• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Democratic Candidates for POTUS, 2016 edition

Thing that's kinda weird about Schweitzer is that his meltdown was about as bad as things Carson, Cruz, Huckabee, Palin, Santorum, Bachmann, Trump, Rand, Jindal, and Perry have said. Bizarre that he's eliminated and some of the others are still considered viable, at least in a primary.
 
He's a Democrat. Those are Pubs.
 
Well aware of party affiliations. All of the above said things that would be problematic in a general election. Schweitzer's comments would be problematic in Dem primaries too. Rand's still considered an upper tier 'Pub.
 
Those things wouldn't be problematic in a Pub primary except with respect to being a problem in the general.

Schweitzer's appeal is that he's a Dem in Pub clothing.
 
So I re-read the 12th amendment - the part about the prez and veep not being from the state. I'm not entirely clear on it. Is it illegal for a prez and veep to be from the same state period, or can that 1 state's elector just not vote for them? I'm guessing the latter. At the time the amendment was adopted, folks' loyalty was to state 1st and country 2nd. But that's long since changed, and geographical diversity with the prez and veep means very little these days. You could certainly make the argument that, if Hillary & Jeb are their parties' nominees, Gillibrand and Rubio would be among the better veep choices. But ain't no way either party would want to forfeit NY's or FL's 29 EVs.
 
Cheney had to re-establish Wyoming as his official residence to run as W's VP. Both were TX residents at the time.
 
I like Kirsten Gillibrand, but she won't be Hillary's VP. They're not going to run a ticket with two women in a country where a woman has never held either office.
 
avalon said:
I like Kirsten Gillibrand, but she won't be Hillary's VP. They're not going to run a ticket with two women in a country where a woman has never held either office.
Click to expand...

Disagree. If they're sympatico, I think it's a good ticket - especially if the Clintons and maybe the Obamas view her as a strong heir apparent. If you're not going to vote for Hillary because she's female, it hardly makes a difference who her veep is. Gillibrand would bring some likeability to the ticket and is 1 of the rising stars in the Senate. And there's not that many great options. I don't see Warren being Hillary's veep. Biden won't do it after he's already been veep. Castro might be a good option, as would Mark Warner if you want safe, Southerner and boring. None of the Western Dems make any sense. O'Malley sucks ass. There is no FL Dem with a high enough profile to counter a Rubio or Bush, except Wasserman-Schultz, and she's a lightning rod who is way less likeable than Hillary. My short list if I were Hillary would be Castro, Gillibrand and Warner.

And thanks for the article, numbers.
 
I'm just now hearing about HRC's comments earlier this week about getting money out of political campaigns, even if it takes a constitutional amendment to do it. If she, or anyone really, could convince me that she's serious about that and could get it done, then I'd probably vote for her. I feel like that's so important that it could make me into a single-issue voter.
 
DeacinBama said:
I'm just now hearing about HRC's comments earlier this week about getting money out of political campaigns, even if it takes a constitutional amendment to do it. If she, or anyone really, could convince me that she's serious about that and could get it done, then I'd probably vote for her. I feel like that's so important that it could make me into a single-issue voter.
Click to expand...

Obama said the same thing, didn't he?
 
Deadbolt said:
Obama said the same thing, didn't he?
Click to expand...

I honestly don't know. But if he did it during his 2008 run (or any time before 2010, really), then I think it has more meaning now in light of the SCOTUS's CI decision. If he said it after that, then he said it as a sitting president in an already gridlocked Washington, to which I don't attribute as much meaning.
 
Yes. He did say the same thing. Most Dems are for campaign finance reform.
 
New polls out this week show that Clinton leads every single GOP potential nominee (that was polled about) by at least 14 points:

"Marco Rubio fares best against the former first lady, trailing Clinton by 14 points, 55% to 41%. Bush trails Clinton by 17 points, 56% to 39%. Christie and Paul fall 19 points behind Clinton, each putting up 39% to Clinton's 58%. Huckabee, Walker, Carson and Cruz each trail Clinton by more than 20 points."

It's not good news for Bush that he's down by 17 points at this juncture since he's pretty well known. Rubio is almost certainly less well known and so that number could be expected to decrease as we near the election IMO.
 
Watched an interview with Rubio over the weekend and came away with the same impression I always have-he's too inexperienced and seems like a kid playing dress up in his dad's clothes. He always seems to be trying too hard like a little brother overcompensating when playing with older brothers' friends. Relative youth doesn't completely work for him. Favor him to several other 'Pubs, but think he's better suited as a VP now and needs to run after serving as Governor.

Like Gillibrand a lot too, but think she's in a similar relative spot as Rubio. Would work as a VP now, but needs to be Governor before running for president. NY and FL are hardly minor states, so they'd be significant tests.
 
FuckmouthedRube said:
Watched an interview with Rubio over the weekend and came away with the same impression I always have-he's too inexperienced and seems like a kid playing dress up in his dad's clothes. He always seems to be trying too hard like a little brother overcompensating when playing with older brothers' friends. Relative youth doesn't completely work for him. Favor him to several other 'Pubs, but think he's better suited as a VP now and needs to run after serving as Governor.

Like Gillibrand a lot too, but think she's in a similar relative spot as Rubio. Would work as a VP now, but needs to be Governor before running for president. NY and FL are hardly minor states, so they'd be significant tests.
Click to expand...

His old school stance on Cuba exemplifies this. He's like a little kid sitting beside his dad playing dominoes outside a little neighborhood store on Calle Ocho. As Americans become more comfortable with the idea of opening up relations with Cuba, specifically the business community, his stance will be like poison.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
New polls out this week show that Clinton leads every single GOP potential nominee (that was polled about) by at least 14 points:

"Marco Rubio fares best against the former first lady, trailing Clinton by 14 points, 55% to 41%. Bush trails Clinton by 17 points, 56% to 39%. Christie and Paul fall 19 points behind Clinton, each putting up 39% to Clinton's 58%. Huckabee, Walker, Carson and Cruz each trail Clinton by more than 20 points."

It's not good news for Bush that he's down by 17 points at this juncture since he's pretty well known. Rubio is almost certainly less well known and so that number could be expected to decrease as we near the election IMO.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Nobody is going to challenge Hillary with those numbers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top