Hillary's running mate

MalibuGuru · Joined: 11 Nov 1993 Posts: 9300

Obama is not the boss. He is not the king. You are a fool if you think congress is supposed to do the things Obama wants them to. They will not vote the R's out in November. That is for sure.

Obama needs to bend to congress's desires, not the other way around. He is one man in one third of government.

mac · Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2014 10:32 pm Post subject:

Well, I might not get any thoughtful ideas about who might make a good vice presidential candidate. The prospect of Bard's head exploding--well before Hillary is even elected--does add a certain amount of drama.

I predict the Republicans will have no idea why they lost--again. And they will continue to say things that poison the party to the growing minority population in the country. Even immigrants from Eastern Europe.

swchandler · Joined: 08 Nov 1993 Posts: 10588

"Chandler, The republicans in congress are being paid not to trust this president. He should come up with something that half of D's and half of R's can agree on. This is the way Tip O'Neil and Reagan got things done."

Oh, you mean important domestic concerns like healthcare reform, immigration reform, infrastructure investment, energy policy, reasonable gun control regulations, government support for technological innovation and development, etc.? You have to remember that House Speaker Boehner doesn't seem inclined at all to abandon the Hastert rule and allow any important votes on any of the above issues. If he did, I think that Senate Majority Leader Reid would be a lot more cooperative.

Frankly, I don't think that the majority of Republicans are willing to compromise, particularly with President Obama. You may not like Obama for a handful of specious reasons, but what he would like the Congress to focus on is not far off path that we need to be following. Why focus on his golf game, the color of his suit, or a bunch of imagined fantasies folks on the right typically seem to dream up?

When it comes to it, you have to admit that you hang in some questionable areas that don't seem to be dedicated at all to any practical compromise with the Obama Administration or the Democratic party. Moreover, you and isobars share a lot of synergy in your outlook and goals. Given that fact alone, you might want to reconsider your stance. isobars is forever lost, but do you need to be?

MalibuGuru · Joined: 11 Nov 1993 Posts: 9300

Food for thought Chandler....The conservatives don't seemed opposed to removing Rino's at the potential cost of losing an election. I have not heard of 1 D contest where the progressives were axing a tenured member of congress.

Why? I simply ask why do you need Hillary? Why do we need incumbents in either party? Don't the American people want and deserve change? You liberals seem content to let crony capitalism and the banks run America. Obama has raised billions of dollars from industry. He outspent McCain and Romney 10 to 1. Isn't the control of these special interests a top priority for us all? Both Obama and congress have very low approval ratings. Let's do something about this.

swchandler · Joined: 08 Nov 1993 Posts: 10588

"Food for thought Chandler....The conservatives don't seemed opposed to removing Rino's at the potential cost of losing an election. I have not heard of 1 D contest where the progressives were axing a tenured member of congress.

Why? I simply ask why do you need Hillary? Why do we need incumbents in either party? Don't the American people want and deserve change? You liberals seem content to let crony capitalism and the banks run America. Obama has raised billions of dollars from industry. He outspent McCain and Romney 10 to 1. Isn't the control of these special interests a top priority for us all? Both Obama and congress have very low approval ratings. Let's do something about this."

Just to be forthright, I've never supported mandatory term limits, and I never would. I think that there's something to be said for experience and the responsibility of maintaining the support of your constituency. What I fear most is the effect of money on electoral politics. Money drives interests, and not necessarily the ones we want. The Koch brothers or Grover Norquist are perfect examples of monied interests unduly influencing electoral politics. Their kind of "change" or "new ideas" is not something that I support.

Regarding your negative taking points about corporate interests and crony capitalists, I'm thinking that you have no real experience working for any large private or corporate interests. You got this empty call for small business as the savior of the economy, but you can provide nothing specific that comes anywhere close to convincing me that you're on it, or know what the details are. Everything in the economy is about supply and demand. Simply wanting more small business, whatever that really is, isn't going to lead to success. How many pizza joints and dry cleaners do we need?

Having worked my career at a large defense and space contractor, I had a great opportunity to see real small businesses perform. We were looking for and depending on excellence. Truly, it was a synergy between large and small companies that could accomplish meaningful goals. It's about the most talented folks getting together and producing the products and services that folks want. Nothing wrong with good business that's profitable and productive. I'm even one to give the oil companies credit in the scheme of things, because we need them.

Lastly, talking about Governor Romney, as if he was lacking in corporate money and support in his bid for the presidency is unbelievable. Both McCain and Romney are rich beyond comparison in the real world, and both had huge corporate influence behind them. Treating them like victims unfairly gamed is laughable. The Republican brand just wasn't selling.

pueno · Joined: 03 Mar 2007 Posts: 2807

coboardhead · Joined: 26 Oct 2009 Posts: 4303

Not that I would vote for her...depends on who the Repubs pick.

Other names to Mac's list

Mark Warner...Virginia is very important.
Wesley Clark...military leadership and cross aisle popularity

Hickenlooper may be out. The Colo liberals forced him to go a bit too far on gun control and he may not even get re-elected.

Agree Castro would be a possible. Too bad we need to look for a star rather than someone with experience. It would be better he did become Gov of Texas first.

mac · Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 10:18 am Post subject:

Thanks CB. Posing this question does not mean that I am necessarily a Clinton supporter--in fact, it is partly an indictment of the weakness of the Democratic bench. I supported Obama because Hillary is too much of a hawk, and I feared that she was too beholden to big pharma. So Obama made the same deal with big pharma that Hillary would have made.

Agree on Hickenlooper, both because gun control is poison to too many independents, and because Hillary doesn't need help in the West. Also agree that one of the twins will be governor of Texas; that will season him and give demographic changes time to develop so that Texas will be in play.

The other two names are interesting--but where do they help?

coboardhead · Joined: 26 Oct 2009 Posts: 4303

Regardless of H Clinton's actual political record, she is still considered by many to be a liberal. So, Clark or Warner could provide some perceived balance. And, if Warner delivers Virginia, it could be important. Clark has experience in the MidEast...maybe our most pressing issue.

I think Warren is out. Two women on the ticket would be tough.

The choice may be more important than in other elections...Obama could have picked anyone...because of Clinton's age.

nw30 · Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 5:21 pm Post subject:

Colin Powell, they both have a closet full of conservative and liberal outfits, when either one of them go out you'll never know what they are dressed as.
They are the perfect couple for today's age, large closets so they can dress for any occasion, interracial, they pander, and everything else needed to run a country obsessed appearances over substance.