Hillary Clinton

[Mr. Perfect]

Hillary Clinton is the only thing between the Democrats and immediate extinction. If HRC for some reason doesn't run then the democrats have no shot at the WH, at all. No national Democrat can win an election other than HRC.

Hillary is the favorite to win. She was however the favorite to win 8 years ago and didn't even get the nomination. The media, who did not see the last election coming at all, is the one telling us she is inevitable. They are not telling you that they failed as surrogates in every single race this year.

She is not inevitable. She has a 50/50 shot at best. In fact, the ONLY thing she has going for her is name recognition. She has no issues, she is a carbon copy of obama outside of left wing salons, no accomplishments to run on. She is not the natural heir of the obama electorate. She has no connection to youth voters or the black vote. She will get a strong women's vote but will be down in all other categories. I used to think that she was also going to benefit from the voters continually voting in divided gov't, but we see the electorate getting way more comfortable with one party Republican government.

The GOP has 4 known candidates (Bush, Christie, Cruz and Paul) and probably 4 more as yet unknown candidates. It's going to be interesting. I'm hoping this time that Bush and Christie can divide the moderates for a change so that a conservative can squeak in.

Nate Silver published a poll very unfavorable to HRC. She is not a lock by any stretch.

[Doc]

Hillary Clinton is the only thing between the Democrats and immediate extinction. If HRC for some reason doesn't run then the democrats have no shot at the WH, at all. No national Democrat can win an election other than HRC.

Hillary is the favorite to win. She was however the favorite to win 8 years ago and didn't even get the nomination. The media, who did not see the last election coming at all, is the one telling us she is inevitable. They are not telling you that they failed as surrogates in every single race this year.

She is not inevitable. She has a 50/50 shot at best. In fact, the ONLY thing she has going for her is name recognition. She has no issues, she is a carbon copy of obama outside of left wing salons, no accomplishments to run on. She is not the natural heir of the obama electorate. She has no connection to youth voters or the black vote. She will get a strong women's vote but will be down in all other categories. I used to think that she was also going to benefit from the voters continually voting in divided gov't, but we see the electorate getting way more comfortable with one party Republican government.

The GOP has 4 known candidates (Bush, Christie, Cruz and Paul) and probably 4 more as yet unknown candidates. It's going to be interesting. I'm hoping this time that Bush and Christie can divide the moderates for a change so that a conservative can squeak in.

Nate Silver published a poll very unfavorable to HRC. She is not a lock by any stretch.

The Democrats are walking dead. They are already feeing on each other. Harry Reid's chief of staff sat down twodays before the election and helped write a 14 page essay on why it is all Obama's fault.
Harry Reid’s top man tears apart the White House
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won ... ite-house/

Never mind that Reid has been in lock step with Obama the last six years. If the Dems want to survive as a party they are going to have to act quickly to save what they can.

Maybe what is left of Democratic Moderates (The closest thing Democrats have for Adults) can step in and take out things from the left wing of the Democratic part. Maybe Joe "This is a real ass whuppin" Manchin can step in. But he says maybe he is going home if things don't change.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pos ... -whooping/

Joe Manchin on election results: ‘This is a real ass-whuppin’

By Ed O'Keefe November 5 

Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W. Va.) did not mince words on Wednesday when asked to describe the historic losses by congressional Democrats.

"This is a real ass-whuppin," he said.

Manchin is a moderate first-term senator who has been openly flirting with going home to run again for West Virginia governor in 2016 instead of running for reelection. In a brief interview with The Washington Post, he unloaded on his party's leader, saying he's deeply frustrated with President Obama and Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) for his stewardship of the Senate in recent years. He openly suggested he might not support Reid to serve as Democratic leader again next year.

"Harry, let us vote, let’s do something. It’s easier for me to go home and explain what I voted for and against than to explain why I don’t vote at all," Manchin said.

Using a sports metaphor, Manchin said Senate Democrats have been acting in recent years like the West Virginia University Mountaineers football team did last Saturday: "We had the lead the whole entire game up until the middle of the 4th quarter and they decided to sit on the ball. And guess what? We got beat 31 to 30."

"This is a rough and tumble sport and you know what? Every member of Congress – 535 – has earned the right to make a complete fool of themselves if they want to," he added. "We just have to make sure that the American public can see who wants to get something done, who wants to be an obstructionist and who wants to be a fool."

When asked whether Reid wants to do something, or is an obstructionist, or a fool, Manchin said: "I have no idea."

"We’re going to find out" about Reid, he added, noting that he's been in talks with other moderate Democrats, including Sens. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Angus King (I-Maine), about how their caucus should comport itself during the lame-duck and going into next year.

But Manchin once again ruled out leaving the Democratic Party -- as many pundits and operatives have suggested in recent weeks that he should do.

"No," he said flatly when asked if he would switch parties. "I’m a moderate Democrat, proud West Virginian. If you don’t have moderates on both sides and if you don’t have moderates on both sides, you don’t get anything done."

But Manchin was complimentary of how the GOP performed in Tuesday's elections.

"I think the Republicans played it masterfully," he said. "You didn’t see them playing to the extremes in their primaries. Cory Gardner is a perfect example. He was a very conservative member of Congress. He runs for the Senate and he couldn’t get to the middle quick enough. So they understand what this country wants."

Democratic losses "started at the White House, and this administration and it went all the way to leadership," he said. "If the Democratic Party was the majority party with a president, they should have gotten something accomplished. But that means working with the other side. I think that people felt that the Democrats didn’t work, did not reach out, basically played politics all the way through. And if Republicans were responsible for obstructing and filibustering and all that, let's see if they can lead. And if Democrats have identified that as the problem, let’s make sure we don’t do the same thing."

Manchin said he'll decide next year about possibly going home to run again for governor: "If the same old same old is going to continue to exist, then I’ll look at other options. Being back home can be a damn good option."

[Mr. Perfect]

Yeah the thing is that it is Harry Reid is as responsible as obama, he's spent 2 years harping on the Koch brothers who nobody in the country knows or cares about and who mean nothing to anything rather than trying to improve the lives of American citizens.

It's on him as much as obama. This is a complete and total failure of the Democrat Party and liberalism.

[Doc]

Yeah the thing is that it is Harry Reid is as responsible as obama, he's spent 2 years harping on the Koch brothers who nobody in the country knows or cares about and who mean nothing to anything rather than trying to improve the lives of American citizens.

It's on him as much as obama. This is a complete and total failure of the Democrat Party and liberalism.

I figure Reid is gone as the senate leader for the Dems and that is what the finger pointing is about. That is what usually happens after an ass whuppin. If the Dems don't do something quick it will be every democrat politician for themself.

[Zack Morris]

The GOP has 4 known candidates (Bush, Christie, Cruz and Paul) and probably 4 more as yet unknown candidates.

There is only one viable candidate in that list: Bush. Is that what you kicked out King George for? A Bush dynasty? 2016 is going to be an ugly campaign because there's so little daylight between the candidates. A pro-establishment child of privilege (Bush) vs. a pro-establishment coveter of privilege. Whoever wins, we'll still be stuck with an administration packed with the same hacks from the past 30 years.

[Zack Morris]

Yeah the thing is that it is Harry Reid is as responsible as obama, he's spent 2 years harping on the Koch brothers who nobody in the country knows or cares about and who mean nothing to anything rather than trying to improve the lives of American citizens.

It's on him as much as obama. This is a complete and total failure of the Democrat Party and liberalism.

You make the Koch brothers sound soooo cool! You should encourage your kids to apply for jobs with Koch Industries.

[Mr. Perfect]

There is only one viable candidate in that list: Bush. Is that what you kicked out King George for? A Bush dynasty? 2016 is going to be an ugly campaign because there's so little daylight between the candidates. A pro-establishment child of privilege (Bush) vs. a pro-establishment coveter of privilege. Whoever wins, we'll still be stuck with an administration packed with the same hacks from the past 30 years.

In 2006 obama was not viable.

[Mr. Perfect]

You make the Koch brothers sound soooo cool! You should encourage your kids to apply for jobs with Koch Industries.

Nobody in America knows anything about them except for a few million people that consume fringe left wing media products.

[Zack Morris]

There is only one viable candidate in that list: Bush. Is that what you kicked out King George for? A Bush dynasty? 2016 is going to be an ugly campaign because there's so little daylight between the candidates. A pro-establishment child of privilege (Bush) vs. a pro-establishment coveter of privilege. Whoever wins, we'll still be stuck with an administration packed with the same hacks from the past 30 years.

In 2006 obama was not viable.

Cruz and Christie are no Obama. Intellect and politics aside, they come across as jerks and don't look like leaders. Sorry, not my basis for judgment, but that's how Americans choose. Paul will do decently well through the primary season but the establishment is going to be relentless in knocking him down a few pegs.

[Zack Morris]

You make the Koch brothers sound soooo cool! You should encourage your kids to apply for jobs with Koch Industries.

Nobody in America knows anything about them except for a few million people that consume fringe left wing media products.

We've learned a lot from the tens of millions they've spent on politics and advertising. Get your head out of the sand.

[Mr. Perfect]

Cruz and Christie are no Obama.

You're right about that. obama is viewed as the worst President in US history.

Intellect and politics aside, they come across as jerks and don't look like leaders.

To MSNBC viewers, sure. But obviously MSNBC viewers don't decide anything anymore.

Sorry, not my basis for judgment, but that's how Americans choose. Paul will do decently well through the primary season but the establishment is going to be relentless in knocking him down a few pegs.

Your political judgements are among the worst I've ever seen in my life, so obviously we'll round file this one.

[Mr. Perfect]

We've learned a lot from the tens of millions they've spent on politics and advertising.

The MSNBC audience, sure. But nobody else.

Get your head out of the sand.

It is. I see teabagged Democrats from sea to shining sea. I teabagged some myself. I am going to write a song, "I teabagged a Democrat and I liked it".

[Doc]

You make the Koch brothers sound soooo cool! You should encourage your kids to apply for jobs with Koch Industries.

Nobody in America knows anything about them except for a few million people that consume fringe left wing media products.

We've learned a lot from the tens of millions they've spent on politics and advertising. Get your head out of the sand.

Yes the 10s of millions the Democrats did nothing and spent it for nothing

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/0 ... 09488.html

Joe Manchin: Democrats Got An 'Ass-Whooping'

The Huffington Post | By Igor Bobic

Posted: 11/05/2014 3:16 pm EST Updated: 11/05/2014 3:59 pm EST

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.) used some off-color language to describe the extent of his party's dramatic losses in Tuesday's midterm election, which gave Republicans control of the U.S. Senate for the first time in eight years.

"This is a real ass-whooping," Manchin told the Washington Post in a Wednesday interview.

The moderate first-term senator criticized President Barack Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) for failing to present voters with a positive record of accomplishments.

"Harry let us vote, let’s do something. It’s easier for me to go home and explain what I voted for and against than to explain why I don’t vote at all," Manchin said of the Senate, which is on track, along with the House, to become the most unproductive Congress in modern history.

Manchin used a football analogy to describe the Democrats' strategy, which he described as misguided.

"We had the lead the whole entire game up until the middle of the 4th quarter and they decided to sit on the ball. And guess what? We got beat 31 to 30," he said.

"This is a rough and tumble sport and you know what? Every member of Congress -- 535 -- has earned the right to make a complete fool of themselves if they want to," he added. "We just have to make sure that the American public can see who wants to get something done, who wants to be an obstructionist and who wants to be a fool."

President Barack Obama also addressed the midterm election results Wednesday afternoon from the White House, telling reporters that he was looking forward to working with the new Congress on issues like patent reform and trade agreements

But the election is over Zack Morris Just go back to your left wing delusions nothing to see here.

[Mr. Perfect]

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Cali ... ng-to-Lose

Veteran California politician Willie Brown has warned this weekend that presumptive Democratic Party presidential nominee Hillary Clinton "is going to lose" in 2016 "nless there are some serious readjustments to the Democratic operation."

Brown made his remarks in his regular column in the San Francisco Chronicle, as he attempted to draw lessons from his party's stunning nationwide losses in the midterm elections.

"Everybody keeps asking me, “Why did this happen?’" Brown wrote. "Beats me. When it came to the elections, I was a dreamer who thought the Democrats were going to retain the Senate. Instead, we got walloped."

Brown suggested that Democrats erred by running away from President Barack Obama, "which simply played into the Republicans’ strategy of portraying him as a failure." The party also failed to turn out young voters, he said.

"Hillary Rodham Clinton must be wondering whether she really wants to run for president. Unless there are some serious readjustments to the Democratic operation, she is going to lose," Brown concluded.

Last year, Brown had predicted Clinton would win easily in 2016: "..[A]ll she has to do is continue to breath[e] and in 2016 she'll be elected to the presidency of the United States," he said.

Brown served two terms as mayor of San Francisco, the first African-American to be elected to that office.

[YMix]

the Koch brothers who nobody in the country knows or cares about and who mean nothing to anything rather than trying to improve the lives of American citizens.

Looooooool. The only thing the Koch brothers stand for is boundless, shameless egoism. They don't give a $hit about anybody's life.

[Doc]

the Koch brothers who nobody in the country knows or cares about and who mean nothing to anything rather than trying to improve the lives of American citizens.

Looooooool. The only thing the Koch brothers stand for is boundless, shameless egoism. They don't give a $hit about anybody's life.

Oh you know them personally? Or are you simply parroting talking points?

[YMix]

Oh you know them personally? Or are you simply parroting talking points?

Oh, now we're supposed to have only first hand knowledge? That would put a massive damper on forum discussions.

[Doc]

Oh you know them personally? Or are you simply parroting talking points?

Oh, now we're supposed to have only first hand knowledge? That would put a massive damper on forum discussions.

No but how about not robotically repeating Harry Reid's talking points?

[YMix]

No but how about not robotically repeating Harry Reid's talking points?

I've no idea what Harry Reid said about the Koch brothers. I read an article about their business practices, especially their refusal to invest in maintenance and repairs because it cut into their profits, and concluded that the bros are not libertarians, but simply greedy and egoistical.

[Doc]

No but how about not robotically repeating Harry Reid's talking points?

I've no idea what Harry Reid said about the Koch brothers.

That is what you are repeating--What Harry Reid has said. He has said it over and over again. Harry Reid the same guy that said Mitt Romney cheated on his taxes right before the 2012 election. When pressed on it as to where Reid got that information Reid said someone told him that and then declined to say who.

I read an article about their business practices, especially their refusal to invest in maintenance and repairs because it cut into their profits, and concluded that the bros are not libertarians, but simply greedy and egoistical.

Refusing to invest in maintenance and repairs is a business decision based on profit. Profit being the sole reason that a business has to exist. If businesses don't make profits, unlike governments, they cease to exist. Which fits fully into the philosophy of libertarianism.

[YMix]

Refusing to invest in maintenance and repairs is a business decision based on profit. Profit being the sole reason that a business has to exist. If businesses don't make profits, unlike governments, they cease to exist. Which fits fully into the philosophy of libertarianism.

That's the extreme view. The brothers could've invested in maintenance and repairs and accepted a smaller profit. I doubt they would've gone bankrupt. They deliberately refused to do so and this led to a string of spills and accidents. Couple of people died, too.

[Doc]

Refusing to invest in maintenance and repairs is a business decision based on profit. Profit being the sole reason that a business has to exist. If businesses don't make profits, unlike governments, they cease to exist. Which fits fully into the philosophy of libertarianism.

That's the extreme view. The brothers could've invested in maintenance and repairs and accepted a smaller profit. I doubt they would've gone bankrupt. They deliberately refused to do so and this led to a string of spills and accidents. Couple of people died, too.

Again you discussed this with the Koch brothers and confirmed there would be a profit at all? OR again did you read this on the internet so it must be true?

And it is not the extreme view it is simple reality.

As for the accidents without knowing exactly what you are talking about I have no idea. Spills of what? What kind of accidents? How did the people die? IE do you have a link to the article in question from a reputable news source?

[YMix]

Again you discussed this with the Koch brothers and confirmed there would be a profit at all? OR again did you read this on the internet so it must be true?

FFS, next time you talk about Obama's policies I'm going to ask you whether you had discussed those policies with Obama personally.

As for the accidents without knowing exactly what you are talking about I have no idea. Spills of what? What kind of accidents? How did the people die? IE do you have a link to the article in question from a reputable news source?

Is this a reputable news source?

[Doc]

Again you discussed this with the Koch brothers and confirmed there would be a profit at all? OR again did you read this on the internet so it must be true?

FFS, next time you talk about Obama's policies I'm going to ask you whether you had discussed those policies with Obama personally.

And I will tell you that I am living under this regime.

As for the accidents without knowing exactly what you are talking about I have no idea. Spills of what? What kind of accidents? How did the people die? IE do you have a link to the article in question from a reputable news source?

Is this a reputable news source?

Rolling stone? Really? No it is the a left wing hack news source. It doesn't even pretend to be neutral The article is lots and lots of demagoguery. But more important than anything else the Rolling Stone is a left wing bias thing that will never ever allow the truth to be told between's its covers if that means going against what it believes.

I look at this article and the first thing I notice is that it starts out with all kinds of POLITICAL charges Then it goes on to make all kinds of claims without giving much in the way of specifics. It demonizes with real zeal. It even goes back to the grandfather /founder to demonize. And lies about it like people of such ilk always tend to do to juice up things.

Hotze "Harry" Koch, a Dutch immigrant who – as recalled in Koch literature – ran "a modest newspaper business" amid the dusty poverty of Quanah. In the family legend, Fred Koch emerged from the nothing of the Texas range to found an empire. But like many stories the company likes to tell about itself, this piece of Koch ­lore takes liberties with the truth. Fred was not a simple country boy, and his father was not just a small-town publisher. Harry Koch was also a local railroad baron who used his newspaper to promote the Quanah, Acme & Pacific railways. A director and founding shareholder of the company, Harry sought to build a rail line across Texas to El Paso.

"Was not just a small town publisher"

In fact he was just a small town publisher for years 12 to be exact before he started a railroad. Yet the author of the Rolling stone says "Koch ­lore takes liberties with the truth"

https://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/onl ... cles/hgq01

and in 1894 merged with the Tribune, first published by Harry Koch in 1890

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quanah,_Ac ... ic_Railway

Quanah, Acme and Pacific Railway (QA&P) was a 117-mile (188 km) freight railroad that operated between the Red River and Floydada, Texas, from 1902 until it was merged into the Burlington Northern Railroad in 1981.[1]

The Rolling stone is clearly the party in this article taking liberties with the truth. And that shows how extreme the Rolling Stone's bias is. Hence to be taken with a large amount of salt.

Oh and just to be sure you understand

https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/topindivs.php
Top Individual Contributors: All Federal Contributions for 2014

61 percent of the money from the top 100 political donors came from two democrats Tom Steyer and Michael Bloomberg 94 million dollars The Koch brothers come in at numbers 23 and 25 with combined political donations of 5 million.

How come you never read any articles about that?

[YMix]

The Rolling stone is clearly the party in this article taking liberties with the truth. And that shows how extreme the Rolling Stone's bias is. Hence to be taken with a large amount of salt.

How do you know the Koch brothers aren't taking liberties with the truth? Have you met them?

Listen, you can play this game however you want. But if you're going to reject some posts because posters haven't personally met various people and reject other posts because the source is not good enough for you, then discussion ends. I can reject sources just as easily, without considering the material, because every source is biased. Rolling Stone? Leftist. Drudge? Right-winger. NYT? Too establishment. And so on. There won't be any acceptable sources left. What then?