OT  

DeBlasio was Clinton’s campaign manager when she successfully ran for the NY Senate seat and today he refuses to endorse her.

Great, you know how to spell server.

hilary cunton is running for President of the United States.

Is to have a viable solution to fix obamacare. She does have wall street backing her up as a plus.

Clinton’s former campaign manager refuses to endorse her...at this time!

Your headline is far from the full story. You didn't say why he refused to endorse her, and you didn't say that he could still do so in the future. He's waiting to see if she is spells out enough of a progressive vision for him. And, you didn't say what he thought of her.  Hmmm!

If the choice is between Hillary and some right wing loon, then I'll either stay home on election day, or vote for a 3rd party as a protest vote. I so wish Elizabeth Warren would run.

You are welcome to live in your bullshit world and lie, lie and lie like your post on taxes.

No major market correction until 2017. The democrats and their wall street buddies are working overtime to prevent a market meltdown before the 2016 election.

I feel the same way about Elizabeth Warren.

Believe it or not, I "might" even vote for the Hildabeast in '16, depending on who the GOP runs. Right now the only Repub I really care much for is Scott Walker,  speaking of which, I wonder what ever happened to Priapussy?  He did finally pay me when Walker not only survived his recall election, but actually crushed the Democratic challenger.

Back to Elizabeth Warren, If she ran against the likes of a Santorum or Huckabee, I too would either stay at hone or maybe write in "annoying fungus" as my protest vote.

The most important reason in voting for a President in my view is the Supreme Court....Who do you want on the court, Justice Ginsburg or Justice Ailito....I'll take the former..

and I hate to tell you this, but we may be voting for the same person come 11-16, unless Hillary self destructs, or the GOP runs someone I really can get behind and isn't just the lesser of the two evils, I can really see myself voting for her over the likes of Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney or any other moderate Republican, and certainly can see myself voting for her against a bible thumper like Santorum or Huckabee.

My one disclaimer to this is if it looks like the Dems are going to retake Congress, which doesn't look likely, I would then most likely vote GOP, unless it was someone like Santorum, Perry, or Huckabee.

I know some people LOVE to vote for divided government, and they base their presidential vote soley on who (likely) control congress...Democrats don't have much of a chance to retake House, at least not until districts are redrawn after the 2020 census.....They have some chance to retake senate only as it will be presidential election year (Democrats tend to stay at home at midterms) and some of the states are favorable ie; IL, WI, NH, FL, IN (If Bayh runs again)..

I see you're still just a disingenuous as ever!

And, little sense of humor!  

If not poor reading comprehension we are only left with dishonesty on your part. If you can't find the information, in the body of my post, you claim I left out then you aren't looking for it.

ferret out the last two points you've alluded to in you last two posts. I know you like to play games, however, unless you specifically address them, we are done here!  

My headline is as close to the full story I can find, at this time.
  I have no clue what  President Obama will do in the future, though I have a strong suspicion he won't be voting for a  carpet bagger from Arkansas, with a  fake Southern accent, accustomed to dodging sniper bullets in Bosnia,  named after an unknown beekeeper who would become famous  for climbing  Everest, years after she was born.  
   
   I do suspect you will jump  off your Hillary  band wagon when your man lets you now what's on your mind.  
http://time.com/3819778/barack-obama-hillary-clinton-endorse/
   Google :  President Obama endorses Hillary Not

Hillary apologist. That was not the point of my post. I'm much more interested in Jim Web, though I doubt De Blasio will endorse him any time soon.  

If you would like to comment on things I have actually stated instead of criticizing me for words I did not use; instead of complaining about concepts you (erroneously) believe I did not address I would be glad to give your analysis due consideration.

and I agree with your assessment of the 2016 election, I think the Dems have ZERO chance of taking back the House, and only the narrowest chance of taking the Senate, the unpopularity of ObamaCare and Obama making a mess in the ME being two major factors. Obama may rival GW and Jimmy Carter in "unpopularity" by the time the elections roll around, and I don't trust them to have complete control any more than I trust the Dems.

As for BB, yeah I thought Kentucky might run the table as well, but it looks like they might have another chance next year, but a perfect season requires a bit of luck as well as talent, you have to get a couple of great bounces here and there to escape without a single loss.

His lack of endorsement would actually make her look better and a more viable candidate to me.

I will have to hold my nose to do so, but the chances of me voting for her in 2016 are at least fifty fifty, and holding my nose while voting is something I have done every election since 1984

So one question is whether HRC has become too conservative for DeBlasio over the past 16 years or is he a hypocritical pseudo-pragmatist. Of course I'm kidding (sort of).

You still have not been specific! So, have fun playing your mind games.  

If that is the case I fully agree, despite my personal dislike of the Hildabeast she is a thousand times better than that POS.

de blasio is not a piece of shit he is the entire turd, the whole stinky disgusting thing.

She’s not nearly as liberal as the left wing Dems but she’s nowhere near the middle or even some left of center Dem. It was no slam on her per se, but a simple observation that there are many Dems that consider her unworthy (as things sit today) to be their nominee. I don’t think she’s a slam dunk for the nomination and certainly not for the general election. She is flawed and damaged at so many levels. She is nothing without Bill’s advice and counsel. She has no charisma (just the opposite). She’s arrogant. In short, she’s NOT a politician. She’s a political operative. She’s an LBJ that has no idea how to treat people. She may have saved Bill’s bacon and made him what he is but she can’t do the same for herself, not from the front row as is now required. If I had to pick a Dem from the present field as most acceptable it would be Webb. But It definitely was a criticism of DeBlasio who now thinks his present position makes it OK to be an outwardly opportunistic slime ball

First off, she is much stronger than our present POTUS where it comes to foreign policy, most likely stronger than her husband. I  don't like her personally, but that's really not relevant. i certainly wouldn't buy a used car or let my sister near Bill, but I don't regret for a minute voting for him.

As for domestic issues, although I think she too is a "big government socialist" at heart, she is a pragmatist and with even split power in Congress, I doubt she could do too much to raise my taxes anymore than Obama already has. Which brings me to my major reason for voting for her, I don't trust the GOP with absolute power any more than I trust the Dems, so the best I can hope for is gridlock, and she gives us the best hope for gridlock IMO.

As for the GOP candidates. The more fiscally conservative ones that I would like to see running the economy are also religious nut jobs that I wouldn't elect to dogcatcher, much less trust not to try to  turn us into the Christian version of the Middle East.

In short, the less government actually "gets" done" the better I like it. the last thing I want are a bunch of crazy religious nut jobs pushing us further into a holy war. Fighting the "ragheads" because they are a danger to the entire world is one thing, fighting them over a dispute about a two thousand year old fairy tale is madness.

The GOP wants to Federal Reserve to raise interest rates to return things to normal. The GOP knows when the bubble pops things are going to get ugly. The Federal Reserve is into the bubblenomics something that Wall Street enjoys. Without the Fed keeping interest rates at zero or negative interest rates = rate of return = interest - (inflation + tax on interest). They love this because it forces folks to invest in the bubble stock market. Where else can one speculate and turn a quick profit in 2.5 months if they know how market time.

Welcome back!

First off, moderate Republicans have gotten their asses kicked the last two election cycles as did Dole before them. So maybe there is something to running a "true conservative" as they can't do much worse. The only problem with "true conservatives" is that they tend to be bible thumping morons like Santorum or Huckabee,

As for VP candidates I have to agree with you on that one, both McCain and Romney made huge fuckups by picking Palin and Ryan, both most likely would have lost anyhow, especially McCain as the country wanted a change and I doubt any Republican could have won.  Romney OTOH had a legitimate chance to win, but fucked it up more ways than I count, not the least of which was picking Ryan.

Once upon a time candidates pandered to their "base" during the primaries and then moved to the middle during the GE, both Romney and McCain did the exact opposite, with the predictable results

I will further agree that the election is Hillary's to win, UNLESS some serious dirt comes out that sticks to her, Her husband was made of teflon and nothing stuck to him, Hillaruy can't say the same.  I could see an eleventh hour revelation costing either the nomination or the GE,  but aside from that happening, I doubt any GOP candidate is going to actually beat her. I just don't see any of them with the message or the charisma to beat her if she doesn't end up beating herself. Of course it's early in the cycle, no one saw either Bill Clinton or Barrack Obama coming this early either.

That such simple truths can get you so irritated at some level, yet it is also a shame you have such difficulty recognizing certain realities (what you have come to think of as "games"). Like I said, your best bet is to give up on me.

still not specifics. Just amorphous terms you use to talk about what's in your mind. Not, specific issues, quoting the words I've used; just vague snipes. And, irritated. I'm the one with the laughing emoticon.

The "reveal" (as you put it) simply corroborates what my OP stated. Truths that were too simple for you to recognize, maybe because you were too eager to disagree with me rather than understand me. Even your major whining over the whole "not yet endorsed" was outlined originally by your's truly when I stated he had *today* refused to endorse.

was going to beat Clinton in 1996...Just like no Democrat was going to beat Reagan in 1984 or Eisenhower in 1956...There is the advantage for incumbents, and the aforementioned presidents would have been VERY tough, if not impossible to beat in their respective re-election years.

I don't like the thumpers any more than you, but I still believe the crazy right wine acts as a buffer against the crazy left wing. It does turn my stomach when the likes of Aiken opens his mouth and claims a woman can't get pregnant by being raped

Romney made a ton of mistakes, but I think he could have still pulled out a victory if he hadn't picked Ryan, even the likes of a Rubio might have been the difference between winning and losing. Obama was quite vulnerable in 2012, Romney flat blew it.

BTW  a "rightie" was the first to post about the Indiana law here, that rightie was me.

Even her biggest detractors like me concede and have always conceded that she is a powerful political force. Nut jobs like Nuguy aside of course.

As for Mitt, virtually every politician steps in it every once in a while, Mitt's biggest problem wasn't what he said, but how he acted AFTER is came out.. A better politician would not have left that one careless statement define the entire election, and THAT is why Romney lost. He just ran a shitty race and was beaten by a superior politician. Of course being a better politician doesn't make one a better leader. I still can't stand Obama and 90% of what he stands for, but I have to concede he is/was a much better campaigner than Romney, the proof is in the results. Even the biggest right wing partisan would do well to accept this and try to do better in the future.

Which is, "there are boards with people even dumber than we have here" because you have to be incredibly stupid to voice an opinion that "Hillary has no chance" Please don't tell me that there are people out there THAT dumb.

Now don't get me wrong, I detest the Hildabeast as much as I ever have, but to claim "she doesn't have a chance" is dumber than even the dumbest of the people we have on this board, and yes we have some pretty dumb people on this board, on both sides of the aisle

but then so was Whitewater, Travelgate and several other scandals in the Clinton's past. but if we are going to dredge up the past, the "past' has brought down many a Presidential candidate from both sides of the aisle, the names Gary Hart, John Edwards, Newt, and Herman Cain are just a few that come to mind.

Truth be told, as much as I dislike  the HildaBeast and as much as i believe she was complicit in such scandals as WhiteWater and Travelgate (the former from personal experience doing business in the state of Arkansas in the early 80's) I don't believe that Hillary was really the villain in the Benghazi fiasco, but more of the fall guy for Obama. And just like her husband before her, none of that really comes into play in my decision as to who would make the best POTUS. Personally, just like you, I DETEST Hillary Clinton, but I still think the chances of me voting for her in 2016 are even greater than 50-50

HRC can only get 1 in 10 people on MSNBC to vote for her. I wonder how long it will take for MSNBC to take this page down

Given no Republican's are going to voter for her, and the maybe's are waiting to see who, if any other Dems. run, which I believe is a prudent thing to do, why would there be much many more than that. It doesn't mean that many of those maybe's won't end up voting for her.

Simply recognizing and calling out other bigots does not make you immune from being one.

I use the one commonly accepted and described in any dictionary.