Speaking of Hillary, she is still making noise about running in 2020. That could be interesting. She could be the lone "centrist" in a crowded field.
Even if that's the case, it doesn't invalidate the analysis. I would hate to leave politicos off the hook because they cater to BigDonor. That kind of catering probably compounds the problem of general antipathy towards them.
Speaking of Hillary, she is still making noise about running in 2020. That could be interesting. She could be the lone "centrist" in a crowded field.
That'd be a pretty fun show to watch, tbh.
I’d call Joe Biden a centrist, at least on economic issues. Delaware Democrats are about as pro-corporate as it gets.
She hasn’t completely closed the door on 2020 yet but if she planned to run I think she’d be making more noise by now. The only way she would win in this crowded field is by getting in early and having the upper hand in terms of infrastructure and fundraising. I’d be really surprised if she plans on running but is also standing by while so many other candidates get their campaigns going.
No. She doesn't need the inevitable negative backlash coming her way. She wants to slither her way in as much as possible.
That has no chance at working in a field this crowded and I think she knows that. She’s the polar opposite of a candidate who can sneak in at the last minute, she won the primary in 2016 because the Democratic voters had been getting beat over the head with her name as the successor to Obama pretty much since Obama took office. Her campaign basically had a 6 year head start over anyone else who wanted to run.
From the interviews I’ve seen, she clearly wants to run and still thinks she’d be a great candidate, but I think her handlers (and probably her husband) have told her she has no shot and that she needs to just go away at this point.
Sneak in is a relative term. Going in early just gives more time for forces to tear her down. She doesn't need the money advantage of going early because she already has a significant system in place. She just needs to get in and get early results and sort of gain a compulsory support base. I don't think she has no shot of securing the nomination; but Bernie and Biden and possibly a dark horse will be formidable. It won't be like 2016, which was a glorified coronation. And even if she does miraculously secure the nomination, I don't know how she thinks she's better than Trump. The contrast will only be more stark this time around.
she's not centrist, nor is any of the Dem establishment.
She's pro-BigFinance, neocon pro-regime change, neither of which is offset by being somewhat progressive socially.
Tough rhetoric. Didn't see that in January - October 2016.![]()
So do you think she enters the race and if so when? If so you want to bet on it?
She doesn’t have a system in place and she’s already been torn down. She doesn’t have people lining up to give her campaign money anymore and putting a campaign staff and ground game together takes time, and she doesn’t have any of it right now. All she’s done since 2016 is give interviews and speeches, there hasn’t been any work being put into a 2020 campaign. She also won’t have the DNC rigging the election for her this time, there will be too many eyes on the primary process being fair.
You guys try the cold choc yet?
![]()
I’d say 5-10% of the primary voters are Reck level Hillary slurpers and will support her come or High Water, but she doesn’t have anything beyond that anymore.
Why, what do you like about her?
Not according to some of what I've read. I've been clear that she doesn't have the 2016 gift that she still had to rig to beat Bernie though. And I'm not saying her chances are great; but I do think she sees this as her Hail Mary of a chance; and a megalomaniac like her is gonna be hard pressed not to take it. The economics and system is the least of her worries. Convincing people that she is likeable and trustworthy is her problem. It's an unsolvable problem; but a psychopath such as her is not going to see it that way. She thinks she just has to find the right formula on issues and optics.
The same description could be used for Hitler or Stalin. What about her actual stance on issues and the agenda she was proposing?
Calm down, sir. Don't make us call campus police.
and since the 2/3 blacks didn't vote,
a voter in slave states had more electoral power than a voter in non-slave states.
And still the ing slave states started the Civil War.
Her stance wasn’t 99% Bernie’s stance. She flip flopped on several issues because she was going to lose votes to Bernie, but there were still significant differences between the two. Just one obvious example, she’s never been in favor of universal healthcare. She’s also pro deregulation of Wall Street and pro free trade (which is why she lost the rust belt to Trump).
I wasn’t comparing her to Hitler or Stalin. I was pointing out the fact that all you could muster up as things you like about her are characteristics Hitler and Stalin had.
Lets see how long you go without being able to point out specific stances and policy that makes you like Hillary Clinton.
She is far from insanely intelligent. She would've been torn limb by limb if not for the deep state bailing her out. She should take her mulligan and her billions and walk away; but again the psychopath in her won't let her do that.
As usual, the point went way over your head.
Lecturing your better-thans ain't gonna get you accepted, dude.
Actually, the point went over your head. John Edwards was kicked to the curb for a fraction of what she's done. She's a lynch pin. Intelligence doesn't have a damn thing to do with it.
The point of what? You responded to a post that wasn’t directed at you, and I never said I thought Hillary was insanely intelligent. The fact I don’t even bother replying to your deep state conspiracy stuff is different than it going over my head.
Comfort terms. In time when you lose your pride though, you'll start to piece it together.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)