The Decline of the DNC III

[TIDE-HSV]

I'm probably about the furthest thing on this board from a leftist liberal. I don't mean Amy Klobuchar, I mean AOC.

But part of me deep down really HOPES that the Democrats:
a) nominate a left-wing nut who drives the GYP crazy
b) that nut actually wins (which is better than average chance if Trump tanks the economy)

It's not that I look forward to living under such a President. I just want that President to do all of the childish, stupid, moronic, pick a fight just to be a jerk stuff that this current clown has spent the last decade doing and watching the GYP lose their collective intestinal contents daily with phony outrage on something that never bothered them previously. (Granted - watching the hypocrisy of Democrats who have cried like stuck pigs for a decade suddenly defending the indefensible would be worth the price of admission, too. Just like with the GYP there'd be a few who would draw the line and end their own political careers).

I'd prefer a return to common sense government. I could take a Clinton or HW...

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I'd prefer a return to common sense government. I could take a Clinton or HW...

In reality so would I.

However...people having to live under the guidelines they created is always a tad bit delicious.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

In reality so would I.

However...people having to live under the guidelines they created is always a tad bit delicious.

Problem is that they're like a lobster being boiled alive and the water is just now warming up...

 

[75thru79]

I'd prefer a return to common sense government. I could take a Clinton or HW...

The funny thing is if Bill Clinton were to run for President today he would probably be a Republican. His presidency was not even remotely close to Biden's.

 

[jthomas666]

The funny thing is if Bill Clinton were to run for President today he would probably be a Republican. His presidency was not even remotely close to Biden's.

The Republicans of today? Not a chance in hell.

 

[Huckleberry]

The funny thing is if Bill Clinton were to run for President today he would probably be a Republican. His presidency was not even remotely close to Biden's.

This is delusional. There's no way that Clinton would be accepted in today's Republican Party. Heck, no previous Republican presidential nominee would be accepted by the party of Trump.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

The funny thing is if Bill Clinton were to run for President today he would probably be a Republican. His presidency was not even remotely close to Biden's.

Except for his policy on abortion, Bill Clinton was LARGELY a Republican in the 90s. And even then, he fit within the rubric of Lee Atwater's "Big Tent", where the party once accommodated people like George Pataki, Tom Ridge, and Christie Whitman. Clinton more than any other Democrat of the modern era took the "I'm reluctantly pro-choice, not pro-abortion candidate who thinks it should be safe, legal and rare."
That's not good enough to the Democrats now.

He was for the death penalty.
His environmental record was sketchy.
He was for balanced budgets.
He didn't really get us all involved in a bunch of wars in the Middle East.
He was even accommodating towards prayer in public school.
He was in favor of downsizing government - for real.
He said the era of Big Government was over.
He signed the Defense of Marriage Act and was against gay marriage.

He even cheated on his wife just like almost all of his Republican impeachers did.

Subtract abortion and Bill Clinton wasn't all that different from GHW Bush.

 

[UAH]

The funny thing is if Bill Clinton were to run for President today he would probably be a Republican. His presidency was not even remotely close to Biden's.

Without a lot of specifics to support it, my belief is that Hillary would have been very similar in philosphy to Bill and even GHW Bush. She always felt she had to speak for labor and minorities to maintain the Big Tent appeal of the Democrats. She ran a terrible campaign and lost a very winnable election leading to the disaster that we are facing today.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Without a lot of specifics to support it, my belief is that Hillary would have been very similar in philosphy to Bill and even GHW Bush. She always felt she had to speak for labor and minorities to maintain the Big Tent appeal of the Democrats. She ran a terrible campaign and lost a very winnable election leading to the disaster that we are facing today.

Let's be honest because nobody wants to say it out of fear of being called a sexist:
She has ALWAYS been a LOUSY candidate.

I don't mean anything bad regarding her nor even about POLICY, I'm referring to how she came across while on the stump or (sometimes) on TV. She was ALWAYS bad at it, just like her husband was (almost) always GOOD at it.

I agree she likely would have been a centrist Chief Executive policy-wise, regardless of what promises she made on the campaign trail. She would have thrown just enough red meat to the base to keep them happy, and the GYP would have remained the GOP and raised millions if not billions with their "Fear Hillary" campaigns for Congress.

That being said, she thought (and so did most of us) that Trump's negatives were so heavy that he had no chance. If the Access Hollywood tape would have come out about almost any other candidate that I can think of IN EITHER PARTY, I cannot imagine such a candidate surviving much less winning.

One thing nobody wants to say in this whole thing is that Trump ran a smart STRATEGIC campaign. We'll set aside his tactical disasters.

Seriously, his entire strategy was basically the reverse of what Bill Clinton did in 1992, and it was smart:
- Bush got 168, Dole 159, McCain 173 and Romney 206 (you can take those 168 or so for granted)
- compete only in states Romney lost by 5 points or less (VA/PA/OH/IA/FL), which are 86 EVs
- you only need to win 64 of those 86 EVs to win the election if you win all the Romney states
- compete in MI, WI, and NC (which Romney won) as a fail safe of something going wrong
- abandon VA when she chose their Senator for VP

Remember - she lost BOTH MI and WI to Bernie Sanders. Indeed, Parnes and Allen have an entire chapter about Bill Clinton realizing early in the race that Michigan's result might cause her some serious problems come the fall. (I think it's possible to read too much into one or two states, but there was an undercurrent of fear that didn't bode well for the fact she represented the incumbent administration).

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I'd prefer a return to common sense government. I could take a Clinton or HW...

I'm also quite a fan of DIVIDED government to be honest with you. I'd prefer a decent Republican President who doesn't have an axe to grind with the Middle East, a Democratic House, and Senate right at the tip of say 52-48 either way. But I could also live with a Democratic President, a saner than now GOP House, and again that Senate.

Which sounds an awful lot like......Bush 89-90, Clinton 96-97.......to me. Not exact numbers but close.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

She always felt she had to speak for labor and minorities to maintain the Big Tent appeal of the Democrats.

Here's the thing: I "get" the fact a Democrat running for the Presidency has to throw a little bit their way, the historic base vote. That doesn't really bother me. It's like when a Republican "has" to address the Religious Right or business community.

But what I don't get is having these debates sponsored by the special pleading base vote. There was a debate, I believe in 2020, where the Democrats lined up kneel before the LGBTQ Town Hall something that....well, is there really ANY SUBSTANTIVE difference now within the Democratic Party on those issues as far as gay marriage, gay civil rights, whatever? Not in 2019 when that happened. MAYBE now in 2025 with the sports issue and military service, although any Democrat who wants to win the nomination via the primaries isn't going to say anything different until after they're nominated.

My point is that these "special group" town halls offer too many chances to invite kowtowing and unwise on the spot commitments and not much upside.

(Now.....if these yahoos want to attend one sponsored by the NRA while the GYP attends an LGBTQ Town Hall......I'd actually watch both of those because it would be hilarious).

 

[jthomas666]

That being said, she thought (and so did most of us) that Trump's negatives were so heavy that he had no chance. If the Access Hollywood tape would have come out about almost any other candidate that I can think of IN EITHER PARTY, I cannot imagine such a candidate surviving much less winning.

One thing nobody wants to say in this whole thing is that Trump ran a smart STRATEGIC campaign. We'll set aside his tactical disasters.

Another key facet to Clinton's downfall was that the GOP systematically demonized her the entire time Obama was in office. In a lot of the red states all people ever heard about her was whatever venom FauxNews was spreading.

 

[92tide]

Another key facet to Clinton's downfall was that the GOP systematically demonized her the entire time Obama was in office. In a lot of the red states all people ever heard about her was whatever venom FauxNews was spreading.

that started in earnest in '92-'93 and was pretty much 24/7 since then

 

[selmaborntidefan]

that started in earnest in '92-'93 and was pretty much 24/7 since then

Absolutely.

It was entirely the fault of red states she came out with condescending comments about staying home and baking cookies while being the very Tammy Wynette figure she insisted she wasn't. (Hint: she was).

I love how when Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachman says something condescendingly stupid it's proof of how dumb they are - but Hillary cemented her reputation early on and she's a "victim of the conservatives."

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Another key facet to Clinton's downfall was that the GOP systematically demonized her the entire time Obama was in office.

You mean when she was Secretary of State and part of the group that tried to make us believe a You Tube video caused Benghazi? Now, I've never understood the hullabaloo about Benghazi, it's too difficult to follow.

but it's easy to follow that the story BEGAN with "it was an anti-Islamic You Tube video" and also reasonably speculate that excuse was solely because it was an election year.

In a lot of the red states all people ever heard about her was whatever venom FauxNews was spreading.

She was never going to carry any red states anyway.

Christopher Hitchens savaged her as well, and he can hardly be dismissed as a red state or religious conservative.

 

[92tide]

Absolutely.

It was entirely the fault of red states she came out with condescending comments about staying home and baking cookies while being the very Tammy Wynette figure she insisted she wasn't. (Hint: she was).

I love how when Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachman says something condescendingly stupid it's proof of how dumb they are - but Hillary cemented her reputation early on and she's a "victim of the conservatives."

I constantly heard plenty of grown-ass men running around saying “billary” and other dumb crap they heard from rush thinking they were being clever. they were just standing up for poor tammy /s

 

[jthomas666]

You mean when she was Secretary of State and part of the group that tried to make us believe a You Tube video caused Benghazi? Now, I've never understood the hullabaloo about Benghazi, it's too difficult to follow.

Benghazi was just a fraction of the right's various attacks on Hillary. Some were warranted, some were not--but regardless, the attacks were 24/7

 

[CrimsonJazz]

Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) admits she and the Democrats will be using dark money in order to cheat in the midterms.

Crockett adds she’ll be “touching people.”

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1948390483115311610

Because if there's one thing we can be sure of, it's that "dark money" will always benefit "the people" and not the donors/special interest groups themselves. I really, really hope she runs for president in 2028.

 

[75thru79]

Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) admits she and the Democrats will be using dark money in order to cheat in the midterms.

Crockett adds she’ll be “touching people.”

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1948390483115311610

Because if there's one thing we can be sure of, it's that "dark money" will always benefit "the people" and not the donors/special interest groups themselves. I really, really hope she runs for president in 2028.

Think how boring life would be if we didn't have people like this to distract us. I wonder how many tickets they could sell to a pay-per-view matchup between Jasmine and Marjorie. It would be pure comedic gold.

 

[some_al_fan]

Think how boring life would be if we didn't have people like this to distract us. I wonder how many tickets they could sell to a pay-per-view matchup between Jasmine and Marjorie. It would be pure comedic gold.

Marjorie vs AOC is a better match-up.
Extra points for the broken nails and screams.