2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumPredicted: Clinton picks a Republican for VP
Feel free to mock me if I'm wrong; I just wanted this here as a prediction.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)Zero chance of that happening.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)A Clinton/Huntsman ticket effectively ends the Republican party.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)Also, he's a REPUBLICAN. Choosing a Republican for the Democratic ticket effectively ends the DEMOCRATIC party.
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)Sounds s GOP VP is just right for her.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)Have you never seen political pandering before? She can't come out and say "Abortion is off the table, next question" even though I'm sure she wants to, because the Repukes will take that and run with it in all 50 states til November. She's been endorsed by Planned Parenthood and NARAL. She's not going to do a damn thing to restrict abortion rights and everyone knows it.
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)are convinced she's doing it to the other side.
When you examine her policy positions, she only looks like a Democrat because of the letter after her name.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)in her presidency, I will personally pay you $50. Bookmark this post.
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)What I know is that she will say anything and sacrifice any moral or ethical principle to stay in power or accumulate more power.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)Do keep up.
onenote
(42,882 posts)leeroysphitz
(10,462 posts)auntpurl
(4,311 posts)leeroysphitz
(10,462 posts)Clinton targeting former Jeb Bush donors on Wall Street...
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2016/05/06/Clinton-targeting-former-Jeb-Bush-donors-on-Wall-Street/3811462559579/
brooklynite
(95,070 posts)Clinton is a mainstream Democrat who will pick a Democrat.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)That's half the fun of DU!
cali
(114,904 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)Probably not Snowe, but you know what I mean.
cali
(114,904 posts)Collins? Maine and she's endorsed Trump. The pickings are slim. Who is left? Powell?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)But anyways: Huntsman has said he doesn't want a contested GOP convention, which is not the same as endorsing Trump.
cali
(114,904 posts)Trump.
http://kutv.com/news/local/jon-huntsman-jr-endorses-trump-says-it-is-time-to-create-winning-coalition
Not going to happen.
CanadaexPat
(496 posts)I wouldn't agree with it, but as a campaign strategy she would build an anti-Trump movement, that would marginalize the left and the far right, with the rationale being that we need to join together to stop Trump, and, perhaps, an added point that by doing this - creating a party or coalition of the center/right - we could overcome the gridlock in Washington by marginalizing groups like that 40-member tea party group in the House that has been such a problem for the Republicans.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)What's the ancient Chinese curse, "Live in interesting times"?
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)For all the talk of "too much partisanship", the parties exist for a reason.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Why were they having such a freakout over independents voting in the primaries, if they're gonna stick a Republican on the ticket that they only wanted capital-D Democrats to vote for?
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)"The parties exist for a reason" - exactly.
And the OP is way off base. There's no chance Hillary picks a Republican. Despite what people here say, Hillary is a true-blue Democrat, through and through.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Also it would kind of look silly for her to have spent all this time going after Sanders for just joining the party, not to mention all the noise about non-democrats voting in them.
Although --- "the first time", that's odd, usually I make a lot of sense. At least to myself. Maybe you're just reading the wrong ones!
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)If she did this, she'd simply be underscoring the fact that she's not very bright, as she's shown everyone, repeatedly.
But if she betrayed the Democratic Party by doing this, I would not be surprised in even the slightest.
BeyondGeography
(39,399 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)It's more playing to this imaginary middle that just doesnt exist.
People thought McCain might pick a right-leaning Democrat in 2008, too. Frankly it stinks of desperation, and I'd like to hope we're not there.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Mike Nelson
(9,991 posts)...but I don't agree. She will pick a Democrat, a 100% Democrat. Now, to your point... it's a good one. Hillary will attempt to find a visible Republican to campaign with and will pick a couple for her Administration. She will take advantage of their unhappiness with Trump, but would not put a Republican in line for the Presidency.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)We'll see.
I have absolutely no problem being wrong (I'd like to be, in fact); I just wanted that out there.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)If she picked a truly progressive Democrat.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)I think the Constitution forbids it, though.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Some versions of herself seem to have been more progressive than others. The iteration in the Senate from 2002-2006, that voted for the IWR, called marriage a "sacred bond between a man and a woman", and wanted to put flag burners in prison for a year, ehhhh. The version that wants a "manhattan project" to make sure people can't encrypt their snapchats, who is "open to" restrictions on abortion and who can only bring herself to support the most basic federal reform to our approach to marijuana despite a majority of Americans favoring legalization, again... ehhhhhhhh
I tell you what, I hope she governs like the progressive I once believed she was. I really do.
TrueDemVA
(250 posts)I would be more surprised if she selected a left leaning democrat. On key issues, she votes as a republican, so this would not be a shock at all. It would probably be the icing on the cake that the Democratic Party is no more.
I know. Sounds all doomsday like. I tend to get a little glass half empty when thinking about a Hillary-Trump election.
fun n serious
(4,451 posts)How is that republican?
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)The 31 times that Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Sanders disagreed happened to be on some the biggest issues of the day, including measures on continuing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, an immigration reform bill and bank bailouts during the depths of the Great Recession. Mr. Sanders, who formally kicked off his campaign Tuesday evening in Burlington, Vt., was opposed to all these actions."
Foreign Policy and Defense
The two disagreed most often on military and foreign policy issues, including approval of the civilian nuclear deal between the United States and India in 2008 Mrs. Clinton was for it and the confirmation of George W. Casey Jr. as Army chief of staff (Mrs. Clinton was against it). Mr. Sanders was among a small number of senators who voted to allow Guantánamo detainees to be transferred to American prisons, and he was against developing and deploying a defense system to stop Iranian ballistic missiles.
Immigration
Seven of the dissenting votes came when the Senate considered an immigration reform bill in 2007, and most of them were cloture votes to advance debate of the proposal. Mr. Sanders voted no on six such votes in an attempt to block the bill from being voted on by the Senate, mainly because of concerns about fraud in guest-worker programs. Mrs. Clinton supported advancing the bill, which would have offered legal status to millions of undocumented immigrants and improved border security.
Financial Crisis
Mrs. Clinton parted ways with Mr. Sanders over his opposition to the bank bailout bill a month before the November 2008 election. He also voted to deny the Treasury Department the ability to spend the remaining $350 billion in the troubled assets purchase program at the start of the next Congress, while she favored it.
Energy
Mrs. Clinton supported ethanol production an issue favored by many voters in Iowa against livestock industry backers, and backed an attempt to end a tax credit for producing renewable diesel by adding animal fat to petroleum. Opponents of the tax credit said the program, designed to help small businesses, was being exploited by large oil and gas companies.
Homeland Security
Mr. Sanders voted to end consideration of three amendments relating to how Homeland Security grants were awarded that pitted small-state senators against senators representing more populous states. Mrs. Clinton favored those amendments, as well as a measure granting limited immunity for reporting suspicious behavior.
Other Topics
The two also disagreed on a 2008 vote that would have barred congressional earmarks Mrs. Clinton was for an earmark moratorium and another that would have eliminated a research and development assistance program at the National Institute of Standards and Technology. (Opponents like Mr. Sanders considered the program an example of wasteful spending, and it was eventually shut down.) Mr. Sanders was the only senator to oppose the passage of a bill to reauthorize drug and device user fees set by the Food and Drug Administration, and he also opposed expanding estate tax exemptions that Mrs. Clinton supported."
fun n serious
(4,451 posts)Immigration
Seven of the dissenting votes came when the Senate considered an immigration reform bill in 2007, and most of them were cloture votes to advance debate of the proposal. Mr. Sanders voted no on six such votes in an attempt to block the bill from being voted on by the Senate, mainly because of concerns about fraud in guest-worker programs. Mrs. Clinton supported advancing the bill, which would have offered legal status to millions of undocumented immigrants and improved border security.
Beowulf
(761 posts)The bill had very limited protections for guest workers, the potential for creating permanent indentured servitude was real. The guest workers would be legal and terrifically exploited
fun n serious
(4,451 posts)CentralMass
(15,265 posts)and voted against measures that would exploit immigrant workers.
http://www.epi.org/blog/bernie-sanders-is-correct-on-immigration/
Beowulf
(761 posts)But I wonder why so many Clinton supporters have such difficulties with a representative who actually studies the bills he votes on rather than just going along with the crowd. Maybe that's why he rarely has to apologize for his votes.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)She's one of the most liberal Senators of the past century, by her voting record, but that wasn't enough. So, yeah: she'll probably look to other realms for support to win. "Congratulations"? Seriously, "great job"
closeupready
(29,503 posts)dana_b
(11,546 posts)fun n serious
(4,451 posts)Floating of Tim Kaine or Elizabeth Warren.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Warren I just don't see adding anything, though I love the woman. Same problem Sanders had: she speaks only to the converted.
fun n serious
(4,451 posts)Scott Brown.. He attacked Warren yesterday... said she was "drunk tweeting." They're getting nasty already!
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Can't even come up his own material.
fun n serious
(4,451 posts)Cant stand him.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)The entire Republican apparatus is in no position to be throwing stones on the concept of inebriation, personal or collective.
fun n serious
(4,451 posts)LenaBaby61
(6,979 posts)I usually don't get so giddy but the guy is a loser. But maybe he does belong on a Trump ticket.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)...and keep us from having a liberal president for another 8 years after HRC's presidency.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)the entire span of the United States of America, all the way from the middle of Pennsylvania, all the way to New Jersey! Lo, all the way from Boston, down to Richmond, to the distant shores of Long Island. The entire great land! The whole entire thing, like, all of it.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)OK, that was awesome.
I believe your erroneous map continues south of Richmond, though: clearly there is no such area.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)but yes, like Atlantis, it is probably imaginary.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)surrealAmerican
(11,370 posts)With a Republican vp, she would be impeached immediately.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Talk about dangling a big juicy steak in front of the House of Representatives. Not like they'd need much encouragement anyway.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)You want a moderate, try Ron Wyden. A solid track record of working with Republicans and he can appeal to the disenfranchised independents concerned about privacy and excesses in unconstitutional spying.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)There's going to be a lot of signaling going on in any case.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)than the east coast boomer-centric one which holds court now.
I like my Ron Wyden idea, though.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)And that includes Gavin. I'd look for someone from flyover country.
LenaBaby61
(6,979 posts)Leave Gavin right here in California. He really needs to succeed Jerry Brown as governor ......
I still think Hillary Clinton's VP pick will be the HUD Secretary, Julian Castro.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)She may as well shore up her left flank with an (R).
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Why not?
FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)You know that, right?
Do you actually not?
Glad you feel comfortable to be nonchalant about that...
FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)Or at least whole sentences
Your like totally coming out of left field with your insinuations
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)Millions of people outside the U.S., no problem.
Demsrule86
(68,868 posts)in 1992 we had lost the presidential election three times and were well on our way to a fourth...the country was solidly behind the Reagan myth. Bill Clinton got the presidency back by triangulation...he paved the way for Obama. It was a different time...but you are seriously simplistic in your analysis. Hillary Clinton was always more liberal than Bill was and has a liberal voting record in the Senate. You all can keep this up another couple of weeks but after that your nonsense is done. She won he lost and at some point, you will have to face reality.
FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)And fuck your "You People" comment
Bill's DLC triangulation publicly was touted as a means to gather "White Middle Class Men" back into the DNC "Big Tent". In reality Bill politically catered to Silicon Valley's moneyed High Tech Corporations and won on the Black Vote through out the Southern States.
America's Economy was in Recession at the time and Working Class Voters voted with the financial interest just to be sold out to NAFTA 4 years later
ReasonableToo
(505 posts)Picking an actual republican. I definitely see her picking a "Reagan democrat" but not a registered R.
I'll say this though, if she DOES pick an R then we can write in Bernie with no guilty conscience. And if she does pick an R then the Dems SHOULD regroup with many independents and form new party. The ads that show favorable/unfavorable should be plastered all over the country.
But again, I don't see her picking a registered R.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)Last edited Thu May 5, 2016, 07:43 AM - Edit history (1)
It plays into the stereotype some Bernie supporters have that all Hillary supporters care about is winning.
Well, I'm a big Hillary supporter and I still care a hell of a lot more about the Democratic Party than I do about Hillary. Saying things like "It'll be genius!" as a political strategy completely ignores that we'd be giving a Republican power on OUR ticket! No way. I want her to choose someone young who can carry the mantle after her 8 years. She's got the experience, she doesn't need a Biden like Obama did. She could raise someone up, someone who can represent hope and the future for our party.
As a strong Hillary supporter, if she chose a Republican, I don't know if I could vote for her.
That said, it's never going to happen. Hillary is a Democrat and she will choose a Democrat. But I don't like the sentiment of this thread at all. Just my two cents.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)We'll see, I guess.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,719 posts)She could award her most stalwart supporters by choosing Frederick Douglass or Thaddeus Stevens.
yardwork
(61,821 posts)Onlooker
(5,636 posts)If you knew anything about Hillary, you'd know she would not choose a Republican and you'd know that there is no Republican that would come close to her liberal views.
rogerashton
(3,920 posts)Lincoln chose a democrat as his running mate in the 1864 election. Now 1) that may have been a mistake -- Johnson was the only president impeached before Bill Clinton, and 2) our national disunion is not as serious today as it was in 1864. Still ....
On the other hand, if she wants to unite the Democratic Party, Jeff Merkley of Oregon would be a good choice. About the right age, too.
betsuni
(25,845 posts)Orangepeel
(13,935 posts)She needs someone young and exciting
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)We need to reach across the isle to our Republican friends and build a strong centrist coalition that will continue the neolib-neocon agenda. Our economy, or at least the Big Donor sector of the economy, depends on perpetual war, on stagnant wages, on huge financial bubbles, and we need to keep the peasants divided over race and gender and culture and religion. We centrists have common ground with the other half of the duopoly.
This is another reason why I am a sensible centrist for Clnton.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)auntpurl
(4,311 posts)azurnoir
(45,850 posts)but also very obvious too
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)And no, I'm not getting complacent. She will work her ass off. But I don't believe she NEEDS a Latino on the ticket to win. I'd like to see one, because Latinos are American's fastest-growing demographic and it's about time they had some representation at the executive level.
onenote
(42,882 posts)from your mistakes.
When it turns out your wrong -- and you will be -- will it cause you to rethink your perception of Clinton and, more importantly, how your own bias distorts your view of reality?
If so, I'm happy you made the prediction.
If not, I just feel sad that your political acumen is so far below sea level.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)I think she's one of the more effective democrats in the past generation.
You disagree?
onenote
(42,882 posts)Democratic candidates for VP and choose a republican when there is nothing in her history as a politician that suggests that she would do such a thing.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)We may disagree there.
You have to win, first. That's number one.
onenote
(42,882 posts)Picking a repub VP would be a particularly bad idea.
First and foremost, it will upset and alienate many Democrats who support her first and foremost out of party loyalty.
Second, it will be a slap in the face to the side of the party and electorate that is to the left of Clinton. The Sanders' supporters are going to be unhappy as it is. Throwing a repub in their face gives them one more reason not to support the ticket.
Finally, the folks attending the convention will include a combination of Sanders supporters and Clinton supporting party loyalists. Her pick would be controversial and the last she wants -- and the last thing we should want -- is any more controversy at the convention and anything that contributes to a storyline that the Democrats are not united.
As a footnote I might add that I can't think of any repub who would be a compatible, qualified choice to share the national ticket -- and be put in the position of being a heartbeat away from the presidency. Maybe you could help me out with some more specific names of someone who you think would help her more than it would hurt.
DinahMoeHum
(21,843 posts)Well, why not? JFK chose LBJ in 1960, and Reagan chose George HW Bush in 1980.
Both pairs weren't exactly buddy chum pals during their primaries.
Hell, Hillary could do a whole lot worse than pick Sanders - and she might do this to keep the Sanders supporters in the party come November.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Geography and demographics don't take a break just because we found a shiny.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)1. He's too old. No, not too old to be president, but Hillary should raise some young talent up in the party, someone who can represent the future. She's got the experience, she doesn't need a Biden like Obama did. She could set us up for 16 more years of WH control if she chooses well.
2. VT is already going to go blue. It'd be good if her choice gave us a swing/contested state that we need to win.
3. We really don't want to take any Democratic senators out of Congress. I'd rather she didn't poach a governor either.
4. Sanders is unlikely to bring his supporters along. His supporters, as has been stated many times on DU, are not interested in the individual but rather the ideology. So if he "sells out", they will abandon him.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,464 posts)Who would be even remotely acceptable? I don't even think the much loathed DWS and elites of the DNC would allow this.
Demsrule86
(68,868 posts)But this has to be the worst...no Democrat is going to pick a Republican. She is not a Republican as most of you know. When this primary is done...they will study the 'Bernie' voter and conclude...that they had a shot at something great but because of fanaticism over one person...they let it slip away...every day, you people write and say stuff that does damage to Bernie's revolution...he does it too. It really is kind of sad. '
DrDan
(20,411 posts)their efforts re running a third-party/independent GOP candidate - it sure would stir things up.
Huntsman would not be a bad choice.
But it sure is a long-shot - Hillary is a staunch-Dem. The party leaders would sure not want a repub a heartbeat away from the WH.
joshcryer
(62,287 posts)But I don't see it happening.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)gordianot
(15,261 posts)Both should claim Democratic membership. I am particularly interested what the Vice President has to offer given the age of both Presidential candidates and potential legal problems of Hillary Clinton.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Of a feather flock together, ergo she is a Democrat, been a Democrat all of her voting life and will select a Democrat as a VP. I will remember the birds of a feather line, yes we do flock together, we are Democrats.
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)You really want to see the full test of Everything That Is Wrong vs. Everything That Is Crazy.
CobaltBlue
(1,122 posts) R/R
D/D
Why the 1960s or 1970s?
A contrast in age will be necessary. It is cliche. But, it is also real.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)DVRacer
(708 posts)How about Jeb Bush you know her brother from another mother. He has already denounced Don Don and this way she can can bring the whole family together.