General Discussion

reddread

(6,896 posts)

86. one of the problems with looking backwards is you never see whats coming

Reply to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #82)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 01:02 PM

Apr 2015

but looking backwards for me means watching the demise of the thin shred of democracy we had,
presidential debates with fair oversight by independant groups like the League of Women Voters.
the deciders have driven out the traditional protections we had against their decisions.
This is a Bush era policy, driven by those who rule us thusly.
playing along as if nothing happened in the last thirty five years to the process is a lot like being culpable.
As confident as i am that Team Hillary has all their friends in all the right places looking out for their interests,
I am concerned about the things that go unmentioned.
We will have exactly what issues to decide upon in 16?

The war criminal on the left, or the war criminal on the right.
That makes everyone an accomplice, and moots the question.
As if we were ever going to reinstate accountability upon the rich.

-and thanks for the numbers!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

211 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Hillary's electability is largely political myth at this point [View all] Prism Apr 2015 OP

My gut told me. hrmjustin Apr 2015 #1

I thought running based on guts DonCoquixote Apr 2015 #3

Well the Holy Ghost had words with me through my stomach. hrmjustin Apr 2015 #6

I hope to be wrong DonCoquixote Apr 2015 #10

That possibility is with every candidate. hrmjustin Apr 2015 #12

Well.... Adrahil Apr 2015 #15

We have only one candidate running so far. Those polls will change as soon as other Candidates sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #18

I meant against the GOP Adrahil Apr 2015 #139

and therein is the problem DonCoquixote Apr 2015 #134

You think wall street prefers her over a GOP candidate? n/t Adrahil Apr 2015 #140

one feeds them quickly DonCoquixote Apr 2015 #151

Goldman-Sachs and Wall Street are hedging their bets hoping (paying) for a Clinton v Bush race. rhett o rick Apr 2015 #177

My gut told me. AlbertCat Apr 2015 #90

It's a joke. hrmjustin Apr 2015 #103

Remember last time she ran. 840high Apr 2015 #112

Yes very well. hrmjustin Apr 2015 #115

Her election in 2000 was only a cakewalk because she made it one dsc Apr 2015 #2

If Guiliani had run, I wouldn't call it a cakewalk Prism Apr 2015 #7

Ghouliani declined to run because HRC would have whupped him and he wanted ... DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #14

Rudy self imploded Geronimoe Apr 2015 #77

Her 2000 Senate race was audacious. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #9

Tillis did this in NC AlbertCat Apr 2015 #92

I am not familiar with that race so it wouldn't be fair for me to comment. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #99

Rudi's poll ratings were in the low 20s at that time. His political career was over. Which is why he sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #21

Note this was the pre 911 Rudy, who announced his divorce to the media before his wife karynnj Apr 2015 #81

Based on the fact that she is popular among rank and file Democratic voters DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #4

For now Prism Apr 2015 #11

It's more than early polling that informs my thinking. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #16

For the 2008 primary, her polls ended up slightly higher than they were at this stage muriel_volestrangler Apr 2015 #50

They're not contradictory statements Prism Apr 2015 #80

"she's been out of the public eye for a few years now" was laughable even without your OP muriel_volestrangler Apr 2015 #85

I am white. SamKnause Apr 2015 #20

If you inferred that I suggested everybody will vote for Hillary DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #22

Inference; SamKnause Apr 2015 #46

I am somewhat SamKnause Apr 2015 #169

Well I respect your passion. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #171

Thanks for your reply SamKnause Apr 2015 #172

I have heard Bernie several times and appreciate his voice for the voiceless DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #186

Iraq war is sane foreign policy? eridani Apr 2015 #182

The MediCal I get as a consequence of the ACA which expanded Medicaid to single indigent adults is. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #185

I'm with you. I've had enough. 840high Apr 2015 #116

I know several African Americans who do not support her Oilwellian Apr 2015 #125

I guess that's why she is getting >90% of their vote. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #127

I am one of those African-Americans who will not rury Apr 2015 #193

Speaking of South Carolina in 2008.... LovingA2andMI Apr 2015 #198

She is the most electable candidate. For now. Autumn Apr 2015 #5

Attempting to tear down a Democrat is easy at this point. onehandle Apr 2015 #8

I'm not tearing her down Prism Apr 2015 #13

So another vote for 'Not Hillary.' onehandle Apr 2015 #17

Here you go- the not Hillary campaign in all its glory... bettyellen Apr 2015 #24

Hilarious. onehandle Apr 2015 #69

Your antagonism is uncalled for Prism Apr 2015 #37

Bah. That statement is so inflammatory it gets you thrown out of the HRC group jeff47 Apr 2015 #48

Ah, projection. onehandle Apr 2015 #52

Being undecided over a year before a primary is not a radical, hateful position. AlbertCat Apr 2015 #95

Not everyone votes phil89 Apr 2015 #60

She's the only candidate running right now. How can anyone state who their candidates are until sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #27

Hey! Chafee's running!! jeff47 Apr 2015 #49

I haven't seen any announcement from Chafee, can you post a link please? sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #55

. jeff47 Apr 2015 #58

'We are still in the exploratory committee phase'. Thanks, that I knew, he has not formally sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #154

Hillary IS electable Proud Public Servant Apr 2015 #19

If that's the best argument in her favor, I'd call that a red flag. Jester Messiah Apr 2015 #88

It was not meant to be an argument in her favor Proud Public Servant Apr 2015 #94

Likewise. [nt] Jester Messiah Apr 2015 #120

Have you seen recent polls? Double digit leads. JaneyVee Apr 2015 #23

and that by itself negates the premise that she is not electable still_one Apr 2015 #31

So what? BrainDrain Apr 2015 #109

It was close. It went to the end. Closeness means the still_one Apr 2015 #131

So, unable to read the OP? jeff47 Apr 2015 #51

I read it, and it just invalidates polls because it doesn't agree with the OPs still_one Apr 2015 #133

Really? So Clinton won the 2008 primary by more than 20 points? jeff47 Apr 2015 #138

Obviously we don't agree on what electability means still_one Apr 2015 #146

It is not only name recognition, what about Joe Biden QuestionAlways Apr 2015 #197

Good point, and I agree it is more than name recognition. However, I also think that once a still_one Apr 2015 #208

I agree, but in any case, Hillary will be difficult to beat QuestionAlways Apr 2015 #209

Will you concur that the same principle applies to Bernie Sanders? brooklynite Apr 2015 #25

Message auto-removed Name removed Apr 2015 #26

So iow, Bernie doesn't have enough money. And that, right there, is the problem. sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #29

POW! merrily Apr 2015 #34

Money rasing is a problem for all of us Geronimoe Apr 2015 #79

Dems need to make this a huge issue in this campaign. For two billion, what are they buying? sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #157

True -- but those are the rules we have to play by in 2016... brooklynite Apr 2015 #97

Why are you asking that question, you know the answer surely. We the people will give him what we sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #161

Very well, now we wait... brooklynite Apr 2015 #164

People were not aware of the poisonous influence of Special Interest money when Dean sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #167

Readily, yes. Prism Apr 2015 #38

I don;t think myth is a good word for what youre trying to describe. aikoaiko Apr 2015 #28

At this point in the 2008 race, she had a 30 point lead on the rest of the field. jeff47 Apr 2015 #54

I don't think anyone has said she can't lose the primary or general. aikoaiko Apr 2015 #61

No, polling data shows squat, because it's impossible to be accurate this early. jeff47 Apr 2015 #68

No, she didn't; perhaps you're thinking of 2006, ie the equivalent of 2014? muriel_volestrangler Apr 2015 #98

All I know is what the polls are saying now, and your assessment is counter to those polls. So are still_one Apr 2015 #30

Every bit as right as they were in 2008 merrily Apr 2015 #35

We will see, but the premise of the OP that Hillary is unelectable does NOT correlate with the polls still_one Apr 2015 #39

Point is, polls this far out are meaningless. merrily Apr 2015 #43

if that is the case then so is the statement that Hillary is unelectable? still_one Apr 2015 #91

Dodging the point again? The statement that polls this far out are meaningless is not merrily Apr 2015 #183

I do not believe she is unelectable Prism Apr 2015 #66

That is a valid point, and subject to discussion still_one Apr 2015 #93

Everthing about 2016 is mth until We all vote in 2016 lewebley3 Apr 2015 #32

What nonsense... of course she is electable. DCBob Apr 2015 #33

Juggernaut? Motown_Johnny Apr 2015 #36

It was very close. She could have won but Obama and his campaign were just too good. DCBob Apr 2015 #42

And her campaign was bad enough to blow a 30 point lead, not to mention all the other merrily Apr 2015 #44

and yet she still almost won. DCBob Apr 2015 #45

Meh. She stayed in the race well beyond the point at which she had any possiblity of winning. merrily Apr 2015 #53

If I recall correctly the caucus states were the key to Obama's victory. DCBob Apr 2015 #57

No, not only the caucus states by any means, though I do recall her saying, to Texans, that merrily Apr 2015 #62

Actually yes, the caucus states were the main reason for Obama's win. DCBob Apr 2015 #73

Thanks. Your chart proves what my Reply 53 said. merrily Apr 2015 #184

or hers was just to bad n/t Motown_Johnny Apr 2015 #89

being the presumed favorite this far in advance is rarely predictive of success reddread Apr 2015 #40

It works pretty well for the Republican primaries; Democratic ones were messier muriel_volestrangler Apr 2015 #82

one of the problems with looking backwards is you never see whats coming reddread Apr 2015 #86

"Polls," whispered a voice on the breeze. Orsino Apr 2015 #41

Myths runs wild here, we have to continue to debunked the talking points. Thinkingabout Apr 2015 #47

You are right, and I find all those who crow SheilaT Apr 2015 #56

I think she has a good chance of being our next pres gwheezie Apr 2015 #59

The same argument was also made about Barack Obama when he ran. guillaumeb Apr 2015 #63

I don't believe Secretary Clinton is unelectable Prism Apr 2015 #71

I do not feel your implied anything about her. guillaumeb Apr 2015 #75

Don't be stupid montex Apr 2015 #64

I've done none of the things you are accusing me of Prism Apr 2015 #74

best candidate? In what universe? ChairmanAgnostic Apr 2015 #199

I believe your subject line to be correct. NCTraveler Apr 2015 #65

With your ability to know the political upaloopa Apr 2015 #67

Uncalled for. Prism Apr 2015 #78

If you oppose Hillary, you are a FOX viewer RufusTFirefly Apr 2015 #188

That was a nasty immature response to the poster. rury Apr 2015 #191

I agree Khaotic Apr 2015 #70

That would all make sense if her presumptive Republican posters were crushing her in the polls. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #76

You're quoting a right wing biased site for data here... cascadiance Apr 2015 #87

Here's Huff Po: DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #96

But they have an agenda of trying to amplify the "importance" of polls, when they aren't meaningful cascadiance Apr 2015 #100

Actually they buried the current great HRC V R poll DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #102

As polls should be buried at this point... cascadiance Apr 2015 #105

Yes, that's how it may likely play out Laughing Mirror Apr 2015 #204

The only thing keeping Hillary afloat... CoffeeCat Apr 2015 #72

She only lost to Obama by a couple percentage points -- NOT a "train wreck." pnwmom Apr 2015 #83

her campaign BrainDrain Apr 2015 #111

So? Ever hear of Ronald Reagan? He tried and failed twice. We didn't stop him the 3rd and 4th times. pnwmom Apr 2015 #113

Don't forget Nixon lost and then won too. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #136

seriously???!!!! BrainDrain Apr 2015 #200

Your logic is flawed DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #201

Seriously???!!! BrainDrain Apr 2015 #206

It was an example of presidential candidates who overcame defeat. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #207

Kinda kills their argument right? LovingA2andMI Apr 2015 #202

You got that right.... BrainDrain Apr 2015 #205

Nonsequiturs strike again anamnua Apr 2015 #211

Her electability is based on her accomplishments Gman Apr 2015 #84

H 16! Gamecock Lefty Apr 2015 #101

Actually, if I may, it was NOT a cakewalk for her in New York. NOT IN THE LEAST. calimary Apr 2015 #104

POTY, POTY , I say DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #107

BS, BS I say BrainDrain Apr 2015 #118

All my family is from New York. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #121

+1 from a fellow New Yorker who's lived here longer than Hillary has. closeupready Apr 2015 #156

2008 was very unusual. MineralMan Apr 2015 #106

Great Post. Her negatives > reasons to support her. She's the Media Darling, selected FOR us. FTS NYC_SKP Apr 2015 #108

She has the best Favorability/Unfavorability ratings of all the candidates... DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #117

...^ that 840high Apr 2015 #119

The thing that is important to remember is how it will impact the primaries. Major Hogwash Apr 2015 #160

Only in the anti-Hillary posts rock Apr 2015 #110

The MEDIA wants another Bush vs Clinton battle with Bush winning this time.... Spitfire of ATJ Apr 2015 #114

Agree in the horse race aspect but Hillary is kicking and will kick his candy ass. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #123

I imagine Jeb will STILL win a majority of the white male vote.... Spitfire of ATJ Apr 2015 #126

Any R will Probably/ definitely win the white vote. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #130

Everyone has heard of "Reagan Democrats" but nobody wants to talk about "Clinton Republicans"... Spitfire of ATJ Apr 2015 #135

America isn't a right wing nation and the further right they go the better for us. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #137

The funny thing is everyone knew Pappy Bush was too much of a wimp to oppose them. Spitfire of ATJ Apr 2015 #141

Yeah, he was much more malleable than Bush ll which turned out to be a bad thing for the nation. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #144

Pappy Bush was literally "spooky", what with his CIA connections. Spitfire of ATJ Apr 2015 #147

And AGAIN, Corporate Amerika wins, and we all lose, no matter who wins that "horse race"... cascadiance Apr 2015 #128

At least if HRC wins I will continue to get my Medi Cal DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #132

And with another Democrat winning, we might get more than Medi Cal (Single Payer!) cascadiance Apr 2015 #148

I support single payer but we couldn't get it when we had the House and sixty Democratic senators. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #149

She's not running to be in office now, but in 2016. Republicans haven't won congress yet then! cascadiance Apr 2015 #150

The way the House is gerrymandered it is going to be some time before we control it again. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #153

You can thank Joementum Lieberman and Blanche Lincoln for that... elzenmahn Apr 2015 #195

Really does feel like you have to get Wall Street's blessing all right. Spitfire of ATJ Apr 2015 #142

Or with Clinton winning, the banksters win either way. This is WHY the media has selected her. NYC_SKP Apr 2015 #124

If the media was really independent the Republicans would get caught in their lies. Spitfire of ATJ Apr 2015 #145

It is just spin from the corporatists who want to eliminate all primary candidates betterdemsonly Apr 2015 #122

Polls are a snapshot of what the public thinks, and right now they think she is the most electable. Agnosticsherbet Apr 2015 #129

Where are the polls measuring how someone like Sanders or Warren does against these candidates? cascadiance Apr 2015 #152

From Real Clear Politics, Clinton is blowing everybody away by double digits. Agnosticsherbet Apr 2015 #155

History shows us this is meaningless. You're just sinking in to realclearpolitics RW agenda... cascadiance Apr 2015 #159

History tells me it is a snap shot of the race now. Assuming it's useless is wishful thinking Agnosticsherbet Apr 2015 #163

Given that it has been shown to be VERY inaccurate in the past as shown by history... cascadiance Apr 2015 #166

Wishing polls were different does 't make them so. Agnosticsherbet Apr 2015 #174

Yep, it is understood that social issues HRC can talk about and not PO the corporate elites... cascadiance Apr 2015 #175

The last time she ran for president it wasn't so good d_legendary1 Apr 2015 #143

There is plenty of evidence, you just dismiss it. DanTex Apr 2015 #158

"Evidence" that doesn't hold up... cascadiance Apr 2015 #162

Of course, nothing is certain. I'm just talking "likely". DanTex Apr 2015 #165

I think more than previous elections, Democrats are increasingly resenting candidates PUSHED on them cascadiance Apr 2015 #168

Maybe. More than in 2000? I'm not sure. DanTex Apr 2015 #173

Electability is largely a myth at this point in the election cycle. Rex Apr 2015 #170

The evidence is rather stark. joshcryer Apr 2015 #176

And Jeb just leapt on the third rail followed closely by Christie: ucrdem Apr 2015 #178

I come down on the opposite side Prism Apr 2015 #194

I'm Ready For Oligarchy - Are You? - Vote HRC cantbeserious Apr 2015 #179

Of course a guy that's not a Democrat workinclasszero Apr 2015 #180

In 2008, 18 months out she was to be the anointed one awoke_in_2003 Apr 2015 #181

But hard-working, flat-broke, sleep-deprived white people support her! RufusTFirefly Apr 2015 #187

By far the most sensible OP on Hillary Clinton I have seen rury Apr 2015 #189

But but but ...Miss Cleo told us Hillary will win. L0oniX Apr 2015 #190

I think O'Malley has a very good chance if he runs. Yo_Mama Apr 2015 #192

President Hillary Clinton Laser102 Apr 2015 #196

Weak argument at best 0nirevets Apr 2015 #203

It's also the transitive argument which is a fallacy in sports DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #210