Skip to main content

Terry McAuliffe is winning the latest polls against some flat-earth Republican in Virginia, and kos sees a bright future for the Democratic party and a heads-up for Hillary Clinton in McAuliffe's "muscular liberalism."

America has changed, and the biggest danger to a Hillary Clinton presidential candidacy is that she doesn't account for that change, that she continues trying to triangulate her way to victory.
So what kind of liberal muscles is Terry McAuliffe flexing?

McAuliffe has endorsed gay marriage; universal background checks for gun purchases; an assault-weapons ban; a pathway to citizenship for immigrants here illegally; a mandate on employers offering health insurance to include free contraception coverage; and limits on carbon emissions from new coal-fired power plants. He would also reverse the tight restrictions on abortion clinics championed by state Republicans led by Cuccinelli and outgoing Gov. Bob McDonnell.
Jobs? Mortgage relief? Restoring the safety net? Single payer, or at least a public option?

Forgeddaboutit!

Forget the Employee Free Choice Act, which Obama promised he would sign into law as President, and in general...

Forget the unions!

Forget the New Deal!

Forget about everything except the latest whiz-bang slogan to confuse the rubes!

"Muscular liberalism!"

It talks like Rambo, but it fights like Pee Wee Herman.

..................................................................................................................

Update: Judging from several thoughtful comments below, I guess I should have been clearer about exactly what I find so repulsive about the game of politics as Terry McAuliffe plays it. For example...

In 2009 Terry McAuliffe opposed gay marriage.

And why not now?

56 percent of likely voters [in Virginia] are in favor of repealing the state ban on gay marriage, compared with the 36 percent wish to keep the ban in place.
Lead from behind!

Wait for the polls and focus groups to tell you what to do!

And if the polls run against gay Americans, or the unions, or anybody and anything...

Then fuck 'em and forget 'em!

So if what you want is another eight years of sell-outs and betrayals, depending only on whatever these weasels think will sell...

Then Terry McAuliffe and his playmates are just what you're looking for.

But if you want a President who actually believes in something all the way down to the ground...

If you want a President who will fight for you no matter which way the latest breeze blows through the polls...

Then forget about the goddamned "centrists!"

ELIZABETH WARREN FOR PRESIDENT 2016!

 

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Well, in all fairness, (8+ / 0-)

    Hillary Clinton has a proven track record of not just talking like Rambo.

    Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

    by corvo on Sun Oct 27, 2013 at 10:14:50 PM PDT

  •  kos stated (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SouthernLeveller

    That is was hard enough getting Sen. Warren to run for the Senate as is.

  •  3 Conservative Parties. (14+ / 0-)

    All that's on the table is buying time.

    We're off the ends of the rails here. There's never been anything remotely resembling the quality of society for the masses that we have today. This is the first time in human history masses have been torn away from the middle class of secure old age, leisure and travel opportunity and cheap education, and thrown back into poverty.

    There's no blueprint to follow; nobody has yet produced a plausible path forward.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Sun Oct 27, 2013 at 10:23:25 PM PDT

  •  I am not sure that Terry McAuliff could get a (16+ / 0-)

    public option or that he could sign the Employee Free Choice Act.

    Instead he is focusing on those liberal policies that no prior Democrat would have embraced in Virginia. That is a dramatic change. And it is working.

    I think that what kos was suggesting is that if Hillary applies the lessons to be learned from McAuliff's campaign, that is, a liberal Democratic platform can appeal to a broad spectrum of Americans, instead of attempting more triangulation we will indeed have a muscular liberalism on a national level.

  •  Does muscular liberalism include citizen spying? (7+ / 0-)

    If so, I want nothing to do with it.

    "So what if a guy threw a shoe at me!"

    by FoodChillinMFr on Sun Oct 27, 2013 at 10:24:49 PM PDT

  •  maybe i am an EVIL moderate (18+ / 0-)

    but i will take Hillary over a tea bagger or a silver spoon ANY fucking day of the week

    now, if someone better could actually WIN then i would support them instead, but since i live in reality and not liberal fantasyland, and since i only have one life to live, i am going to support the best choice i actually have

    so, you go ahead and shout from the roof tops that she's not good enough, but i am going to support her if she runs, because i compare her to the alternative not to some high and mighty liberal ideal that has never existed and won't exist for another generation

    •  that's how it works (6+ / 0-)

      the other side is so bad we become happy to accept someone we don't really want.

      Dear NSA: I am only joking.

      by Shahryar on Sun Oct 27, 2013 at 11:52:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Even better, instead of spending your progressive (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CwV

      work hours finding and supporting a candidate with your values why do "true progressives" continue to beat the drum of Warren for President.  There is absolutely no indication whatsoever that she has a remote interest in running.  What's wrong with trying to find a true liberal who wants to be President and supporting that person?  Except that's a lot of work and involvement.  And generally supporting real candidates instead of pretend ones involves compromise and disappointment.  So the diarist runs a diary campaign.  Easy to win and you never have to compromise.

      "Speak the TRUTH, even if your voice shakes."

      by stellaluna on Mon Oct 28, 2013 at 04:15:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  um, she IS a silver spoon . . . . (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NonnyO
      i will take Hillary over a tea bagger or a silver spoon ANY fucking day of the week
      She is not the daughter of an unemployed truck driver.
  •  Triangulating or not, Hillary is better (5+ / 0-)

    To be frank, I don't care if she triangulates her way to victory or runs as a socialist, whatever works.

    If she doesn't run, there's a good chance the Tea Party could win because I don't see anyone else on the Democratic bench nationally that looks too strong.

  •  Hillary is going to be a great President if (7+ / 0-)

    she runs and wins. We have many other great potential candidates as well (Biden, Kerry, for example). I don't get the anti-Hillary pieces here.

  •  Terry McAuliffe (31+ / 0-)

    is winning because Ken Cuccinelli has done everything but slap a cancer patient, kick a baby, and spit in the face of of a nun holding an armful of orphans, kittens, and puppies to make the Teahadi Jihadi happy.

    That said, as a Dirty Fucking Hippy myself, who has endured more than his share of Centrist Hippy Punches and sneering "liberal" media pundits, who would love to see Elizabeth Warren in the White House, let's not let Kos's exuberance for Ken Cuccinelli's march of a thousand stepped on rakes, and his noting that Terry Mac is piling on via progressive rhetoric and that it is not hurting him a bit, define where kos actually is or bury the lede of what he was actually saying.

    He has never been a fan of Terry Macs. Or Harold Ford. Or Lanny Davis. Or Blanche Lincoln. He has never been a fan of negotiating with people who are acting in bad faith as if they are acting in good faith.

    I doubt Kos thinks Terry Mac is going to govern as a Warren Sanders DeBlasio figure. Or Clinton for that matter.

    He's telling Hilary Clinton it's 2013 so open your eyes and get a clue that the 1990's are over. Did you not learn a thing from losing to Obama in 2008?

    I don't think it's bad advice, or putting your brain in the pickle jar for Clinton 2016.

    Kos is imploring a Democrat who stands a very good chance of being the 2016 nominee to look at the evidence that the era she seems gearing up to rhetorically put forward as her vision is not where the nation is right now. That you can abandon triangulation and Very Serious Person-like Reasonable Centrism, and you should do that as a candidate, based on the idea that a Terry Mac, notorious corporatist DLC type, running in Virginia no less, is actually successfully piling on the CoochFail by not Hippy Punching but tacking in the other direction as a way to further define the contrast between the two.

    I understand the scars of Hippy Punches past. I have them myself.

    Nobody is claiming that Terry Mac is a born-again Bernie Sanders, but the idea that Terry Mac is piling on a reactionary thug by not trying to Reasonable Centrist him, but tact in a more progressive direction, is something the Clintons should note as an effective tactic to beating the Right.

    If Kos was guzzling some kind of Unicorn's Milk about Terry Mac being a born-again Elizabeth Warren, I'd agree. What he is doing is imploring somebody who is showing signs of running a campaign that is about chasing bipartisanship and triangulation, which is something that could deliver us a Republican President or result in an unexpected Democratic primary upset to bookend the loss to Obama in 2008, to look at the evidence that this is a bad idea whose time has passed.

    If anything, he's telling Hilary Clinton to get a clue.

    A kind of, take it or leave it, but if you make the wrong decision is might cost you, and big time, sort of warning.

    I am a Loco-Foco. I am from the Elizabeth Warren wing of the Democratic Party.

    by LeftHandedMan on Sun Oct 27, 2013 at 10:56:10 PM PDT

    •  At this point, this diary drives me to despair (11+ / 0-)

      Hippy Punching is clearly corrosive, the most substance-free comment is owned by all as representative of all who dissent or object, and all objections or protests are "purity" or "circular firing squadding". The establishment Democratic playbook that lives on like a zombie no matter how badly it fails to check let alone roll back Movement Conservatism. It is draining a lot of good people of their ability to trust many of their fellow travelers, and clearly skews one to the default to the defensive. Where is the betrayal. Where is the screwjob. Where am I being suckered, played for a chump, or used?

      How am I going to get my hopes up, and then get more Michelle Rhee, Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles, Pete Peterson, Jamie Dimon.

      When does that moment arrive where the shitty is what is the only possible outcome, and the best policy or person for the job is essentially ruled out from minute one as wanting a pony or chasing unicorns.

      I get it. I just hate how this keeps being a point we cannot get past because we keep circling back to Hippy Punching and accusations of purity trolling for not universally celebrating everything the establishment serves up as a tremendous victory that will fundamentally change the game.  

      Kos wasn't doing anything but imploring Hilary Clinton to open her eyes to the reality that somebody like her is not running a Hippy Punching, Third Way, Triangulating campaign to win Virginia and beat a reactionary thug.

      But past is present and future, so, where I am being hosed or lied to or scammed becomes the default.

      Fundamentally, the Democratic Party is responsible for it's own bad outcomes. Not the voters. You have to make an argument to win an argument, and instead we get the Sequester. The ultimate monument to neoliberal thinking on how to win without partisanship or acting ideologically in a non-Conservative way. I belong to a political party that fails, and then blames the voters for it's bad results, and wonders why it keeps ending up squandering opportunities and never has a lasting and sustained period of dominance no matter how badly the GOP epic fails.

      I don't doubt for a moment that I would probably agree on the vast majority of superior policy outcomes and candidate choices with this diarist.

      If you have reached a point where you sincerely feel you are always, somehow, being played for a chump, this is the sort of way you filter and parse information.

      I understand exactly how you came to be thinking about this this way, and I hope you are willing to, at least, consider my counter-interpretation as offered sincerely and not attacking you or belittling or diminishing your concerns in any way in the offering.

       

      I am a Loco-Foco. I am from the Elizabeth Warren wing of the Democratic Party.

      by LeftHandedMan on Sun Oct 27, 2013 at 11:56:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  That's the funniest - and sadly the most accurate (6+ / 0-)

      take I've read on the whole bloomin' race:

      Terry McAuliffe is winning because Ken Cuccinelli has done everything but slap a cancer patient

      The only thing that stops a Bad Republican with a vote is a Good Democrat with a vote.

      by here4tehbeer on Mon Oct 28, 2013 at 12:17:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  This is spot on (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Larsstephens
    •  Clintons and McAuliffes are on the one (0+ / 0-)

      hand the closest people on the planet -- practically the same people -- as that article suggests. On the other hand Hillary has no clue what strategy that Terry Mac is using.

      While I agree that the kos strategy is correct; it is beyond belief that Hillary doesn't already have a clue.

  •  Eh, you're totally misreading kos's post. (25+ / 0-)

    kos doesn't like McAuliffe, but he's arguing that the National Journal's reading of the race is correct: that  he's winning because of, or despite, adopting socially liberal positions that Virginia Democrats had argued needed to be avoided.

    That's why the post is focused on the issues in the blockquote, and not the issues you listed afterward.  Hot-button social issues that too-cautious Democrats have avoided taking a position on because it might hurt them with moderate voters.  See: Mark Warner and Tim Kane.  And yet McAuliffe embraced these issues instead of running away from them, and he's doing quite well.

    Certainly it's a more complicated race than that, and we can analyze it in different terms.  But what you're saying here is irrelevant to the point kos and the National Journal were making.

    Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce

    by pico on Sun Oct 27, 2013 at 10:57:06 PM PDT

  •  Spin on TM win now in play: Kos is right to try (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Miss Blue, fcvaguy, bythesea, TXdem

    spinning it (correctly) in the Progressive direction.

  •  Sadly (9+ / 0-)

    Warren has already ruled out a 2016 Presidential run. And I don't think she was being coy.  She's not ambitious.  She was perfectly content to teach at Harvard Law School until retirement.

    She was persuaded to be nominated for the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (which was her brainchild) because of the need of the country. This sense of civic duty was also how she was persuaded to run for Senate.  She knows legislation. She is a great senator and will become even better. We can help out by giving her more progressive company in the senate.

    But I don't think Warren wants to be president and I don't think she'd take corporate cash.

    "I was not born for myself alone, but for my neighbor as well as myself."--Richard Overton, leader of the Levellers, a17th C. movement for democracy and equality during the English Civil War.

    by SouthernLeveller on Mon Oct 28, 2013 at 02:56:10 AM PDT

    •  Thanks for commenting, SouthernLeveller. (0+ / 0-)

      I agree that Senator Warren probably is not infected with the kind of ambition that drives many politicians to propel themselves up the ladder as if nothing else mattered except getting themselves elected.

      But I think the country needs her, and I don't mean we need some as-yet-unnamed more-or-less-liberal Democrat.

      We need to take back our country.

      We need to take supreme political and economic power out of the hands of Wall Street bankers.

      Because if the same bosses are still running the show after 2016, it won't matter what kind of puppet they cram into the Oval Office.

      IMHO Elizabeth Warren is by far the best qualified candidate for controlling the Wall Street mega-banks, and no amount of noise that a gaggle of made-for-TV candidates can make...

      No matter how many worthless promises may soon flood the media...

      No amount of Pixar Special Effects can turn any of them into a monster that would scare the banks as much as Elizabeth Warren scares them.

      Elizabeth Warren for President 2016!

      by Frank Whitaker on Mon Oct 28, 2013 at 03:35:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Sen. Warren will do more good in the Senate (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CwV, sfbob, Meteor Blades

    for the next 18 years or so, than she would as President.  I want her to stay where she is.

    I'm no fan of Clinton--who else will be running?

  •  Just because (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Wee Mama, TXdem
    Jobs? Mortgage relief? Restoring the safety net? Single payer, or at least a public option?
    KOS didn't mention healthcare, or Jobs or Mortgage Crisis, it doesn't mean McAuliffe's platform doesn't address it.

    For example, he supports Medicaid expansion in Virginia, which the current regime turned down. He also supports Virginia establishing a state exchange which the current regime also turned down.

    A bit more research on the things you have questions about would have given you answers.

    •  Thanks but no thanks for that over-simplication. (0+ / 0-)

      If you're trying to draw a bright line between Terry McAuliffe and "the current regime" of Republican Governor Bob McDonnell, then Medicaid expansion isn't really a very good choice.

      Legislators and state health officials say they have made major strides in getting federal permission to carry out significant reforms to the program, such as coordinating the care of people eligible both for Medicaid and Medicare benefits.

      “I’d say we are a little more than halfway there,” said Sen. Emmett W. Hanger Jr., R-Augusta, chairman of the commission [which  and a proponent of expansion.

      “What do I want to see? I want to see the reforms done,” McDonnell said Monday.

      But the governor made clear that the decision ultimately rests with the new commission, which will meet again in October and December, with a public hearing expected before the next meeting.

      “If they say ‘done,’ Medicaid expansion goes into place,” McDonnell said.

      So McAuliffe and moderate Republican Bob McDonnell aren't essentially very far apart, and if the legislature rejects Medicaid expansion, it isn't going to happen, no matter which party sits in the governor's mansion.

      And that's the way it is: If you want a Democratic party that's on the same page as moderate Republicans, then Terry McAuliffe and his "centrist" friends are the ticket for you.

      But if you're looking for anything remotely resembling the New Deal commitment to economic justice, then focus-group heroes like Terry McAuliffe will sell you out every time.  

      Elizabeth Warren for President 2016!

      by Frank Whitaker on Mon Oct 28, 2013 at 05:05:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  How can you say McAulliffe=McDonnell? (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jiffypop, highacidity, TXdem, sfbob

        The article you link to is Michigan/Virginia's request for an exception to expand Medicaid by "reforming" it first - read CUTS.

        McAulliffe wants to expand Medicaid straight up, without strings, consistent with ACA.

        And, to be clear, I am not at all a fan of McAuliffe. However, I understand the state I live in. McDonnell/Kookinelli are worlds apart from milquetoast McAuliffe. That said, KOS is spot on - McAuliffe has not been running as a centrist, but more like a liberal Democrat. And in a state like Virginia, thats remarkable.

        Sorry you were offended by my "over-simplification", but I thought at least a few facts would be a vast improvement over what you provided on McAuliffe's health care position - which was nothing.

  •  Al Gore for president! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Kickemout

    "Lets show the rascals what Citizens United really means."

    by smiley7 on Mon Oct 28, 2013 at 03:49:18 AM PDT

  •  Sorry, I've been away (0+ / 0-)

    Did Markos really say "muscular liberalism" to invite a better female politician to emulate an inferior male politician?

    You know, I sometimes think if I could see, I'd be kicking a lot of ass. -Stevie Wonder at the Glastonbury Festival, 2010

    by Rich in PA on Mon Oct 28, 2013 at 03:55:08 AM PDT

  •  I guess I don't understand the phrase, (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CwV, Dillonfence, TXdem, sfbob

    "lead from behind".  Or at least what you and the right wing who also use the phrase want.  What's wrong with a politician who changes position over time to better reflect the views of his constituency?  We are electing them to be representative.  We want them to reflect the changing progressive values of citizens don't we?  And isn't Kos saying we need to convince them that there is more support for progressive  policy than they think and that thus they should change some more?  Why would that be bad?

    Maybe that's why we never get progressive politicians.  We try to elect progressive leaders instead of trying to make the electorate more progressive--or convince the leaders we have that the populace is more progressive than they think.   As long as we think we will be able to elect a President that is significantly more progressive than the people who vote for her we are never going to have good choices on election day.  

    "Speak the TRUTH, even if your voice shakes."

    by stellaluna on Mon Oct 28, 2013 at 04:27:33 AM PDT

    •  Politicians that lead from behind tend to... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TXdem, sfbob

      be politicians that keep their jobs.

      Its our job to make gay marriage palpable. Its our job to make access to health care a winning issue. Its our job to make politicians think deeply before sending soldiers to war. Its our job to put an end to the war on the inanimate concept of the day.

      Rarely in American history has a political figure pressed the boundaries and defied public sentiment. Progressive change has happened with the wind at the backs of the politicians because THE PEOPLE have demanded it. Howard Zinn knew this and he was right. The real heroes of the history books are the everyday citizen that took a stand.

      •  With such low bars for leadership (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Frank Whitaker

        and with such high bars for unpaid civilians, why do we even need to pay the politicians?

        Obama: self-described Republican; backed up by right-wing policies

        by The Dead Man on Mon Oct 28, 2013 at 08:24:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  If we don't, someone else will. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Frank Whitaker

          It's also good to have people other than the independently wealthy or those adept with declaring "personal expenses" in Congress.  

          "Politics should be the part-time profession of every citizen who would protect the rights and privileges of free people and who would preserve what is good and fruitful in our national heritage." -- Lucille Ball

          by Yamaneko2 on Mon Oct 28, 2013 at 10:25:52 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Hillary's running and Warren's not (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CwV, citizenx, TXdem, Jeremimi

    Much as I would love to see a President Warren, it ain't happening in 2016.

    Get over it, folks.

    •  Yep, another wasted 4 years of status quo (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Frank Whitaker

      damn I'm excited.

      Obama: self-described Republican; backed up by right-wing policies

      by The Dead Man on Mon Oct 28, 2013 at 08:23:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Who's your paladin? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sfbob

        I'm sick to death of hearing how bad or wrong the current slate of Democratic candidates are during primary season!  Elizabeth Warren, great as she is, does not want the job!    

        Who do we support?  Or do we just let the Tea Party take everything and sit back for capitalism's contradictions to collapse the economy -- a situation that leads to Fascism or Bolshevism more readily than social democracy.

        "Politics should be the part-time profession of every citizen who would protect the rights and privileges of free people and who would preserve what is good and fruitful in our national heritage." -- Lucille Ball

        by Yamaneko2 on Mon Oct 28, 2013 at 10:30:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I love Warren (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sfbob

    But she has made it clear she isn't interested in running. You absolutely cannot become president unless you really want it. I do agree that labeling McAuliffe a "muscular liberal" is stretching the point pretty far, but I think the point of Kos' post was that Clinton need not fear taking more liberal positions.
    Personally, I am less than thrilled at the prospect of Hillary as president, and fear that even if she did run as a so called "muscular liberal" she'd pull an Obama on us and actually govern as a center right third wayer.
    Unfortunately, I don't see any viable candidate from her left to back instead.
    Warren doesn't want it, just accept that, neither does Bernie Sanders, and neither would stand a chance if they did. We are not going to get a genuine liberal unless the role of money in politics is drastically changed. When a presidential campaign costs upwards of a billion dollars, every candidate that stands a chance will be chasing big bucks doners, and pretty much by definition, anyone who does that isn't a liberal. Given that, I'll hold my nose and vote for Hillary.

  •  Ah, the ultimate GOP dream. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TXdem, Jeremimi

    The Dems nominate a far-left Harvard professor. Really, if I were a rightie I couldn't hope for anything better. We have a huge advantage in any presidential - unless we blow it by nominating someone who would lose. Do you really think that America is as liberal as this community is?

  •  Yeah! Lose with Liz! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jeremimi

    Because purity is what we are all about, and can Cruz or Paul or Ryan or Christie really be that bad?

    And we mock teabaggers for cliff-plunging?

  •  Cheer Up (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dump Terry McAuliffe

    At least he isn't Lanny Davis.

    This aggression will not stand, man.

    by kaleidescope on Mon Oct 28, 2013 at 06:58:22 AM PDT

  •  Some people just don't want to be President (0+ / 0-)

    Shocking I know. As much as I admire Elizabeth Warren, I don't think she should be our candidate, and in that I believe she and I are in agreement. The Senate is the perfect place for her.

  •  Until we have Democrats who really (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sfbob

    do care for those things we really care about, like the New Deal, Employee Free Choice, Single Payer, Unions and the average working "Joe," and convince (and that's the big one) that those ideals are better than the conservative ideas people have been spoon fed by a corporate owned media for decades, Centrists are the only ones who will able to get elected to offices like president.  

    We need our own Heritage  Foundation and news media that isn't corporate owned.  We should have been in step with them all these decades, but we haven't been.  Conservatives know how to get the message out, even if they have to lie to do it, sadly.

    The GOP will destroy anything they can't own.

    by AnnieR on Mon Oct 28, 2013 at 09:59:06 AM PDT

  •  ELECT COOCH!!! Afterall, he and McAuliffe are the (0+ / 0-)

    EXACT same. Same with Hillary and Ted Cruz...clones.

    /dripping sarcasm

    Politicians engage in the game of politics. It has been that way since the dawn of time.

    Oh man.

    "Southern nights have you ever felt a southern night?" Allen Toussaint ~~Remember the Gulf of Mexico~~

    by rubyr on Mon Oct 28, 2013 at 11:08:12 AM PDT

  •  ya know (0+ / 0-)

    I would support Sen. Brown from Ohio with all  I could.....

    A Brown / Clinton series of debates? You bet...

    ashes..ashes..we all fall down..

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site