• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

Gestahl
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:36 PM)

Originally Posted by Fox Mulder

Wasn't her or he campaign. Just racist white clinton supporters.

You know, 9-10 years wasn't that long a time ago and it's pretty easy to remember shit like "as far as I know" and Reverend Wright and Farrakhan. You can split hairs and argue the technicality of who did what or well that's not literally about birth certificates but no one with sense is going to buy it.
Mammoth Jones
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:38 PM)
Mammoth Jones's Avatar
Joe telling the truth. Sorry.

"The other choice is so much worse" only worked for so long.
Holmes
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:38 PM)
Holmes's Avatar
Mm, he was literally forced to drop out the first time around for plagiarism, and he's a total gaffe machine, but ok werk.
Escape Goat
(05-19-2017, 03:38 PM)
Escape Goat's Avatar
That's not a diss. It's being objective and not personal. Clinton was damaged goods. Whether that damage was real or perceived isn't relevant. GOP had decades to define her.
Wag
Junior Member
(05-19-2017, 03:39 PM)
Wag's Avatar

Originally Posted by KarmaCow

His son died.

So stop talking about how much better you would have been.
Htown
STOP SHITTING ON MY MOTHER'S HEADSTONE
(05-19-2017, 03:39 PM)
Htown's Avatar
She was a good enough candidate to win the popular vote.

That's okay, though. Let's all be revisionist and pretend no one ever wanted Clinton in the first place and nobody knows why she was the nominee.
DonShula
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:40 PM)
DonShula's Avatar

Originally Posted by Fercho

Elizabeth Warren will be a kick ass candidate in 4 years.

She won't and should not run. My personal feelings aside (I'd vote for her), she is not going to get those swing votes that we need from PA, OH, MI, etc. The sad truth is that she isn't apologetic enough to those bases. In those states, she's a Pelosi-level abhorrent crone who lied about being Native American. It's not fair but it's reality unfortunately.
silkysmooth
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:40 PM)
silkysmooth's Avatar
Solid mix of being salty, hindsight being 20/20, and the classic "told ya so" bullshit.

This is exactly what we don't need.
jrh2
Banned
(05-19-2017, 03:40 PM)
You're not a great candidate if you were never an actual candidate, Joe. Can't complain if you didn't run.
BadAss2961
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:40 PM)
BadAss2961's Avatar
Biden would've been a good counterpick to Trump. Would've matched Trump's charisma while driving him crazy with dismissive rebuttals and laughing in his face during debates.
Cesare Borgia
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:44 PM)
Cesare Borgia's Avatar

Originally Posted by Fox Mulder

Wasn't her or he campaign. Just racist white clinton supporters.

Her campaign leaked a picture of Obama dressed in Kenyan attire to the press. Her campaign spent a lot of time insinuating Obama was different, didn't understand certain parts of America, etc. Same playbook McCain and the rest of the party ran in 08 and beyond.

They ran a shitty, pathetic campaign from the minute they realized Obama was a threat, and even at the last minute were calling super delegates making ugly racial arguments against his campaign. I'm all for doing everything to win but when you're actively looking to harm people in your own party, you've gone too far. I have no respect for her or her husband.
Escape Goat
(05-19-2017, 03:44 PM)
Escape Goat's Avatar

Originally Posted by Htown

She was a good enough candidate to win the popular vote.

That's okay, though. Let's all be revisionist and pretend no one ever wanted Clinton in the first place and nobody knows why she was the nominee.

That's not really what the OP is about. On paper she had the best record of any candidate. But, she was easy target for conservative shills to exploit. She was rife with controversy kept alive by Republicans. And, as we know, people are deeply stupid and will remember the last thing they see on tv.
DonShula
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:44 PM)
DonShula's Avatar

Originally Posted by BadAss2961

Biden would've been a good counterpick to Trump. Would've matched Trump's charisma while driving him crazy with dismissive rebuttals and laughing in his face during debates.

I agree. There's no way he would have out-gaffed Trump. And the best way to shoot down a white con-man is to get a trusted tell-it-like-it-is white man to run against him. The votes Hillary needed were the votes he would have gotten.

But I've been shot down for saying that before, so yeah. It's done and over with.
Holmes
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:45 PM)
Holmes's Avatar
And someone who voted for the Iraq war, wrote the 1994 crime bill, and supported NAFTA and TPP would've had a tough time with the left. And he probably would've treated them much more harshly than Clinton did.
Your Entertainer
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:45 PM)
Your Entertainer's Avatar
I would have voted for Biden over Clinton just because I like him more
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:46 PM)
Snowman Prophet of Doom's Avatar

Originally Posted by gutter_trash

Hillary is not good at campaigning but she would have done an excellent job being the President.

She is a policy wonk and that's what she is good at, would have done a good job.

But when it comes to running and campaigning; that's a different story

She's bad at actually working with people to get her policies passed, though. Recall that HillaryCare largely flopped the to her consciously cutting party members out of the crafting process because she thought her and her team could do it better, then none of the people who had to vote for it had any personal stake in it.

She's not that great at practical politics, period. She doesn't know how to leverage people.
dakini
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:47 PM)
dakini's Avatar

Originally Posted by Yoda

I'd say they were both centrist democrats with Hiliary being more of a hawk/pro-intervention than he was. Biden wouldn't have had the CGI weighing him down, so the perception of being owned by the donors wouldn't have existed for him.

It's true that Biden would've been able to avoid the specific attacks used against Hillary for her Wall Street speeches and connections, but I still think Bernie's (and Trump's) anti-establishment, anti-Wall Street attacks would've worked well against Biden as well. He would have to answer for being the author of the 94 Crime Bill, voting for the Iraq War, support of free trade, etc.
Raven117
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:48 PM)
I would have climbed over people to vote for Joe Biden.

Hard to know what would have happened, but I think Joe would have beaten Trump.

And we would all be in a much better place. Sorry about your family Joe (and I know you were quietly asked NOT to run...don't care if you deny it or not), but what about us? WE the United States (and eff it, the world), needed you.

I still like Joe...but damnit the DNC really effed us over...effed us over hard.
Tubs_McNubs
Junior Member
(05-19-2017, 03:48 PM)

Originally Posted by dramatis

I wasn't talking about Sanders. If you are a Sanders backer that would be more okay with Biden than Hillary, then you are not about policy or positions, you are about 'likeability'.

You claimed many Sanders backers were with him for his 'likability' and not his policy. I'd like to see the receipts on that because I find it hard to believe when Bernie ran such a policy focused campaign.

Second, how does it follow that if someone would prefer Biden over Clinton, but prefers Sanders over both, they are only for Sanders for his 'Charisma'? So in your mind, Sanders supporters would only be serious about supporting his policies if they would support Hillary over Biden... Thats especially rich given Biden and Clinton are from the same wing of the party, and would be pretty similar on policy
shawnbuddy
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:49 PM)
shawnbuddy's Avatar
I'm a Hillary supporter all the way, I think she would have been a great President, and he's right. She's not a charismatic or likeable candidate. I thought people would look past that and look at qualifications and policy, but I was wrong.
tearsintherain
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:49 PM)
tearsintherain's Avatar

Originally Posted by Glass Rebel

The fact that a woman of her pedigree and expertise isn't a great candidate is just a sad reality of modern American politics.

The President is the cheerleader in chief and a guy or girl who can convince everyone that they really should take a risk and follow his or her idea. Its not really a managerial or administrative job, they have a million other people to execute their vision. The hard part is convincing everyone that their vision is good and to go along with it, even when things go wrong.

Democrats, with their consensus building and backdoor politics, keep nominating people who are completely incapable of getting people to ignore reality and believe in them. Al Gore, John Kerry, and Hillary Clinton all shared this core issue: they were extremely competent professionally, but had very little charisma.

Yes, its a bummer that the job isn't about getting someone smart to make a bunch of great decisions and then quietly sit down and make sure they get done. But that's been the reality since 1776 and its not going to change anytime soon.
xDUMPWEEDx
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:50 PM)
xDUMPWEEDx's Avatar
He has a sweet Trans-Am so I would have voted for him.


DontBeThatGuy
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:50 PM)
DontBeThatGuy's Avatar

Originally Posted by shawnbuddy

I'm a Hillary supporter all the way, I think she would have been a great President, and he's right. She's not a charismatic or likeable candidate. I thought people would look past that and look at qualifications and policy, but I was wrong.

I mean, millions did, just not in the "right" places.
TarNaru33
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:51 PM)
TarNaru33's Avatar

Originally Posted by btrboyev

She was the nominee, he choose not to run. He isn't going to say anything negative during the campaign.

I am talking about during the primary. Not backing any other Democratic candidate despite thinking she was a flawed candidate comes off as a bit stupid.
shawnbuddy
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:51 PM)
shawnbuddy's Avatar

Originally Posted by DontBeThatGuy

I mean, millions did, just not in the "right" places.

Cold comfort in Trumpland.
besada
#NotMyAmerica
(05-19-2017, 03:52 PM)
besada's Avatar
I don't disagree with Biden, but there's no real point in saying it. He could have run, he chose not to. I understand why he made that choice, but that doesn't change that he did.

Looking back and saying "I'd have done better" poses an unknowable counterfactual, and produces no good outcomes in the present.
shawnbuddy
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:52 PM)
shawnbuddy's Avatar

Originally Posted by TarNaru33

I am talking about during the primary. Not backing any other Democratic candidate despite thinking she was a flawed candidate comes off as a bit stupid.

The only other reasonably viable one was Bernie. Maybe Biden thought Hillary was still better than him?
DontBeThatGuy
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:53 PM)
DontBeThatGuy's Avatar

Originally Posted by shawnbuddy

Cold comfort in Trumpland.

That's the Electoral College for you.
Ray Wonder
Banned
(05-19-2017, 03:53 PM)

Originally Posted by DontBeThatGuy

I mean, millions did, just not in the "right" places.

Someone wins the Democratic primaries, they're going to get tens of millions of votes, almost no matter what.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:54 PM)
DontBeThatGuy's Avatar

Originally Posted by Ray Wonder

Someone wins the Democratic primaries, they're going to get tens of millions of votes, almost no matter what.

I mean millions more than the person who's now president, which you know, is super rare.
Isaac Otherworld
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:55 PM)
Isaac Otherworld's Avatar

Originally Posted by besada

I don't disagree with Biden, but there's no real point in saying it. He could have run, he chose not to. I understand why he made that choice, but that doesn't change that he did.

Looking back and saying "I'd have done better" poses an unknowable counterfactual, and produces no good outcomes in the present.

It's him posturing. He's basically saying "I will win against Trump in 2020."
BigBeauford
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:57 PM)
BigBeauford's Avatar
I would be behind Joe 100% if he runs in 2020.
SolidSnakex
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:58 PM)
SolidSnakex's Avatar

Originally Posted by Htown

She was a good enough candidate to win the popular vote.

That's okay, though. Let's all be revisionist and pretend no one ever wanted Clinton in the first place and nobody knows why she was the nominee.

It's not revisionist history. We know that as a candidate she chose not to even campaign in Wisconsin, which was a state critical to her path to victory. And according to reports, she ignored Bill's and others suggestions of who should should campaign to and where

And she ceded the white working-class voters who backed Mr. Clinton in 1992. Though she would never have won this demographic, her husband insisted that her campaign aides do more to try to cut into Mr. Trump’s support with these voters. They declined, reasoning that she was better off targeting college-educated suburban voters by hitting Mr. Trump on his temperament.

Early on, Mr. Clinton had pleaded with Robby Mook, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign manager, to do more outreach with working-class white and rural voters. But his advice fell on deaf ears.

Former Gov. Edward G. Rendell of Pennsylvania also said he had encouraged campaign aides at Mrs. Clinton’s Brooklyn headquarters to spread their vast resources outside Philadelphia and Pittsburgh and focus on rural white pockets of the state. “We had the resources to do both,” Mr. Rendell said Wednesday. “The campaign — and this was coming from Brooklyn — didn’t want to do it.” (Mr. Trump won Pennsylvania by one percentage point.)

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/10/u...-campaign.html

And a bit more that says a lot about her as a candidate

At a private fund-raiser Tuesday night at a waterfront Hamptons estate, Hillary Clinton danced alongside Jimmy Buffett, Jon Bon Jovi and Paul McCartney, and joined in a singalong finale to “Hey Jude.”

I stand between you and the apocalypse,” a confident Mrs. Clinton declared to laughs, exhibiting a flash of self-awareness and humor to a crowd that included Calvin Klein and Harvey Weinstein and for whom the prospect of a Donald J. Trump presidency is dire.

Mr. Trump has pointed to Mrs. Clinton’s noticeably scant schedule of campaign events this summer to suggest she has been hiding from the public. But Mrs. Clinton has been more than accessible to those who reside in some of the country’s most moneyed enclaves and are willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to see her. In the last two weeks of August, Mrs. Clinton raked in roughly $50 million at 22 fund-raising events, averaging around $150,000 an hour, according to a New York Times tally.

And while Mrs. Clinton has faced criticism for her failure to hold a news conference for months, she has fielded hundreds of questions from the ultrarich in places like the Hamptons, Martha’s Vineyard, Beverly Hills and Silicon Valley.

If Mr. Trump appears to be waging his campaign in rallies and network interviews, Mrs. Clinton’s second presidential bid seems to amount to a series of high-dollar fund-raisers with public appearances added to the schedule when they can be fit in. Last week, for example, she diverged just once from her packed fund-raising schedule to deliver a speech.

Mr. Berger, who joined Mrs. Clinton last month at a donor event in Miami Beach, said many of the individual conversations before and after she speaks at the gatherings are centered more on grandchildren than weighty policy matters. But when she has had a give-and-take this summer about issues, Mrs. Clinton, who has promised to “reshuffle the deck” in favor of the middle class and portrayed Mr. Trump as an out-of-touch billionaire, has almost exclusively been fielding the concerns of the wealthiest Americans.

Another advantage to choosing private fund-raisers over town halls or other public events is that Mrs. Clinton can bask in an affectionate embrace as hosts try to limit confrontational engagements.

Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild, a backer of Democrats and a friend of the Clintons’, made sure attendees did not grill Mrs. Clinton at the $100,000-per-couple lamb dinner
Mrs. Forester de Rothschild hosted under a tent on the lawn of her oceanfront Martha’s Vineyard mansion.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/04/us...ndraising.html

And finally

Originally Posted by numble

He is throwing shade at the Clinton campaign for relying on demographic calculations and not campaigning:

Clinton campaign schedule:
http://www.p2016.org/clinton/clintoncal0816.html
August 18 - New York, NY
August 19 - Martha's Vineyard, MA
August 20 - Nantucket, MA, Martha's Vineyard, MA - 5 fundraisers
August 21 - Provincetown, MA, Osterville, MA - 2 fundraisers
August 22 - Beverly Hills, CA - 2 fundraisers
August 23 - Los Angeles, CA, Laguna Beach, CA, Piedmont, CA - 4 fundraisers
August 24 - Redwood City, CA, Los Altos, CA, Woodside, CA - 3 fundraisers
August 25 - Reno, NV - urban swing state campaign event
August 26 - None
August 27 - White Plains, NY
August 28 - Sag Harbor, NY, Southampton, NY, Bridgehampton, NY - 3 fundraisers
August 29 - East Hampton, NY, Quogue, NY - 2 fundraisers
August 30 - Sagaponack, NY, North Haven, NY - 2 fundraisers
August 31 - Cincinnati, OH - urban swing state campaign event

22 fundraising events, 2 visits to urban areas of swing states

This was Obama's schedule in the same period in 2008:
https://www2.gwu.edu/~action/2008/obamacal0808.html
August 18 - Albuquerque, NM
August 19 - Orlando, FL, Raleigh, NC
August 20 - Greensboro, NC, Martinsville, VA, Danville, VA, Lynchburg, VA
August 21 - Richmond, VA, Chester, VA, Petersburg, VA, Emporia, VA, Chesapeake, VA
August 22 - Chicago, IL
August 23 - Springfield, IL
August 24 - Eau Claire, WI
August 25 - Davenport, IA, Kansas City, MO
August 26 - Kansas City, MO
August 27 - Billings, MT, Denver, CO
August 28 - Denver, CO
August 29 - Monaca, PA, Aliquippa, PA, Beaver, PA
August 30 - Boardman, OH, Cleveland, OH, Marengo, OH, Dublin, OH
August 31 - Lima, OH, Toledo, OH, Hamilton, IN, Battle Creek, MI

0 fundraisers, multiple visits to urban and rural swing state areas.

The September calendars:
Obama - 5 fundraisers, visits to Detroit, MI, Monroe, MI, Milwaukee, WI, New Philadelphia, OH, Dillonvale, OH, York, PA, Columbia, PA, Lancaster, PA, Duryea, PA, Wyoming, PA, Terre Haute, IN, Flint, MI, Farmington Hills, MI, Riverside, OH, Green Bay, WI, Detroit, MI.

Clinton - 14 fundraisers, 1 visit to Philadelphia, 1 visit to Cleveland -- that's it for the Rust Belt in September!

The Greek Freak
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:58 PM)

Originally Posted by Cesare Borgia

Her campaign leaked a picture of Obama dressed in Kenyan attire to the press. Her campaign spent a lot of time insinuating Obama was different, didn't understand certain parts of America, etc. Same playbook McCain and the rest of the party ran in 08 and beyond.

They ran a shitty, pathetic campaign from the minute they realized Obama was a threat, and even at the last minute were calling super delegates making ugly racial arguments against his campaign. I'm all for doing everything to win but when you're actively looking to harm people in your own party, you've gone too far. I have no respect for her or her husband.

You don't get it bro, all of that was done by time traveling Russians to smear Clinton.
Karsticles
(05-19-2017, 03:58 PM)
Karsticles's Avatar

Originally Posted by DonShula

She won't and should not run. My personal feelings aside (I'd vote for her), she is not going to get those swing votes that we need from PA, OH, MI, etc. The sad truth is that she isn't apologetic enough to those bases. In those states, she's a Pelosi-level abhorrent crone who lied about being Native American. It's not fair but it's reality unfortunately.

My grandmother in MI refers to Warren as "that 'Native American' lady".
Lo-Volt
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:59 PM)
Lo-Volt's Avatar
But it isn't like Joe Biden didn't make an effort. He ran in 1988 and didn't make it to the general election. He ran in 2008 and didn't make it to the general election (while Hillary Clinton did at her second attempt) and became Vice President. And that's good; he didn't harm the Obama administration at the very least. But Democrats and the American public got the chance to assess Joe Biden's suitability for the presidency and passed twice.

So maybe he could keep off the Monday morning quarterbacking.
TangoAlphaLima
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:59 PM)
TangoAlphaLima's Avatar

Originally Posted by besada

I don't disagree with Biden, but there's no real point in saying it. He could have run, he chose not to. I understand why he made that choice, but that doesn't change that he did.

Looking back and saying "I'd have done better" poses an unknowable counterfactual, and produces no good outcomes in the present.

The implication is that Biden is suggesting he should be the party's nominee for 2020, because he would have won in 2016 if he'd ran.
TestOfTide
Member
(05-19-2017, 03:59 PM)
TestOfTide's Avatar

Originally Posted by Fercho

I believe Sanders was a better candidate than Hillary. Don't know about Biden since he didn't run.

Elizabeth Warren will be a kick ass candidate in 4 years.

I like Warren but she needs to not be the next nominee for 3 big reasons:

1) Her place is in the senate. I don't mean that in some sexist manner I mean in the sense that the Fire she brings to the party is better suited in the senate. She is a great senator.

2) Hillary lost because the GOP had been spending the last 4 years focused on attacking her. Warren is who i think of when I ask "Who would the GOP be able to turn into their next Hillary" because the GOP has already gotten used to focusing on attacking her and would see her coming a mile away.

3) I don't want the GOP to have a chance at putting another Scott Brown in that senate seat.
Pizza
Member
(05-19-2017, 04:01 PM)
Pizza's Avatar
I thought the "I'm not a natural politician" line from Hillary was pretty great. Like what is your deal then? You're a career politician and have been involved for years before running for prez

I'm pretty much fine with people being blunt about what the democrats could have done different and should do in the future. Being really critical of stuff is the only way to actually improve it, no need to sugarcoat stuff rn
Paskil
Member
(05-19-2017, 04:01 PM)
Paskil's Avatar
I like Biden, but he would have been the most conservative Democrat in the field. Even if he'd been in, Hillary was still my choice. My $.02.
Ray Wonder
Banned
(05-19-2017, 04:01 PM)

Originally Posted by DontBeThatGuy

I mean millions more than the person who's now president, which you know, is super rare.

Yeah, that's also true.
shawnbuddy
Member
(05-19-2017, 04:01 PM)
shawnbuddy's Avatar
Hillary's public support of the crime bill was often the main objection to her I heard from hardcore Berners. I can think that the guy who literally wrote it would have had an even tougher time, unless the objection was of course veiled sexism, as it was in many case.
dakini
Member
(05-19-2017, 04:02 PM)
dakini's Avatar
I mean if Biden wants to run in 2020, he should. I think 2016 showed us that Dems need to have a wide open primary. I just don't see him being able to pull it off, especially when everyone else will be running to the left of him and will be 20 years younger.
Last edited by dakini; 05-19-2017 at 04:04 PM.
Plumbob
Member
(05-19-2017, 04:03 PM)
Plumbob's Avatar

Originally Posted by The Greek Freak

How could I forget the Clinton campaign starting this birther shit that went on for years.

Haha, ignoring the link that doesn't reflect well on Bernie, nice. You do you bud.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
(05-19-2017, 04:03 PM)
DontBeThatGuy's Avatar
Warren probably shouldn't run. (and I don't think she will). She could potentially keep the sort of gains Hillary made with white suburban women, but I don't see her making up for the losses.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
(05-19-2017, 04:03 PM)
davepoobond's Avatar

Originally Posted by shawnbuddy

Hillary's public support of the crime bill was often the main objection to her I heard from hardcore Berners. I can think that the guy who literally wrote it would have had an even tougher time, unless the objection was of course veiled sexism, as it was in many case.

Lol the crime bill?

Not Wall Street speeches or ties to Wall Street?


At least she was personally responsible for the latter. The last election was an absolute mess. I don't appreciate Biden saying this now, whether or not he is right.
The Greek Freak
Member
(05-19-2017, 04:03 PM)

Originally Posted by Lo-Volt


So maybe he could keep off the Monday morning quarterbacking.

The Monday morning quarterbacking should continue until the DNC shows they are competent unless you want Trump to be followed by some less disgusting but 80% as bad worthless fuck for 8 years.
phanphare
Member
(05-19-2017, 04:03 PM)
phanphare's Avatar

Originally Posted by SolidSnakex

It's not revisionist history. We know that as a candidate she chose not to even campaign in Wisconsin, which was a state critical to her path to victory. And according to reports, she ignored Bill's and others suggestions of who should should campaign to and where







https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/10/u...-campaign.html

And a bit more that says a lot about her as a candidate









http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/04/us...ndraising.html

And finally

的 stand between you and the apocalypse, a confident Mrs. Clinton declared to laughs

ugh.......
Koomaster
Member
(05-19-2017, 04:03 PM)
Koomaster's Avatar
Biden can join Sanders in the nursing home. Sometimes these old guys should just retire so they can keep their feet out of their mouths.
TetraGenesis
Member
(05-19-2017, 04:05 PM)
TetraGenesis's Avatar
God, I wish Biden had been in a place where he could have run.

A President Biden would be doing great things for America right now.

Thread Tools