We aren't dealing with logical people with the world's best interests at heart, though.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 12:26pmShe was given her shot, tho, and she blew it to an absolute boob. After getting steamrolled by Obama in '08, the DNC had to rig the game to make sure she wasn't beaten by Sanders, but they couldn't fix it against a meathead. The Clintons may be powerful, but the insiders know that she's a loser and her type is very replaceable (Biden, Booker, etc). Plus, she might be the one candidate to get disaffected Trump voters back on his side, while pissing off the younger, more leftish Democratic base. If she were pushed thru, it would take a massive conspiracy of insane insiders. The negatives are so much greater than the positives to any operator that I can't see it going anywhe43.Silent Majority wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 12:05pmI think you underestimate the hold of the Clinton money, connections and allies in powerful positions for the Dems.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 12:01pmHonestly can't see it. The ego is definitely there, but she's a two-time loser (first time to Obama). She got the nomination last time because it was somehow owed to her. There'll be all kinds of gross corporate liberals running in 2020 without her baggage.Silent Majority wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 11:12amShe'll run for the Primary, win it, and lose the general.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 10:44am
A friend of mine likes to say we won't be rid of the Clintons until they've been decapitated, and the parts burned and buried in separate locations.
The Future of the Republican Party
-
Silent Majority
- Singer-Songwriter Nancy
- Posts: 18757
- Joined: 10 Nov 2008, 8:28pm
- Location: South Londoner in the Midlands.
Re: The Future of the Republican Party
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116721
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Future of the Republican Party
No, they want to win and get their snouts back in the trough. And there's no reason to think that Hillary is the best path to that when there are any number of corporate liberal hacks available without her baggage. And, unlike 2016, more of those bastards will be running in the primaries. Because she'd been anointed by the party in 2016—it was "her turn," which is always a horrible reason—she had no competition in the primaries from others like her. That wouldn't be the case in 2020.Silent Majority wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 2:18pmWe aren't dealing with logical people with the world's best interests at heart, though.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 12:26pmShe was given her shot, tho, and she blew it to an absolute boob. After getting steamrolled by Obama in '08, the DNC had to rig the game to make sure she wasn't beaten by Sanders, but they couldn't fix it against a meathead. The Clintons may be powerful, but the insiders know that she's a loser and her type is very replaceable (Biden, Booker, etc). Plus, she might be the one candidate to get disaffected Trump voters back on his side, while pissing off the younger, more leftish Democratic base. If she were pushed thru, it would take a massive conspiracy of insane insiders. The negatives are so much greater than the positives to any operator that I can't see it going anywhe43.Silent Majority wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 12:05pmI think you underestimate the hold of the Clinton money, connections and allies in powerful positions for the Dems.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 12:01pmHonestly can't see it. The ego is definitely there, but she's a two-time loser (first time to Obama). She got the nomination last time because it was somehow owed to her. There'll be all kinds of gross corporate liberals running in 2020 without her baggage.Silent Majority wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 11:12am
She'll run for the Primary, win it, and lose the general.
"Ain't no party like an S Club party!'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
- WestwayKid
- Unknown Immortal
- Posts: 6788
- Joined: 20 Sep 2017, 8:22am
- Location: Mill-e-wah-que
Re: The Future of the Republican Party
God, I hope not. I'm really done with the Clintons. They are all very unsavory. I think she operated in 2008 like the nomination was owed to her...but then Obama came out of left field and took them by surprise...so in 2016 she and the Dem establishment felt it was truly owed to them. I just hated the whole process. I felt dirty and icky.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 12:01pmHonestly can't see it. The ego is definitely there, but she's a two-time loser (first time to Obama). She got the nomination last time because it was somehow owed to her. There'll be all kinds of gross corporate liberals running in 2020 without her baggage.Silent Majority wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 11:12amShe'll run for the Primary, win it, and lose the general.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 10:44amA friend of mine likes to say we won't be rid of the Clintons until they've been decapitated, and the parts burned and buried in separate locations.WestwayKid wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 10:15amIt seems she is just attempting (badly) to remain somewhat relevant at this point...Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑23 Nov 2018, 5:20pmTrump and the Republicans are xenophobic racists, which makes them bad. Here comes Hillary to the rescue!
https://splinternews.com/heres-hillary- ... 1830622170
Hillary Clinton and centrist Democrats: Republican policies without the Republican brand.
"They don't think it be like it is, but it do." - Oscar Gamble
- WestwayKid
- Unknown Immortal
- Posts: 6788
- Joined: 20 Sep 2017, 8:22am
- Location: Mill-e-wah-que
Re: The Future of the Republican Party
The book Game Change - for me - really underscored their arrogance in 2008.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 12:26pmShe was given her shot, tho, and she blew it to an absolute boob. After getting steamrolled by Obama in '08, the DNC had to rig the game to make sure she wasn't beaten by Sanders, but they couldn't fix it against a meathead. The Clintons may be powerful, but the insiders know that she's a loser and her type is very replaceable (Biden, Booker, etc). Plus, she might be the one candidate to get disaffected Trump voters back on his side, while pissing off the younger, more leftish Democratic base. If she were pushed thru, it would take a massive conspiracy of insane insiders. The negatives are so much greater than the positives to any operator that I can't see it going anywhe43.Silent Majority wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 12:05pmI think you underestimate the hold of the Clinton money, connections and allies in powerful positions for the Dems.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 12:01pmHonestly can't see it. The ego is definitely there, but she's a two-time loser (first time to Obama). She got the nomination last time because it was somehow owed to her. There'll be all kinds of gross corporate liberals running in 2020 without her baggage.Silent Majority wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 11:12amShe'll run for the Primary, win it, and lose the general.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 10:44am
A friend of mine likes to say we won't be rid of the Clintons until they've been decapitated, and the parts burned and buried in separate locations.
"They don't think it be like it is, but it do." - Oscar Gamble
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116721
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Future of the Republican Party
What's funny about her making no effort in the Midwest in the 2016 general is that it's pretty much what she did in the primaries in 2008. She spent hardly any time in Iowa and was blindsided by the Obama machine, then let the same thing sink her in 2016. It suggests (a) an inability to learn from past mistakes; (b) a laziness towards politics, being unwilling to hustle; and (c) a profound arrogance of assuming people will just vote for her because she deserves it. And when your personal negative ratings are as high as they are with her, you'd better fucking hustle and take nothing for granted. She approached both 2008 and 2016 as a coronation, not a campaign, and there's no reason to think she wouldn't approach a 2020 run as a way of America apologizing to her for their mistake.
"Ain't no party like an S Club party!'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
- WestwayKid
- Unknown Immortal
- Posts: 6788
- Joined: 20 Sep 2017, 8:22am
- Location: Mill-e-wah-que
Re: The Future of the Republican Party
A well summed up look at why HRC failed in both 2008 and 2016. I think there truly was a lot of arrogance - a true belief that she deserved the nomination and that people would vote for her in the general election because of that. I think the arrogance led to an inability to both learn from past mistakes and to make mid-course adjustments. Clinton and her team seemingly could not understand a world where she would not win. I know that arrogance rubbed a lot of Democrats the wrong way - myself and my family included. Sure, we voted for her in the general election - but we didn't feel "good" about it. I know I never had a lot of enthusiasm for her campaign. I never felt fired up...and that's rare for me.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 4:37pmWhat's funny about her making no effort in the Midwest in the 2016 general is that it's pretty much what she did in the primaries in 2008. She spent hardly any time in Iowa and was blindsided by the Obama machine, then let the same thing sink her in 2016. It suggests (a) an inability to learn from past mistakes; (b) a laziness towards politics, being unwilling to hustle; and (c) a profound arrogance of assuming people will just vote for her because she deserves it. And when your personal negative ratings are as high as they are with her, you'd better fucking hustle and take nothing for granted. She approached both 2008 and 2016 as a coronation, not a campaign, and there's no reason to think she wouldn't approach a 2020 run as a way of America apologizing to her for their mistake.
"They don't think it be like it is, but it do." - Oscar Gamble
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116721
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Future of the Republican Party
She was, in her own way, a superb symbolic candidate for the dying neoliberal standard. Harsh and unappetizing, contemptuous of the average person, the smugness of wealth, the claim of expertise as the only valid quality in a candidate (her resumé was really long!), and predicated on the notion that, as Thatcher said, there is no alternative. If not for Trump, I would have loved her humiliation like fine booze.WestwayKid wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 5:21pmA well summed up look at why HRC failed in both 2008 and 2016. I think there truly was a lot of arrogance - a true belief that she deserved the nomination and that people would vote for her in the general election because of that. I think the arrogance led to an inability to both learn from past mistakes and to make mid-course adjustments. Clinton and her team seemingly could not understand a world where she would not win. I know that arrogance rubbed a lot of Democrats the wrong way - myself and my family included. Sure, we voted for her in the general election - but we didn't feel "good" about it. I know I never had a lot of enthusiasm for her campaign. I never felt fired up...and that's rare for me.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 4:37pmWhat's funny about her making no effort in the Midwest in the 2016 general is that it's pretty much what she did in the primaries in 2008. She spent hardly any time in Iowa and was blindsided by the Obama machine, then let the same thing sink her in 2016. It suggests (a) an inability to learn from past mistakes; (b) a laziness towards politics, being unwilling to hustle; and (c) a profound arrogance of assuming people will just vote for her because she deserves it. And when your personal negative ratings are as high as they are with her, you'd better fucking hustle and take nothing for granted. She approached both 2008 and 2016 as a coronation, not a campaign, and there's no reason to think she wouldn't approach a 2020 run as a way of America apologizing to her for their mistake.
"Ain't no party like an S Club party!'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
- Wolter
- Half Foghorn Leghorn, Half Albert Brooks
- Posts: 55432
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 7:59pm
- Location: ¡HOLIDAY RO-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-OAD!
Re: The Future of the Republican Party
To be fair, the Democrats are mainly a Think Tank at this point. They all have jobs no matter who wins.
”INDER LOCK THE THE KISS THREAD IVE REALISED IM A PRZE IDOOT” - Thomas Jefferson
"But the gorilla thinks otherwise!"
"But the gorilla thinks otherwise!"
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116721
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Future of the Republican Party
Just Democrats or is that a statement about both parties? I don't disagree, tho I might say lobbying organizations for mostly corporate interests. Certainly nothing related to a common good.
"Ain't no party like an S Club party!'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
- Wolter
- Half Foghorn Leghorn, Half Albert Brooks
- Posts: 55432
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 7:59pm
- Location: ¡HOLIDAY RO-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-OAD!
Re: The Future of the Republican Party
Just Democrats. The Republicans are cutthroat as hell. They may fuck up due to incompetence, but they will do what it takes never to compromise.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 6:41pmJust Democrats or is that a statement about both parties? I don't disagree, tho I might say lobbying organizations for mostly corporate interests. Certainly nothing related to a common good.
”INDER LOCK THE THE KISS THREAD IVE REALISED IM A PRZE IDOOT” - Thomas Jefferson
"But the gorilla thinks otherwise!"
"But the gorilla thinks otherwise!"
-
Silent Majority
- Singer-Songwriter Nancy
- Posts: 18757
- Joined: 10 Nov 2008, 8:28pm
- Location: South Londoner in the Midlands.
Re: The Future of the Republican Party
They probably get more donations when out of office.
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116721
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Future of the Republican Party
Not sure I see as great a distinction as you. The jobs will always be there for the party loyalists, win or lose. A greater zealotry exists on the right, partly cultural, partly a deeper intellectual hostility to representative democracy, and partly based on an awareness of its numerical disadvantage, but both parties exist to serve private interests not public, and they'll take care of each other between elections.Wolter wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 7:22pmJust Democrats. The Republicans are cutthroat as hell. They may fuck up due to incompetence, but they will do what it takes never to compromise.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 6:41pmJust Democrats or is that a statement about both parties? I don't disagree, tho I might say lobbying organizations for mostly corporate interests. Certainly nothing related to a common good.
"Ain't no party like an S Club party!'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
- Wolter
- Half Foghorn Leghorn, Half Albert Brooks
- Posts: 55432
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 7:59pm
- Location: ¡HOLIDAY RO-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-OAD!
Re: The Future of the Republican Party
We’re talking about different, parallel things.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 7:51pmNot sure I see as great a distinction as you. The jobs will always be there for the party loyalists, win or lose. A greater zealotry exists on the right, partly cultural, partly a deeper intellectual hostility to representative democracy, and partly based on an awareness of its numerical disadvantage, but both parties exist to serve private interests not public, and they'll take care of each other between elections.Wolter wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 7:22pmJust Democrats. The Republicans are cutthroat as hell. They may fuck up due to incompetence, but they will do what it takes never to compromise.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 6:41pmJust Democrats or is that a statement about both parties? I don't disagree, tho I might say lobbying organizations for mostly corporate interests. Certainly nothing related to a common good.
”INDER LOCK THE THE KISS THREAD IVE REALISED IM A PRZE IDOOT” - Thomas Jefferson
"But the gorilla thinks otherwise!"
"But the gorilla thinks otherwise!"
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116721
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Future of the Republican Party
It would seem. I don't understand your distinction or perhaps your definition.Wolter wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 10:59pmWe’re talking about different, parallel things.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 7:51pmNot sure I see as great a distinction as you. The jobs will always be there for the party loyalists, win or lose. A greater zealotry exists on the right, partly cultural, partly a deeper intellectual hostility to representative democracy, and partly based on an awareness of its numerical disadvantage, but both parties exist to serve private interests not public, and they'll take care of each other between elections.Wolter wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 7:22pmJust Democrats. The Republicans are cutthroat as hell. They may fuck up due to incompetence, but they will do what it takes never to compromise.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑24 Nov 2018, 6:41pmJust Democrats or is that a statement about both parties? I don't disagree, tho I might say lobbying organizations for mostly corporate interests. Certainly nothing related to a common good.
"Ain't no party like an S Club party!'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116721
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Future of the Republican Party
https://splinternews.com/laura-loomer-h ... 1830753245
Yep, protest pretty much the way Thoreau wrote it up. It's depressing to consider how bad these people are at stuff, yet still dominate.
Yep, protest pretty much the way Thoreau wrote it up. It's depressing to consider how bad these people are at stuff, yet still dominate.
"Ain't no party like an S Club party!'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft