a very wealthy GOP donor that neither Murdoch nor Koch like him. I think he took the hint.
I've heard the concern by the Kochs. Additionally, I'm not sure Romney could have overcome the "47 percent/too wealthy" label. Team Obama never took their foot off the gas with that...
...in his dislike for Romney, and for his admiration for Bush.
I think Bush will get the nod, and is the best candidate the Repubs can expect in this go-round. I expect Clinton to get the Dem nod, but I really, really hope that someone else pops up to at least make it a horse race.
you don't know who I am...stop being judge and jury. The political threads cause a lot more grief than is necessary. Some people here can't help it. They think they are above it....
you don't know who I am...stop being judge and jury. The political threads cause a lot more grief than is necessary. Some people here can't help it. They think they are above it....
I can't be judge and jury, but you can be executioner with "delete this?"
You're the one who came and here and derailed the thread. Nobody else.
do not think it's a slam dunk Hillary runs. She will be 69 on election day 2016. Does she really have the energy to go through a campaign that will be brutal and then do the job for the next 8 years if she won? Found it interesting that her inner circle is debating to wait as long as possible before jumping into the race.
Why would Mitt be in line for State? I mean, he's a smart guy and all, but his resume doesn't exactly scream "foreign policy experience."
Cabinet posts have been known to be awarded based on experience in the field. Especially the less glamorous ones. But they are also considered prizes to be given to important supporters. If Romney cooperates in gracefully funneling the big money which he reputedly still had first call on to Bush, that would be the kind of support that might call for a cabinet post. State is the prime spot and the most likely to be desired by Romney IMO. I'll admit I don't know if the money is a big enough favor to rate that kind of treatment. It could be, as others have mentioned, that he was "nudged" and will have to be content with whatever he gets. That's why I asked what others thought.
Someone who knows political threads shouldn't be placed here...informational or not.... who the fuck are you?
Why don't you just ignore the thread?
Normally I do but then the next time someone will try it except they will add their negative spin on one party or another and then the fur flies. The best strategy is to not post the threads....it's a simple request that 95% of the posters here adhere to.
Why would Mitt be in line for State? I mean, he's a smart guy and all, but his resume doesn't exactly scream "foreign policy experience."
Cabinet posts have been known to be awarded based on experience in the field. Especially the less glamorous ones. But they are also considered prizes to be given to important supporters. If Romney cooperates in gracefully funneling the big money which he reputedly still had first call on to Bush, that would be the kind of support that might call for a cabinet post. State is the prime spot and the most likely to be desired by Romney IMO. I'll admit I don't know if the money is a big enough favor to rate that kind of treatment. It could be, as others have mentioned, that he was "nudged" and will have to be content with whatever he gets. That's why I asked what others thought.
Eh, if Mitt gets into the running for a "prestige" cabinet spot, Treasury would make a whole lot more sense than State, no?
but he blew it in 2012. I was only glad he was running because I thought he and Jeb would cancel each other out. I don't want a Bush/Clinton election. UGH.
rather than an opinion thread, as we all know one comment will blow it up. Its unfortunate but it will be deleted.
I was posting at BBI way back in the mid-90s, and did so daily for almost 8 years. I've been more off than on at BBI since...
Now I've always enjoyed the political topics, even when they went sideways. In fact, I thought if you just let them play out, the thread would ultimately die a quiet death. So I was always surprised how Eric/BBI would overreact by deleting the thread because people stupidly complained.
Bush v Clinton is pretty much a lock at this point. And theres plenty of venom out there for each, based mostly on their names. I also think they are very alike in many ways, perhaps more so than people realize. Hes a moderate Rep and shes fairly Hawkish in a number of areas. If you Venn Diagrammed them I bet the shared ctr would be larger than we might first think.
Bush v Clinton is pretty much a lock at this point. And theres plenty of venom out there for each, based mostly on their names. I also think they are very alike in many ways, perhaps more so than people realize. Hes a moderate Rep and shes fairly Hawkish in a number of areas. If you Venn Diagrammed them I bet the shared ctr would be larger than we might first think.
I'm pretty surprised at the lack of quality candidates each election. I thought Romney was a good candidate on paper but a shitty 'political athlete'.
Bush v Clinton is pretty much a lock at this point. And theres plenty of venom out there for each, based mostly on their names. I also think they are very alike in many ways, perhaps more so than people realize. Hes a moderate Rep and shes fairly Hawkish in a number of areas. If you Venn Diagrammed them I bet the shared ctr would be larger than we might first think.
Yep. The masses will be drawn to what they see as the familiar.
and a hard place. Literally. The Tea Party was peaking and Mitt had to swerve to the extreme right, something he never was if you look at his Mass Govs record. He lost indep surburban women and Hispanics etc and could never win them back in sufficient numbers. Hes a $ guy, a Wall St guy, not a true politician in my view.
I really cant imagine what drives someone to run for president
It just doesnt seem worth it, with all the scrutiny you get even if you lose. And look at the recent winners -- Clinton, Bush, and Obama aged terribly fast before our eye. And if you run a 3rd or 4th place campaign you're suddenly a national joke (even if you had decades of exemplary public service before that).
I'm not sure that Victor Cruz is really qualified to run for the Presidency. He's definitely got charisma, but maybe he should start at the local level and then climb up?
Bush v Clinton is pretty much a lock at this point. And theres plenty of venom out there for each, based mostly on their names. I also think they are very alike in many ways, perhaps more so than people realize. Hes a moderate Rep and shes fairly Hawkish in a number of areas. If you Venn Diagrammed them I bet the shared ctr would be larger than we might first think.
Exactly, they are the same candidate. Maybe they should run together. But who would be on top:)
I actually thought Romney was the best R candidate since Bush41.
But he had to cave so badly during the campaign, he became virtually unelectable.
Really - in a normal political environment, his platform SHOULD AND WOULD have been built around his successful Healthcare Reform rollout in Massachusetts. Hate Obamacare? I'M THE GUY WHO KNOWS HOW TO FIX IT!
Instead, thanks to pressure from right-wing extremists, he is forced to ignore what is probably his greatest political achievement! Mind boggling.
Honestly, we're just wasting a ton of time and money here.
Just give it to Hillary already. Gerrymandering doesn't work in Presidential elections. She's going to win running away.
Bush v Clinton is pretty much a lock at this point. And theres plenty of venom out there for each, based mostly on their names. I also think they are very alike in many ways, perhaps more so than people realize. Hes a moderate Rep and shes fairly Hawkish in a number of areas. If you Venn Diagrammed them I bet the shared ctr would be larger than we might first think.
I'm pretty surprised at the lack of quality candidates each election. I thought Romney was a good candidate on paper but a shitty 'political athlete'.
I'm not sure that Victor Cruz is really qualified to run for the Presidency. He's definitely got charisma, but maybe he should start at the local level and then climb up?
Plus with that bad knee campaign events might be difficult :)
and a hard place. Literally. The Tea Party was peaking and Mitt had to swerve to the extreme right, something he never was if you look at his Mass Govs record. He lost indep surburban women and Hispanics etc and could never win them back in sufficient numbers. Hes a $ guy, a Wall St guy, not a true politician in my view.
Yup..Awful timing with Obamacare being center of the debate...And you have Mitt with a similar plan in Mass.
Yup..Awful timing with Obamacare being center of the debate...And you have Mitt with a similar plan in Mass.
In hindsight, I HAVE to believe Romney would have been MUCH better served to have claimed Obamacare as HIS idea, blamed Obama for implementing it poorly, and said that Massachusetts PROVES that he's the guy for the job.
I'm very happy that he didn't win though. For the most part, I am an Obama fan.
Bush v Clinton is pretty much a lock at this point. And theres plenty of venom out there for each, based mostly on their names. I also think they are very alike in many ways, perhaps more so than people realize. Hes a moderate Rep and shes fairly Hawkish in a number of areas. If you Venn Diagrammed them I bet the shared ctr would be larger than we might first think.
I'm pretty surprised at the lack of quality candidates each election. I thought Romney was a good candidate on paper but a shitty 'political athlete'.
I'm curious if anyone else shares that thought.
I agree he was an absolutely brutal candidate but would have done a great job as President..
Bush v Clinton...if you Venn Diagrammed them I bet the shared ctr would be larger than we might first think.
hard to believe but this is exactly the strategy GWB used to get close enough to Gore in 2000 to take the election.
I can see it now there is no difference really between them .. if you vote for the Bush you will get almost same results without all the rancor and gridlock.
I think Cuomo has his eyes on running. If he isn't in danger of indictment during campaign season he could have a chance at the nomination. He's set himself up as a business friendly democrat and that might be a good place to be. I believe most of his actions the last couple years have been aimed at positioning himself nationally by supporting some dem causes (gun control), ducking others (fracking), and supporting business-friendly tax and regs positions.
RE: I actually thought Romney was the best R candidate since Bush41.
But he had to cave so badly during the campaign, he became virtually unelectable.
Really - in a normal political environment, his platform SHOULD AND WOULD have been built around his successful Healthcare Reform rollout in Massachusetts. Hate Obamacare? I'M THE GUY WHO KNOWS HOW TO FIX IT!
Instead, thanks to pressure from right-wing extremists, he is forced to ignore what is probably his greatest political achievement! Mind boggling.
Honestly, we're just wasting a ton of time and money here.
Just give it to Hillary already. Gerrymandering doesn't work in Presidential elections. She's going to win running away.
That's the way it goes. Watch the Warren wing put pressure on Hil to move to the left.
You need the extreme to win the primary because that's who votes in primaries and then you hope to be able to tack back to the center once you've won the nomination. It's one reason why candidates who don't have to primary sometimes have an advantage. It's also the reason the D's spent so much money in the May and June prior to the last election painting Romney as the rich guy who was going to take away your check.
Eh, if Mitt gets into the running for a "prestige" cabinet spot, Treasury would make a whole lot more sense than State, no?
That or Commerce might be a better match for his life experience. But State is the prestige job and as a former presidential nominee I figured that would be his target.
Republicans have done a masterful job of taking over the lions share of State Houses, of Governorships, of Congress and the Senate - but the country's demographics have been shifting LEFT for some time now, and the R's basically have their fingers in the dyke. Gerrymanderring and depending on Baby Boomer votes will only get you so far. Whites are slowly becoming a minority, and the younger generations are NOT heavily Conservative.
Also - we're gonna be dealing with a heavy emphasis on womens rights for the next 2 years. It will be another historic election - Jeb and Christie are not strong enough Candidates to threaten Hillary - really, right now her greatest threat is herself.
could make some noise. Solid enough on social issues for the base without being as alienating as some of the darlings of the Tea Party and with decent economics bonafides. Also Scott Walker has the advantage of at least posturing as a Washington outsider, which the guys who have been on the Hill can't do as easily.
In about 3 months they wonder why they ever wanted it. I'd be willing to bet a lot of money that if that rumor was true in 2008 that the Hillary camp told Obama to drop out of the race and she'll put him on the Supreme Court when the next opening occurs, that Obama quickly realized he should have took that offer. It's lifetime, and you can do a hell of a lot more to actually affect policy. Why anyone wants to become President and 4 or 8 years have to deal with lobbyists, special interests, talking heads, and politicians worried about getting re-elected and fundraising is beyond me.
Gerrymandering doesn't affect Governor and Senate races. I think they have a simple message that resonates: blame the government for all your troubles. Hard to refute.
I loathe the idea of clinton and bush on the top of both tickets
Gerrymandering doesn't affect Governor and Senate races. I think they have a simple message that resonates: blame the government for all your troubles. Hard to refute.
Oh, I concur. I wasn't implying that gerrymandering had to do with the states - really, the prolonged weak economy (for most) is the primary driver there.
Bush/Walker or Bush/Kasich ticket v Clinton/Cuomo, if those two egos can be managed neatly together lol.
Clinton would have to move her residence to take Cuomo on her ticket. Two people I could see on Hillary's short list for VP are HUD secretary and former San Antonio mayor Julian Castro and current Virginia Senator Mark Warner (keep in mind Clinton's good buddy Terry McAuliffe is now the Governor there)
both castro brothers have very bright political futures ahead of them
the person of their time? Teddy blew the doors off the Presidency and changed America for the better. I donr know if we will ever see the likes of TR again or Franklin for that matter
I'm not sure that Victor Cruz is really qualified to run for the Presidency. He's definitely got charisma, but maybe he should start at the local level and then climb up?
He'll never beat OBJ!
RE: when i was a litte kid growing up in nyc in the 60s
the person of their time? Teddy blew the doors off the Presidency and changed America for the better. I donr know if we will ever see the likes of TR again or Franklin for that matter
Two wealthy New York patricians, one a short, stumpy character with a reputation for being unstable and a trouble-maker, and the other a womanizer, suffering the after-affects of a near fatal illness with an odd accent. Or Kennedy for that matter- a rich, prescription drug-dependent cockhound. How do you think any of them would have fared in the primary system we have today?
The smoke-filled rooms did have their advantages.
RE: RE: when i was a litte kid growing up in nyc in the 60s
there was a famous sofa store called Castro Convertibles that had a radio jingle. I thought it was owned by Cuba lol.
All the time I was growing up, a "Castro" was the generic name of any pull-out sleeper. Kind of like Xerox was for copiers and the copying process.
I'm pretty sure there's politics involved there though. There was a Bernadette Castro who was a scion of the sofa family and who was an official in the Pataki admin..she ran the Empire State Games among other things and did a great job. I don't think the Games are held anymore, which is a shame imo. Not sure whose decision.
I think Cuomo has his eyes on running. If he isn't in danger of indictment during campaign season he could have a chance at the nomination. He's set himself up as a business friendly democrat and that might be a good place to be. I believe most of his actions the last couple years have been aimed at positioning himself nationally by supporting some dem causes (gun control), ducking others (fracking), and supporting business-friendly tax and regs positions.
I think he will try but I'm not sure he will succeed. He's an extreme autocrat and a bully. That might be okay but he earned those stripes by turning the unions against him...not a great thing as a Democrat. Not popular in NY at all beyond NYC and Westchester. I think other than that, he captured only one county in the state and that was Albany. Having 99% of the geography, albeit not the population, of your own state hate you would make for bad national press imo
In regards to Cuomo. As you alluded, he is very much intertwined in this since the Feds got to Silver based on their suspicions of the Moreland Commission fiasco. Cuomo is at the epicenter of that since he closed his own commission because, it is widely believed, they had turned their eye towards investigating him.
Your question was where is the next TR coming from. TR was considered at the time to be a wing nut and a troublemaker. He was put in the VP role under McKinley to get him out of the way in a place where he couldn't do any damage. The last thing anyone expected was for McKinley to be assassinated and TR end up President. Today's opposition research would have had a field day with him.
It is possible to learn at home; I finished a biography of TR a couple of months ago. Reading; you should try it.
Your question was where is the next TR coming from. TR was considered at the time to be a wing nut and a troublemaker. He was put in the VP role under McKinley to get him out of the way in a place where he couldn't do any damage. The last thing anyone expected was for McKinley to be assassinated and TR end up President. Today's opposition research would have had a field day with him.
It is possible to learn at home; I finished a biography of TR a couple of months ago. Reading; you should try it.
I am a big Teddy fan myself, and you are absolutely correct here. There were a TON of people who wanted him nowhere near the presidency.
And there was a ton of opposition towards him for the sake that he wanted to be a more public figure with sports, big game hunting, and being more of a public face.
Who knows if he would have had a chance today with the way people are scrutinized?
in Albany, big deal. He probably would be diagnosed with ADHD and he was principled. He was a pain in the ass to the other Police Commissioners, big deal. His job as VP was to. make sure McKinley didn't die, but lucky for us he did. He did more in one day than most do in a month
RE: The Bush name could eventually prove to be an anchor around
I'm not sure that Victor Cruz is really qualified to run for the Presidency. He's definitely got charisma, but maybe he should start at the local level and then climb up?
While I"m sure Romney would bring honor and integrity back to the White House, he's not the right candidate for the time. I'm glad he's out. Now if only Jeb would follow suit.
the person of their time? Teddy blew the doors off the Presidency and changed America for the better. I donr know if we will ever see the likes of TR again or Franklin for that matter
TR ...best president we ever had IMHO
The Rs have a screwed up combination and it is likely to fade
the person of their time? Teddy blew the doors off the Presidency and changed America for the better. I donr know if we will ever see the likes of TR again or Franklin for that matter
TR ...best president we ever had IMHO
Teddy was a mixed blessing. Personally dynamic, presided over our emergence on the international scene, but expanded the profile and expectations of the Presidency like few before him. Only Lincoln, a wartime President, and Jackson can really have been said to have been as consequential among the non-Founders, in many ways for better but in ways that in less capable hands would prove to be much worse.
RE: The Rs have a screwed up combination and it is likely to fade
Evangelicals conflated with Wall street and money conflated with gun rights and anti abortion...
Somewhere in there is reasonable conservative philosophy.
Then as someone notes above, the demographics are changing ....not in their favor
Reports of their demise, yadayadayada... The seminal issue is immigration, which undermines their appeal to growing constituencies. Ironically the tension that probably should be there between Democratic constituencies on the subject isn't there because of other issues and because of good old fashioned party identification. They were dead in the water after 2008 and managed to dominate the two midterms. Not the same as a presidential of course, but if you had told them that six years after getting demolished in 2008 they'd have viable majorities in both houses I think they would have been pretty surprised.
The primary factor in their poor performances was women's issues
R's learned to shut-up about wacko stuff like abortion in caes of rape or incest and did much better.
R's also have a big advantage in congressional elections from redistricting. That more than compensates for their demographic disadvantage, which they have always had.
I have voted democratic pretty much every year outside of maybe a few individual races. But I can not throw my hat into the ring with people that don't believe in
Evolution
World is older then 6k years
Jesus is coming back soon
The government is coming to take our guns
Taxing the rich less creates more jobs because they are the job creators and will have more money to hire people.
Anything that has to do with what a woman does with her body
If Hillary is the Democratic candidate the R's will have a tough time getting much of the women's vote.
Who knows? The War on Women rhetoric seemed to boomerang this time around, and if the Republicans find a Veep nominee who has ovaries and isn't tabloid fodder Hillary dominating the female vote (over and above the usual Democratic advantage) may not be a given.
If Hillary is the Democratic candidate the R's will have a tough time getting much of the women's vote.
Perhaps. The White House will be harder, and demographics matter alot more (exept for Gore). My gut is that Hillary isn't as popular with women as other female candidates, and R's may really be learning the value of appealing to the non-white-male voting block.
as the World Power in the 20th Century. He was a super hawk and believed might makes right. He built the navy. However he was the first president to invite a Black man to the White House and fought the Morgan's Gould's and the Trusts. Who is the person that will define 21st Century America? I don't see that person
Does The Rise of Teddy Roosevelt by Edmund Morris qualify as a pretty good bio of TR? If it does, shut the fuck up
you actually have to open it. Leaving it on your coffee table to try and give visitors a false impression of your intellectual prowess obviously doesn't do you any good.
If Hillary is the Democratic candidate the R's will have a tough time getting much of the women's vote.
Perhaps. The White House will be harder, and demographics matter alot more (exept for Gore). My gut is that Hillary isn't as popular with women as other female candidates, and R's may really be learning the value of appealing to the non-white-male voting block.
It will be the same breakdown. Single and ultra liberal women will vote for Hillary. Married women will vote for the R candidate. That's how's it was under Romney and most of the recent elections. Meanwhile the Dems have lost the white male vote and will not be getting that back with Hillary.
as the World Power in the 20th Century. He was a super hawk and believed might makes right. He built the navy. However he was the first president to invite a Black man to the White House and fought the Morgan's Gould's and the Trusts. Who is the person that will define 21st Century America? I don't see that person
We'll see if that person is even a possibility nowadays. It's misremembering to pretend that they lacked tabloid journalism and sensationalism in that day and age, but internet news is a different phenomenon entirely. And while nobody could afford to be deaf to public opinion, TR was as apt to shape it as to react to it. Does a guy like that get anywhere near the White House nowadays?
You can make the case (though many will disagree) that Obama had those qualities. Even if you don't agree with the above, it is hard to imagine any POTUS succeeding when the opposition is so determined to see him fail. I don't think things will change much even if a Republican gets elected unless they can also gain control of 60 seats in the Senate.
I would suggest their visions were clear but that realities, both political and otherwise got in the way. That is a good thing or we would have what is happening now in Russia.
Its is interesting since both Reagan and Bill Clinton
reached across the isle and built consensus to push ideas and suggest courses of legislation.
which has not been the case in a while.
However, while there is still support for consensus at some point, the legacies of both of those presidents in terms of laws passed may not be so hot as respective leaders supporters would like to think.
I would like to believe that there is a new consensus to be built in the populist segment of each party, however, the potential consensus builders seem to be facing a continual stonewall in each party, with the insiders looking to preserve the weird compromise of theories that Bill and Ronald ended up with.
Somebody said recently, we have to stop looking at 20th century solutions.
because he put in limits on receiving services and welfare, forced people to do work programs and such, so he therefor was seen as 'someone who worked across the isle.'
But, if you think about it, what everyone really wants is a growing economy, jobs and to build their own lives and those sorts of compromises are really just tweaking around the edges.
Yes, the economy was growing like crazy at the time..BUT
That was the cheap money game...and
Now that the cheap money game is over, taking the wind out of the sails of the vestiges of the Clinton Miracle, we can start looking for a new way.
Just forging compromises around the edges of the old 20th Century solutions wont do it.
If Hillary is the Democratic candidate the R's will have a tough time getting much of the women's vote.
Who knows? The War on Women rhetoric seemed to boomerang this time around, and if the Republicans find a Veep nominee who has ovaries and isn't tabloid fodder Hillary dominating the female vote (over and above the usual Democratic advantage) may not be a given.
Teddy like Lincoln in this regard saw far into the future. He entered politics when the size of the average American was shrinking as was life span and infant mortality wad increasing. So was the appeal of socialism, anarchism and Lenin was not the only one reading Marx. The average work week was six days times 12 hours and the average pay per day was $2 dollars. He became more and more find a third way as he served longer.
And to me the thing that makes one think the most of him? The I am fit as a Bull Moose speech he gave when he rose from being shot was remembered for its "get off my plane" bad ass quote. But 90% of what he advocated was eventually implemented into law the first term of Franklin Roosevelt s administration.
The vision met the time when the divide between the social crisis foment of the Industrial Revolution simply had to be healed.
I thought for sure he was going to run, esp. after all the latest chatter that he didn't think Jeb Bush would be a strong nominee.
On the GOP side, I think it comes down to Bush, Walker, & Paul. Bush's stances on Common Core & immigration might hurt him-esp. immigration-but I think he ends up prevailing.
On the Democratic side, it's Webb, O'Malley, Sanders, & oh yeah, HRC. HRC wins in a walk.
Bush vs. Clinton. Ugh. I'll vote for HRC obviously, but can't America do better than offer up these two families?
that Bush Vs Clinton sucks Bull Moose Balls as a choice for the country, that is a big deal, since our politics are very different.
and hehe separate note, anything is possible but:
''RE: who would this one be addressed to, were it today?
Chris in Philly : 1/30/2015 2:27 pm : link : reply
In comment 12116212 idiotsavant said:
Quote:
You?''
since, yeah, the beard, 6'195lbs...i dont look much like any 'miss'
If Hillary is the Democratic candidate the R's will have a tough time getting much of the women's vote.
Who knows? The War on Women rhetoric seemed to boomerang this time around, and if the Republicans find a Veep nominee who has ovaries and isn't tabloid fodder Hillary dominating the female vote (over and above the usual Democratic advantage) may not be a given.
Kelly Ayotte?
She is so boring....but maybe that's a good thing.
If Hillary is the Democratic candidate the R's will have a tough time getting much of the women's vote.
Who knows? The War on Women rhetoric seemed to boomerang this time around, and if the Republicans find a Veep nominee who has ovaries and isn't tabloid fodder Hillary dominating the female vote (over and above the usual Democratic advantage) may not be a given.
Kelly Ayotte?
She is so boring....but maybe that's a good thing.
Ayotte is up for reelection in '16. I'm not sure if she could run for VP while simultaneously running for Senate. I know in KY you can't. Biden was able to do it in '08.
that someone who stumbles out of that clown car of candidates is actually going to beat Hillary, should she be the Democratic nominee. Yeah, she gets people fired up because of "no more glass ceiling!" and "it's our time!" and all that, but is that going to be enough to overcome her actual past positions and platform and inspire enough Dems to vote for her?
I guess I might hold my nose and vote for her if her competition is that much worse, but it would be a bitter pill.
Where I would vote hillary. The manipulation and deceitful Ness of her is one of the worst I've ever seen of anpolitician. I think she is just a miserable person and candidate.
Alas, this gives that Jeb Bush a bigger opening. The last thing the GOP, and the nation needs, is another Bush...I'm a big subscriber of Bush Fatigue.
I just hope Clinton Fatigue grows, too...She's the very last option this country needs...
Why would Mitt be in line for State? I mean, he's a smart guy and all, but his resume doesn't exactly scream "foreign policy experience."
I've heard the concern by the Kochs. Additionally, I'm not sure Romney could have overcome the "47 percent/too wealthy" label. Team Obama never took their foot off the gas with that...
Hey, the OP merely reported the fact and wasn't political. It should only get deleted if (when?) the thread goes off the tracks.
Who the fuck are you?
I think Bush will get the nod, and is the best candidate the Repubs can expect in this go-round. I expect Clinton to get the Dem nod, but I really, really hope that someone else pops up to at least make it a horse race.
Quote:
delete this....
Who the fuck are you?
Someone who knows political threads shouldn't be placed here...informational or not.... who the fuck are you?
This isn't a discussion on left-vs-right. This is discussion on a very noteworthy development regarding who will be the next president of our country.
Stop being a terrible human being.
Someone who knows political threads shouldn't be placed here...informational or not.... who the fuck are you?
Why don't you just ignore the thread?
Great news!
All aboard!
I can't be judge and jury, but you can be executioner with "delete this?"
You're the one who came and here and derailed the thread. Nobody else.
Why would Mitt be in line for State? I mean, he's a smart guy and all, but his resume doesn't exactly scream "foreign policy experience."
Cabinet posts have been known to be awarded based on experience in the field. Especially the less glamorous ones. But they are also considered prizes to be given to important supporters. If Romney cooperates in gracefully funneling the big money which he reputedly still had first call on to Bush, that would be the kind of support that might call for a cabinet post. State is the prime spot and the most likely to be desired by Romney IMO. I'll admit I don't know if the money is a big enough favor to rate that kind of treatment. It could be, as others have mentioned, that he was "nudged" and will have to be content with whatever he gets. That's why I asked what others thought.
Quote:
In comment 12115897 BigBlueShock said
Someone who knows political threads shouldn't be placed here...informational or not.... who the fuck are you?
Why don't you just ignore the thread?
Normally I do but then the next time someone will try it except they will add their negative spin on one party or another and then the fur flies. The best strategy is to not post the threads....it's a simple request that 95% of the posters here adhere to.
Quote:
Why would Mitt be in line for State? I mean, he's a smart guy and all, but his resume doesn't exactly scream "foreign policy experience."
Cabinet posts have been known to be awarded based on experience in the field. Especially the less glamorous ones. But they are also considered prizes to be given to important supporters. If Romney cooperates in gracefully funneling the big money which he reputedly still had first call on to Bush, that would be the kind of support that might call for a cabinet post. State is the prime spot and the most likely to be desired by Romney IMO. I'll admit I don't know if the money is a big enough favor to rate that kind of treatment. It could be, as others have mentioned, that he was "nudged" and will have to be content with whatever he gets. That's why I asked what others thought.
Eh, if Mitt gets into the running for a "prestige" cabinet spot, Treasury would make a whole lot more sense than State, no?
Good point - because your defense of Bill Cosby wasn't low at all. Good thinking.
Great news!
All aboard!
She's got my vote!
Quote:
I'm not even going to stoop to your level. I can't go that low.
Good point - because your defense of Bill Cosby wasn't low at all. Good thinking.
What thread was this in? I know you or filthy has an archive of it...link it!
I was posting at BBI way back in the mid-90s, and did so daily for almost 8 years. I've been more off than on at BBI since...
Now I've always enjoyed the political topics, even when they went sideways. In fact, I thought if you just let them play out, the thread would ultimately die a quiet death. So I was always surprised how Eric/BBI would overreact by deleting the thread because people stupidly complained.
Quote:
In comment 12115944 Bake54 said:
Quote:
I'm not even going to stoop to your level. I can't go that low.
Good point - because your defense of Bill Cosby wasn't low at all. Good thinking.
What thread was this in? I know you or filthy has an archive of it...link it!
It was deleted. r
What the hell does that have to do with anything? You and filthy archive just about all drama-laced threads. So one of you two should have this one.
I'm pretty surprised at the lack of quality candidates each election. I thought Romney was a good candidate on paper but a shitty 'political athlete'.
I'm curious if anyone else shares that thought.
I'm not sure that Victor Cruz is really qualified to run for the Presidency. He's definitely got charisma, but maybe he should start at the local level and then climb up?
Exactly, they are the same candidate. Maybe they should run together. But who would be on top:)
Really - in a normal political environment, his platform SHOULD AND WOULD have been built around his successful Healthcare Reform rollout in Massachusetts. Hate Obamacare? I'M THE GUY WHO KNOWS HOW TO FIX IT!
Instead, thanks to pressure from right-wing extremists, he is forced to ignore what is probably his greatest political achievement! Mind boggling.
Honestly, we're just wasting a ton of time and money here.
Just give it to Hillary already. Gerrymandering doesn't work in Presidential elections. She's going to win running away.
Quote:
Bush v Clinton is pretty much a lock at this point. And theres plenty of venom out there for each, based mostly on their names. I also think they are very alike in many ways, perhaps more so than people realize. Hes a moderate Rep and shes fairly Hawkish in a number of areas. If you Venn Diagrammed them I bet the shared ctr would be larger than we might first think.
I'm pretty surprised at the lack of quality candidates each election. I thought Romney was a good candidate on paper but a shitty 'political athlete'.
I'm curious if anyone else shares that thought.
I do! *soulmates*
All I can say is that I hope that there is some sort of Palin/Cruz ticket.
Or any mix of the following: Rand Paul, Rick Perry, Donald Trump, Michele Bachmann
Comedic gold that writes itself.
Quote:
.
I'm not sure that Victor Cruz is really qualified to run for the Presidency. He's definitely got charisma, but maybe he should start at the local level and then climb up?
Plus with that bad knee campaign events might be difficult :)
Yup..Awful timing with Obamacare being center of the debate...And you have Mitt with a similar plan in Mass.
Quote:
Yup..Awful timing with Obamacare being center of the debate...And you have Mitt with a similar plan in Mass.
In hindsight, I HAVE to believe Romney would have been MUCH better served to have claimed Obamacare as HIS idea, blamed Obama for implementing it poorly, and said that Massachusetts PROVES that he's the guy for the job.
I'm very happy that he didn't win though. For the most part, I am an Obama fan.
Quote:
Bush v Clinton is pretty much a lock at this point. And theres plenty of venom out there for each, based mostly on their names. I also think they are very alike in many ways, perhaps more so than people realize. Hes a moderate Rep and shes fairly Hawkish in a number of areas. If you Venn Diagrammed them I bet the shared ctr would be larger than we might first think.
I'm pretty surprised at the lack of quality candidates each election. I thought Romney was a good candidate on paper but a shitty 'political athlete'.
I'm curious if anyone else shares that thought.
I agree he was an absolutely brutal candidate but would have done a great job as President..
Vs
Clinton/ and either Warner from VA or Hickenlooper from Colorado
hard to believe but this is exactly the strategy GWB used to get close enough to Gore in 2000 to take the election.
I can see it now there is no difference really between them .. if you vote for the Bush you will get almost same results without all the rancor and gridlock.
Hillary was a lock in 08 as well. A lot can happen in a campaign.
Scott Walker, Rand Paul, Christie and maybe Rubio will be good challengers to Bush.
I think Clinton is the D nominee unless she decides not to run. I don't see anyone strong enough to defeat her, like there is on the GOP side.
Really - in a normal political environment, his platform SHOULD AND WOULD have been built around his successful Healthcare Reform rollout in Massachusetts. Hate Obamacare? I'M THE GUY WHO KNOWS HOW TO FIX IT!
Instead, thanks to pressure from right-wing extremists, he is forced to ignore what is probably his greatest political achievement! Mind boggling.
Honestly, we're just wasting a ton of time and money here.
Just give it to Hillary already. Gerrymandering doesn't work in Presidential elections. She's going to win running away.
You need the extreme to win the primary because that's who votes in primaries and then you hope to be able to tack back to the center once you've won the nomination. It's one reason why candidates who don't have to primary sometimes have an advantage. It's also the reason the D's spent so much money in the May and June prior to the last election painting Romney as the rich guy who was going to take away your check.
Quote:
Eh, if Mitt gets into the running for a "prestige" cabinet spot, Treasury would make a whole lot more sense than State, no?
That or Commerce might be a better match for his life experience. But State is the prestige job and as a former presidential nominee I figured that would be his target.
Also - we're gonna be dealing with a heavy emphasis on womens rights for the next 2 years. It will be another historic election - Jeb and Christie are not strong enough Candidates to threaten Hillary - really, right now her greatest threat is herself.
We need major new blood in american politics
I mean, give us some fresh fucking product to work with here people.
It is not even fun making fun of these old hacks anymore, we need new people!
Oh, I concur. I wasn't implying that gerrymandering had to do with the states - really, the prolonged weak economy (for most) is the primary driver there.
I'd like to see a Taft run. Or Roosevelt, Kennnedy, or Adams.
Quote:
but it's pathetic the affinity that the republic seems to have for political dynasties.
I'd like to see a Taft run. Or Roosevelt, Kennnedy, or Adams.
My law school invited a Kennedy to speak at Commencement last year, described him as a "fresh face in Washington." Except that he grew up a Kennedy.
Clinton would have to move her residence to take Cuomo on her ticket. Two people I could see on Hillary's short list for VP are HUD secretary and former San Antonio mayor Julian Castro and current Virginia Senator Mark Warner (keep in mind Clinton's good buddy Terry McAuliffe is now the Governor there)
Think about that for a second.
Think about that for a second.
Yep, there will be a Latino in the white house... But I surely hope the ideology is not like the Castros we know.
Quote:
.
I'm not sure that Victor Cruz is really qualified to run for the Presidency. He's definitely got charisma, but maybe he should start at the local level and then climb up?
He'll never beat OBJ!
All the time I was growing up, a "Castro" was the generic name of any pull-out sleeper. Kind of like Xerox was for copiers and the copying process.
You?
The smoke-filled rooms did have their advantages.
Quote:
there was a famous sofa store called Castro Convertibles that had a radio jingle. I thought it was owned by Cuba lol.
All the time I was growing up, a "Castro" was the generic name of any pull-out sleeper. Kind of like Xerox was for copiers and the copying process.
I'm pretty sure there's politics involved there though. There was a Bernadette Castro who was a scion of the sofa family and who was an official in the Pataki admin..she ran the Empire State Games among other things and did a great job. I don't think the Games are held anymore, which is a shame imo. Not sure whose decision.
I think he will try but I'm not sure he will succeed. He's an extreme autocrat and a bully. That might be okay but he earned those stripes by turning the unions against him...not a great thing as a Democrat. Not popular in NY at all beyond NYC and Westchester. I think other than that, he captured only one county in the state and that was Albany. Having 99% of the geography, albeit not the population, of your own state hate you would make for bad national press imo
Just about any home schooling is probably better than the utter bullshit that's taught in our US History classes.
Good point.
Florida State?
Jersey to DC.
What's that, 2 1/2 rolls for him?
It is possible to learn at home; I finished a biography of TR a couple of months ago. Reading; you should try it.
Quote:
Were you home schooled?
Your question was where is the next TR coming from. TR was considered at the time to be a wing nut and a troublemaker. He was put in the VP role under McKinley to get him out of the way in a place where he couldn't do any damage. The last thing anyone expected was for McKinley to be assassinated and TR end up President. Today's opposition research would have had a field day with him.
It is possible to learn at home; I finished a biography of TR a couple of months ago. Reading; you should try it.
I am a big Teddy fan myself, and you are absolutely correct here. There were a TON of people who wanted him nowhere near the presidency.
And there was a ton of opposition towards him for the sake that he wanted to be a more public figure with sports, big game hunting, and being more of a public face.
Who knows if he would have had a chance today with the way people are scrutinized?
Agreed. Big fan of his.
I guess you're not from Jersey. Christie has no chance. 1st rd KO.
Christie Falls Off Chair. - ( New Window )
I'd say that's a pretty fair guess.
Quote: swing and a miss. Cruz = Senator Ted Cruz
.
I'm not sure that Victor Cruz is really qualified to run for the Presidency. He's definitely got charisma, but maybe he should start at the local level and then climb up?
For the life of me, I will never, ever understand this.
Walker 2016
TR ...best president we ever had IMHO
Somewhere in there is reasonable conservative philosophy.
Then as someone notes above, the demographics are changing ....not in their favor
Quote:
the person of their time? Teddy blew the doors off the Presidency and changed America for the better. I donr know if we will ever see the likes of TR again or Franklin for that matter
TR ...best president we ever had IMHO
Teddy was a mixed blessing. Personally dynamic, presided over our emergence on the international scene, but expanded the profile and expectations of the Presidency like few before him. Only Lincoln, a wartime President, and Jackson can really have been said to have been as consequential among the non-Founders, in many ways for better but in ways that in less capable hands would prove to be much worse.
Somewhere in there is reasonable conservative philosophy.
Then as someone notes above, the demographics are changing ....not in their favor
Reports of their demise, yadayadayada... The seminal issue is immigration, which undermines their appeal to growing constituencies. Ironically the tension that probably should be there between Democratic constituencies on the subject isn't there because of other issues and because of good old fashioned party identification. They were dead in the water after 2008 and managed to dominate the two midterms. Not the same as a presidential of course, but if you had told them that six years after getting demolished in 2008 they'd have viable majorities in both houses I think they would have been pretty surprised.
R's also have a big advantage in congressional elections from redistricting. That more than compensates for their demographic disadvantage, which they have always had.
Congress is Gerrymandering
Demographics are undeniable.
Evolution
World is older then 6k years
Jesus is coming back soon
The government is coming to take our guns
Taxing the rich less creates more jobs because they are the job creators and will have more money to hire people.
Anything that has to do with what a woman does with her body
to name a few...
Who knows? The War on Women rhetoric seemed to boomerang this time around, and if the Republicans find a Veep nominee who has ovaries and isn't tabloid fodder Hillary dominating the female vote (over and above the usual Democratic advantage) may not be a given.
Perhaps. The White House will be harder, and demographics matter alot more (exept for Gore). My gut is that Hillary isn't as popular with women as other female candidates, and R's may really be learning the value of appealing to the non-white-male voting block.
Quote:
If Hillary is the Democratic candidate the R's will have a tough time getting much of the women's vote.
Perhaps. The White House will be harder, and demographics matter alot more (exept for Gore). My gut is that Hillary isn't as popular with women as other female candidates, and R's may really be learning the value of appealing to the non-white-male voting block.
It will be the same breakdown. Single and ultra liberal women will vote for Hillary. Married women will vote for the R candidate. That's how's it was under Romney and most of the recent elections. Meanwhile the Dems have lost the white male vote and will not be getting that back with Hillary.
We'll see if that person is even a possibility nowadays. It's misremembering to pretend that they lacked tabloid journalism and sensationalism in that day and age, but internet news is a different phenomenon entirely. And while nobody could afford to be deaf to public opinion, TR was as apt to shape it as to react to it. Does a guy like that get anywhere near the White House nowadays?
which has not been the case in a while.
However, while there is still support for consensus at some point, the legacies of both of those presidents in terms of laws passed may not be so hot as respective leaders supporters would like to think.
I would like to believe that there is a new consensus to be built in the populist segment of each party, however, the potential consensus builders seem to be facing a continual stonewall in each party, with the insiders looking to preserve the weird compromise of theories that Bill and Ronald ended up with.
Somebody said recently, we have to stop looking at 20th century solutions.
But, if you think about it, what everyone really wants is a growing economy, jobs and to build their own lives and those sorts of compromises are really just tweaking around the edges.
Yes, the economy was growing like crazy at the time..BUT
That was the cheap money game...and
Now that the cheap money game is over, taking the wind out of the sails of the vestiges of the Clinton Miracle, we can start looking for a new way.
Just forging compromises around the edges of the old 20th Century solutions wont do it.
Quote:
If Hillary is the Democratic candidate the R's will have a tough time getting much of the women's vote.
Who knows? The War on Women rhetoric seemed to boomerang this time around, and if the Republicans find a Veep nominee who has ovaries and isn't tabloid fodder Hillary dominating the female vote (over and above the usual Democratic advantage) may not be a given.
Kelly Ayotte?
And to me the thing that makes one think the most of him? The I am fit as a Bull Moose speech he gave when he rose from being shot was remembered for its "get off my plane" bad ass quote. But 90% of what he advocated was eventually implemented into law the first term of Franklin Roosevelt s administration.
The vision met the time when the divide between the social crisis foment of the Industrial Revolution simply had to be healed.
On the GOP side, I think it comes down to Bush, Walker, & Paul. Bush's stances on Common Core & immigration might hurt him-esp. immigration-but I think he ends up prevailing.
On the Democratic side, it's Webb, O'Malley, Sanders, & oh yeah, HRC. HRC wins in a walk.
Bush vs. Clinton. Ugh. I'll vote for HRC obviously, but can't America do better than offer up these two families?
and hehe separate note, anything is possible but:
''RE: who would this one be addressed to, were it today?
Chris in Philly : 1/30/2015 2:27 pm : link : reply
In comment 12116212 idiotsavant said:
Quote:
You?''
since, yeah, the beard, 6'195lbs...i dont look much like any 'miss'
Quote:
In comment 12116736 BobOnLI said:
Quote:
If Hillary is the Democratic candidate the R's will have a tough time getting much of the women's vote.
Who knows? The War on Women rhetoric seemed to boomerang this time around, and if the Republicans find a Veep nominee who has ovaries and isn't tabloid fodder Hillary dominating the female vote (over and above the usual Democratic advantage) may not be a given.
Kelly Ayotte?
She is so boring....but maybe that's a good thing.
"Peace will come, when the arabs love their children more than they hate us"
"Don't be humble....you're not so great"
Quote:
In comment 12116749 Dunedin81 said:
Quote:
In comment 12116736 BobOnLI said:
Quote:
If Hillary is the Democratic candidate the R's will have a tough time getting much of the women's vote.
Who knows? The War on Women rhetoric seemed to boomerang this time around, and if the Republicans find a Veep nominee who has ovaries and isn't tabloid fodder Hillary dominating the female vote (over and above the usual Democratic advantage) may not be a given.
Kelly Ayotte?
She is so boring....but maybe that's a good thing.
Ayotte is up for reelection in '16. I'm not sure if she could run for VP while simultaneously running for Senate. I know in KY you can't. Biden was able to do it in '08.
I guess I might hold my nose and vote for her if her competition is that much worse, but it would be a bitter pill.
Moderator: Ok, lets move on to the economy.
Repub: Benghazi.
Moderator: I'm sorry, that doesn't seem fitting he-
Repub: Benghazi.
Moderator: Sir...
Repub: Call me Ben.
Moderator: Ben?
Repub: GHAZI!
God help us,
I mean what you want Chef, McDonalds or BurgerKing?