Forum Thread

Winning 2016 Democratic Ticket

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 28 1 2 Next
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I had mentioned this idea in an earlier post, but decided to make it a "stand-alone" subject. With close to 98-100% confidence, I say the combination of Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren would be virtually unbeatable. First of all, they would get the vast majority (>60%) of women's votes. Next, they would get over 75-80% of Hispanic-American voters to cast ballots their way. And perhaps the biggest block of voters would be the Black vote. When you couple all these together with the huge number of Democratic-only voters, I see it as a guaranteed victory. It simply won't matter who the other party throws in as their candidate. As to which one would be the top name of the ticket, I would certainly leave that to them, BUT I can envision 8 years with Hillary as President, and then 8 more a strong possibility for Elizabeth immediately thereafter.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Michael39301 Wrote: I had mentioned this idea in an earlier post, but decided to make it a "stand-alone" subject. With close to 98-100% confidence, I say the combination of Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren would be virtually unbeatable. First of all, they would get the vast majority (>60%) of women's votes. Next, they would get over 75-80% of Hispanic-American voters to cast ballots their way. And perhaps the biggest block of voters would be the Black vote. When you couple all these together with the huge number of Democratic-only voters, I see it as a guaranteed victory. It simply won't matter who the other party throws in as their candidate. As to which one would be the top name of the ticket, I would certainly leave that to them, BUT I can envision 8 years with Hillary as President, and then 8 more a strong possibility for Elizabeth immediately thereafter.
    No; I've got my strong doubts about that; just follow the "money" that will tell you more; as well as all the "voters" who stay "home". How will you undo the damage of the interim elections? Call the Koch brothers, they may have some more insider info.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I just can't get over the fact that we as a country think only two families can lead us. We are a country of over 300 million people. Isn't there anyone with a last name other than Bush or Clinton that can lead us after President Obama's time is up? Don't get me wrong--I will support Ms. Clinton with all of my might if she wins the Democratic nomination, but shouldn't we make her earn it and not just anoint her?
  • Liberal
    Independent
    Durham, NH
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Yes, but it's not going to happen! American voters get what they deserve, and most of them don't deserve (or expect) a whole lot it seems!
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote:
    Michael39301 Wrote: I had mentioned this idea in an earlier post, but decided to make it a "stand-alone" subject. With close to 98-100% confidence, I say the combination of Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren would be virtually unbeatable. First of all, they would get the vast majority (>60%) of women's votes. Next, they would get over 75-80% of Hispanic-American voters to cast ballots their way. And perhaps the biggest block of voters would be the Black vote. When you couple all these together with the huge number of Democratic-only voters, I see it as a guaranteed victory. It simply won't matter who the other party throws in as their candidate. As to which one would be the top name of the ticket, I would certainly leave that to them, BUT I can envision 8 years with Hillary as President, and then 8 more a strong possibility for Elizabeth immediately thereafter.
    No; I've got my strong doubts about that; just follow the "money" that will tell you more; as well as all the "voters" who stay "home". How will you undo the damage of the interim elections? Call the Koch brothers, they may have some more insider info.
    The damage from the interim elections will be undone exactly as they were from the 2010 interim elections, and with women running, I doubt if any noticeable percentage of women voters will stay home. The Koch boys can spend trillions--if they have it--, just like they did in 2012, but that got them nothing but a loss.
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Central, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Well Michael you're just wrong. Remember the last time a woman was on the ticket....... Sarah Palin...... before that was (I forget her name) with Walter Mondale...... that was a massacre. One woman might have some success (but wouldn't win) but two is incredibly unlikely. I'm thinking an older white male will have a strong chance in '16. I voted for Mr. Obama twice. I'd love to see more diversity. I just don't expect that it will happen yet. For now if we could get the number of women in the Senate or Congress closer to 40 - 50 % I think that would be real progress. Plus a few more women in important cabinet seats. That's where I think Warren is destined (secretary of: Something)
  • Liberal
    Other Party
    Llos Angeles, CA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Michael 90210

    What's up? you were doing good for a second. Thought maybe you came over to the dark side......Are you back to your republican craziness??? C'mon man....join us as coffee shop revolutionaries.

    HEEEEEEEE HAWWWWWWWW Lets a go a Hog Huntinnnn. Hang'em Bubba
  • Independent
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    hillary not only isn't unbeatable but the ticket proposed wouldn't be either.

    first of all who cares what the phucque the polls are now. by the time the election rolls around assuming hillary declares she will have been beaten bloody over benghazi (nothing really there), the e-mail bullschlitz (nothing really there), and virtually everything associated with her husband's tenure.

    elizabeth warren should run but not in 2016.

    never, ever underestimate the far superior ability of republicans, truthful or lying, to engage in debate framing and agitprop. for too long democrats have believed that putting facts or reasonable positions to the american people would result in the electorate supporting them by electing them.

    doesn't happen. bird's theorem, "'we the people' are stupid", is most highlighted at election time. people cast votes for single issues, because they are too lazy to examine the issues, because their parents voted for one party or another, because they have "always" voted one way or another, because they think one candidate "looks presidential" whatever the phucque that means etc ad infinitum ad nauseum.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    lonely bird Wrote: hillary not only isn't unbeatable but the ticket proposed wouldn't be either.

    first of all who cares what the phucque the polls are now. by the time the election rolls around assuming hillary declares she will have been beaten bloody over benghazi (nothing really there), the e-mail bullschlitz (nothing really there), and virtually everything associated with her husband's tenure.

    elizabeth warren should run but not in 2016.

    never, ever underestimate the far superior ability of republicans, truthful or lying, to engage in debate framing and agitprop. for too long democrats have believed that putting facts or reasonable positions to the american people would result in the electorate supporting them by electing them.

    doesn't happen. bird's theorem, "'we the people' are stupid", is most highlighted at election time. people cast votes for single issues, because they are too lazy to examine the issues, because their parents voted for one party or another, because they have "always" voted one way or another, because they think one candidate "looks presidential" whatever the phucque that means etc ad infinitum ad nauseum.
    Lonely; absolutely correct; the evangelicals in this country will stick like glue to the GOP; deceit and money will rule; dig up as much dirt as you can, or create it that is the game and the GOP is a master in it. Certainly "churches" will make sure their followers vote for the "holy" party.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    L.A. Citizen Wrote: Michael 90210

    What's up? you were doing good for a second. Thought maybe you came over to the dark side......Are you back to your republican craziness??? C'mon man....join us as coffee shop revolutionaries.

    HEEEEEEEE HAWWWWWWWW Lets a go a Hog Huntinnnn. Hang'em Bubba
    la
    I'll tell you what's up, my intent to remove any thoughts you have about MY republican craziness. I say the republicans have NO ONE who can whip Hillary, even though they keep spewing their lies about her Sec. of State activities. The fact is the republicans are just P.O.'d because she was able to keep us out of a war in Iran. That's what they want, a PERMANENT state of war, so their supporters (military suppliers) can be fat and happy rolling in the bucks.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Michael39301 Wrote:
    L.A. Citizen Wrote: Michael 90210

    What's up? you were doing good for a second. Thought maybe you came over to the dark side......Are you back to your republican craziness??? C'mon man....join us as coffee shop revolutionaries.

    HEEEEEEEE HAWWWWWWWW Lets a go a Hog Huntinnnn. Hang'em Bubba
    la
    I'll tell you what's up, my intent to remove any thoughts you have about MY republican craziness. I say the republicans have NO ONE who can whip Hillary, even though they keep spewing their lies about her Sec. of State activities. The fact is the republicans are just P.O.'d because she was able to keep us out of a war in Iran. That's what they want, a PERMANENT state of war, so their supporters (military suppliers) can be fat and happy rolling in the bucks.
    Michael, sure, I agree with your last part; however I've noticed especially with women, which are church goers, that they don't like Hilary and vote GOP regardless, because the fanatism in churches has increased drastically since ISIS popped up. That will be the "voters" which push the GOP agenda, because as Schmidt clearly stated, they will support Israel even if they murder all the Palestinians, because the non-existing "ghost" of "jesus" may return there. My note about that is , if so, then the "ghostly" guy is nuts, I would select a beach villa in Hawaii instead, if I was that "ghost"
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote:
    Michael39301 Wrote:
    L.A. Citizen Wrote: Michael 90210

    What's up? you were doing good for a second. Thought maybe you came over to the dark side......Are you back to your republican craziness??? C'mon man....join us as coffee shop revolutionaries.

    HEEEEEEEE HAWWWWWWWW Lets a go a Hog Huntinnnn. Hang'em Bubba
    la
    I'll tell you what's up, my intent to remove any thoughts you have about MY republican craziness. I say the republicans have NO ONE who can whip Hillary, even though they keep spewing their lies about her Sec. of State activities. The fact is the republicans are just P.O.'d because she was able to keep us out of a war in Iran. That's what they want, a PERMANENT state of war, so their supporters (military suppliers) can be fat and happy rolling in the bucks.
    Michael, sure, I agree with your last part; however I've noticed especially with women, which are church goers, that they don't like Hilary and vote GOP regardless, because the fanatism in churches has increased drastically since ISIS popped up. That will be the "voters" which push the GOP agenda, because as Schmidt clearly stated, they will support Israel even if they murder all the Palestinians, because the non-existing "ghost" of "jesus" may return there. My note about that is , if so, then the "ghostly" guy is nuts, I would select a beach villa in Hawaii instead, if I was that "ghost"
    So let me ask you Dutch, are you saying that Democratic-registered women won't vote for Hillary because of her view on Israel? I don't think I've ever heard of her having any sort of negative view for Israel, and her view of "no nukes" for Iran actually is a strong message of support for Israel because if Iran gets a nuclear weapon and Israel and Iran get into a war of their own, both of these countries, as well as an other countries in the general vicinity, will be "erased"--- either by the nuclear explosions or the radioactive fallout therefrom.
  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I'll add my two bits worth. As a former Democratic Party precinct chair and a volunteer for not only President Obama but also local candidates, our biggest obstacle is apathy. I have rang hundreds of doorbells and sat at a table registering voters, but I have to say honestly that the experience can be demoralizing. I suppose the number one thing we need in a candidate is charisma...someone that can arouse passions. Obama was able to do that and Hillary maybe a little less so, but for Congressional seats, state and local offices, the vast majority of voters and prospective voters have only a very superficial view of the candidates based on maybe a short sound bite on TV. And many of them are single issue voters or the more politically correct, "low information voters". If I were to ask people now if they support the Affordable Care Act, I would get a yes or a no. But if I were to go further and ask why, then you start hearing a few platitudes or maybe a shrug.

    Now to be fair, the doors that I knocked on were targeted because they had not voted or were not registered. I didn't knock on doors of die hard Democrats. We have our base and Republicans have their base...maybe it's the 40 percent on each end. The 20 percent in the middle has been my target. And many of them are what I would call disillusioned or apathetic. They are a hard nut to crack. Nationwide the split for president will be around 51 to 49...or maybe 52 to 48. The key states will be Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Michigan and if we're lucky, my state of Colorado.

    Presidential elections can help to get out the vote for other offices. That's when Democrats do well. In the other elections, we stay home and give all of our hard fought victories away...because we just don't care enough.
  • Liberal
    Other Party
    Llos Angeles, CA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    But black voters aren't gonna show up for Hlliary like they did for Obama....And Women,...just don't like other women. You'll have democratic women vote for Bush because of all that nonsense women do to each other. Bush will get the white vote.....far more than Romney. Bush will get mexicans to vote for him...Not all....but he'll get his take. Romney never concerned himself with the Mexican voter.

    Hilliary comes off as pompous and entitled...and she has strong ties with Wall Street......so she can't bash repubs for the very relationship she has with these BIG FAT CATS.
    Many think she'll just win by default. Not the case. She's not Obama. Also, Mexicans aren't too happy with Obama for his little quick fix (boost) with immigration. He didn't do shit for immigrants. Sounded great. It was never going to transpire...especially with the repubs taking everything to court.
    Same old nonsense. Nothing has changed unless you're a man who wants to marry Bob from accounting.
    ALL DRAMA
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote: I'll add my two bits worth. As a former Democratic Party precinct chair and a volunteer for not only President Obama but also local candidates, our biggest obstacle is apathy. I have rang hundreds of doorbells and sat at a table registering voters, but I have to say honestly that the experience can be demoralizing. I suppose the number one thing we need in a candidate is charisma...someone that can arouse passions. Obama was able to do that and Hillary maybe a little less so, but for Congressional seats, state and local offices, the vast majority of voters and prospective voters have only a very superficial view of the candidates based on maybe a short sound bite on TV. And many of them are single issue voters or the more politically correct, "low information voters". If I were to ask people now if they support the Affordable Care Act, I would get a yes or a no. But if I were to go further and ask why, then you start hearing a few platitudes or maybe a shrug.

    Now to be fair, the doors that I knocked on were targeted because they had not voted or were not registered. I didn't knock on doors of die hard Democrats. We have our base and Republicans have their base...maybe it's the 40 percent on each end. The 20 percent in the middle has been my target. And many of them are what I would call disillusioned or apathetic. They are a hard nut to crack. Nationwide the split for president will be around 51 to 49...or maybe 52 to 48. The key states will be Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Michigan and if we're lucky, my state of Colorado.

    Presidential elections can help to get out the vote for other offices. That's when Democrats do well. In the other elections, we stay home and give all of our hard fought victories away...because we just don't care enough.
    Schmidt, your picture was correct, but not anymore; you forget the "churches" the "fanatism" has increased since ISIS; I notice that every Sunday the "herds" which flock to the churches are getting bigger since that happening; the "doctrine: preached there is pure Republican related to fighting ISIS and supporting Israel etc. To my shock I saw in the Publix ministers/priests with their "frock" on and "gold" crosses around their neck shopping fo chicken; this country is rapidly going downhill and straight to "hell".