opposing new sanctions on Iran.
raven
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q): Ugh
Betty Cracker
@Suzanne: I dunno, I think criticisms of Clinton’s 2008 campaign are on point because we need someone to run a much better campaign in 2016 if we want to beat the Repubs. Her campaign not only featured odious cretins like Mark Penn and horrid surrogates like Lanny Davis, the brain trust was apparently so incompetent they didn’t even map out the delegate count. Fair game, in my book anyway.
gene108
@Laertes:
Unlike then candidate Obama, who was saying, since 2007 that he would unilaterally ramp up U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, if he were elected President in 2008.
PNAC started, in the 1990’s, because those fuckers thought Bill was not being aggressive enough using U.S. military power to dictate foreign policy, and spent too much damn time making sure he got coalitions so we did not go it alone, when we did deploy troops.
The gap between where Bill and Hillary are versus neo-cons is about as deep and wide as the Grand Canyon.
Tree With Water
@SatanicPanic: I’m with you on the ‘progressive’ tag. But I would quibble about the president being one in 2015, to no useful end. Suffice to say, I dig politicians who pick fights with the GOP.
Citizen Alan
@Germy Shoemangler:
IMO, it was because Lieberman was one of the most important Democratic voices to attack Clinton on the Lewinsky matter. Being able to say “see, I’m nothing like that adulterous cad” was more important than actually winning the damned election.
different-church-lady
Keep hitting each other over the head with those Nerf bats, people! The cable news political porn networks are counting on you!
Davis X. Machina
@Rick Taylor: If a Democratic president gets us mired in an insane war, it will be because he or she has a Democratic Congressional delegation solidly behind him or her.
That concern isn’t a reason to oppose Mrs. Clinton. It’s a reason to abandon the Party.
DTGstl314
His name is Julián Castro.
gene108
@Suzanne:
I do not think she ran a shitty campaign. She was up against an opponent, Barrack Obama, who revolutionized campaigning in the modern age. From the use of data mining to courting large numbers of small donors, Obama changed how campaigns will be run for the next few years.
The only real downside about what Obama did is he killed whatever attempts were made for public financing of campaigns, since the 1970’s.
EDIT: If she ran a truly shitty campaign, she’d not have made 2008 as interesting as it was.
jl
@mikej: Hey there fellow indifferencer.
I understand the obsession, and BS, emanating from places like the GOP who may have to run against her (so far) double digit leads against their top potential nominees, and elements in the media (e.g. NYT) who hate her on principle or know a story will get lots of attention (no matter how crappy).
But Democrats? I especially do not understand the bitterness about whether she announces or not. The other Democrats are adults who can make up their own minds. You want someone to run against HRC, contact your favorite and encourage them to run and offer to work for them. Or work for some local or state or Congressional candidate. Quit whining so much.
Citizen Alan
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I did say “final deciding factor.” There were plenty of others. And I did vote for Clinton twice because there were no other candidates who I thought were ethically superior in 1992 and 1996. So yes, i held my nose and voted for the man who cold-bloodedly made a show of suspending his 1992 campaign for a few days so he could go back to Arkansas and preside over the execution of a mentally-retarded prisoner.
trollhattan
@srv:
Too old? If he can fog a mirror he’ll run. Ralph loves himself some attention.
Mnemosyne (iPhone)
@Cacti:
I tend to agree with you (and with hoodie right below you). It’s not like anyone on the Republican side has much charisma, so it will probably be all about who works harder, shakes more hands, kisses more babies, etc.
I do worry about Hillary’s health and I wonder if that’s why she hasn’t officially announced yet. I suspect that, if she can’t run, she will want to be the kingmaker (or queenmaker) by announcing her support for a candidate.
Botsplainer
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q):
It isn’t as if we didn’t have screaming warnings on the severity of this two days in advance, or that every media outlet was megaphoning warnings from state officials from the night before and the morning of that this thing was moving in during the afternoon and to stay off the roads from that point forward.
Dumbass truckers gotta go too fast, idiot employers gotta keep people around too late and into dangerous timeframes.
Tree With Water
@Citizen Alan: Everyone can point to one major blunder in their life that fucked-up everything else along with it. Joe Lieberman is Gore’s major f/u, one which the planet and peoples have suffered for ever since, too.
Granted, the Judicial Coup of 2002 also played a factor in Gore’s defeat.
Gravenstone
@samiam: Someone let Derf de Derp out of its cage. Quick, notify the game wardens.
mikej
Update, dad’s docs could not figure out why his heart rate dropped to 30, bp 60/?. Someone in hospital said, hey what if it’s not a cardiac problem, even if he did collapse in a cardiologist office? Test showed hypothyroid, which is easily treatable. Still sitting around Swedish waiting for internist to show, but hoping to go home this afternoon.
Davis X. Machina
@Mnemosyne (iPhone):
I have no doubt there’s a Plan B, even if we don’t know who he or she is.
Without the Kennedy endorsement, Obama in 2008 falls short.
That’s a pretty powerful example to have before you.
grandpa john
@Cacti: Which thought should scare the living shit out of any reasonably sane person even vaguely thinking of voting republican
srv
@trollhattan: Perhaps, but I can always settle for a Snowden write-in.
Baud
@gene108:
This! (I’m a machine). Obama ran a historically awesome campaign. Clinton’s was not without flaws, but it’s not like she lost to Gravel. It’s denigrating to Obama’s campaign to suggest that losing to him in 2008 is something she should be ashamed of.
Baud
@Mnemosyne (iPhone):
Someone said somewhere that there are fundraising considerations associated with the timing of the announcement.
Mandalay
@Patricia Kayden:
You are creating strawman, just as I would be creating a strawman if I replied to you “So Hillary Clinton should be above criticism?”.
It would be harmful for the Democrats and the country to give Clinton a free pass on this. She’ll be far less inclined to pull shit like this as president if she gets some real heat now. And if she doesn’t like the heat then the sooner she gets out of the kitchen the better.
And putting the presidential race aside, what she did was fundamentally wrong; it wasn’t a faux pas or a gotcha. She put a lot of effort into creating that security wall around herself. As Cole correctly pointed out last night:
Baud
@mikej:
I hope that person was a medical professional.
Keeping fingers crossed for good news.
JPL
@Baud: Most people forget that.
srv
Libs are worse than Nixon.
askew
@Davis X. Machina:
He didn’t need Kennedy’s endorsement to win. He was a once in a lifetime candidate and Hillary just couldn’t play at his level. I think he would have even beaten Bill in his prime.
OT – I had to get a B-12 shot today and man this one really hurts. Normally they are quite painless.
Baud
@Mandalay:
Iowa Old Lady
@DTGstl314: Absolutely. Castro is really impressive. His name will give him problems with the American electorate though. I mean, if you think Bush is a problematic name, try Castro.
Mandalay
@Baud:
Right. Once she says that she’s running her six-figure speaker fees are off the table.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@mikej: That’s pretty good news! An inexpensive, non-invasive fix.
Baud
@srv:
No comparison with Nazis? Our GOP is losing its edge.
Ben Cisco
I’ve stayed out of the fray on this one, but as a network admin let me just say this: I feel for the poor bastard in IT that (probably) tried to tell someone, ANYONE, that this was a bad idea. Not saying that I know for sure that it happened, but I’d bet it did.
Mandalay
@Iowa Old Lady:
Or Hussein of course.
Baud
@Mandalay:
Maybe. But I think there are also campaign fundraising restrictions that kick in. But I’m not sure.
Cervantes
@Davis X. Machina:
How do you know this? Or what makes you think it’s true?
askew
@Cacti:
I’m from Minnesota and I love my Governor but no. He makes Hillary look like Obama. He has the charisma of oatmeal, has horrible public speaking skills and some issues in his personal life. He’s been an extraordinary Governor but he is like Dean in that he just doesn’t have the skill set for a successful presidential campaign. He’d be a great president though.
That’s my annoyance with Hillary she is a B-level politician at best with A-level name recognition who is going to be a mediocre president due to her surrounding herself my morons who kiss her ass and her poor management skills.
different-church-lady
@Mandalay:
Oh, well, by all means, freaking out is completely appropriate as long as it’s equitable.
Baud
@Iowa Old Lady:
I don’t know. Aren’t there a bunch of baseball players named Castro? And by the time he runs, Cuba will be a different place.
Zam
@Baud: Yea there are spending restrictions I believe on things and her announcement will draw in a lot of money that would be useless if spent too early and tap out donors way before primary season.
Davis X. Machina
@Cervantes: Dan Balz and the late Haynes Johnson, who, especially the latter, have forgotten more about politics than I’ve ever learned.
mikej
@Baud: I’m unconcerned about where the idea came from as long as the pros check it out.
askew
@SatanicPanic:
I found someone else to back in O’Malley that I’ve been talking up for years now. I don’t know that he can compete in money and media attention but when it comes to policy, political skills, list of accomplishments and progressive message to run on, he is light-years ahead of Hillary.
He gets standing ovations as he’s been speaking around the country at Dem functions. And I think he’ll play well in Iowa, NV and SC primaries. But, he’s going to face an uphill battle just like Dean did in 2004.
That doesn’t mean that I have to sit back and not offer any criticism of Hillary. Her supporters seem to think she should have a free ride into the WH while they are free to trash any potential rivals to the nomination. Same shit Obama and Edwards supporters heard in 2008.
Baud
@mikej:
Good attitude.
Kay
@Tripod:
Democrats don’t lead when they’re running states. We’re all watching Republicans change a ton of state law, which Democrats are “opposing” from the minority.
They don’t have any kind of coherent state law governing approach. They defend until they lose and then we all watch while GOP governors reshape these places for decades to come. For some reason Democrats at the state level could never take all that risk, I’m not clear why. People don’t vote for “policy agnostics” at the state level. That’s a think tank phrase.
I’m learning about John Kasich’s plan to push taxes down to poor people and wondering why this is the one and only “tax reform” that is even proposed, let alone enacted. Is there a Democratic position on state taxes? What is it?
askew
@Betty Cracker:
But, that positive is offset by the intense hatred many women voters on the right and middle have for her. A woman without her baggage would be much more likely to attract female voters than Hillary would. And as Palin showed in 2008, you don’t win voters over based on gender alone.
BleedBlue
You people disappoint me. We’re facing the prospect of either a third Bush presidency, in which case prepare for world war III, or a Scott Walker/Rand Paul presidency, in which case prepare for the abolishment of social security, ACA, and medicare, PERIOD.
Yet all you people can do is whine about Clinton taking SANE and SENSIBLE precautions to protect herself from a republican congress that is obviously out to get her?
Makes me sick.
askew
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Emily’s List members already vote for Democrats. They are going to vote for whoever the D candidate is.
Bill is going to be a problem because of his Obama bitterness. His ego is going to cause Hillary problems just like it did in 2008.
mai naem mobile
@DTGstl314: I’m really impressed with Tom Perez, the labor secretary. I think he would appeal to hispanics and blacks because he worked in the civil rights division at the DOJ. I saw him being interviewed about the longshoremen strike by Joe Kernen the douchebag on CNBC and he didn’t get into a pissing match with Kernen. He made his point repeated his point and kept trucking on.
Baud
Since we’re talking about who is and is not a good Democrat, here’s one for the not column:
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/new-group-shows-how-not-debate-us-policy-iran#break
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@Iowa Old Lady: But damn what I wouldn’t have to have a President named Castro. Any surviving RWNJ over age 62 would stroke out and the younger ones would be apoplectic. Demographics could make it happen – and there’s a few million voters for whom Castro is a terrific name…
@Mandalay: Good point – and it was used every.time.possible in both campaigns.
Cacti
@srv:
Pretty much every GOP investigation can be attributed on some level to their need to make somebody into the Democratic Richard Nixon.
Similarly, every foreign conflict the GOP plunges us into is based on a psychological need to re-fight Vietnam, and have the US come out the winner.
askew
@Tree With Water:
I dig politicians who deliver progressive policy which Obama has ton by the truck load. I don’t care about silly posturing fighting with the GOP that amounts to nothing that improves Americans’ lives. But, if you like that Hillary is the one for you. All sound and fury and no results. That’s Hillary.
chopper
@gene108:
she certainly surrounded herself with some chumps who didn’t think it was necessary to do their homework, like mark “what do you mean, texas has both a primary and a caucus?!” penn. that worries me a bit, not only as to how she’ll run a campaign in 2016, but also as to the quality of the people she’d have on her team in the WH.
Davis X. Machina
@Kay: Chances are your state legislature is like every other state legislature — there’s a nearly monolithic bloc of Republicans and a messy, inchoate bag of Democrats.
The latter will contain the usual shit-heel brigade of auto dealers, insurance brokers, and real-estate types, who are Democrats because that was the shorter line, and actual Democrats of various kinds — community activists, union leaders, local elected officials who have made a step up, etc. That’s a coalition ill-suited to driving an agenda home — or even having an agenda.
They’ll have deep divisions over taxes, and a take-no-risks position on social issues.
Neither will have equivalents that affect the GOP caucus’ behavior
Cacti
@askew:
Hillary? Sound and fury? When did that happen?
I thought the knock on Hill and Bill was their risk-averse centrism.
Sound and fury with no results was Dennis Kucinich.
Amir Khalid
@askew:
You’re talking about the Bil Clinton who endorsed Obama in both 2008 and 2012, right?
Davis X. Machina
@Cacti: Does it really matter how she’s wrong, once we’ve established that she’s wrong?
Cervantes
@Citizen Alan:
Ricky Ray Rector’s brain was severely damaged when he shot himself in the head trying to commit suicide after killing two other people. While he may have known what he was doing when he killed those people, I doubt he knew what he was doing when he was put on trial.
Having said that, I should also say that, like Mike Dukakis, I oppose the death penalty without exception.
askew
@Amir Khalid:
Yep and the same one who did incredible damage to Hillary’s campaign in 2008 when he started the dog whistle racism that got so bad Kennedy and other party elders had to intervene. The same Bill Clinton who kept saying bitter things and talking up McCain all the way through the general.
Obama’s team was smart enough to go at Bill’s ego because they knew he couldn’t handle it and they needled him enough to get him to explode. We’ll see if he can contain himself this time around.
askew
@mikej:
Fingers crossed for you. Hope it is something as simple as thyroid issues.
Doug r
@Botsplaineranything beats that racist prick
KG
@Kay: there’s the old line that Reagan made “liberal” a bad word in the 80s. To a certain extent that still holds, what with people calling themselves progressive instead of liberal. I think the electorate and conditions have changes enough that an avowed liberal could actually win. But most of the career political people at the state level came up in a world where liberal was a bad word. So better to be “pragmatic” and a “manager” than actually seek to change things. Not sure how you change that without someone running as an avowed liberal, winning, and then governing as such. In a way, the same thing has happened to conservatives here in california
Betty Cracker
@askew: Palin was / is a blithering moron, and she wasn’t at the top of the ticket. HRC, whatever her faults, isn’t stupid, and she has genuinely been an advocate for women. That’s not everything, but it’s not nothing either.
Grumpy Code Monkey
I’ll take almost any other Democrat over Hillary, although I’ll be damned if I can name any that are in the pipeline. I’ll take Hillary over any Republican, in a heartbeat, and not regret the decision for at least two years.
To beat my usual drum, it’s Congress we need to worry about. If it’s a choice between winning the White House and flipping the HoR, I’d rather focus on flipping the HoR. Blah blah blah gerrymandering voter suppression-cakes – that can be overcome with sufficient turnout.
Also need to win state houses.
Betty Cracker
@Grumpy Code Monkey:
Two words: Supreme Court.
But in general, I agree. I think we should walk, chew gum and pat our tummies at the same time by focusing on winning the White House, state houses and the HoR.
Carolinus
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Hillaryis44? NoQuarter? I haven’t really looked at any of them in years but I always thought they were _way_ too far gone to ever support a Dem presidential candidate again, including HRC. To be honest it would be mildly disturbing if they fully came back in to the fold.
grandpa john
@Betty Cracker: heh, you beat me to it.
So many people don’t seem to understand how significant the politicalization of the judicial system by the republicans has affected governing in this country and why it is so important that democrats be in control of the appointments of judges.
Gravenstone
@Iowa Old Lady: Aside from the die hard Cuban exile community (which are dying off by the day by this point), how is Castro a negative? I mean, with that sort of attitude, we can just forget running anyone named Hussein right off the bat.
different-church-lady
I’m tellin’ you folks, watching you all play this full-contact grudge match of dueling-insider-baseball-narratives is just time-kill GOLD!
askew
@Betty Cracker:
No, but I think people are too quick to think that Hillary being a female is going to automatically win votes from independent and Republican women. It’s actually pretty insulting to women to think that. And Hillary is far from a generic woman. She carries a lot of baggage. I’ve always said that the public likes the idea of Hillary a lot more than the reality of Hillary. Once she starts getting out and campaigning and we have to deal with more mistakes/scandals like this, her favorables are going to start falling and she isn’t going to be able to win over voters for have written her off for years.
That’s why I’d like a new face as our nominee. Hillary has no place to go but down in polling and I think she is going to drop like a rock once people remember why they didn’t like her.
I could be wrong, but it is one of the reasons I want a competitive primary.
Socraticsilence
The email thing doesn’t really bother me as much as it initially did. Well it didn’t until about an hour ago: I got this link from a wing nut (I know all skepticism is warranted but it’s well documented and is plausible as something no one would have cared about until the email bit) is saying the ambassador to Kenya was forced to resign under her for having same email set up- which would make it something that would annoy me.
eemom
@different-church-lady:
[passes popcorn]
Betty Cracker
@askew: I’d like a competitive primary too, but we don’t seem to be getting our wish. (I know, I know — thanks to the eeee-ville machinations of Hillary!) It’s not too late for that to happen, but it’s getting late-ish.
Regarding women and Hillary, I don’t claim that every woman is going to flock to her banner, obviously, but if she does win the nomination, I think the idea of finally breaking the gender barrier is going to take on a life of its own, and there’s nothing wrong with that.
I believe there’s an excellent chance that the identity politics aspect of it will offset the “Hillary is uninspiring” rap on her candidacy. I base this partially on what I’ve heard from women who aren’t particularly political and also on youngsters like my daughter and her friends, who will be old enough to vote in 2016 and find it outrageous that there has never been a woman president.
I might be totally wrong, but my guess is the race won’t be decided by people who are plugged into politics like the folks who read this blog. It never is, really.
askew
Every woman I know wants a woman president but not Hillary so we’ll see what happens.
So, is there anything there about Hillary’s State Dept. forcing a resignation of an Ambassador Gration in part due to his use of private email. There is documentation going around that the State Dept. said that private email was a no-no. But, I can’t tell if I just fell into some crazy GOP wormhole and his is just another Vince Foster nonsense story.
wasabi gasp
1. Will alter topography because girls aren’t sissies.
2. Popcorn.
OK. What else?
Cervantes
@askew:
He wasn’t doing well in general, which is why he was fired. The e-mail thing was the least of his problems.
Tree With Water
@askew: I won’t quibble. But politicians are like cops. When they (or their supporters) start expecting you to kiss their ass, something is wrong.
askew
@Cervantes:
So, the documentation that is floating around with State Dept saying private emails were against rules is made up then? That would be excellent news.
Because this doesn’t look so good:
http://dlvr.it/8rWtr4
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@gene108:
Gutter?
Maryland Reporter:
(Emphasis added.)
When states are running a deficit, they have to close the hole. Sometimes the way that’s done are via things we don’t like. Let’s not go overboard on the descriptions of what was done…
Cheers,
Scott.
Davis X. Machina
@askew:
No one I know voted for Reagan. Funny that way.
Rarely Posts
@Davis X. Machina:
I take your point. But he probably could have accomplished more before 1994 if he had exercised better judgment in his approach to Congress and his focus on various priorities (letting Congress take the lead on healthcare, waiting on gays in the military, waiting on corporate priorities, such as NAFTA, etc.).
Second, no one can identify any significant, liberal policy shift accomplished or successfully led by Hillary Clinton. It’s hard to get excited about a politician who has been on the scene for well over 20 years with few significant accomplishments (as opposed to significant positions). Partially, she began her political career in a more conservative era, but it’s still a problem.
Third, I worry that the Clinton team still thinks today’s landscape is like that of 1991-1996. Some of her advisors certainly seemed to in 2008. And it would explain Hillary’s hawkishness—a worry that democrats have to make war to prove they are “though.” If she wanted to win over serious liberals, she would be doing more to establish that she is a liberal and is not afraid to articulate a liberal vision. I do not expect her to do so because, fundamentally, she’s a centrist-moderate.
Keith G
@Betty Cracker:
As it turns out, the race will probably be decided by a several thousand voters living in Ohio, Florida, Virginia, and somewhere else. If the Dem nominee wins women, ethnic minorities and holds on to the white males who voted Dem in 2012, we get to keep the White House and the Obama legacy will be immensely strengthened.
If HRC is the nominee, and if she stays clear of major fuck ups, she may even be able to expand the white male vote a bit. Quite an “if”, but that cuts both ways.
askew
@Davis X. Machina:
I was just offering a counter to Betty’s comment that she knows women who can’t wait to vote for Hillary. So, I am sure your comment applies to her as well right?
cokane
@Keith G: basically nowadays, republicans have to sweep ohio, virginia and florida. that aint impossible but still, they’re kind of fuct in prez elections
Keith G
@Rarely Posts:
Clinton got shit-canned in 2008. If Hillary and her team still thinks today’s landscape is like that of 1991-1996, she is too stupid to walk and breath at the same time. She seems to be capable of learning. We will see how much.
As for the hawkishness, I will be interested to hear what candidate Clinton’s views are and if/how they have changed since 2001. American foreign policy has never been (nor should it be) a straight line of navigation. In the modern era, we have tacked between periods greater and lesser “hawkishness” and that has not been without merit as the changes of attitude often have brought about important opportunities. The trick is to avoid excesses on either extreme.
cokane
lemme add that even if obama had lost ohio, florida and virginia, he still would have won. so basically republicans have to sweep those 3 key swing states and then pick up something else — new hampshire, iowa or pennsylvania… and this is all while holding onto north carolina, where the latino population is growing and where republicans have made zero inroads to court them… just saying
WaterGirl
@jeffreyw: I am appreciating the levity!
WaterGirl
@mikej: So glad to hear that. Thank god for the person who was able to think about the big picture.
Bobby Thomson
@Amir Khalid: I see things the opposite way. The way I see it, anyone who isn’t competing with Clinton toe to toe right now, this very minute – that is to say, the rest of the Democratic party – isn’t going to be ready to take on Jeb Bush next year. If they’re too timid to jump in now, with gusto, they won’t be prepared to bring the wood and raise a shit ton of cash when it really counts. It was the same deal in the Pennsylvania governor’s race. People like Allyson Schwartz and convicted felon Rob McCord were sitting around with their thumbs up their asses and probably would have lost to a very weak but well-funded Tom Corbett in the general. Tom Wolf got out and did stuff, which signaled that he took the race seriously.
WaterGirl
@askew: I was volunteering for Obama in Colorado when Kennedy came out with the big speech for Obama. It had a huge impact, and the timing was impeccable, but I think Obama would have still won without it. Glad we didn’t have to find out, though.
WaterGirl
@Ben Cisco: Ditto on being in IT, etc. That was one of my first thoughts, too. Somewhere there is a tech person who knew better and no one listened. I would bet money on that.
WaterGirl
@askew:
THIS.
(sorry, baud, hoping this won’t leave you short-handed.)
WaterGirl
@mikej: I don’t know why, but my first thought was a nurse who quietly said something to a physician. Just grateful that someone got there.
Cervantes
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet:
Someone who guts.
Davis X. Machina
@Rarely Posts:
And the list of individual Democratic senators who are identified with a significant, liberal policy shift in that same 20 year time frame is…
WaterGirl
@Davis X. Machina: Raising my hand, sadly. sheepishly. My first vote at 18. My only republican vote.
Robin Atlas, wherever you are, I am so sorry I thought all that stuff you were telling me about a break-in at some hotel was utter nonsense. If that was true, it would be all over the news, I was sure of it.
Watergate was a pivotal moment for me, that’s when I became interested in politics.
Kay
@WaterGirl:
I don’t think the “good campaigns. good manager” thing holds up.
Bush had great campaigns. His GOTV was terrifyingly efficient. I have no idea what happened to his awesome managerial skills the day after the election(s).
Kay
@Davis X. Machina:
Why don’t we have a state law operation like ALEC, except not evil?
I recognize they need legislation templates. Ohio Republicans once introduced an ed bill with the ALEC caption still on it. They had to pull it and make up a caption with “Ohio” in it.
I don’t think liberals lack lawyers to draft state “model” laws.
johnnybuck
@SatanicPanic:
More fun to bitch and moan than to get dirty.
Renie
@SRW1: Chuck Schumer replaced Al D’Amato. I worked on that campaign. Hilary replaced Daniel Moynihan.
Rarely Posts
@Davis X. Machina:
Some liberal politicians with significantly bigger policy accomplishments than Hillary Clinton:
Elizabeth Warren: Dodd-Frank & Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)
Joe Biden: Violence Against Women Act
Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid: Affordable Care-Act (I give Pelosi the most credit for carrying it across the finish-line, but it was a group project of course)
Martin O’Malley: (1) signed the bill allowing same-sex marriage in Maryland and campaigning for the Referendum that got it through; (2) repealing the death penalty in Maryland; (3) getting Maryland “Dream Act” passed so children of undocumented immigrants could be eligible for in-state college tuition; (4) signing a bill decriminalizing possession of small amounts of marijuana and another bill authorizing medical marijuana.
Andrew Cuomo: signed same-sex marriage legislation in New York and increased some taxes on high-earners.
Now, not all of these people would be good candidates for President. And I would vote for Hillary over Cuomo because Cuomo is so bad on the environment and is not a team-player. But the point is, Hillary’s lack of accomplishments is a problem. Personally, I’d vote for Warren if she ran (but she probably won’t). If she doesn’t, I’m currently leaning towards O’Malley. He certainly isn’t perfect, and I doubt he can defeat Hillary. But we have at least one candidate who has some significant liberal policy accomplishments.
jl
@johnnybuck:
It is true that the Democrats may have someone who can do better. But that person has to decide to run. Why has no one done so? It’s up to them, not HRC.
I would like to see a good challenge to HRC, but I sure cannot make anyone run.
Biden will probably run, and he might be good to have in primary debates, but I doubt he would win against HRC. (Edit: but if Biden somehow does get the nom, I think he could win in the general.)
Maybe problem is that potential Democrat nominees have better things to do with their time than run perpetual campaigns and grift operations, so they don’t start making big stinks the day after the midterms, or the day after the last presidential campaign.
And if people are turned off by presidential politics, they should focus on state and local and Congressional elections, which are important too.
I can see why HRC drives the GOP into a fury. She might well beat them like rug in 2016. Why she does so with some Democrats, it’s hard to see.
And, every candidate is going to come with weaknesses and baggage, we just don’t see it as well as for HRC because she is a focus of (often crappy and sloppy) news coverage and others are not.
One thing true about HRC, if she does run, she will run fierce and hard and won’t quit, which is an advantage. Which I hope outweighs any problems, for example, staff work like her last, second rate, primary campaign team.
Patricia Kayden
@Mandalay: Nope, Secretary Clinton is not above criticism. As I said before, I neither love or hate her. She’s a skilled politician who makes mistakes like other human beings.
Hopefully, this “scandal” will fizz out and won’t be an issue by next year. And hopefully, those on the Left will be pushing Secretary Clinton about issues that actually matter (such as her position on the ACA for example).
Just Some Fuckhead
No love for John Edwards???
GHayduke (formerly lojasmo)
@Amir Khalid:
same reason i voted for Obama. a better candidate who i felt could win the general.
ETA: during the 2004 convention, after Obama’s speech, I KNEW he would be the next president.
if clinton is the candidate, our next president will be her opponent.
HR Progressive
No, sorry, if Hillary Clinton personally killed one of my pets, I wouldn’t vote for her, even if the opponent was Pat Robertson.
I’d just not vote. Or I’d cast a third party vote. Or something.
Beyond that? I’m a Clinton “Meh”-er. She’d probably be better than any GOPer, but I would really like someone more liberal/populist to pull an Obama and swipe the nomination from her.
Irony Abounds
Frankly, I’m embarrassed to say I’m a Democrat, so I wear the Anti-Republican label. Which mean I’ll vote for Hillary if I have to, and given the lack of virtually anyone else with any heft in the Democratic Party, I’ll guess I have to.
Haroldo
@samiam: Mr Sam I am (maybe you are, maybe not – but it is patently the case you are a clown): stuff and nonsense.
Haroldo
@Mandalay: Mr/Ms Mandalay (@60): Concisely put. Thanks.
Haroldo
@Cacti: Mr/Ms Cacti: Hop into the clown car w/ Mr/Ms Sam.
Davis X. Machina
@Rarely Posts: Small-bore stuff, or team stuff.
The governors you like, you like because they signed stuff.
That’s something executives get to do, not legislators.
Personally, I’d not let either one of them near my pension.
priscianus jr
@Amir Khalid: if you’d vote for Hillary in the presidential election proper, why would you not vote for her in a primary as well? I keep seeing here comments to this effect; I don’t understand the thinking.
Because in a primary you still have a choice. Or at least your vote can still make a point. By the time of the election, there’s only one candidate. Assuming you understand that not voting is tantamount to casting a vote for the other side, that’s about it.
Full metal Wingnut
@SenyorDave: On the merits I see no difference between her and Cuomo. Well, cuomo stabbed his own party in the back in the state legislature. I don’t think Clinton would do that.
Full metal Wingnut
@Kent: You’ll see the next Obama in 20-30 years. He’s a once in a generation candidate. In terms of oratory skills, no even mentioned as a halfway plausible candidate comes close.
Full metal Wingnut
@aimai: Popular *for* an ex-President? They’re always more well-liked when they leave office. After 8 years of Walker, Shrub will be the new Bill Clinton.
Full metal Wingnut
@dedc79: It doesn’t help that she’s married to Bill Clinton, who is known for his preternatural charisma and speaking skills. It’s a natural juxtaposition and invites an unfair comparison (I don’t give a fuck about pretty speeches). They couldn’t be more different in that regard.
Full metal Wingnut
@burnspbesq: In what respect? She’s young, attractive, enthusiastic, but she lacks his oratory skills. She’s not even close to him in that regard.
Full metal Wingnut
@Amir Khalid: Do you need the difference between a primary and general election explained to you?
Full metal Wingnut
@Amir Khalid: You’re wrong. It’s not a “blue” state. The city is very blue, but lots of upstate is red. The city is about 50% of the population, Republicans can still get by. I remember Schumer’s first Senate election being very close.
Read a book.
Full metal Wingnut
@askew: Kerry came damn close to winning. His problem was he didn’t have the skin to go dirty to counter the swiftboating.
Cervantes
@Amir Khalid:
Suppose there are two candidates in the primary: Center and Left-of-Center. Suppose you agree more with the latter and would like him to be your party’s candidate (and, eventually, President). You vote for him in the primary. He loses. Center wins the party’s nomination.
Now in the general election, your choice is between Center and Utter-Nitwit-who-Mouths-Right-Wing-Slogans.
What do you do?
Cervantes
@Full metal Wingnut:
No more than you or I might need the vagaries of Malaysian politics explained to us, I’ll wager.
Rarely Posts
@Davis X. Machina:
Assuming you’re correct, what does it say that Clinton does not even have “small bore stuff” or “team stuff”?
What was her biggest accomplishment as Secretary of State?
What was her biggest accomplishment as a Senator?
I realize that her lack of accomplishments is not entirely her fault (a lot of it is circumstances). But she wants to be President, and in 2008, she ran on her “experience.” An experience of not getting anything done?
Second, you’re incorrect. It’s not all small bore stuff. Frank-Dodd did a lot to stabilize our banking system and protect consumers, and Warren’s advocacy against the Bankruptcy Bill was awesome. Meanwhile, Bill repealed Glass–Steagall, and to my knowledge, Hillary has never argued for the kind of regulations of the banking industry or finance that are crucial to our economic stability. Is she going to take on wall street?
Getting gay marriage passed through the political process is actually a pretty significant accomplishment. Meanwhile, Hillary was relatively late to endorsing gay marriage. It’s not a flattering comparison.
Getting more resources devoted to helping women escape domestic violence is pretty darn important. I’m sure Clinton supports it, but has she ever done as much as Biden did to actually help people on the ground?
I’m not saying any of these people are dream candidates. But Clinton supporters tend to do a bit of an unfair two-step. On one hand, criticisms of Clinton are often dismissed as unrealistic. But then, alternatives are rejected for not being perfect. It’s all an issue of comparisons, and Clinton does not look that good in comparison to some of the other options.
Paul in KY
@Amir Khalid: Our Acorn operatives will find a way for you to vote multiple times. Buwahahahahaha!!!!
Paul in KY
@aimai: You didn’t address the 2 specific examples provided.
Paul in KY
@KG: Man up & vote for the Democrat. Hillary or whomever else.
Paul in KY
@MattF: Johnson also undercut him. Said he’d rather Nixon win than Humphrey.
Paul in KY
@NotMax: You also need to man up & vote for the Democrat.
Paul in KY
@Tree With Water: I proudly voted Kerry-Edwards & would again in a heartbeat. I don’t care how smarmy-sleazy Edwards is or was. He’d have been 20 times better than Darth Snarly & his chimpy mascot.
Paul in KY
@askew: It still would have been an issue, but that would have been a better way to tackle it than what he did (IMO).
Paul in KY
@Citizen Alan: No way Florida is lost if Sen. Graham had been on the ticket.
Paul in KY
@Davis X. Machina: Bob Graham was waaaaaay more popular in Florida than Joe fucking Lieberman.
Paul in KY
@Citizen Alan: If you thought Ralph Nader was ethically superior to Al Gore, you are a dipshit.
Paul in KY
@Iowa Old Lady: Or Barak Hussein Obama…
Paul in KY
@priscianus jr: He lives in Malaysia & is not an American citizen.
Tripod
@Rarely Posts:
The defining election for Bill and Hillary was the 1980 loss.