Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Ted Cruz

7 (6.5%)

Rick Santorum

16 (14.8%)

Michelle Bachmann

13 (12%)

Chris Christie

23 (21.3%)

Rand Paul

49 (45.4%)

Total Members Voted: 107

[GrizzlyAdamz]

My question is, who would they field if Hillary doesn't run, though I'm sure it's been talked about extensively in this thread before.

My money'd be on Warren.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Warren has already refused. I think Biden would take it.

[GrizzlyAdamz]

Mm, they'd have to get creative with his compaign, paint him as a fighter instead of a gaffe-ridden VP.
And they'd have to do it well if they want to arouse their young liberal constituents with an old, familiar white guy.

[Culise]

Warren has already refused. I think Biden would take it.

In Biden's case, the question would be if anyone else would want him to.  It'd be like President Dan Quayle. 

EDIT: And, yes, his age as well.  He's almost as old as McCain, and McCain's age was a significant talking point in 2008 as well. 

[RedKing]

Warren has already refused. I think Biden would take it.

In Biden's case, the question would be if anyone else would want him to.  It'd be like President Dan Quayle. 

EDIT: And, yes, his age as well.  He's almost as old as McCain, and McCain's age was a significant talking point in 2008 as well.

I don't think people think Biden is stupid in the way that Quayle was thought of. It's more that he's just....well....

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[Descan]

Then again, his candor and uncomplicated nature* might be selling points, to various groups of voters.

*I don't mean he's dumb, I mean he comes across as a "what you see is what you get" kind of guy. He's certainly a smart fellow too, so it wouldn't be like having another Bush in office, who also seemed like a "what you see is what you get" kind of fellow.

[FearfulJesuit]

Warren has already refused. I think Biden would take it.

In Biden's case, the question would be if anyone else would want him to.  It'd be like President Dan Quayle. 

EDIT: And, yes, his age as well.  He's almost as old as McCain, and McCain's age was a significant talking point in 2008 as well.

Hillary's age is an issue, too- she'll be as old in 2016 as Reagan was in 1980.

[Helgoland]

I'd love to see Biden as POTUS, simply to troll the everliving fuck out of the Republicans.

I was looking for that video with Biden going into righteous fury mode about the US not abiding (abiden?) by the Geneva convention, but couldn't find it. Does anyone have a link?

In the meantime, have this instead. He won't shut up when he believes he's right, and I very much appreciate that.

[Culise]

I don't, but then again, I believe that a President should know when to be diplomatic.  It's his subordinates who can afford to shoot their mouths off.  I've had enough of pigheaded ideologues or empty suits who surround themselves only with people who adopt their own worldview, on either side of the spectrum.  Still, with that said, I suppose Biden isn't the worst we could do.  In spite of how he talks, he's been pretty willing to compromise domestically with Congress Republicans; apparently, part of why he's played less of a role in negotiation during their second term is because Reid felt he gave too much away during budget negotiations in the first term, which is rather an endorsement of Biden in my opinion. 

In Biden's case, the question would be if anyone else would want him to.  It'd be like President Dan Quayle. 

EDIT: And, yes, his age as well.  He's almost as old as McCain, and McCain's age was a significant talking point in 2008 as well.

Hillary's age is an issue, too- she'll be as old in 2016 as Reagan was in 1980.

Yeah, that's definitely true.  Hillary is no better in that respect, though I do like her a bit, and I don't think she'd make a terrible president.  She exerted significant influence during her husband's administration, and I don't doubt that if she rose to the presidency, the two would continue to work closely together.  There is kind of a dearth of candidates on the Democratic side, thinking about it.  There aren't really any Democratic governors that have distinguished themselves (except for our own local one, who I dislike), either, which is a shame, though I suppose that lack of news is still better than the news about Republican governors.  The real shame, I think, is that in spite of that, I'd probably still vote for almost any Democratic candidate over anyone who could possibly pull off the Republican nomination. <_<
^{Well, no, I'd actually vote Green or Libertarian again if the DFL and Republicans both put in unsuitable candidates like last time, but the principle stands...}

[Owlbread]

Have we already discussed the fact that George Clooney is going to run for Governor of California?

[smjjames]

Warren has already refused. I think Biden would take it.

In Biden's case, the question would be if anyone else would want him to.  It'd be like President Dan Quayle. 

EDIT: And, yes, his age as well.  He's almost as old as McCain, and McCain's age was a significant talking point in 2008 as well.

Hillary's age is an issue, too- she'll be as old in 2016 as Reagan was in 1980.

And Reagan got Alzheimers in the last parts of the last term. I don't know how long he had alzheimers while president, but having a grandma who died from Alzheimers, I'm concerned that Hillary might get Alzheimers. There are treatments coming up and the disease is better known now than it was in the 1980s.

It's really just a big what if scenario.....

Have we already discussed the fact that George Clooney is going to run for Governor of California?

Uh, I'm pretty sure I didn't see that on the ballot that we did earlier this month.

[Owlbread]

How would the independence statehood of Upstate New York affect American politics? Would it be an island of redness in the very blue North East? How do you fellows view the proposal in general?

Personally I think it makes sense; Upstate New York has absolutely nothing in common with Long Island and New York City. I would, however, name it the State of Iroquois.

[Frumple]

I'm not entirely sure there's enough people in non-New York New York to matter at all, Owl.

[Helgoland]

Also, why Iroquois? It's not like there's significant amounts of them left.

[Owlbread]

I'm not entirely sure there's enough people in non-New York New York to matter at all, Owl.

There are four cities in Upstate New York with more than 1,000,000 people; Buffalo, Rochester, Syracruse and Albany. I have heard that there's 6 million living up there in total.

If there's 6 million people up there, that means there's more people in Upstate New York than Alabama, Colorado, Missouri, Minnesota, Worst Carolina, Louisiana, Kentucky, Oregon, Oklahoma, Connecticut, Mississippi, Iowa, Arkansas, Utah, Kansas, New Mexico, Idaho, Rhode Island, Delaware, North Dakota, South Dakota, DC, Vermont, Wyoming, even Borinqueno.

Also, why Iroquois? It's not like there's significant amounts of them left.

Why Arkansas? Why Iowa? Why Kansas? Why Illinois? Why Missouri?