2016 Election
February 10th, 2016 at 11:56:01 AM
permalink
Quote: RonCBernie is basically working with one hand tied behind his back:
Well, has anything in the process changed since Obama overcame Hillary's coronation the last time?
(My guess for all the whiners, is Hillary prepared better for certain events which might happen this time around)
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
February 10th, 2016 at 12:16:21 PM
permalink
Just FYI - super delegates can switch from Hillary to Bernie.
I don't care who gets the nomination. I just want to win in November.
I think I either of them could beat Trump.
I don't care who gets the nomination. I just want to win in November.
I think I either of them could beat Trump.
Ding Dong the Witch is Dead
February 10th, 2016 at 12:18:33 PM
permalink
kewlj-
I still believe you need to get a 1-hour primetime show. Your analysis is pretty damn good. Have any of the networks contacted you yet? Could you continue your AP activities AND host a nightly show? Let's make this happen.
I still believe you need to get a 1-hour primetime show. Your analysis is pretty damn good. Have any of the networks contacted you yet? Could you continue your AP activities AND host a nightly show? Let's make this happen.
February 10th, 2016 at 12:21:36 PM
permalink
My vote would be for ANYONE not named Donald, Hillary, or Bernie. None of those 3 goofs is worthy of leading this great, but declining, nation. And I mention us to be a declining nation since I do not believe that anyone or anything can reverse the decline.
DO NOT blindly accept what has been spoken.
DO NOT blindly accept what has been written.
Think. Assess. Lead. DO NOT blindly follow.
February 10th, 2016 at 12:22:07 PM
permalink
Quote: HowManykewlj-
I still believe you need to get a 1-hour primetime show. Your analysis is pretty damn good. Have any of the networks contacted you yet? Could you continue your AP activities AND host a nightly show? Let's make this happen.
I'm amazed how easily "fascinated" he is ;)
PS, Bernie mentioned climate change in his victory speech, I though it was just you who was obsessed with that topic.
February 10th, 2016 at 12:51:20 PM
permalink
Quote: ams288Just FYI - super delegates can switch from Hillary to Bernie.
They have until 10 days "after the completion of the state's delegate selection process." I'm not quite sure when that is in New Hampshire, but in Iowa, it's at the state convention, which I think is in mid-June.
February 10th, 2016 at 12:57:09 PM
permalink
Quote: ams288Just FYI - super delegates can switch from Hillary to Bernie.
I don't care who gets the nomination. I just want to win in November.
I think I either of them could beat Trump.
YOU just want to win in Nov?
Are you about to announce your candidacy?
Someone needs to save the Dems ( actually someone needs to save the Reps too ).
If you run I'll send you some money. I've sent my money weirder places before...
Can you get Walker as your running mate, unite the country, and tell the rest of the world to kiss our collective **whatever**? I think you maybe could, what are you waiting for?
Youuuuuu MIGHT be a 'rascal' if.......(nevermind ;-)...2F
February 10th, 2016 at 1:02:51 PM
permalink
Quote: TwoFeathersATLYOU just want to win in Nov?
Are you about to announce your candidacy?
Someone needs to save the Dems ( actually someone needs to save the Reps too ).
If you run I'll send you some money. I've sent my money weirder places before...
Can you get Walker as your running mate, unite the country, and tell the rest of the world to kiss our collective **whatever**? I think you maybe could, what are you waiting for?
How much time did you waste typing this?
Ding Dong the Witch is Dead
February 10th, 2016 at 1:12:06 PM
permalink
About the same amount you spent reading it, time you might have spent on other nonsense.Quote: ams288How much time did you waste typing this?
Youuuuuu MIGHT be a 'rascal' if.......(nevermind ;-)...2F
February 10th, 2016 at 1:33:19 PM
permalink
Fiorina & Christie are out.
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
February 10th, 2016 at 2:07:25 PM
permalink
Quote: rxwineFiorina & Christie are out.
Wonder if she will continue to call herself President Fiorina?
February 10th, 2016 at 2:12:55 PM
permalink
Quote: rxwineWell, has anything in the process changed since Obama overcame Hillary's coronation the last time?
(My guess for all the whiners, is Hillary prepared better for certain events which might happen this time around)
Who is whining?
February 10th, 2016 at 2:42:25 PM
permalink
Quote: RonCWho is whining?
No one, it was just a random bag of puppies on my doorstep.
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
February 10th, 2016 at 2:46:40 PM
permalink
Quote: RonCWho is whining?
I don't often use the word 'sad' because
it's so overused on the net. But when
I see Bill and Hill together, they just look
sad together. Bill is old and frail, Hill is
fat and frumpy, her face is saggy. They
seem tired and from another era. There
was a pic of them eating in some diner
yesterday, it just looked sad. That's the
only word to describe it.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
February 10th, 2016 at 3:18:42 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobI don't often use the word 'sad' because
it's so overused on the net. But when
I see Bill and Hill together, they just look
sad together. Bill is old and frail, Hill is
fat and frumpy, her face is saggy. They
seem tired and from another era. There
was a pic of them eating in some diner
yesterday, it just looked sad. That's the
only word to describe it.
Nailed it.
February 10th, 2016 at 3:51:43 PM
permalink
Quote: rxwineNo one, it was just a random bag of puppies on my doorstep.
Good. The process is interesting...
February 10th, 2016 at 5:15:04 PM
permalink
Quote: HowManyNailed it.
Bah, Evenbob only looks at the silver lining in clouds so he can comment on how gray and dingy it looks.
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
February 10th, 2016 at 6:59:31 PM
permalink
Bill does look so much older than he didQuote: rxwineBah, Evenbob only looks at the silver lining in clouds so he can comment on how gray and dingy it looks.
Damn, the phone rang, gotta go.....
Youuuuuu MIGHT be a 'rascal' if.......(nevermind ;-)...2F
February 10th, 2016 at 7:19:15 PM
permalink
Quote: TwoFeathersATLBill does look so much older than he did
Well.... that's what happens in life.
Ding Dong the Witch is Dead
February 10th, 2016 at 7:45:03 PM
permalink
Saw Trump on O'Reilly. He said he's only had an
hours sleep since yesterday. Got to SC really late
from NH, slept for an hour, and doing rallies all
day. He still looked good, he's older than me, I
would have been laying on the floor.
Carson all but admitted he's still in for the
exposure. He said he has two years worth of
speaking engagements already lined up and
more are coming in.
hours sleep since yesterday. Got to SC really late
from NH, slept for an hour, and doing rallies all
day. He still looked good, he's older than me, I
would have been laying on the floor.
Carson all but admitted he's still in for the
exposure. He said he has two years worth of
speaking engagements already lined up and
more are coming in.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
February 11th, 2016 at 6:32:07 AM
permalink
Quote: kewljLast fall, I posted about how the field was severely tilted against Bernie because of the super delegate in the democratic elections that are not representative of the actual vote. At the time, I speculated that Bernie would need to win 67% of vote-related delegates to overcome Hillary's super delegate advantage.
So, after two contest, one that was basically tied and one which was a 60% to 38% sanders win, here is the delegate count: Hillary 44, Bernie 36. That tell you all you need to know about this process. :/
Here's an article written by a Bernie fanatic that makes a good point:
Quote:
Here’s why it doesn’t matter: Superdelegates have never decided a Democratic nomination.
While the author makes some assertions that I wouldn't be so quick to agree with, he is correct on that historical point.
I wouldn't put it past the "establishment" to nominate Hillary in a tight race with the power of the super delegates. But holy crap would it look bad to go against the will of the "people" (i.e. the percentage of pledged delegates).
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
February 11th, 2016 at 10:12:59 AM
permalink
Quote: AcesAndEightsHere's an article written by a Bernie fanatic that makes a good point:
Quote:
Here’s why it doesn’t matter: Superdelegates have never decided a Democratic nomination.
While the author makes some assertions that I wouldn't be so quick to agree with, he is correct on that historical point.
I wouldn't put it past the "establishment" to nominate Hillary in a tight race with the power of the super delegates. But holy crap would it look bad to go against the will of the "people" (i.e. the percentage of pledged delegates).
Ed Rendell (a Hillary supporter) was on MSNBC this morning, claiming that super delegates DID decide the 2008 democratic nomination. Rendell claims that Hillary received more popular vote than Obama but that super delegates were the difference in that close election.
I don't recall hearing that at the time. But in a close election that could happen without a 'whole' lot of controversy, but if sanders were to win 60% of the popular vote and super delegates pushed Hillary over the top, I think there would be a huge outcry. THAT would be seen as going against the will of the voters.
February 11th, 2016 at 11:41:11 AM
permalink
Quote: kewljQuote: AcesAndEightsHere's an article written by a Bernie fanatic that makes a good point:
Quote:
Here’s why it doesn’t matter: Superdelegates have never decided a Democratic nomination.
While the author makes some assertions that I wouldn't be so quick to agree with, he is correct on that historical point.
I wouldn't put it past the "establishment" to nominate Hillary in a tight race with the power of the super delegates. But holy crap would it look bad to go against the will of the "people" (i.e. the percentage of pledged delegates).
Ed Rendell (a Hillary supporter) was on MSNBC this morning, claiming that super delegates DID decide the 2008 democratic nomination. Rendell claims that Hillary received more popular vote than Obama but that super delegates were the difference in that close election.
I don't recall hearing that at the time. But in a close election that could happen without a 'whole' lot of controversy, but if sanders were to win 60% of the popular vote and super delegates pushed Hillary over the top, I think there would be a huge outcry. THAT would be seen as going against the will of the voters.
Here is some information that show Hillary winning the popular vote in some counts:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2008_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries
February 11th, 2016 at 11:58:28 AM
permalink
Quote: AcesAndEightsHere's an article written by a Bernie fanatic that makes a good point:
Quote:
Here’s why it doesn’t matter: Superdelegates have never decided a Democratic nomination.
I wouldn't put it past the "establishment" to nominate Hillary in a tight race with the power of the super delegates. But holy crap would it look bad to go against the will of the "people" (i.e. the percentage of pledged delegates).
In other words, "Superdelegates should vote with whomever gets a plurality, or at least a majority, of the pledged delegates" - which defeats the entire purpose of having superdelegates.
Also, it appears that Obama's pledged delegate lead over Clinton's in 2008 was slightly more than 100 - far less than the number of superdelegates, who have to pledge to a particular candidate long before the floor vote takes place. The current rule is, 10 days after all of the pledged delegates in that state are determined.
February 11th, 2016 at 12:33:18 PM
permalink
"The will of the people" doesn't mean much to a party that contradicted "the will of the people" with Obamacare and the deal to let Iran go nuclear in a few years.Quote: AcesAndEightsI wouldn't put it past the "establishment" to nominate Hillary in a tight race with the power of the super delegates. But holy crap would it look bad to go against the will of the "people" (i.e. the percentage of pledged delegates).
Last edited by: SanchoPanza on Feb 11, 2016
February 11th, 2016 at 1:10:44 PM
permalink
So how much do you need to send to a candidate of your choice ( has to be a contender I presume ) to get them to open their mouth one time and complain that the system appears to be rigged, and that it should be changed? I remember someone recently running on 'change' but I do not remember any discussion of letting the citizens of the USA, plus some others from Cook County, actually electing a president. Tell me which candidate is running on that platform plank. Not a bad place to start, or is it? Do we as a country trust the voters? Or do we need hidden machinery to protect us from ourselves. Who's running that machinery anyway, how do I vet them?Quote: SanchoPanza"The will of the people" doesn't mean much to a party that contradicted "the will of the people" with Obamacare and the deal to Iran go nuclear in a few years.
Last edited by: TwoFeathersATL on Feb 11, 2016
Youuuuuu MIGHT be a 'rascal' if.......(nevermind ;-)...2F
February 11th, 2016 at 1:30:53 PM
permalink
Quote: RonCQuote: kewljQuote: AcesAndEightsHere's an article written by a Bernie fanatic that makes a good point:
Quote:
Here’s why it doesn’t matter: Superdelegates have never decided a Democratic nomination.
While the author makes some assertions that I wouldn't be so quick to agree with, he is correct on that historical point.
I wouldn't put it past the "establishment" to nominate Hillary in a tight race with the power of the super delegates. But holy crap would it look bad to go against the will of the "people" (i.e. the percentage of pledged delegates).
Ed Rendell (a Hillary supporter) was on MSNBC this morning, claiming that super delegates DID decide the 2008 democratic nomination. Rendell claims that Hillary received more popular vote than Obama but that super delegates were the difference in that close election.
I don't recall hearing that at the time. But in a close election that could happen without a 'whole' lot of controversy, but if sanders were to win 60% of the popular vote and super delegates pushed Hillary over the top, I think there would be a huge outcry. THAT would be seen as going against the will of the voters.
Here is some information that show Hillary winning the popular vote in some counts:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2008_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries
Yeah I read that while writing my post and actually made a couple edits (I initially had said will of the "people" = popular vote).
It looks by some counts she won the popular vote, but Obama did have a majority of the pledged delegates. I have not researched these results in depth, but it looks like the mismatch could be due to caucuses not always reporting a "popular" vote number.
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
February 11th, 2016 at 1:40:29 PM
permalink
Oh god, I was blissfully unaware of the dust-up between the DNC and the local Democratic parties in Florida and Michigan in 2008. That also adds to the confusion.
Last edited by: AcesAndEights on Feb 11, 2016
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
February 11th, 2016 at 2:56:09 PM
permalink
In case you missed it, Funny or Die released a 50-minute adaptation of Donald Trump's book The Art of the Deal. Not really an adaptation, more of a skewering. Johnny Depp does a pretty good Donald Trump.
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
February 11th, 2016 at 3:31:33 PM
permalink
Quote: AcesAndEightsIn case you missed it, Funny or Die released a 50-minute adaptation of Donald Trump's book The Art of the Deal. Not really an adaptation, more of a skewering. Johnny Depp does a pretty good Donald Trump.
Talk about boring, I made it to 15min and gave up.
Took them 4 days to shoot it, looks like they did
it in 4 hours to me. I didn't understand what they
were saying half the time, the audio is terrible.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
February 11th, 2016 at 4:36:51 PM
permalink
Quote: AcesAndEightsOh god, I was blissfully unaware of the dust-up between the DNC and the local Democratic parties in Florida and Michigan in 2008. That also adds to the confusion.
I remember the "compromise" for the Michigan delegates that happened a few weeks before the convention - which the Clinton campaign ended with, "We're taking this to the floor of the convention." (Translation: "We're going to try to get a majority of the delegates to seat a Michigan delegation that's half pledged to Clinton and the other half unpledged, so if we can stack them with Clinton-leaning delegates, we've got a shot to win.")
If anybody wonders, "Why would Florida and Michigan have early primaries, knowing their delegates wouldn't be counted?", I think the theory is, they had early primaries so they could have more say in who the nominee is through the "we establish the front runner" factor, and then, when a clear leader emerges and the states' delegates don't matter one way or the other, the party will readmit the delegations (which is what it did). When it comes down to it, will Iowa's and New Hampshire's delegates be the difference between first and second?
February 11th, 2016 at 5:36:10 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobQuote: AcesAndEightsIn case you missed it, Funny or Die released a 50-minute adaptation of Donald Trump's book The Art of the Deal. Not really an adaptation, more of a skewering. Johnny Depp does a pretty good Donald Trump.
Talk about boring, I made it to 15min and gave up.
Took them 4 days to shoot it, looks like they did
it in 4 hours to me. I didn't understand what they
were saying half the time, the audio is terrible.
The audio was fine for me, but I agree it wasn't that good. After the initial shock of how good Johnny Depp is at playing the character, there weren't a ton of laughs. They would have been better to distill it down to 20 minutes or shorter.
Although the bits with Jack McBrayer's character concocting a personal story for each of the tiny people was amusing.
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
February 11th, 2016 at 6:19:13 PM
permalink
Don't think I'm going to learn anything new from the current Democratic debate tonight. Pretty much know Hillary and Bernie positions.
Only thing interesting is watching the dynamics of the Republican positioning pan out, which is kind of like watching the TV show Survivor. You wonder if the infighters are going to figure out how to get to the end or just get distracted by throwing tomatoes at each other.
Only thing interesting is watching the dynamics of the Republican positioning pan out, which is kind of like watching the TV show Survivor. You wonder if the infighters are going to figure out how to get to the end or just get distracted by throwing tomatoes at each other.
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
February 11th, 2016 at 6:25:11 PM
permalink
I'm not watching the debate. Too boring. I'll wait till tomorrow when they play the best bits over and over and over and over all day on all the cable news channels.
Ding Dong the Witch is Dead
February 11th, 2016 at 6:57:43 PM
permalink
Quote: ams288I'll wait till tomorrow when they play the best bits.
Or what passes for 'best bits' from Gram
and Gramps. It would be great if they
wandered into a discussion about Depends
and hearing aids and dentures, and didn't
realize it. lol
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
February 12th, 2016 at 2:17:01 AM
permalink
Bernie "Yes we can"
Hillary " No we can't"
And she wonders why people are moving to Sanders? You would think she would see the lack of understanding of many voters on how Washington works and the only thing they care about is what is in it for them. Romney was vilified for the comment, but no one ever argued it wasn't true. A good percentage of the people don't care about the debt level, the deficit and even the future (Except for Global Warming), only how they can get for free what others made sacrifices for.
Hillary " No we can't"
And she wonders why people are moving to Sanders? You would think she would see the lack of understanding of many voters on how Washington works and the only thing they care about is what is in it for them. Romney was vilified for the comment, but no one ever argued it wasn't true. A good percentage of the people don't care about the debt level, the deficit and even the future (Except for Global Warming), only how they can get for free what others made sacrifices for.
February 12th, 2016 at 3:41:27 AM
permalink
""There aren't enough good paying jobs, especially for young people. And yes, the economy is rigged in favor of those at the top," she said during her opening remarks, echoing the Vermont Senator almost word-for-word from his stump speech."
Hillary stealing Bernie's line in the debate
http://abc13.com/news/5-moments-that-mattered-in-the-democratic-debate/1197591/
She also tried to downplay her Wall Street connections by saying that President Obama got a lot of money from them, too...and he "took on" Wall Street. That all sounds good, but people against Wall Street (which is silly class warfare crap that PREVENTS us from fixing anything rather than helping anyone but the freebie seekers out there) didn't have a choice when BOTH candidates took lots of money from the Street.
The class warfare stuff is boring. I don't really see a commitment to fixing the problem--a tax system that on one end allows multi-millionaires to "make" lots of money but gives it special tax treatment and on the other gives so much away that people actually choose not to work and get just as much money as many who work hard every day...all the while putting more of the tax burden on the middle class. The answer is not taking from the rich and giving to the poor, it is making a tax system that is fair for everyone while making sure not working does not pay as much as working.
The politicians pit one group against the other, get elected on "supporting the poor" and don't do anything to help them in a meaningful way. How has Liberal/Progressive policy worked in the efforts against poverty? If it hasn't worked, why keep on trotting out the same tired ideas?
Hillary stealing Bernie's line in the debate
http://abc13.com/news/5-moments-that-mattered-in-the-democratic-debate/1197591/
She also tried to downplay her Wall Street connections by saying that President Obama got a lot of money from them, too...and he "took on" Wall Street. That all sounds good, but people against Wall Street (which is silly class warfare crap that PREVENTS us from fixing anything rather than helping anyone but the freebie seekers out there) didn't have a choice when BOTH candidates took lots of money from the Street.
The class warfare stuff is boring. I don't really see a commitment to fixing the problem--a tax system that on one end allows multi-millionaires to "make" lots of money but gives it special tax treatment and on the other gives so much away that people actually choose not to work and get just as much money as many who work hard every day...all the while putting more of the tax burden on the middle class. The answer is not taking from the rich and giving to the poor, it is making a tax system that is fair for everyone while making sure not working does not pay as much as working.
The politicians pit one group against the other, get elected on "supporting the poor" and don't do anything to help them in a meaningful way. How has Liberal/Progressive policy worked in the efforts against poverty? If it hasn't worked, why keep on trotting out the same tired ideas?
February 12th, 2016 at 8:08:39 AM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobOr what passes for 'best bits' from Gram
and Gramps. It would be great if they
wandered into a discussion about Depends
and hearing aids and dentures, and didn't
realize it. lol
I'm actually surprised I haven't seen more complaints about Hillary's age this cycle. Prior to this election season, I assumed that was going to be the number 1 hit on her. I can't tell you how many times I've heard my right-wing family members refer to her as an "ugly old lesbian."
Seems like the email nonsense kinda swept the age nonsense under the rug.
And the fact that both Bernie and Trump are older than her. So any digs on her age without mentioning them just come off as misogyny.
Ding Dong the Witch is Dead
February 12th, 2016 at 8:34:10 AM
permalink
delete
February 12th, 2016 at 9:16:39 AM
permalink
IMO
I think the next election will be more of an 'right of passage' issue than political experience e.g., the first elected African American/Black President ---- the first female President. Hopefully a socialist President isn't deserving of that office just because we've never elected one.
I think the next election will be more of an 'right of passage' issue than political experience e.g., the first elected African American/Black President ---- the first female President. Hopefully a socialist President isn't deserving of that office just because we've never elected one.
February 12th, 2016 at 9:33:17 AM
permalink
Quote: ams288I'm actually surprised I haven't seen more complaints about Hillary's age this cycle. Prior to this election season, I assumed that was going to be the number 1 hit on her.
How can Hillary's age be an issue when she is running against Bernie who is 5 years older and the front runner on the republican side is a year older (Trump will be 70 in June). Should Bloomberg enter the race, he too is older (73). She is the younger candidate in her primary race and could end up being the youngest person in a three way general election. Those scenarios completely remove age as a factor for her.
IF Hillary ends up running in the general against Cruz or Rubio or even Jeb, I think age will be some what of an issue.
February 12th, 2016 at 9:49:05 AM
permalink
In a way I kinda want trump to. I'm just wondering if he would trade up to a younger wife again while he is in office or wait until his term is over. Melania looks at least half his age now, that's getting too old. Reagan is the only president to hold office after a divorce, and that was far before his presidency.
February 12th, 2016 at 10:01:31 AM
permalink
Quote: mcallister3200In a way I kinda want trump to. I'm just wondering if he would trade up to a younger wife again while he is in office or wait until his term is over.
Pretty sure he uses them for blood transfusions. (that thought care of Olympic blood doping)
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
February 12th, 2016 at 11:25:27 AM
permalink
Quote: kewljHow can Hillary's age be an issue when she is running against Bernie who is 5 years older and the front runner on the republican side is a year older (Trump will be 70 in June). .
It's that she looks and acts older so much
of the time. She seems tired and worn out,
and Trump and Sanders never do.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
February 12th, 2016 at 12:10:30 PM
permalink
Quote: TankoHillary lost NH by 22 points, yet she walked away with the same number of delegates as Sanders.
Big waste of time for the people of New Hampshire.
She currently leads in Super Delegates 362 to 8.
This is all meaningless.
ABC News
Playing the system effectively to win just sounds like AP to me.
If the system changes you still have to figure out how to beat an opponent under it, or you'll probably be run over by one who does.
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
February 12th, 2016 at 12:47:01 PM
permalink
I don't know that this is a case of her figuring out the system, so much as the system being set up to insure that a nominee friendly to special interests is chosen.
I wouldn't really say Saddam APed the Iraqi elections either.
I wouldn't really say Saddam APed the Iraqi elections either.
February 12th, 2016 at 1:10:40 PM
permalink
Quote: RigondeauxI don't know that this is a case of her figuring out the system, so much as the system being set up to insure that a nominee friendly to special interests is chosen.
I wouldn't really say Saddam APed the Iraqi elections either.
Well, she ought to know it by now, as first lady, senator, and Secretary of State. One assumes she already learned a lesson about upstarts in 2008 who didn't seem probable candidates at first. Admittedly, each candidate has to figure out the strengths they can play to, and minimize weaknesses, so what worked for Obama or Sanders, or Trump is not necessarily the same road that will work for her. And it may not work still.
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
February 12th, 2016 at 1:25:37 PM
permalink
On that note:
"The Democratic National Committee has rolled back restrictions introduced by presidential candidate Barack Obama in 2008 that banned donations from federal lobbyists and political action committees.
The decision was viewed with disappointment Friday morning by good government activists who saw it as a step backward in the effort to limit special interest influence in Washington. Some suggested it could provide an advantage to Hillary Clinton’s fundraising efforts."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/dnc-allowing-donations-from-federal-lobbyists-and-pacs/2016/02/12/22b1c38c-d196-11e5-88cd-753e80cd29ad_story.html
"The Democratic National Committee has rolled back restrictions introduced by presidential candidate Barack Obama in 2008 that banned donations from federal lobbyists and political action committees.
The decision was viewed with disappointment Friday morning by good government activists who saw it as a step backward in the effort to limit special interest influence in Washington. Some suggested it could provide an advantage to Hillary Clinton’s fundraising efforts."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/dnc-allowing-donations-from-federal-lobbyists-and-pacs/2016/02/12/22b1c38c-d196-11e5-88cd-753e80cd29ad_story.html
February 12th, 2016 at 3:16:59 PM
permalink
I almost pulled the trigger to see Trump tonight just to watch the spectacle
He's at a rally tonight only 30 min drive for me
I thought why not, probably free. I checked the internet.
Its at the USF Sundome
Entry is free
but
20 bucks for parking
sheesh
I think I will pass
He's at a rally tonight only 30 min drive for me
I thought why not, probably free. I checked the internet.
Its at the USF Sundome
Entry is free
but
20 bucks for parking
sheesh
I think I will pass
Its just a forum. Nothing here to get obsessed about.
