Slog

Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drinks

Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Biden or Clinton in 2016?

Posted by on Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:00 AM

Clearly it's not too early to be discussing this:

Biden's private swearing-in ceremony on Sunday was attended by recently elected New Hampshire Gov. Maggie Hassan, someone who would be a potent ally in the state's first-in-the-nation primary. Attendees at a Sunday afternoon reception at the vice president's residence at the Naval Observatory said they noticed a lot of party activists from early voting states like New Hampshire, Iowa and South Carolina.

So, let us begin the early Slog voting:

 

Comments (52) RSS

Newest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
76
overweight is the common problem of each and every person. all are suffering from excessive weight and no body likes to talk about this topic and depends upon more on fast food i have a personal experience with in i myself have more weight and i also can not stop eating and also can't talk about this i feel embarrassed in talking about this. and most person lose confidence after this and also has inferiority complex by seeing other person slim and trim(body in perfect shap)
Posted by hylandsenterprises on April 4, 2013 at 12:08 AM · Report this
53
Kathleen Sebelius? Amy Klobuchar?
Posted by EricaP on January 24, 2013 at 11:56 AM · Report this
dirac 52
Conservatives from the 1990s-mid 00s only need to vote Democratic because they've migrated to that party in practice and population.

So the other major condition that exists which helped Dems is that previous Republican Party members were at one time way more reasonable and the last Republican president was a treacherous war criminal.
Posted by dirac on January 23, 2013 at 8:01 PM · Report this
dirac 51
Cuomo.
Posted by dirac on January 23, 2013 at 7:54 PM · Report this
49
Patty Murray
Posted by nifty on January 23, 2013 at 6:41 PM · Report this
Matt from Denver 48
@ 47, most of those elections you list came down to one thing, as elections are wont to do. In 2000, it all boiled down to Florida, it was only possible because of those other factors.

That said, there is a lot more chaos and random luck involved in presidential elections as you correctly point out. While things are definitely trending toward progressivism, where would we be today if no one had leaked Romney's 47% speech?
Posted by Matt from Denver on January 23, 2013 at 4:30 PM · Report this
Fnarf 47
@46, but you know, most elections are "perfect storms", if you look at them closely. Obama "got lucky" by running against the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. Bush won the first time (despite losing the popular vote) because Florida is a banana republic. Clinton won (both times) because a certain dipshit named Ross Perot split the Republican vote. Reagan won in large part because of economic conditions out of Carter's control. Nixon took back the White House for the Republicans just four years after his party was declared dead after the debacle of Goldwater, thanks to the debacle of Chicago '68 and the collapse of the labor coalition (a debacle that was amplified four years later). Eisenhower won because he was both a Democrat and a Republican (both parties tried to nominate him at one point or another). And on and on.

Elections are never about calm, rational weighing-in-hand of opposing points of view; they are emotional, chaotic, and usually based on events that neither party has control of.

In a way it just points up how extraordinary Obama's achievement is. He got a majority twice. The only other Democrat to win with a majority twice in the past 180 years (since Andrew Jackson) was FDR. Kennedy never did it even once; nor did Clinton, or Truman, or Woodrow Wilson, or Grover Cleveland even. Carter did, barely -- 50.1%. I think in retrospect Obama's victories are going to loom very large.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on January 23, 2013 at 4:06 PM · Report this
Matt from Denver 46
@ 43, where did I say that Biden wouldn't have to deal with factor # 3? Hell, where did I say that I support Joe Biden? I was just pointing something out to #38 (that, by rights, Al Gore should have been on that list).

Anyway, Gore's loss was one time that you could say the factors combined into a perfect storm, and not be stating a cliche. It's awfully hard to imagine Obama having a scandal so major that Biden would want to run away from him in 2016. And if Obama is serious about pushing a more progressive platform, there won't be any hard left third party challenge. Maybe the election will still end up being really close, but that's really impossible to say now.
Posted by Matt from Denver on January 23, 2013 at 3:30 PM · Report this
very bad homo 45
I like them both, but I'm not even going to think about it for another 2 years.
Posted by very bad homo on January 23, 2013 at 3:03 PM · Report this
Fnarf 44
Nancy Pelosi will be 76 years old. Elizabeth Warren will be 67. Hillary Clinton will be 69. Joe Biden will be 74. These people are dinosaurs.

Senators are generally speaking not good candidates. Yes, Obama was a Senator, and so was JFK -- but they were both short-termers, who moved into the Senate specifically to gain a platform to run for President, and were barely present in that body during their terms. And the only other Senator elected President -- ever -- was Warren Harding (plenty of other former Senators have been elected, but not directly from the Senate; usually they were VP first). The only Congressman to be elected President straight out of the House is the illustrious Mr. James A. Garfield. With the ill repute with which the current Congress is viewed, the odds are even longer than that suggests.

Biden, who will not be seriously considered, takes the VP out of play, though; there will be no straightforward line of succession. And thus a fight. So you need a fighter.

Booker is a possibility for the future; he has charisma. But he's not there yet, and won't be by 2016. If he runs for Senate in 2014, and wins, he certainly enters the conversation, but he's far from the front-runner. The better candidates will be the governors mentioned above. They'd better get moving (I assume they already are). They need to get personalities, too, or start to display them more.

But the juice next time around is going to be with the Republicans, specifically Christie. He's the only one in either party who's been doing run-for-president things, getting in the news. He could blow that, though, with one bad press conference, one "macaca moment".
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on January 23, 2013 at 2:20 PM · Report this
43
@41, what makes you think Joe Biden won't have to deal with factor #3? I adore Biden but I can't see why he'd win this time when he's been running since the 1980's.

I have zero feelings about Hillary. Maybe I don't know enough about her. I'm serious--I've never paid attention to her except for one impressive performance under questioning by Ken Starr way back in the day.

I love Elizabeth Warren but I don't know how she is as a campaigner. Martin O'Malley is a good speaker with a strong record. I like what I've heard of Patrick and Schweitzer. The Dems will find somebody.
Posted by Prettybetsy on January 23, 2013 at 1:32 PM · Report this
42
Time Lords have two gall bladders.
Posted by DisorganizedReligion on January 23, 2013 at 1:31 PM · Report this
Matt from Denver 41
@ 38, if the outgoing president is popular enough, a sitting VP is a shoe-in, provided he doesn't fuck up his campaign, or have a third-party challenge from the flank, or a dishonest opposition willing to do anything to win (these factors all combined to keep Al Gore off your list).
Posted by Matt from Denver on January 23, 2013 at 1:01 PM · Report this
Reverse Polarity 40
Uhh, no. And no.

Biden is amusing, but I can't take him seriously as a real presidential candidate. I like Hillary Clinton well enough, but both of them are getting too old for this.
Posted by Reverse Polarity on January 23, 2013 at 12:56 PM · Report this
39
@33 ...Johnson did fine with one gall bladder...

Ummm... Phoebe? Exactly how many gall bladders do you think the average human has?
Posted by Brooklyn Reader on January 23, 2013 at 12:37 PM · Report this
dlauri 38
Only four sitting vice presidents have been elected president: John Adams 1796, Thomas Jefferson 1800, Martin Van Buren 1836 and George H. W. Bush in 1988. Biden may well run for president, but it's highly unlikely that he'd win.
Posted by dlauri http://www.davidlauri.com on January 23, 2013 at 11:54 AM · Report this
37
Sanders, what the Hell is the matter with electing a real Democrat for a change?????
Posted by sgt_doom on January 23, 2013 at 11:15 AM · Report this
Jerry M. Ander 36
Hillary Clinton. Not only does she hold every part of the Obama coalition together (African-Americans, Asian Americans, Latinos, gays, single women, young people), but she brings married white women, as well.

If fortune smiles on us and she serves two terms, the Republican Party as we know it today will be history.

And, if progressives can get their shit together between 2016 & 2020 to focus on taking and holding state legislatures & governorships so that we can get fair reapportionments, we can make real change for an entire generation.

So, let me put it as my father would, "You'll vote for Hillary Clinton, and like it."
Posted by Jerry M. Ander on January 23, 2013 at 10:55 AM · Report this
35
Get a life.
Posted by Confluence on January 23, 2013 at 10:54 AM · Report this
Asparagus! 34
Fuck Cory Booker.

Right now I'm very passively supporting Martin O'Malley.
Posted by Asparagus! on January 23, 2013 at 10:23 AM · Report this
Phoebe in Wallingford 33
Clinton is not too tired. And the Secretary of States always takes a lot more world-wide flights than the President.
As to her blood clot, please, she's had them even earlier in her adulthood and the treatments are effective and there's rarely chance of a stroke. Do we forget that Bill Clinton never released his health records, Johnson did fine with one gall bladder, Kennedy did fine under horrific back pain, and we all know about FDR.
If there ever was the right time for a woman president, that time is now and we have the best candidate with four years to prepare.
Posted by Phoebe in Wallingford on January 23, 2013 at 10:21 AM · Report this
skjaere 32
I love Joe, but I think realistically, Hillary has a better shot at it.
Posted by skjaere on January 23, 2013 at 10:06 AM · Report this
bleedingheartlibertarian 31
I could get behind Schweitzer.

My problem with Clinton and Biden isn't age qua age so much as the fact that I see them as part of the early Boomer generation that has been running the show now for a very long time (not just politically, but culturally and in business as well.)

The nominally progressive party should be moving forward, not backward, is what I'm saying.

Posted by bleedingheartlibertarian on January 23, 2013 at 9:48 AM · Report this
reverend dr dj riz 30
elizabeth warren was the first person i thought of. but maybe i need caffeine since she's not on the ballot
Posted by reverend dr dj riz on January 23, 2013 at 9:40 AM · Report this
Cascadian 29
I like Elizabeth Warren, but she's no spring chicken either. The problem is that none of the new faces are positioned for a credible run. I think it's Clinton if she runs and Biden otherwise, and they choose a young VP like Julian Castro. I'd prefer someone younger and/or more progressive at the top but I don't see it happening.
Posted by Cascadian on January 23, 2013 at 9:35 AM · Report this
sloegin 28
Talk about Biden and Clinton, and you might as well talk about digging up and dusting off Adlai Stevenson.
Posted by sloegin on January 23, 2013 at 9:28 AM · Report this
27
√ Elizabeth Warren.
Posted by j.lee on January 23, 2013 at 8:55 AM · Report this
Matt from Denver 26
@ 22, four years. Frankly, his first term proved that a presidential candidate should have more experience than that. He learned on the job and I'm confident in him now, but it was touch and go for a while there.

Clinton is too tired, and the 74-as-of-November-2016 Biden really will be too old for the job. I resist ageist dismissals like that, but there really is a point where someone has to yield on that account. Besides, what I think as fair is one thing, but what the public thinks as fair is another, and if the GOP runs someone like Paul Ryan (who will no longer be young enough to be perceived as too young), people will vote for him for that reason. And given the GOP's absolute lack of regard for playing fair, we really have to eliminate from consideration any candidate who is that vulnerable to the prejudices of the populace. It's a repugnant thing for me, personally, but the proto-Fascists on the right aren't going to play fair.

Anyway, I'm sure other good options for 2016 will make themselves known. They basically have until this fall to start making noise. Schweitzer is one name you sometimes hear. Colorado governor John Hickenlooper is another.
Posted by Matt from Denver on January 23, 2013 at 8:54 AM · Report this
25
Actually now that other people brought it up, I agree that Elizabeth Warren is the one Democrat I'd enthusiastically vote for in 2016.
Posted by Tent_Liberation_Army on January 23, 2013 at 8:54 AM · Report this
I Fucked Your Dad 24
Biden has lost every presidential primary in which he participated. People don't want him. If that's who the Democrats think will be successful, they're screwed.
Posted by I Fucked Your Dad on January 23, 2013 at 8:48 AM · Report this
cressona 23
The hell with Cory Booker. He's the kind of "false equivalence" Wall Street centrist who gives moderation a bad name. The only place he has on a presidential ticket is as Chris Christie's running mate.

The one prospect out there I've really been excited about is Deval Patrick, someone who gives moderation a good name. But Brooklyn Reader @19, I love the suggestion of Brian Schweitzer. Like Patrick, the guy's got a personality and a policy authenticity, and he's a governor, which helps. And how awesome would it be to have a president who wears bolo ties?
Posted by cressona on January 23, 2013 at 8:47 AM · Report this
22
I vote for Elizabeth Warren. (How long had Obama been a senator when he ran for president?)
Posted by nw3227 on January 23, 2013 at 8:22 AM · Report this
Bauhaus I 21
Sometimes political parties get lost in their choosing of a nominee. They'll nominate characters because - well - maybe it's their time to run or they've earned the nomination through life experience, but the nominee never really catches on with the public (Dole in '96 and Kerry in '04). Sure, these people win primaries because the only people who'll turn out will be the ones who'll vote for them in a general - not necessarily a mandate and not necessarily a majority.

Nobody's going to accept Joe Biden as a presidential candidate. Well, some will. They'll be the ones who go to the primary polls in 2016. Clinton has a lot of fans, but a lot of detractors as well. If the Democrats are serious about wanting to wipe up the floor with super right-wing Republicans, they'll have to run someone who is at least friendly to the progressive movement, someone who can gently inform the American people how Corporate US has dominated internal and foreign policy for years, and can start changing this country back toward the country we were supposed to be - friendly, respectable, strong.

But I'm afraid the Democratic Machine will think Joe Biden - simply because he is VP - is automatically next in line. Unlike many, I'd vote for him to keep a Republican out of the office, but I sure won't be excited about it.
Posted by Bauhaus I on January 23, 2013 at 8:19 AM · Report this
20
Why not nancy pelosi? Most public opinion hates congress. When she was majority leader she definitely carried her brass well. She can run on the platform that she gets shit done. If she runs against Chris Christie, her record would prove better then his. Republicans have this bad habit about nominating on seniority. Christie doesn't have a chance. If he loses 50 pounds and runs as an independent, he definitely could skew the election, much like ron paul.
Posted by pussnboots on January 23, 2013 at 8:18 AM · Report this
19
@4, 10 Well, Cory Booker has made a bit of a splash, although he has to win the governorship of New Jersey first.

Other new voices on the national stage included Julian Castro, the mayor of San Antonio, Elizabeth Warren, who I wouldn't underestimate, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Deval Patrick, and Brian Schweitzer, the witty Governor of Montana who vetos Republican bills he doesn't like with a big ol' red-hot branding iron in front of the tv cameras. In my opinion, if we wanted to front an Anglo white guy for President, he'd be kinda fun, although I'm not sure how much we need the Anglo white guy vote anymore. I like all of them and I think we'll see a couple of them in the primaries.
Posted by Brooklyn Reader on January 23, 2013 at 8:15 AM · Report this
16
Too old, both of them.

Although if the Republicans don't at least float Chris Christie, it will prove they aren't paying attention.
Posted by Jenkitty on January 23, 2013 at 8:04 AM · Report this
17
Corey booker could run if he follows Obama's path by becoming senator of nj.
Posted by apres_moi on January 23, 2013 at 8:04 AM · Report this
internet_jen 15
as a person who works at 6 am, I like 6 am posts .... I mean ... I work at work!!

(today is dentist day though)
Posted by internet_jen on January 23, 2013 at 7:56 AM · Report this
14
This poll reminds me of a Howie Mandel bit I happened to catch years ago:

Would you rather bite down on a metal file, really hard, and then have someone rip it out? Or would you rather slam your fingers in a car door from the outside and have the car drive off?

Just admit it, Eli. You want us to despair and take our own lives, and the sooner the better. If the Democratic Party can't offer us something better than Corporatism Lite (now with more gay equality!)™, we're fucked.
Posted by PCM on January 23, 2013 at 7:56 AM · Report this
13
These are the only choices? Seriously? Jesus does the left need to form a viable third party...
Posted by Tent_Liberation_Army on January 23, 2013 at 7:50 AM · Report this
Max Solomon 12
too old. obama's (and my) generation, please.
Posted by Max Solomon on January 23, 2013 at 7:17 AM · Report this
dnt trust me 11
Having a woman president would be neat. There's such a girly robotic elegance about Eli's consistent 6am posts.
Posted by dnt trust me on January 23, 2013 at 6:58 AM · Report this
Fnarf 10
@8, what worries me, though, is that there's no one moving to the front. Obama was obviously running in 2008 by 2004. Kennedy too (he was a VP discussion in '56). Clinton was in the public eye as a presidential candidate. Getting nominated is about momentum, and that momentum should feature an appearance before the national public in the previous election cycle -- like Obama's convention speech in '04. Who's there this time around? Obviously, there are possibilities, but they should have at least the beginnings of a national presence and a team on the ground already.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on January 23, 2013 at 6:54 AM · Report this
Asparagus! 9
No
Posted by Asparagus! on January 23, 2013 at 6:51 AM · Report this
8
Don't worry, the Democrats always pick somebody from the back of the room. Dems prefer their message in a new bottle. It's the Republicans who pick their candidates early. Nixon ran twice, Reagan 3 times, Bush twice McCain twice, Romney twice. Kennedy, McGovern, Carter, Dukakis, Clinton, Obama: all new people who toppled their primary frontrunner. Only LBJ and Mondale break that trend. Relax. Neither of the above mentioned will be president in '16
Posted by Why are there cars? on January 23, 2013 at 6:44 AM · Report this
7
Hillary won't run again. She's already been the most powerful person in the world.
Posted by six shooter on January 23, 2013 at 6:42 AM · Report this
6
what @4 said.
Posted by Cow on January 23, 2013 at 6:29 AM · Report this
care bear 5
HILLARY 4 LIFE!
Posted by care bear on January 23, 2013 at 6:28 AM · Report this
Fnarf 4
If this is what the Democrats are talking about now, they're already in trouble for 2016. They need to start promoting new blood, and they need to start yesterday.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on January 23, 2013 at 6:21 AM · Report this
The Max 3
I think the They should just go ahead and make Biden Vice President for Life.
Posted by The Max on January 23, 2013 at 6:17 AM · Report this
2
I think that Biden has a long road ahead of himself to establish actual credibility with the majority of the voting public this term. He definitely scored major points when he came out in favor of marriage equality, but he's got that whole ''crazy/drunk uncle" stigma attached to him.

As for Clinton, she's going to have to work at getting back to where she was in the public's view back in 2008 and then build from there. She's also going to have to deal with health-related questions that started with the blood clot this past December and are only going to grow over the next four years.

As it stands right now I have thoughts, but no position. Why no third option for 'shit, can't I sleep in it?'
Posted by ultrasuedecushion on January 23, 2013 at 6:10 AM · Report this
tainte 1
gross
Posted by tainte on January 23, 2013 at 6:10 AM · Report this

Add a comment

Commenting on this item is available only to registered commenters.
Advertisement

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy