B-Man Posted January 25, 2015 Posted January 25, 2015 As the race for 2016 shifts into gear, old conflicts are reemerging between Hillary Clinton supporters and Team Obama; this time, it’s over access to Obama’s massive email lists. Amie Parnes and Niall Stanage of The Hill reported: Obama, Clinton tensions build over email lists ahead of 2016 New tensions are emerging in the relationship between allies of President Obama and Hillary Clinton. At issue is the fate of the political equivalent of gold dust — the enormous email list, comprised of many millions of supporters and donors, that the Obama team has compiled over the course of his two presidential campaigns. The Clinton camp would dearly love to get its hands on the list, but there is no promise as yet that the president’s aides will comply. There are “large concerns” about the lists among Clinton supporters, one Hillary ally told The Hill. To the Clintons and their friends, it’s near unthinkable that a Democratic president — who has plenty of reasons to want a member of his party to succeed him — would withhold such a valuable commodity. But Team Obama has long believed that the president’s support is built upon the bedrock of his personal qualities rather than mere party identification. His people are loath to be seen as treating the passion of his supporters in a cavalier fashion. “There’s a lot of data — voter data, massive email lists — that Obama built and there are a lot of people who want to make sure that he spreads that wealth,” the Clinton ally said. “They want to make sure he doesn’t take it in a suitcase back to Chicago and move on. No one wants to see it disappear or have it used just to build a library.” Democrats are probably hoping everyone has forgotten how ugly the conflict between Hillary and Obama became during the 2008 Democratic primary. There’s plenty of evidence that the rift never healed. .
DC Tom Posted January 25, 2015 Posted January 25, 2015 But Team Obama has long believed that the president’s support is built upon the bedrock of his personal qualities rather than mere party identification. His people are loath to be seen as treating the passion of his supporters in a cavalier fashion. NOT, notably, his qualifications for the office.
Nanker Posted January 25, 2015 Author Posted January 25, 2015 No, sadly. Those were his qualifications for the office.
Doc Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 As the race for 2016 shifts into gear, old conflicts are reemerging between Hillary Clinton supporters and Team Obama; this time, it’s over access to Obama’s massive email lists. Amie Parnes and Niall Stanage of The Hill reported: Democrats are probably hoping everyone has forgotten how ugly the conflict between Hillary and Obama became during the 2008 Democratic primary. There’s plenty of evidence that the rift never healed. . Barry's trying to squeeze Shrillary for a few more dollars.
Tiberius Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Sarah Palin, who has been teasing the press with hints she might actually run for president, appeared to end much hope of that Saturday by delivering a 33-minute speech of such incoherence that even veteran Palin-watchers were puzzled. Some sample lines from Palin: “Screw the left and Hollywood!” “Coronation, rinse, repeat.” Obama “is so over it. America, he’s just not that into you.” “The man can only ride you when your back is bent.” I would provide some context, but there wasn’t any. It is possible she was improperly inflated. In the clown car, you have to check for that regularly. Roger Simon is POLITICO’s chief political columnist http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/gop-clown-car-runs-into-ditch-114565.html?hp=c1_3 Sorry to interior your anti-Hillary circle jerk, but the GOP--you guys remember them?--are doing it again! The Circus is just warming up. Palin, Trump and Mitt again! Lol
3rdnlng Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) Sarah Palin, who has been teasing the press with hints she might actually run for president, appeared to end much hope of that Saturday by delivering a 33-minute speech of such incoherence that even veteran Palin-watchers were puzzled. Some sample lines from Palin: “Screw the left and Hollywood!” “Coronation, rinse, repeat.” Obama “is so over it. America, he’s just not that into you.” “The man can only ride you when your back is bent.” I would provide some context, but there wasn’t any. It is possible she was improperly inflated. In the clown car, you have to check for that regularly. Roger Simon is POLITICO’s chief political columnist http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/gop-clown-car-runs-into-ditch-114565.html?hp=c1_3 Sorry to interior your anti-Hillary circle jerk, but the GOP--you guys remember them?--are doing it again! The Circus is just warming up. Palin, Trump and Mitt again! Lol Could you translate this from Reptile speak? Edited January 26, 2015 by 3rdnlng
Tiberius Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Could you translate this from Reptile speak? Sorry 3rdTurd, it was suppose to be "interrupt"
B-Man Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 What, exactly, is Hillary Clinton’s strategy to get voters excited about her candidacy? by Phillip Bump FTA: Which brings us back to a core Clinton problem: energy. No, commenters and people on Twitter, the best president is not the one who has the best ability to invigorate voters. But this is, you may have noticed, a key component of how we pick presidents in an age so thoroughly saturated with marketing. And Clinton, although not without vocal supporters, seems continuously unlikely to be the most energizing candidate. "Ready for Hillary" often seemed less like a grass-roots push born of uncontainable excitement than a sharp strategy from some political consultants looking to align with a winning candidate early in the process. At her book-signing in New York last June, the refrain from those who bought "Hard Choices" was commonly, "Well, she might be president." And those who bought the book were in the stark minority. More at the link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/01/26/what-exactly-is-hillary-clintons-strategy-to-get-voters-excited-about-her-candidacy/?tid=sm_tw_pp .
IDBillzFan Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Sarah Palin, who has been teasing the press with hints she might actually run for president, appeared to end much hope of that Saturday by delivering a 33-minute speech of such incoherence that even veteran Palin-watchers were puzzled. And yet you were probably first in line to watch Obama get interviewed by a woman who sits in a bathtub full of milk and cereal.
DC Tom Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Sarah Palin, who has been teasing the press with hints she might actually run for president, appeared to end much hope of that Saturday by delivering a 33-minute speech of such incoherence that even veteran Palin-watchers were puzzled. Some sample lines from Palin: “Screw the left and Hollywood!” “Coronation, rinse, repeat.” Obama “is so over it. America, he’s just not that into you.” “The man can only ride you when your back is bent.” I would provide some context, but there wasn’t any. It is possible she was improperly inflated. In the clown car, you have to check for that regularly. Roger Simon is POLITICO’s chief political columnist http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/gop-clown-car-runs-into-ditch-114565.html?hp=c1_3 Sorry to interior your anti-Hillary circle jerk, but the GOP--you guys remember them?--are doing it again! The Circus is just warming up. Palin, Trump and Mitt again! Lol What does this have to do with Hillary Clinton?
B-Man Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) What does this have to do with Hillary Clinton? Absolutely nothing. but she lives rent free in the Left's heads.................................and she knows it. She has no intention of running for the Presidency seriously, but she knows if she hints at it the loons will come out. Besides, all the stories about Hillary look like this...........................we NEED a distraction. Dems see an oddly monochromatic consistency from Team Hillary It’s the kind of bean-counting that the media usually applies to Republicans when they run for high office, and which drive conservatives and libertarians up the wall. When the diversity inventory method gets applied to Democrats, though, it feels much more like sauce for the goose, hoisting by own petards, and so on. That’s why Tim Mak’s query about “white dude-fest 2016″ at Team Hillary will get lots of attention on the Right today, as well as the Left: In interviews with The Daily Beast, nearly a dozen Democrats, said they were worried Clinton’s hires for the top echelons of her pre-campaign haven’t taken gender and racial diversity into account. Their concern started after early leaks about heavy hitters recruited for the likely 2016 presidential candidate’s proto-campaign all had two distinct things in common: they were white and male. More at the link:http://hotair.com/archives/2015/01/26/dems-see-an-oddly-monochromatic-consistency-from-team-hillary/ . Edited January 27, 2015 by B-Man
IDBillzFan Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 As we were saying...the left has no bench. What it really suggests is: the Democratic bench is now so thin that the party cannot even give its voters a real choice. At this point, the only three other candidates seriously considering the race are: Martin O’Malley, former Maryland governor who is decidedly lackluster; Jim Webb, the quirky one-term senator who -- oh by the way! -- used to work in the Reagan Administration (Democratic voters will love that); and Bernie Sanders, who does not even call himself a Democrat (he’s a socialist). Why are the only three challengers such fourth-raters? Peruse the sitting governors who are Democrats. Don’t worry, it won’t take you very long. You’ll see that none of them could be serious contenders. They either hail from small states, were just recently elected, were barely reelected, or are quirky/problematic. Now take a gander at the party’s Senate caucus. If you squint really hard you might imagine some of them could be presidential material, but not really. The overwhelming majority are too old, too dull, too new, or barely won reelection. Elizabeth Warren is the only exception out of these 45 senators, and she looks like she is not going to run.
B-Man Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 POLITICO: Exclusive: Hillary Clinton may delay campaign: Top Democrats give a new date for the campaign’s likely start. Love the photo. A cynic would say that Hillary isn’t running — perhaps her health isn’t up to even a fake campaign — but that they want to keep the possibility alive as long as possible to maximize speaking revenues and political leverage. Or they may have just found out that she polls best when she’s out of the public eye. . . . Heck, maybe she could announce the day before election day, then she wouldn't have to face any questions.................lol .
/dev/null Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 POLITICO: Exclusive: Hillary Clinton may delay campaign: Top Democrats give a new date for the campaign’s likely start. . At this point, what difference does it make?
B-Man Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 Hillary's not looking so inevitable, after allby Thomas Lifson My spidey sense has been telling me for a while that Hillary Clinton would not be a very strong candidate for president, despite those polls that seem to show her ahead of the GOP field. First of all, she has tons of baggage, including a disastrous term as Secretary of State. Relations with Russia are in the tank, and there is that picture of her with an idiot grin holding a “reset button” with her Russian counterpart. Then, there is Benghazi, still ignored by the major media, but fodder for devastating ads to be used against her. Beyond that, the entire Obama foreign policy has been a disaster, and she planted all of the seeds for it, from the Arab Spring to the dissing of Israel. But beyond these considerations is that fact that she is old, and is yesterday’s news. And America, as Barrack Obama’s candidacy showed, likes to turn the page on bad news, and put its faith in new faces. Then there is the Hillary screech. Face it, she is not a pleasant voice to listen to, has eyes that bulge out at the slightest provocation, and when agitated, says dumb stuff like, “What difference, at this point, does it make?” in offensive, angry tones. She has dropped out of sight lately, which is a sure sign that plastic surgery is underway (again) to repair that tired visage. But she can’t remake history. Now comes a very interesting poll, leaked to Politico, and insightfully analyzed Ed Morrissey of Hot Air. In a PPP poll taken this week, Hillary Clinton can’t get to 50% against any Republican challenger paired against her, even Romney: The automated poll of nearly 900 registered voters, conducted last week by Public Policy Polling, found that 48 percent of respondents had an unfavorable opinion of Clinton, compared to 43 percent who viewed the former secretary of State favorably. More at the link: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/02/hillarys_not_looking_so_inevitable_after_all.html
/dev/null Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 Now comes a very interesting poll, leaked to Politico, and insightfully analyzed Ed Morrissey of Hot Air. In a PPP poll taken this week, Hillary Clinton can’t get to 50% against any Republican challenger paired against her, even Romney: The automated poll of nearly 900 registered voters, conducted last week by Public Policy Polling, found that 48 percent of respondents had an unfavorable opinion of Clinton, compared to 43 percent who viewed the former secretary of State favorably. More at the link: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/02/hillarys_not_looking_so_inevitable_after_all.html Hillary doesn't need to get over 50%. Her husband never did and he still won twice
Nanker Posted February 1, 2015 Author Posted February 1, 2015 So who's going to be her H. Ross Perot? He only got in the race because of a blood feud with G HW. Go ahead. I'm listening. I'm all ears.
/dev/null Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 So who's going to be her H. Ross Perot? He only got in the race because of a blood feud with G HW. Go ahead. I'm listening. I'm all ears. Go read Azalin's posts in the Mitt thread. Won't take much to siphon enough votes to a 3rd party or not vote at all to give HRC the Electoral votes even with under 50%.
DC Tom Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 So who's going to be her H. Ross Perot? He only got in the race because of a blood feud with G HW. Obama. Hey, the 22nd Amendment says he can't be elected more than twice, it doesn't say he can't run.
Recommended Posts