2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumCan Martin O’Malley be Democrats’ Plan B?
(Interesting point of view, even considering the source.)
'If Democrats could find a candidate to Hillary Clintons left domestically, without her record of foreign policy stumbles (including, from the lefts perspective, her vote for the Iraq war) and without her ethical landmines, would they grab him? Especially if the alternative were, say, 15 years younger and had some real executive experience, it might seem like a no-brainer. And so, we wonder, is it former Maryland governor Martin OMalleys moment?
His debate performance was not only his strongest, but also the strongest of any Clinton challenger to date. He slammed her from the right on national security (making him more difficult for Republicans to attack), but on domestic policy, he reached out to the base. He argued that we restored voting rights to 52,000 people, we decriminalized possession of small amounts of
marijuana. I repealed the death penalty, and we also put in place a civilian review board. On guns, he argued that he has been leading while Clinton has put her finger to the wind. We passed comprehensive gun safety legislation, background checks, ban on assault weapons, he said. He chided Clinton, whom he accused has been on three sides of this. When you ran in 2000 you said that we needed federal robust regulations. Then in 2008 you were portraying yourself as Annie Oakley and saying that we dont need those regulation on the federal level. He twisted the knife, telling the moderator that theres a big difference between leading by polls and leading with principle.
More than on substance, however, he seems stylistically to have a gift for well-placed attacks on Clinton, highlighting her weaknesses. He is not insulting or outlandish, as Donald Trump is, but OMalley can be just as biting. MSNBC reported on OMalleys Sunday appearance in Ames, Iowa:
OMalleys tone was especially notable, as it was significantly more critical than it has been in the past, both towards Clinton and Sanders.
Speaking with reporters, OMalley said Clinton made a gaffe in a very, very distasteful way, trying to pump out a smokescreen for her coziness with the big banks of Wall Street by invoking the tragedy of 9/11 and those attacks and especially so fresh after so many were murdered in Paris.
And it wasnt just Clinton whom OMalley targeted. I dont believe we need to scrap capitalism and replace it with socialism, as Sen. Sanders thinks, he said of Sanders.
On Monday, OMalley twisted the knife again, calling her 9/11 justification for Wall Street donations pretty shameful and accused her of wrapping herself in the tragedy of 9/11.
Frankly, he reminds us a lot of Clinton Bill Clinton. Not only is OMalley a young man with gubernatorial experience, as Clinton had in 1992, but OMalley is also engaging in classic triangulating, veering to Clintons left on Wall Street and to her right on terrorism (but still to the GOPs left).
OMalley is currently no threat to Clinton. But what if she falters, or is snared in the FBI investigation? Vice President Joe Biden is not on the ballot anywhere; OMalley has a campaign operation. Besides, Biden is even older than Clinton and has his fingerprints all over the failed Obama foreign policy. OMalley can disclaim responsibilities for the serial blunders.
OMalley should hang in there, keep punching and position himself as the real backup to Clinton. Given a choice of running against the senior citizen and socialist, the failed former secretary of state or the former Maryland governor, Republicans, I am certain, would least prefer OMalley. With OMalley, the Democrats vulnerabilities shrink. Instead of playing defense, they can wage a standard war against the GOP as the party of the rich.
Democrats now may see him as a non-entity, but that is precisely why, of the three contenders, he could be most effective waging a negative campaign against the GOP. The last thing the GOP wants is to run against a young, progressive ex-governor who cannot be blamed for the Obama debacles, both foreign and domestic.'
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2015/11/16/can-martin-omalley-be-democrats-plan-b/
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Perhaps I'm being too hopeful, but O'Malley would be a great "Plan VP"
I'm eager to see more poll results. He's not likely to peel-away substantial numbers of votes and support from the hard-core Bernie and Hillary supporters, but it would be very interesting if he could get a lot of the current "undecided" voters. He'll probably surprise many people.
Andy823
(11,495 posts)I like it, and it may come to be, we never know what could happen. O'Malley has been pretty much shut down by the media, who still want a Clinton vs Sanders slug fest. I think O'Malley could pick up the ball of either Hillary or Bernie dropped it.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)karynnj
(59,504 posts)I don't think that would happen. (Yes, I know there are many right leaning sources on the internet hoping and praying that the FBI will recommend indicting her -- and ignoring that she was never identified as a target.) As to saying or doing something so bad that she loses a huge amount of support, it seems completely contrary to everything we know of Clinton since 1992.
At one point, I considered it could be 2004 like -- where Dean and Gephardt took each other down -- helping John Kerry. I like O'Malley and could see that if people for Clinton or Sanders had to pick a second choice -- O'Malley might be it. As HRC is so dominant, I don't see much chance that her people leave her - and many Sanders people are very enthused about their candidate and were even when he was seen as likely to get Kuchinich level numbers.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)and could get crossover votes that hillary can't.
elleng
(130,961 posts)Can get votes from EVERYWHERE, imo.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)a midwestern or southwestern left moderate, trump can fuggetaboutit. i am not a big fan of geo strategic tickets but that could be a strong one
elleng
(130,961 posts)restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)he has no ego that i can detect, so he would not be afraid of his veep "showing him up." he could pick someone really strong and popular.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)Often the nominee picks a running mate with a view toward healing intra-party divisions.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)but brown is not popular right now with bernie supporters for good reason.
and disillusioned bernie supporters not good for a ge
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)I don't know whom he could pick that would cover both those bases.
The best he could do would be a Clinton endorser who's nevertheless to Clinton's left.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)would be someone who is left to clinton, slightly right of sanders who didn't endorse either one.
can't think of anyone but they must exist.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)Like, say, Ohio.
OK, I admit it, I like Sherrod Brown. He'd be worth considering as a running mate for any of our three contenders.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)elleng
(130,961 posts)magical thyme
(14,881 posts)choose him as Plan B.
tritsofme
(17,379 posts)Regardless, O'Malley has zero chance.
elleng
(130,961 posts)onenote
(42,714 posts)If Jennifer Rubin writes it, there's a very good chance its nonsense.
elleng
(130,961 posts)Do you THINK it's nonsense?
You CAN use your own judgment, you know.
onenote
(42,714 posts)book_worm
(15,951 posts)bigtree
(85,998 posts)...assuming he bests the others.
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)It seems the bigger issue might be that O'Malley's campaign is perhaps to the left of Clinton's (maybe), but his record is perhaps to the right of Clinton's. Slate had an interesting article, "The Progressive Impersonator -- Martin OMalley wants to be the liberal alternative to Hillary Clinton. It's a good strategy for an actual liberal." I like O'Malley, and I think he kicked a not-inconsiderable amount of ass in Saturday's debate, but I'm not sure I see him as a "liberal alternative" to Clinton.
Koinos
(2,792 posts)The article from Slate appears quite biased and uninformed from my point of view. Biased opinion pieces are usually charged with inflammatory language like "Progressive Impersonator." It is "dated" (April 1) and does not reflect the reality of O'Malley's record fairly and accurately. Moreover, "On the Issues" graphs never seem to match even their own data, which is woefully incomplete in O'Malley's case. Putting O'Malley to the right of Clinton is a bit odd, from almost any perspective. That would be like putting Sanders to the right of Clinton because he has a mixed record of voting with regard to gun control.
It is better to spend one's time learning about the candidates themselves -- to read what they have done, what they have said, the policies they have laid out and implemented -- than to rely on second-hand and subjective outdated opinion pieces.
Koinos
(2,792 posts)I'm not sure which "Democrats" would claim ownership to "Plan B." The "powers that be" don't like him. Wall Street fears him. Many people don't know him. And the big shots with big money aren't calling him and setting up numerous superPACs. The fact that his campaign is "running on fumes" is well known. If the DNC wanted O'Malley, they would have sent more money his way and not stifled him at every turn.
But O'Malley just keeps going out there and campaigning vigorously; and he is the first to joke about his occupying "third place" in the polls and his lack of funding. He is not a rich guy. He has more debt than assets. He is running because he thinks it is the right thing to do. He believes it is a matter of principle.
Gloria
(17,663 posts)I never realized how ...reserved? he was? Dull? Just very little personality at all....I hate to judge like that, but
I find him very uninspiring...
elleng
(130,961 posts)'They are rejecting our values in the face of fear & ignorance. Keeping America safe and staying true to who we are is not a zero-sum choice.'
Gloria
(17,663 posts)Wasn't it part of the Obama campaign? The media is all over it...strong, weak, etc. etc.
To me, he is very flat...it's a valid observation given the way our elections work.....
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)I can support pretty much any other D besides Hillary.
demwing
(16,916 posts)Can't say what the party bosses think, but I don't give a damn what they say anyway. The "Party" clearly wants to move to the center, and is willing to negotiate with our financial future. It's these types of actions that will send progressives off to find/form a third party, which holds potential for disaster.
O'Malley doesn't seem the party centrist type...which, to me, is part of his appeal.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)I think they make a great team. I am not paying much attention to the bickering between them it's a campaign they are supposed to do that. I think Bernie is more on fire to take down the 1% so that is why he gets the edge for me. But, if something imploded Hillary's campaign and O'Malley took the majority of her support, I would not upset me in the slightest. He is a good choice.
Kilgore
(1,733 posts)Hadn't stopped to think about it.
elleng
(130,961 posts)but glad someone else did, to give folks something to think about.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)No question.
think
(11,641 posts)onenote
(42,714 posts)What has happened to this place?
Sample of Jennifer Rubin's political acumen:https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/obama-loses-his-2008-coalition/2012/10/30/b689b640-229a-11e2-8448-81b1ce7d6978_blog.html?wprss=rss_right-turn
or
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/11/07/wapos-jennifer-rubin-admits-she-misled-her-read/191214
elleng
(130,961 posts)Did you notice I wrote, in the OP: '(Interesting point of view, even considering the source.)' ?