Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Just now, Buffalo_Gal said:


Make one!

And I love Sarah Palin. What a raw deal she got from that ***** John McCain and the "MSM".

 


I’m not politically smart enough to start that thread.

 

?

  • Replies 10.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

The 1980 race "kinda" between Carter and Ted Kennedy at least had some political gravity

 

I will forever assert Gore and Kerry and Hillary were very suitable candidates, way more so than Carter/Mondale/Dukakis

 

 

1 hour ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


Make one!

And I love Sarah Palin. What a raw deal she got from that ***** John McCain and the "MSM".

 

 

her appeal wasn't carrying into enough categories to be a political winnner, they had no shot in the first place so it didn't matter

 

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

Hey...the republicans ran John McCain and Sarah Palin...so it’s not exclusive to the Dems.

 

McCain and Dole and Romney had zero chance to win

 

they were decent candidates

 

Posted
35 minutes ago, row_33 said:

The 1980 race "kinda" between Carter and Ted Kennedy at least had some political gravity

 

I will forever assert Gore and Kerry and Hillary were very suitable candidates, way more so than Carter/Mondale/Dukakis

 

 

 

her appeal wasn't carrying into enough categories to be a political winnner, they had no shot in the first place so it didn't matter

 

 

McCain and Dole and Romney had zero chance to win

 

they were decent candidates

 

Tell us, what did that trio of candidates stand for? What would make them suitable?

Posted
3 hours ago, Taro T said:

1984 springs to mind.  Though it would've been close.

  2020 stands all by itself in terms of poor D candidates.  It baffles the mind that people such as Harris and Warren could actually be candidates.  

Posted
47 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Tell us, what did that trio of candidates stand for? What would make them suitable?

 

i 100% thought they all would win over the GOP candidate

 

i was quite happy they didn't

 

 

42 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  2020 stands all by itself in terms of poor D candidates.  It baffles the mind that people such as Harris and Warren could actually be candidates.  

 

practically impossible to unseat an eligible President with a strong economy

 

so many are going to bow out

 

 

the surprise to me was 1972 for the Dems, I thought Humphrey would have taken it, but with the new rules the Dems put in after 1968 I guess the epically all-time pointless McGovern weaseled it out.  Carter got going on the new rules in 1976 very early and sealed it off before anyone knew what hit them.

 

 

Posted
1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said:

You said they were suitable. Why?

 

they were the better candidates over W and Trump

 

doesn't need more than a one-second intuitive snap decision that is eternal...

 

still can't believe W and Trump beat the 3 of them.

 

 

 

 

 

Presidential is a matter of first introduction that never changes.  The first time I saw Bill Clinton at a press conference, while governor, i thought "geez, he will be dangerous if the Dems put him up front."

 

 

Posted

saw a study where the first impression and a further 15 minutes of an interview was no more reliable on a final judgment of a person than the first 2 seconds of the first impression

 

 

Obama looked Presidential from the first second he was nationally brought forward

 

and that's 98% of the game...  :D

 

Posted
5 hours ago, njbuff said:

I ask the more politically experienced hands in here...............

 

Has there ever been a worse pool of candidates in the Democratic Party for the presidential nomination?

Well, 1988 was pretty weak:

Michael Dukakis, Jessie Jackson, Al Gore, Paul Simon (not that Paul Simon), Dick Gephardt, and Gary Hart.

 

1972 was a bit better but quite an eclectic mix of:

George McGovern, Hubert Humphrey, George Wallace, Edmund Muskie, and Shirley Chisholm.

 

1992 brought us Bill Clinton, Jerry Brown, Paul Tsongas, Tom Harkin, and Bob Kerrey. 

12 minutes ago, B-Man said:

Eyeing and "Ready to Report for duty," taking a page from John Kerry no doubt.

marty.jpg

Posted
3 minutes ago, Wacka said:

My first impression of Bill Clintonn was he was Eddie Haskell. I wasn't wrong.

 

 

i recall a second Southern politician the same age of Willy, and thinking there were 2 on the scene at the same time  :(

 

 

can't recall who the other one was, he must have been Arkansided.

 

Posted
1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

:lol: 

 

 

 

 

She needs to get in front of the IG. 

I read that she is under enormous pressure to rule out running for President in 2020.  As much as I'd like to see her lose again to Trump, just sit down and shut up Cankles.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

The “pressure” she’s feeling is to declare her candidacy so she gets protected from any scrutiny under the newly-minted “Biden Rule.”  

 

Can’t investigate a Democrat that’s running for office. 

  • Like (+1) 3
Posted
12 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

:lol: 

 

 

 

 

She needs to get in front of the IG. 

Staying in front of the IG is like staying in front of an oncoming glacier.  

×
×
  • Create New...