I donated money for the last election, so I get shit from the Democratic party all the time. A lot of it is directed towards getting Hillary first nominated and then elected.
She hasn't decided to run. Frankly I'm not that interested. But I can see the arguments, pro and con.
pro/con: We would in effect be reelecting Bill Clinton, since hubby would no doubt have a say in things, much more so than Michele Obama does. The con is that he has a lot of baggage attached, for all that he was a good president.
pro/con: experience, first as First Lady, then a Senator, then Secretary of State. Well known figure, has worked at the national and international level, seems to be respected by other national governments. Same con: baggage.
I'm a little intrigued by the possibility, but frankly, she never struck me as a charismatic leader, but more of a hard worker. Probably a better choice between the two, but she doesn't bring exactly a sparkling presence to the party. I'm honestly not a big fan, but would probably vote for her if nominated, because anything the Republican Party can bring is tainted by the Tea Party.
I like Elizabeth Warren. She is one gutsy babe, and has had the moxie and intelligence to stand up to the power brokers on Wall Street and in congress. I haven't seen anything she's done I disagree with, and she has very little in the way of baggage, so far as I can tell.
Whatever. Interested in your opinion.
i would love a Warren presidency... she seems a true progressive. Hillary is still too establishment. But she would wipe the floor with the Republicans like her husband did.
Hillary is better than anyone I can foresee the Republicans putting up, but yeah she is far too establishment to get my support. The Democratic party has several people who would be far better choices.
It would take a lot to convince me to vote for anyone who identifies as either republican or democrat.
I only vote Democrat out of necessity; while voting for the people you like is fine and dandy, the majority of Americans simply do not agree with third party candidates enough for them to stand a chance. Therefor I vote for the most likely to win who has the closest ideology to me... which is pretty damn far, but still a good-bit closer than the opposition.
If we had a third party that wasn't hard-core libertarian, hard-core communist, hard-core (insert ideology here) they might actually stand a chance. But we don't, or they are so small they don't even get the limited attention the Libertarian and Freedom or w/e its called parties get.
I think a more central-left party could actually compete with the Ds and Rs, but there isn't one with outreach to establish itself on a national level.
I'd vote for old ironsides Hillary anytime!
Quote from: "Atheon"i would love a Warren presidency... she seems a true progressive. Hillary is still too establishment. But she would wipe the floor with the Republicans like her husband did.
When Hillary ran against Obama, I voted for Obama. I liked Hillary well enough, but I used the words "a good ole boy" when describing her. She does seem rather establishment. Would I vote for her if she ran? I'm not sure. She would have to make an argument that convinced me, but as I get older, I tend not to believe much of what career politicians say.
Hillary gets things done. Thats it in a nut shell.
The Democrats managed to avoid that mistake in 2008. Obama saved them from Candidate Hillary.
It seems that the Democrats are never satisfied when they fail to make a mistake.
Quote from: "Jason_Harvestdancer"It seems that the Democrats are never satisfied when they fail to make a mistake.
No, there are Democrats who seem genuinely satisfied when the guy they vote for wins. At that point, they go from activist mode into cheerleading mode and praise everything their guy does, no matter how bad it is. Where they can actually see failure, it's the Republican's fault. I know people like this. They account for about 25% of the Democratic base. The Republican Party has it's cheerleaders also, and they make up an even higher percentage of their own base, maybe more like 75%.
Hilary is ruthless from what I know. the whole clinton machine is. They pissed me off during the 2008 campaign. I like Obama because he was willing to reach across the aisle.
But then I saw the results of that. Anything Obama agrees to, the republicans blindly oppose, even bills they created. Obama's a good guy, I think even if if I don't agree with him on everything, but he's too nice and conciliatory. He's not a good politician. unfortunately because of how our system is setup you have to be a good politician to get anything done, no matter how right you are.
So hillary gets my support this time. She's ruthless and crooked enough out outwit the GOP while still being sane and not wanting to gut everything from the post office to free lunches for kids, even if you have to take down the country to get your way.
my ideal would be Warren but if she won, I doubt she'd get anything done given how our system is set up. She'd push for all these wonderful ultra left goals and every one of them would get cockblocked by the congress. I hope she runs in 2024 though. maybe we'll be progressive enough by then as a nation that she may actually have a chance at getting her stuff through without having to resort to political shenanigans.
I don't think it makes any difference who gets in, the super rich and powerful control everything in the world, always have and always will because they can. :evil: Solitary
(//http://i.imgur.com/LAxUtOR.jpg)
Ask yourself if you would vote for her if she weren't a Clinton. If she were just another career politician.
I won't vote for her just because she is a member of a celebrated political family.
I won't vote for her just so I can see the first female president in office. I already made that kind of mistake once. NEVER again.
She will have to convince me that she is worthy of my vote and honestly it's going to take some things that a Democratic candidate isn't ever going to do.
1) Repeal Obamacare
2) Close Guantanamo Bay forever and pass a law forbidding such prisons from existing
3) Discontinue the Patriot Act
4) Terminate NSA surveillance and order a criminal investigation of the agency for constitutional violations
5) Pass internet freedom laws that put all the power in the hands of the individual users and take it decidedly out of the hands of corporations
6) Pursue congressional term limits. Yes I know it won't happen but the debate should always be on the table and never ever go away.
7) Completely withdraw all military forces from Afghanistan immediately
8) Federal recognition of gay marriage
9) Federal funding for abortion
10) Legalization of drugs. Yeah thats right. All of them. End the war on drugs. Put the right to choose what people put into their bodies back in their hands. Take an enormous chunk of power and funding out of the prison industrial complex
11) Refund NASA with a larger budget than ever and a new stated goal of colonizing the moon and putting astronauts on Mars
12) Pursue the disabling of the filibuster
13) Propose a national plan to repair our crumbling road and bridge infrastructure
14) Pass legislation severely curtailing private lobbying
Those are just the things I can think of off the top of my head. A lot of that stuff was supposed to be done by Obama. I believe that behind all the promises and smiles, Hillary is the same kind of politician as Obama. I can't ever see myself voting for her.
They're all corrupt to a degree but anybody that thinks the GOP and democrats are the same thing with different names just isn't paying attention. its that simple.
either that or you so so radical that you're like the christian fundies who see atheists and liberal christians and think they are one and the same.
Money talks and bull shit walks with any name tag! :shock: :evil: Solitary
Quote from: "Nonsensei"Repeal Obamacare
and go back to the system where you can be denied coverage for care? my guess is you want it repealed so we can go to single payer. problem is thats not a political reality right now.
I'm with John Stewart who wants the same thing but admits that "extending health insurance to 25 million people is better than not that."
The left's version of the uncompromising idealists teabaggers who don't see political realities and work for reachable improvements needs to wake up.
Quote from: "hillbillyatheist"They're all corrupt to a degree but anybody that thinks the GOP and democrats are the same thing with different names just isn't paying attention. its that simple.
either that or you so so radical that you're like the christian fundies who see atheists and liberal christians and think they are one and the same.
Sadly, it's that kind of thinking that allows the GOP to get in. And with every election, the radicals in that party have been emboldened. And so what we have right now is a tiny faction of a party that controls 1/3 of the government holding the whole country under extortion. But people as we see in this thread can't make the difference between these two parties. Go figure.
I'd vote for Hillary no problem. While I'd prefer a much more left leaning president, unless you have a similarly configured congress and Senate, it would be pointless. Jfk was great, but lbj had the moxi, the mmuscle and the savy to get some tough legislation passed.
Quote from: "hillbillyatheist"Quote from: "Nonsensei"Repeal Obamacare
and go back to the system where you can be denied coverage for care? my guess is you want it repealed so we can go to single payer. problem is thats not a political reality right now.
I'm with John Stewart who wants the same thing but admits that "extending health insurance to 25 million people is better than not that."
The left's version of the uncompromising idealists teabaggers who don't see political realities and work for reachable improvements needs to wake up.
There are a number of problems with Obamacare that make it worthwhile to repeal it in it's entirety and pursue passing something better, like socialized health care. It was a bill passed in haste and at any cost. Obama decided to foolishly pursue this agenda first, banking the majority of his political capital on passing it. All the republicans had to do was stonewall, and they did. Desperate to pass anything rather than look like he suffered a serious defeat right off the bat, Obama became willing to put almost anything in the bill to get people to vote for it. By the time it was over some thousand page mess that nobody has fully read and nobody really wanted was enacted.
A national bill that enacts legal penalties on all citizens unless they purchase a private product should be passed because everyone agrees that it is necessary, not because it was what came out the anus of Washington after the political machine that doesn't give the slightest fuck about American citizens was done with it.
Yes, I would vote for her, but I don't think she stands a chance in hell.
Elizabeth Warren is my favorite potential so far. I don't think we'd be lucky enough to have her run but one can dream.
The republicans are likely to put up the most extreme asshole they can find. Virtually any democrat will destroy them unless they succeed in preventing minorities from voting and it is hard to imagine the courts allowing that.
With that, I think Hillary would have been a better choice than Obama this time but he was the one who got the nomination.
Honestly a long shot but hey, I can dream
http://www.policymic.com/articles/64355 ... candidates (http://www.policymic.com/articles/64355/elizabeth-warren-2016-danger-actual-democrat-may-be-among-presidential-candidates)
They're all working for the same people. Id doesn't matter who gets the nomination from either party.
Elizabeth Warren and Barney Frank FTW Not likely but would be sure to get my vote.
Quote from: "Minimalist"The republicans are likely to put up the most extreme asshole they can find.
That has not served them well in the last two elections, why would they make the same mistake a third time? I bet they are still kicking themselves over McCain, who was a relatively normal Republican, but his running mate completely slaughtered any chances he had.
If they pick a moderate that isn't a fucking crazy religious asshole, they may actually stand a chance.