I'm thinking, if they value their careers, they will stick with the Clintons.
I'm thinking, if they value their careers, they will stick with the Clintons.
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
MSM?
I'm betting that a 3rd person gets the nomination. In 2002, everybody just knew that that it was going to be between Clark and Dean. Whoever wins the first 2 or 3 primaries usually gets it.
Originally Posted by proud gonzo
MSM=Main Stream Media=network tv news, and newpapers, all Cable news except Fox News Channel.Originally Posted by Penguin
Really, who could possibly win the dims' nomination besides Hillary or Obama?
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
Obama is a very, very long shot...
Originally Posted by RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
That's the thing. Nobody knows. Did anyone take Kerry seriously in 2002? How about W in '98?
It's too soon to tell who will get the nomination.
Originally Posted by proud gonzo
Originally Posted by RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
Actually, people were taking Bush very seriously in '98. By the end of '98 he was already raising a truly unprecedented amount of money and lining up the GOP ducks. Bush was definitely not a "surprise" in the GOP primary and was widely seen as the overwhelming favorite and front runner throughout the GOP primary. McCain was the surprise not Bush.Originally Posted by Penguin
I hate to say this again, but Fox News Channel is carried by every major cable and satellite provider in the country.
Fox News IS mainstream.
... that's not food.
I agree a surprise could occur but Obama is a long shot...
Fox is closer to reality and unbiased more than any other network...
I watch/read both and they report the same ****. I never understood this argument.
In fact, to carry it one step further - Fox News has higher ratings than any other cable news channel. From that point of view, the so-called "mainstream" media actually isn't.
... that's not food.
I remember hearing a story that David Boren was planning on a run in 1996 and that Clinton was supposed to be the sacrificial lamb to the Bush juggernaut in 1992. That didn't work terribly well...
I'm going with Bill Richardson picking up the nomination if he chooses to run. I don't know if he's even exploring the possibility.
I have no idea who the Republicans are going to run on the "Anyone but Hillary" ticket.
"The choices we discern as having been made in the Constitutional Convention impose burdens on governmental proceses that often seem clumsy, inefficient, even unworkable, but those hard choices were consciously made by men who had lived under a form of government that permitted arbitrary governmental acts to go unchecked." INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983) (Burger, C.J.)
Richardson is running, I think. Maybe he can have our AZ gov. (Dammit) Janet Napolitano as running mate. She's from New Mexico, and is sensitive to Illegal immigration issues.
Howz about Hillary and Napolitano. Thay are sorta like "birds of a feather".
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
Nah, I don't think I'd vote for Napoleon.
Oh, and spek for the Dammit, Janet.
... that's not food.
Yeah, so who will they back, Hillary or Obama?Originally Posted by GottaHavePride
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
Sorta?
" A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have"
Thomas Jefferson
Olevet Posse Member
I couldn't even begin to guess. I don't really pay attention to the news networks.Originally Posted by RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
... that's not food.
This is the political equivalent of asking: Who is Mark May going to pick to win this week?
Barney Frank and Al Franken?
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.