General Discussion

applegrove

(118,642 posts) Tue Dec 9, 2014, 12:55 AM Dec 2014

Clinton camp says long-shot Democratic challengers still pose a real threat

Clinton camp says long-shot Democratic challengers still pose a real threat

By Anne Gearan at the Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clintons-backers-say-they-welcome-a-challenge-in-the-democratic-primary/2014/12/02/4956ab52-7584-11e4-8893-97bf0c02cc5f_story.html?hpid=z1

"SNIP......................

Backers and allies of Hillary Rodham Clinton are increasingly worried about the threat posed by a motley field of Democratic presidential hopefuls who could complicate, or even derail, a Clinton candidacy in 2016 by focusing attention on her weaknesses.

All of the possible challengers are long shots against Clinton and would face a steep climb against the well-known former secretary of state. Many Clinton supporters also say competition would help her by honing her campaigning skills and discouraging the sense of entitlement that damaged her White House bid in 2008.

But each of the emerging challengers also appeals to a constituency within the Democratic Party that Clinton has struggled with in the past. And unlike Clinton — who has yet to formulate a clear message for a potential campaign — each has distinct issues to build a campaign around.

Jim Webb, the former senator from Virginia who just formed an exploratory committee, is a populist native of Appalachia with potential appeal to working-class and Southern whites. Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley has been laying the groundwork of a campaign for months, focusing his energies on wooing the kind of progressive activists who view Clinton with suspicion. Sen. Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.), the gadfly socialist who is also pondering a run in the Democratic primaries, represents the antiwar left still bitter with Clinton over the war in Iraq.

.......................SNIP"

18 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Clinton camp says long-shot Democratic challengers still pose a real threat (Original Post) applegrove Dec 2014 OP

"Sen. Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.), the gadfly socialist" here we go, Sanders is the threat. TheNutcracker Dec 2014 #1

Caucuses are her week spot. She is going to have to do better in the caucus states. hrmjustin Dec 2014 #2

Nothing is a sure thing gwheezie Dec 2014 #3

Of course they are.... daleanime Dec 2014 #4

Exactly, the drumbeat of inevitabilty...BS it is... TheNutcracker Dec 2014 #6

"Clinton — who has yet to formulate a clear message for a potential campaign" NYC_SKP Dec 2014 #5

I think taking that beating from a black guy with a middle eastern sounding name... phleshdef Dec 2014 #7

You win the prize !! n/t jaysunb Dec 2014 #8

Clinton supporters say a challenger would discourage the sense of entitlement. morningfog Dec 2014 #9

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Dec 2014 #10

who has yet to formulate a clear message for a potential campaign oldandhappy Dec 2014 #11

"And unlike Clinton — who has yet to formulate a clear message for a potential campaign — " sweetapogee Dec 2014 #12

Oh, I think everyone on the planet knows who Hillary is. nt delrem Dec 2014 #13

I am aghast that your reasoning could pass as logic. appal_jack Dec 2014 #15

I'm not saying that Hillary sweetapogee Dec 2014 #16

I will take Bernard any day over Hills. onecaliberal Dec 2014 #14

There's a lot of stinky baggage on Hillary's unstoppable train. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2014 #17

I'd really like to see a debate between Clinton, Schweitzer, Sanders, Webb and O'Malley. n/t lumberjack_jeff Dec 2014 #18

TheNutcracker

(2,104 posts)

1. "Sen. Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.), the gadfly socialist" here we go, Sanders is the threat.

Reply to applegrove (Original post)

Tue Dec 9, 2014, 12:58 AM

Dec 2014

Not to just Hillary, but to the establishment. Sanders is a threat because HE is the clear alternative.

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)

2. Caucuses are her week spot. She is going to have to do better in the caucus states.

Reply to applegrove (Original post)

Tue Dec 9, 2014, 12:58 AM

Dec 2014

Primaries are better because more people vote in them.

gwheezie

(3,580 posts)

3. Nothing is a sure thing

Reply to applegrove (Original post)

Tue Dec 9, 2014, 12:59 AM

Dec 2014

Hillary should run her campaign to win it.

daleanime

(17,796 posts)

4. Of course they are....

Reply to applegrove (Original post)

Tue Dec 9, 2014, 01:05 AM

Dec 2014

she's managed to tick off plenty of her 'base' over the years. Tends to make primaries with actual opponents difficult, which might be why the drum beat of "only possible choice" has started already.

TheNutcracker

(2,104 posts)

6. Exactly, the drumbeat of inevitabilty...BS it is...

Reply to daleanime (Reply #4)

Tue Dec 9, 2014, 01:12 AM

Dec 2014

Because she is not a real alternative, she will lose.

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)

5. "Clinton — who has yet to formulate a clear message for a potential campaign"

Reply to applegrove (Original post)

Tue Dec 9, 2014, 01:10 AM

Dec 2014

Because, I guess, 8 years just isn't long enough to "find your voice".

phleshdef

(11,936 posts)

7. I think taking that beating from a black guy with a middle eastern sounding name...

Reply to applegrove (Original post)

Tue Dec 9, 2014, 01:12 AM

Dec 2014

...would likely have taught her and her camp to take every "long shot" pretty damn serious in the future.

jaysunb

(11,856 posts)

8. You win the prize !! n/t

Reply to phleshdef (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 9, 2014, 01:18 AM

Dec 2014

morningfog

(18,115 posts)

9. Clinton supporters say a challenger would discourage the sense of entitlement.

Reply to applegrove (Original post)

Tue Dec 9, 2014, 01:36 AM

Dec 2014

As she marches to her entitled position?

Those supporters are piss poor at messaging. Just like Clinton.

Response to applegrove (Original post)

1000words This message was self-deleted by its author.

oldandhappy

(6,719 posts)

11. who has yet to formulate a clear message for a potential campaign

Reply to applegrove (Original post)

Tue Dec 9, 2014, 01:43 AM

Dec 2014

Very sad! She has had eight years. She has had massive exposure. The no clear message means she is ducking everything. Very sad.

sweetapogee

(1,168 posts)

12. "And unlike Clinton — who has yet to formulate a clear message for a potential campaign — "

Reply to applegrove (Original post)

Tue Dec 9, 2014, 01:43 AM

Dec 2014

The good news for HRC is that at this point she doesn't need a clear message. Reason: there are no clearly defined candidates running against her...yet. Think about it, why come out with position X when she can just wait to see how the competition behaves and this will allow her to taylor her message to suit the occasion. She has the name recognition and connections so she has the luxury of time. Any other Democratic potential needs to get busy soon, first to formulate policy and second to get the fund raising machine in motion.

delrem

(9,688 posts)

13. Oh, I think everyone on the planet knows who Hillary is. nt

Reply to sweetapogee (Reply #12)

Tue Dec 9, 2014, 02:17 AM

Dec 2014

appal_jack

(3,813 posts)

15. I am aghast that your reasoning could pass as logic.

Reply to sweetapogee (Reply #12)

Tue Dec 9, 2014, 07:19 AM

Dec 2014

The office of the President is not a brass ring to be snatched on a carousel ride: it is one of the most powerful elected leadership positions in the world. Hillary should have a clear message at this point because she seeks to occupy this leadership position. I don't want a leader who waits for the polls, I want a leader who leads, guided by principles of truth, transparency, equality, justice, and spreading political and economic power as widely as possible across our Republic. Of course, the Clintons have opposed these principles for most of their political lives. That complicates their 'clear message' considerably.

-app

sweetapogee

(1,168 posts)

16. I'm not saying that Hillary

Reply to appal_jack (Reply #15)

Tue Dec 9, 2014, 02:13 PM

Dec 2014

shouldn't have a clear message. I'm saying that she doesn't have to have one.

Question: As of today, who has officially declared their intent to run for President?

Answer: No one.