This^. I will take a guaranteed Republican lock on the House for the next decade with a liberal supreme court any day over a Republican President with a maybe chance of a Democratic House in 2 years. The cons of such a scenario outweighs the pros too much and I know my friend Tom feels the same way.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2015 |OT| Keep Calm and Diablos On
- Thread starter Aaron Strife
- Start date
- Status
This^. I will take a guaranteed Republican lock on the House for the next decade with a liberal supreme court any day over a Republican President with a maybe chance of a Democratic House in 2 years. The cons of such a scenario outweighs the pros too much and I know my friend Tom feels the same way.
Metaphoreus
This is semantics, and nothing more
Did he say that? I've only seen the quotation on the previous page, which didn't include anything like that.
JesseEwiak
Member
Sherrod Brown, Kloubach, Heitkamp, Gillibrand, etc.
There's plenty of people who could be in theory on the Democratic bench, if they were needed. We just happen to have the most vetted and qualified candidate in decades running instead.
Aaron Strife
Banned
This too. Democrats have a bench, but why would any of them waste their time running against Hillary?
Klobuchar would be a fantastic candidate, for example. She's the most popular senator in the country.
I am pessimistic right now, but even I can smpell the reeking pile of trollish bullshit coming from this post.
My impact.
Klobuchar would have been heavily courted to run, as she is Ruling Monarch of the Midwest United States.
Jesus, she's only 55.
QUEEN OF THE MIDWEST
Aaron Strife
Banned
If Hillary loses she'll be a top contender in 2020. Even in 2024.Klobuchar would have been heavily courted to run, as she is Ruling Monarch of the Midwest United States.
Jesus, she's only 55.
QUEEN OF THE MIDWEST
Biden-Klobuchar is my dream 2016 ticket tbh
Abinash117
Member
Do anyone support Hillary other than electability and nominees? If Supreme Court nominees weren't an issue were anyone still support her?
The entire D bench could get completely rejiggered in 2016.
I don't foresee the Democrats running a Governor for president in 2020 or 2024. For one, the gubernatorial bench for the Democrats has sort of been ruined due to the complete implosion of Democrats at the state level and the fact that almost all gubernatorial elections happen in midterms. The only blossoming candidates I could see are if either John Gregg or fuck it, Glenda Ritz even (though she's a former Republican) win against Pence in 2016. Or a Roy Cooper if he can win. Malloy hasn't really turned Connecticut around enough (and can come off as an asshole) to have the resume to run. Hassan doesn't strike me as having those types of ambitions. If Gina Raimondo can turn Rhode Island around, she's absolutely one to watch. She's incredibly impressive. Deval Patrick seemed to fuck himself over for any further ambitions in the Democratic party by going to Bain. So dumb.
But in 2016, you have some potential new faces that could complement the Gillibrands, Bookers, and Klobuchars: Cortez Masto, Murphy, Kamala, etc.
And then in 2018, things get interesting. Can key red state Democrats hold on to their seats that they then become more mainstays of the political process? Can the Democrats take back governorships like in Ohio or Florida or Michigan or Wisconsin or Nevada or New Mexico or (I'm out of breath) Maine or Massachusetts where those could be strong candidates for 2024 and further on?
Yes, obviously. If you were to ask her 51.6% of her supporters, I'm sure the majority of them would not say they're voting for Hillary just because of electability and almost definitely not because of SCOTUS nominees.
The country is not NeoGAF.
I don't foresee the Democrats running a Governor for president in 2020 or 2024. For one, the gubernatorial bench for the Democrats has sort of been ruined due to the complete implosion of Democrats at the state level and the fact that almost all gubernatorial elections happen in midterms. The only blossoming candidates I could see are if either John Gregg or fuck it, Glenda Ritz even (though she's a former Republican) win against Pence in 2016. Or a Roy Cooper if he can win. Malloy hasn't really turned Connecticut around enough (and can come off as an asshole) to have the resume to run. Hassan doesn't strike me as having those types of ambitions. If Gina Raimondo can turn Rhode Island around, she's absolutely one to watch. She's incredibly impressive. Deval Patrick seemed to fuck himself over for any further ambitions in the Democratic party by going to Bain. So dumb.
But in 2016, you have some potential new faces that could complement the Gillibrands, Bookers, and Klobuchars: Cortez Masto, Murphy, Kamala, etc.
And then in 2018, things get interesting. Can key red state Democrats hold on to their seats that they then become more mainstays of the political process? Can the Democrats take back governorships like in Ohio or Florida or Michigan or Wisconsin or Nevada or New Mexico or (I'm out of breath) Maine or Massachusetts where those could be strong candidates for 2024 and further on?
Yes, obviously. If you were to ask her 51.6% of her supporters, I'm sure the majority of them would not say they're voting for Hillary just because of electability and almost definitely not because of SCOTUS nominees.
The country is not NeoGAF.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
If nothing else, people clearly support the pathway to citizenship over deportation, which makes me think that people aren't that worried about immigration.
Though I guess I don't know what people think about birthright citizenship or walls.
Abinash117
Member
I edited( I'm sure I did looks like it didn't go through) to make it more about the supporters on NeoGaf not the country. I fully aware of that. On NeoGaf, many people cite the reason they support Hillary is because of those two things I mentioned. It seems like those two reasons are the biggest reasons, but some of them prefer Bernie policies more . I'm curious to know the other big reasons some would support her outside of those two specific reasons I mentioned and if Bernie starts to actually look like he becomes more competitive to actually beating her; would they switch to him.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Glenda Ritz is out of the running for Indiana governor - she endorsed Gregg.
Hobbestetrician
Member
His mentioning the 'democrat party' twice gave him away. C'mon guys.
Missed that, weee.
I've always maintained that if polls were to begin to consistently showing him outperforming her in the general election match-ups, I would have no qualms switching my preference to him in the primary (that is, if I were voting in my state's Democratic primary). I tend to match-up with Bernie slightly more than Hillary as far as policy preferences go, but I'm also pretty confident that, in these political circumstances, a Hillary presidency would not look significantly different from a Bernie presidency or a Biden presidency.. so it'd make no sense for me to support putting-up a slightly riskier candidate, especially given how close elections have been over the past few decades.
The Republicans don't have a break out star, either. Evidenced by the fact that they have 5 million candidates and most of them technically are viable for the party ticket. And then you have to remember they need to figure out who will be VP.
The Dems haven't really fostered anyone outside of Hilary and the Republicans eat their young before any breakout star can establish themselves and even begin to force the party to come back towards the center.
We'll see some breakout stars in a few years - but I think we're going to have to wait for the Clinton and ReaganBush political cliques to start aging out of the system.
The democratic party is fine primarily because Obama has been a successful 2 term president and the entire party has a clear direction on all the major issues of our time. The republican party is leaderless and in internal conflict over what positions the party should hold moving forward.
The only reason the 2016 dem field is so small is because most democrats with presidential aspirations don't want to lose to Hillary now. They'd rather wait for a better cycle.
The only reason the 2016 dem field is so small is because most democrats with presidential aspirations don't want to lose to Hillary now. They'd rather wait for a better cycle.
cartoon_soldier
Member
I can't help but think how stupid Clinton had to be to use a private email server for State Department use.
That was quite short sighted, could have just easily avoid any controversy all together and sailed through it all.
That was quite short sighted, could have just easily avoid any controversy all together and sailed through it all.
Too bad about Newsom. He'll be the next California Governor but I feel like the electorate outside of the state won't get past his character issues.
Eh, let's be real, if it wasn't the server, it'd be something equally inane that Republicans would make a colossal stink over. Do I need to mention Benghazi(!) ? And she didn't even do anything wrong in that case!
cartoon_soldier
Member
Yes, Republicans will overplay their hands and all that is fine. It was still pretty short sighted for her to use one especially for all her emails. Controversy around use of private email addresses for official use by politicians is nothing new and Hillary should have been savvy enough to avoid it.
It also is much easier to explain why use of a private server is shady vs. explaining to anyone how Hillary is at fault for Bengazhi.
https://twitter.com/notbobbyjindal/status/633544209698459648
Maybe it's lack of sleep, but this (not) Bobby Jindal promo video got to me. Keep an eye out for the volcano..
Maybe it's lack of sleep, but this (not) Bobby Jindal promo video got to me. Keep an eye out for the volcano..
Retromelon
Member
RustyNails
Member
New CNN/ORC poll: Trump pulls clear of competition and is now the frontrunner. Leading among every issue
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/18/politics/donald-trump-presidential-poll-debate/
Basileus777
Member
I wonder if all those damning Trump for his favorables will do the same with Bush now that his have tanked.
And this is pretty interesting data. I wonder how much of this translates to Trump gaining supporters when other candidates drop out.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
45% of Republicans thinking Trump is the best for the economy and 33% thinking he's the best on ISIS when he's proposed the worst plans possible for both issues is terrifying. Donald's right, we do have stupid people.
Hmm. Both Bush and Walker's favorability ratings took hits. And Trump's pretty good on that "Second Choice" question, too (10%); if the field were to clear a bit, it doesn't look like he'd slide or benefit too much.
We might be past the point where "flavor of the month" is an apt description for Trump.
We might be past the point where "flavor of the month" is an apt description for Trump.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Walker released his health care proposal:
https://www.scottwalker.com/obamacare-plan/files/Day-One-Patient-Freedom-Plan.pdf
There's some OK ideas, but the plan doesn't provide nearly enough for the poor and this part seems possibly horrible unless I'm reading this incorrectly.
https://www.scottwalker.com/obamacare-plan/files/Day-One-Patient-Freedom-Plan.pdf
There's some OK ideas, but the plan doesn't provide nearly enough for the poor and this part seems possibly horrible unless I'm reading this incorrectly.
Coriolanus
Banned
So... "here's our plan to decrease coverage"?
That's what I'm keeping an eye on.. not Hillary's favorable numbers by themselves, but compared to the likely others.
It'd be one hell of an entertaining message to the GOP if exit polls show that voters don't think she's particularly ethical or even very likeable, but she still ends-up winning comfortably.
I honestly expect that to be the case.
PhoenixDark
Banned
He's not wrong about Obamacare having limited benefits to middle class people, subsidy wise. I think that's one of the bigger problems with the law's struggle to gain popularity.
speculawyer
Member
She does seem to have a bit of weird plastic surgery face.
speculawyer
Member
I've talked to a fair number of people that don't like her or trust her but will plug their nose & vote for her in the general.
speculawyer
Member
My impact.
Klobuchar would have been heavily courted to run, as she is Ruling Monarch of the Midwest United States.
Jesus, she's only 55.
QUEEN OF THE MIDWEST
Klobuchar is definitely a star. My mom & sister (based in MN) rave about her.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Walker is folding under the spotlight? Well, I never...
Who could have seen Walker melting under the spotlight coming? Oh wait...
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
the democrat party, PD? LOL
BertramCooper
Banned
Ending birthright citizenship. I just can't even...
Those post-2012 GOP brainstorming sessions must feel like they took place a generation ago.
Those post-2012 GOP brainstorming sessions must feel like they took place a generation ago.
Hmm..
The stealth Republican strikes again!
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/08/hillary-clinton-arctic-drilling-shellHillary Clinton Just Came Out Against Obama's Arctic Drilling Plan
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has agreed with the vast majority of President Barack Obama's policies, but in a Tweet on Tuesday she expressed her disapproval with one: letting Shell drill for oil in the Arctic.
Clinton had previously said she was "skeptical" and had "doubts" as to whether the Obama administration should have given Shell the go-ahead for exploratory drilling. The oil company's permit from the US Department of the Interior allows it to drill in the Chukchi Sea off the northwest coast of Alaska. Shell halted its drilling program in the region after it lost control of a massive rig in 2012.
The stealth Republican strikes again!
Basileus777
Member
Like that would have been an acceptable idea even a generation ago.
David Incorporated Esq.
Member
How do you allow for access to plans across state lines while at the same time returning regulatory authority to the states? How the fuck does that work?
He means the state. As in the state with the weakest regulations.
What do you mean, he would give tax breaks to millions more people!
Bigger tax breaks for those who don't need it and smaller ones for those who do. But that's just details, details I tell you.
Seriously, let's look at the ideas that seem to be the most popular now amongst candidates:
-End birthright citizenship
-Build a wall to stop illegal immigration
-Abortion ban with no exceptions
-Bring back torture
-Defund planned parenthood
-Repeal and replace Obamacare with race to the state with the lowest regulations
-Constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court decision allowing same sex Marriage
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked