So until "virtually impossible" becomes "absolutely impossible" he's going to keep riding the tiger? I can't believe he's making a lot of friends in the party doing that.Quote:
Originally Posted by catherine
Printable View
So until "virtually impossible" becomes "absolutely impossible" he's going to keep riding the tiger? I can't believe he's making a lot of friends in the party doing that.Quote:
Originally Posted by catherine
I think he's praying for an indictment. If that happens while he's in the race, he has a much stronger case against the DNC who would probably award all her delegates to their next-in-line favorite, Joe Biden, in the absence of an active contender.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
At this point, I think he'd be foolish to suspend his campaign.
She is above the law.
Definitely not, especially Hill's pal Debbie Wasserman Schultz. But frankly, I don't think he cares.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
There's the nomination - but there's also the DNC. The nominee does not decree the party platform, maybe he feels he might have some sway?Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
Also I can see folks running for other offices running as "Clinton style democrats" or "Sanders style democrats". In some states, I think "Sanders style democrat" might play better.
He's in it for the groupies.Quote:
Originally Posted by creaker
Sounds like as good of a reason as any. Look at Dennis Kucinich. He managed to woo his wife after he explained to her his idea for a Department of Peace. She's a total hottie so maybe going after the groupies is a good idea. And really, who can resist a dude that can get a little birdie to come sit on his podium!Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamsmith
So the NYT answers your question--saying they're in it no matter what to change the way political campaigns are waged. In addition, looks like Alan is right: he's hoping for a stumble.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
In addition--there's the argument that really, Sanders v Trump has a MUCH better chance of keeping Dems in the White House than Clinton v Trump.
"Advisers to Mr. Sanders said on Wednesday that he was newly resolved to remain in the race, seeing an aggressive campaign as his only chance to pressure Democrats into making fundamental changes to how presidential primaries and debates are held in the future. They said he also held out hope of capitalizing on any late stumbles by Mrs. Clinton or any damage to her candidacy, whether by scandal or by the presumptive Republican nominee, Donald J. Trump.
Mr. Sanders, his advisers said, has been buoyed by a stream of polls showing him beating Mr. Trump by larger margins than Mrs. Clinton in some battleground states, and by his belief that an upset victory in California could have a psychological impact on convention delegates who already have doubts about Mrs. Clinton."
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/19/us...s=AUDDEVREMARK
I suppose that if you've got the money and are enjoying yourself, there's no reason not to defy the odds. Especially if your affiliation to the party isn't particularly strong and you're not worried about the unity issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by catherine
Sure. This is as it always has been. The close also-rans serve a valuable purpose in helping to define the platform and clue in the party on the mood of the base. He has already pulled Hill a little more to the left on some issues. That's a good purpose.Quote:
Originally Posted by creaker
Unfortunately for the right, Donald doesn't know the rules or want to play by them. He doesn't give a rip about the base except how to play them, and after all, he IS appealing to the base. That's who he is. But I suspect that if he wasn't, he wouldn't move for anyone. Oh he would for a bit to play them, but sooner or later he shows his true colors. Lucky for him, the republican base believes exactly as he does. His real challenge now is to appeal to the rest of the party who doesn't. He'll try, but again, changing spots and all... Again, lucky for him, republicans would fall behind Stalin if he had an R behind his name.:|(
Bernie was a long shot from the beginning. I think his whole reason for running was not to win, but to get a message out, which he continues to do successfully.
The Democratic Party has a bigger problem than the Republicans. The Dems are split almost equally in half by contrasting ideologies. Socialism vs. Democratic Favoritism. There is enough difference to create a third party. The base on the Republican Party is just angry that they have rolled over to progressives over and over and over. Once a true leader comes along, they will cohabit once again. Unless, someone like Cruz can start a third party radical Christian wing to advance a taliban like social agenda.
Bernie just needs to drop the Democratic moniker and admit to full blown socialism.
I think he should run as an independent in the general election.Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamsmith
I think that would be an excellent idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraliteAngler
And become as dishonest as the other candidates?Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamsmith
That would be a bad idea. If he loses he should endorse Clinton. As bad as some think Clinton will be stupid Trump will be much worse.
Agreed 100 percent. RobQuote:
Originally Posted by Teacher Terry
My hope is that egos will be contained and Hillary and Bernie run as a team! I think it's a pipe dream, but one can hope.
If Bernie is VP what difference will it make? Will he influence policy? Won't Bill be a far greater influence? List Biden's accomplishments for example.
I don't see Bernie as VP (funeral attendee). More as a change agent.
That's one thing find a little depressing - so much fighting over the nominees that there's no discussion of what the Democrats will present as a platform at the DNC - that's one place where change could happen, but no one is talking about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneV2.0
I expect we're all socialists - just to different degrees.Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamsmith
I thought I heard fireworks last night outside after the AP declared Clinton the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party for clinching the pledged delegate and super delegates she needs for an "historic" achievement. But when I poked my head outside during the intermission of the Stanley Cup finals between the San Jose Sharks and the Pittsburgh Penguins, I found it was just a summer thunderstorm rolling past. No glee in the heart of the rust belt. Just plenty of yawns.
Clinton said she has more "work to do" and plans to "fight" on. The only work she has ever done to my knowledge is with a microphone in hand collecting millions for talking to rich Goldman Sacks types and the only fighting has been done by the soldiers and embassy members in Lybia whom she allowed to be slaughtered. But hey, who defines work and fighting in this political season? She is good with personal emails though. The most highly qualified politician ever to run for President if knowing how to use the system to your favor and to amass wealth is a measure of qualification.
So, Democratics rejoice. The anointed one......is now anointed. Californians don't matter ........once again.
Today is primary day in my state today, too. You bet I'm going to vote for Bernie. He's not going down without a contested convention, so it ain't over till the old Democratic Socialist sings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamsmith
Catherine, enjoy casting your vote for the Bern, to me it would be like giving Hillary a final one finger salute. Now, about Philadelphia, are you sure there isn't a way you guys in New Jersey wouldn't like to adopt one more great liberal city? It's right there on your border.Quote:
Originally Posted by catherine
How can there be a contested convention if his opponent has the majority of delegates?Quote:
Originally Posted by catherine
It won't be contested, it'll just be testy.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
Well, according to The Bern, its wrong to count the super delegates that are committed to Clinton because after all, they haven't actually cast their vote for Hillary until the Convention. Have you ever been in the courtroom when you know the fix is in?Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
http://youtu.be/saQJ8z4714w
If Bernie does well today--if he pulls an upset in CA for instance (they're pretty much neck-and-neck), he can try to pull over the superdelegates she has or challenge them, as Williamsmith said. He'll have more leverage if he continues to win states.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
At least that's how I understand it.
Hillary Clinton is certainly as qualified as 99% of presidential candidates; Benghazi is a manufactured scandal. Maybe the Republicans shouldn't have blocked funding for embassy security. And I don't think she's particularly dishonest--especially as compared to the average politician. My problems with Clinton are her apparent eagerness to go to war at the least provocation, her cozy relationship with corporate CEOs, and the notion of dynasty, which is anathema to me. If we're going that route, why not just go back to the monarchy?
Women are apparently held to a different standard--the "walks on water" standard.
If they're close to neck and neck, and the remaining delegates are awarded proportionately, wouldn't that require the mother of all upsets to convince the superdelegates to betray Clinton? Not impossible, but certainly improbable?Quote:
Originally Posted by catherine
Of course, this question is coming from a guy who thought the Trump campaign was a joke or publicity stunt. I suppose anything could happen.
And to that point, the monarchy was kinder to "woman's rights"--at least they couldn't take away the crown from Elizabeth, Mary, Victoria, etc--because of birthright. At cracks me up that we're now seeing the news media playing up this "historic" nomination of a woman for president. It almost makes America seem backward, given the number of female heads of state there are and have been all over the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneV2.0
I simply cannot make electoral predictions anymore. I made too many incorrect ones about the GOP/Trump. haha
the way I see it.........Trump vs Sanders = change vs change......... Trump vs Clinton = change vs the same
Today the Clinton News Network will be all over Grumpy old Bernie for not acknowledging the historic achievement of Hillary Clinton, the primary accomplishment being that as a Democratic nominee for President that she is by chromosonal chance born a woman. Not that she is an excellent communicator, leader, administrator, inspiring human(which of course would all be a lie)..no she is a woman. Of all the qualifications they could laud that have to be worked for, they will choose to highlight her sex. Well, if she is elected President, at least it will be over Bernie's dead body. I got to hand to the old man from Vermont. He isn't accepting artificial glass ceilings either.Quote:
Originally Posted by catherine
As he said, "the struggle continues", however irrelevant. I liked how Hillary made a sort of concession speech on his behalf.Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamsmith
I suppose it now comes down to who the voters consider to be the least insufferable.
I predict that if Billary becomes Prez then about three years from now you claim that she set back gender relations in this country by 30 years. hahaQuote:
Originally Posted by Williamsmith
No UA, I did that all by myself last night while returning home in the wee hours from a lengthy double header between Pittsburgh and New York.......I somehow failed to hear my wife ask twice for me to pull over and get a blanket out for her.Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraliteAngler
When Billary is Prez you'll do jail time for that!Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamsmith