2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forum“Growing realization” that Dems “looking for new leadership."SFChronicle
As talk ramps up of Vice President Joe Biden entering the 2016 race following Hillary Clintons continued email troubles, former Maryland governor Martin OMalley whos also campaigning for the White House argues that theres a growing realization among Democrats that they must find new leadership in the party.
OMalley, the former mayor of Baltimore, was in San Francisco last week for a series of tech events that included a session with the political action group Brigade, and a fundraiser. He sat down with the Chronicle to talk up the 2016 race.
Heres how the conversation went with Chronicle comrade Joe Garofoli:
*On how hes different from Hillary Clinton:
I think Im different from all of the candidates in our field. Not only have I made progressive promises in the past, as we all have, but I have 15 years of progressive accomplishments whether it was passing a living wage, increasing the minimum wage, passing the Dream Act, making our public schools the best in America for five years in a row, making college more affordable for people by freezing college tuition.
Thats something the other candidates cant say.
*On the discussion of a Plan B for Democrats who once thought Clinton was inevitable:
No. I think its a growing realization that people are looking for new leadership in our party. The fact that this years inevitable front-runner, six months out from New Hampshire would be trailing a candidate who has not even been a member of our party should tell us that people are looking for new leadership.
When at this late stage in the game you have people actively talking about Vice President Biden or Vice President Gore entering the race I think that should tell us that perhaps maybe we should rethink this notion that the inevitable front-runner is inevitable.
I believe people are looking for new leadership and theyre going to find it either in our party or the other party. WE cannot be this dissatisfied with how our national politics has succumbed to the influence of big money. We cannot be this dissatisfied with the fact that 70 percent of us are working harder but falling further behind and feel that a resort to old names is going to pull us forward. Thats not how the real world works.
*Why are you not seeing a surge like Senator Bernie Sanders?
Usually in our party a candidate emerges from relative obscurity that none of us had ever heard of before to become the voice of a new generation of leadership
.I believe that we are poised to be that candidate once the debates start to emerge as that new voice of leadership.
Both parties, while looking for a new leader, are expressing their anger and frustration at established leaders. In our party, expanded, Sen. Sanders is attracting and is the vehicle for the expression of that frustration and anger. And in the Republican Party, Donald Trump is the vehicle and the expression for those dissatisfied views. But come the fall, once the debates start, people will focus in on which one of us offers the best candidacy to move our country forward as president of the United States.
*On his statements that the Clintons email fiasco raises legitimate questions:
I think you guys know what the legitimate questions are and she and her lawyers are capable of answering them. From my part, Im going to stay focused on the ideas that actually serve us as a country
.I would hope that as we start having debates in our party, that those ideas would drive the conversation rather than what Secretary Clinton knew and when she knew it about classified emails. I know theyre legitimate questions for all of you to ask of her but I dont think theyre the most important questions in terms of what will move our country forward.
http://blog.sfgate.com/nov05election/2015/08/24/martin-o-malley-growing-realization-that-dems-looking-for-new-leadership/
musiclawyer
(2,335 posts)There is a significant % of people who tend to vote Dem And who pay attention this early that don't want Hillary or Bill anywhere near leadership. ( sorry they are bundled). There are myriad reasons--the email reason probably least important. Clinton = same ole shit. That's the unsophisticated way of capturing the zeitgeist right now
Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)and aside from being a woman Clinton doesn't represent change. If she's the nominee I'll vote for her but I won't be happy about.
I love Hill and Bill but their time is up. IMO. And now the polls are confirming it unfortunately. Favorables the lowest I have ever seen ! Hill is trailing in Blue Michigan, trailing most if the swing states. We are screwed. It's probably gonna be Bernie or Joe IMO
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)We prefer Bernie's consistency working against those that in the corporate and wall street world who work to STEAL the 99%'s lives away from us!
Biden as shown by his pushing the Bankruptcy bill against the 99%'s wishes, simply HAS NOT! That's why he didn't win in 2008, and why he won't win in 2016 either!
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)one sign of when a scandal is growing legs is how often people who have recognized names, pound it back into the wood, and the nail keeps coming out.
cprise
(8,445 posts)He is another Capitalist USA Uber Alles figure.
KMOD
(7,906 posts)Nothing more, nothing less.
He is campaigning as new leadership. Obviously as a polished politician he will answer all questions by turning the spotlight back on himself. Politics 101.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)Yes, at this stage, just about anything O'Malley says is campaign talk. So is anything Hillary Clinton (or, for that matter, Bill Clinton) says. Add in three more Democrats and seventeen Republicans and it's still true. So what?
O'Malley turned the spotlight on substantive reasons for dissatisfaction. He made it clear he'd speak to issues, not classified emails. Overall, he gave a good answer.
elleng
(131,136 posts)As he has continually, O'Malley turned the spotlight on substantive reasons for dissatisfaction. He made it clear he'd speak to issues, not classified emails. Overall, he gave a good answer.
KMOD
(7,906 posts)I don't criticize any Democrats on DU. I just wanted to point out that he was not being critical of Biden, Sanders or Clinton. Some responses to this thread seem to believe it was a knock on other Democrats.
delrem
(9,688 posts)and a failure, as usual, to address the actual truth of it.
KMOD
(7,906 posts)delrem
(9,688 posts)KMOD
(7,906 posts)The divisive games that some people want to play bore me.
O'Malley said what he should say. I stand by my post that he was not dissing anyone, he was doing what he should do, and that is keep the topic and questions about the issues. But if you want to pretend it was an attack on Clinton or Sanders, have at it. I'm tired of the silliness.
delrem
(9,688 posts)Your original post said nothing like that.
That's your "evolution" of it - and it's just a moment upthread for all to see. heh.
And wow, are you ever good at "evolution", you not only "evolve" your own posts but mine as well! Where did I "pretend it was an attack on Clinton or Sanders"? Hmmm? Perhaps you're a creationist at heart, not an evolutionist? But ... whatever!
Ok then.
At no point in my correspondence with you did I suggest anything remotely pertaining to your allegation "if you want to pretend it was an attack on Clinton or Sanders".
I said that your original post was dismissive crap. A failure to address the actual truth of what O'Malley said.
Guess what, KMOD. I still think your original post was dismissive crap, failing to address the actual truth of what O'Malley said.
KMOD
(7,906 posts)You bore me.
See ya.
delrem
(9,688 posts)elleng
(131,136 posts)something too many here ignore.
KMOD
(7,906 posts)making arguments for why he feels he is best on the issues.