Hillary was once defeated by a newbie/no-namer, she can be defeated again.

[Veganhealedme]

Obama won the '08 primaries running on a rather progressive campaign, compared to Hillary, who was the establishment pick.

Obama then went on to win the general election, again while running on rather progressive themes. He campaigned on ending wars, promoting EFCA, reversing outsourcing and bringing factories back home, equal pay, better wages etc.

Those are some very progressive themes to run a national campaign for president on. He was elected while running on those prog themes.

He defeated a Dem powerhouse. He defeated the Dem establishment's favorite pick. He then went on to defeat the Repubs and Sen McCain/Brawlin.

He did this as a progressive.

A virtual unknown, outside of Democratic circles.

Virtual unknowns that run progressive campaigns can't win pres elections, RIGHT?

If anyone thinks that Bernie or Warren can't win, please review the '08 Dem primary and the ensuing general election.

Then, get back to me.

Sanders or Warren can win.

[JI7]

1. Obama was not a "newbie/no namer" , his 2004 speech got him huge national and international attentio

he was a huge name in US politics from that time.

i don't know why people act like he just came out of nowhere to run in 2008. he became huge even before the 2004 elections took place.

also Obama was getting many Dem Establishment members on his side early on also.

this is just silly.

[billhicks76]

72. He Ws Promoted Like Crazy After That Speech

Almost like he was chosen...maybe by the intelligence community who knew they could blackmail him later by leveraging wiretaps of his personal life? It all seemed so choreographed you're right. But Hillary is WAY too close to the Bush family...I refuse to vote for her or Jeb...and if you don't believe those are our dictated choices and have been since 2008 then I suggest you don't gamble. I will vote third party progressive and accept we change nothing unless its in the streets and town halls.

[brooklynite]

146. TOS: Don't go overboard with the crazy talk.

[billhicks76]

187. Lol...Not :)

Its just funny because I always said he came out of nowhere and he did but in 2004 with that speech and they talked about him as a Presidential candidate minutes afterward. But I stand by what I said about NSA...Its not crazy talk and you need a refreshed perspective because blackmail and leverage are political tactics that go back centuries whether brainwashing TV existed or not. Already 2 high level NSA analysts, Binney and Tice, have said we have no elected government anymore and that the intelligence community makes the rules now. We see Representatives resign without reason or journalistic endeavors dropped at the last minute all the time...we see the Senate roll over even when spied on and damning torture reports suppressed. These two guys said NSA and military contractors with access to their info spend an inordinate amount of time wiretapping federal judges, attorneys, journalists, activists, generals, Senators etc and they indicated that Obama was under surveillance in 2005. And they said it was all about leverage so unless you are going to impugn their solid reputations like NSA did and call them crazy, which is exactly what the USSR used to do to its dissidents and whistleblowers, I suggest you keep an open mind and look outside the box...especially the celluloid one because Truth Is Stranger Than Fiction.

[brooklynite]

192. I repeat my comment...

You're welcome to believe what you want, and it's not my site, but what you propose verges on CT in my book.

[Enthusiast]

204. +1!

[fadedrose]

112. Bernie said on Chuck Todd's program...

at least I think it was Meet the Press, maybe it was, maybe it wasn't, but who cares?

Anyhow, he was asked about the possibility of running as a Democrat. He said he might "have to" because the Dems had every state's party organized and apparatus set up, and the Independents did not have these features for him to use..

So, why can't he ask to speak at the Democratic Convention, as a Democrat if he must, embrace the platform, and speak to the people about their problems.

He will have the biggest audience of his life, and a lot of Dems already want him...

[Enthusiast]

206. +1!

Right on, fadedrose!

[YoungDemCA]

127. +1

False comparison.

[bread_and_roses]

193. "huge" in the Beltway mayhap, but out here in the hinterlands

- even the hinterlands of upstate NY - no one had a clue who he was. So what was it like in - say - the hinterlands of Oklahoma?

Most ordinary people could care less about a speech at a national political convention. To think otherwise is just - well, you know.

[geek tragedy]

2. Obama was a household name by 2007.

There will be no Obama-like candidate in 2016.

[LordGlenconner]

28. But Bernie CAN win

[Atman]

147. America will not, under any circumstances, elect a SOCIALIST president.

Last edited Thu Sep 25, 2014, 05:10 PM - Edit history (1)

It ain't gonna happen. We've been brainwashed our entire lives that "European style Socialism" is akin to Communism and Fascism and any other ism the right-wing want to throw out there. It just won't happen. Bernie Sanders can win elections in the big hippie commune that is Vermont, but he'll never win on a national scale.

[Veilex]

203. "America will not" - People said that about a 2nd Bush term... and yet it happened.

Regardless of reasons, it happened. There are countless things that "America will not" vote for, that get voted for all the time.
It is not a question of if Bernie can get elected. He absolutely can! It is a question of campaign support and logistics. A good campaign can win nearly anyone the presidency... how else would you explain away Bush Jr's first term in office?

[allinthegame]

185. Perfect

Response

[Veilex]

205. If by perfect you mean

perfectly asinine, I agree!

[Cali_Democrat]

63. True

Obama was new, but he certainly wasn't a no-namer.

This is revisionist history.

[JDPriestly]

71. I had never heard of him. Most Americans had not heard of him other than his convention

speech. Elizabeth Warren is also extremely well known. So is Bernie Sanders.

Either Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders could win. And even if they don't win, they can change the discussion and thereby change the course of history.

[Cali_Democrat]

80. Actually I would argue that Obama was much more well-known then

than Warren is now.

The average American has no idea who she is.

[thesquanderer]

101. Do you have any links/facts to support that?

i.e. what Warren's name recognition is now, versus what Obama's was in September of 2006?

[Cali_Democrat]

102. No, but does the other poster have links to support their assertions?

I was thinking that this was more of a matter of opinion.

I didn't save any polls/links from 2007/2008.

Google is your friend?

[thesquanderer]

103. Okay, I have some facts!

My first googling didn't come up with anything useful , that's why I asked you. I figured, if you said that's what you would argue, you might have the facts. But yes, facts are there to be found... kind of. These are not definitive by any means, but they do at least give some indication:

Gallup poll July 2006
Polled opinions on ten Dem politicians who were thought to be possible candidates. Obama was not even on the list.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/23245/clinton-giuliani-top-2008-presidential-nomination-polls.aspx

Gallup poll July 2014
Polled opinions on five Dem politicians who are thought to be possible candidates. Warren is on the list.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/173594/cuomo-warren-malley-unknown-democrats.aspx

[LawDeeDah]

105. I didn't know who Obama was during the first debates. Never heard of him.

Not that my knowledge or lack thereof is any yardstick.

He may have been well noted by people on the inside who are political beasts, but I don't think the average voter knew who the heck he was in the early stages of the primaries.

just my 2 dollars.

[laundry_queen]

227. Good find! nt

[JDPriestly]

242. Thanks!

Hillary tends to make political mistakes. That is the big problem. Her tongue runs away with her. Warren also makes mistakes, but Warren's humility lets her recover. Hillary is very proud. That is one of her big problems. She was always top of her class and doesn't recover well from a goof. That is more typically a Republican failing.

[customerserviceguy]

120. Sorry, once Hillary brushes both of them out of her way

She will do whatever she wants to, no matter how she changes a few stump speeches.

There's an old saying, "If you would kill a king, then you must succeed." Nobody's going to knock Hillary off her trajectory.

[Veilex]

209. Only time will tell for sure.

[Ikonoklast]

226. Hillary's "inevitability" took a huge ding the first time around...she was rejected by Democrats.

What makes you think Democrats want her this time around?

Turd Way Democrats are floaters or sinkers, you pick.

[customerserviceguy]

240. Yeah, yeah, I keep hearing that

But there's no Barack Obama in the race this time. Joe Biden isn't going to outperform her, and unfortunately, neither is Bernie Sanders, a man who most Americans wouldn't be familiar with right now. I doubt that a simple majority (pun intended) could even tell you what state he represents in the US Senate.

Elizabeth Warren says she's not running. And there's no Southerner, like John Edwards was in 2008, grabbing the rightmost Democratic voters. Had he not run, Hillary might have won Iowa.

The stars are all aligning in her way this time that they just didn't six years ago. Don't get me wrong, I'm not happy with the possibilities, but I'm sure seeing whatever reich wing nutjob the Repukes put up will cause us all to focus on picking the lesser of the two evils.

[Veilex]

207. "This is revisionist history" - Hardly

He might have made a name for himself amongst civics fanboys and at a local level, but he was far and away not a house-hold name until, really, the presidential debates.

[Logical]

106. Bullshit. Maybe for people here, not for the average person! nt

[geek tragedy]

123. He was the 2004 Keynote speaker, and had written two best-selling novels.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/19/weekinreview/19kornblut.html?_r=0

He was described as a "rock star" so often it became a cliche.

He raised more money than Hillary Clinton. A lot more than the 2004 VP nominee, John Edwards. In the very first quarter (1Q2007) he was a candidate.

And, do I really have to post the pictures of the crowds he drew in 2007?

There's no one in the entire Democratic party now--other than Hillary Clinton--who has anywhere near that kind of juice.

[Logical]

126. He was so popular that Hillary had a 30 point lead on him....

Even from black voters!

[geek tragedy]

129. Not where he was campaigning.

Obama is a very special political talent. People have forgotten that.

[Generic Other]

122. I never heard of the Clintons

before Bill won the nomination.

[geek tragedy]

124. Bill ran against an exceptionally weak field since the big names sat it out, because

they thought Poppy Bush would be unbeatable after the Iraq war.

His only competition was Paul Tsongas and then former Governor Moonbeam.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. The important question is, Will Goldman Sachs still pay her for entertaining them if she loses?

[VanillaRhapsody]

5. question is...

Are you going to vote for her if she is the Dem. nominee?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. The simple answer is....No.

Well....anything is possible. But, I put the chances of wasting my vote on Hillary about the same as winning the Mega-Bucks lottery, which I don't play.

[VanillaRhapsody]

13. and why do we Democrats care what an Indie thinks

About Hillary Clinton?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. I've been a Democrat since 1965...you?

[VanillaRhapsody]

17. and elizabeth warren WAS a Republican soooo

[former9thward]

50. And Hillary was a Republican and Reagan was a Democrat.

So what? In a nation governed by a one party duopoly it is easy to shift back and forth.

[VanillaRhapsody]

61. no she wasnt

Sorry to disappoint you. But if you are not cimmutted ti vote for whom my fellow Democrats select in the Democratic Primary.....YOU are not a Democrat....you are officially Independent by definition.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

74. How does one become "officially" independent? By decree?

[VanillaRhapsody]

76. when you can no longer be counted on to vote

Democrat.....then you are Independent by definition...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

99. Whose definition? Yours?

[VanillaRhapsody]

152. dictionaries

Perhaps you have heard of them?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

156. I'll inform my state government to check the dictionary to see if I'm registered as an Independent.

According to them I'm a Democrat.

[VanillaRhapsody]

167. please do...

[Veilex]

211. "dictionaries Perhaps you have heard of them?"

"when you can no longer be counted on to vote Democrat.....then you are Independent by definition... " - said no dictionary ever.

[former9thward]

92. You don't know the history of your candidate?

Sorry to disappoint you.

Raised in a politically conservative household, at age thirteen Rodham helped canvass South Side Chicago following the very close 1960 U.S. presidential election, where she found evidence of electoral fraud against Republican candidate Richard Nixon. She then volunteered to campaign for Republican candidate Barry Goldwater in the U.S. presidential election of 1964. Rodham's early political development was shaped most by her high school history teacher (like her father, a fervent anticommunist), who introduced her to Goldwater's The Conscience of a Conservative, and by her Methodist youth minister (like her mother, concerned with issues of social justice), with whom she saw and met civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. in Chicago in 1962.

In 1965, Rodham enrolled at Wellesley College, where she majored in political science. During her freshman year, she served as president of the Wellesley Young Republicans; with this Rockefeller Republican-oriented group, she supported the elections of John Lindsay and Edward Brooke.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton

I know you will shout that that is when she was young. And yes it was. I don't care that she was a Republican and I don't care if Warren was either. They are not now.

[VanillaRhapsody]

154. oh as a child?

Are you serious?

Or are you the same exact person you were then? I did polling for Ross Perot as a kid.....but i didnt vote for him..did she register as a Republican? Because EW sure did!

So yeah i knew about that......and knew my history. Reach much?

[former9thward]

158. So now college students are "children"?

We allow someone who is a "child" by your definition the right to vote, drive, enlist in the military, sign contracts, etc. Amazing.

[Veilex]

212. You're the one who made the absolute claim that Hillary

had never been a republican. Here's your crow... would you like salt with that?

[VanillaRhapsody]

221. Then my original position that if you DON'T commit to vote for the winner of the Democratic primary

you are no longer a Democrat but an Independent stands....


Thanks for proving my point as you cannot have it both ways!

AND thanks for playing ya hear!

[Veilex]

224. I'm in awe of your utter lack of logic.

More: World according to VanillaRhapsody™

[VanillaRhapsody]

225. its VERY logical

Read a dictionary once in a while it might help with that

[Veilex]

232. lol

You need a re-education on logic... and quite a few other things. Especially based on the "dictionary" you use.

[VanillaRhapsody]

234. no actually I'm a programmer

Logic is my thing....I suggested a dictionary for you because you obviously have no idea what that word means...

[Veilex]

238. I've already seen what you equate to a dictionary definition...

<?php
printf("VanillaRhapsody needs a real dictionary... badly&quot ;

fscanf(STDIN, "%s", $Pause);
// Knowing computer logic and argumentation are ?
?>

[VanillaRhapsody]

190. and warren was an adult...

[DavidG_WI]

97. Hillary is a corporate dem...

AKA Republican lite.

[VanillaRhapsody]

177. bullfuckingshit

Http://ontheissues.com/hillary_clinton.htm

[Veilex]

213. Then I guess this is all just smoke and mirrors...

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/hillary-clintons-goldman-sachs-problem

Can the former secretary of state cultivate populist cred while hobnobbing with Goldman and pocketing money from it and other Wall Street firms? Last year, she gave two paid speeches to Goldman Sachs audiences. (Her customary fee is $200,000 a speech.)

[VanillaRhapsody]

219. Then I guess you haven't seen this....

and they have all the proof you want right here:

http://www.ontheissues.org/hillary_clinton.htm

[Veilex]

222. Interesting how your site there fails to count actions such as taking bribes from Goldman Sachs...

[LawDeeDah]

197. She certainly is. She can speak all the pretty speeches she wants

on equality and fairness or whatever the lie du jour is, but her actions speak otherwise. Proven to be otherwise. Unfortunately this contrast between what is her truth and what are her lies, don't get much attention from people that so desperately want a first woman president they will stick their heads in sand, while blindfolded, on a moonless night.

[VanillaRhapsody]

220. For you too

http://www.ontheissues.org/hillary_clinton.htm


Based on these stances:

Strongly Favors topic 1:
Abortion is a woman's unrestricted right
(+5 points on Social scale) Lift ban on stem cell research to cure devastating diseases: Favors topic 1
Respect Roe v. Wade, but make adoptions easier too: Favors topic 1
Alternatives to pro-choice like forced pregnancy in Romania: Strongly Favors topic 1
Must safeguard constitutional rights, including choice: Favors topic 1
Remain vigilant on a woman’s right to chose: Favors topic 1
Keep abortion safe, legal and rare: Favors topic 1
Being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion: Favors topic 1
Supports parental notice & family planning: Opposes topic 1
No abortion for sex selection in China: Opposes topic 1
Voted liberal line on partial birth & harm to fetus: Favors topic 1
Endorsed Recommended by EMILY's List of pro-choice women: Favors topic 1
Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record: Strongly Favors topic 1
Expand embryonic stem cell research: Favors topic 1
Sponsored bill providing contraceptives for low-income women: Favors topic 1
Sponsored bill for emergency contraception for rape victims: Favors topic 1
Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance: Strongly Favors topic 1
Provide emergency contraception at military facilities: Favors topic 1
Ensure access to and funding for contraception: Favors topic 1
Focus on preventing pregnancy, plus emergency contraception: Favors topic 1
NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP: Favors topic 1
NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime: Favors topic 1
YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives: Favors topic 1
NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions: Favors topic 1
YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines: Favors topic 1
Strongly Favors topic 2:
Legally require hiring women & minorities
(-5 points on Economic scale) Some world leaders are still misogynistic: Favors topic 2
We’ve come a long way on race, but we have a long way to go: Strongly Favors topic 2
Apologize for slavery, but concentrate on civil rights now: Favors topic 2
Human rights are women’s rights: Neutral on topic 2
Women’s rights are human rights: Favors topic 2
OpEd: "18 million cracks" meant "lingering sexism": Strongly Favors topic 2
Equal pay is not yet equal: Strongly Favors topic 2
1988: Instituted gender diversity Report Card within ABA: Strongly Opposes topic 2
Argued with Bill Clinton about diluting affirmative action: Strongly Favors topic 2
Shift from group preferences to economic empowerment of all: Neutral on topic 2
Sponsored bill maintaining role of women in armed forces: Favors topic 2
Rated 96% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance: Strongly Favors topic 2
Recognize Juneteenth as historical end of slavery: Strongly Favors topic 2
Re-introduce the Equal Rights Amendment: Strongly Favors topic 2
Reinforce anti-discrimination and equal-pay requirements: Favors topic 2
Ban discriminatory compensation; allow 2 years to sue: Favors topic 2
Sponsored bill enforcing against gender pay discrimination: Strongly Favors topic 2
Strongly Favors topic 3:
Comfortable with same-sex marriage
(+5 points on Social scale) Increase America’s commitment against Global AIDS: Favors topic 3
DOMA discrimination holds us back from a more perfect union: Strongly Favors topic 3
I support gay marriage personally and as law: Strongly Favors topic 3
Let states decide gay marriage; they’re ahead of feds: Favors topic 3
2004:defended traditional marriage; 2006:voted for same-sex: Strongly Favors topic 3
Federal Marriage Amendment would be terrible step backwards: Favors topic 3
Gays deserve domestic partnership benefits: Strongly Favors topic 3
Military service based on conduct, not sexual orientation: Favors topic 3
More funding and stricter sentencing for hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3
Rated 89% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance: Strongly Favors topic 3
Provide benefits to domestic partners of Federal employees: Strongly Favors topic 3
YES on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3
NO on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage: Strongly Favors topic 3
No opinion on topic 4:
Keep God in the public sphere
(0 points on Social scale) Partner with faith based community in empowerment zones: Strongly Favors topic 4
Tap into churches to avoid more Louima & Diallo cases: Favors topic 4
Community involvement helps, but only in short term: Favors topic 4
Link payments to good parenting behavior: Opposes topic 4
Allow student prayer, but no religious instruction: Opposes topic 4
Character education: teach empathy & self-discipline: Favors topic 4
Change what kids see in the media: Favors topic 4
Co-sponsored bill to criminalize flag-burning: Favors topic 4
Rated 0% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-Family-Value voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 4
Rated 100% by the AU, indicating support of church-state separation: Strongly Opposes topic 4
NO on recommending Constitutional ban on flag desecration: Opposes topic 4
Strongly Favors topic 5:
Expand ObamaCare
(-5 points on Economic scale) Outcry if AIDS were leading disease of young whites: Favors topic 5
Lower costs and improve quality and cover everybody: Strongly Favors topic 5
Supply more medical needs of families, & insure all children: Strongly Favors topic 5
Medicare should be strengthened today: Favors topic 5
Smaller steps to progress on health care: Favors topic 5
Guaranteed benefits & focus on prevention: Neutral on topic 5
2006: If I can't do universal coverage, why run?: Strongly Favors topic 5
Universal health care will not work if it is voluntary: Strongly Favors topic 5
Universal health care coverage by the end of my second term: Strongly Favors topic 5
We need a uniquely American solution to health care: Favors topic 5
Health care initiatives are her first priority in Senate: Strongly Favors topic 5
Establish "report cards" on HMO quality of care: Favors topic 5
Invest funds to alleviate the nursing shortage: Favors topic 5
Let states make bulk Rx purchases, and other innovations: Opposes topic 5
Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record: Strongly Favors topic 5
Preserve access to Medicaid & SCHIP during economic downturn: Strongly Favors topic 5
NO on means-testing to determine Medicare Part D premium: Favors topic 5
NO on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit: Favors topic 5
NO on $40 billion per year for limited Medicare prescription drug benefit: Opposes topic 5
YES on increasing Medicaid rebate for producing generics: Favors topic 5
YES on negotiating bulk purchases for Medicare prescription drug: Strongly Favors topic 5
YES on expanding enrollment period for Medicare Part D: Favors topic 5
NO on limiting medical liability lawsuits to $250,000: Opposes topic 5
YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D: Favors topic 5
YES on overriding veto on expansion of Medicare: Favors topic 5
Strongly Opposes topic 6:
Privatize Social Security
(-5 points on Economic scale) 1997: Hillary warned against privatizing Social Security: Strongly Opposes topic 6
Soc.Sec. one of greatest inventions in American democracy: Strongly Opposes topic 6
Social Security protects families, not just retirees: Strongly Opposes topic 6
All should join the debate now to preserve future solvency: Opposes topic 6
Create Retirement Savings Accounts: Favors topic 6
Rated 100% by the ARA, indicating a pro-senior voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 6
NO on establishing reserve funds & pre-funding for Social Security: Opposes topic 6
Strongly Opposes topic 7:
Vouchers for school choice
(-5 points on Economic scale) OpEd: Common Core recycled from Clintons in 1980s and 1990s: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Fully fund special education & 21st century classrooms: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Supports public school choice; but not private nor parochial: Opposes topic 7
Vouchers drain money from public schools: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Fight with Gore for public schools; no voucher “gimmicks”: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Charter schools provide choice within public system: Opposes topic 7
Vouchers siphon off much-needed resources: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Parents can choose, but support public schools: Opposes topic 7
Supports public school choice and charter schools: Favors topic 7
Solemn vow never to abandon our public schools: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Offer every parent Charter Schools and public school choice: Opposes topic 7
Rated 82% by the NEA, indicating pro-public education votes: Strongly Opposes topic 7
YES on funding smaller classes instead of private tutors: Opposes topic 7
YES on funding student testing instead of private tutors: Opposes topic 7
YES on $5B for grants to local educational agencies: Opposes topic 7
Strongly Opposes topic 8:
Clean air and water are property rights
(-5 points on Social scale) $5B for green-collar jobs in economic stimulus package: Opposes topic 8
Voted against and consistently opposed to Yucca Mountain: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Scored 100% on Humane Society Scorecard on animal protection: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Remove PCBs from Hudson River by dredging 200 miles: Opposes topic 8
Rated 89% by the LCV, indicating pro-environment votes: Strongly Opposes topic 8
EPA must do better on mercury clean-up: Opposes topic 8
Grants for beach water pollution under Clean Water Act: Opposes topic 8
Strengthen prohibitions against animal fighting: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Opposes topic 9:
Stricter punishment reduces crime
(+2 points on Social scale) Longtime advocate of death penalty, with restrictions: Strongly Favors topic 9
Address the unacceptable increase in incarceration: Opposes topic 9
Mandatory sentences have been too widely used: Strongly Opposes topic 9
Give kids after-school activities to prevent gangs: Opposes topic 9
Spend more time with kids to prevent violence: Opposes topic 9
Supports citizen patrols & 3-Strikes-You’re-Out: Favors topic 9
Supports “Three Strikes” and more prison: Strongly Favors topic 9
End hate crimes and other intolerance: Favors topic 9
Require DNA testing for all federal executions: Opposes topic 9
Increase funding for "COPS ON THE BEAT" program: Opposes topic 9
Reduce recidivism by giving offenders a Second Chance: Strongly Opposes topic 9
YES on reinstating $1.15 billion funding for the COPS Program: Opposes topic 9
Strongly Opposes topic 10:
Absolute right to gun ownership
(-5 points on Economic scale) Rein in idea that anybody can have a gun anywhere, anytime: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Against illegal guns, crack down on illegal gun dealers: Opposes topic 10
Get assault weapons & guns off the street: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Background check system could prevent Virginia Tech massacre: Opposes topic 10
Congress’ failure at Littleton response inspired Senate run: Opposes topic 10
Limit access to weapons; look for early warning signs: Opposes topic 10
License and register all handgun sales: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Gun control protects our children: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Don’t water down sensible gun control legislation: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Lock up guns; store ammo separately: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Get weapons off the streets; zero tolerance for weapons: Opposes topic 10
Prevent unauthorized firearm use with "smart gun" technology: Opposes topic 10
NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence: Strongly Opposes topic 10
NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Strongly Favors topic 11:
Higher taxes on the wealthy
(-5 points on Economic scale) Rescind tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 a year: Strongly Favors topic 11
Pay down debt & cut taxes within balanced budget: Favors topic 11
GOP tax plan would hurt New York’s students: Favors topic 11
Rated 21% by NTU, indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes: Strongly Favors topic 11
Rated 80% by the CTJ, indicating support of progressive taxation: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on raising the Death Tax exemption to $5M from $1M: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on allowing AMT reduction without budget offset: Favors topic 11
YES on reducing marriage penalty instead of cutting top tax rates: Favors topic 11
YES on spending $448B of tax cut on education & debt reduction: Favors topic 11
NO on $350 billion in tax breaks over 11 years: Strongly Favors topic 11
YES on extending the tax cuts on capital gains and dividends: Strongly Opposes topic 11
YES on $47B for military by repealing capital gains tax cut: Favors topic 11
YES on retaining reduced taxes on capital gains & dividends: Strongly Opposes topic 11
NO on permanently repealing the `death tax`: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on supporting permanence of estate tax cuts: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on raising estate tax exemption to $5 million: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax: Strongly Favors topic 11
Favors topic 12:
Pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens
(+2 points on Social scale) Introduce a path to earn citizenship in the first 100 days: Strongly Favors topic 12
Consider halting certain raids on illegal immigrant families: Favors topic 12
Deporting all illegal immigrants is unrealistic: Strongly Favors topic 12
Illegal immigrants with driver’s licenses puts them at risk: Opposes topic 12
Oppose granting driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants: Opposes topic 12
More border patrolling on both Mexican AND Canadian borders: Opposes topic 12
Anti-immigrant bill would have criminalized Jesus Christ: Strongly Favors topic 12
Sanctuary cities ok; local police can’t enforce immigration: Favors topic 12
Comprehensive reform to get 12 million out of shadows: Strongly Favors topic 12
Sponsored bill covering child resident aliens under Medicaid: Favors topic 12
Sponsored bill funding social services for noncitizens: Favors topic 12
Rated 8% by USBC, indicating an open-border stance: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on continuing federal funds for declared "sanctuary cities": Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on establishing a Guest Worker program: Favors topic 12
YES on building a fence along the Mexican border: Strongly Opposes topic 12
YES on eliminating the "Y" nonimmigrant guestworker program: Neutral topic 12
NO on declaring English as the official language of the US government: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on comprehensive immigration reform: Strongly Favors topic 12
Opposes topic 13:
Support & expand free trade
(-3 points on Economic scale) Smart, pro-American trade: NAFTA has hurt workers: Strongly Opposes topic 13
No fast-track authority for this president: Opposes topic 13
Defended outsourcing of US jobs to India: Favors topic 13
1980s: Loved Wal-Mart's "Buy America" program: Opposes topic 13
Globalization should not substitute for humanization: Opposes topic 13
Supports MFN for China, despite concerns over human rights: Strongly Favors topic 13
Build a rule-based global trading system: Favors topic 13
Rated 17% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on removing common goods from national security export rules: Favors topic 13
YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam: Favors topic 13
NO on extending free trade to Andean nations: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on establishing free trade between US & Singapore: Favors topic 13
YES on establishing free trade between the US and Chile: Favors topic 13
NO on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on free trade agreement with Oman: Strongly Favors topic 13
Opposes topic 14:
Maintain US sovereignty from UN
(-3 points on Economic scale) US support & no-fly zone, but UN troops on ground in Darfur: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Support UN reform because US benefits: Opposes topic 14
2002 Iraq speech criticized both Saddam and U.N.: Opposes topic 14
Urged President to veto UN condemnation of Israel: Favors topic 14
Engage in world affairs, including human rights: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Keep Cuban embargo; pay UN bills: Opposes topic 14
2002: Attacking Iraq "not a good option" but authorized it: Favors topic 14
Voted against Levin Amendment: it gave UN veto over US: Favors topic 14
Dems believe in fighting terror with cooperation: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Restore habeas corpus for detainees in the War on Terror: Opposes topic 14
YES on preserving habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees: Strongly Opposes topic 14
YES on requiring CIA reports on detainees & interrogation methods: Strongly Opposes topic 14
NO on removing need for FISA warrant for wiretapping abroad: Strongly Opposes topic 14
No opinion on topic 15:
Expand the military
(0 points on Social scale) There is no safe haven for the terrorists: Favors topic 15
Our troops are stretched; so increase size of military: Favors topic 15
Rated 100% by SANE, indicating a pro-peace voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 15
Extend reserve retirement pay parity back to 9/11: Favors topic 15
Improve mental health care benefits for returning veterans: Favors topic 15
YES on requiring on-budget funding for Iraq, not emergency funding: Opposes topic 15
YES on limiting soldiers' deployment to 12 months: Opposes topic 15
Strongly Favors topic 16:
Stricter limits on voting rights
(-5 points on Social scale) Voter suppression revives old demons of discrimination: Favors topic 16
Stand for public financing and getting money out of politics: Strongly Favors topic 16
Presidents should reveal donations to their foundations: Strongly Favors topic 16
Move to public election financing, not banning lobbyists: Strongly Favors topic 16
Verified paper ballot for every electronic voting machines: Favors topic 16
Called for ban on all soft money in 2000 campaign: Favors topic 16
Prohibit 'voter caging' which intimidates minority voting: Favors topic 16
YES on banning campaign donations from unions & corporations: Favors topic 16
YES on banning "soft money" contributions and restricting issue ads: Favors topic 16
NO on establishing the Senate Office of Public Integrity: Opposes topic 16
NO on allowing some lobbyist gifts to Congress: Strongly Favors topic 16
Favors topic 17:
Stay out of Iran
(+2 points on Social scale) Smartest strategic choice is peace: Favors topic 17
Extend peace treaties to Palestinians, Syrians & Lebanese: Favors topic 17
Foreign aid spending is only 1%; lead by remaining engaged: Strongly Favors topic 17
Up to the Iraqis to decide the future they will have: Favors topic 17
Demand Bush to explain to Congress on his plan on Iraq: Favors topic 17
Deauthorize Iraq war, and don’t grant new war authority: Strongly Favors topic 17
Phased redeployment out of Iraq, beginning immediately: Strongly Favors topic 17
Withdraw troops within 60 days after taking office: Strongly Favors topic 17
Voted for Iraq war based on available info; now would not: Favors topic 17
Progressive Internationalism: globalize with US pre-eminence: Favors topic 17
No troop surge: no military escalation in Iraq: Strongly Favors topic 17
Require Congress' approval before military action in Iran: Favors topic 17
YES on authorizing use of military force against Iraq: Strongly Opposes topic 17
NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007: Strongly Opposes topic 17
YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq by March 2008: Strongly Favors topic 17
Strongly Favors topic 18:
Prioritize green energy
(-5 points on Economic scale) $100B per year by 2020 for climate change mitigation: Strongly Favors topic 18
Remove energy dependence on countries who would harm us: Strongly Favors topic 18
Stands for clean air and funding the EPA: Favors topic 18
Reduce air pollution to improve children’s health: Favors topic 18
Ratify Kyoto; more mass transit: Strongly Favors topic 18
Supports tradable emissions permits for greenhouse gases: Favors topic 18
Keep efficient air conditioner rule to conserve energy: Strongly Favors topic 18
Establish greenhouse gas tradeable allowances: Strongly Favors topic 18
Rated 100% by the CAF, indicating support for energy independence: Favors topic 18
Designate sensitive ANWR area as protected wilderness: Favors topic 18
Set goal of 25% renewable energy by 2025: Strongly Favors topic 18
Let states define stricter-than-federal emission standards: Strongly Favors topic 18
Gas tax holiday for the summer: Opposes topic 18
NO on terminating CAFE standards within 15 months: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on targeting 100,000 hydrogen-powered vehicles by 2010: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on removing consideration of drilling ANWR from budget bill: Favors topic 18
YES on reducing oil usage by 40% by 2025 (instead of 5%): Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on disallowing an oil leasing program in Alaska's ANWR: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on banning drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Favors topic 18
YES on factoring global warming into federal project planning: Favors topic 18
YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies: Strongly Favors topic 18
Opposes topic 19:
Never legalize marijuana
(+2 points on Social scale) Medical marijuana maybe ok; states decide recreational use: Opposes topic 19
Divert non-violent drug offenders away from prison: Strongly Opposes topic 19
Address drug problem with treatment and special drug courts: Strongly Opposes topic 19
End harsher sentencing for crack vs. powder cocaine: Opposes topic 19
Require chemical resellers to certify against meth use: Favors topic 19
Strongly Favors topic 20:
Stimulus better than market-led recovery
(-5 points on Economic scale) Wealthy should go back to paying pre-Bush tax rates: Favors topic 20
Want to restore the tax rates we had in the ‘90s: Favors topic 20
Help people facing foreclosure; don’t just bail-out banks: Strongly Favors topic 20
Minimum wage increases haven’t kept up with Congress’ wages: Strongly Favors topic 20
Co-sponsored bills totaling $502B in spending thru 2005: Strongly Favors topic 20
End Bush tax cuts;take things away from rich for common good: Favors topic 20
Social issues matter; wrong time for tax cuts: Strongly Favors topic 20
Use tax dollars to upgrade infrastructure, not for stadium: Strongly Favors topic 20
America can afford to raise the minimum wage: Strongly Favors topic 20
Just Say No to GOP tax plan: Strongly Favors topic 20
YES on increasing tax rate for people earning over $1 million: Strongly Favors topic 20

[aikoaiko]

223. And the jury results are in....

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
Mail Message
On Thu Sep 25, 2014, 09:13 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

For you too
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5585152

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Violates TOS which only allows up to 4 paragraphs from a cited source. The information provided is clearly more than 4 paragraphs... even being generous in defining what a paragraph is. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=copyright

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Sep 25, 2014, 09:20 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The alerter may be right but the link shows all of the posted info within a box, not paragraphs. Besides, it's excellent info. Leave it.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: These people are nuts..Let them talk each other to a breakdown, that is their business...I looked at the calendar. The election for president is 2 years and 6 weeks away. That is all I got on this one
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Copyright violation
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is alright, I think. Its a list and not really paragraphs.

[DRoseDARs]

188. Yes, she was.

Good lord, try reading her autobiography sometime, even just a snippet pointing out that yes, she was.

[VanillaRhapsody]

189. registered?

Or worked on a campaign?

Not to mention the fact that there were Liberal Republicans in those days....

[DRoseDARs]

196. By no reasonable person's definition does one need to be registered to identify.

She had her Come to Jesus moment decades ago, while you seem to be stuck waaay up de Nile.

[Veilex]

210. Yes she was

Sorry to disappoint you.
http://mic.com/articles/13080/hillary-clinton-was-a-republican-and-ronald-reagan-a-democrat-top-10-political-defections-in-us-history

Hilary Clinton was there to campaign for her husband and Democrat former President Bill Clinton, ran for President as a Democrat, and currently is the Secretary of State for Democrat President Obama. What many people don't know about Hilary, is that she used to be a hardcore Republican. When she was a teenager, she canvassed and campaigned for Republican Richard Nixon for President. She worked for Republican Barry Goldwater's campaign in 1964, and was even elected president of Wellesley College's Young Republicans club. Due to issues like the Vietnam War however, Hilary left the Republican Party to help candidates like Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern. Imagine the current political atmosphere if she never had a change of heart to switch parties in the early 1970s...

"YOU are not a Democrat....you are officially Independent by definition" - More of: The world According to VanillaRhapsody

[VanillaRhapsody]

4. first Bernie is not a Dem

And Warren has endorsed Hillary Clinton and has rigerously said she isnt interested..

Now if you have a candidate that shows they can beat every potential Republican Bring It.

Otherwise....this is not Anti Hillary Clinton Underground..

[Dawgs]

19. Why is more important for you to vote for the label instead of the ideology?

That seems quite ridiculous, no?

[winter is coming]

94. I think it's performance art. n/t

[LondonReign2]

171. I think so too

Rigid belligerence + desire to bog down every discussion as an art form

[Veilex]

214. Sucinctly identified.

[laundry_queen]

228. +1

I think so too.

[DavidG_WI]

96. Our political system is fundamentally designed to...

only allow for 2 parties. Without the backing of a party Bernie, as much as we need him just can't win as there is no national organization or money to back him, he'd be shouted down by the Republicans in the media, not talked about let alone be invited to mass media debates, and the majority of his potential supporters will just vote for the person with the D next to their name.

This is the sad reality of our system.

[Enthusiast]

208. +1

[cascadiance]

24. First of all Joseph Liebermann was also a Dem before he wasn't when he ran in an election too!

So, just that he isn't a Dem now OVER TWO YEARS before 2016 election means just as much as saying "Hillary Clinton is running" when she HAS NOT ENTERED THE RACE YET EITHER!

Warren support Hillary Clinton running, as any Democrat who supports democratic processes to decide who runs our government would say about just about any candidate! Endorsed? Has Warren said yet that she only supports Clinton and no one else? NO!!!!

And are you trying to say Warren "rigorously" is saying she's not running? Just wondering if "rigerously" might mean something else, and perhaps Obama was also "rigerously" saying he wasn't running before he was running too!

Can you show that Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders CAN'T beat every potential Republican? NO!!!

Who supports more the will of the people wanting to hold the bankster and other corporate wrongdoers accountable more than others? And that sentiment crosses party lines, as many Republicans also criticize Obama for being in the pockets of the banks since he hasn't prosecuted any of them, which says that it is more of a "people's bipartisan issue" rather than a "corporate money bipartisan issue"...

This also isn't Corporatist Propaganda Underground either...

[dionysus]

132. I myself would vote for Bernie in a heartbeat, but most americans wouldn't, mostly for stupid

reasons. but that's how it is, sadly for us...

[morningfog]

30. Wen Bernie declares as a dem, he'll be a dem.

Which is where he's always caucused.

[NYC_SKP]

6. K/R. He was known, but ran as a black man, with a funny sounding name, "B. Hussein Obama", so, yeah

Hillary can be taken out by a Warren or a Sanders.

[MohRokTah]

8. Obama was very well known.

2008 was a once in a lifetime matchup, plus, Obama could have never been successful any other time than 2008.

[senz]

59. Never? Seriously?

Apparently you don't think much of him.

[Iwillnevergiveup]

86. Oh, I thought he won in 2012, too. n/t

[MohRokTah]

87. Re-election is different from being elected for the first time

[Logical]

107. Pure BS, for people here, not for the average person. nt

[LondonReign2]

172. So well known that he got 0% support in the June 2006 poll

See post 103

[MohRokTah]

218. He wasn't even considered a possible run by the vast majority in 2006.

[LondonReign2]

239. Indeed

Indeed. Data really isn't your thing.

[brooklynite]

9. Warren will be too busy campaigning for Clinton...

Sanders, if he runs, won't run as a mainstream liberal like Obama did. He'll run as an unrepentent leftist, which may be appealing to the activist base of the Party, but not to the ordinary voters in Ohio, Virginina, Pennsylvania, etc.

[cascadiance]

29. So... how do you define the difference between a "mainstream liberal" and "unrepentent leftist"?

Why don't you be more specific instead of just name calling so that we can analyze your logic that "liberals" and "leftists" are somehow that much different... Now a label of "Neo-liberal" might be different than these two, but I'll try not to confuse people too much...

[bobduca]

38. Lunch

Having Lunch with Warren trumps all that.

[brooklynite]

45. Well, actually the Warren thing comes from her own quote...

That said, I -have- had dinner with Bernie and his wife.

[senz]

60. So Bernie's message of economic fairness for working people

won't appeal to "ordinary voters" in Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania, etc.?"

Don't be so sure about that.

[brooklynite]

93. Yes, that's what I'm saying...

Poor (or working class) doesn't automatically mean liberal. Whether it's in their interest or not, Democrats in these States tend to be more politically centrist.

[leftstreet]

10. Obama got the Kennedy endorsement. End of story

That won't happen again

Hillary is inevitable - unless she completely screws up her campaign

[DonCoquixote]

20. "Hillary is inevitable - unless she completely screws up her campaign"

However, 2008 she showed she could do EXACTLY that, especially if she hires Mark Penn again, or does not keep Bill from mugging the camera and the microphone.

[leftstreet]

22. Oh yes, Penn's 'Strategy For Winning' !!

Hillary better hope he's not available

[MohRokTah]

25. If she's smart, she'll pull in some of Obama's team. eom

[LawDeeDah]

110. Hillary not being in control of her campaign is a huge failing.

And should be remembered.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

178. ...like she did in 2008.

[AtomicKitten]

12. of course they can win

[VanillaRhapsody]

14. thats weather not politics..

And I am prepared to campaign and vote for whoever wins the primary.You?

[morningfog]

42. Vote? Most likely. Campaign and donate? Depends.

I campained and contributed to Obama in '08. Voted for him in the primary and general. I did nothin but cast a vote in '12.

If it's Hillary, I won't work for her either. Whether I vote for her will depend on the polls in my state.

[marions ghost]

16. Despite the odds

I think it's still possible for a progressive candidate to win.

We just have to do better than Bhillary.

[VanillaRhapsody]

18. we have a Progessive

HRC.

[marions ghost]

23. That is a really debatable statement

I'm sure you realize. Hillary is not a progressive candidate. I think you know why.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/189919-left-wants-challenger-for-hillary

"Clinton raised concern among the Democratic Party’s populist base when she recently accepted an estimated $400,000 from Goldman Sachs for two speeches.

Influential progressives wonder whether someone who accepted such a large sum from one of Wall Street’s biggest investment firms could be expected to hold corporate executives accountable if elected president.

They also wonder how aggressively she’d call for addressing income inequality, which many see as one of the biggest economic problems facing the nation.

“If Hillary has no opposition, if she has a coronation instead, that debate doesn’t happen,” Hickey said.

Charles Chamberlain, executive director of Democracy for America, a liberal grassroots advocacy group, said the Democratic Party would benefit from a competitive presidential primary in 2016.

“The issue of income inequality is vital, and Hillary Clinton has not always had the right position,” he said. “Hillary has changed a lot, and she’s grown a lot. I think this is a candidate who has evolved in a number of important ways.

“She has some heavy lifting to do to show she’s not in the pocket of banks and a candidate of the 1 percent. That’s a more open question,” he added."

[MohRokTah]

27. Hillary is a VERY progressive candidate.

FDR was, too, but those purists towards the far end of the left spectrum despised him, too.

[cascadiance]

34. Candidates that are pro H-1B Visa expansion, amongst other things are NOT progressive in my book!

... amongst many other areas that she's NOT progressive!

[MohRokTah]

37. Purists who make demands for purity

are least progressive of all.

[cascadiance]

49. Hmm... We ask for anything that's "not corporatist" and we're called "purist"!

I think the REAL purists are the ones that behind our back our "pure" in their support for corporate lobbying money power. Clinton and her supporters seem to be more in that camp!

[Veilex]

215. Those calling out names like "purist" are just trying to dilute already diluted demands

of the left. They want to "Win by any means necessary"... which means their values and demands are up for sale... that's more in line with GOP values than Democratic values.

[LondonReign2]

174. And so-called conservative democrats

who advocate shifting Democratic policy further rightward to "appeal to more right wing voters" aren't Democrats at all.

[MohRokTah]

217. I know of no such democrats on DU. eom

[LondonReign2]

235. Since you specifically stated elsewhere

that Democrats need to alter policy to appeal to conservatives, I'd suggest contacting your physician to check into your sudden memory loss.

[MohRokTah]

236. Then put up the link

You cant' because I never said that.

I said that when the left becomes unreliable voters, Democratic Politicians must seek votes from further to the right.

I merely stated a fact. I did not advocate.

I await your apology for your false accusation.

[LondonReign2]

237. Here you go buddy

--->"To get elected, a candidate must get votes. If a Democratic candidate cannot count on votes from the left, that candidate has no choice but to alter policies in order to seek the votes from the right. "

In context, you previously stated (falsely, as the data I posted showed) that the left was unreliable. This was your rationalization for the party to continue to move rightward.

[morningfog]

35. Viva Huey Long!

[marions ghost]

36. Tell me

what is progressive about Hillary?

I don't despise her (I save that for Rethuglicons), but she is not a progressive.

[MohRokTah]

43. Too numerous to list here.

I could cut and paste those progressive stances and votes from the record, but I'll let her record speak for itself. There are some issues I would rather see a candidate be more progressive about, but this record is about the most progressive you will ever see in a national electoral contest. For more progressivism, you must start local and work your way up.

The entire progressive movement for the most part has it all completely ass backwards as there is so much concentration at the top. Meanwhile, right wing nuts and teabaggers are taking over at the local level, which is how they get a minority of votes for the House yet maintain control.

Here's the full record:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Hillary_Clinton.htm

[Scuba]

57. Pro war, pro Wall Street, pro TPP, pro Keystone XL yet you call her "VERY progressive".

I call her policy positions "moderate Republican".

[KamaAina]

51. S/he said "progessive"

That's a progressive with only one (R).

[marions ghost]

91. She's not even pro-gessive

she is somewhat pregressive...

[woo me with science]

161. I would say, "pro-regressive."

[marions ghost]

169. even better

[MohRokTah]

26. Yep.

Purists will never buy it, but the same sorts of people were vehemently opposed to FDR and constantly bad mouthed him.

[LordGlenconner]

33. Purists covet the struggle

Their worst nightmare is getting everything they want.

[noiretextatique]

40. there are two purists groups who are THE PROBLEM

the GOP/RW and the Third Way. Both groups have taken us where we are now.

[MohRokTah]

44. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

You might want to put the sarcasm thingie there.

[noiretextatique]

133. i suggest you

prove me wrong, i posit that you cannot.

[MohRokTah]

136. Wow, such a fallacious post.

Requiring I prove a negative?

Tsk tskm your lack of tautological understanding is showing.

[brooklynite]

48. I'll accept that you don't like Third Way's policies...what makes them purists?

[cascadiance]

53. Well supporting things that that the Kochs paid them to when they used to be in the DLC...

... before they had to ditch that, when it became more public these sorts of agendas happening in the DLC...

[noiretextatique]

134. they have pure corporate interests at heart

that makes them purists.

[noiretextatique]

198. the same thing that makes leftists "purists"

the third way advocates for its positions, doesn't it?

[brooklynite]

199. Purity generally refers to an unwillingness to accept an intermediate goal...

...or to negotiate with those who don't agree, presumably leading to on a partial achievement of the goal. I see no evidence that Third Way is unwilling to consider alternatives to its goals through the political process.

[senz]

64. I've always disliked purists too, MohRokTah, especially the ones who voted Nader in 2000,

but Hillary takes anti-purity 360 degrees into PURE 1% territory.

[tiredtoo]

79. I beg to differ

HRC is a corporatist.

[Logical]

108. LOL, that is really funny. Good one! :-)

[LondonReign2]

173. LMAO!

[bhikkhu]

21. Its not about defeating a Democratic candidate

its about keeping a Democratic president at the helm. Clinton agrees with the Democratic party platform, which I also agree with, and she'd have my support. I'm not interested at all in a back-stabbing primary, but in a successful election.

[cascadiance]

41. A back stabbing primary in this case is when the rest of us are all getting "stabbed in the back"...

... by not having a real democratic process choose who we want leading us, and having our leader "pre-selected" by the PTB that want us to believe they are "inevitable" to continue the long blood lines of corporatists that they want to have run the country for their buddies.

We need some real change now, to get us off the train we've been on for 30 years that has taken our middle class and economy in to the trash heap over that time.

[bhikkhu]

241. Its not Clinton you need to worry about

combine a repug senate (a very real possibility) come November, and a repug president (another real possiblity in 2016), and you'll liely know what getting stabbed in the back feels like. I support the Democratic party platform, and so does everyone, to the best of my knowledge, in our party.

[cascadiance]

243. Then who are you suggesting is "backstabbing" in the primary?...

You were the one that was saying a "backstabbing primary". That implies that anyone who questions the "inevitable" is "backstabbing" us. I'm merely suggesting that a process that preselects someone and doesn't let the party select who they really want to represent them is doing the backstabbing. I'm not even necessarily pointing at Clinton herself but a warped process that seems to think we should just accept what we are given instead of having a DEMOCRATIC process to pick our representative.

[morningfog]

31. She is Evitable!

[SheilaT]

32. Wasn't Hillary inevitable and unbeatable in 2008?

What happened?

What I find most frightening about the Hillary Will Of Course Be Our Next President meme is that no one else seems to have come up in the Democratic Party in six years.

[Jim Lane]

65. We have alternatives this time, too.

You write that "no one else seems to have come up in the Democratic Party in six years." I agree that no one has as much attention as Obama did eight years ago, but people have come up. Martin O'Malley hasn't formally declared but is widely seen as running a typical pre-campaign campaign. A Bernie Sanders candidacy is usually considered to be symbolic and issue-raising, because he's too old and too Socialist to be either nominated or elected, but O'Malley is more than 20 years younger than Sanders and is progressive without the stigma of that dreaded S-word. In the Senate, Sherrod Brown and Sheldon Whitehouse have attracted some speculation, although neither is moving toward a run as openly as O'Malley is. Brian Schweitzer is a former governor who declined to run for the Senate but who seems not completely averse to moving to Washington if he can be at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. Any of these candidates would attract some votes from people who think Clinton is too conservative.

I must also note, with regret, that people have come up from the conservative wing of the Democratic Party. Andrew Cuomo is a good bet to run if Clinton opts out. Former Senator Jim Webb has recently been reported to be considering a campaign.

By the way, we aren't limited to people who've come up in the last six years. Joe Biden has been placing second in polls of Democrats. Howard Dean is more than a year younger than Clinton (who, if inaugurated on January 20, 2017, would be the second-oldest President ever).

[SheilaT]

104. Who is Martin O'Malley?

I know I could google him, but if I haven't even heard of him at this point, he'd better get out there immediately. I agree that Bernie Sanders campaign would be largely symbolic, although if he were to switch soon and become an actual Democrat, it might be possible, but not very likely.

What little I know about Schweitzer I like. But he's someone else who is not out there front and center, getting his name and possible candidacy known.

I do like Sherrod Brown, but so far I've never heard anything at all about him running. Howard Dean is completely done with running for office. I was a huge supporter back in '04, met him several times at events and was highly impressed. But he's not going to run again. Joe Biden, as much as I like him, is damaged goods, at least so far as running for the top of the ticket again. And he's already 71.

I wish Kathleen Sibelius would consider running, but I think the way she got trashed over the ACA that she won't even bother. I used to live in Kansas and she's another politician I met several times and think highly of.

[Jim Lane]

231. Martin O'Malley is Governor of Maryland.

Before that he was Mayor of Baltimore. His Wikipedia bio is here.

He's been getting out there in various ways. His PAC has paid staffers in the field to help Democratic candidates. They're in the field in Iowa, by strange coincidence.

He's generally considered to be more progressive than Hillary. As against that, her lead in the polls is so great that some have speculated that O'Malley doesn't really think he can beat her. Instead, the idea is that he'll run an effective campaign without going negative about Hillary, and his strong second-place finish will make him the logical pick as her running mate. I don't know to what extent, if any, that enters into his calculations.

[SheilaT]

233. Thank you.

As I noted, I could have simply googled him, but it's important for all of us to understand that the rest of the country has not necessarily heard of our wonderful local politicians, including various Governors.

Sounds like a great guy, and if he wants to run for President in two years, he needs to get out there. At this point the polling mostly reflects name recognition. If I got polled (and I get those polling phone calls surprisingly often) and were just presented with a list of names, because I had not yet heard of O'Malley -- and I consider myself pretty well-informed -- I wouldn't be choosing him, other than over Hillary, before now it would have been with great reluctance because I didn't know anything about him.

Howard Dean got out there early enough to make a very credible run for the nomination. Despite the fact that he didn't get the nomination, he did pretty much everything right. Someone like O'Malley needs to do the same thing.

[BeyondGeography]

39. There's something called the black vote

You need it to win the Democratic nomination. Not just anyone can have it; blacks do not take a flyer on newbies. Hillary led among blacks until Iowa, that was the beginning of the end for her.

No white "newbie" is going to win the black vote from Hillary (who also does very well with Hispanics, btw), and that includes Warren. If you wonder why people aren't exactly lining up to oppose her, there's a good part of your answer.

[MohRokTah]

46. Polls showed Hillary Clinton had that vote for the most part.

All the way up to Iowa, that is. The African American community refused to believe it was possible that Barack Hussein Obama could win the nomination, until he proved he could by taking the caucuses in the very European American state of Iowa.

[BeyondGeography]

56. Obama wasn't just another newbie

As others have mentioned, he was nationally known, better than, say, Warren, at this point of things. And not only was he able to win the black vote almost in its entirety (while driving huge AA turnout), he was exceptionally well organized, especially compared with Hillary, whose campaign manager didn't understand how anything worked. Like the basics of primaries (he thought California was winner-take-all) or caucuses, where Obama competed unopposed in red states like Idaho and ran up huge delegate advantages. Mark Penn. She won't make that mistake again.

With that, it was a very tough fight. If you were all-in for Obama, you remember that. How hard it was for him in OH and PA, for instance, or the pounding he took in TX with the hispanic vote. There's still a lot of goodwill toward her and Bill among registered Dems and Hillary is very good on her feet, campaigning and debating. And yet many here continue to underestimate her...

[JI7]

113. at this point and even earlier on there were Obama support groups around the country

some of them didn't think he could win the nomination but thought they could at least help to get him as a VP candidate or help in a future run.

but nobody else has this type of support so far.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

148. Some people don't want to hear this.

I am doing this from my head but I believe African Americans while comprising fourteen percent or so of the national electorate comprise thirty percent or so of Democratic primary voters. Considering Obama was carrying this vote 75-25% or higher it is truly amazing Hillary did as well as she did.

If there is a Democratic primary challenger who can repeat Barack Obama's stellar performance among this group he or she has a chance. He or she also should have plans for the Latino community where the affection for the Clintons is tangible.

[blkmusclmachine]

47. Yep. And remember, Obama presented himself as the less conservative of the two of them!!!

[Nye Bevan]

52. Definitely. And I say that as a Hillary supporter.

Anything can happen, nothing is inevitable.

[justiceischeap]

54. A) Warren has stated repeatedly she isn't running

B) Clinton hasn't declared
C) Sanders is an actual Socialist and I think in primaries that would be to his disadvantage
D) finally, if we can't win the House and keep the Senate, it won't matter what Dem wins, we'll see a repeat of the last four years.

[pa28]

55. Which makes me wonder why anyone would be optimistic about her chances in the general election.

She lost the nomination to a young newcomer who lacked a power base of big money funders.

She does not wear well with the public during a long campaign and if she cruises to the nomination unopposed she will face a year long onslaught from Republicans.

I'm still hoping she will survey the landscape and decide against running.

[leftstreet]

58. Because the GOPers won't waste a credible nominee on her

They pulled out McCain last time around, knowing she'd win

They're not grooming anyone with some charisma and a bit of populist rhetoric to push against her, so I'd say it's the GOPers who've deemed her inevitable

[Man from Pickens]

66. The bottom line on Hillary

If elected, there is no hope that anything will change.

We owe each other and our posterity better than that.

[NorthCarolina]

67. Sanders, Warren, either will get my vote. nt

[cali]

68. I keep saying it: Hillary just isn't that good at this running for president thing

given a viable alternative (and much as I like Bernie, he ain't it), I think dems will desert her in droves.

I know I'll get shit for this, but no, she's just not likeable enough.

[tularetom]

83. Theres a certain element that she lacks and I can't describe it

Bill Clinton has it, so much so that a lot of us for 8 years overlooked the fact that he was basically a republican. He lied and we knew it but somehow it was OK. Maybe we felt sorry for him because the republicans constantly beat up on him.

Obama has it too, when he wants to use it. It was way more noticeable in Campaign Obama than it is in President Obama. He too does a lot of bullshitting and we knew it but accept it anyway.

GW Bush didn't have it, probably because he was too dumb to lie convincingly or too arrogant to care whether or not people thought he was lying.

Whatever it is, Hillary doesn't have it. Her lies don't sound convincing. "I was shot at by snipers in Bosnia", or "We were dead broke when we left the white house" just pissed people off. Her supporters will deny this, but I don't think she's very smart. And she sure as hell isn't likable, so voters aren't apt to cut her a lot of slack.

[dionysus]

135. agreed but who else?! that is the problem.....

[cali]

138. nice to see you!

I don't know. O'Malley?

[dionysus]

194. yeah i haven't been around much. hope all is well. O'Malley seems a decent fellow.

[senz]

69. One of the things I love about Bernie

is his willingness to discuss the REAL issues openly, calmly and rationally without getting nasty toward his opponent(s). I hope he runs as a Dem in the primaries, and I will gladly give him what money and support I can.

He is the only one who is going to tell the American people the truth. Even if the uber-prepared, fussed and trussed, moneyed-up, insanely cautious Hillary wins the primary, she'll have had to either: a) discuss the issues, or b) look very bad indeed for having avoided them.

Run, Bernie, run.

[senz]

75. Correction: Bernie's not the "only one" who tells the truth -- Eliz Warren does, too. n/t

[rurallib]

70. Seems to me like someone came to light a fire here

I do not much care who is running for president until this election is over.
Then I will make my choice based on what candidates say and their records. And yes mistakes can be forgiven.

But let us stay focused on 2014 first. Many races need help. Let us see that work through first.

[FSogol]

73. Exactly and even if someone totally hates, hates, hates, Hillary, why not promote their favored

Democratic candidate instead of trying to bust other Democrats down? The primary process has barely begun, why start from a point of disgusting negativity?

[Historic NY]

77. You seem to be a little "naive" about the political process vis-a-vis,

Democratic Party politics. This isn't the days of JFK when the 'convention' selected the ticket, its about down and out party politics. Warren has said she will not run, Bernie again is not a Democrat. He may try to get into a primary or two but he has said he doesn't have a ground game or the ability to organize one. Yet for some mystical reason people seem to think that the majority of the Democrats will vote for them.

[still_one]

78. It is called money.

[NotHardly]

81. Hillary's previous defeat... mostly simple sexism

I call bunk on the discussion header. Much like "we are past racism" it is seriously convenient to believe that sexism is passe ... it is not. Any dude over any woman will do is more the mantra of both parties in US... we are less developed than many of our European friends. PS... not all progressive thought or its full agenda are all the best ideas, if country was progressive we would have had a female president 30 years or so ago.

[EEO]

84. I disagree with Hillary on policy. She will never get my vote.

[marions ghost]

88. "We need a woman president"

...is NOT a reason to vote for Hillary.

[Thinkingabout]

82. The 2008 election may have been won by a newbie, how many elections did newbies lose, odds

are against the newbie. Though I voted for Obama both times, sometimes experience is not found in a can, it takes time.

[rock]

85. So tell me

How did this newbie do on delivering his campaign promises? Did we get what we voted for?

[wyldwolf]

89. Provided she runs, in 16 months you'll either be defending her or you'll be trashing her...

... BUT you won't be trashing her on DU.

[Union Scribe]

153. Can't wait for the clampdown can you? nt

[wyldwolf]

159. I would feel that way about ANY Dem. It gets old really quick.

[NYC Liberal]

90. Obama was a widely known national figure in 2007.

He had been so since 2004.

I'm with Elizabeth Warren in supporting HRC, so I don't want her defeated anyway.

[winter is coming]

95. Widely known to people who follow politics. Lots of voters don't. n/t

[wyldwolf]

98. that's true. I personally registered many of those in 2008

... most were African American, had never voted before, and were excited to be able to vote for an African American.

If any other 2007 Dem primary candidate had been in Obama's position, Clinton would have won in rout.

[NYC Liberal]

100. And more widely known outside than Warren or Sanders

[JI7]

114. he was known as much as John Kerry, Hillary Clinton by the 2004 Elections

[winter is coming]

115. No, he wasn't. n/t

[JI7]

117. yes he was , by election day he was that well known, not just nationally but internationally

[winter is coming]

118. Then I must have known some remarkably ignorant apolitical people back in 2007,

because the only people I talked to at the time who knew anything about Obama were people who follow politics pretty closely. He had not made a lasting impression on any of the apolitical people I ran into.

[JI7]

119. yes, probably the type of people you talk to , there are wingnuts who say everyone they talk to

were impressed by newt gingrich.

so personal accounts don't always reflect on what is true among most.

[LondonReign2]

175. Do poll results from this same time in the 2008 Presedential cycle count?

Because Obama polled exactly 0% amongst Democrats. See post 103.

[Capt. Obvious]

166. Fail

The Washington Times
Sunday, July 1, 2007

Sen. Barack Obama, despite two best-selling books, heavy press coverage and a slight fundraising edge, is still lagging behind his 2008 rivals Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and John Edwards in name recognition.

It has been three years since the self-described “skinny kid with a funny name” introduced himself to Democrats during the party’s 2004 national convention. Now, the Illinois Democrat’s presidential campaign is working to give voters a better idea of what he’s all about.

It’s a tough job, especially since he’s up against the 2004 vice presidential nominee and the wife of a two-term former president, who is recognizable to about 15 percent more of the population.

....

The Gallup Poll has been tracking Mr. Obama’s level of name recognition since December 2006. Mr. Obama was at 53 percent familiarity rating at the start, and then he shot up to 72 percent when he announced his candidacy for president in February, but that is where he seems to have peaked. He moved up only three points in a May poll that showed him at 75 percent.

Mrs. Clinton hasn’t run any TV ads yet, enjoying nearly total name recognition nationwide — Gallup showed her at 90 percent and above in three polls — and she has a double-digit lead over her rivals in most preference polls.

Moonie Times

I know it's the Washington Times but it was the first article I got to that used hard numbers from 2007.

[TheNutcracker]

109. Obama was new and introduced in 2004 to convention delegates, I was there. People know Sanders.

[SidDithers]

111. Welcome to DU...

Sid

[greatlaurel]

116. We need to GOTV 2014. This post does nothing to help get the vote out this November.

Anyone trying to tear apart the Democratic Party unity before the election this November is working for the GOP intentionally or unintentionally.

[marions ghost]

141. You must be kidding

"tear apart the Democratic Party unity" ... Must not be a very strong unity if this thread is a threat to it. This IS the time to consider alternatives to Hillary--especially as Billary has begun campaigning.

It can be discussed with no threat to the current elections. Don't go over the top with fear and worry.

[greatlaurel]

142. You are working against the Democratic Party interests this November 2014 by attacking HRC now.

We need to GOTV this November. Clearly, you are not interested in getting the Democratic Party candidates elected this year by wasting time before the campaign for president has started. There will be plenty of time to work on the Democratic Party presidential campaign after this November.

[FSogol]

143. Very true.

GOTV

[marions ghost]

150. WRONG

I am registering voters in a battleground state tomorrow. Very aware of the criticality.

Yes, GOTV--duh.

How arrogant to tell me what I am doing -- "not interested", "wasting time" --ie. giving me the finger wagging naughty naughty

Sorry--the Hillary Again for Prez Campaign HAS started, and what I say here about it will not lose a single voter for the Dems. Consider that (among progressives) it might actually GET some votes not to go lockstep for Hillary at this point in the game. We need to look like we at least tried to come up with alternatives, since it's all about images. But really I don't think the discussion affects this November much at all.

All your shussing is what really looks weak.

[Union Scribe]

155. Neither do your wild, stupid accusations

that people who have been here years longer than you are paid operatives. That's definitely building party unity isn't it?

[Kablooie]

121. Hillary doesn't seem to have the same degree of support today that she had in 08.

She clearly had a strong following back then until Obama sapped so much of it away.
She is starting from a worse position than she was back then.

What I fear is that we don't get someone that everyone pulls for and Bush 3 pushes his way into the gap.

8 more years of Bush and an eternal war to go along with him.
Republican beds will be sopping wet for years.

[brooklynite]

125. What lack of support are you referring to?

(other than here...)

She polls miles ahead of every other Democratic candidate, and beat every Republican.

She'll also have the financial and political resources that Sanders won't be able to match.

[JI7]

128. actually, she has more support this time around

[sabrina 1]

130. True. But I remember it was touch and go between Obama and McCain towards

the end of the campaign. Then came the Crash. McCain floundered on what to do about it. Obama met with Wall St. and was 'briefed' on how to explain it and what could be done about it. Obama sounded informed, McCain sounded lost. That helped put Obama over the top.

It's scary to think that half this country were willing to vote for Palin but they were.

Money talks in the end. Airc, Wall St didn't 'brief' McCain.

[MattBaggins]

131. Sanders could not win a GE

Warren I believe could win a GE, but I think would be more centrist and middle of the road than people realize.

[Beacool]

137. Sanders, really?

How delusional does someone have to be to think that Sanders has a chance in Hell of becoming president??????



It reminds me why I now skip this site more often than not. It's like living in a parallel world.

[greatlaurel]

149. Just put the GOP trolls on permanent ignore. They are becoming more transparent in their desperation

The GOP is absolutely terrified of the idea of HRC running for president. The more anti-HRC posts are coming fast and furious in their bid to divide and conquer the voters.

Hang in there! We cannot let them disrupt our forum.

Bernie Sanders is a good man, but is not a Democrat. The GOP dreams about Bernie or some other candidate they can fool into running causing a bigger fiasco than Nader's effort against the Democratic Party. Bernie will not do a Nader. He is smart.

[marions ghost]

163. Did you know

there's a primary before the final showdown? Most voters know that.

"We cannot let them disrupt "our" forum." Sorry, it's not your forum.

As for trolls--I see the corporate closet Republicans are here in FULL force....oh yeah, they'll vote for Hillary...happily.

So don't worry, with Hillary--you lose the progressives, but you GAIN the Republicans!!

[Veilex]

216. +1

[quaker bill]

139. Like it or not

Hillary likely has a base in the 46 to 48 percent range, just like she did in 2007 - 2008. She only needs expand this a little to win.

Barack figured out how to cut this expansion off, aided by very good planning, some Clinton mistakes, and the fact that the big dog was the pres. just before shrub. Barack also had the advantage of being the most clear and precise opposite of shrub.

If she runs, Clinton will not remake the mistakes of 2008. She could still be beaten, but the chances are very slim. Clinton fatigue is no longer as much an issue.

While I am more likely to support another candidate in the primary, my bet is that the race is all but over before it gets to me on Super Tuesday.

[JustAnotherGen]

140. I don't disagree with the premise

I posted something similar last night . . . But I think we should wait for the entire field of candidates to present themselves.

I don't feel revved up by any of the three. Last night after posting to a different thread I went to look at the three candidates campaign sites - and found nothing.

[Atman]

162. All are fatally flawed. Warren perhaps the least so.

Bernie Sanders is a self-proclaimed SOCIALIST. Americans will never, ever vote for a Socialist, despite the fact that we're already pretty much a Socialist nation anyway. But we've been trained well.

Hillary has two strike against her from the get-go. Not that she isn't capable, but she'll still have to work with a Republican Congress, due to gerrymandering and stupid people in America. If you think gridlock is bad with a black guy in charge, wait until you see what these old rich white dudes do when then have to take orders from a WOMAN named CLINTON. It'll make Obama look like Powder.

Elizabeth Warren is talented and capable, but she's got that "woman" baggage. She's already fighting Wall Street, which the suits don't like. Did I mention that she is a woman? The power structure is geared for the rich white men. They will block EVERYTHING until another rich white man is in office. It saddens me to say this. I don't want it to be true, but it is true. The rich white men are pricks and assholes, and until a rich white man is back in office -- or until attrition takes out the lot of them -- things will not get better. No millionaire Southern leader is going to take orders from some ornery woman. It isn't going to happen. Not in our lifetimes.

[brooklynite]

144. At this time, 8 years ago, the "newbie/no-namer" was organizing financial and political support...

How is Bernie Sanders gearing up to hit the ground running with the necessary resources to run for President for 18 months?

[Atman]

145. Sanders abd Warren are "unknowns?" On what planet.

Maybe it's because I live in pointy-headed liberal-elite New England.

[marions ghost]

195. Good point (on your head)

--they are known around the country...

[3rdwaydem]

151. Wishful thinking. Hillary is the one!

[Atman]

157. Your name is "3rdwaydem" and you're backing Hillary Clinton?

How, exactly, is Hillary "3rdway?" She practically a Republican!

[3rdwaydem]

160. Really?

Then why do the majority of Democrats, when polled nationwide, consistently favor her for 2016? I live in New York, a deep blue state, and she is wildly popular as our US Senator. Perhaps you believe that the majority of Democrats are really close to being Republicans?

[Atman]

164. NANNY NANNY BOO BOO! I live in Connecticut.

The trouble is, there are lots of other states outside of New England (which, technically, New York isn't even a part of). We loves us some Warren and Sanders. Hillary Clinton is a Southerner, and a DINO. She is part of the establishment. But that is the ONLY thing that makes her viable. America won't vote for hippie Socialists from Vermont, or anti-Wall Street women from Massachusetts. We're a very stupid county, party because of Fox "News" and idiots in the heartland who only vote about teh gay, and abortions and welfare mothers (while they collect their own welfare checks).

Not gonna happen. And to call Hillary Clinton "3rd Way" is absolutely laughable.

[liberal N proud]

165. Sanders running will have a similar effect as Ralph Nader in 2000

You will have enough votes pulled from the Democratic Candidate that the pukes will win.

[marions ghost]

170. Like I said above

If Hillary is selected, what progressives you lose in the final count you'll gain in swing-voting (especially younger) Republicans.

On the other hand, if we really had a more progressive candidate, you'd get the solid and unswerving support of
ALL democrats...

It is a tug of war now--progressives at this point have no voice in America, tho they get a lot of lip service from Dem moderates at election time. If you want things to change, you have to acknowledge that the Dem party IS split, no matter how many will hold their nose and vote --over the Rethug candidate.

[grahamhgreen]

176. Gore won in 2000, remember?

[liberal N proud]

179. Had Nader not taken some of the votes the margin would have been larger

avoiding the opportunity for the bu$h regime to steal.

[grahamhgreen]

181. Maybe.

[senz]

182. Not if he switches parties & runs as a Dem,

which he is considering doing -- if he runs at all. The point would be to push the conversation -- and Hillary -- to the left.

[liberal N proud]

184. Like that is going to happen.

[librechik]

168. It will be a MIRACLE if Hillary is elected. Sorta like Obama.

There is so much hatred in this country .Despite her accomplishments I don't give her much of a chance.

However, i thought the same thing about a black guy with a funny name.

[Fearless]

180. They would stick to those principles after the election.

Unlike some who keep on Bush appointees and restart wars in sovereign nations.

[marym625]

183. Hardly anyone knew who Bill Clinton was back when he went to Iowa eom

[mrmpa]

186. I don't care if I get bombed for this, but here goes....

In 2008 my thought(s) were that the nomination should go to Hillary with Obama as VP, then in 2016, Obama would run for President, I thought this could, would lead to the Democrats having the White House for 16 years.

[greenman3610]

191. maybe democrats would win more if we thought about how to defeat republicans

[Tommy_Carcetti]

200. As others have pointed out, Obama was hardly a no-namer by the time campaigning begun.

Ever since he gave the convention address in 2004, many people were predicting presidential aspirations on his part.

[rocktivity]

201. And if memory serves me correctly

Hillary is RELATED to a former political newbie/no namer!


rocktivity

[Enthusiast]

202. Sanders or Warren can win!

[SidDithers]

229. livingwagenow...nt

Sid

[bobduca]

230. No more clintons, no more bushes