Schweitzer on Obama: “They just haven’t been very good at running things"
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 18, 2021, 08:53:31 PM

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Schweitzer on Obama: “They just haven’t been very good at running things"
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Schweitzer on Obama: “They just haven’t been very good at running things"  (Read 2431 times)
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 43,323
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: January 15, 2014, 06:05:44 PM »

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/brian-schweitzer-obamacare-102204.html?hp=l7

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Here's the full Schweitzer profile / interview:

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/dem-thinks-he-can-win-the-anti-obama
Logged
Donerail
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,835
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -1.39


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: January 15, 2014, 06:17:59 PM »

Interesting results in the MSNBC poll at the bottom.



There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what.
Logged
Flake
JacobTiver
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 8,695
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: January 15, 2014, 06:35:05 PM »

Because a guy criticizes Obama, he's now the anti-Obama. Nice. (Coming from a former Obama hack)
Logged
Reluctant Republican
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,041


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: January 15, 2014, 06:39:38 PM »

Personally I don't think he has a shot with this sort of rhetoric. Annoying both the Clintons and Obama parts of the party probably leaves him very little room to grow, at least amongst super delegates.
 
I am beginning to wonder if he intends to try to run Green or another third party. He's really pulling no punches here, and I don't think he'd be invested in seeing Clinton or most of the other potential candidates win.
Logged
BaconBacon96
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,679
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: January 15, 2014, 07:05:08 PM »

Wow he really is going after the Democratic establishment.

Sanders/Schweitzer third party perhaps?
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,880
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: January 15, 2014, 07:30:03 PM »

Schweitzer's theoretical coalition here seems incredibly awkward, and a lot of the Democratic primary voters he'd probably appeal to are Clinton fans.  I just don't understand what groups he'd consolidate in theory, and certainly not when he says stuff like this.
Logged
Lief 🐋
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,542
Dominica


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: January 15, 2014, 07:32:27 PM »

Disgusting. Can't wait for Clinton (with Obama's support) to crush this traitorous attention whore.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 7,698
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: January 15, 2014, 08:01:15 PM »

Schweitzer's theoretical coalition here seems incredibly awkward, and a lot of the Democratic primary voters he'd probably appeal to are Clinton fans.  I just don't understand what groups he'd consolidate in theory, and certainly not when he says stuff like this.

He is trying for working class/rural Dems + people who disapprove of Obama from the left.  That is a very tough needle to thread.  But of course Obama ran the same anti-establishment strategy, but with affluent/suburban Dems + people who disapproved of (Bill) Clinton from the left and it worked out for him.  He is clearly betting that Obama will be in Bush 2008 territory by the 2016 primary.  Think of how Bryan disowned Cleveland and won the nomination in 1896.  Same idea. 
Logged
Nichlemn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,925


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: January 15, 2014, 08:14:58 PM »

Schweitzer's theoretical coalition here seems incredibly awkward, and a lot of the Democratic primary voters he'd probably appeal to are Clinton fans.  I just don't understand what groups he'd consolidate in theory, and certainly not when he says stuff like this.

He is trying for working class/rural Dems + people who disapprove of Obama from the left.  That is a very tough needle to thread.  But of course Obama ran the same anti-establishment strategy, but with affluent/suburban Dems + people who disapproved of (Bill) Clinton from the left and it worked out for him.  He is clearly betting that Obama will be in Bush 2008 territory by the 2016 primary.  Think of how Bryan disowned Cleveland and won the nomination in 1896.  Same idea. 

Of course, the nomination wouldn't be very valuable if Obama was indeed in Bush 2008 levels of popularity.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 7,698
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: January 15, 2014, 08:23:01 PM »

Schweitzer's theoretical coalition here seems incredibly awkward, and a lot of the Democratic primary voters he'd probably appeal to are Clinton fans.  I just don't understand what groups he'd consolidate in theory, and certainly not when he says stuff like this.

He is trying for working class/rural Dems + people who disapprove of Obama from the left.  That is a very tough needle to thread.  But of course Obama ran the same anti-establishment strategy, but with affluent/suburban Dems + people who disapproved of (Bill) Clinton from the left and it worked out for him.  He is clearly betting that Obama will be in Bush 2008 territory by the 2016 primary.  Think of how Bryan disowned Cleveland and won the nomination in 1896.  Same idea. 

Of course, the nomination wouldn't be very valuable if Obama was indeed in Bush 2008 levels of popularity.

That is a good point.  But it's more possible to overcome incumbent approval in an open seat election, or to lose in spite of it.  Think about 1960, 1968 and 2000.  They all should have been blowouts based on Ike/LBJ/Clinton approvals and instead they were basically tied.  Also, it wasn't close in 2008 but McCain did a lot better than Hoover or Carter.
Logged
Triangle Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,822
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: January 15, 2014, 08:37:42 PM »

Is there any example of someone running for an unpopular incumbent party and winning by running against it? I know that's how Sazkozy won but that was France.
Logged
seanNJ9
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 508
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: January 15, 2014, 08:37:48 PM »

Who's vote does this guy want? You can't expect to win democratic voters if you piss off the Clinton's and Obamas.
Logged
BaconBacon96
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,679
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: January 15, 2014, 08:48:44 PM »

Schweitzer's theoretical coalition here seems incredibly awkward, and a lot of the Democratic primary voters he'd probably appeal to are Clinton fans.  I just don't understand what groups he'd consolidate in theory, and certainly not when he says stuff like this.

He is trying for working class/rural Dems + people who disapprove of Obama from the left.  That is a very tough needle to thread.  But of course Obama ran the same anti-establishment strategy, but with affluent/suburban Dems + people who disapproved of (Bill) Clinton from the left and it worked out for him.  He is clearly betting that Obama will be in Bush 2008 territory by the 2016 primary.  Think of how Bryan disowned Cleveland and won the nomination in 1896.  Same idea. 
That actually makes a lot of sense.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 43,323
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: January 15, 2014, 08:50:19 PM »

Wow he really is going after the Democratic establishment.

Sanders/Schweitzer third party perhaps?

I doubt Schweitzer would leave the party.  But even if he wanted to, he would almost certainly run as a Democrat in the primaries first.  You just don't get much media coverage as a 3rd party candidate.  But being one of the only Dems to challenge Clinton as a Democrat will get you media coverage.  Even if you're trailing in the polls by about 50%.

Heck, even Sanders commented that while he'd prefer to run as an Indy, he might run as a Dem just because it gets you in the nationally televised primary debates.  If both Sanders and Schweitzer run as Democrats, the fact that there'll be two of them would also allow them to hold debates even if Clinton doesn't show up.
Logged
H. Ross Peron
General Mung Beans
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 8,752
Korea, Republic of


Political Matrix
E: -6.58, S: -1.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: January 15, 2014, 08:57:04 PM »

I face-palmed at the people who are calling Schweitzer a Republican in the comments section...
Logged
Senator Scott, PPT
Scott
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,027
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: January 15, 2014, 09:09:50 PM »
« Edited: January 15, 2014, 09:11:26 PM by Scott »

Wait, people here seriously think the Democratic Party is just composed of Obama loyalists and Clinton loyalists?

Has the Democratic Party gone so low that now you must embrace either one or both of those last names to have any credibility?

Really?
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,917
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: January 15, 2014, 09:38:08 PM »

Wait, people here seriously think the Democratic Party is just composed of Obama loyalists and Clinton loyalists?

Has the Democratic Party gone so low that now you must embrace either one or both of those last names to have any credibility?

Really?

Nobody said "must". But chances are, if you're a Democrat, you're a fan of one or both of them.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 43,323
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: January 15, 2014, 09:45:29 PM »

From the perspective of pure political self interest, it makes sense for Schweitzer to go after Clinton, but not Obama.  That is, he can and should criticize specific Obama policies, to separate himself from Clinton, but it doesn't make much sense for him to paint those criticisms with such a broad brush, and go as far as saying "They just haven’t been very good at running things", or to call Obama a corporatist.

So it's not exactly the politically "smart" thing to do.  But I guess the brand he's going for: The "Bulworth"-type, who'll act as an anti-political politician, speaking truth to power regardless of the consequences.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 50,165


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: January 15, 2014, 10:09:51 PM »

Is there any example of someone running for an unpopular incumbent party and winning by running against it? I know that's how Sazkozy won but that was France.

As was already mentioned, Bryan won the 1896 nomination, although not the general. The Democratic party had lost over half their seats in the House in 1894.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 7,698
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: January 15, 2014, 10:37:36 PM »

Is there any example of someone running for an unpopular incumbent party and winning by running against it? I know that's how Sazkozy won but that was France.

As was already mentioned, Bryan won the 1896 nomination, although not the general. The Democratic party had lost over half their seats in the House in 1894.

There is also 1856, which was equivalent to a successful primary challenge to an incumbent president in the modern system, with the primary challenger going on to win the general election for the incumbent's party.
Logged
Triangle Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,822
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: January 15, 2014, 10:49:49 PM »

Is there any example of someone running for an unpopular incumbent party and winning by running against it? I know that's how Sazkozy won but that was France.

As was already mentioned, Bryan won the 1896 nomination, although not the general. The Democratic party had lost over half their seats in the House in 1894.

There is also 1856, which was equivalent to a successful primary challenge to an incumbent president in the modern system, with the primary challenger going on to win the general election for the incumbent's party.

And that President basically destroyed the country and is the closest thing we have to an example for Schweitzer to follow. It would basically be unprecedented in American history for him to be successful, then. I like Schweitzer but that doesn't mean that I don't like Obama or Clinton, too though they are very different.
Logged
Blue3
Starwatcher
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 9,908
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: January 15, 2014, 10:52:49 PM »

Talking like this only helps the Republicans, as well as hurt his standing with everyone who did vote for Obama and Clinton. Which is a majority of the country. Man is he stupid, Schweitzer is really disappointing me.
Logged
Triangle Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,822
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: January 15, 2014, 10:54:39 PM »

Talking like this only helps the Republicans, as well as hurt his standing with everyone who did vote for Obama and Clinton. Which is a majority of the country. Man is he stupid, Schweitzer is really disappointing me.
Though he is right about Obama being scared on civil liberty issues.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 43,323
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: January 17, 2014, 07:20:39 PM »

Here's an interesting anecdote on the Obama/Schweitzer relationship that I hadn't been aware of:

http://www.webpronews.com/brian-schweitzer-mulls-2016-presidential-bid-2014-01

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,917
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: January 17, 2014, 08:05:26 PM »

Here's an interesting anecdote on the Obama/Schweitzer relationship that I hadn't been aware of:

http://www.webpronews.com/brian-schweitzer-mulls-2016-presidential-bid-2014-01

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Because a bad system is better as long as it's "uniquely American". Ugh.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.059 seconds with 13 queries.