General Discussion

loyalsister

(13,390 posts)

10. She would have to loyal to the leadership in congress and the executive branch

Fri Jul 1, 2016, 04:01 PM

Jul 2016

What she wants and what she has to do very well could be two different things. On the flip side, Bush as president was bad enough imagine if the Chenney had gone against him and implemented his full agenda? I think he would have gone far beyond the damage Bush did. I suppose with that in mind we could be grateful that he was loyal to a degree.

I think we also would want someone who is much younger. At some point the Dem leadership is going to have to groom younger candidates. The baby boomer bench is naturally shrinking.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Rachel building strong case for a Clinton/Warren [View all] 99th_Monkey Jun 2016 OP

Republican Massachusetts governor messes it up. nt Lucky Luciano Jun 2016 #1

Could you elaborate? 99th_Monkey Jun 2016 #2

The post below yours seems to refute what I was thinking. Lucky Luciano Jun 2016 #5

Wrong. If Warren is Clinton's VP, Harry Reid has a plan to replace her w4rma Jun 2016 #3

Ok that would be pretty cool. nt Lucky Luciano Jun 2016 #4

Yeah, but we need her to be an active V.P., Mc Mike Jun 2016 #6

110% agreed. n/t 99th_Monkey Jun 2016 #7

She doesn't have enough experience to pull that off loyalsister Jun 2016 #8

You're right, on some points. Mc Mike Jul 2016 #9

She would have to loyal to the leadership in congress and the executive branch loyalsister Jul 2016 #10