Is that the excuse now? Hmm. Didn’t seem to help with Franken. Maybe Spartacus can bring it off, but I doubt it.
Regards,
Shodan
Still can’t interpret what the hell you’re talking about, but it’s a hijack, so I’ll drop it. I’m sure if you’re actually interested in the topic than you’ll start a thread on it.
I’m independent and I think Gillibrand is about as strong a candidate as the Democrats could put forward. At least she’s generally well respected, the question would be whether or not she can handle herself face to face with Trump.
Given that there are about three dozen potential Democratic candidates, of whom Franken was only one, it seems rather pointless to throw Franken “under the bus” simply to get rid of him as a rival. Especially because Franken is an older Midwestern man while Gillibrand is a younger Northeastern woman; it’s hard to see how Franken being out of the race would be a big boost to her campaign.
Also, it’s worth noting that sexual assault, particularly in the military, has been something that Gillibrand has taken quite seriously. It is entirely within character for her to take on Franken on that principle.
Now if Gillibrand undercuts Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar, and Bernie Sanders one by one over the next few months, I might consider changing my mind. (Though if she does so successfully, I think we’d have to consider the possibility that she is really, really good at realpolitik and would perhaps be an excellent nominee for that reason.)
She seems Ok.
I have issues with her ties to Big Tobacco.
But we really want someone from the South or Rust Belt. New York is in the bag already.
She also switches positions at the drop of a hat.
She will get pilloried by Republicans for her statements on Kavanaugh.
Wouldn’t the same be true of any potential candidate from the Democratic Party? They were almost uniformly opposed to Kavanaugh. (those who weren’t opposed to him won’t have a chance).
I think she has potential. The idea of “female Senator from NY” does bring on some PTSD symptoms, but I’m not sure that’s really fair or relevant. She does seem to be pretty close to the middle of the ideological road within the Democratic Party, so potentially could be acceptable to both progressives and establishment types. OTOH, she’s probably not getting Hillary’s endorsement, after saying earlier this year that she thought Bill should have resigned over the Lewinsky affair.
I’m not familiar enough with her to pass judgment on how big a problem this is, but one knock I’ve heard on her is that she has a history of flip-flopping; specifically, I’ve heard that her position on gun control rapidly “evolved” when she went from representing a rural district to running in a Statewide NY election.
Overall, I see her as one of a fairly large number of potentially serious contenders at this point.
She didn’t flip-flop as much as drift to the left from the conservative side when she went from representing a conservative region of NY State to being the junior Senator of the entire state. Actually the correct thing to do as an elected representative I would think.
I like that she has consistently opposed Trump’s nominees.
As for ties to tobacco, well, that’s not good. It’s better than ties to firearms or petroleum, but in principle, I’d like someone with no strings.
Maybe, but will that matter?
Swing state senators who voted against Kavanaugh went 9-1 in senate races last week.
Swing state senators who voted for Kavanaugh went 0-1.
The Kavanaugh effect helped Democrats not Republicans.
Her recent record on Israel-related issues (supporting the Iran deal, removing her name from anti-BDS legislation, visible friendship with Linda Sarsour) will resonate badly with the voting public in the center, which tends to be pro-Israel. If she’s the Democratic nominee, the Republicans will absolutely make that a big issue, and Trump has major pro-Israel credentials he can tout in his favor for those voters.
Hahaha. Good one.
Hrmm. I could have sworn it was her taking out potential competition before any momentum was established. There’s politicking and there’s politicking, after all.
There are enough potential serious Democratic candidates, all of whom are clearly and unambiguously better than Trump, that I don’t think it’s productive to research any of them too deeply yet, and absent such research, I don’t think it’s reasonable to have a strong preference for any of them yet. Of those potential serious candidates, some will run and some won’t, and of those who run, some will already be out by the time my state holds primaries. Once I know who will be in Ohio’s primary, it will make sense for me to do research then and determine which one I prefer, rather than wasting time on candidates I’ll never even get the opportunity to support.
Gillibrand is a serious potential candidate (as opposed to, say, Avenatti or Oprah). That’s about all I have to say about her yet.
…I could have sworn that Franken took himself out because he couldn’t keep his grubby hands to himself.
No need to refight the Franken fracas … it is if nothing else clear that those who would be voting in primaries are not in strong agreement about how admirable or shamefully self-serving her posture in that episode was. Agree or disagree with the perception a large group of Democratic voters have now pegged her as self-serving not principled. Many have her now placed as someone who will move to whatever position seems convenient to have, trying to get in front of where a crowd is going so she can claim to be leading them. It could be a wrong perception but the degree to which it is held handicaps her prospects to win the nomination and to win the election if she won the nomination.
Better to have someone without that baggage, who does not come in a divisive force among Democrats right out of the gate. Better to have someone whose authenticity is not in question.
I’m a Democrat and I don’t think she is even the best woman Senator who could be chosen as the candidate. That nod, IMO, goes to Klobuchar. I’ll admit up front that I don’t know as much as i should about either Senator but from what I have seen, Klobuchar has really impressed me. Gillenbrand not nearly as much. I mean, I wouldn’t really be upset if she became the nominee but I wouldnt be excited or happy either. She’s a bit mediocre and kinda forgettable.
Well I think we can scratch Avenatti off the list of potential candidates of any caliber now.
No, because he mixed up being a comedian with being a Senator. What he did was for laughs. It’s still wrong, but he wasn’t being a horndog so much as totally inappropriate.
…if people are going to repeat (what, IMHO are) baseless accusations then I think we need to “refight the Franken fracas.” Especially if the argument is that “Gillibrand is tainted, even if the allegations against her are not true”.