Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-13-2018, 07:42 PM
Mangosteen Mangosteen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Namche Bazaar
Posts: 2,334
Hillary 2020

Yes, I know this has been done before, but its July, 2018, only 2 and a half years before the election. And the media is putting out more stories about her desire to run again. Should she? Would she beat Trump this time? Running mate?
__________________
Its only funny until someone gets hurt, then its fuckin' hilarious!
  #2  
Old 07-13-2018, 07:55 PM
not what you'd expect not what you'd expect is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,433
Her time has passed. No to Hilary.
  #3  
Old 07-13-2018, 07:58 PM
Lancia's Avatar
Lancia Lancia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Denial
Posts: 1,516
There is a LOT of hate for Hillary Clinton out there--most of it unjustified, IMO, but at this point she's poison and if she really actually gives a shit about the country she'll let herself dissappear into obscurity (probably a pipe dream on my part). I know several people who voted for Trump not because he was Trump but because he wasn't Hillary. If she runs again she'll likely lose again. If people didn't like her the last two times she ran what makes people think that the third times is her charm?

We need another Obama: young, charismatic, and arriving on the scene without a bunch of baggage and built-in hate. Whether we'll get it or not... I have my doubts.
  #4  
Old 07-13-2018, 08:20 PM
DWMarch DWMarch is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Nanaimo, BC
Posts: 2,021
New rule: if you lose to Donald Trump you are disqualified from holding any office anywhere ever.
  #5  
Old 07-13-2018, 08:36 PM
Beckdawrek's Avatar
Beckdawrek Beckdawrek is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: So.Ark ?
Posts: 8,379
No, she won't run. Her time was lost. It's really too bad. She is very smart.
  #6  
Old 07-13-2018, 08:48 PM
bobot's Avatar
bobot bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 6,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangosteen View Post
...And the media is putting out more stories about her desire to run again. ..
I have seen no such stories. Would you happen to have a link?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangosteen View Post
...Should she? ...
Fuck no. She lost to Donald Mutherfucking Trump. She's permanently unwelcome to run again. Nothing against her, she'd have been a fine President. But the American idiots won't have her. Time to move on.
  #7  
Old 07-13-2018, 08:48 PM
PastTense PastTense is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,583
Considering what Trump did from his "grabbing women's pussies" comments to attacks on Hispanics to attacks on the parents of soldiers who died in combat to proposals like removing the Environmental Protection Agency to his buddy, buddy comments about Putin some of us think lots of competent Democrats could have easily beaten him.

So no way to Hilary in 2020.
  #8  
Old 07-13-2018, 09:02 PM
Sunny Daze's Avatar
Sunny Daze Sunny Daze is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 10,414
I deeply regret that she didn't win. Deeply. It's time for another candidate.
  #9  
Old 07-13-2018, 09:06 PM
China Guy China Guy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,225
She's tried a couple of times and couldn't close the deal. Third time is not a charm. And we need some younger blood.
  #10  
Old 07-13-2018, 09:18 PM
kunilou's Avatar
kunilou kunilou is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 23,596
What's Hillary doing right now?

Is she out raising money for Democratic candidates? Is she showing up in Wisconsin, Michigan, or Pennsylvania? Is she writing books about sensible foreign and domestic policies? Is she appearing on the Sunday morning talk shows?

If she is, then she's testing the waters. If she's hanging out in Chappaqua, occasionally appearing in blurry photographs in People magazine, then she ain't running.

Anecdote: in 1965 my father (literally) bumped into Richard Nixon in the airport in St. Louis. My father said, "Aren't you..." whereupon Nixon flashed a big smile, grabbed my father's hand and gave him a hearty handshake, and boomed out, "Hi, Dick Nixon. Good to meet you." My father came home and declared, "That son of a bitch is going to run again!"
  #11  
Old 07-13-2018, 09:21 PM
flurb flurb is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 864
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobot View Post
I have seen no such stories. Would you happen to have a link?
The NY Post has a recent article based on some pretty thin evidence.
  #12  
Old 07-13-2018, 09:46 PM
Mangosteen Mangosteen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Namche Bazaar
Posts: 2,334
http://dailycaller.com/2018/07/13/hi...nning-in-2020/
__________________
Its only funny until someone gets hurt, then its fuckin' hilarious!
  #13  
Old 07-13-2018, 10:40 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 4,148
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangosteen View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sourcewatch
The Daily Caller is a conservative/Republican news spin organization founded by conservative reporter Tucker Carlson and former Dick Cheney aide Neil Patel.[1] The Daily Caller's announced objective is to be a "content" response tool to articles on The Huffington Post. The Daily Caller intends to "challenge mainstream and other liberal news-media outlets." A "representative screenshot" of their "actual news reporting and not just opinion-writing" includes articles with headlines such as "Obama's Credit Card Rejected By NY Resturant" and "Chris Matthews: It's More Complicated To Be A Liberal." [1]
https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/The_Daily_Caller

...if you want the OP to be taken seriously you really need to come up with a more authoritative cite than a website founded by Tucker Carlson. It would be charitable to describe Carlson as merely partisan. IMHO it would be more accurate to describe Carlson as part of the Trump propaganda machine.
  #14  
Old 07-13-2018, 10:46 PM
Kolak of Twilo's Avatar
Kolak of Twilo Kolak of Twilo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edgewater/Chicago
Posts: 3,582
HELL NO!

I already think Trump will win a second term. This would guarantee it.
  #15  
Old 07-13-2018, 11:05 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 20,820
She'd have been a great president. And now the party needs to put the divisiveness of 2016 behind it. It is time for her (and for that matter Sanders too) to lay low and let someone emerge who all can potentially end up rallying around end of day. The only place for them to show will be at joint appearances calling for a united front moving forward and supporting the eventual nominee be they from the progressive or plain liberal wing.

She is very smart. Smart enough to not run again.
  #16  
Old 07-14-2018, 06:36 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 6,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWMarch View Post
New rule: if you lose to Donald Trump you are disqualified from holding any office anywhere ever.
I like this idea. I like it a lot.
  #17  
Old 07-14-2018, 06:42 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 6,331
I doubt that Clinton is seriously considering a run.

But Hillary Clinton is not, and never has been, the sole problem with the Democratic party. The problem that Bernie Sanders exposed is that the country has changed, and the Democratic party failed to understand how it has changed. Progressives are no longer satisfied with voting for the Corporate Lite alternative party; they want to vote for economic and social justice.
  #18  
Old 07-14-2018, 06:56 AM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 35,850
1) Hillary isn't running.

2) Nor should she. (Or Bernie, for that matter.) She'd have been a fine President, but for 2020, Democrats have moved on; we're looking at Kamala Harris and Kirsten Gillibrand and so forth.

3) However, there's something deeply wrong with the notion that she should shut up and fade away, just because she lost. Has Mitt Romney done that? How about John McCain, at least before his cancer got the upper hand? John Kerry? Al Gore?

I find it deeply disturbing that this expectation's being applied to Hillary, and only Hillary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
the country has changed, and the Democratic party failed to understand how it has changed. Progressives are no longer satisfied with voting for the Corporate Lite alternative party; they want to vote for economic and social justice.
This. We're gonna be called socialists and gun-grabbers and whatnot anyway, so we might as well advocate for what we really want and believe in, rather than putting forward a program of watered-down shit that excites nobody.
  #19  
Old 07-14-2018, 08:12 AM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 84,017
Hillary would have a much better chance of winning that Kamala Harris would. And although I doubt Hillary will run, I have to think the gears are still turning in her head: what if...?

As for the OP, maybe he should rephrase it as "medium is putting out a story".
  #20  
Old 07-14-2018, 08:19 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 29,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
Hillary would have a much better chance of winning that Kamala Harris would.
I seriously doubt that. Harris doesn't have a 30 year vendetta against her. Further, Hillary's proven to be incapable of motivating high turnout among minorities and young voters. I think Harris is much likely to be successful at that.
  #21  
Old 07-14-2018, 08:25 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 16,643
OP must think Democrats are masochists. I agree that it often sure seems that way, but No, Hillary won't run in 2020. Her recent speeches opposing GOP anti-children and-ACA programs are because she opposes GOP malice and perfidy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by flurb View Post
The NY Post has a recent article based on some pretty thin evidence.
I know it gets confusing. The New York Times and the Washington Post are newspapers. The New York Post and the Washington Times are not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangosteen View Post
Daily Caller, hunh? Did you also click on 'Dem Senator reveals the brutal truth about the Democratic Party'? Or the Daily Caller's brand-new story about ... [did you guess?] ... Hillary's e-mails.

Where do you guys come up with "news sources" like these?, if I may ask. You do know about the "" icon at the upper-left of your browser window, right?
  #22  
Old 07-14-2018, 08:27 AM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 84,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I seriously doubt that. Harris doesn't have a 30 year vendetta against her. Further, Hillary's proven to be incapable of motivating high turnout among minorities and young voters. I think Harris is much likely to be successful at that.
When was the last time we elected a one-term Senator to the presidency?

But seriously. A one-term Senator? And you might as well call her Nancy Pelosi, Jr. There's your 30 year vendetta. Oy. Hopefully the Democrats can do better than that.

Last edited by John Mace; 07-14-2018 at 08:28 AM.
  #23  
Old 07-14-2018, 08:34 AM
What Exit?'s Avatar
What Exit? What Exit? is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Central NJ (near Bree)
Posts: 28,327
Hillary should not run. She is a terrible choice. Don't go to Biden either. Give us a rising star in the democratic party. Give us someone that people actually trust. It won't be easy, but Obama came from effectively nowhere and in fact so did Bill Clinton & Jimmy Carter.
  #24  
Old 07-14-2018, 08:36 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 29,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
When was the last time we elected a one-term Senator to the presidency?

But seriously. A one-term Senator? And you might as well call her Nancy Pelosi, Jr. There's your 30 year vendetta. Oy. Hopefully the Democrats can do better than that.
Worked pretty well last time. I'm not saying I want her to get the nomination (I'm waiting to see), I just think she's a much better option than Hillary.

But 30 year attacks don't work on someone most voters haven't known for more than a year. And really, all Democrats need to win is someone who is slightly better at motivating young and minority voters than Hillary. I think it's quite clear that Harris, at the very least, offers that likelihood.
  #25  
Old 07-14-2018, 09:33 AM
Mangosteen Mangosteen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Namche Bazaar
Posts: 2,334
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Worked pretty well last time. I'm not saying I want her to get the nomination (I'm waiting to see), I just think she's a much better option than Hillary.

But 30 year attacks don't work on someone most voters haven't known for more than a year. And really, all Democrats need to win is someone who is slightly better at motivating young and minority voters than Hillary. I think it's quite clear that Harris, at the very least, offers that likelihood.
Too early for Ocasio-Cortez?
__________________
Its only funny until someone gets hurt, then its fuckin' hilarious!
  #26  
Old 07-14-2018, 09:50 AM
survinga survinga is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: In the Deep South
Posts: 122
I'd prefer the next Dem candidate be much younger than Hillary or Bernie or Trump. The Dems need someone with some youthful energy, without 30 years of public baggage, and someone who is not afraid of mixing it up in all 50 states. They have ceded too much territory across the nation, and need to become a national party again.

Many people who voted for Trump didn't really like him. But they just liked Hillary even less. So, these people need to be given someone else to vote for, where Hillary seemed to represent everything about DC that they hated to begin with. Was it fair for her to be judged that way? Probably not. But politics aint fair.
__________________
Formerly gtyj
  #27  
Old 07-14-2018, 10:02 AM
dalej42 dalej42 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 13,001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangosteen View Post
Too early for Ocasio-Cortez?
Thankfully yes, she's not old enough nor has she won anything except a primary.
  #28  
Old 07-14-2018, 11:06 AM
katgirl katgirl is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Dominican Republic
Posts: 51
I don’t think she’ll run

losing to Trump took the wind out of her sails

how do you come back from that?
  #29  
Old 07-14-2018, 11:26 AM
Bricker Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,047
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangosteen View Post
Too early for Ocasio-Cortez?
Legally ineligible.
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #30  
Old 07-14-2018, 11:39 AM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 84,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Worked pretty well last time. I'm not saying I want her to get the nomination (I'm waiting to see), I just think she's a much better option than Hillary.

But 30 year attacks don't work on someone most voters haven't known for more than a year. And really, all Democrats need to win is someone who is slightly better at motivating young and minority voters than Hillary. I think it's quite clear that Harris, at the very least, offers that likelihood.
Emphasis added. That's not all they have to do. They have to not turn off an even larger number of voters who don't fall into those categories. Especially since there are a lot more voters outside those categories than inside. Don't expect to ride the demographic wave to victory.
  #31  
Old 07-14-2018, 11:47 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 29,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
Emphasis added. That's not all they have to do. They have to not turn off an even larger number of voters who don't fall into those categories. Especially since there are a lot more voters outside those categories than inside. Don't expect to ride the demographic wave to victory.
I don't think there are any significant number of Hillary voters left to turn off. But it's just my feeling -- that it's much, much more important to excite and motivate minorities and young Democrats than it is to try and appeal to a (nigh miniscule, IMO) middle. And Harris isn't even wildly left. On the issues, she's barely different than Hillary.
  #32  
Old 07-14-2018, 11:55 AM
Roderick Femm's Avatar
Roderick Femm Roderick Femm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: On the cusp, also in SF
Posts: 6,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beckdawrek View Post
No, she won't run. Her time was lost. It's really too bad. She is very smart.
That's one thing the last election proved, i.e. that Hillary may be intelligent and she may have been well-prepared, but she wasn't (and probably still isn't) strategically smart. She didn't seek or take good advice about how to handle Trump. She didn't have a simple message that resonated with the public. She didn't smile enough (I'm talking a sincere smile, not that rictus that just said she was mad as hell). In short, being smart in the way she was smart is not nearly enough to win any presidential campaign. Nor is it enough to make a good president. I'm not glad that she lost but I wish the Democrats had had a better candidate.
  #33  
Old 07-14-2018, 12:04 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 35,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
Hillary would have a much better chance of winning that Kamala Harris would.
Whatever. My point was, Hillary wouldn't win the nomination because the Dems have largely moved on. Ditto Sanders, Biden.
  #34  
Old 07-14-2018, 02:42 PM
DrDeth DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 36,485
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
1) Hillary isn't running.

2) Nor should she. (Or Bernie, for that matter.) She'd have been a fine President, but for 2020, Democrats have moved on; we're looking at Kamala Harris and Kirsten Gillibrand and so forth..

If it is Harris, I will vote for Trump. Seriously. She has done nothing.
  #35  
Old 07-14-2018, 02:44 PM
DrDeth DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 36,485
What we need is a nice bland middle of the road white guy from the South or rust belt. Someone boring the hate machine can't get their hooks into.

And sure, maybe a fiery black woman as Veep.
  #36  
Old 07-14-2018, 03:04 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 35,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
What we need is a nice bland middle of the road white guy from the South or rust belt. Someone boring the hate machine can't get their hooks into.
No such person exists. Whoever the Dem nominee is, they'll be the commiest commie to come down the pike, the biggest baby-killer and gun-grabber in the history of western civilization. No matter how bland and boring they were before anyone thought that person would run.
  #37  
Old 07-14-2018, 03:04 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 20,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
If it is Harris, I will vote for Trump. Seriously. She has done nothing.
She's top on PredictIt for now ...

So "seriously" you'd rather have someone who has done the somethings that Trump has been doing than someone who you think of as having dome "nothing"?

That said ... too early, much will change, and handicapping who will be running and win the nomination is another thread. But HRC won't be.
  #38  
Old 07-14-2018, 03:08 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 35,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
If it is Harris, I will vote for Trump. Seriously. She has done nothing.
You're right. Better to stick with the guy who is destroying everything from immigrant families to our democracy to the western alliance to the environment, while blatantly being Putin's puppet.

Go with experience, right?

Seriously, WTF?!
  #39  
Old 07-14-2018, 03:15 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 6,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
If it is Harris, I will vote for Trump. Seriously. She has done nothing.
Well, could you just compromise and go on vacation out of the country that week?
  #40  
Old 07-14-2018, 03:32 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 29,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
If it is Harris, I will vote for Trump. Seriously. She has done nothing.
If you really mean this then this reflects very, very poorly on you. Harris has over 14 years of public service experience (city DA, state AG, and now Senator), and even if you're not a particularly big fan of hers, she hasn't spread racist conspiracy theories, praised white supremacists, bragged about sexual assault and violation of consent, weakened national security, denigrated many Americans and immigrants, and much, much more terrible shit Trump has done.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 07-14-2018 at 03:33 PM.
  #41  
Old 07-14-2018, 04:09 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 56,585
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangosteen View Post
Yes, I know this has been done before, but its July, 2018, only 2 and a half years before the election. And the media is putting out more stories about her desire to run again. Should she? Would she beat Trump this time? Running mate?
Nice try.

I know it would be easier for Trump and his Trumpettes to be given such an easy target this early in the game, but they will just have to wait until the Democrats pick their own candidate, I'm afraid.
  #42  
Old 07-14-2018, 04:19 PM
John Mace's Avatar
John Mace John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay
Posts: 84,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Whatever. My point was, Hillary wouldn't win the nomination because the Dems have largely moved on. Ditto Sanders, Biden.
Sure, I can more or less agree with that. But I wouldn't rule out Bernie categorically. He's old, but that's part of his appeal. He's the "cranky old New York Jewish guy from Vermont" that so many people can't get enough of. In the spirit of never say never, I'd put Biden at 1% chance of running, Hillary at about 5% and Bernie at about 20-25%.

Last edited by John Mace; 07-14-2018 at 04:19 PM.
  #43  
Old 07-14-2018, 04:26 PM
bump bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 15,482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lancia View Post
I know several people who voted for Trump not because he was Trump but because he wasn't Hillary..
Me too. More than a few actually. And they'll vote for Trump again rather than vote for her, despite all the stuff Trump is doing.

She's political cancer at this point, and nominating her or even letting her be a candidate is a mistake. The Democrats desperately need to get as far from the 2016 election in all ways, including Bernie Sanders as they possibly can. Running a mostly independent Jewish socialist isn't going to beat Trump either.

They need to find a middle of the road, respectable and upstanding white or Hispanic man. I think choosing a woman or a black person at this point would be a gamble; now's not the time to try and do something controversial- it'll just end up being a competition of who's more outrageous.
  #44  
Old 07-14-2018, 04:33 PM
foolsguinea foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 15,239
It's an absolutely terrible idea. The one arguably "good" thing if it happen would be that the US Democratic Party as a brand, party of Andrew Jackson and Andrew Johnson, would be finally reduced to a sad sick joke in all minds, and could join the Whigs in the graveyard of history. This would be a good thing. Future progressives could shut down criticism that identifies them spuriously with Dixiecrats and Indian Removal.

In the eventuality of a Clinton nomination, all progressives should run away from the Clinton circus first; those who have an actual vision of a real choice for this country shouldn't be tarred with the Clinton glop as the Democratic Party implodes into ultimate ridiculousness.
  #45  
Old 07-14-2018, 04:39 PM
Merneith Merneith is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: The Group W Bench
Posts: 6,630
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
What we need is a nice bland middle of the road white guy from the South or rust belt. Someone boring the hate machine can't get their hooks into
What - like Tim Kaine? Yeah, he brings all the boys to the yard.


Quote:
And sure, maybe a fiery black woman as Veep.
That statement is both sexist and racist. Maybe you'd be happier with a different party's milkshake.


As for Hillary - I wouldn't be surprised if she ran again or if her pals in the DNC supported her. But she's a lot quieter at the moment than she was in the summer of 2015. I think reason just might prevail, here.

I think Bernie & Diamond Joe have both missed their windows, too. I suspect they both know it. I don't see either of them gearing up right now, either.

Last edited by Merneith; 07-14-2018 at 04:42 PM.
  #46  
Old 07-14-2018, 05:16 PM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,304
Did anyone else notice that the only sources bringing this up are overtly right-wing sources? The right loves bringing Clinton back into the spotlight. They're the only ones thinking this. Clinton isn't going to run for president in 2020, and I will bet money on it if anyone's interested.
  #47  
Old 07-14-2018, 05:25 PM
Tamerlane Tamerlane is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Posts: 13,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
If it is Harris, I will vote for Trump. Seriously. She has done nothing.
Picky. I'm not a huge fan of Harris - I'd be about enthused for her as I was with Hillary. Which is to say, not all that much.

But at this point I'd probably vote for an irritable, incontinent alpaca over Trump. A low standard most normal politicians should be able to reach with a little work. Trump vs. David Duke? Then I might vote for Trump.
  #48  
Old 07-14-2018, 05:29 PM
FavreCo FavreCo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 45
That butt plug wearing pear shaped loser would have no chance against Trump.
  #49  
Old 07-14-2018, 05:39 PM
Locrian Locrian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Valley Village, CA
Posts: 3,825
With the disgusting misogynistic and racist comments from various GOP reps, it can NOT even be a woman for the Dems in 2020, let alone anyone who isn't white. The trumpeters already showed they want a rich, white, racist celebrity. I think the Dems' best chance is to find their own celebrity in order to turn some of TrumpTurdBase to their celebrity. Maybe someone from Shark Tank?
  #50  
Old 07-14-2018, 05:41 PM
Lancia's Avatar
Lancia Lancia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Denial
Posts: 1,516
If we compare where we are right now to the 2016 election, we're in the summer of 2014. If my memory is even somewhat accurate, here were the blowing political winds then:

Clinton was clearly the democratic front-runner and, even though she hadn't announced yet she was running. She had a lot of people gunning for her and a lot of endorsements, as well as people like Jim Messina working to get her elected.

Jeb Bush was pretty much the only Republican name being seriously discussed. I don't remember if he had officially discussed a run, but he certainly did by the end of 2014. I remember most political junkies (and a lot of folks here on the Dope) believed the 2016 race would come down to H. Clinton v. Jeb Bush. Other possibilities were Rubio and Cruz, but most of the money was on Jeb!. Trump, of course, was nothing more than a two-bit TV star who was famous for being famous.

I'm not seeing any of this right now. There's some talk of Harris, Booker, or Merkley running but none of this is, as far as I can tell, anything more than gossip. Clinton isn't even on the radar.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017