Jim Webb Quietly Meeting With Dems Looking For Clinton Alternative

[candelista]

Source: HuffPo

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — Former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb says his decision whether to challenge Hillary Rodham Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination will rest on whether he can raise enough money to be viable in running against the heavy favorite.

"It's not worth it go through this process if you have to sell out what you believe," Webb, 69, a former Navy secretary, said Wednesday between private meetings with South Carolina party leaders. "The question is, can we get the right kind of support in order to get out and make our case to the American people rather than to the financial sector?"

Webb said he wants to be a voice for working-class Americans neglected in a political system dominated by money. He says he will decide this spring whether to run.

He said raising enough money to power a campaign of his own "will be a challenge after Citizens United," the Supreme Court ruling that has helped super PACs spend staggering sums of money from corporations, unions and wealthy people.

Webb served in the Senate alongside Clinton for two years before she became secretary of state. He did not seek re-election in 2012, leaving the chamber after one term.

He said he wants Democrats to return to their roots as "the party that is assisting the objectives of the people who do the hard work in our country."

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/18/jim-webb-2016-meetings_n_6898040.html

[djean111]

1. For those who think Citizens United is ever going away, just check the smugness of the

Hillary supporters as they present Hillary's (unofficial until she declares, I suppose) campaign chest as proof of her qualifications for being the Candidate.

Really, just eBay the damned election or have Jerry Lewis do a telethon. Be a LOT more representative. And honest.

[blkmusclmachine]

3. Elections = dog and pony shows.

[delrem]

6. You have to admit, $$ can present a powerful argument.

A problem that HRC has, IMO, is that she hasn't distinguished herself from a moderate Republican. So she's alienating a substantial portion of the Democratic vote. But there's also a meanness to it! There's a "fuck you! left-wingers! We don't need you!" to all too many of the missives from her supporters, and it goes all the way up the line.

[djean111]

7. Exactly.

[brooklynite]

30. Perhaps she has...just not to you and the purists...

...every poll of DEMOCRATS (e.g. the people VOTE in Democratic Primaries) shows broad support.

[MADem]

9. I don't think being realistic is being smug--money and the ability to rake it in has always been a

big part of the scene in the post CU environment. It doesn't mean that people LIKE this environment but let's get real--this IS how it's done. We can all put on hair shirts and play the "We won't involve ourselves in THAT!!!" attitude, and we can enjoy eight years of ... JEB! No thanks.

The significance of the Ready For Hillary PAC is that there is a LIMIT on contributions--it's not about the "dollar amount" raised, it's about the number of individual donors--many of whom are donating very small amounts, ten or twenty five bucks. When someone likes a candidate enough to give them ANY money, they are usually good for a vote--it's a way of gauging support.

Maybe a telethon wouldn't be a bad idea (I'm joking, but really...). We'd have better acts than the GOP, certainly.

[msongs]

2. webb should run as a republican. he would be a breath of fresh air...for them nt

[delrem]

4. Yes. He's a Republican.

Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs during the Reagan administration.
This was the time of Oliver North, and of horrendous evil-doing in Latin America.

I don't think he should be awarded by the Dems, for that.

[MADem]

13. He switched parties and was the Democratic Senator from VA for a term.

He would have done well to stay in the Senate. He defeated "Macaca George" Allen.

He was a rather conservative Senator, and a fan of the "gallantry" of the Confederacy. He has ancestors who fought on the southern side, and he thinks that's just a dandy thing to celebrate.

[delrem]

14. Look at the clown car from the Republican party, on the front page now.

Surely the Democratic party can come up with a good solid progressive Dem that can win against any of that bunch.

[MADem]

17. Well, I'm backing a candidate who hasn't declared yet. There are others who have

made noise about maybe running (O'Malley, Sanders) but the only one who is formally exploring is Webb. HRC doesn't need to "explore," as she's been down the road before, but she's smart to push back declaring for as long as possible--if I were her, I'd wait until July.

Many of the donors that an unnamed progressive candidate would approach have already committed their dollars and time to Clinton and they're unlikely to shift allegiances. Some of Obama's ground-game people are already on her payroll. Howard Dean and his associates/connections are on board as well. She's got a lock on a lot of the "talent" on our side.

The only person with that mysterious, not-fully-defined "progressive" label with any name recognition is Warren, and she has said--pretty plainly, in words and an official cease-and-desist letter--that she's not running. I don't think she will change her mind.

Name recognition goes a long way, too...and I don't think there's a candidate with more name recognition than Clinton.

[Chellatious]

63. ...and so is the HP

I no longer consider the Huffington Post a reliable source of information. They are in my Fox file as far as credibility goes. I cannot believe she sold out and allowed them to continue using her name. I guess most people do have a price. And yes, I do realize that's very old news.

I agree, the guy's totally GOP, which is not to say all former military people are. A lot drink the koolaid, a lot don't.

General Wesley Clark I respect. He has a brilliant intellect and he's charming in person. He called, during the leadup to Bush's wars of choice, precisely how the destabilization over there would progress, and so it did, just as he predicted. He also predicted how Bush would tank the economy, though I don't think anyone could have foreseen some of his more outrageous financial misdeeds, like "losing" billions of dollars and putting off... eh, well all know the grizzly details. But I have to add visionary to Clark's resume. Like Bill Clinton, he is a Rhodes Scholar.

I want Hillary to run and I hope he's a big part of both terms of her administration and stays on for Elizabeth Warren's eight years to follow. He's only 70. It's certainly possible.

[RedstDem]

24. Hilliary was a Goldwater girl

She could do the same.

[Myrina]

41. Neither of them are the candidate working folks need.

n/t

[MFM008]

5. no

Hillary may not be perfect but this guy is a repuke.

[RedstDem]

25. Hilliary was a Goldwater girl

Back in the day

[Drunken Irishman]

26. Goldwater > Reagan

[RedstDem]

27. yep

Reagan sucked, so did Goldwater, so you should have used a equal sign

[Drunken Irishman]

29. Not even.

Reagan was much, much, much worse than Goldwater. Goldwater was a downright liberal by the time of the Reagan Revolution.

[RedstDem]

31. maybe personally for you

But Goldwater was worse than Reagan.
He hated unions, welfare, civil rights.

He was the "conscience of a conservative".

There would be no Reagan without Goldwater

[Drunken Irishman]

32. Goldwater was pro-choice and outspoken over the religious right taking over the GOP.

As for all those things, Reagan hated em too but actually did everything in his power to roll em back. Goldwater softened up later in his life.

[WestSeattle2]

74. I think you're talking about two Goldwater's. When he first ran in

1964, BG was a fire breather. It was only after he aged and became ineffective, that his views softened. I don't believe RR was ever the rightwinger that BG was.

[Drunken Irishman]

81. He was a fire breather - but even then, I'd put him to the left of Reagan in the 80s.

Goldwater was right-wing for the 60s, which would be just conservative for the 80s and downright moderate in the 10s.

[KittyWampus]

38. FFS, she was a teenager at the time of Goldwater.

[OKNancy]

48. The number one stupid argument against HRC

THere are things one could not like about her, but this old saw is just dumb.

1. She was 17, living in her parents house when she participated as a "Goldwater Girl".
2. SHe did not vote for GOldwater. Voting age was 21 at the time.
3. By 1968 ( she just turned 21)she was a Eugene McCarthy supporting liberal Democrat.
4. She was never a registered Republican

[Chellatious]

64. I'll second that!

I have never understood the Hillary haters, back then or now. The current crop dreams of Warren running, even though she has repeatedly stated that she will work hard to see Hillary elected because she will make a fine president and that she, herself, has no intent to run this time around. She is not a liar, so why don't her fans believe her?

We've seen what a silver-tongued pseudo-liberal who is actually a conservative Democrat can do, and some of it is pretty okay. Now I'd like to see what Hillary can do, though I'd have preferred to see it in reverse order. The GOPTP has been allowed to get FAR too full of themselves and drunk on their own power to boot. This congress badly needs taking down a few pegs, and the Clintons are about the only people I can think of with the real power and allies, here and abroad, to get that done.

The Clintons, a team back then and a team now, can stand toe to toe with the "turd blossoms" and Rupert Murdochs and (my mind just barfed) Koch brothers of the world and hold their own and then some. They won't back down for fear of being perceived as this or that, and their legacy is already well established.

If the dems don't go with the strongest, bravest, most experienced choice this time around, plutocracy will be more than a word we read about in school.

[LeFleur1]

91. Re: OK Nancy

The haters aren't going to listen to, or excuse any mistakes she may have made during her teenage years, because, as they say, haters wanna hate. She's going to have a problem with some because she's a strong, opinionated (opinions that are based on facts and her experience) woman. She is, and was more liberal than her husband...except maybe in the free marriage realm.
If she runs I will vote for her unless she promises to appoint some loony to her cabinet if she wins. She knows everyone, (and maybe their secrets) she investigates, she is capable of changing her mind. Yes, she voted for Bush's war and that was a mistake that they all made except for a couple of Senators and Obama who was not yet in Washington, DC at the time. Money is what gets a person elected these days. That doesn't mean she has made promises...she probably doesn't even know WHO has given money for her campaign.

Hillary R. Clinton would be a fine President and could probably kick some butt, take some prisoners, and move the country ahead.
If you have a complaint about her, state IT. Going after her personally is what the right wing nutcakes do.

Thanks, OKNancy.

[karynnj]

68. She was in high school in 1964 (she graduated college in 1969) - she worked on the McGovern campaign

in 1972 - right out of Law School.

Webb, on the other hand, was a Republican most of his adult life - until he saw the likelihood of winning a Senate seat as a Democrat.

I think it is 100% disqualifying that he smeared John Kerry, as our nominee, in 2004. He, like the Republicans, distorted Kerry's speech to Congress in 1971. Chopping off the beginning of a sentence where Kerry spoke of things soldiers testified to a the Winter Soldier hearing -- instead saying KERRY made these accusations. Now, you could say that maybe some of the people repeating this were unaware of the full sentence and the fact that it on the Winter Soldier hearings that Kerry was asked to testify, however Webb used graphically described atrocities by Americans in Vietnam in his book! (I guess in his mind colorful descriptions in a novel are ok, a sober listing of things people DID testify to in a SFRC hearing are not.) In reality from a RS article his anger stemmed from JK arguing against continuing the war - which Webb insisted was winnable and still popular at that time!

Futhermore, he repeated RW accusations against Kerry's difficult and more successful than anyone could have predicted at the beginning work on reconciliation with Vietnam. This was a thankless task that Kerry's staff preferred he not take on.

Now, I admit that I think Kerry was and is the best statesman my generation (loosely defined) has produced. However, his stubborn insistence on the chance of victory in Vietnam and his willingness to smear rather than just dispute him on the issue make Webb someone I can not vote for. If he is the nominee, I will write in Burlington's own Bernie Sanders -- I will vote for HRC.

[michello]

8. Jim Webb: Democrats need to focus more on 'white, working people'

Jim Webb: Democrats need to focus more on 'white, working people'


Washington (CNN)If Jim Webb had his way, the Democratic Party would return to its "Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Andrew Jackson roots" and put a greater focus on "white, working people."

Webb, the former Democratic senator from Virginia who is entertaining a run 2016 presidential nomination, told NPR Friday morning that his party has not focused enough on white, working class voters in the past elections. In order to be successful in the future, Webb said, that will need to change.

"I think they could do better with white, working people and I think this last election showed that," Webb said, referencing the 2014 midterms where Republicans took control of the Senate and added more power in the House. "The Democratic Party could do very well to return to its Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Andrew Jackson roots where the focus of the party was making sure that all people who lack a voice in the corridors of power could have one through the elected represented."

Pressed on his statement by NPR's Steve Inskeep, Webb said that he doesn't think Democrats' distancing from white, working people was a byproduct of President Barack Obama's election.

"This was happening before President Obama," Webb said.

Looking ahead to a 2016 race that he may run in, Webb added: "You are not going to have a situation again where you have 96% of the African American vote turning out for one presidential candidate. ... We need to get back to the principles of the Democratic Party that we are going to give everyone who needs access to the corridors of power that access regardless of any of your antecedents. I think that is a fair concept."

In 2012, the last presidential election, Republican Mitt Romney won nearly 60% of all white voters, compared to Obama's 40%. That difference is an increased split from 2008, when Obama won 43% of the white vote and Republican John McCain won 55%.

If Webb were to enter the 2016 presidential race, he would do so as a longshot candidate. Not only would he likely be challenging Hillary Clinton for the 2016 nomination, but he told Inskeep that raising money would be a big challenge.

Like other Democrats toiling about a presidential run, Webb declined to directly attack Clinton.

"I really don't have an answer for you on that," he said when asked how he would differentiate himself with the former secretary of state. "She has not announced that she is running, I haven't announced that I am running. If I were to run, it would not be as a counterpoint to her. I have issues that I care about, I want to put them on the table and we'll see."


http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/30/politics/jim-webb-white-working-people/


No thank you. I will do whatever I can to make sure he loses.

[delrem]

10. What a dick. nt

[MADem]

11. I don't like the way that's coming across, frankly.

Webb is the "opposite" of Clinton in that he's the "No Women in Combat" guy, the "Why Women Can't Fight" champion (tell that to Rhonda Cornum and Tammy Duckworth, pal...).

When Webb was on a (very long) list as a VP candidate back in 2008, one of his stumbling blocks was his affinity for the Confederacy.

Sorry, I just can't get behind a guy whose three claims to fame are as follows:

Former Reagan Republican.

Anti-woman.

Pro-Confederacy.

I'm just not feeling it. I could hold my nose about that shit when he was running for the Senate, because I knew full well that he was about the only guy who could beat the even more racist "Macaca George" in VA. But if those kinds of attitudes can be paired with the word "progressive" then I think that word has undergone a disturbing metamorphosis--and I don't want or need that kind of "progressiveness."

[delrem]

15. He is, however, HRC's perfect opponent in a primary contest. sweet.

[MADem]

18. I don't think he'll get much support--except, maybe, from the GOP! nt

[delrem]

19. He's got plenty of support from Dems.

As you explained, he won as a Dem.
Isn't winning everything?

[MADem]

20. No, he won as a slightly more reasonable, more "military" (in a military state), more

authentically "Confederate" alternative to George "Macaca" Allen, who ran on his DADDY's name and fame. He was a Democrat like Mike Bloomberg was a Republican. It was a way to get in the race. As a Democrat, he'd be the most conservative Dem running for the Presidency in a half century or more.

He got a lot of crossover support, and he managed to get people out who held their nose to vote for him simply because they were sick to death of Do Nothing George, who ran as though he assumed it was "his" seat and no one else's.

[Drunken Irishman]

28. Even then, without the Macaca comment, Webb would've never won.

He barely won. Barely - as in, by about 10,000 votes. That was in a Democratic year where the Dems took total control of the House & Senate.

Webb didn't run for reelection in 2012 because he knew he might not win.

Had Allen never made that comment, though, you've got to think he wins and no one knows who the fuck Jim Webb is.

[FSogol]

43. All VA races in the last 10 years have been pretty close. VA is a truly divided purple state.

Also, Webb would have easily won, he didn't run for reelection because he was frustrated by gridlock and the legislative process. He had always be an executive before and sitting on Senate committees bored him. Webb easily wins any race in VA.

[MADem]

46. Well, if you're of a certain age, you know who he was...might not translate to any clout, of course!

I can remember him disrupting carrier operations when he was at the Pentagon...! Quitting in a huff, too! Those were interesting times...

I can remember him pissing off some of the most senior military women to the point they were ready to challenge him to a duel with his speechifying!

He cut quite the wide swathe when he was affiliated with the Reagan regime--impossible to ignore! That was a couple of wives ago--he's mellowed with age.

Here he is, pooh-poohing TAILHOOK in the NYT: http://www.nytimes.com/1992/10/06/opinion/witch-hunt-in-the-navy.html

Here he is, dissing women in combat: http://www.washingtonian.com/articles/people/jim-webb-women-cant-fight/

Here he is, praising the Confederate Army: http://www.jameswebb.com/speeches-by-jim/remarks-at-the-confederate-memorial

I mean, like I've said, over and over, the worst Democrat is better than the best Republican, and a whip and a leader do know how to maintain party discipline and get that vote when needs must, but .... when it comes to this guy.... eh. He's better than a Republican, but for someone who is plainly intelligent, he's just not very smart at times.

If people are going to try to paint this guy as "progressive" then the meaning of the term has morphed!

I just don't think the fellow is terribly ... evolved.

[Comrade Grumpy]

56. How about his positions on foreign policy, Wall Street, and the criminal justice system?

Way more progressive than Hillary.

[MADem]

57. You sure about that? Or are you morphing?

Hillary is a Rodham, she's not an appendage of her husband...

[elias49]

94. These are REALLY old stories!

People do change. We talk about that here all the time.
The "Dissing women" thing is from 1979 I believe.

Anyway, I don't think he's trying to portray himself as a 'progressive'. I think he's trying to convey 'maturity', or at least not friggin lunacy like most on the other side! I might be inclined to pay a little attention to a democrat candidate who might be called an 'old-style- republican' because some 'old republicans' were not bad people. Kind of like the flip side of blue dogs. Blue dogs can be disappointing, but they're Dems.
(I'm having a bit of a struggle keeping analogies/comparisons understandable here.)

[MADem]

95. He's very conservative. I don't think he has changed that much.

I think OTHERS are trying to portray him as progressive, in actual fact.

And I think you would have had to have heard him talk on his views to understand how deeply resented they were--and he was "in your face" about his views, as well. He wrote that article in 79 but he was still touting those attitudes during the Reagan years--con brio, too. To gatherings of senior leaders, to include female senior leaders.

He also tends to get bored easily--he quits when things don't go his way--marriages, jobs (SECNAV, the Senate), whatever. I don't think he's the guy for the gig. And that "Rah Rah Confederacy" shit? That's a dealbreaker.

[Blue_Tires]

73. It was still an epic win

since despite his stupidity Allen enjoyed huge popularity here...And he was on the fast track for a presidential/VP nomination had he won...

I still chuckle to remember that election night...

[MADem]

96. That is a fair point--Allen was the Favorite Son for that VP gig. nt

[bklyncowgirl]

21. Blue collar whites--especially men consistently vote Republican. Why not try and get some of them?

If Webb can develop a strong populist agenda, and new ideas on economic issues like trade and Wall Street reform I could support him despite his perceived imperfections on social issues. The fact that Democrats happily write off white working class people--a large percentage of the population--seems to me ridiculous.

[FSogol]

44. True, but also remember that half the people in this country don't vote. Those are the votes he

wants the party to look at.

[RBInMaine]

22. And he's exactly right. This party needs to be about ALL the constituencies.

When men, especially white working class men who used to vote overwhelmingly for Democrats, have left the party in droves to vote for asshole Republicans who exist to destroy their jobs and unions, there is a problem. There is a disconnect. We are supposed to be the party of working Americans, and we need to message to this group that the Republicans are rotten bastards who are not working in their economic interest at all.

There are other issues where we have lost too many of these voters. It is ok for Democrats to who hunt and sport shoot to SAY SO and support RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERSHIP.

It is ok for Christian Democrats to say they are Christian.

It is ok for Democrats to say that able-bodied people can and should WORK (though we should also say that we are working to help create jobs with living wages for them to work in).

There are NO conflicts between these things and ANYTHING the Democratic Party stands for. Nothing. Just look at FDR, Harry Truman, Jack Kennedy, LBJ, and Bill Clinton. All successful Democratic leaders and ALL would entirely agree with me.

[michello]

47. As a stated in my previous post:

I will be working my ass off to make sure that he loses!

White men left the Democratic Party because more African Americans joined. If those are the types of people that he want to cater to, then he is an idiot!

The poor White man has had it soooooo hard. Spare me.

[candelista]

54. You are quoting yourself?

Well, it must be worth repeating! And from such a sage authority!

[michello]

60. As

Long as you got the message.

[candelista]

61. Actually, I didn't read it.

I stopped when you indicated that you were going to quote yourself. Anyone with that high an opinion of himself is not worth reading. Try not doing it in the future.

[RobinA]

35. I Believe

he is correct on the African American vote. The AA turnout for Obama was huge and I don't think the party can count on that big a turn out for the next white Dem. That needs to be part of the equation when deciding how to play this.

[Nay]

37. I keep telling ppl this, but they don't seem to believe me. IMO, the Dems won't be

winning the presidential vote here in 2016.

[candelista]

53. What have you got against white working people?

What did they ever do to you?

[Chellatious]

65. Misconstrued

We are far to quick to jump to accusations of RACIST!

The guy made a valid point. The republicans DO get the majority of white male voters. If trends continue as they have in the past, the democrats are not going to garner as many white male votes as the GOP, as usual, and black voters are not, indeed, going to turn out in numbers like they did for Obama.

That was an historic event, and the voter suppression and violence far too many black Americans face is a very real obstacle to voting. Some have to be "specially motivated". It is my hope that Obama has not lost too much luster and still has a few barn burners left in him, but what Webb said isn't racist. It's factual.

That said, I still wouldn't vote for him because I think he's too republican. Sometimes we can learn from our enemies though. Heck, maybe he doesn't like the idea of corporations running the country any more than most, but clearly not all, of us do.

[davidpdx]

12. He's an alternative

just not the alternative I want.

[RBInMaine]

23. Warren IS NOT RUNNING, WILL NOT RUN, DOES NOT WANT TO RUN, and COULD NOT WIN.

Of course Warren is a good progressive leader, but, like Bernie Sanders, she doesn't have snowball's chance of winning a NATIONAL election. She's a Massachusetts liberal and doesn't have the national clout and experience at the national level yet to run successfully. Ain't gonna happen, probably ever. Especially since she's already 65.

The pipe dream is OVER.

[frylock]

52. RIGHT FUCKING NOW!!!

[davidpdx]

62. There is not going to be a coronation

One way or the other we are going to find an alternative to Clinton. You guys boast that she's unbeatable because of her poll numbers and that we should just get over it. Nope, not going to happen.

As to your comment about her age:

Really, she won't be successful since she's over 65?

So we are allowed to use ageism as an excuse for Warren, but not for Hillary. Heck of a double standard you guys set.

Than you for setting my new sig line.

Ps-Just in case you attempt to self-delete:


[IMG][/IMG]

[stonecutter357]

16. who?

[leftofcool]

33. Mr Confederate Sympathizer. Sure, that'll work!

[Vinca]

34. Webb is NOT an alternative for Democrats.

He shouldn't waste his time and other people's money.

[candelista]

58. Ipse dixit.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

36. You mean, someone more racist than she is? No thanks.

[KittyWampus]

39. That implies you think Hillary Clinton is racist. Would you mind giving me some background

on how you came to that impression? I'd appreciate it, cause it's not a claim commonly made. But that might just be my own perception. Thanks.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

40. Yes. I absolutely do! See her behavior in 2007 and 2008 for plenty of examples.

There's a huge discussion in this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/118712607

[Chellatious]

66. Bill Clinton was called the first black president...until there WAS one.

I'm assuming you are quite young, or immature and missed the actual Clinton administration, or perhaps weren't paying attention.

Just because Hillary had the audacity? to run against Obama you call her racist? I admit I am guessing here, because no evidence whatever exists to link Hillary to racism of all ridiculous things.

Do you support some other candidate perhaps?

Are you real? I'm new here, so I don't know the real people from the trolls.

Even after Obama and his staff demonstrated some true cruelty and harshness unbefitting a candidate for our nation's highest office, Hillary had the ultimate Grace to stand face to face with him and accept the role of Secretary of State ...after helping him get elected.

Is that racism? I mean, it's not her fault her skin isn't dark. What more do you want?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

77. Bill Clinton is an asshole, so who gives a fuck about him. I don't.

But if you want to see clear examples of her racism, there's a discussion here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/118712607

As for being "ignorant" that describes everything you wrote is your post.

Bottom line: Hillary Clinton is not entitled to my or anyone else's vote. You may think she is, but she is not. She has to EARN the vote like everyone else.

You can attack me all you want, but that doesn't bother me one bit because it doesn't change the facts. She has to EARN votes. Period.

[bravenak]

76. Girl!!!

I know, right? Lol! No thanks! Let's keep looking.

[Arkana]

42. The Clinton alternative is sure as hell not Jim fucking Webb.

The guy is indistinguishable from Hillary on foreign policy and arguably worse on social issues. We could do better.

[RedstDem]

45. He's close to being the anti clinton

You should do some more reading up on him. Saying his foreign policy would be the same doesn't jibe.

[Bluenorthwest]

49. The 'we are too liberal for Hillary' folks need to find at least one candidate who is not a former

Reagan/Bush Republican. Webb sounds racist, is homophobic and has a shitty track record of saying sexist shit. I have no use for such a candidate at all.
I understand that straight white people voted for Reagan and want to elect people from his Party and era but that's just a huge turnoff for me. Sorry.

[candelista]

55. "Racist"? 'Homophobic"?

Can you justify these claims or did you just make them up? Where's the proof?

[Sunlei]

50. He worked with Mrs. Clinton. Wish he would stop saying he will run if he gets enough money......

Money is important but he has to WANT the position of President, tell Americans why he wants to be president- even if he worked for free.

And speak to Mrs. Clinton in private, get on the same page to do the best thing for America and Americans.

Don't just use the anti-Mrs. Clinton media campaigns to boost his own 'standing'. And 'ask' for money.

[fredamae]

51. Sorry, those looking

for a Healthy primary (at least in my home/friends) are not looking in Webbs direction. Nice guy-Waaaay to conservative for a Progressive minded America, imo.

[candelista]

59. Here are some of his positions on the issues:

James Webb on Abortion

•Supports Roe v. Wade and abortion rights. (Jun 2006)
•Voted NO on restricting UN funding for population control policies. (Mar 2009)
•Voted NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP. (Mar 2008)
•Voted NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion. (Mar 2008)
•Voted NO on barring HHS grants to organizations that perform abortions. (Oct 2007)
•Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)

James Webb on Budget & Economy

•Top of economy doing great; but workers not. (Jan 2007)
•Voted YES on $192B additional anti-recession stimulus spending. (Jul 2009)
•Voted YES on modifying bankruptcy rules to avoid mortgage foreclosures. (May 2009)
•Voted YES on additional $825 billion for economic recovery package. (Feb 2009)
•Voted YES on $60B stimulus package for jobs, infrastructure, & energy. (Sep 2008)
•Voted NO on paying down federal debt by rating programs' effectiveness. (Mar 2007)
•Reform mortgage rules to prevent foreclosure & bankruptcy. (Feb 2008)

James Webb on Civil Rights

. •Evolution on gay marriage has been good for the country. (Oct 2014)
•Affirmative action should apply to African-Americans only. (Sep 2006)
•Supports civil unions; opposes constitutional ban. (Jun 2006)
•Opposes constitutional ban of gay marriage. (Jun 2006)
•Government’s power should end at my front door. (Apr 2006)
•Realign politics by union of Scots-Irish & African Americans. (Jan 2006)
•ENDA: prohibit employment discrimination for gays. (Jun 2009)

James Webb on Corporations

. •If you've got capital, you're feeling pretty good. (Oct 2014)
•GOP puts corporate interests first; Dems put workers first. (Apr 2006)
•Rated 86% by UFCW, indicating an anti-management/pro-labor record. (May 2012)

James Webb on Crime

•Voted NO on reinstating $1.15 billion funding for the COPS Program. (Mar 2007)
•Reduce recidivism by giving offenders a Second Chance. (Mar 2007)


James Webb on Education

•Public education levels the playing field. (May 2006)
•Voted YES on additional $10.2B for federal education & HHS projects. (Oct 2007)

James Webb on Energy & Oil

•Called for energy independence every year since 2001. (Jan 2007)
•Support alternative sources instead of drilling ANWR. (Jun 2006)
•Voted NO on barring EPA from regulating greenhouse gases. (Apr 2011)
•Voted YES on protecting middle-income taxpayers from a national energy tax. (Apr 2009)
•Voted YES on requiring full Senate debate and vote on cap-and-trade. (Apr 2009)
•Voted YES on tax incentives for energy production and conservation. (Jun 2008)
•Voted YES on addressing CO2 emissions without considering India & China. (May 2008)
•Voted YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies. (Jun 2007)
•Voted YES on making oil-producing and exporting cartels illegal. (Jun 2007)
•Voted NO on factoring global warming into federal project planning. (May 2007)
•Sign on to UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. (Jan 2007)


James Webb on Environment

•More funding to reduce traffic congestion. (Oct 2006)
•Voted YES on $2 billion more for Cash for Clunkers program. (Aug 2009)
•Voted NO on prohibiting eminent domain for use as parks or grazing land. (Dec 2007)
•Make tax deduction permanent for conservation easements. (Mar 2009)
•Rated 0% by HSLF, indicating an anti-animal welfare voting record. (Jan 2012)

James Webb on Foreign Policy

•We need a clearly articulated doctrine for the Mideast. (Oct 2014)
•Arab Spring: stay out if no Americans at risk. (Oct 2014)
•Focus on strategic threats like China, not Iraq. (Apr 2006)
•Voted YES on cooperating with India as a nuclear power. (Oct 2008)
•Rated +1 by AAI, indicating a mixed Arab/Palestine voting record. (May 2012)
•Allow travel between the United States and Cuba. (Feb 2009)


James Webb on Free Trade

•Enforce existing trade laws to create fair trade. (May 2006)
•GOP free trade dream world costs American jobs. (Apr 2006)
•Voted YES on promoting free trade with Peru. (Dec 2007)

James Webb on Government Reform

•Increasing number of lobbyists is a problem. (Jun 2006)
•Culture of corruption in Washington needs real reform. (Apr 2006)
•Voted YES on Congressional pay raise. (Jul 2009)
•Voted YES on providing a US House seat for the District of Columbia. (Feb 2009)
•Voted YES on granting the District of Columbia a seat in Congress. (Sep 2007)
•Voted NO on requiring photo ID to vote in federal elections. (Jul 2007)


James Webb on Gun Control

•Voted YES on allowing firearms in checked baggage on Amtrak trains. (Apr 2009)
•Voted YES on prohibiting foreign & UN aid that restricts US gun ownership. (Sep 2007)
•Allow veterans to register unlicensed guns acquired abroad. (Jun 2011)
•Ban gun registration & trigger lock law in Washington DC. (Mar 2007)
•Dangerousness, not mental incompetence, limits gun rights. (Mar 2009)

James Webb on Health Care

•Focus on health access, not on corporate profits. (May 2006)
•Don’t let drug companies write Rx drug plan. (Apr 2006)
•Voted NO on the Ryan Budget: Medicare choice, tax & spending cuts. (May 2011)
•Voted YES on regulating tobacco as a drug. (Jun 2009)
•Voted YES on expanding the Children's Health Insurance Program. (Jan 2009)
•Voted YES on overriding veto on expansion of Medicare. (Jul 2008)
•Voted NO on means-testing to determine Medicare Part D premium. (Mar 2008)
•Voted NO on allowing tribal Indians to opt out of federal healthcare. (Feb 2008)
•Voted YES on adding 2 to 4 million children to SCHIP eligibility. (Nov 2007)
•Voted YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D. (Apr 2007)
•Establish a national childhood cancer database. (Mar 2007)
•Preserve access to Medicaid & SCHIP during economic downturn. (Apr 2008)


More at the link:

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/james_webb.htm#Foreign_Policy

[Chellatious]

67. Wish he'd stuck around for the hard votes

A LOT of important votes missing here. I'll take a snoop at the Library of Congress, as this list is highly selective and definitely skewed to appeal to liberal viewers, though I appreciate the share.

I'd have loved to see how he'd have dealt with some of the more controversial votes taken his years "off".

I like what he's shown us. I just wonder what else is there. I'll share anything new/interesting I find.

[Corey_Baker08]

69. No Thanks, He Isn't Even A Real Democrat, He's An Opportunist

[candelista]

71. And Hillary isn't?

[Corey_Baker08]

86. Has She Ever Switched Political Parties? Yes Hillary Is A Real Democrat...

I've heard some crazy shit trashing Hillary here but you questioning if she is a Democrat is like Republicans questioning if President Obama is a Muslim or if he was born in the United States...

[candelista]

88. The opposite of 'opportunist' is not 'Democrat.'

It's 'person of principle.'

[Corey_Baker08]

92. I'm Simply Suggesting Mr.Webb Switched Parties To Further His Political Career...

Ronald Reagan did it and it worked well for him.

I will admit I haven't done extensive research into Jim Webb, but should the Democratic Party's Nominee For President really be someone who spent most of their life as a Republican?

I don't think so but that's gonna be for the voters to decide...

[LiberalFighter]

70. If Jim Webb is such a great Democrat then why

is he to the right of Lieberman, Snowe, and Clinton?



https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/jim_webb/412249

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/hillary_clinton/300022

[candelista]

72. Because...

...he is not to the right of Lieberman, Snowe, and Clinton, as your very own citations show. He is a centrist just like Clinton.

[LiberalFighter]

80. So you didn't bother checking it out.

It must be because you don't care.

[candelista]

83. I just didn't see much difference between the different dot maps.

Last edited Sat Mar 21, 2015, 01:06 AM - Edit history (1)

Webb has an ADA Liberal Quotient of 90% in his last year in office. Hillary's was 75%.

http://www.adaction.org/pages/publications/voting-records.php

[OKNancy]

85. very misleading

1. The reason she had 75% was because she was absent for some votes, not because she voted against the ADA position.

2. All her ADA rankings from 2001-to 2006 were either 95% or 100%

3. Jim Webb's lifetime ADA rank was 70%

[candelista]

87. Citation?

[OKNancy]

89. It's on the ADA website

[WestSeattle2]

75. Another almost-70 something running for prez?! Come on.

We saw the effects of senility in the White House; do we really want to go down that road yet again?

[BlueStater]

82. Yep.

Never thought I'd see the day where a major political party is seemingly incapable of getting anyone under 65 to run for them. Utterly pathetic.

[markpkessinger]

78. I'm all for an alternative to HRC -- but NOT Jim Webb! n/t

[PeteSelman]

79. Is there a chance we can get an actual Democrat to run?

Clinton, Webb....really? Is this best we can do?

[brooklynite]

90. Oh, I see what you did there...Hillary Clinton isn't a "real" Democrat...

...fortunately, the "real" Democrats who vote have a slightly different perspective.

[PeteSelman]

93. Correct.

It's not my fault most people really have no clue about issues.

She's Reagan in a dress if his handlers were sane on social issues.

[DeSwiss]

84. ''Quiet Meetings?'' -- Headliner at AP, carried by HuffPo and posted on DU-LBN.

- Please define ''quiet'' for me again, it must have been changed while I was out sick.....


Maybe everything's fucked up because we no longer respect the meanings of words......

[HR_Pufnstuf]

97. kick

kick