PDA

View Full Version : Thoughts from the Clinton campaign



David G
04-12-2015, 12:29 PM
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2015/0411/Hillary-Clinton-2016-How-this-presidential-campaign-will-be-different-video?cmpid=FB


WASHINGTON — No more speculation – Hillary Rodham Clinton is in. And this time, people close to her presidential campaign say, she’s taking nothing for granted.

Hanging over Mrs. Clinton’s 2016 enterprise will be her shocking failure to win the Democratic nomination in 2008, when she got smoked by a flashy young upstart named Barack Obama. The former first lady’s inevitability proved to be a mirage, both because of then-Senator Obama’s superior skills as a candidate and mistakes by her campaign.

Here are some key ways in which Clinton’s 2016 campaign will be different:

Gerarddm
04-12-2015, 03:38 PM
One real difference is that it will be run with an iron hand by John Podesta.

David G
04-13-2015, 01:15 AM
And... already the nontroversies have started. Her logo? Really? People don't want to talk about her economic policies... or ideas on immigration... or approach to the many issues extant in the Middle East? Instead they want to critique her logo? I guess if you got nothing to say... you'll dredge up any little particle of negativity...

wudzgud
04-13-2015, 12:52 PM
Every time I see that pear shaped arrogant old hag walk up to a microphone, it just makes me smile. Good luck running the old grandmother nobody listens to anymore...

Kevin T
04-13-2015, 01:01 PM
Every time I see that pear shaped arrogant old hag walk up to a microphone, it just makes me smile. Good luck running the old grandmother nobody listens to anymore...

So who do you like this time around Mr(s). Wudzgud?

wudzgud
04-13-2015, 02:17 PM
So who do you like this time around Mr(s). Wudzgud?
Well, not a lot of choices on the dem side, and over on the right? no use grabbing a plate before all the food hits the table. Hopefully, by this time next year, there will be a couple of candidates with some contrast to consider and not just more of the same old partison mud slinging BS.
On the flip side, I think a debate between Elizabeth Warren and Rand Paul would be quite entertaining, as they both have ideas I agree with.

Kevin T
04-13-2015, 02:38 PM
Ms Warren unfortunately has said more than a few times that she has no intention of running, although with all politicians, any statements this early in the game must always be taken with a grain of salt or is that a grain of skepticism?

wudzgud
04-13-2015, 02:56 PM
Well, I hope the dems come up with a few alternatives to Hilary, be a shame to think she's all they got.

John Smith
04-13-2015, 06:11 PM
Well, not a lot of choices on the dem side, and over on the right? no use grabbing a plate before all the food hits the table. Hopefully, by this time next year, there will be a couple of candidates with some contrast to consider and not just more of the same old partison mud slinging BS.
On the flip side, I think a debate between Elizabeth Warren and Rand Paul would be quite entertaining, as they both have ideas I agree with.

It appears as if Hillary is going to pick up Warren's issues. We will see.

wudzgud
04-13-2015, 06:54 PM
It appears as if Hillary is going to pick up Warren's issues. We will see.
She'll say whatever she has to, whether she believes it or not, she has to be everybody to everyone coming out of the gate. Be interesting to see how Warren reacts.

skuthorp
04-13-2015, 07:23 PM
Another fictional personality on board for the election?

wudzgud
04-13-2015, 07:47 PM
Another fictional personality on board for the election?
Another hack with nothing to add?

skuthorp
04-14-2015, 01:05 AM
Oh I got plenty to add, you should look about a bit. I doubt you'll be about after the election band as for a boat……………
But I may be surprised.

Most politicians, whatever the actually believe, have to get elected first to be politicians etc., etc.
Hillary is probably the most experienced candidate in presidential matters you've ever had. Not only that she has the runs on the board, the international relationships, a history of involvement at the top level and could not possibly be labeled 'left'. The US does not have a 'left'. She also knows the strains and pressures of the job and is not saddled by sectional ideologies or splinter group interests. And she probably is the least likely candidate to be influenced by lobby groups, been there, done that, doesn't need them half as much as other candidates might. She has her own capital. That said, as someone else noted, she'd make a first class Republican candidate.

I might add that I'm not from the US and have no vote, but as our successive governments brown nose themselves to your pollies I refer to Aus. as a US Satrapy, and have for a long time. I am stuck with the pres. you elect and hence I comment.