Dream 2016 Ticket
 

A truly unbeatable Democratic Presidential- Vice Presidential ticket in 2016 would be Hillary Clintin and Bill DeBlasio.

She is the front-runner by far and he won the NYC Mayor race with 82 percent of the votes.

Union support (except police unions), women, liberals, young people, most minority voters, and you got it sewn up.

Grumpy old men do not rule!

A superb national ticket - except, she doesn't need him to win NY. Usually, a VP is selected to help win the state he is from and where the candidate may be weak.

However, seeing as how Hillary is strong everywhere, she may not need any geographic voter assistance from her VP.

I might go with Warner of VA.

Bwahahaha! 2 Liberals from NY - guaranteed to lose - big time!

But it would assure the Republicans a 2016 victory! Bring it on! LOL

I'm kind of torn. Clearly, what's best for the NATION is a strong REPUBLICAN ticket of low taxes, explosive economic growth, huge increases in employment and a strong national defense.


On the other hand, a DEMOCRAT win will continue the economic strangulation of businesses, high taxes, and flat job/wage growth. African Americans and all minorities will continue to suffer disproportionately high unemployment rates and dismal future prospects. It's quite likely we'll fall back into recession under a tax and choke Democrat administration and that will prompt the Fed to continue its artificial juicing of Wall St. We've all benefitted GREATLY by the terrific returns on our investment portfolios due to the anemic growth, so selfishly I'd like to see the good times continue rolling on Wall St., but I'm torn knowing so many are suffering and will continue to suffer needlessly under Democrat policies.

Lets
 

Just drive them all a little crazier. Hillary and Warren. I love it!

And the qualifications of the dream team are what?

I know after the two most recent elections qualifications don't seem to matter to some (too many in fact)......but it would be nice to hear a Hillary Clinton supporter tell the rest of us why she is a worthy candidate.
Certainly not just because she is a democrat. Certainly not just beacuse she is a Clinton. Most certainly not for her job as Secretary of state.

So please enlighten us to why she is the candidate of choice.

Dear OP:

The combination you select is clearly for name recognition. I will go no further then to say neither is qualified for the position they held or are holding and certainly not to the top spots in the western world

The problem with our political system today is that the most popular and the biggest campaign spenders win. It is however not indicative of the best candidate.

As a consequence the quality of our elected officials continues to diminish and "we the people"are suffering for it. These elected officials stuff their pockets feather their nests and in quid pro quo arrangements work for large corporations when they leave office.

Harry S. Truman refused to trade on his position as president and he could have used the money. Look at presidents today If they didn't come in rich they sure leave rich.

Unfortunately I do not see one candidate in either party who can fulfill the dual role of being honest and sincere as a desire to serve the people and getting elected.

It is disheartening to see voters so naive to believe that if their candidate gets elected s/he is served well. Ask the black population how it is working out for them since Obama came on board?

We reap what we sow

Personal Best Regards

Once we have the idealized President and Congress the political comments section won't be needed! We will have the perfect politics of a one party political system like our dear friends in China. No opposition, no problems!

Excellent post and insightful. :)

With the smartest woman in the universe on top (who was broke for a while and excels at tormenting her cheating husband's many mistresses), and a closet commie as VP, this would be the best means by which to continue if not increase income inequality. The rubes in Flyover will never figure this out so I agree ... Clinton/DeBlasio 2016 ... and while we're at it, let's allow all Mexican citizens anywhere to vote in US elections as well. After all, we stole a big piece of their country and must atone. White guilt can be a crushing burden as we all know.

So it's doubtful that you will vote for Jeb Bush and his Mexican wife and half-Mexican children to occupy the White House? Just wondering?

Actually, I would vote for George P Bush ... generally speaking, he's conservative and is also a Naval Intel officer (reserves), as well as being a Rice Univ. graduate all of which I like. His mother, Columba, is a naturalized US citizen fyi, not in any way "illegal" which is what I was referring to.

As far as voting for Jeb ... he's totally corrupt with Wall St money just like Hillary Clinton is. ( Bush Holds $100K Per Ticket Fundraiser - Political Wire : Political Wire ) so he will never get my vote.

Absolutely true!

DeBlasio is loved by unions except police unions as as Clinton. Minorities will vote as a bloc for any liberal, young people will not vote for the establishment old white men, and most women will vote for a woman.

The age 60 and over white men are now the odd men OUT.

Very racist comment ... how shameful

Of course he wouldn't. Jeb's not a democrat.

Clinton is now 67. Two more years she'll be 69. Afer 4 years 73. Ya don't think that's old???

Now you have union leaders in the W/H sucking up to DeBlasio, instead of Al Sharpton and his band of merry men. Don't that make ya feel warm and fuzzy ... NOT!!

I believe Reagen was 69 when first elected. No, that is not too old to be President. He served 2 terms and was a good President.

You may not like the statement but tell us what you do not think is true.

Oh yes, those above mentioned groups will turn out in high numbers in order to elect such a dream ticket when the GOP runs their typical candidate such as Romney, Palin, or McCain.

OK so some do not think she is too old!

I am still waiting to hear from her supporters why they think she is qualified.

And I do understand the precedent that has been set by the 2008 & 2012 elections...Qualifications obviously DO NOT matter!

While the Constitution does not require the Pres and VP to be from different states, it does prohibit the electors in the home state from voting for their own state citizens for both positions. Thus with your idealized ticket of Clinton and the mayor, the electors from NY would have to cast their electoral college votes for a different person for VP even when the Dems win the state. This is why Cheney (AKA Darth) at the last moment changed his residency from Texas to Wyoming in 2000 as had he been a Texan he could not have received that state's electoral college votes.

I am a bit mystified at the many comments that say that Clinton is not qualified to be president. Is she a US citizen? Is she age 35 or more? Has she resided in the US for at least 14 years? All YES, she is qualified.

She also was a US Senator for 12 years and Secretary of State for 4. Being first lady of a state and the US did likely give her some experience in the operation of government from the executive side as well.

Those previously held positions seem to make her very qualified for POTUS. Certainly as qualified as say someone who
Was governor of a state (Christie, Perry, Jindal, Palin (sort of), Bush, Walker, Kasich) or a US senator for less than a single term and (Cruz, Paul) Or a surgeon who has no experience working in a political environment (Carson). Or the person who still seems interested and did lead in the polls for a while in 2012, Trump. Person with most experience who has expressed some interest in running from the GOP, Graham.

So for the Clinton haters, and there clearly are a lot of you, please explain what qualification she lacks other than you disagree with her politics?

Why do RWers use Sucking and Shoving it down our throats so often in their discussions? What imagery are you invoking here, and why?

I'll give you 2008. Obama was only a U.S Senator for two years (a state senator before that). But not qualified in 2012? Being President for four years definitely puts you in the most highly qualified ranks. Especially those four years of straightening out the mess he was left and getting Healthcare passed. Be thankful for that first term.

Don't be naive - You surely know by now that the (self)right(eous)- wingers don't believe any Democrat is qualified, especially those of color or the female persuasion.

I think a more appropriate question would be "what has she accomplished" other than holding these offices. I recall she had a run at healthcare reform when she was First Lady and failed miserably. We certainly can't use her time as Secretary of State because the world is a mess since her term. So what has she accomplished. At least a Governor has shown he can successfully run a state and get things done. A CEO has run a corporation and knows how to negotiate. Dr. Carson is just plain smart and level headed and could probably come up with ideas that are beyond most of our capabilities, and hasn't had any scandals come up (yet) and really loves this country.

So I will ask again - what has Hillary accomplished that she can run on?

Out in left field (yes PUN intended) prejudice and totally off base comments highlighted above.

Let's see how the discussion would progress if there were a stand out qualified candidate available from either party....and contrary to the nasty sniping above it does not matter what race or gender or religion.

Holding any office does not automatically bestow qualification.

Your time would be better spent vetting the candidates who might be running for the Republican nomination. Did you know that Gov Scott Walker, one of the favorites, does not have a college degree? Why is this important you might ask? Well, not since the 1800's has anyone been elected president without a college degree, and most of the recent presidents have degrees from Ivy League schools.

Another favorite, Sen Rand Paul has always told people that he holds two bachelor degrees from Baylor. Well, Salon.com is reporting that he doesn't even have one degree from Baylor. If this is true, how did he get into Duke Medical School without having a BS. Could you research this and report back? It could tell us who is qualified and who is not qualified.

This thread was begun about a certain team for 2016. Dont you think that out of respect that is what should be talked about mostly.

ON that degree thingie....I recall Mr. Dean, who was one of the first and loudest to proclaim this some kind of issue...anyway, I recall him making a fool of himself during his run at the nomination. Is that what a degree gets you ? No thanks...rather have a mature, statesman type.

Governor Walker and Senator Paul could be on somebody's dream team in 2016. Who is that mature, statesman type?

Rick Perry, Chris Christie, Rick Santorum, Sarah Palin, Donald Trump....:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Dear guest: Being a US citizen age 35 and residing I the US for the past 14 years makes her eligible not qualified.

She did nothing as the Senator from New York and traveled thousand of miles around the world as secretary of state and her claim to fame was a reset with Russia. How's that working out for us?

I can't speak for other but I hate no one because the issuing of voting for president is business and not personal to me.

The same people that twice elected Obama will rush to vote in Hillary and for the same reasons. If they succeed then we will all continue to suffer the continual decline of America.

so what about the Republicans and I am registered so I do not see one candidate thus far that excites me. so bottom line this country is in deep doo doo because qualified people are not coming forward to serve

Gov Perry, indicted by a grand jury in Texas; Gov Christie, under federal investigation in NJ; Rick Santorum, lost his last senate race by 18% in PA; former Gov Palin, doing stand-up comedy on SNL tonight on NBC, that leaves us with our nominee Donald Trump.

WHO is this shallow to post such bunk. Talk about lack of education !!

The politics of .....not sure what kind of politics this is...but slimy is one word that rolls off my tongue.

Not sure what this means relative to our voters, but the election of 2016 is about TWO YEARS AWAY.

The world is a mess.....we have serious legislation issues....economy issues and on and on and on.....and our voters choose to rant on about stuff that is fodder for National Enquirer, although event hey would raise their eyebrows at the shallow nature of some.

Better than doing unintentional stand-up comedy on the campaign trail.

Back in the 60's and 70's some students were accepted into medical school without a bachelor's degree. Not to say that they didn't do undergrad studies - they did, but because they were found to be exceptional students, and as long as they completed the necessary prerequisite courses, they could be admitted without completion of a BS. I'm not sure if any medical school permits that today, but as you can see it puts Rand Paul in a pretty different light when looking at it from this perspective.

Yeah, I am not sure I could support Paul, but this is ludicrious to talk about college degrees.

Is this what politics has come to ? When Dean made his initial comment on MORNING JOE on MSNBC, I thought everbody, Dems and Repubs on the set would choke. There is a certain segment to take all these elections right straight to the name calling, one liners.

IRONY is that these obviously not well educated or well read people are making fun of people who have more going for them in one pocket that these posters could ever hope for.

Again, these nim wits attack a thread with the "bathroom wall" stuff and the OP's entire thread is gone.

Rand Paul caught lying about his college record - Salon.com

Senator Rand Paul said in a speech this past Thursday that he has two bachelor degrees from Baylor, but his office had to walk that back later and say he does not have any degree from Baylor.

BAD MAN...and another inciteful post from the same poster !!!

People are being beheaded and you are...well, not sure what you are doing...it is a pure mystery...certainly not discussing anything.

This is a great post ... and I think some of the Dems on this board are somewhat confused by it because they don't fully get your points :)

You may be correct ... I mean, right now, our (uh, not really mine) President is steadily evolving into the Dear Leader