General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHillary is lousy at campaigining. she sucked in 2008 and ran a disaster of a campaign
and it appears she hasn't learned a thing since then.
Frankly, and with relief, I don't think she will be the nominee.
good night all.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)"Frankly, and with relief, I don't think she will be the nominee."
Goodnight.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)rustydog
(9,186 posts)I'm surprised the suicide hotline hasn't overloaded after your post!
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)No kidding! Nearly everyone here is pro-Hillary.
Warren supporters are few and far between.
cali
(114,904 posts)Most DUers support Warren OVER Hill.
I didn't think my post needed this --->>>
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)But I didn't see polls that measured how vocal supporters were.
Do you have a link?
I do see much more pro-Warren posts on DU than pro-Hillary posts so I would have thought Warren supporters were more vocal, but maybe I'm wrong.
Got a link?
Thank you in advance.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)yes, did have Warren as the overwhelming DU favorite.
Sorry, I don't bookmark much so I don't have the links but maybe the search function will help locate them.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Although I'm of the opinion that Warren supporters are more vocal here.
At least from what I've seen.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)bradla
(89 posts)So many people do not have the long view. A republican president after Obama would be a complete an utter disaster. There is not another democrat right now that has chance. Not one. Period.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)I don't see any other democrat winning in 2016.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)... the cozying up to Wall St, the dismantling of public education, the threats to cut SS, etc. ? You mean nominate a candidate who'll dismantle all that? COUNT ME IN!!!
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)It will *totally* be worth running a candidate who has already lost one presidential primary and remains politically tone deaf, to get a smorgasbord of policy like that!
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)never win.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)hardly a "country hick". Also the best natural politician of his generation. Now if you can find a "nobody" who combines intellectual brilliance and movie-star charisma, they might have a chance.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)campaigned for him and helped get him elected as governor of Arkansas. He was still a nobody at that point. And, he won. And then he kept winning.
Don't discount nobodies. They can win if they are the right candidate for the times. And Bill was.
rocktivity
(44,546 posts)Last edited Wed Jul 2, 2014, 11:35 PM - Edit history (5)
but he managed to take Hillary out of the race within three months.
Fourteen years ago, that "nobody" was George Bush's very own son.
And 22 years ago, that "nobody" was Hillary's very own husband!
If Hillary's Dem opponent doesn't bring up memories of things like Tuzla and the Clintons' own ties to Wright and Rezko, her GOP opponent might. Wondering if history will, or should, repeat itself is a very legitimate question.
rocktivity
jeff47
(26,549 posts)She's been around waaaaaaaay too long to expect her to get better.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)So far, she's running the same inevitability campaign that lost last time.
That's three huge problems:
1) She lost. Destroys the inevitability argument.
2) Like all Democrats, she needs turnout. "I'll win whether you show up or not" does not boost turnout.
3) Democrats need something to vote for. Republicans need something to vote against. "I'm gonna win anyway, so come along for the ride" does neither.
More practice at the same thing that failed in 2008 is not going to help.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)Xipe Totec
(43,866 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Hair on Fire....its a disaster....
Could this possibly be far behind?
Evergreen Emerald
(13,069 posts)"Suck." Your exaggeration demeans you .
rsmith6621
(6,942 posts)....you were asking to change your forum name?
cali
(114,904 posts)you were on the boards Sunday asking about changing your name. Is this why?
UTUSN
(70,435 posts)She was all inside-the-box, blew millions on the inside p.r. peeps, said nothing original, etc.
Obviously, I will vote for the nominee. Even Joe.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)But sometimes I like to root for the underdog.
Beaverhausen
(24,464 posts)You really need to speak up more.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)It would be more mature, and civil.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Authoritarian!
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Seriously?
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)This, from adults on a discussion board.
Why would you behave this way, Cali_Democrat? The other poster started out making nasty comments about another DUer and trying to imply mental issues. Now you join in with juvenile mocking.
Why would you want to present yourself this way here?
leftstreet
(36,064 posts)We just have to suffer through her 4 yr term and move on
applegrove
(117,885 posts)a politician in 5 years. Being SOS is a much different use of brain power. Im sure shell tighten up her game in the months yo come.
BootinUp
(46,852 posts)What is your record for picking Dem nominees? Based on this post I am guessing it blows chunks.
cali
(114,904 posts)BootinUp
(46,852 posts)I would rather you just use the asshole tone you are well known for.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)MineralMan
(146,116 posts)Either that or someone is very hungry.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)betsuni
(25,063 posts)Is that supposed to make us feel bad? Take our ball and get off the lawn? Make us hungry? Odd.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)betsuni
(25,063 posts)I was presented with quite an impressive parade of sweet insults in ONE POST, not even a thread. It was the second act of The Nutcracker ballet, Clara in the land of sweets. Cracking nuts is so much trouble, I avoid nuts unless they're shelled and roasted.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)Hey, it worked for Bill, why not me?
Could anyone be comfortable with a dense person like this to be President? Someone so absolutely clueless about so many basic things? No, no one should be comfortable with the idea. She is a disaster waiting to happen.
Metric System
(6,048 posts)NYC Liberal
(20,132 posts)She will crush whatever looney tune candidate the Republicans pick out of the clown car.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)NYC Liberal
(20,132 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)Inevitability is a terrible strategy.
1) Democrats need turnout. "I'll win even if you stay home" doesn't help turnout.
B) Democrats need a reason to vote for someone. Republicans need a reason to vote against someone. "I'll win, so you might as well come along for the ride" does neither.
Continuing with an inevitability strategy after losing Iowa was very dumb - you can't be inevitable when you lose. Using an inevitability strategy in 2016 would be even dumber. You're Bullwinkle pulling the rabbit out of a hat. There's a reason we laughed at that.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)She's been in politics too long to be making these kinds of mistakes. It has occurred to me that they aren't mistakes and she could be trying to create an opening for someone else. Martin O'Malley has been in Iowa and NH already. He chaired her MD campaign. I don't think he's be taking those steps if she was going to run. Maybe maintaining her "presumed nominee" status is intended to allow O'Malley to build a campaign the size of Obama's?
Response to loyalsister (Reply #38)
woo me with science This message was self-deleted by its author.
MineralMan
(146,116 posts)Carry on.
11 Bravo
(23,921 posts)Multiple daily posts, attacking either the current front-runner to be our next Democratic nominee for President, or teeing off on our current Democratic President. All of this on the DemocraticUnderground.
Have you considered seeking out a new playground, (one where you can work and play well with others)?
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)it's getting rather disturbing.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)to Clinton being the Democratic Nominee for President. Hardly concern "trolling".
try again, dear.
Sen. Walter Sobchak
(8,692 posts)Romney already tried that shtick,
Hillary would be a disaster. She has no vision she just wants power because she believes she is entitled to it.
rock
(13,218 posts)Last edited Tue Jun 24, 2014, 06:35 PM - Edit history (1)
but since it's the truth, I will repeat it. 1) Hilary lost the primary by a hair's breadth; 2) She lost to an opponent who was black, male, and inexperienced. Feel free to draw your own conclusions.
BootinUp
(46,852 posts)Obama focused on the caucuses and kicked ass there.
Obama is actually a very good politician.
He did have an advantage via less baggage.
It was a very close race. Hillary has nothing to be ashamed of.
rock
(13,218 posts)Thanks Bottoms, er, I mean, BootinUP.
BootinUp
(46,852 posts)except Obama.
this is just another typical thread where the OP is completely over exaggerated for attention.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)Being a suboptimal campaigner isn't a disqualifier in my book. Compare Campaign Obama to President Obama, then tell me if smiles and platitudes make for goid governance.
I just want Clinton to defy all the money whispering in her ear, and to gather the courage to say fuck-you to more than just us. We need her to be astonishingly good, not just good enough to coast to victory on her stardom. We need her to be more than just better-than-Republicans.
Time is running out. We have solutions that demand more than just a triangulator.