ANALYSIS: Why people are freaking out about Howard Schultz running for president

24

Comments

  • Meltdown99Meltdown99 None Of Your Business...Posts: 7,312
    fife said:
    fife said:
    fife said:
    I have no problem with him running but for me my problem is that he is wimping out on not running in a primary.  if he is that confident that the "silent majority" is not being represented by both parties than put that to the test and run in a primary.
    He is running as an independent.  He does not need the primaries.
    I understand that but he says that he is more of a democrat than republican so if he believes that and believes that the democrats have gone to far left then run in the democratic primary and put that to the test.
    Why should he?  If he wants to run as an independent, then good for him.  He saw what happened 4 years, he probably feels he has a better chance as independent...
    by running as an independent, he actually makes his chances less to become president cause you are just splitting the votes.  if you run in a primary and win then you don't split the vote.  
    That's also the beauty of the US system, anyone can run to be president, does not mean anyone will win.
  • fifefife Posts: 3,305
    fife said:
    fife said:
    fife said:
    I have no problem with him running but for me my problem is that he is wimping out on not running in a primary.  if he is that confident that the "silent majority" is not being represented by both parties than put that to the test and run in a primary.
    He is running as an independent.  He does not need the primaries.
    I understand that but he says that he is more of a democrat than republican so if he believes that and believes that the democrats have gone to far left then run in the democratic primary and put that to the test.
    Why should he?  If he wants to run as an independent, then good for him.  He saw what happened 4 years, he probably feels he has a better chance as independent...
    by running as an independent, he actually makes his chances less to become president cause you are just splitting the votes.  if you run in a primary and win then you don't split the vote.  
    Yes but the primaries are the problem. The wacko wing of each party has more of a voice. Moderates don’t appeal as much in primaries.


    I don't know if that is true to be honest.  other than this past election with Trump winning most of the time the moderates have won the nomination.  I don't think of Mccain, Mitt, Obama and Hillary to be an extreme candidate.  I would agree abit more with the house and senate primaries but not for the president
  • Ledbetterman10Ledbetterman10 Posts: 11,688
    fife said:
    fife said:
    fife said:
    I have no problem with him running but for me my problem is that he is wimping out on not running in a primary.  if he is that confident that the "silent majority" is not being represented by both parties than put that to the test and run in a primary.
    He is running as an independent.  He does not need the primaries.
    I understand that but he says that he is more of a democrat than republican so if he believes that and believes that the democrats have gone to far left then run in the democratic primary and put that to the test.
    Why should he?  If he wants to run as an independent, then good for him.  He saw what happened 4 years, he probably feels he has a better chance as independent...
    by running as an independent, he actually makes his chances less to become president cause you are just splitting the votes.  if you run in a primary and win then you don't split the vote.  
    He likely feels he has no chance to win the Democratic nomination.  As an independent, he will be part of the show, which is what he probably wants more...
    But he can run in the democratic primary and if he doesn't win the nomination, run as an independent. I think it'd be dumb for him not to at least try the primary route. 
    2000: Camden 1, 2003: Philly, State College, Camden 1, MSG 2, Hershey, 2004: Reading, 2005: Philly, 2006: Camden 1, 2, East Rutherford 1, 2007: Lollapalooza, 2008: Camden 1, Washington D.C., MSG 1, 2, 2009: Philly 1, 2, 3, 4, 2010: Bristol, MSG 2, 2011: PJ20 1, 2, 2012: Made In America, 2013: Brooklyn 2, Philly 2, 2014: Denver, 2015: Global Citizen Festival, 2016: Philly 2, Fenway 1, 2018: Fenway 1, 2

    Pearl Jam bootlegs:
    http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 21,902
    The Dems are trying to protect our electoral process. They don't want to see a third-party candidate with no shot at winning taking votes away from one of the major party candidates...unless of course that third-party candidate is Ross Perot and the major party candidate he's taking votes away from is George Bush. 
    He actually took more votes away from Clinton.
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • fifefife Posts: 3,305
    fife said:
    fife said:
    fife said:
    I have no problem with him running but for me my problem is that he is wimping out on not running in a primary.  if he is that confident that the "silent majority" is not being represented by both parties than put that to the test and run in a primary.
    He is running as an independent.  He does not need the primaries.
    I understand that but he says that he is more of a democrat than republican so if he believes that and believes that the democrats have gone to far left then run in the democratic primary and put that to the test.
    Why should he?  If he wants to run as an independent, then good for him.  He saw what happened 4 years, he probably feels he has a better chance as independent...
    by running as an independent, he actually makes his chances less to become president cause you are just splitting the votes.  if you run in a primary and win then you don't split the vote.  
    That's also the beauty of the US system, anyone can run to be president, does not mean anyone will win.
    sorry that happens in any democratic system.  anyone can run to be the Prime Minster of Canada. 
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 12,874
    edited January 30
    fife said:
    fife said:
    fife said:
    fife said:
    I have no problem with him running but for me my problem is that he is wimping out on not running in a primary.  if he is that confident that the "silent majority" is not being represented by both parties than put that to the test and run in a primary.
    He is running as an independent.  He does not need the primaries.
    I understand that but he says that he is more of a democrat than republican so if he believes that and believes that the democrats have gone to far left then run in the democratic primary and put that to the test.
    Why should he?  If he wants to run as an independent, then good for him.  He saw what happened 4 years, he probably feels he has a better chance as independent...
    by running as an independent, he actually makes his chances less to become president cause you are just splitting the votes.  if you run in a primary and win then you don't split the vote.  
    Yes but the primaries are the problem. The wacko wing of each party has more of a voice. Moderates don’t appeal as much in primaries.


    I don't know if that is true to be honest.  other than this past election with Trump winning most of the time the moderates have won the nomination.  I don't think of Mccain, Mitt, Obama and Hillary to be an extreme candidate.  I would agree abit more with the house and senate primaries but not for the president
    The trend. Hillary barely won and some would argue it was given to her. The primary was trying to move the party far left. The republican primary has always been a bit interesting. Moderates having to take some stands on issues they probably don’t agree with in order to make it through. Then they stuck McCain with Palin. And because a moderate republican couldn’t energize the base to vote and lost to Obama 2x....the party moved stupidly right. And now we have trump.

    In the recent past fake promises seemed to get the crazies to still vote for the moderate. I’m concerned that is not the case anymore. 

    The real reason to run in a primary is to get the $ and get the votes from people that don’t know the issues and just vote the letter. Lots of those. I do wish we had about 4 viable candidates anymore...:and I wish the runner up became VP like in the past.



    Post edited by cincybearcat on
    hippiemom = goodness
  • OnWis97OnWis97 St. Paul, MNPosts: 1,949
    It's a great example of how random a presidential election can be.  Perot may have helped Clinton in 1992.  Nader almost certainly helped Bush in 2000.  Now people who don't like Schultz are cheering for him while people that do like him are throwing rocks (figuratively) at him.

    And that's just the reality. Tell the Dems to quit whining all you want, but this can be the difference-maker and it can steer an election in a way that the electorate (i.e., the voters, adjusted for the electoral college) do not want to go.

    It would be really interesting to see whether someone on the right tries do do this.  Some "Never Trump" conservative could cater to other "never trump" conservatives.  Would that candidate steal votes from Trump or just take those votes from the Democrat, too?  Maybe someone's looking into it. Someone that would relish the chance at help Trump lose.  
    1995 Milwaukee
    1998 Alpine, Alpine
    2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston
    2004 Boston, Boston
    2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty)
    2011 Alpine, Alpine
    2013 Wrigley
    2014 St. Paul
    2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley
    2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley
  • fifefife Posts: 3,305
    fife said:
    fife said:
    fife said:
    I have no problem with him running but for me my problem is that he is wimping out on not running in a primary.  if he is that confident that the "silent majority" is not being represented by both parties than put that to the test and run in a primary.
    He is running as an independent.  He does not need the primaries.
    I understand that but he says that he is more of a democrat than republican so if he believes that and believes that the democrats have gone to far left then run in the democratic primary and put that to the test.
    Why should he?  If he wants to run as an independent, then good for him.  He saw what happened 4 years, he probably feels he has a better chance as independent...
    by running as an independent, he actually makes his chances less to become president cause you are just splitting the votes.  if you run in a primary and win then you don't split the vote.  
    He likely feels he has no chance to win the Democratic nomination.  As an independent, he will be part of the show, which is what he probably wants more...
    again, using his own words, if you feels that there is a silent majority that doesn't want the "extreme left or right" then why would he believe that he would not win the nomination.  I believe this is more of a vanity project then anything else.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 47,926
    brianlux said:
    CM189191 said:
    Because people who run 3rd party do not understand US Government and need to go back to civics class?

    Gtilley8 said:
    CM189191 said:
    Because people who run 3rd party do not understand US Government and need to go back to civics class?
    This

    PJ_Soul said:
    Gtilley8 said:
    CM189191 said:
    Because people who run 3rd party do not understand US Government and need to go back to civics class?
    This
    +2
    Say, say, say what?
    What you want, how it should be, and current reality aren't the same thing Brian, sorry.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Ledbetterman10Ledbetterman10 Posts: 11,688
    The Dems are trying to protect our electoral process. They don't want to see a third-party candidate with no shot at winning taking votes away from one of the major party candidates...unless of course that third-party candidate is Ross Perot and the major party candidate he's taking votes away from is George Bush. 
    He actually took more votes away from Clinton.
    Not surprised that you would say that but I'm not sure where you're getting that information from. Exit polls showed that Perot took away from both. My comment was meant more to suggest that the democrats are mad now about the prospect of someone taking votes away from their candidate, but they didn't care when it was assumed that Perot would take away from Bush.

    Here's the exit poll data and a link to the article it's pulled from...

    "If Mr. Perot had not been on the ballot, 38 percent of his voters said, they would have voted for Gov. Bill Clinton, and 38 percent said they would have voted for President Bush. Of the 31 states where Mr. Perot garnered more than 20 percent, 17 were won by Mr. Clinton and 14 by Mr. Bush."

    https://www.nytimes.com/1992/11/05/us/1992-elections-disappointment-analysis-eccentric-but-no-joke-perot-s-strong.html
    2000: Camden 1, 2003: Philly, State College, Camden 1, MSG 2, Hershey, 2004: Reading, 2005: Philly, 2006: Camden 1, 2, East Rutherford 1, 2007: Lollapalooza, 2008: Camden 1, Washington D.C., MSG 1, 2, 2009: Philly 1, 2, 3, 4, 2010: Bristol, MSG 2, 2011: PJ20 1, 2, 2012: Made In America, 2013: Brooklyn 2, Philly 2, 2014: Denver, 2015: Global Citizen Festival, 2016: Philly 2, Fenway 1, 2018: Fenway 1, 2

    Pearl Jam bootlegs:
    http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
  • Meltdown99Meltdown99 None Of Your Business...Posts: 7,312
    edited January 30
    fife said:
    fife said:
    fife said:
    fife said:
    I have no problem with him running but for me my problem is that he is wimping out on not running in a primary.  if he is that confident that the "silent majority" is not being represented by both parties than put that to the test and run in a primary.
    He is running as an independent.  He does not need the primaries.
    I understand that but he says that he is more of a democrat than republican so if he believes that and believes that the democrats have gone to far left then run in the democratic primary and put that to the test.
    Why should he?  If he wants to run as an independent, then good for him.  He saw what happened 4 years, he probably feels he has a better chance as independent...
    by running as an independent, he actually makes his chances less to become president cause you are just splitting the votes.  if you run in a primary and win then you don't split the vote.  
    That's also the beauty of the US system, anyone can run to be president, does not mean anyone will win.
    sorry that happens in any democratic system.  anyone can run to be the Prime Minster of Canada. 
    No they can't.  If I had a billion dollars I could just not go to election Canada and tell them I'm running put me on the ballot, you have to  hook on with one of the crooked parties and win the nomination.  We do not vote for our crooks directly, you vote the crooked party in.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 47,926
    fife said:
    fife said:
    fife said:
    fife said:
    I have no problem with him running but for me my problem is that he is wimping out on not running in a primary.  if he is that confident that the "silent majority" is not being represented by both parties than put that to the test and run in a primary.
    He is running as an independent.  He does not need the primaries.
    I understand that but he says that he is more of a democrat than republican so if he believes that and believes that the democrats have gone to far left then run in the democratic primary and put that to the test.
    Why should he?  If he wants to run as an independent, then good for him.  He saw what happened 4 years, he probably feels he has a better chance as independent...
    by running as an independent, he actually makes his chances less to become president cause you are just splitting the votes.  if you run in a primary and win then you don't split the vote.  
    That's also the beauty of the US system, anyone can run to be president, does not mean anyone will win.
    sorry that happens in any democratic system.  anyone can run to be the Prime Minster of Canada. 
    No they can't.  If I had a billion dollars I could just not go to election Canada and tell them I'm running put me on the ballot, you have to  hook on with one of the crooked parties and win the nomination.  We do not vote for our crooks directly, you vote the crooked party in.
    True, but anyone who wants to put some effort in and just a little money can start their own political party and then run for PM as that party's leader. To create a political party in Canada you have to:
    • have an allowed name, a party leader and a party office;
    • have a minimum of three officers (other than the leader);
    • appoint a chief agent;
    • appoint an auditor, who must have a Canadian professional accounting designation;
    • have at least 250 people who are registered to vote, who must sign and declare that they are members of your party.
    Once your party is registered, then you can endorse candidates in an election. However, if you don't endorse at least one candidate in each general election, then your party will be deregistered.

    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 21,902
    The Dems are trying to protect our electoral process. They don't want to see a third-party candidate with no shot at winning taking votes away from one of the major party candidates...unless of course that third-party candidate is Ross Perot and the major party candidate he's taking votes away from is George Bush. 
    He actually took more votes away from Clinton.
    Not surprised that you would say that but I'm not sure where you're getting that information from. Exit polls showed that Perot took away from both. My comment was meant more to suggest that the democrats are mad now about the prospect of someone taking votes away from their candidate, but they didn't care when it was assumed that Perot would take away from Bush.

    Here's the exit poll data and a link to the article it's pulled from...

    "If Mr. Perot had not been on the ballot, 38 percent of his voters said, they would have voted for Gov. Bill Clinton, and 38 percent said they would have voted for President Bush. Of the 31 states where Mr. Perot garnered more than 20 percent, 17 were won by Mr. Clinton and 14 by Mr. Bush."

    https://www.nytimes.com/1992/11/05/us/1992-elections-disappointment-analysis-eccentric-but-no-joke-perot-s-strong.html
    I heard it on NPR this morning by a guy who studies independent campaigns and their effect on the candidates of either party. He basically said the concept of silent majorities are a myth and that voters are highly loyal to their party affiliation. As such, independents don’t stand a chance in a general election. He also said research showed that Perot drew more voters from Clinton. I think maybe Reagan Dems who would identify with fiscal conservatism? Anyway, this guy had credibility as a researcher and wasn’t some talking head. I’ve tried to find the interview and if I’m successful, I’ll link it.

    Why are you not surprised id say that? The interview was really interesting and he shattered some myths about third party candidates.
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 21,902
    Gore should have moved left as nadar pushed and embraced bill to campaign for him. Instead it took a Supreme Court decision and Florida electoral malfeasance to throw it to Bush.
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • Ledbetterman10Ledbetterman10 Posts: 11,688
    edited January 30
    The Dems are trying to protect our electoral process. They don't want to see a third-party candidate with no shot at winning taking votes away from one of the major party candidates...unless of course that third-party candidate is Ross Perot and the major party candidate he's taking votes away from is George Bush. 
    He actually took more votes away from Clinton.
    Not surprised that you would say that but I'm not sure where you're getting that information from. Exit polls showed that Perot took away from both. My comment was meant more to suggest that the democrats are mad now about the prospect of someone taking votes away from their candidate, but they didn't care when it was assumed that Perot would take away from Bush.

    Here's the exit poll data and a link to the article it's pulled from...

    "If Mr. Perot had not been on the ballot, 38 percent of his voters said, they would have voted for Gov. Bill Clinton, and 38 percent said they would have voted for President Bush. Of the 31 states where Mr. Perot garnered more than 20 percent, 17 were won by Mr. Clinton and 14 by Mr. Bush."

    https://www.nytimes.com/1992/11/05/us/1992-elections-disappointment-analysis-eccentric-but-no-joke-perot-s-strong.html
    I heard it on NPR this morning by a guy who studies independent campaigns and their effect on the candidates of either party. He basically said the concept of silent majorities are a myth and that voters are highly loyal to their party affiliation. As such, independents don’t stand a chance in a general election. He also said research showed that Perot drew more voters from Clinton. I think maybe Reagan Dems who would identify with fiscal conservatism? Anyway, this guy had credibility as a researcher and wasn’t some talking head. I’ve tried to find the interview and if I’m successful, I’ll link it.

    Why are you not surprised id say that? The interview was really interesting and he shattered some myths about third party candidates.
    Well when you first said it with nothing to back it up, I thought, "Well, I know he loves the Clintons so maybe he's just saying that because he doesn't want to see Clinton's election stained by Perot." 

    I've never listened to NPR and don't know who this researcher you're referencing is. I do agree with his finding that independent candidates don't have a chance. As far as 1992 goes, the exit polls say one thing, and your guy says another. So I would be interested to see where he got his info from if you can find it. And not just pertaining to 1992. Since you said he studies independent campaigns, he would probably have insight on Perot in '96, Nadar in '00, etc. 
    2000: Camden 1, 2003: Philly, State College, Camden 1, MSG 2, Hershey, 2004: Reading, 2005: Philly, 2006: Camden 1, 2, East Rutherford 1, 2007: Lollapalooza, 2008: Camden 1, Washington D.C., MSG 1, 2, 2009: Philly 1, 2, 3, 4, 2010: Bristol, MSG 2, 2011: PJ20 1, 2, 2012: Made In America, 2013: Brooklyn 2, Philly 2, 2014: Denver, 2015: Global Citizen Festival, 2016: Philly 2, Fenway 1, 2018: Fenway 1, 2

    Pearl Jam bootlegs:
    http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
  • OnWis97OnWis97 St. Paul, MNPosts: 1,949
    Gore should have moved left as nadar pushed and embraced bill to campaign for him. Instead it took a Supreme Court decision and Florida electoral malfeasance to throw it to Bush.
    He also should have embraced Clinton's presidency more.  Because of the Monica scandal, I don't think Gore really knew what to do and hi kinda distanced himself from a presidency that people were generally happy with with the exception of one thing that was not seen as having anything to do with Gore.
    1995 Milwaukee
    1998 Alpine, Alpine
    2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston
    2004 Boston, Boston
    2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty)
    2011 Alpine, Alpine
    2013 Wrigley
    2014 St. Paul
    2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley
    2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Your Mom'sPosts: 8,956
    Jason P said:
    jeffbr said:
    Jason P said:
    The guy sold the Seattle Supersonics to OKC.  I don't know how anyone could trust him.
    He's not trusted in Seattle, I can tell you that! 
    Yeah, I was living in Seattle when that charade was carried out.

    He sold them for $350 million.  10 Years later OKC is valued at $1.3 Billion.  I'm guessing if they stayed in Seattle they would be closer to $1.75 Billion.  But he couldn't get the taxpayers to build a new stadium so he threw a tantrum. 

    Yeah that isn't going to go over well.

    I heard he was talking about running, then I heard the Dem freak out, then I heard him on Morning Joe this morning.

    I don't think the Dems have anything to worry about.  The Dems aren't going to like this guy.  He'll pull many more votes from tRump then he will from the Dems.

    He thinks medicare for all is socialist and seems to have a very high opinion of himself.  That isn't going to fly.
    Remember the Thomas Nine!! (10/02/2018)

    1998: Noblesville
    2003: Noblesville
    2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville
    2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Chicago
    2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1
    2018: Wrigley #1, Wrigley #2, Boston #1, Boston #2
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 12,874
    High opinion of himself? Sounds like a politician alright!
    hippiemom = goodness
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Your Mom'sPosts: 8,956
    His main message was that our government is broken and that he can fix it.

    Yeah...we heard that before.  Nice idea but no....
    Remember the Thomas Nine!! (10/02/2018)

    1998: Noblesville
    2003: Noblesville
    2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville
    2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Chicago
    2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1
    2018: Wrigley #1, Wrigley #2, Boston #1, Boston #2
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 12,874
    His main message was that our government is broken and that he can fix it.

    Yeah...we heard that before.  Nice idea but no....
     He’s at least half right! 
    hippiemom = goodness
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Your Mom'sPosts: 8,956
    He did say that he believes health care to be a right.  He also said that he supported the ACA but didn't like certain aspects of it....yeah, who does?


    Remember the Thomas Nine!! (10/02/2018)

    1998: Noblesville
    2003: Noblesville
    2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville
    2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Chicago
    2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1
    2018: Wrigley #1, Wrigley #2, Boston #1, Boston #2
  • BS44325BS44325 Posts: 5,967
    I thought this was a pro-choice forum?
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,118
    The Dems are trying to protect our electoral process. They don't want to see a third-party candidate with no shot at winning taking votes away from one of the major party candidates...unless of course that third-party candidate is Ross Perot and the major party candidate he's taking votes away from is George Bush. 
    He actually took more votes away from Clinton.
    Come again Watson?
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 21,902
    my2hands said:
    The Dems are trying to protect our electoral process. They don't want to see a third-party candidate with no shot at winning taking votes away from one of the major party candidates...unless of course that third-party candidate is Ross Perot and the major party candidate he's taking votes away from is George Bush. 
    He actually took more votes away from Clinton.
    Come again Watson?
    The person I heard on NPR this morning stated that Perot took more votes from Clinton. This 538 analysis that’s linked in a different NPR piece from yesterday says Perot took from both Clinton and Bish equally. I might have to wait for tomorrow to find what I heard this morning online.

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-ross-perot-myth/
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 28,956
    Will coffee be free?
    “After silence, that which comes nearest to expressing the inexpressible is music.”
    -Aldous Huxley
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.









  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 4,686
    brianlux said:
    Will coffee be free?
    you couldn't pay me to drink over-roasted over-brewed over-priced starbucks

    seriously, gas station coffee has come a long way in the last decade and way cheaper

    usually i just brew my own at home in the morning.  french press only takes 4 minutes.
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020 AT 07/07/2020
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 28,956
    CM189191 said:
    brianlux said:
    Will coffee be free?
    you couldn't pay me to drink over-roasted over-brewed over-priced starbucks

    seriously, gas station coffee has come a long way in the last decade and way cheaper

    usually i just brew my own at home in the morning.  french press only takes 4 minutes.
    Silly me!  I forgot it was Star*ucks.  Totally agree- that stuff is nasty!  Give me Pete's or better yet, Jeremiah's Pick!
    “After silence, that which comes nearest to expressing the inexpressible is music.”
    -Aldous Huxley
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.









  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 12,874
    brianlux said:
    CM189191 said:
    brianlux said:
    Will coffee be free?
    you couldn't pay me to drink over-roasted over-brewed over-priced starbucks

    seriously, gas station coffee has come a long way in the last decade and way cheaper

    usually i just brew my own at home in the morning.  french press only takes 4 minutes.
    Silly me!  I forgot it was Star*ucks.  Totally agree- that stuff is nasty!  Give me Pete's or better yet, Jeremiah's Pick!
    Hmmm I like Starbucks. I find gas station coffee to be awful. Pete’s is good too. I like over roasted coffee apparently. 
    hippiemom = goodness
  • benjsbenjs Toronto, ONPosts: 7,946
    brianlux said:
    CM189191 said:
    brianlux said:
    Will coffee be free?
    you couldn't pay me to drink over-roasted over-brewed over-priced starbucks

    seriously, gas station coffee has come a long way in the last decade and way cheaper

    usually i just brew my own at home in the morning.  french press only takes 4 minutes.
    Silly me!  I forgot it was Star*ucks.  Totally agree- that stuff is nasty!  Give me Pete's or better yet, Jeremiah's Pick!
    Hmmm I like Starbucks. I find gas station coffee to be awful. Pete’s is good too. I like over roasted coffee apparently. 
    For my first time in about ten years, I quit coffee six or seven weeks ago. Unbelievable the positive impact it's had on me.
    '05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2

    EV
    Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 28,956
    benjs said:
    brianlux said:
    CM189191 said:
    brianlux said:
    Will coffee be free?
    you couldn't pay me to drink over-roasted over-brewed over-priced starbucks

    seriously, gas station coffee has come a long way in the last decade and way cheaper

    usually i just brew my own at home in the morning.  french press only takes 4 minutes.
    Silly me!  I forgot it was Star*ucks.  Totally agree- that stuff is nasty!  Give me Pete's or better yet, Jeremiah's Pick!
    Hmmm I like Starbucks. I find gas station coffee to be awful. Pete’s is good too. I like over roasted coffee apparently. 
    For my first time in about ten years, I quit coffee six or seven weeks ago. Unbelievable the positive impact it's had on me.
    Bravo!  I've quit coffee a few times... for a few days.  

    What are the benefits for you, Ben?
    “After silence, that which comes nearest to expressing the inexpressible is music.”
    -Aldous Huxley
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.









Sign In or Register to comment.