...Hillary Clinton on Monday announced the launch of Onward Together, a new political group aimed at advancing progressive causes by harnessing grass-roots opposition to President Trump’s policies.
Mrs. Clinton, 69, who until recently had maintained a low profile after her loss in the presidential election in November, said on Twitter that her new group would encourage people to “get involved, organize, and even run for office
Lest we forget, the "announcement window" is less than two years away.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
As I noted over at the Amtrak Forum, "Amtrak Joe", who is "definitely not running", has established a PAC "to foster awareness of the issues of our day".
The Donald 9/4 (favoring re-election) Pence 8/1 Hillary 25/1 Amtrak Joe 40/1 Dwyane The Rock 66/1 Kim Kardashian 500/1
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
The strong tilt toward the Donald is interesting. If the 2016 had been a sporting event, given the strong media bias in favor of Hillary it would be said that the referees had been bought by the team that lost and still couldn't win. Given that and their history, I would give the British odds makers more credibility than the US media either at the time of the election or any time since. What seems not to be grasped is the reality is that many of the pro-Trump people at the time of the election were not so much pro-Trump as they were anti-Clinton, and given his actions since taking office have therefore been somewhat pleasantly surprised by his peformance since then. Clinton was seen as an extension of Obama who was seen by many (including me) as having programs and policies that were driving the country straight into the ground. As to all his moral and other failings both real and percieved, that has been taken as more of a so what? Do you really think Clinton and hangers on were better? I mean, would any woman tolerate the actions of Bill unless they saw staying with him as aggrandizing their own power?
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
No question whatever, Mr. Harris.
The only reason Hillary stayed with Bill through first the '08 Primaries and then the '16 Cycle was that in both cases, the handlers (however competent or otherwise they might have been) deemed it beneficial to Hillary's election.
While having never been married in this life, who am I to say what constitutes love? I think there is love between "The Hillbillies", but it is the love of power (think Francis.and Claire "House of Cards") and hubris.
Now the interesting question is that The Clintons have stayed together post-Election. Could she and handlers be thinking of another run? Who knows "how old is too old?".
Just think; should The Donald be reelected and serve out the two terms, he will be 78 when leaving office (and I will be - or would have been; whichever - 83)
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Just think; should The Donald be reelected and serve out the two terms, he will be 78 when leaving office (and I will be - or would have been; whichever - 83)
And I will be 80, and probably have achieved Greatgrandfather status a couple or few times. (Looking at wedding of first grandchild to acheve that status like the headlight of an oncoming train. Scarey.) Maybe a piece of the California HSR will actually be running. Who knows?
Posted by Jerome Nicholson (Member # 3116) on :
And I'll be 70 and looking at constructing of the Hyperloop!!
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jerome Nicholson: And I'll be 70 and looking at constructing of the Hyperloop!!
I could go on for quite a while about all the things not considered that make the hyperloop beyond impractical into the realm of hallucination. Maybe I could watch it work from the back of my favorite flying pig.
Posted by Jerome Nicholson (Member # 3116) on :
😁
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
Hyperloop, one more time: Now, now: Let's not get too bothered about the laws of physics or other realities here.
Actually, the vacuum tube system that seems to be the basis of this concept goes back to the 19th century. It was not successful then.
Let's do a few things here: Calculate the volume of people, and I mean in cubic feet that have to make the trip. How big a box do you need? Then how big a travel way do you need? You will get around to needing a box about 4 or 6 people plus walkway wide, whether bus, train, plane, or vacuum tube. Then you will need one for each direction. Wow! you are up to the size of a double track railroad for your vacuum tube line. Then, how about capacity? You gotta have more that little capsules. You are back up to train size people containers.
Then, let's looks at the basis of mechanical physics, such things as acceleration, speeding slowing, and making curves. OK, to reduce run time you must drastically increase speed. That means much larger radius curves. Pause and think about this for a while.
Let's think of such mundane things as crossing farmland, towns, mountains, fault lines. Then there are such things as provisions for evacuation, fire-life-safety, etc.
I refrain from comment on the people making these pronouncements other than to say the list does not appear to include any that have dealt with the reality of getting a transportation line of any sort in operation between points A and B.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
The Donald is 5/2; Pence is 12/1, and the highest woman at 12/1 is...Oprah.
I think within weeks this Oprah "phoenom" will have come and gone. Simply because she delivered a "Presidential" speech at the Golden Globes does not make her a candidate - if she even wants to be one.
Hard as it may be to believe, The Journal editorialized about an Oprah candidacy;
No one waltzes into the Oval Office. Unless the Democratic Party chooses to coronate Ms. Winfrey, an unpopular idea in liberal circles, she would have to run through a primary gauntlet likely to include Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris and maybe 15 other Democratic contenders. We’ve learned it’s possible to survive this ordeal without knowing much of anything about public policy, but Democratic primary voters might not take it on faith that this famous entrepreneur is on board with the current progressive turn toward some American version of statism.
Ms. Winfrey’s other obstacle might be convincing voters in a general election that her Presidency in practice wouldn’t merely return the Obama -era apparat to power after Mr. Trump’s policies restored the economy. Ms. Winfrey might have to talk her way around what the Democrats represent, but after 2016 only a fool would rule out Oprah’s chances