2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary sounds like the most reasonable Republican running for president
You'd think she was debating with the goal of locking up the endorsement of the chamber of commerce.
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)What a massive failure this debate is. I bet the Repubs luvv it!!
They want nothing more than Hillary to win, since she is so easy to beat in the GE.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)The hosts were fair. They did not show favoritism to Hillary.
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)And you know it.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Duval
(4,280 posts)stonecutter357
(12,694 posts)daybranch
(1,309 posts)Bernie seized his opportunities to speak and Hillary received hers from supportive and biased hosts.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)Can't you just taste the Status Quo?
KentuckyWoman
(6,679 posts)Autumn
(45,016 posts)But I don't vote for republicans. Never have and I never will, especially in 2016.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)in_cog_ni_to
(41,600 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)gilpo
(708 posts)SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)earthside
(6,960 posts)Hillary Clinton seems to be trying to revive the Eisenhower Republican Party.
Now, that is a better Republican Party than the one that exits now, but I certainly prefer Roosevelt or Truman Democrats.
This is Sen. Sanders debate -- all the discussion has pretty much been about his ideas and his proposals.
DhhD
(4,695 posts)JohnnyRingo
(18,622 posts)... an Eisenhower Democrat:
Im undoubtedly a liberal, which means that Im in almost total agreement with the Eisenhower-era Republican party platform.
...and that must put her to the left of Bernie Sanders who said last November that he's not as much of a socialist as Ike:
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&es_th=1&ie=UTF-8#q=maddow+is+an+eisenhower+democrat
Sen. Bernie Sanders, in the second Democratic primary debate, answers a question about how he'll pay for some of his agenda items by pointing out that he won't raise taxes as much as Eisenhower did because he's "not that much of a socialist."
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Excuse me:
She's not that far left.
earthside
(6,960 posts)I was born in the 1950s in Wyoming.
Hillary could easily be a mainstream conservative Republican of the 1960s -- even by Wyoming standards.
Which shows you, indeed ... that Hillary is "not that far left" vis-a-vis Ike, Nixon, Lodge, Rockefeller, etc.
The 'Goldwater Girl' is still in there.
It also shows you just far right this country has moved. My gosh, even Bernie Sanders is closer to the mainstream liberalism of FDR and Truman.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Gregorian
(23,867 posts)Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)in the financial services industry so far this cycle, compared with just $270,000 for Sanders. However, although no individual Republican candidate has out-raised Clinton in the industry Jeb Bush, at $4.5 million, is closest in the aggregate, Republican presidential candidates have raised about twice as much as Democrats, with $12.7 million in contributions, compared with $6.3 million for Clinton and other Democrats combined."
link
dsc
(52,155 posts)who are pro choice, in favor of the equality act, support a new voting rights act, and raising the minimum wage. I eagerly await your response.
Here is my list of those:
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)entering the race.
dsc
(52,155 posts)He was never, as in not even one time, elected as Republican running for a federal office. Oh, and BTW, he was a lifelong Democrat when he switched parties to run for mayor knowing he couldn't win a Democratic primary.
still_one
(92,110 posts)Democrat they disagree with a republican.
DFW
(54,328 posts)Some propagandists find it the path of least resistance, but many others do no buy into that facile and tired way of getting a point across. Many have coherent arguments as to why they support their particular candidate. Not everyone uses the Republican tactic of resorting to stock slogans.
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)Republicans are actively recruiting Bloomberg to run as a "pro-business independent" if Trump or Cruz gets the nomination.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/jamie-stiehm/2015/11/30/michael-bloomberg-could-save-republicans-in-the-2016-presidential-election
http://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2016/01/michael-bloomberg-cant-quite-give-up-his-presidential-dreams/423504/
still_one
(92,110 posts)and has not looked back.
Bloomberg is NOT running for president in 2016, and he is an independent.
As far as zuckerman's usnews, and the Atlantic assessment, they are full of baloney.
Those rumors have been going on for years.
He started off as a democrat, changed to republican, and is now an independent when the republicans went far right
The last election Bloomberg ran for mayor he ran as an independent, and won as an independent.
He is an independent now, and has been since 2007. That is how he views himself.
and he is not running for President in 2016, no matter what the bullshit rumor mills are saying. He has repeatedly said so. Not unlike when Elizabeth Warren said she would not run for President in 2016. The press can spew whatever garbage they want, and they will still be wrong.
Also, the base of the republican party does not like Bloomberg. That is a very well known fact. Hell will freeze over before they nominate him.
A person is what he identifies with today, not 10 years ago, and today he is an independent, and the last election he won, was as an independent.
Sorry that doesn't fit your version of reality
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)run in 2016.
dsc
(52,155 posts)I would be encouraging another liberal to run and split the vote too. It would be their only realistic shot. But I notice you leave out the part of federal office. There is no GOP candidate FOR FEDERAL OFFICE that believes those things. Not one.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Did I win? Is there a prize?
MADem
(135,425 posts)asuhornets
(2,405 posts)as a matter of fact Sanders agreed with her several times.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)That is why republicans like her are democrats today.
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)If Clinton were around during the Nixon administration, she sounds like someone who would say it is "unrealistic" to
* create the Environmental Protection Agency
* create the Clean Air Act
* create the Clean Water Act
* create Title IX
* end the draft
erronis
(15,216 posts)or not at all.
Renew Deal
(81,852 posts)JRLeft
(7,010 posts)JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)There are other parties and other candidates.
Green Forest
(232 posts)brooklynite
(94,465 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)She was registered as an independent until she changed her affiliation to Republican during the 90s for a handful of years and then changed her affiliation to the Democratic party.
Hillary supporters like to pretend that Warren was a Republican from her youth. But she wasn't.
And, of course, you and every other Hillary supporter likes to float this canard that Warren was always a Republican.
brooklynite
(94,465 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)"Just like Elizabeth Warren?"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1023301
Just trying to keep thing honest. Happy in my skin that what I post here I strive to do with integrity and try not to promote with disinformation.
I'm not perfect and may get caught up in the moment but regularly, when I learn the facts, I back off from spreading disinformation.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)pleasure junkets, ffs.
stonecutter357
(12,694 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)Not a child, too young to vote.
It's ok if you're "not Hillary," though.
And, when Hillary was old enough to vote, she was a Democrat, voting for Democrats.
The first person Senator Sanders ever voted for, according to him, was ..... himself.
All you can do is consider the source....
votesparks
(1,288 posts)nm
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)hill2016
(1,772 posts)from moderates?
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)It's just sour grapes. Some are disappointed that Clinton commanded the stage and had such a decisive grasp of the issues. Start to finish (and Flint was a HUGE finish) she dominated. Leadership in action.
still_one
(92,110 posts)That should work out real well for you
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)"She has met the enemy and it is herself" Seems fitting in this case. She was the reason she lost the nomination last time and will be the reason again.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Hulk
(6,699 posts)She gave me the impression she was doing her Carly fiorina impression. The angry screaming is a turn off when you want to get your message out.
Bernie is the guy, but HRC is light years ahead of any of the gop clowns.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)thomservo
(147 posts)They jumped into the democratic party in the 80's and 90's and are known as 3rd wayers.
merrily
(45,251 posts)You'd think she was debating with the goal of locking up the endorsement of the chamber of commerce.
You say that as though it were hyperbole.
Bernblu
(441 posts)Vinca
(50,249 posts)It was kind of depressing given she's still the odds on favorite to win the nomination. I would just like a brief glimpse of something that isn't "Third Way."
lark
(23,081 posts)There is no Repug who takes her stances, not one single one and that's an unfair comparison. Are any Repugs running for president pro-choice, would any rake Snyder over the coals the way Clinton did, would they promote taxes (fees?) on the wealthy, would they end the earned income rip-off, would they even continue the ACA much less implement something even better? No, no, no,no and no. Clinton may not be as progressive as I'd wish, but she's miles away from the Repugs. There are no reasonable Repugs running for any races as they don't exist.
Surprised to see Dems using it against a Dem candidate. Dems need to vote in the highest numbers possible to have a chance of winning the race when the msm is totally in the bag for repugs and the voting machine owners are 100% repug. I hope the candidate is Bernie, but I will 100% vote for Clinton if she's the nominee. This country would be radically and irrevocably changed for the worst if a repug gets in, if only because of the power to nominate SCOTUS.
leftupnorth
(886 posts)The only ideal is winning. Everything else can be compromised to that end.
And people wonder why so many are fed up with the two party monopoly of the process. It's tyranny, plain and simple.
erronis
(15,216 posts)Turd way vs. Tea Party? Most of us aren't interested.
Don't give us talking points - give us real solutions to problems. If you can't, get off the stage.
gordyfl
(598 posts)HILLARY CLINTON: "But, there are serious questions about how we're going to pay for what we want to see our country do. And, I'm the only candidate standing here tonight who has said I will not raise taxes on the middle class. I want to raise incomes, not taxes."
BERNIE SANDERS: "What is correct, and I'm disappointed that Secretary Clinton's campaign has made this criticism. It's a Republican criticism."
TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)Obama called himself a moderate republican, and I respect his honesty.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)joeybee12
(56,177 posts)Not some loner who has never accomplished anything or worked with anyone in the Senate.
Phlem
(6,323 posts)She the only hope Republicans have to continue negotiating laws for the 1%, period.
Duval
(4,280 posts)Odin2005
(53,521 posts)She only became a Dem because of who she married.
GeorgeGist
(25,315 posts)I believe she is the best the PTB will offer.