Martin O'Malley
In reply to the discussion: O'Malley: GOP raises 'legitimate' Clinton email questions.Hill [View all]MADem
(135,425 posts)She's damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. O'Malley piling on, for those who take notice (and most just aren't locked on to this--save ardent opponents who are unlikely to ever vote for her) just isn't a winner for him.
Jenifer Granholm was joking when she said that he was screwing himself out of a cabinet position the first time he brought this up, but if he keeps it up he may find himself in the wilderness. I don't say that to be unkind, I just think he is getting HORRIBLE campaign advice. He doesn't really want to debate "policy" with her--she could clean his clock. He just wants to play that time-honored "avoiding a fight" card in order to get publicity. Contenders in boxing do it to the World Champion all the time.
Maybe he should get some new campaign advisors, and try a new tack. He's spending his "likability" at a rapid clip, dispensing it at a faster rate than it is replenished. There are WAY easier ways to get publicity.
He'd do WAY better to play his "likability" card (though he has work to do w/the black community as well) in non-confrontational venues, and create a reputation as an accessible, friendly guy than continue down this path. The place to play that card, too, isn't getting pounded on the debate stage, it's on the talk show stage. He needs to introduce himself, and shitting on Clinton or Sanders (or trying to--and failing) isn't the way to introduce yourself.
He's younger and far more energetic and youthful appearing than Sanders, when he pulls out the guitar and starts strumming, he's "have-a-beer-with" friendlier-seeming than Clinton (and he is helped by the fact that women have to work twice as hard to get half the credit), and to the inattentive voter, there's barely daylight between any of them.
I know people on this board like to pretend otherwise, but people who gather around the midpoint-to-left end of things aren't all that attentive. Any Dem will do, so long as they are cheerful, smart, say the right things, pound the GOP candidates for their backwards views on women, LGBT, and social issues, and GOTV. If people that THEY like and respect support them, better still--the people who whistle past the graveyard saying "Endorsements don't matter" are being unrealistic. People who loved Ted Kennedy, for example, if he told them to vote for Filbert McGillicuddy for alderman, they'd flock to the polls in droves, no question, even if they had no idea what Filbert looked like or what he stood for. Referrals count in this gig, particularly with the party liners.
I think the debates aren't going to start any sooner than they're scheduled. The "GOP platform" isn't going anywhere, and why shoot at seventeen pissant targets when in time, the GOP will pare it down to a manageable five to seven on their own.
If O'Malley keeps crabbing, he's going to be painted as desperate for attention. You don't see anyone in the DNC machine saying "Yeah, the guy's RIGHT...we should have debates in the heat of summer when everyone's at the damn beach!" It's just not a winning gambit. It's throwing money at a venue that is nothing more than a potential source of "gotcha" quotes for the GOP down the line--and that's no matter who prevails.
It's only people who are trailing and need exposure who want debates. Continuing to cry for them just won't catch on. People who are leading don't need them or want them.
There's just no impetus for the institutional Democratic machine to hurry the process. Let the GOP beat each other up first, and then our crew takes on the leftovers.
Also, there's no sense "debating" a madman like Trump, even in a proxy fashion. Give Trump enough rope, and he'll hang himself. Right now he's amusing, he's out-RAGE-eous, but after a while, that act will wear very thin indeed.
Even people who insist that they "like" him won't vote for him. They "like" him the same way that some people "like" shit-stirrers on message boards....they keep things lively. And the pollsters? They just haven't quite figured out how to sniff out bullshit when they ask people if they intend to vote for a nitwit like Trump.
They call it "silly season" for a reason.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):