ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
The notion that Democrats would nominate the woman who lost to Trump instead of the man who beat Trump seems ridiculous on its face
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
The Unofficial Hillary vs Donald 2024 Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny thread (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter NorvilleBarnes
- Start date
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
For some reason, people want to believe that folks like the head of the DNC are like the old-school political bosses with an army of flacks at their disposal. They don't realize that the party chairs are themselves the flacks. To borrow the old phrase from the Obama era, they "lead from behind".timschochet said:
ETA: Case in point; These supposedly Machiavellian superdelegates are such incompetent political bosses that they voluntarily voted to reduce their own power in the nominating process. Prior to 2016, they theoretically had the power to swing the nomination, although it was clear to anyone paying attention they were never going to do so. (The irony is that it was the Hillary '08 and Bernie '16 supporters who were imploring them to overturn the will of the primary voters, but they were always going to vote for the candidate who finished the primary with the most pledged delegates.) But after 2016, they officially stripped themselves of the power they were too scared to ever use.
Last edited by a moderator:
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
Side note: Has any candidate in history, at any level, ever resigned for "health reasons"? (Not actual health reasons, mind you, but "health reasons").glvsav37 said:
I feel like it's the ultimate political cliche that's meant to sound savvy but actually shows a complete ignorance about how politics works. The implication is supposed to be that the candidate cites their health as a fig leaf to cover up the fact that they're withdrawing for other reasons. But the scare quotes give the game away. The person who suggests they employ the phrase is suggesting that they know the real reason, but the rubes in the media and general public would actually fall for it.
Except of course that's not how it would work. If a candidate ever tried to pull off a maneuver like that, no one, absolutely no one, would be fooled. They would just look ridiculous for telling an obvious lie. So what would even be the point?
There actually is a real-life example of a candidate dropping out late in a campaign. Back in 2002, the scandal plagued NJ Senator Robert Torricelli was running for re-election. He was corrupt AF, and as the election got closer, the news (and polls) for him got worse, to the point where it became increasingly clear he was going to lose what would otherwise be a very winnable race for the Democrats. So he just dropped out. He didn't tell some BS story about his health or his family, he was pretty straightforward that he was dropping out because he was losing. (The health thing would have been a particularly hard sell considering the Dems replaced him with former Sen. Frank Lautenberg, who was older than dirt). It was simultaneously the most and least cynical thing a politician has ever done.
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
Assume you mean for the GOP nomination?
And you're probably right, but I wonder about DeSantis. The dude is very thirsty. I'm sure he knows that the timing for him in 2024 is perfect, and in politics if you let moments like that pass you by you may never get another chance.
I don't know how it would work. I don't know what his angle would be for running against Trump. I don't know how he would win over the MAGA base, whose loyalty is very much tied up in Trump as an individual rather than any core belief system. I don't know how, if he managed to beat him, he would unite the party behind him.
But I'm still not totally convinced he won't try.
zoonation
Footballguy
I am. It would be political suicide to run against Trump in a primary race. Even if you do fancy yourself an heir apparent. He owns the base and Trump, being the malignant narcissist he is, would do everything in his power to ruin you for daring to oppose him.
Unless Trump makes him king, which malignant vindictive narcissists are incapable of, Ron has to wait until 2028.
Last edited by a moderator:
GordonGekko
Footballguy
Biden has inflicted untold damage to America in just one year. What will three more years bring? In three years, if they are battered enough, the American people might be begging for Matt Damon to run for President. Or Larry The Cable Guy. Or just about anyone not named Trump nor Biden nor Harris.
Hillary Clinton doesn't carry COVID19 baggage. Who else can say that? Some but many contenders are in nebulous territory with the pandemic. Florida's numbers are dropping currently but that's right now, what happens in the sum of three years from now? Newsom has over 40+ million people in his state, what will his numbers be in three years? For all her flaws, Clinton doesn't carry the weight of the virus on her political resume like Trump and Biden.
She's still a name brand Democrat in a 2024 field that looks wide open for the DNC ticket. Do I think she would win? No. Do I think she has a particularly strong chance at getting the ticket? No. Do I think she can overcome Benghazi in the backdrop of abandoning Americans in Afghanistan in 2020? No. ( Though in an earlier reply I covered the one move she could make to give her a shot at a hard reset) But in an open field like this, it's not impossible.
Hillary Clinton is basically looking to be the political version of Marion Campbell of the Atlanta Falcons. You don't need to be the best all the time, sometimes you just need to be the best of what's left.
( I just explained how most marriages happen)
glvsav37
Footballguy
I dont or ever will claim I'm a political expert. I was just making a (half assed) prediction based on what i'm seeing today and the topic here. IDK if that is even a fully possible scenario with the due process that has to happen.
but on the flip side, I dont put anything past this administration—there is a 1st for everything.
However, you say the "health reasons" being a "cover up" I would agree in most cases, but with Biden I think it is 100% plausible, its been so since the election. As many on this board argue, he's speeches often seem to have issues with mumbling, incoherent thoughts or ideas. Unlike any other sitting president, visually he is largely non-existent in the day to day workings of the office. And we are less then a year into his term, 3 more at this pace seems unlikely to me.
I (and many) had a feeling that picking Harris as VP was a way to get a POC woman to be president w/o having to go through the election process. With Joe's age and decline (similar issues through the campaign), that she could slide into the office by him stepping down mid-term. But the obv lack of ability to do even do the VP job and what seems like a growing rift in the partnership is making that (alleged) plan not likely.
Enter Hillary. There is no denying that she is still power hungry and wants that seat. She's also proven to do whatever it takes to get there, ie when Bernie was the D frontrunner in 2016 though the primaries and hey now....in swoops Hillary. Along with (what I see as) often blind support for the D candidates simply b/c they carry the D next to their name: "I"m with her" and "Blue no matter who" ideology, I can easily see a transition like this happening and many/most D supporters being like "
IDK what you are talking about, I don't see anything wrong here?" As you had mentioned, its ridiculous for the Democrats to nominate the woman who lost to Trump already...well if she had a head start on the process and 2 or 3 years in the position already, she would be a much stronger contender then just 2 candidates starting from scratch (in 2016) and with Trump already being president, she would need some oval office experience to compete in 2024. I think this alone—momentum for Hillary into 2024—would get enough support from the D base that it would be a move that would be applauded rather than questioned.
Last edited by a moderator:
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
Yeah, I didn't mean to pick on you. As I said, it's become such a political cliche that it gets repeated constantly, but if you actually think it through you realize it's completely unrealistic. All of these grand Machiavellian plans of replacing VPs and early resignations are fodder for bad TV shows that could never happen in real life (I remember my wife was a big fan of "Madame Secretary", which featured a plotline where the president loses re-nomination by his own party, runs as an independent, and then succeeds in throwing the race to the House, where he somehow wins re-election)I dont or ever will claim I'm a political expert. I was just making a (half assed) prediction based on what i'm seeing today and the topic here. IDK if that is even a fully possible scenario with the due process that has to happen.
but on the flip side, I dont put anything past this administration—there is a 1st for everything.
However, you say the "health reasons" being a "cover up" I would agree in most cases, but with Biden I think it is 100% plausible, its been so since the election. As many on this board argue, he's speeches often seem to have issues with mumbling, incoherent thoughts or ideas. Unlike any other sitting president, visually he is largely non-existent in the day to day workings of the office. And we are less then a year into his term, 3 more at this pace seems unlikely to me.
I (and many) had a feeling that picking Harris as VP was a way to get a POC woman to be president w/o having to go through the election process. With Joe's age and decline (similar issues through the campaign), that she could slide into the office by him stepping down mid-term. But the obv lack of ability to do even do the VP job and what seems like a growing rift in the partnership is making that (alleged) plan not likely.
Enter Hillary. There is no denying that she is still power hungry and wants that seat. She's also proven to do whatever it takes to get there, ie when Bernie was the D frontrunner in 2016 though the primaries and hey now....in swoops Hillary. Along with (what I see as) often blind support for the D candidates simply b/c they carry the D next to their name: "I"m with her" and "Blue no matter who" ideology, I can easily see a transition like this happening and many/most D supporters being like "
As you had mentioned, its ridiculous for the Democrats to nominate the woman who lost to Trump already...well if she had a head start on the process and 2 or 3 years in the position already, she would be a much stronger contender then just 2 candidates starting from scratch (in 2016) and with Trump already being president, she would need some oval office experience to compete in 2024. I think this alone—momentum for Hillary into 2024—would get enough support from the D base that it would be a move that would be applauded rather than questioned.
Write it down: You will see the Detroit Lions facing off with the Jacksonville Jaguars in the Super Bowl as both vie to achieve the NFL's first-ever 20-0 season before any of these scenarios actually come to pass.
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
To tie a couple of my recent posts together, one of the reasons you can be sure there won't be any convoluted "sneak Hillary into the White House via the backdoor" plots is precisely because of the weakness of the so-called party power brokers. I agree with Tim that the most likely scenario is that Biden runs for re-election, and if for any reason he doesn't Harris will be the favorite to get the '24 nomination. But even in that case, there will be a contested primary. If the Dem Establishment tries to short-circuit the '24 primary and install Hillary as the nominee, not only will they likely screw it up, the blowback from the base will hurt the party way more than any supposed gain to be had by giving her a head start. (And spare me the talk about how the DNC rigged the '16 and '20 primaries. Both Hillary and Biden won their respective nominations because they were the clear choice of Democratic primary voters.)
Again, this is all the stuff of bad TV plots. It won't happen in the real world.
Again, this is all the stuff of bad TV plots. It won't happen in the real world.
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
I pretty much agree with everything you wrote, except that I'm not sure about that last part. Not to say you're definitely wrong -- in fact, it probably is the most likely scenario -- but presidential prospects waiting their turn does not have a good track record in recent American politics. Hillary waited her turn in '04 and ran in '08. Christie waited his turn in '12 and ran in '16. Warren did it in '16/'20. Now, obviously I can't prove the counterfactual and say what would have happened if they hadn't waited. Hillary has since demonstrated she's more than capable of blowing a race any year she runs, and even at the time I thought Christie and Warren's chances were overrated. Still, it's worth considering the most famous counter-example of a candidate not waiting: Obama in 2008.
I think DeSantis knows all of this at some level. Again, maybe there's nothing he can do about it, and he's like a character in "Succession", dreaming of taking the old man down even though it should be obvious by now that, short of a massive heart attack, it's never going to happen. Still, DeSantis is clearly the Kendall in this scenario, and I could see him possessing enough irrational confidence to think he can pull it off. (Of course, I can also see how it will inevitably end.)
ETA: I should say that the idea that DeSantis is likely screwed despite the fact that, if the GOP were a remotely normal party, he would be ideally positioned to cruise to the nomination and take down an incumbent president brings me no small amount of Schadenfreude.
Last edited by a moderator:
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
From Tuesday’s Wall Street Journal:
Hillary Clinton’s 2024 Election Comeback
A perfect storm in the Democratic Party is making a once-unfathomable scenario plausible: a political comeback for Hillary Clinton in 2024.
Several circumstances—President Biden’s low approval rating, doubts over his capacity to run for re-election at 82, Vice President Kamala Harris’s unpopularity, and the absence of another strong Democrat to lead the ticket in 2024—have created a leadership vacuum in the party, which Mrs. Clinton viably could fill.
She is already in an advantageous position to become the 2024 Democratic nominee. She is an experienced national figure who is younger than Mr. Biden and can offer a different approach from the disorganized and unpopular one the party is currently taking.
If Democrats lose control of Congress in 2022, Mrs. Clinton can use the party’s loss as a basis to run for president again, enabling her to claim the title of “change candidate.”
Based on her latest public statements, it’s clear that Mrs. Clinton not only recognizes her position as a potential front-runner but also is setting up a process to help her decide whether or not to run for president again. She recently warned of the electoral consequences in the 2022 midterms if the Democratic Party continues to align itself with its progressive wing and urged Democrats to reject far-left positions that isolate key segments of the electorate.
In a recent MSNBC interview, Mrs. Clinton called on Democrats to engage in “careful thinking about what wins elections, and not just in deep-blue districts where a Democrat and a liberal Democrat, or so-called progressive Democrat, is going to win.” She also noted that party’s House majority “comes from people who win in much more difficult districts.”
Mrs. Clinton also took a veiled jab at the Biden administration and congressional Democrats in an effort to create distance: “It means nothing if we don’t have a Congress that will get things done, and we don’t have a White House that we can count on to be sane and sober and stable and productive.”
Even Bill Clinton recently set the stage for his wife’s potential 2024 candidacy, referring to her in an interview with People magazine as “the most qualified person to run for office in my lifetime, including me,” adding that not electing her in 2016 was “one of the most profound mistakes we ever made.”
We can infer based on these recent remarks that Mrs. Clinton would seize the opportunity to run for president again if an opening presents itself. But what are the odds that an opportunity will arise?
The Democrats’ domestic agenda is in disarray given the failure of Mr. Biden’s Build Back Better plan in Congress. Senate Democrats’ latest desperate push to repeal the legislative filibuster to pass their secondary legislative priority, voting-rights reform, will likely weaken their agenda further.
Mr. Biden’s overall approval rating is low (40%), as is his rating on issues including the economy and jobs (38%) and taxes and government spending (33%), according to a recent Economist/YouGov poll. Nearly two-thirds of independent voters disapprove of the president.
Barring a major course correction, we can anticipate that some Democrats will lose important House and Senate races in 2022—in part for the reasons Mrs. Clinton identified—giving Republicans control of both chambers of Congress.
Polls generally show the GOP with a solid lead of at least 2 or 3 points in the 2022 generic congressional vote—a margin that likely would be enough to take back the House, given the narrow Democratic majority and the anticipated outcomes of redistricting in several states that could affect key races.
Given the likelihood that Democrats will lose control of Congress in 2022, we can anticipate that Mrs. Clinton will begin shortly after the midterms to position herself as an experienced candidate capable of leading Democrats on a new and more successful path.
Mrs. Clinton can spend the time between now and midterms doing what the Clinton administration did after the Democrats’ blowout defeat in the 1994 midterms: crafting a moderate agenda on both domestic and foreign policy. This agenda could show that Mrs. Clinton is the only credible alternative to Mr. Biden, Ms. Harris, and the entire Democratic Party establishment.
Hillary Clinton remains ambitious, outspoken and convinced that if not for Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey’s intervention and Russian interference that she would have won the 2016 election—and she may be right.
If Democrats want a fighting chance at winning the presidency in 2024, Mrs. Clinton is likely their best option.
Mr. Schoen is founder and partner in Schoen Cooperman Research, a polling and consulting firm whose past clients include Bill Clinton and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Mr. Stein is a former New York City Council president, Manhattan borough president and state assemblyman.
Hillary Clinton’s 2024 Election Comeback
A perfect storm in the Democratic Party is making a once-unfathomable scenario plausible: a political comeback for Hillary Clinton in 2024.
Several circumstances—President Biden’s low approval rating, doubts over his capacity to run for re-election at 82, Vice President Kamala Harris’s unpopularity, and the absence of another strong Democrat to lead the ticket in 2024—have created a leadership vacuum in the party, which Mrs. Clinton viably could fill.
She is already in an advantageous position to become the 2024 Democratic nominee. She is an experienced national figure who is younger than Mr. Biden and can offer a different approach from the disorganized and unpopular one the party is currently taking.
If Democrats lose control of Congress in 2022, Mrs. Clinton can use the party’s loss as a basis to run for president again, enabling her to claim the title of “change candidate.”
Based on her latest public statements, it’s clear that Mrs. Clinton not only recognizes her position as a potential front-runner but also is setting up a process to help her decide whether or not to run for president again. She recently warned of the electoral consequences in the 2022 midterms if the Democratic Party continues to align itself with its progressive wing and urged Democrats to reject far-left positions that isolate key segments of the electorate.
In a recent MSNBC interview, Mrs. Clinton called on Democrats to engage in “careful thinking about what wins elections, and not just in deep-blue districts where a Democrat and a liberal Democrat, or so-called progressive Democrat, is going to win.” She also noted that party’s House majority “comes from people who win in much more difficult districts.”
Mrs. Clinton also took a veiled jab at the Biden administration and congressional Democrats in an effort to create distance: “It means nothing if we don’t have a Congress that will get things done, and we don’t have a White House that we can count on to be sane and sober and stable and productive.”
Even Bill Clinton recently set the stage for his wife’s potential 2024 candidacy, referring to her in an interview with People magazine as “the most qualified person to run for office in my lifetime, including me,” adding that not electing her in 2016 was “one of the most profound mistakes we ever made.”
We can infer based on these recent remarks that Mrs. Clinton would seize the opportunity to run for president again if an opening presents itself. But what are the odds that an opportunity will arise?
The Democrats’ domestic agenda is in disarray given the failure of Mr. Biden’s Build Back Better plan in Congress. Senate Democrats’ latest desperate push to repeal the legislative filibuster to pass their secondary legislative priority, voting-rights reform, will likely weaken their agenda further.
Mr. Biden’s overall approval rating is low (40%), as is his rating on issues including the economy and jobs (38%) and taxes and government spending (33%), according to a recent Economist/YouGov poll. Nearly two-thirds of independent voters disapprove of the president.
Barring a major course correction, we can anticipate that some Democrats will lose important House and Senate races in 2022—in part for the reasons Mrs. Clinton identified—giving Republicans control of both chambers of Congress.
Polls generally show the GOP with a solid lead of at least 2 or 3 points in the 2022 generic congressional vote—a margin that likely would be enough to take back the House, given the narrow Democratic majority and the anticipated outcomes of redistricting in several states that could affect key races.
Given the likelihood that Democrats will lose control of Congress in 2022, we can anticipate that Mrs. Clinton will begin shortly after the midterms to position herself as an experienced candidate capable of leading Democrats on a new and more successful path.
Mrs. Clinton can spend the time between now and midterms doing what the Clinton administration did after the Democrats’ blowout defeat in the 1994 midterms: crafting a moderate agenda on both domestic and foreign policy. This agenda could show that Mrs. Clinton is the only credible alternative to Mr. Biden, Ms. Harris, and the entire Democratic Party establishment.
Hillary Clinton remains ambitious, outspoken and convinced that if not for Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey’s intervention and Russian interference that she would have won the 2016 election—and she may be right.
If Democrats want a fighting chance at winning the presidency in 2024, Mrs. Clinton is likely their best option.
Mr. Schoen is founder and partner in Schoen Cooperman Research, a polling and consulting firm whose past clients include Bill Clinton and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Mr. Stein is a former New York City Council president, Manhattan borough president and state assemblyman.
Godsbrother
Footballguy
A Trump/Hillary re-do would be awful for America.
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
"missteps"
Phil Elliott
Footballguy
I think Biden already teased he isn't running for re-election. He replied to a question about this about a week ago and replied basically "if I am healthy".
KiddLattimer
Footballguy
Looking forward to not voting for either of them, again
Da Guru
Fair & Balanced
Yes, but better than Trump-Biden. Biden looks out of it. Hillary would be much better.
Godsbrother
Footballguy
Da Guru
Fair & Balanced
No Trump, Hillary, Biden or Kamala..please
No way Biden will run again as he is too old right now but the others??
Godsbrother
Footballguy
Assuming Biden does not run again I think it is a foregone conclusion that Harris will throw her hat in the ring. I doubt she gets the nomination but if she does it would take a horrendous GOP candidate for me to vote Dem. Someone like Trump for instance.
Da Guru
Fair & Balanced
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
Schoen is a professional concern troll who wrote the exact same article in 2012, urging Hillary to run in place of Obama. Meanwhile, he's such a Hillary fan that when he had the opportunity to vote for her, he endorsed Trump.ekbeats said:
No one should take anything this guy says seriously, ever.
ignatiusjreilly
Footballguy
I think Biden will probably run, but I would shift that to "definitely" if Trump runs. Biden was open about the fact that he only ran in '20 because he thought Trump was an existential thread and he was the only Dem who could beat him (I scoffed at that idea when I first heard it, but in retrospect he was probably right). I don't see why the same wouldn't apply in '24.
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
LawFitz
Footballguy
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
SCOTUS decision makes this more likely.
AAABatteries
Footballguy
I could see more likely for Hillary but less likely for Trump. Pro-life folks got what they wanted from Trump and can throw him under the bus.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
I gave this a like because I think you're probably right about Trump. Not sure why evangelicals would prefer this guy to any semi-normal Republican considering the baggage that he brings to the table and that the right (broadly) has already "won" SCOTUS.
I think Hillary's cooked though. My sense is that independent voters have had enough of super-old candidates, and I don't think Hillary enjoys much goodwill among Democratic primary voters.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Same here, but be careful with saying that. I am already seeing some rumblings from pissed off people from yesterday screaming that anyone who didn't vote for Hillary in 2016 is to blame for the Supreme Court's horrific decision yesterday (and it was most certainly horrific). No, the Democrats should have given us a better and more likable candidate to run against the clown that was Trump.
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
Mostly agree except that Hillary has made health care in general, and "reproductive rights" in particular, part of her brand. This is what she really needed.
AAABatteries
Footballguy
When I say more likely for Hillary I’m talking about passing hurdle #1 of running. I seriously doubt she’s running but I do think the chances go up a little as I could see her thinking she needs to be the person to save abortion.
KiddLattimer
Footballguy
I'm one of them (though Im in NY where it didn't matter... if I was OH or FL I probably would have voted for her).
This certainly is worst case scenario for sure, but at the same time there were so many opportunities to prevent this before or during 2016.
Either way it certainly sucks though.
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
AAABatteries
Footballguy
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
The whispers are "Psst -- keep this person away from any cameras or microphones."
AAABatteries
Footballguy
This is the same stupidity that Tim mentions in the thread about Democrats. The "now is her moment" quote is from a conservative. There's no doubt some on the right that want Hillary to run as she's proven she can't beat a horrible candidate. Put up the same horrible candidate or someone a little better and you stand a decent chance of winning. Until you don't and now the roles are reversed from 2016.
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
dickey moe
Fingerpicker
Please. God. No.
Phil Elliott
Footballguy
I don't want either of them running in 2024 but Hillary will not rule it out:
CBS Morning yesterday (recorded interview previous day promoting a book and several of the current issues, notably Roe decision).
(at about 4:50)
Gayle King: "Is there any scenario in your brain you think I want to get back in?"
Hillary: "No, I miss it. I miss it."
King: "No scenario in 2024, even remotely, consider"?
Hillary: "You know, I can't imagine it. I really can't".
King: "That isn't a no."
CBS Morning yesterday (recorded interview previous day promoting a book and several of the current issues, notably Roe decision).
(at about 4:50)
Gayle King: "Is there any scenario in your brain you think I want to get back in?"
Hillary: "No, I miss it. I miss it."
King: "No scenario in 2024, even remotely, consider"?
Hillary: "You know, I can't imagine it. I really can't".
King: "That isn't a no."
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
If we're going to elect a narcissistic sociopath who seeks office just to take out their personal grievances on a nation that they irrationally feel has wronged them, I'd just as soon have Trump thanks.
Rich Conway
Footballguy
I might pony up for the pay per view, depending on the rules. I mean, I'm out if it's going to be three rounds of them waddling around followed by judges scorecard. I'm in if it's 2 people enter, last one standing wins.
roadkill1292
Footballguy
Hilary running again sounds like Trump supporter wish-casting. Or a Democratic Party death wish.
. You and I think alike. I was going to suggest a steel cage death match but I couldn’t sacrifice the Danny Bonaduce and Greg Brady reference. And for those of that never saw it, do yourself a favor and watch it on YouTube.
Similar threads
