2016 Postmortem

MyNameGoesHere

(7,638 posts)

43. Well I can sleep nights even opposing

Reply to Doctor_J (Reply #37)

Sat Oct 31, 2015, 09:17 PM

Oct 2015

a Democrat in the primaries, you'll have to live with that one.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

43 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Steve Kornacki: Why Bill Clinton really signed DOMA [View all] portlander23 Oct 2015 OP

I take everything Kornacki has to say with COLGATE4 Oct 2015 #1

Perhaps, however this NorthCarolina Oct 2015 #3

If he's right wing he should be much kinder to Hillary than to Sanders Doctor_J Oct 2015 #8

indeed stupidicus Oct 2015 #13

Suggesting the Clinton is a right winger? MyNameGoesHere Oct 2015 #20

far more conservative than Sanders. more conservative than Reagan Doctor_J Oct 2015 #37

Well I can sleep nights even opposing MyNameGoesHere Oct 2015 #43

To the contrary, RWer's are pushing Bernie COLGATE4 Oct 2015 #42

I remember the time very well and while I don't specifically remember a constitutional OregonBlue Oct 2015 #2

No one is saying the Clintons were anti-gay portlander23 Oct 2015 #4

Exactly what barrel was that? Rilgin Oct 2015 #5

+++ - Your points are well stated. Why does everyone want to do triangulation with the Clintons? erronis Oct 2015 #15

Because people automatically think, "triangulation," when they hear the name Clinton? Fawke Em Oct 2015 #40

This idea of the constitutional amendment has been debunked passiveporcupine Oct 2015 #39

Hillary Clinton�s Bizarre Gay Marriage Revisionism Doesn�t Fool Those Who Remember Segami Oct 2015 #6

Kornacki does bring up the point that Congress would have overridden the veto. BlueCheese Oct 2015 #7

Clinton thought his election was at risk portlander23 Oct 2015 #12

There was nothing to gain. Personally he might not gain jwirr Oct 2015 #29

Of course his veto would be over-ridden by a Republican Congress AND Bohunk68 Oct 2015 #9

Don't forget to add this to your links: JaneyVee Oct 2015 #10

He gets much correct and I basically agree while being annoyed yet again at the lack of mention Bluenorthwest Oct 2015 #11

Thank you for including Carol Mosely-Browns eloquent testimony to this discussion! erronis Oct 2015 #17

I want to thank you for that as well. MuseRider Oct 2015 #28

This is the result of politics by polling. Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2015 #14

Let's assume he is right. If Bill had vetoed that would have been a major club to use pnwmom Oct 2015 #16

Mostly agree portlander23 Oct 2015 #18

Thank you for stating it so eloquently. They had him over a barrel. He was damned either way. Laser102 Oct 2015 #21

Yes, I remember the atmosphere then very well. pnwmom Oct 2015 #23

More echo chamber crap. Gman Oct 2015 #19

The political ignorance on a board for political junkies is really amazing. closeupready Oct 2015 #22

The strategic ignorance on a board for political junkies is really amazing. pnwmom Oct 2015 #24

That's some twisted logic right there. azmom Oct 2015 #26

lol closeupready Oct 2015 #27

Then why did it need to be repealed? Motown_Johnny Oct 2015 #31

Because the country had progressed between 1996 and 2013 and the reason pnwmom Oct 2015 #32

But was the threat of a Constitutional Amendment a serious one? Motown_Johnny Oct 2015 #35

It felt like a serious threat to many of us. I disagree with Maddow and Sanders. pnwmom Oct 2015 #36

they are both political chameleons, playing to the crowd restorefreedom Oct 2015 #25

Same sex marriage was not new or exotic in 1996. Motown_Johnny Oct 2015 #30

Legal gay marriage in the US was non-existent in 1996. n/t pnwmom Oct 2015 #33

Duh. Motown_Johnny Oct 2015 #34

It's a direct r�ponse to the claim you had just made about same sex marriage. n/t pnwmom Oct 2015 #38

That's a lie Chitown Kev Oct 2015 #41