Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 11-23-2013, 04:40 AM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,419 posts, read 20,391,293 times
Reputation: 8958

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElizaTeal View Post
Elizabeth Warren, the pseudo American Indian. I have high cheek bones, maybe I should work that to my advantage.
Sure. Democrats seem to have no problem with lies and cheating. Why should we be different? (I couldn't)

My wife has real Cherokee blood (admittedly only about 1/16 Cherokee, I think).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-25-2013, 08:58 AM
 
Location: Denver, Colorado
1,976 posts, read 2,361,897 times
Reputation: 1769
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knox Harrington View Post
Easy, Warren over Clinton.

I probably know Senator Warren better than anyone on this board (although we are not close friends), and she is sharp as a tack and is dead set on making life better for the average Joe and making life worse for the big banks if they play outside the rules.

Trust me, she didn't run for office to get rich or make a name for herself. She was plenty accomplished before she was elected to the Senate. She really is passionate about leveling the playing field and that has been shown in her track record in the Senate since she was elected.
Our country needs more public servants like Warren. I support her positions on the issues, whereas Clinton is a mixed bag. I like that Clinton supports gun and health care reform, but unfortunately she doesn't support single-payer. She appears to be pro-choice. Her position on labour is unclear but I cannot locate any evidence that she has worked to support labour and labour unions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-28-2013, 04:37 AM
 
1,496 posts, read 1,863,686 times
Reputation: 1224
Hillary Clinton because she can win.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2013, 12:27 AM
 
48,493 posts, read 97,151,588 times
Reputation: 18310
Both's problem is their association being part of the Washington stagnation now. That is where Christie gets his edge leading among independents in polls over Hillary. The number one problem listed in poll time after time is that nation is headed in wrong direction. I don't think anyone in with a record lately in Washington can win. They will be associated with one side or the other's failure to reach compromise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2013, 06:55 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,913 posts, read 19,607,701 times
Reputation: 9673
Warren is a lair and a nut job.....Hillary all the way
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2013, 11:47 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,975 posts, read 16,519,388 times
Reputation: 4586
As a Republican, I'd like to say Warren because she'd be easier to beat. But, just as a nutjob on the right like Ted Cruz could actually win given the right set of circumstances, so could Warren. So I say Hillary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2013, 02:59 PM
 
Location: the ass of nowhere (the midwest)
502 posts, read 720,438 times
Reputation: 468
If not Warren, I sense that *someone* from the far left will challenge Hillary in 2016.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2013, 03:15 PM
 
Location: Type 0.73 Kardashev
11,109 posts, read 9,889,921 times
Reputation: 40166
Quote:
Originally Posted by fightforlove View Post
If not Warren, I sense that *someone* from the far left will challenge Hillary in 2016.
'If'? Warren clearly will not run.

Someone? Sure. There will be a Dennis Kucinich type out there. And there will probably be someone more viable to Clinton's left, such as Martin O'Malley. But he's not left enough to really fire up the base, most likely.

But there just isn't a liberal darling of the left, such as Warren, who seems likely to run - at least, not at this point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 08:00 AM
 
Location: the ass of nowhere (the midwest)
502 posts, read 720,438 times
Reputation: 468
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unsettomati View Post
'If'? Warren clearly will not run.

Someone? Sure. There will be a Dennis Kucinich type out there. And there will probably be someone more viable to Clinton's left, such as Martin O'Malley. But he's not left enough to really fire up the base, most likely.

But there just isn't a liberal darling of the left, such as Warren, who seems likely to run - at least, not at this point.
Howard Dean was a little-known VT governor in 2003. Of course, he hadn't been very liberal until then, but he came out against the war and caught fire with the far left. If the economy is still messy in 2016 and Obama's presidency is seen as a disappointment, I could see someone seriously challenge Hillary from the left on economy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 08:33 AM
 
Location: Type 0.73 Kardashev
11,109 posts, read 9,889,921 times
Reputation: 40166
Quote:
Originally Posted by fightforlove View Post
Howard Dean was a little-known VT governor in 2003. Of course, he hadn't been very liberal until then, but he came out against the war and caught fire with the far left. If the economy is still messy in 2016 and Obama's presidency is seen as a disappointment, I could see someone seriously challenge Hillary from the left on economy.
Well, that's precisely what I mean.

Howard Dean? He won one state in 2004. He was buried by the lackluster campaign of the lackluster John Kerry. He was also lapped by John Edwards that year. And Hillary Clinton is, I daresay, politically rather more formidable than Kerry and Edwards ever were, combined.
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:45 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top