U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-26-2015, 10:52 AM
 
9,209 posts, read 4,238,914 times
Reputation: 10994

Advertisements

There are so many posts from seemingly a parallel universe, I don't know which ones to address first. Nor do I have the time or inclination to go point by point.

For those of you who think "Hillary is conservative", you are out of your political minds. She may not be a left wing as Bernie Sanders or Warren, but she is not conservative by any means. A perfect example is that she pushed Bill to nominate Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the SCOTUS. She is obviously one of the most liberal justices to ever serve, and Hillary knew that going in. She was also responsible for pushing him left as governor, and when he lost re-election he needed to get back to being more moderate or his political career was over.

As to the media being conservative, I can't tell if this is a new (D) talking point, or some of you really believe it. I actually had someone (maybe one of you in this thread) try to say in another thread that the NYT was part of the conservative media.
They seemed to genuinely think they were correct on this point, despite me pointing out they were cracked, or on crack.

I have been watching & reading news longer than many here have, well before FOX ever started. The media was always leaning left, just to different degrees. So when FOX came along it seemed to the liberals as if it was all right wing zealots. Sure most of the talking heads like Hannity are conservative, but the news is balanced, though not perfectly. It is just that so many grew up with liberal spin that anything not in line with that is viewed as conservative.

Regardless, when I see other misinformation posted like more presidents have been senators than governors, how do you educate people like that without going to great lengths to do so? I think the figure is fairly close historically with it being more governors, but in recent times it is by far governors. It should be obvious to most the being an executive vs. a legislator is better training to be POTUS, but some people seem too dense or obtuse to acknowledge it.

When simple comments about needed experience for the potus can be best gained by being a governor, then having posters exaggerating using years on the job in the Congress, you begin to wonder if the person is just dense, or fooling with you.
Hillary conservative, the NYT conservative, Obama not being a liberal senator when his ranking was far left, etc., etc. makes you really wonder.

`
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-27-2015, 07:08 AM
 
Location: Hiding from Antifa?
6,343 posts, read 4,141,071 times
Reputation: 5654
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Sheila Lee Jackson, would be a perfect fit.
A woman and black
Plz! plz! Nominate her! The groundswell turnout against her would give the Republicans a filibuster proof Senate, and make it difficult for the Dems to ever get a majority in the House for many years to come.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2015, 08:46 AM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,794 posts, read 14,223,537 times
Reputation: 7950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1 View Post
There are so many posts from seemingly a parallel universe, I don't know which ones to address first. Nor do I have the time or inclination to go point by point.

For those of you who think "Hillary is conservative", you are out of your political minds. She may not be a left wing as Bernie Sanders or Warren, but she is not conservative by any means. A perfect example is that she pushed Bill to nominate Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the SCOTUS. She is obviously one of the most liberal justices to ever serve, and Hillary knew that going in. She was also responsible for pushing him left as governor, and when he lost re-election he needed to get back to being more moderate or his political career was over.

As to the media being conservative, I can't tell if this is a new (D) talking point, or some of you really believe it. I actually had someone (maybe one of you in this thread) try to say in another thread that the NYT was part of the conservative media.
They seemed to genuinely think they were correct on this point, despite me pointing out they were cracked, or on crack.

I have been watching & reading news longer than many here have, well before FOX ever started. The media was always leaning left, just to different degrees. So when FOX came along it seemed to the liberals as if it was all right wing zealots. Sure most of the talking heads like Hannity are conservative, but the news is balanced, though not perfectly. It is just that so many grew up with liberal spin that anything not in line with that is viewed as conservative.

Regardless, when I see other misinformation posted like more presidents have been senators than governors, how do you educate people like that without going to great lengths to do so? I think the figure is fairly close historically with it being more governors, but in recent times it is by far governors. It should be obvious to most the being an executive vs. a legislator is better training to be POTUS, but some people seem too dense or obtuse to acknowledge it.

When simple comments about needed experience for the potus can be best gained by being a governor, then having posters exaggerating using years on the job in the Congress, you begin to wonder if the person is just dense, or fooling with you.
Hillary conservative, the NYT conservative, Obama not being a liberal senator when his ranking was far left, etc., etc. makes you really wonder.

`
I've been reading HRC which is a book written by a couple of journalists, one from Bloomberg, and one from thehill.com. Both are clearly fond of and impressed by Hillary Clinton. The impression I get from the book is that Hillary Clinton is not about left or right; she's about Hillary Clinton. When Pres-elect Obama asked her to be his Secretary of State, she didn't express concerns about policy. Her main demand in return for accepting the job was that she would get to choose who would fill the slots underneath her. She wanted to bring in her friends and allies, not Obama's.

Upon becoming SOS, she formed strong alliances with Robert Gates and David Petraeus, both Republicans. Hillary does not have core principles; she has core allies and core interests. That is her framework, and she's good within that framework. Maybe that is what the US voter wants now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2015, 05:56 AM
 
2,320 posts, read 2,083,618 times
Reputation: 3835
I think Martin O'Malley is the best of the Democratic crop right now. He's composed for the most part; just a little nervous around the edges, but he can snuff that out through coaching. He's direct; he won't answer questions that he doesn't want to, and he'll say so, and he doesn't seem to dodge questions. He doesn't speak in that cookie-cutter language with all the talking points; he's more human. AND he's won Maryland, a tough city for a conservative-looking white guy.

He comes across as trustworthy and a little younger than his years. Attorney wife is not a stand-out but not a detriment, like Sandra Lee would be to Andrew Cuomo. I think platinum-blonde chef Sandra would hold him back (in public sentiment / opinion) if Cuomo does run. They'd likely get married, which would be just as likely to be contrived, and she just stands out TOO much. He also has those Kennedy girls, which is a detriment to those who really, really want to move beyond ANYTHING Kennedy, and he might come off in Middle America as a little too ethnic. He's not as polished as O'Malley, but his numbers are better right now. These two are probably the best.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2015, 08:34 AM
 
Location: Earth
17,447 posts, read 23,883,118 times
Reputation: 7264
Jim Webb
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2015, 09:18 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 72,326,058 times
Reputation: 27564
I don't know but surely the Dem party has someone better than Hillary.
I do not think she will be good for the country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2015, 02:39 PM
 
Location: Utah
546 posts, read 324,073 times
Reputation: 674
Joe Manchin doesn't toe the Democratic party line on issues, and that would be refreshing, but I don't think he has a chance with the party faithful. On paper though, with experience as Governor and Senator, I think he's more than reasonably qualified.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:43 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top