Now things are starting to get interesting.
brite wrote:We shall see if it’s true.... Sen. Sanders has said several times before that he has no interest in running...
brite wrote:I posted that, and within 10 minutes he threw his hat into the ring....
Rommie wrote:Well it would've been weird if no one ran against Hillary... that said, he's got a looooong road ahead if he's going to be actually viable.
SciFi Chick wrote:Rommie wrote:Well it would've been weird if no one ran against Hillary... that said, he's got a looooong road ahead if he's going to be actually viable.
I'd be very shocked if he's viable at all, but he will push Hillary farther left, and I think that would be a good thing.
geonuc wrote:SciFi Chick wrote:Rommie wrote:Well it would've been weird if no one ran against Hillary... that said, he's got a looooong road ahead if he's going to be actually viable.
I'd be very shocked if he's viable at all, but he will push Hillary farther left, and I think that would be a good thing.
I actually think it would be a bad thing. Hillary Clinton is who she is - no campaign is going to change that. So, if you want a Democrat elected instead of a Republican, it would be best that Ms. Clinton not be forced to take a more liberal stand on pretty much anything. Democrats are already going to vote for her; it's the undecided vote that matters in a campaign.
Some people have already been saying the same thing.Swift wrote:Thumper wrote:Paul Krugman had an interesting article basically stating that this election, more than any other in recent memory will be about parties and not individuals. No matter who runs as a republican, we know all their major positions, same with the democrats. So people will be voting on ideology, not personality. He doesn't understand anyone that is undecided now and certainly not someone still undecided in the coming year.
Hey, I was able to find it quickly.
Yeah that sounds about right
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests