Since he’s now officially in the race, let’s get this thing started:
Matt Yglesias points out that O’Malley is adopting Warren’s platform. So Warren fans should have plenty of reason to support him, especially given his superior qualifications.
Until and unless Schweitzer announces that he’s running, I think that O’Malley probably has the best chance at Hillary’s VP slot.
That’s all I have to say, really.
If he wins, do the Dropkick Murphys play the inaugural ball? I’ll vote for him for that alone.
He’s got that preacher’s quaver when he gets rolling in a speech; all it needs is “Can I get an A-MEN!” at the end. I’m going to wait to see his platform before venturing a solid opinion on the guy, but he’s got the political chops and has done right by immigrants and same-sex marriage. He’s not a Clinton or a Bush, which is a plus for me, and he’s not 120 years old, also a plus. That only leaves whatever smarm factor may be hiding out there to be unearthed.
Smart guy and a competent politician. Glad he’s in the race. I’ll be looking forward to the debates – I could support him, Sanders, or Hillary, and be okay with it.
My sense is that he’s running for VP.
As of right now, with only the linked article as background, he is my candidate. Reinstate Glass-Steagall? That plus same-sex marriage is enough for me. I look forward to being disillusioned as I learn more about him. Off to do some research.
Petyr Baelish vs. Hillary Clinton! Place your bets!
Wasn’t Carcetti on “The Wire” based on him? Also, isn’t he responsible for a lot of the policing policies that people in Baltimore seem to be taking issue with?
Tommy Carcetti was based very loosely on a number of people, one of whom was Martin O’Malley. At least that’s what David Simon is saying.
I don’t think the tensions between Police and the urban poor in Baltimore are that much different from the tensions in almost every other American city. I don’t think it’s a problem that can be fairly laid at the feet of any one mayor. I doubt it will hurt O’Malley too much, though he’d better have responses if anyone asks him about it. He hasn’t been mayor in a while.
Policing practices that reduced crime are nothing to be ashamed of. Is there any evidence at all that such policing practices lead to the kind of police abuse that’s at issue? It sounds to me like some people are being opportunistic and trying to relate the anti-crime efforts of the 90s and early 00s with police abuse. But I recall police abuse being an issue well before those anti-crime efforts were undertaken. Is there any evidence that the problem has gotten worse?
Besides, we do not live in a liberal utopia. If a Democratic Presidential candidate hasn’t pissed off at least one liberal interest group then he can’t be elected.
I don’t understand why anyone would do this. I realize the VP has become a more visible position and important adviser but it is the rare former Veep who has been able to convert that job into the Presidency. The only person who was ever on the losing ticket as the VP nominee and later got to the Oval Office was FDR (1920). That hardly seems like a good plan.
Similar things have been said about Pataki in the thread about his candidacy. That makes even less sense given his age.
Maybe O’Malley is running in the hope Hillary stumbles and he is able to capitalize on it and take the lead. Or he may be hoping to run this time and build name recognition for a future run; he is only 52 after all. But thinking getting the number two spot on either ticket would help a persons chances next time doesn’t really make sense, at least to me.
Gore should have been able to do that, if Florida were any good at math.
O’Malley had nothing but praise for Hillary on the Sunday shows. Didn’t sound like a man who was running against her.
Yes, that is a reasonable thought. If Hillary gets tarred by scandal, or otherwise stumbles along the way, he can present himself as the alternative. But I think that is really his only hope.
But a viable candidate generally needs a public platform from which to run. By 2020, O’Malley will be long removed from his governorship. By 2024, 8 years removed. Will he hold some other office then? If there is none within reach, VP looks like his best bet as a platform from which to launch.
Yet.
As a group, the left isn’t that interested in Utopia. We remain nonetheless convinced that things could be a hell of a lot better, which will do for now. Besides, if there were a Utopia, what could we bitch about?
Unfortunately history says otherwise. Your argument assumes a Clinton/O’Malley ticket would be a lock to win. I know all us Democrats are supposed to be so sure of Hillary’s victory that the actual election is little more than a formality standing in the way of the 2nd coming of the Clintons, but - nothing is ever a sure thing. O’Malley would be much better off coming in second for the nomination in 2016 than risk being the VP nominee on a ticket that might lose. As I pointed out in my last post, there has only been one person to be in the VP spot on a losing ticket in the entire history of the Republic who later ran for and won the Presidency.
I rather think those are pretty crappy odds to overcome.
Obviously I don’t buy into the party line that Hillary is a shoe-in for the nomination and will crush the opposition come Election Day 2016; too many things could happen between then and now. O’Malley should run a full on, no holds barred campaign and do all he can to win the top spot. If that doesn’t happen he would be smart to figure out how to be ready in 2020 or 2024.
I really don’t think Hillary is a sure thing (but I admit, that is also my hope). She’s light years ahead in the polls now because most voters have no clue who O’Malley is, and the media have been snickering at Sanders since he announced. It’s pretty clear that Sanders cannot overcome his Socialist label (or his age, or the many other reasons he’s not going to win the nomination), but when people start getting to know O’Malley via the media stories, ad buys and debates, I think we’ll see that Hillary’s support is broad but very shallow. Give Democrats a chance to vote for someone else and I bet a lot of them will.
I meant utopia only in the sense that there would be general agreement on liberal solutions to all problems, thus making it unnecessary to ever anger a member of the coalition.
So O’Malley isn’t all that popular with African-Americans. Find me a Democrat that a Democratic voting bloc doesn’t have beef with and I’ll show you the next 49-state GOP landslide.
Because all of the Dem voting blocs all added together would be swamped by the massive demographic of rich folks and grumpy old white men?
All of the Democratic interest groups only get you about 35% of the vote. If you want to see a GOP candidate win 80% of the white vote, by all means run a candidate that every liberal interest group loves.
O’Malley seems to have a Romney-like problem though. He’s running to Clinton’s left but he’s never been all that liberal:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/martin-omalley/bs-md-rodricks-0531-20150530-column.html