Gov. Martin O'Malley Will Challenge Hillary In Primaries

[LuteHawk]

Former Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley will
announce his candidacy for the Democratic
nominee as President this May. He said that
Hillary should not get the nomination as a family
birthright.

O'Malley is 15 years younger than Hillary and
celebrated his 52nd birthday this past January.
He has been spending time in Iowa already this
year as he gears up for the Iowa Caucus. He
would force Hillary to spend time, money and
energy to debate across this nation.

 

[LuteHawk]

Hillary will need to get the media to start knocking
down former governor Martin O'Malley. She did
not want to be distracted by another Democrat.

 

[nowalkin]

This is great news. We need choices, period.

 

[mstp1992]

Originally posted by nowalkin:
This is great news. We need choices, period.

Totally agree. I think O'Malley has a lot of good qualities.

 

[INXS83]

I'm sure others will get in the mix in the days to come. Hillary, though well funded, has a lot of baggage and is vulnerable to a 'rising star' with a fresh face and a fresh spin on the same old democrat mantras.

 

[lucas80]

Originally posted by INXS83:

I'm sure others will get in the mix in the days to come. Hillary, though well funded, has a lot of baggage and is vulnerable to a 'rising star' with a fresh face and a fresh spin on the same old democrat mantras.

It is well documented that I am not a Hillary supporter. But, I doubt that Hillary's supposed baggage will weigh her down. So much of that baggage is 20+ years old it won't resonate to anyone who doesn't already hate her.
As far as O'Malley jumping in I am excited. We need a solid set of choices on each side of the debate. O'Malley was a successful governor with a lot to offer in a primary. If I have to hold my nose and vote for Hillary in 2016 I will. If I have to do that I want it to be after she is vigorously challenged.

 

[IMCC965]

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by INXS83:

I'm sure others will get in the mix in the days to come. Hillary, though well funded, has a lot of baggage and is vulnerable to a 'rising star' with a fresh face and a fresh spin on the same old democrat mantras.

It is well documented that I am not a Hillary supporter. But, I doubt that Hillary's supposed baggage will weigh her down. So much of that baggage is 20+ years old it won't resonate to anyone who doesn't already hate her.
As far as O'Malley jumping in I am excited. We need a solid set of choices on each side of the debate. O'Malley was a successful governor with a lot to offer in a primary. If I have to hold my nose and vote for Hillary in 2016 I will. If I have to do that I want it to be after she is vigorously challenged.

Hillary's baggage is RECENT. E-mails, taking money from ME countries while Sec of State, Bill's visit's to the island of pedophilia……….what else did I miss?

 

[lucas80]

Originally posted by IMCC965:

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by INXS83:

I'm sure others will get in the mix in the days to come. Hillary, though well funded, has a lot of baggage and is vulnerable to a 'rising star' with a fresh face and a fresh spin on the same old democrat mantras.

It is well documented that I am not a Hillary supporter. But, I doubt that Hillary's supposed baggage will weigh her down. So much of that baggage is 20+ years old it won't resonate to anyone who doesn't already hate her.
As far as O'Malley jumping in I am excited. We need a solid set of choices on each side of the debate. O'Malley was a successful governor with a lot to offer in a primary. If I have to hold my nose and vote for Hillary in 2016 I will. If I have to do that I want it to be after she is vigorously challenged.

Hillary's baggage is RECENT. E-mails, taking money from ME countries while Sec of State, Bill's visit's to the island of pedophilia……….what else did I miss?

The supposed e-mail scandal will fade away like the other Republican driven scandal of Benghazi. It's great for right wing fundraising, but, it will not resonate. There is no "there", there. All politicians take money. If you are holding Hillary to some standard you think all of the Republican candidates don't violate you are delusional.
What Bill did decades ago has no bearing on Hillary running for President. Right wingers bringing it up probably only helps Hillary with moderate and independent women. The very voters Republicans need.

 

[LuteHawk]

It is reasonable to assume that governors have more
executive experience than a senator. Governors of
states like Walker of Wisconsin, Kasich of Ohio, and
O'Malley of Maryland bring more to the oval office.

Senators like Cruz of Texas, Paul of Kentucky, and
Hillary Clinton of New York have less experience in
making government work.

I hope that both the Democrats and Republicans will
nominate a governor for the Presidency.

 

[ICWestfan]

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by IMCC965:

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by INXS83:

I'm sure others will get in the mix in the days to come. Hillary, though well funded, has a lot of baggage and is vulnerable to a 'rising star' with a fresh face and a fresh spin on the same old democrat mantras.

It is well documented that I am not a Hillary supporter. But, I doubt that Hillary's supposed baggage will weigh her down. So much of that baggage is 20+ years old it won't resonate to anyone who doesn't already hate her.
As far as O'Malley jumping in I am excited. We need a solid set of choices on each side of the debate. O'Malley was a successful governor with a lot to offer in a primary. If I have to hold my nose and vote for Hillary in 2016 I will. If I have to do that I want it to be after she is vigorously challenged.

Hillary's baggage is RECENT. E-mails, taking money from ME countries while Sec of State, Bill's visit's to the island of pedophilia……….what else did I miss?

The supposed e-mail scandal will fade away like the other Republican driven scandal of Benghazi. It's great for right wing fundraising, but, it will not resonate. There is no "there", there. All politicians take money. If you are holding Hillary to some standard you think all of the Republican candidates don't violate you are delusional.
What Bill did decades ago has no bearing on Hillary running for President. Right wingers bringing it up probably only helps Hillary with moderate and independent women. The very voters Republicans need.

It truly amazes me what a Democrat shill tou are.

 

[wneff]

There's a great deal of debate regarding how much of Tommy Carcetti (The Wire) is based on O'Malley.

 

[Speedway1]

Anyway you look at it. I am in the NO Clinton NO Bush camp.

 

[LuteHawk]

America is not looking for Clinton or Bush reruns.
Instead it is looking for new LEADERSHIP. There
is a feeling in our nation that America needs a
fresh face not a recycled family heirloom.

 

[lucas80]

Originally posted by ICWestfan:

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by IMCC965:

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by INXS83:

I'm sure others will get in the mix in the days to come. Hillary, though well funded, has a lot of baggage and is vulnerable to a 'rising star' with a fresh face and a fresh spin on the same old democrat mantras.

It is well documented that I am not a Hillary supporter. But, I doubt that Hillary's supposed baggage will weigh her down. So much of that baggage is 20+ years old it won't resonate to anyone who doesn't already hate her.
As far as O'Malley jumping in I am excited. We need a solid set of choices on each side of the debate. O'Malley was a successful governor with a lot to offer in a primary. If I have to hold my nose and vote for Hillary in 2016 I will. If I have to do that I want it to be after she is vigorously challenged.

Hillary's baggage is RECENT. E-mails, taking money from ME countries while Sec of State, Bill's visit's to the island of pedophilia……….what else did I miss?

The supposed e-mail scandal will fade away like the other Republican driven scandal of Benghazi. It's great for right wing fundraising, but, it will not resonate. There is no "there", there. All politicians take money. If you are holding Hillary to some standard you think all of the Republican candidates don't violate you are delusional.
What Bill did decades ago has no bearing on Hillary running for President. Right wingers bringing it up probably only helps Hillary with moderate and independent women. The very voters Republicans need.

It truly amazes me what a Democrat shill tou are.

One of the funniest things over the last 20 years has been watching certain Republicans twist themselves up in outrage over the Clinton's. If only they can be louder and more intense in their hatred they believe the rest of America will understand how evil the Clinton's are!
Wayne LaPierre went into the dumpster yesterday in an anti-Clinton rant. He brought up every silly conspiracy theory including Vince Foster. LaPierre was playing to his audience, but, the guy has horrible negative ratings when you get out of the NRA demographic.

Please. Please. As a Democrat I urge the right to go full on crazy conspiracy theory against Hillary Clinton. If you folks think this election is going to hinge on convincing voters (Many of them younger voters born after Bill Clinton was first elected), that Hillary killed Vince Foster, and organized a cover up then you keep right on at it. You will drive independent and moderate voters into her camp.
And, again. I must mention I am not a fan of Hillary. Just an astute observer of people being stupid in the political arena.

 

[Madman_1]

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by INXS83:

I'm sure others will get in the mix in the days to come. Hillary, though well funded, has a lot of baggage and is vulnerable to a 'rising star' with a fresh face and a fresh spin on the same old democrat mantras.

But, I doubt that Hillary's supposed baggage will weigh her down. So much of that baggage is 20+ years old it won't resonate to anyone who doesn't already hate her.

The sad thing is, you are probably right.

One thing, and one thing only should have disqualified the Clintons from any public office: They were partners in the Whitewater Development Corporation. Hell, if there was any justice, all the partners should be in prison for the rest of their lives. Ordinary, middle-class workers and the elderly had their life savings stolen from them. And Hillary was right in the middle of it, receiving all the monthly payment checks.

While there have been many other examples since then, you need look no further than their involvement in the Whitewater Development Corporation to realize what human scum the Clintons are.

I realize the large majority of the voting public has no idea what Whitewater (the corporation, not the resulting scandal) was all about, but there are many democrats that DO know, and yet will happily vote for Hillary.

.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

"If you hate the POTUS more than you hate the Ayatollah, then you probably shouldn't be in the government of the U.S."

So says Martin O'Malley.

Obviously he can't be allowed anywhere near the White House with such traitorous views.

 

[Gonzo3705]

I hope he proves himself viable. I cannot stand Hillary and think she is unelectable.

For the folks that think she is inevitable, she was inevitable back in 2008 as well and failed. I think people will be looking for another option.

I think that the Republicans will help sink her chances with their focus on her, and I would appreciate that.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Originally posted by Gonzo3705:
I hope he proves himself viable. I cannot stand Hillary and think she is unelectable.

For the folks that think she is inevitable, she was inevitable back in 2008 as well and failed. I think people will be looking for another option.

I think that the Republicans will help sink her chances with their focus on her, and I would appreciate that.

I like O'Malley. He was a good mayor and a good governor. But his personality simply doesn't get people charged up. Too gentle-spoken and even-keel. Might be desirable qualities for the occupant of the White House, but won't play well on the campaign trail.

OTOH, we won't have any Dean Scream moments from O'Malley.

That said, I'm glad he's in. If nominated, I might vote D for the first time in over 2 decades.

I rather suspect that he's really angling for the VP spot. We'll know soon enough by how aggressively he presses Hillary. My guess is he won't push her too roughly. But he may push policies that moderates and lefties like better. He's no flaming liberal, but more liberal than Hillary.

 

[Lone Clone]

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by IMCC965:

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by INXS83:

I'm sure others will get in the mix in the days to come. Hillary, though well funded, has a lot of baggage and is vulnerable to a 'rising star' with a fresh face and a fresh spin on the same old democrat mantras.

It is well documented that I am not a Hillary supporter. But, I doubt that Hillary's supposed baggage will weigh her down. So much of that baggage is 20+ years old it won't resonate to anyone who doesn't already hate her.
As far as O'Malley jumping in I am excited. We need a solid set of choices on each side of the debate. O'Malley was a successful governor with a lot to offer in a primary. If I have to hold my nose and vote for Hillary in 2016 I will. If I have to do that I want it to be after she is vigorously challenged.

Hillary's baggage is RECENT. E-mails, taking money from ME countries while Sec of State, Bill's visit's to the island of pedophilia……….what else did I miss?

The supposed e-mail scandal will fade away like the other Republican driven scandal of Benghazi. It's great for right wing fundraising, but, it will not resonate. There is no "there", there. All politicians take money. If you are holding Hillary to some standard you think all of the Republican candidates don't violate you are delusional.
What Bill did decades ago has no bearing on Hillary running for President. Right wingers bringing it up probably only helps Hillary with moderate and independent women. The very voters Republicans need.

You are probably right that nothing will stick to her, but not because there's "nothing there," which is preposterous. The reason is that everybody knows she's crooked as a dog's hind leg and totally incompetent. She's demonstrated both qualities for decades. People are inured to it. The situation is similar to Joe Biden's foot-in-mouth affliction. People simply don't expect Hillary to tell the truth, so when she's shown to have lied, they shrug their shoulders.

 

[naturalmwa]

Originally posted by LuteHawk:

It is reasonable to assume that governors have more
executive experience than a senator. Governors of
states like Walker of Wisconsin, Kasich of Ohio, and
O'Malley of Maryland bring more to the oval office.

Senators like Cruz of Texas, Paul of Kentucky, and
Hillary Clinton of New York have less experience in
making government work.

I hope that both the Democrats and Republicans will
nominate a governor for the Presidency.

A couple of Texans, Bush and LBJ, might disprove this theory.

 

[lucas80]

Originally posted by Lone Clone:

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by IMCC965:

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by INXS83:

I'm sure others will get in the mix in the days to come. Hillary, though well funded, has a lot of baggage and is vulnerable to a 'rising star' with a fresh face and a fresh spin on the same old democrat mantras.

It is well documented that I am not a Hillary supporter. But, I doubt that Hillary's supposed baggage will weigh her down. So much of that baggage is 20+ years old it won't resonate to anyone who doesn't already hate her.
As far as O'Malley jumping in I am excited. We need a solid set of choices on each side of the debate. O'Malley was a successful governor with a lot to offer in a primary. If I have to hold my nose and vote for Hillary in 2016 I will. If I have to do that I want it to be after she is vigorously challenged.

Hillary's baggage is RECENT. E-mails, taking money from ME countries while Sec of State, Bill's visit's to the island of pedophilia……….what else did I miss?

The supposed e-mail scandal will fade away like the other Republican driven scandal of Benghazi. It's great for right wing fundraising, but, it will not resonate. There is no "there", there. All politicians take money. If you are holding Hillary to some standard you think all of the Republican candidates don't violate you are delusional.
What Bill did decades ago has no bearing on Hillary running for President. Right wingers bringing it up probably only helps Hillary with moderate and independent women. The very voters Republicans need.

You are probably right that nothing will stick to her, but not because there's "nothing there," which is preposterous. The reason is that everybody knows she's crooked as a dog's hind leg and totally incompetent. She's demonstrated both qualities for decades. People are inured to it. The situation is similar to Joe Biden's foot-in-mouth affliction. People simply don't expect Hillary to tell the truth, so when she's shown to have lied, they shrug their shoulders.

See my post about people flailing away for decades only to come up empty. There isn't anything there. Is she 100 percent ethical? No. Neither is the average politician on the national scale, or the average HROT poster for that matter. Did she murder Vince Foster, or lie so brave men could die in Benghazi? No. But, again, please keep flailing away. It amuses me, and it assures a Democrat is elected President in 2016.
Hillary will be talking about stuff the average American cares about.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Originally posted by wneff:
There's a great deal of debate regarding how much of Tommy Carcetti (The Wire) is based on O'Malley.

I have never heard that. But Carcetti, like O'Malley, was a deceptively mild-mannered operator. Not necessarily a bad thing.

 

[Lone Clone]

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by Lone Clone:

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by IMCC965:

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by INXS83:

I'm sure others will get in the mix in the days to come. Hillary, though well funded, has a lot of baggage and is vulnerable to a 'rising star' with a fresh face and a fresh spin on the same old democrat mantras.

It is well documented that I am not a Hillary supporter. But, I doubt that Hillary's supposed baggage will weigh her down. So much of that baggage is 20+ years old it won't resonate to anyone who doesn't already hate her.
As far as O'Malley jumping in I am excited. We need a solid set of choices on each side of the debate. O'Malley was a successful governor with a lot to offer in a primary. If I have to hold my nose and vote for Hillary in 2016 I will. If I have to do that I want it to be after she is vigorously challenged.

Hillary's baggage is RECENT. E-mails, taking money from ME countries while Sec of State, Bill's visit's to the island of pedophilia……….what else did I miss?

The supposed e-mail scandal will fade away like the other Republican driven scandal of Benghazi. It's great for right wing fundraising, but, it will not resonate. There is no "there", there. All politicians take money. If you are holding Hillary to some standard you think all of the Republican candidates don't violate you are delusional.
What Bill did decades ago has no bearing on Hillary running for President. Right wingers bringing it up probably only helps Hillary with moderate and independent women. The very voters Republicans need.

You are probably right that nothing will stick to her, but not because there's "nothing there," which is preposterous. The reason is that everybody knows she's crooked as a dog's hind leg and totally incompetent. She's demonstrated both qualities for decades. People are inured to it. The situation is similar to Joe Biden's foot-in-mouth affliction. People simply don't expect Hillary to tell the truth, so when she's shown to have lied, they shrug their shoulders.

See my post about people flailing away for decades only to come up empty. There isn't anything there. Is she 100 percent ethical? No. Neither is the average politician on the national scale, or the average HROT poster for that matter. Did she murder Vince Foster, or lie so brave men could die in Benghazi? No. But, again, please keep flailing away. It amuses me, and it assures a Democrat is elected President in 2016.
Hillary will be talking about stuff the average American cares about.

When I was talking about why she gets away with lying, I wasn't talking about worshippers such as yourself.

She lies about her futures trading, and you bring up the death of Vince Foster. She lies about Benghazi after the men died, so you "defend" something that didn't happen. She lies about her records and her e-mails, she lies about being under fire in the Middle East, and you pretend you don't know about it.

I was talking about people who are not in such thrall they cannot think.

 

[lucas80]

Originally posted by Lone Clone:

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by Lone Clone:

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by IMCC965:

Originally posted by lucas80:

Originally posted by INXS83:

I'm sure others will get in the mix in the days to come. Hillary, though well funded, has a lot of baggage and is vulnerable to a 'rising star' with a fresh face and a fresh spin on the same old democrat mantras.

It is well documented that I am not a Hillary supporter. But, I doubt that Hillary's supposed baggage will weigh her down. So much of that baggage is 20+ years old it won't resonate to anyone who doesn't already hate her.
As far as O'Malley jumping in I am excited. We need a solid set of choices on each side of the debate. O'Malley was a successful governor with a lot to offer in a primary. If I have to hold my nose and vote for Hillary in 2016 I will. If I have to do that I want it to be after she is vigorously challenged.

Hillary's baggage is RECENT. E-mails, taking money from ME countries while Sec of State, Bill's visit's to the island of pedophilia……….what else did I miss?

The supposed e-mail scandal will fade away like the other Republican driven scandal of Benghazi. It's great for right wing fundraising, but, it will not resonate. There is no "there", there. All politicians take money. If you are holding Hillary to some standard you think all of the Republican candidates don't violate you are delusional.
What Bill did decades ago has no bearing on Hillary running for President. Right wingers bringing it up probably only helps Hillary with moderate and independent women. The very voters Republicans need.

You are probably right that nothing will stick to her, but not because there's "nothing there," which is preposterous. The reason is that everybody knows she's crooked as a dog's hind leg and totally incompetent. She's demonstrated both qualities for decades. People are inured to it. The situation is similar to Joe Biden's foot-in-mouth affliction. People simply don't expect Hillary to tell the truth, so when she's shown to have lied, they shrug their shoulders.

See my post about people flailing away for decades only to come up empty. There isn't anything there. Is she 100 percent ethical? No. Neither is the average politician on the national scale, or the average HROT poster for that matter. Did she murder Vince Foster, or lie so brave men could die in Benghazi? No. But, again, please keep flailing away. It amuses me, and it assures a Democrat is elected President in 2016.
Hillary will be talking about stuff the average American cares about.

When I was talking about why she gets away with lying, I wasn't talking about worshippers such as yourself.

She lies about her futures trading, and you bring up the death of Vince Foster. She lies about Benghazi after the men died, so you "defend" something that didn't happen. She lies about her records and her e-mails, she lies about being under fire in the Middle East, and you pretend you don't know about it.

I was talking about people who are not in such thrall they cannot think.

20 years and the right hasn't landed a glove on her. Nothing but sound and fury. Martha Stewart has spent more time in jail than Hillary, yet for all the right wing angst you'd think Hillary would have enough against her for consecutive life terms.
And, again, I don't like her. I've been posting for at least 6 months that I'd prefer just about anyone else. I still hope Jim Webb and O'Malley get in.

 

[THE_DEVIL]

Evidently Hillary is smarter than the entire sum total of the republicans in this country. Haven't been able to lay a glove on here yet.

BTW- I will not vote for her if she is the nominee. It will be the Green party candidate for me.