They've definitely surpassed the Longs of Louisiana.
― oh no! must be the season of the rich (Aimless), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 18:48 (nine years ago) link
LandrieusNunnsRufus T Fireflys
― things lose meaning over time (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 18:49 (nine years ago) link
at the national level - Kennedys, Roosevelts, Adamses
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 18:50 (nine years ago) link
get down to the state level and there's tons
I hadn't been paying attention so I don't know if it's new info, but Jeb's official declaration of interest in the presidency is hugely depressing. Plenty of the people disgusted with a black president will be equally disgusted by the idea of a female president. And he has a name that they've heard before. He should coast to victory.
Hey, I'm a descendant of Daniel Webster, I should probably run in ten years or so. DYNASTY.
― My Name Is You (Old Lunch), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 18:54 (nine years ago) link
Jeb's gonna have some of the same issues Mittens had w the base in the primary, but he doesn't seem as awkward/weird so that's in his favor. I'd put money on him taking the nomination though.
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 18:58 (nine years ago) link
Obama just solved Jeb's big immigration reform problem by giving him a way to dodge and derail and redirect questions about his position. So, yes, the nomination now becomes Jeb's to lose. Christie is gnashing his teeth.
― oh no! must be the season of the rich (Aimless), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:12 (nine years ago) link
I look forward to this parade of bozos - Christie, Jeb, Perry - trying to dig up dirt on/trip up each other. The resulting nomination will be as revolting as ever but the process will be entertaining.
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:14 (nine years ago) link
I do kind of wonder how hard his opponents are going to go after his family record
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:15 (nine years ago) link
whether Jeb or HRC wins i srsly think we shd fuck shit up
― things lose meaning over time (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:15 (nine years ago) link
jeb's big establishment competition is christie who the base hate even more (that's unless romney gets in which is unlikely unless they both flounder and the gop get desperate) while the wingnuts will split the vote between themselves like they always do. that on paper should give him the best path to victory.
but i think his biggest problem is actually that's he not run in a campaign since 2002. he's going to be very rusty and could well end up a paper tiger. one of the reasons hillary did her book tour this summer and campaigned these midterms was to overcome that problem, and 2002 feels like ancient history compared to 2008.
i'd probably put money on walker, as he looks the best person to overcome the tea party/establishment divide, but then again he's a charisma vacuum.
― prolego, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:18 (nine years ago) link
lack of charisma not a huge impediment when you look at some prez nominees, esp the losing ones
― things lose meaning over time (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:22 (nine years ago) link
Yeah, Mittens seemed like a hapless Home Depot store manager.
― My Name Is You (Old Lunch), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:23 (nine years ago) link
my money is on bobby jindal. he is very charismatic
― ya'll are the ones who don't know things (Karl Malone), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:25 (nine years ago) link
I mean look at Poppy Bush v Dukakis, that was an election where we were up to our ankles in charisma
― things lose meaning over time (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:27 (nine years ago) link
one of the reasons hillary did her book tour this summer and campaigned these midterms was to overcome that problem
I heard this on the morning shows but nothing I saw looked like she'd shaken any cobwebs.
― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:28 (nine years ago) link
agree charisma isn't generally too much of an impediment, but with the most wide open gop field in decades it could be easy to get lost in the shuffle. especially when paul and christie and cruz will take up so much oxygen.
― prolego, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:29 (nine years ago) link
Hillary simply doesn't have the common touch - she's always been super-stiff
xp
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:30 (nine years ago) link
like I can't picture Hillary speaking convincingly and extemporaneously about anything
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:31 (nine years ago) link
her stock portfolio and cookie recipes
― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:33 (nine years ago) link
she's not a really talented liar like her husband and Obama
― things lose meaning over time (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:35 (nine years ago) link
p much
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:35 (nine years ago) link
Obama is a much more talented and fluent liar than Clinton...and actually Obama's done what he promised to do except close Gitmo.
― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:36 (nine years ago) link
i.e. neoliberalism with many more sops to progressivism than Clinton accomplished
― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:37 (nine years ago) link
I would venture that Hillary's chances hinge almost entirely on how well she can motivate enthusiasm among women to vote for her as the first woman president. she has no policies or values that are going to win over a majority, it's gonna be this identity politics aspect that makes or breaks her. it's going to be all about how well she connects with women and whether or not she can unify them as a voting bloc. which, given the actual politics and voting patterns of women and Hillary's shortcomings as a candidate, is not going to be easy.
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:38 (nine years ago) link
not closing gitmo is more congress's fault, isn't it?
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:39 (nine years ago) link
Alfred's estimation of O pretty otm imo
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:39 (nine years ago) link
I don't know where to start with that, but you should talk to my labor organizer friend who remebers O saying he'd be the first prez to walk a picket line in a strike.
― things lose meaning over time (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:41 (nine years ago) link
I mean, Clinton didn't once beguile me in his glory days – and I don't say it in a sanctimonious way. He looked phony and oozed sincerity that I find repulsive in people and politicians. The only time I got his reputation was at the '12 convention.
― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:46 (nine years ago) link
i like the idea of an elizabeth warren presidency
― Treeship, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 19:53 (nine years ago) link
sorry, if by some miracle we elected a prez who vowed to "Move the ball" he/she would never live to January 20 and yes I really believe that. Look elsewhere.
(or like me, accept the inevitable)
― things lose meaning over time (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:00 (nine years ago) link
warren, even if elected, would be forced to the status of a placeholder
― oh no! must be the season of the rich (Aimless), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:01 (nine years ago) link
idk she seems pretty fucking capable
― Treeship, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:09 (nine years ago) link
in any case, she's my candidate. i'm not voting for a clinton. i voted green in 2012 and will do so again if i don't like the candidate.*
* i don't dislike obama as far as democrats go, and don't regret my 2008 vote, but i couldn't abide all the pointless killing
― Treeship, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:11 (nine years ago) link
This election will be primetime for third-party candidates.
― RAP GAME SHANI DAVIS (Raymond Cummings), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:12 (nine years ago) link
she seems pretty fucking capable
atm no one can move the senate to do anything in almost any direction, and the house is an even harder nut to bust if you don't have wingnut cred.
― oh no! must be the season of the rich (Aimless), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:15 (nine years ago) link
yeah that's why she should run for president.
― Treeship, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:16 (nine years ago) link
she can do more good in the senate
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:19 (nine years ago) link
like take a principled stand against the banks before losing the vote
― things lose meaning over time (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:20 (nine years ago) link
when the Dems retake the Senate in 2016 she will be in line for powerful committee/legislation-writing positions
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:23 (nine years ago) link
Is Jeb Bush Too Liberal To Win The Republican Nomination In 2016?
may god have mercy on our souls
― ya'll are the ones who don't know things (Karl Malone), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:27 (nine years ago) link
https://espnfivethirtyeight.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/silver-datalab-jeb-1.png?w=610&h=916
― ya'll are the ones who don't know things (Karl Malone), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:28 (nine years ago) link
lol at Paul's disparity between statements and voting record
― Clay, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:30 (nine years ago) link
interesting, in that chart, that rand paul's public issue statements are rated as the 3rd least conservative, and his public voting record as the most conservative by far.
xpost yep
― ya'll are the ones who don't know things (Karl Malone), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:31 (nine years ago) link
And Santorum's public statement bark outweighing his voting record bite. Interesting chart.
― The Thelonius Monk of nu-ki? (Dan Peterson), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:42 (nine years ago) link
that's why she should run for president
I have no objection to warren being president, but this doesn't change the fact that, without any leverage over congress, she'd be a reduced to a placeholder. just being president doesn't ensure you can accomplish much, unless you can command enough votes in congress.
― oh no! must be the season of the rich (Aimless), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:43 (nine years ago) link
guys she would never win. never.
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:44 (nine years ago) link
why because $$$
maybe she can apologize to wall street the day before she announces her candidacy
― ya'll are the ones who don't know things (Karl Malone), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:45 (nine years ago) link
in 2016 it would not surprise me
― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 16 December 2014 20:47 (nine years ago) link