• 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

jhmd2000 said:
Tuffalo, this is what I'm saying. The only thing standing between a prospective Dem challenger and the Presidency is...Hillary Clinton's personality. Biden is out of his mind not to run.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where Republicans are getting the idea that Biden is an attractive candidate.
 
TuffaloDeac10 said:
Al Gore: 50,999,897

George Bush: 50,456,002
Click to expand...

And poor Gore gets up everyday and can't believe he lost to Bush. The electoral college and all that crazy nonsense. If Gore had even a little charisma he would have won.

Seems like O'malley has the most charisma on the democratic side. Sanders has a kind of crazy charisma but is ultimately a bit too scary.
 
O'Malley has as much a chance to be the next president as I do.
 
No...he said that the most charismatic candidate has won every election since Nixon. Bush was the more charismatic candidate and he won.
 
Nixon won easily (303 electoral votes) in 1968 and won 49 states in 1972. George Wallace carried 5 Southern states in 1968. Trump's not winning any states. Jeb will have to move toward the center on immigration to have any hope of winning NV, CO, and NM. A splintered conservative vote isn't winning any of those states and they could lose AZ too. HRC's electoral floor is 242 (which doesn't include any Western swing states). A split conservative vote doesn't get even remotely close to 270.
 
SkinsNDeacs said:
Maybe for you (and I would agree) but for the electorate as a whole you have to inspire people to vote for you. Obama definitely did it...W did it...Clinton did it....Reagan did it....Carter did it (once). In my life time (and perhaps in everyone's life time) there has never been a candidate that has generated less enthusiasm than Hillary and won the Presidency.
Click to expand...

Quoting for Morning Joe-addled beltway bullshitters.
 
PhDeac said:
I don't think 2016 will be a difficult election. In the time Hillary has been working hard to get the nomination, Republicans have been making themselves less appealing overall. Plenty of people who don't like Hillary will vote for her because the Republican Party is worse.
Click to expand...

http://www.vox.com/2015/7/24/9035541/gop-favorable-pew-poll

favorable.png
 
One of the panelists on Up just put out the idea that President Hillary would appoint Obama to the Supreme Court.

Outside of any policy or personal agreement, I'd love the idea because of all the right-wingers whose heads would explode.
 
Senate wouldn't confirm. Besides, I doubt Obama would find that a very appealing retirement.

That said, yeah, it would be hilarious to see conservatives freak out.
 
You assume the makeup will be the same after Hillary wins.
 
bigdoublezero said:
I do, yeah. I don't think the Senate will have a Democratic majority in the next 10 years.
Click to expand...

Could go either way, probably back and forth. Interesting that Republican favorability peaked during the midterm and dove soon thereafter.
 
PhDeac said:
Could go either way, probably back and forth. Interesting that Republican favorability peaked during the midterm and dove soon thereafter.
Click to expand...

It's easy to love a party before they have to do something.
 
Timing doesn't work for Obama. He'll be 55 when he leaves office and he'll want to decompress, write a book, and make some money. HRC would rather appoint someone in their late 40s/early 50s. Even if Dems control the Senate, they won't have 60 votes. Someone like Cruz or Sessions could still filibuster his nomination. Didn't think it was possible, but Hillary could be treated worse than Obama. With Trump in the race, Hillary may put up a bigger electoral college total than Obama, but she'll win with less than a majority of the popular vote.
 
You can't appoint somebody to SCOTUS that went on record prior to the ACA decision and said that it's not the job of SCOTUS to determine what the law is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top