Wow! The Obama Campaign and the Democrat Party has to be rethinking the OB (Obama / Biden) ticket. With President Romney announcing VP Paul Ryan to his ticket will there be a change a comin for Obama?
Biden is now a liability for Obama and the Dems IMO. I could see this happening very soon.

How long before Biden bites the dust and Hillary is on the ticket for VP?

Will this happen or is Obama ego to big that the fear of the Democrat Party will announce Hillary as a President Candidate at the Dem Convention and Obama out…. Could that happen???? Is that even possible?

Belly35;1247507 wrote:Wow! The Obama Campaign and the Democrat Party has to be rethinking the OB (Obama / Biden) ticket. With President Romney announcing VP Paul Ryan to his ticket will there be a change a comin for Obama?
Biden is now a liability for Obama and the Dems IMO. I could see this happening very soon.

How long before Biden bites the dust and Hillary is on the ticket for VP?

Will this happen or is Obama ego to big that the fear of the Democrat Party will announce Hillary as a President Candidate at the Dem Convention and Obama out…. Could that happen???? Is that even possible?

Not a chance. Hillary is going to take the next 2 years off to recharge the batteries so she can run in 2016.

She has had one of the biggest political turn arounds I can remember quite frankly. She has went from being hated and despised, so actually having really high approval ratings. I think losing to BHO in that primary was a public humbling that did more for her than I think winning would have.

She claims she isn't running, but she will be just young enough (69 in 2016) that I think she will give it one last try. She has had a successful run at SoS, and will undoubtedly be the most popular Democrat in the country at that time.

Fondness for the Clintons has grown exponentially over the past few years as more nostalgia for the 90's (when things were supposedly good) has built.

I could be wrong, but I think that is her plan of attack at this point even though she will deny she has any interest in running.

Uhhh no.
She is done. Being SECSTATE is an endeavor.
No way, this close to the election she jumps on the ticket.
And, I also doubt she will run in 2016. She will be 69, by the election.

The D's will also have moved on by that point to someone else in the party.

ptown_trojans_1;1247815 wrote:Uhhh no.
She is done. Being SECSTATE is an endeavor.
No way, this close to the election she jumps on the ticket.
And, I also doubt she will run in 2016. She will be 69, by the election.

The D's will also have moved on by that point to someone else in the party.

I'm not so sure the democrats will find anyone by 2016 at this point. I remember people unjustifiably obsessing over Obama in 2004. You got the sense he was a "rising star" for 2008 back then. Who is there that gives you that sense for Democrats in 2012? No one really.

Belly thinks Biden is a liability. He must have gotten the talking points memo from the Romney team. All of the Fox people got it and that's all you hear on Fox, how Biden said something terrible and how negative Obama has been to Romney/Ryan. Of course this from a party which questioned Obama's birthplace, religion, patriotism and just about everything else.

Get used to seeing him, Belly. He'll be the Veep for another four years. I know it will be tough for you, seeing as how you and your right-wing buddies here predicted McCain/Palin would win in 2008. Being on the wrong side of things must really gnaw at you.

I don't consider what he said was a gaffe at all.

If I want to remember an embarrassment for a VP, I recall the days of Spiro Agnew. The man had to resign because of a pending tax evasion charge, to which he pled down after he resigned.

He was speaking about how the R's want to "take the chains" off Wall St. and businesses. He said that they want to "put y'all back in chains". Pretty straighforward, but I'm sure you didn't read or hear the entire speech, did you?

Let's just say that if Biden were a Republican, the media and all the lefties would be roasting his ass for lunch right now on all of his supposed "non-gaffe's".

But as usual since he's a liberal, the left makes all sorts of excuses for his slip-up's.

Frankly I don't give a crap what Biden says. In fact I hope he keeps spewing his wacky babble.

The scary thing is this loon is only a heartbeat away from the White House.

Biden don't worry Obama got your back.......

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/15/obama-defends-biden-on-chains-remark/

I'm all for Obama keeping Biden as VP (incompetents breeds incompetents) and I also agree that Hillary will stay away from jumping into this election .... Now if only Bill would get the memo

I'm always amazed at how the libs get away with changing their accents at opportune times. It's not just what he said, but how he said it that made it bad.

But this is the same guy that made a joke about having to be Asian to get clothes dry cleaned, so no surprise in his last gaffe.

Belly35;1248210 wrote:Biden don't worry Obama got your back.......

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/15/obama-defends-biden-on-chains-remark/

I'm all for Obama keeping Biden as VP (incompetents breeds incompetents) and I also agree that Hillary will stay away from jumping into this election .... Now if only Bill would get the memo

Need I say more?

ccrunner609;1248684 wrote:Joe Biden is another example of how poor Obamas judgement is in selecting people to surround himself with

He needed someone with experience that wouldn't overshadow him. Contrast that with Romney's choice that some would have liked to see run for POTUS this year.

Hillary is a despicable, warmongering pig. She would make a perfect president or vice president.

BoatShoes;1247823 wrote:I'm not so sure the democrats will find anyone by 2016 at this point. I remember people unjustifiably obsessing over Obama in 2004. You got the sense he was a "rising star" for 2008 back then. Who is there that gives you that sense for Democrats in 2012? No one really.

Martin O'Malley
Andrew Cuomo
Rahm Emanuel

Those three will be the top 3 choices in 2016 for us....with my personal pick being O'Malley followed closely by Rahm

Ty Webb;1249167 wrote:Martin O'Malley
Andrew Cuomo
Rahm Emanuel

Those three will be the top 3 choices in 2016 for us....with my personal pick being O'Malley followed closely by Rahm

Ty Webb;1249167 wrote:Martin O'Malley
Andrew Cuomo
Rahm Emanuel

Those three will be the top 3 choices in 2016 for us....with my personal pick being O'Malley followed closely by Rahm

Rahm is already a wartime mayor - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/16/chicago-homicide-rate-wor_n_1602692.html

More dead in Chicago than in Afghanistan. And he's qualified to be POTUS, eh?

Ty Webb;1249167 wrote:Martin O'Malley
Andrew Cuomo
Rahm Emanuel

Those three will be the top 3 choices in 2016 for us....with my personal pick being O'Malley followed closely by Rahm

Emanuel will never be POTUS.

ccrunner609;1249514 wrote:Man I hope you are right.....looks like a good 8 years for Mitt.

He's gotta win first!


If Hillary wants to run in 2016.....it's all a moot point anyway. No one on either side could beat her

I'll concede that one of Obama's most impressive and incredible accomplishments is making me wish we had Hillary instead.

Ty Webb;1249167 wrote:Martin O'Malley
Andrew Cuomo
Rahm Emanuel

Those three will be the top 3 choices in 2016 for us....with my personal pick being O'Malley followed closely by Rahm

O'Malley-no. Yes, he is Governor of Maryland, but he hasn't done anything of substance to really be in the discussion of President.
Cuomo-No, too much baggage and I highly doubt anyone other than Bloomberg from NY could be President.
Emanuel-hell no. He has too many enemies in his own party.

The D's will find someone new that will pop up between now and 2016.

gut;1249855 wrote:I'll concede that one of Obama's most impressive and incredible accomplishments is making me wish we had Hillary instead.

I'll admit, Hilliary would probably be a little bit better than Obama. Interesting what if. Although, I am not sure she would have won the election in 2008.

ptown_trojans_1;1249887 wrote:O'Malley-no. Yes, he is Governor of Maryland, but he hasn't done anything of substance to really be in the discussion of President.
Cuomo-No, too much baggage and I highly doubt anyone other than Bloomberg from NY could be President.
Emanuel-hell no. He has too many enemies in his own party.

The D's will find someone new that will pop up between now and 2016.


I'll admit, Hilliary would probably be a little bit better than Obama. Interesting what if. Although, I am not sure she would have won the election in 2008.

I agree that the O'Malley, Cuomo and Emmanuel don't look like strong contenders.

It should've been Hillary-Obama 2008 and they would've won. Hillary is just as strong (weirdly, I think) as Joe Biden with white, working class voters. Then, President Obama would have had a reasonable case for 2016 (assuming they win in 2012) because he would have had some experience as the vice president.

Liberals just couldn't wait for their post-racial uniter prince who wasted two years trying to reason with people calling him a neo-colonialist marxist. Hillary would've known better and we'd be much better off. Additionally, who knows if we would have seen such radical conservatives take over the Republican Party largely as a reaction to President Obama?

The cupboard is pretty bare for democrats in 2016 compared to Republicans who have the possibilities of:

John Kasich
Scott Walker
Mitch Daniels (If crazy wife comes around)
Paul Ryan
Chris Christie

etc.

BoatShoes;1249901 wrote:Additionally, who knows if we would have seen such radical conservatives take over the Republican Party largely as a reaction to President Obama?

It's no different than the way radical liberals have taken over your grandfather's Democratic Party as a reaction to Reagan and Bush. Besides, I'd hardly label Romney a "radical conservative."

believer;1250073 wrote:It's no different than the way radical liberals have taken over your grandfather's Democratic Party as a reaction to Reagan and Bush. Besides, I'd hardly label Romney a "radical conservative."

Well Romney isn't a Tea Partier but the Tea Party fully controls the Republican Agenda if you ask me and Romney has endorsed that agenda. It's not like he'll push some liberal agenda if he had tea partiers running the house and the Senate to keep him in line.

When will "My Man Mitch" decide to run?