It takes either guts or a Don Quixote complex- or both- to run against HRC

[cali]

In terms of structure, it's more like running against an incumbent President than another candidate- far more so than in 2008. She has huge advantages in almost every conceivable way. But that's also a potential achilles heel.

Can anyone really compete against HRC? I doubt it, but challengers can help in pressuring her to give specifics. Martin O'Malley just did that with his strongly stated opposition to the TPP. The press will be asking her more insistently about this and other issues because he's come out with specifics on issues that she hasn't as of yet.

Challengers to her left can (maybe) move HRC to the left. That would take polling that shows that a challenger can garner some real backing.

HRC has formidable backing, a political and fund raising structure that is unparalleled and a campaign that is well mapped out. That has to be daunting to any prospective challenger. She is the prohibitive favorite. But huge, powerful structures have their flaws. They are notoriously hidebound, for one thing. We'll see how HRC and her campaign maneuver through the next several months.

And we'll see if Martin O'Malley or anyone else can become a credible candidate.

[leftofcool]

1. I agree.

There are some things about O'Malley I did not like while living under his leadership in Maryland, but those are things I could get past because he is dead right on 99% of other things. One good thing about O'Malley is that he has never been a Republican (see Chaffee and Webb). I may support Hillary in the primary but if O'Malley runs and wins the primary, I will support him 100%.

[cali]

2. Thanks for your thoughtful response. I agree about Webb and Chaffee

Could you tell me the things that that he did in MD that you didn't like. I really want to know his negative history as well as the positives.

If, as I expect, HRC is the nominee, I'll vote for her. She's certainly far better than any repub who heads the ticket.

[leftofcool]

4. Property taxes in Maryland

He raised the property taxes on middle class home owners so high that many just fled Maryland because they could no longer afford to live in their homes. This was not a problem for the rich because we all know that if you live in a million dollar mansion, you can afford your taxes. Our condo was a 900 sq foot, two bedroom that we picked up cheaply and lived in it for 11 years. 70K for the condo which is cheap in Annapolis. Our first 3 years of property taxes were reasonable, about 700.00 per year. On that 4th year, our taxes jumped to $2500 per year and over a $1000 increase for the next 3 years and yet the property value did not go up. When were were finally to sell it after being retired for 2 years, O'Malley charged us an extra $4000 in taxes on the sale of the home because we had already retired and moved out of state. That is 4K I could have used to pay for chemo treatments, used for medicine, used to buy groceries etc.... But all that aside, O'Malley is correct on 99% of issues I care about.

[Bluenorthwest]

5. O'Malley has many strong points. His very dated views on cannabis will hinder him in both the West

and other areas of the 21st Century. He's also one of those politicians who seems eager to exploit LGBT issues when it serves himself, just as willing to be silent on LGBT issues when that serves himself. In 2007 when we had Hillary and Barack doing the 'Sanctity of God in the Mix Roadshow' O'Malley did not speak up for us, did not attempt to stop either of those candidates. He endorsed Clinton, whose views at the time were 'civil unions only' without a word in favor of marriage, without a word of criticism for her. Now he's running against her, so he is nattering about the views she held when he endorsed her. That's exploitative of the issue, not being an advocate for us, but for himself, using us as a device.

[cali]

6. thanks for the info.

I need to learn a lot more about him. I will say that in 2008, to my knowledge, there was no dem candidate running who supported marriage equality, so pols who did, had no options other than not endorsing a candidate at all.

[Bluenorthwest]

11. Actually the option of endorsing with an asterisk has always existed, I know this because there has

yet to be a serious contender for the nomination who I have been able to endorse unreservedly. The people who have standing to criticize others for opposing equality are those who always spoke up for equality. He played the politics of the moment, as did she, now he is criticizing her for doing exactly what he and the entire freaking Party was doing at that time. She pissed me off for not supporting equality, but so did all the officials save Dennis and Bernie, as well as the bulk of DU. Making all of that about Hillary, who has been both ahead and behind the field at various times in her life with LGBT stuff is just not reason based.
I mean, it is literally possible to look up the days just prior to Obama's 'evolution' on marriage equality and see DU full of people insisting Obama could never do that because he'd lose if he did, civil unions are pragmatic, stop wanting your pony. So the whole pretense of straight Democrats that some of them have much more standing than others on issues they were virtually all fearful of and incorrect about is sort of annoying.

[Vattel]

8. I really despise his excessive arrest policies when he was mayor.

And calling critics of those policies leftwing ideologues shouldn't sit well with a progressive like yourself. Of course, the talking points are in place now to disavow responsibility for any excessive arrests that when on when he was mayor. Those talking points are laughable to those of us in the Baltimore area who know what really went on, but they will work for those who want to believe in him.

I also am noticing various other misleading talking points too. It is claimed that because he raised the income tax on high earners, he is all about fairness in taxation. That is partly true--kudos to him for improving the fairness in income taxes--but he also raised several taxes and fees that hurt the poor and middle class disproportionately (e.g., the sales tax, gasoline tax, toll booth fees, taxes on alcolohol and tabacco). Regardless of whether you think those tax hikes were, on balance, worth it, it will make it hard for him in the general election. I think his tax record played the biggest role in Maryland, a very blue state, electing a republican for governor this time around.

I find it impossible to trust O'Malley. He has never been out in front on issues like marriage equality, and his attempt now to adopt populist Warren-like rhetoric on economic issues seems to me to be rather transparently motivated by his desire to be president. I don't trust his sudden interest in criticizing Obama on immigrant rights either, although I agreed with the criticism.

[cali]

9. It doesn't sit well with me

but whatever his motivations, it's good to have someone who's running who is taking a stand against the TPP and for a $15 minimum wage.

There are very few politicians I do trust. He hasn't earned my trust at this point and I still have a lot more to learn about him.

[HereSince1628]

3. Other candidates may influence the dialog but not the philosophy and trajectory of others

We're better off with multiple candidates not because it changes a shallow current in campaign narratives but because it at least provides an illusion of choice and it might provide some choice.

We're beyond the need to watch polls and focus groups bend campaign rhetoric that won't be fulfilled. That just creates a population of expectations of which are often never met (remember O's promise re his walking shoes?).

In the long run sincere representations of philosophies and policy preferences of candidates would be better for voters to know than watching the act to act costume changes of political theater.

[PowerToThePeople]

7. bookmarking for when Bernie jumps in.

Guts!

[cali]

10. My informed guess is that he won't jump in. He's my Senator and I'm pretty familiar with

him in a way few outside VT are.

[lame54]

12. not true...

running for office can be very lucrative - winning has neighing to do with it