Right.
Clinton would just do what? Move to Wyoming? And the right would simply sit there and not say a word?
In the 60s you needed mescalin to get your head to do that.
Doesn’t she still have a residence in Arkansas? Sure, the right would complain, but how much good would it do? It didn’t do the left any good against Cheney. Heck, that’s the first I’d heard about the controversy. never knew Cheney lived in Texas.
Who cares what they say? They’re not going to vote for her anyway. I’ve got to go with adaher on this one; it’d be a non-issue.
Really white. And mainstream. Which I guess is good, but it opens up an opportunity for the Republicans.
As opposed to all the tickets of color we’ve enjoyed throughout history? 
Cuomo is a party outcast, since arranging for the *minority *Republicans to control the NY state Senate, for reasons of his own that probably have to do with personal spite more than anything else. He’s capped his own career with that move.
This is the first I’ve heard of that, ElvisL1ves. More details?
Cuomo was very popular with Republican voters early in his term. He’s frittered much of that away recently in order to position himself for the primaries, but I believe his instincts are fairly conservative, at least on fiscal and regulatory policy.
In not really seeing how it’s Cuomo’s fault if some democrats defected.
Wasn’t the gerrymandering bill passed when Republicans had the majority? I can understand why Democrats would be enraged by that, but Cuomo had a better relationship with Republicans than with his own party at the time.
That’s just helping your friends out. If Democrats hadn’t been so beholden to public employee unions and backed up their governor better…
No, it would be the one thing talked about every minute on every venue. This is not the media universe of 2000. You’d grow as tired of the carpetbaggers as you did of the birthers. And that was a completely phony issue. If Clinton left for another state after the carpetbagger accusations in her 2000 Senate run, it would be a legitimate issue and probably deadly. Nobody wins anything in national politics with only core supporters.
Not that it matters. It won’t happen. Clinton is not moving. Clinton is not going to be the nominee. Cuomo is not going to be her Veep. Cuomo wants only one thing: to be the nominee and get the stain off the family name put there by Mario’s vacillation. Obama outspent and outmaneuvered Clinton in 2004. Imagine how many resources the sitting governor of New York State could strip out from underneath her. It would be a callback to Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson; they’d pay to get him out of the state.
I have to agree that Clinton will probably fail to win the nomination again, but I really don’t know if Cuomo’s the guy to do it.
If this was the GOP culture, I’d bet on Howard Dean, since most GOP candidates that rise and flameout do much better the second time around. Howard Dean is an eminently qualified candidate who can get to Clinton’s left and is a lot more direct and honest than she is.
Maybe Cuomo could hit the tanning booths and affect a heavy Italian accent.
Somehow I’m not convinced the rest of the country is going to care all that much about those particular doings with local Republicans. That just sounds like local politics to me. Could even be spun to show he can work in a bipartisan manner?