I’m partial to the marble inscription that no one bothered to proofread.
-Tom
Canuck
2823
Hah! That’s too good to be real. I guess he decided that it wasn’t important enough to be fixed? Surely a brain surgeon can spell proverbs.
Communism. And death panels.
Timex
2825
It’s awesome that the typo in proverbs appears to be CARVED INTO THE WALL.
But that’s an alien that definitely didn’t build the pyramids.
Scuzz
2827
I think anyone who has ever done business with him would dis-agree with you.
Probably* in the category of wishful thinking: http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/259812-in-new-shock-poll-sanders-has-landslides-over-both
Second, and perhaps more important, Sanders’s strength in general election polling gives credence to the argument I have been making in recent years, that American voters favor progressive populist positions which, if taken by Democrats in the general election, would lead to a progressive populist Democratic president and far greater Democratic strength in Congress.
It is a fallacy argued by conservatives and, in my view, inaccurately parroted by the mainstream media, that Sanders and other liberals take positions that are far too “left.” The polling shows, issue by issue, and increasingly in general election match-ups of Republicans running against Sanders, that it is the left, not the right, which has the upper hand with American voters.
*And by probably I mean near certainty. And by wishful thinking, for those of us on the left.
Yup, MrGrumpy, unfortunately the Right in the US was scared to death during the populist 1930s and WW2 period, and went to work immediately after that war to wage a new ideological war on all fronts–political/academic and in civil society. Unfortunately Stalin pretty much did half of their work for them by setting up obvious puppet regimes in the Soviet zones of occupation, and the American Communists didn’t speak up against that as they should have. Certain politicians (McCarthy et al.) got on the bandwagon and the second Red Scare was born, and Rightist ideology gained new respectability.
Ye Old Mainstream Powers That Be want Rubio to become a thing so badly you can taste it. Right now there’s a headline article on nbcnews.com under Chuck Todd’s byline that says, “Rubio Looks Like GOP Frontrunner, But There’s a Catch” …
… then you click on the article and learn that the “catch” is that Rubio is not, in fact, the GOP frontrunner, and indeed comes in no better than third. Oh, and he has no gameplan for either New Hampshire or Iowa.
But other than that, he’s crushing it!
Yeah, I think Rubio is kind of caught off-guard by the current situation.
He pretty much came into the race running for VP, or to introduce himself to the country as a serious contender for the 2020 campaign. Maybe he was thinking of a run for Florida Governor after Super Tuesday. The fact that he is suddenly third behind two protest candidates that have no chance of actually winning is probably making him squirm… he’s got no real presidential campaign organization, what the hell is he going to do when he gets the nod?
Timex
2833
To who, Clinton?
I don’t see there’s anyway he loses to Clinton.
RichVR
2834
Really? That’s funny, because we obviously are completely at odds here. I don’t see how he wins. No disrespect intended.
Edit: This pretty much sums up my beliefs in this situation: Most Likely Next President Is Hillary Clinton Warning for auto play audio
Timex
2835
Dude, how does Clinton win? Not even Democrats like her, while we have democrats in this thread saying they DO like Rubio, despite not agreeing with him on policy.
The vast majority of voters don’t give a crap about policy. They don’t understand any of it.
Mark Haliperin thinks Clinton’s a shoe-in… He’s also essentially the only person in the entire world to think that.
It’s early, of course… lots of things can happen. But given that Clinton does not even come close to energizing the democrats, I just don’t see where her votes are going to come from. The only way I see her winning is if the Republicans put up someone horrific like Carson, Trump, or Cruz.
I think the best thing going in Clinton’s favor is that nationally, voting trends in presidential years are skewing further and further toward Center (or Left, as we call it here in the US). While the Reds may have state- and city-level voting locked up tight for a variety of reasons, the big election seems to be leaning Democrat more and more heavily as time goes on. Without some very significant changes to the Republican platform, I suspect most people don’t think that trend will reverse itself.
Mind you, I feel like a loathsome critter like Hillary might well be just what the Republicans need to get back in the Presidential game. . . hence my stumping for Bernie :-D
Because when the chips are down, people tend to actually vote for their interests… or at least the party that they think holds their interests. A charismatic POTUS candidate may get more people to vote (see: Obama), but it doesn’t much change the demographics or party composition.
I like Rubio’s passion and life story… and if he and Clinton both offered to sit down and have a beer with me, I would absolutely pick him over her. But I would VOTE for Clinton.
Of all the GOP candidates, I think Rubio is the one that would have the best chance… because he MIGHT be able to get the 47% of Latino voters that the GOP needs, and he MIGHT be able to edge the female voters closer to the 50/50 mark. There is no other Republican that has the tiniest hope of overcoming the Latino/woman/young gap that they need to win the White House.
Do we know if Rubio polls better among non-Cuban Latino voters in states he might have a reasonable shot at winning? Because “Latinos” are hardly a monolithic ethnic and cultural bloc, shockingly enough.
Timex
2839
A charismatic POTUS candidate may get more people to vote (see: Obama), but it doesn’t much change the demographics or party composition.
But it’s that ability to energize the electorate that wins the election.
It’s not so much a matter of getting people to vote for you rather than the other guy… it’s about getting folks who will vote for you to actually give enough of a shit about it to actually go to the polls and vote.
I just don’t see Hillary having that effect, at all. And I think that will result in lower voter turnouts for the democrats.
This is actually really bad for them too, as it means that they will likely lose other positions as well, since fewer democrats will go to the polls and vote at all for anything.
Scuzz
2840
While I think Hillary probably “should” win easily in 2016 I think her likability can easily play a role in how the election plays out. And of the possible GOP front runners I do think Rubio is the one who would give her the most trouble. I also have no idea if he is ready to be president.
I don’t have the data at hand but everything I’ve read says Clinton has extremely strong Latino support, and IIRC, Rubio’s support is lukewarm at best.
A quick turn to The Google yields this article, which includes this quote:
Caveat: that article is from June, and the election is still a year away, IMHO drawing any firm conclusions is still a bit premature.
