While I can’t recall the exact statistic, I remember the pundits discussing the unlikelihood of the same party holding on to the presidency for more than three consecutive terms during Dubya I’s fall from grace in 1992. I don’t think that this is necessarily the fault of the party or the candidate in question, it’s just that a same party successor like Bush brings so much political baggage with him/her into their presidency that it’s very easy for a challenger to convince swing voters that it’s time for a change if things are going less than perfectly.
That being said, nobody would be happier than me if the Dems pulled it off.
True, that makes it a less clear case for Hillary using her evolving position to generate political capital for a presidential run. And I’ll acknowledge that it would have been wholly inappropriate for her to jump into that political fray as SecState. It’s just hard to believe that she hasn’t actually been in favor of SSM all along, and if she was willing to triangulate her position in the past for political reasons, I’m inclined to believe that such a triangulation is at least part of what is going on now.
GHW Bush was born in MA, but he can’t be said to be from there, politically, since his family moved away when he was a toddler. He’s either “from” CT or TX, but not MA. He has no political history in MA.
Fauxcahontis for president? Please, run her. She’s a rabid liberal. An academic. She’s shrill. She’s from MA. She has little experience in governing. She has no executive experience that I’m aware of.
You want her to lead the country? Has she ever led anything?
I hope she runs. Her left wing position on many issues might actually make her a contender in the primary. But there’s no way she wins a general election.
The only way she even has a Senate seat is that she was running against a Republican in MA. This is a state that has 11% Republicans, yet she only took 54% of the vote to his 46%.
This is a center right country. There’s no way she is winning a general election unless she completely re-invents herself.
I agree, She’s too far to the right for my tastes—she was actually a registered Republican for most of her adult life, so how I can trust her base values?
Like I said, I’d rather see Warren as VP. She doesn’t have to be as moderate as the presidential candidate, and she has more freedom to be the attack dog which is what we want from her. The president has to be too… presidential.
So I see her joining the bottom of the ticket with a younger candidate who will make assurances that he will “work with” the Republicans. Obviously “younger” leaves out Clinton and Biden.
“Fauxcahontis”- LOL! What is it that causes certain kinds of people to focus on these little issues of minor (at best) importance while ignoring the big ticket items? I find that so very strange.
It’s true, there are similarities. Obama was also very under qualified as a candidate. But after GWBush and Iraq just about anybody could have beat McCain.
I will grant you that even the fake Indian would have had a shot in 2008.
However, she is even weaker than Obama. He is a good speaker, where she is shrill. He is Liberal but not as far out there as she is. They’re both academics, they both only have a history (as POTUS candidates) of winning elections in liberal areas.
We all see how far Brown got in running on the Indian heritage platform.
She’s a wonderful person in perfect sync with me politically. I’d love to see her be president, I’d hate for her to run for president. The country is just too damn ignorant to elect her. Let’s take two terms of Hillary and see how it goes. I’d rather have people like Michael Moore, Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow, and Jane Fonda in the White House but I’m fine with a slow leftward progression.
I just think its hilarious that you guys still are hung up on the whole Cherokee thing. Kind of racist though. If the GOP runs with that line against Warren in a presidential election then look for her to win handily.