Is this the dems 2016 dark horse to unseat Clinton?
 

O'Malley for president - Baltimore Sun

And so it begins......again?

Is this ................... wishful dreaming?

Some of us do acknowledge your obligation.

His policies on taxation were too much for the citizens of Maryland. They elected a Republican over a Democrat - in a very liberal state.

No, he is polling in the low single digits while Mrs. Clinton is in the high 60's.

Run scared, Republicans. Hillary Clinton WILL be your next President of the USA.

What were her high percentage numbers for the 2008 campaign and what was the spread? (we already know the end results).

Reports have it that Martin O'Malley called Hillary Clinton to inform her of his intention to enter the race. The call went something like this:

Hillary: Hello

Marty: Hi Hillary, this is Marty.

Hillary: Who?

Marty: Martin O'Malley

Hillary: Who?

Have You Temporary Lost Your Bearing?
 

Dear OP:
Have you temporary lost your bearings? You want to give progressives a heart attack? Do you not understand that the term "dark horse" creates a trigger warning masking as an ethnic slur, and in this case advancing the position this this candidate has appeal to black voters.

O'Malley has never met a tax, a union, a greenie, a lobbyist, etc he didn't like. But one can never say never when it comes to political races because a pedestrian does not have access to the political underworld and its corruption. I mean with an underworld like that we could even elect our first black president just because well s/he is black...maybe even a woman president. Stranger things have happened.

Personal Best Regards:

Not sure how realistic this is, but a well written op Ed from a liberal writer and newspaper.


"There are a few signs of hope for O’Malley. Though Clinton has cruised so far without having to actually answer to the voters, she’s shown signs of weakness. A new Quinnipiac poll showed a There are a few signs of hope for O’Malley. Though Clinton has cruised so far without having to actually answer to the voters, she’s shown signs of weakness. A new Quinnipiac poll showed a stunning 53 percent of voters don’t trust her and more than half of independent voters don’t like her. That’s got to make Democrats nervous"


Battenfeld: How Martin O'Malley can beat Hillary Clinton | Boston Herald

Good fodder for Democrats to kick around. The writer then details what he considers a strategy for O'Malley.

Note to O'Malley: Try to not launch your presidential campaign the day after a GOP sex scandal materializes, if such a day exists.

Hillary Clinton sent Martin O'Malley a tweet that read "Welcome to the race, Governor O'Malley. Looking forward to discussing strong families and communities".


Translation: "I will crush you like a little bug".

Troll Cronie alert.

All postings to this group represent an opportunity to either demean or mock, so please understand that this group is incapable of anything adult in conversation.

Keep an eye, they are consistent in their immaturity.

You would think that within their own party, they could either shut up or enhance the conversation.

It seems to be your cronies that are trying to talk O'Malley up in an effort to knock Mrs. Clinton. You KNOW that she is way out front and in all likelihood will be the next President.

Ok....so the Democrats on here want no discussion of anyone but Ms Clinton.

If I misread what you are saying, please correct me. I thought a democrat would have enough respect for his own party to allow someone else.

This is a political forum. Many Republicans in the race...I felt O'Malley entering was political news and worthy of discussion. I was not intent on bashing anyone, and now am aware that you want nothing but talk of Ms. Clinton...case closed, she is it.

And note...I have no "cronies" I do not post in tandem with others...I do not exchange PM's with anyone on posting here, I do not know who is posting and am able to recognize, AND AM SURE MANY CAN, a small group of posters who shy away from subjects and sharpen their street corner wit using this forum as entertainment for them and their cronies. I do not view political discussion as using verbal assaults on personal people. You mistake critique OF A SITTING PRESIDENT, COMMANDER IN CHIEF, LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD, as personal attacks which speaks to your allegiance, not to country, not to policy, but to not even a party but more anti whatever the other side says. I have my doubts if you know much about what either party actually stands for, and that includes your own.

You obviously did not even read the article supplied, which is no surprise.

It is an article in a liberal newspaper, by a liberal writer who acknowledged the long **** involved, and even takes a little "shot" at Huckabee.

YET you do not care, and are so shallow to just assume and attack. And you probably wonder why posters like you are made fun of. READ..you might even learn something

An article right in your "wheelhouse" and you ignore and attack. What is your world like ?

The old diversion technique does not play well for you. It does not work for you here nor on To-ix.

Anyhow, when a viable Democrat contender besides Mrs. Clinton emerges, they can be looked at with interest. The Republicans know O'Malley has no chance of winning the general election and, therefore, would love for him to be THE candidate.

I would suggest on winnowing down the crowd of GOP contenders and settle on Cruz (I am voting for him in the primary) or Santorum. Both smart guys with great things to say. Both are great contenders that would make for a tight race in 2016.

And you read the article in the link ?

Your post makes ZERO sense. Do you see some sort of conspiracy everytime someone says something that does not jibe with your thoughts ? Do you actually READ or simply make assumptions, and your post is rife with assumption.

I can assure you that after posting a liberal article by a liberal writer in a liberal paper and getting hammered for it, I will only discuss Ms Clinton. That is what the democrats, at least the closed mind ones on here, want.

Calling diversion by allowing for an article that plays to the liberals is a really unique attack. Your definition of diversion is different than mine for sure. From what was I diverting ?

I must say, this post has left me confused. So much of it makes no sense whatsoever.

Confused as to why I consider Cruz and Santorum to be good candidates? Both men speak very highly of family values, want a strong military, and oppose open borders.

Talk about diversion.

What was this thread about until this.......?

This thread is missing all together. Clinton or O'Mally really doesn't matter. There are to many voters making their living from government to elect a Republican. It is simply numbers, all this other stuff is just noise. Republicans fed this bloated government when they should have taken a stand but didn't have the courage. We've gone beyond the tipping point.

It is so very simple to eliminate the confusion or to get the question aswered what is this thread all about......just go back and read the original link.

It helps to ignore the arm waving and rantings of those trying to derail the subject.

It is also of note, these folks are the very first to attack a link source....except this one. No mystery here is there?

I understand, but when I posted a follow up link to the OPs, I got the distinct impression that the democrats on this board want no discussion of anyone but Ms. Clinton.

I thought there might be some discussion, but I suppose not. The attacks were on me for even posting a link...I was diverting from something. My post by the way was from a liberal writer, for a liberal newspaper in a liberal city, yet...so I don't understand.

And your link was fine.

The problem with elections is that name recognition means more than qualifications because name recognition only requires well recognizing the name of the candidate. and that's about as far as they need to go before they enter the voting booth.

The 19+ Republicans candidates provide an opportunity for needed debate about national priorities and solutions.

Following the Republican primaries we will have an opportunity to test if name recognition is enough?

If elections in Europe are any indication the mood of voters is leaning conservative

All great points.

But do you not find it curious that in a democratic primary season with someone as far ahead and as easily identifiable as she is, that a new candidate on the scene might make for a bit of conversation ? I was shocked that not one democrat has posted on this (or at least that I recognized a such)

Will be interesting as he hits the road how he is received and if the press even gives him a nod !

I realize, or maybe assume from the conversation or lack thereof on here, that nobody wants anyone but Ms Clinton to be discussed, but today I am reading a few viewpoints on the three running, mostly related to Wall St.

""Martin O'Malley is now like, I would say persona non grata — public enemy number one in in the halls of Goldman Sachs, in the halls of Black Rock, the big money management firm. All throughout Wall Street right now,"

Read more: Martin O'Malley is Wall Street's 'public enemy number one' - Business Insider

This from an article in Business Insider noting that he ticked off Wall St in his opening remarks for the campaign.

This referring to Ms Clinton.....

"WASHINGTON — Former President Bill Clinton flew to Nashville, Tenn., in February to earn a fast $225,000 for sharing his insights with a private gathering of wealthy clients of Switzerland’s largest bank.

It marked at least the ninth time since 2011 that the widely sought ex-president had appeared at a speakers’ series for UBS’ American clients, at venues stretching from Miami to Los Angeles. For voicing his thoughts, he reaped a tidy $1.5 million, according to financial disclosure statements filed by his wife.

But with Hillary Clinton once again a presidential candidate, the global gallivanting, which brought her husband a windfall of more than $118 million in speaking fees since 2001, is prompting questions about whether he has compromised her independence, including with Wall Street.

Ten of the world’s biggest financial institutions – including UBS, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup and Goldman Sachs – have hired Bill Clinton numerous times since 2004 to speak for fees totaling more than $6.4 million. Hillary Clinton also has accepted speaking fees from at least one bank.


Read more here: WASHINGTON: Bill Clinton’s Wall Street cash puts wife in an ethical spot | Elections | McClatchy DC

And most importantly, Sen Sanders......This quote is from the President of the USA at the 2015 White House Correspondents dinner....

""Apparently some folks want to see a pot-smoking socialist in the White House."

Now that event is meant to be funny and sarcasm rules. But, Sen Sanders has a sense of humor as well

"As his campaign gathers steam and Sanders begins to crack double digits in national polls, he has an idea for a job for his main rival, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton -- whom he has steadfastly refused to criticize during his nascent campaign.

"Would she be interested in being my vice president?" he said.

Is Bernie Sanders really a pot-smoking socialist? - CBS News

I know that everyone wants Ms Clinton, but you have to stay aware of everyone,