O'Malley: the presidency is not some crown to be passed between two families

[Former Democrat]

please let him run

[heatmaster]

Hillary runs, it inoculates Jeb, that's why she must run. If she professes to try and use a double standard, that dynasty issues doesn't affect her, not going to work. She's being married to Bill for forty years, that qualifies as a dynasty standard, she can try and run away from it, but that tar baby ain't going away.

[Ebsy]

Hillary runs, it inoculates Jeb, that's why she must run. If she professes to try and use a double standard, that dynasty issues doesn't affect her, not going to work. She's being married to Bill for forty years, that qualifies as a dynasty standard, she can try and run away from it, but that tar baby ain't going away.

I guess you get to make that determination because you're an expert on the definition of "dynasty."

[Beet]

I don't care, but the idea that the Clintons aren't a political dynasty simply because Hillary is Bill's wife is silly. Would you have said in 1970 that the Kennedys weren't a "dynasty" either because they were all brothers? If we want to talk real monarchies, uxorial succession is a thing there too, you know: Catherine the Great, Mary II, Hatshepsut...

Eh, I can see what you're saying, but the Kennedy's were at least all born into a political family, neither of the Clintons were. The Clintons from the beginning saw their enterprise as a joint one. As individuals before meeting, they were both highly capable and successful. As a couple starting out, they had no particular advantages inherited from birth. The Kennedy brothers certainly did.

A Google search for "uxorial succession" brings back your post as the 2nd result. , which may serve to show how uncommon such an idea is. The first entry, from Britannica, equates the phrase with matrilineal succession, the third refers to wifely duties.

In any case, the point is rather that when RFK was running for president, very few if any people said that he should not be elected solely because his election would represent a dynastic tendency. My suspicion is that not many people would actually change their vote based on this, and people who constantly harp on this are wasting their breath.

[heatmaster]

Well glad you say this, that gives Jeb a free run, I'll remember to quote you, should you change your position.

[Sumner 1868]

In any case, the point is rather that when RFK was running for president, very few if any people said that he should not be elected solely because his election would represent a dynastic tendency.

You forget his brother was shot in public.

[Brewer]

There are so many more reasons not to vote for Jeb Bush than the fact that he had family members also serve in the office. I would assume many Republicans and some Democrats also feel this way about Hillary. Anyone who votes based on or spouts off about a personal opposition to "political dynasties" is, yes, wasting their breath, and their arguments are ridiculous. If I find you qualified to serve as my President, I don't give a damn if your father also served, or your husband, or your second cousin twice removed. I care about your positions, your experience, and your record. Everything else is just an excerpt from the "Fun Facts" section of your biography.

O'Malley's being an opportunistic (and not in a remotely positive sense) moron in an attempt to gain some relevance. Also in the news, the sky is blue, the grass is green, and the Democratic path to a majority is PA, NH, WI, OH, and Mizz.

[Brewer]

O'Malley's being an opportunistic (and not in a remotely positive sense) moron in an attempt to gain some relevance. Also in the news, the sky is blue, the grass is green, and the Democratic path to a majority is PA, NH, WI, OH, and Mizz.

O'Malley isn't doing anything different than what any other politician including Hillary would do to an opponent. I did think he would be different- not because of anything about him but to protect his chances of ending up VP. Then again, Edwards attacked Kerry and Bush Sr attacked Reagan so even this attack doesn't preclude a Clinton-O'Malley ticket.

That doesn't give him a pass from me criticizing him, as inconsequential as my criticism may be. Take what I said and apply it to anyone else who says the same. My point remains.

[IceSpear]

Hillary runs, it inoculates Jeb, that's why she must run. If she professes to try and use a double standard, that dynasty issues doesn't affect her, not going to work. She's being married to Bill for forty years, that qualifies as a dynasty standard, she can try and run away from it, but that tar baby ain't going away.

You're forgetting a rather crucial element here.

2 > 1

Or in other words:

A potential 3rd > a potential 2nd

[Panda Express]

Wow, brutal. O'Malley is a BEAST. Just wait until he takes the gloves off. Hillary isn't going to know what hit her.

[Thunderbird is the word]

I can't see an O'Malley VP pick. What would he add to the ticket? More likely a speaking spot at the convention and maybe a cabinet post.

[Suburbia]

O'Malley is doing this because he sees an opening. Yes, the presidency should not be passed betwen two families, but the Bushes are a larger dynasty than the Clintons. I could see O'Malley being a veep for Hillary because he'll be seen as more liberal than her, but he won't deliver a state to the ticket (maybe Pennsylvania Irish-Catholic roots.)

[Gallium]

O'Malley's advisor Gary Hart doubles down on the dynasty critique in a Politico interview. It looks like stressing this and playing up his relative youth will be part of O'Malley's strategy to reach out to the anti-Hillary 50%:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/gary-hart-hillary-clinton-2016-billion-dollar-campaign-116673.html

[IceSpear]

O'Malley's advisor Gary Hart doubles down on the dynasty critique in a Politico interview. It looks like stressing this and playing up his relative youth will be part of O'Malley's strategy to reach out to the anti-Hillary 50%:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/gary-hart-hillary-clinton-2016-billion-dollar-campaign-116673.html

How can you trust an advisor who can't even get basic facts right? And she's even higher once you exclude Warren.

[Blair]

Yeah O'Malley is trying to get the anti-Hilary vote, and hoping that people will vote for him out of pure disdain for Hillary. I honestly don't see the appeal for O'Malley, I mean yeah he ticks all the progressive boxes for a democrat but it needs to be something bigger to actually tackle HRC.

In regards to Dynasty politics the issue isn't their name- one of the worst tactics used was in the 1962 Massachusetts senate debate when Ted Kennedy's opponent attacked him along the lines of 'you're only here because you're a kennedy' and it fell flat. I think the American people can appreciate a good candidate, and someone who has the ability to be President. People only tend to get pissed off when the candidate as in the case of GWB is simply not smart enough to get in on merit. HRC for all her faults is an extremely intelligent politician-if she didn't marry Bill she would of most likely been involved in high end politics

At least Jeb is going to have a fiery primary in 2016-if he can beat Walker, Cruz and Paul then that proves that he's relatively ready to fight an election

[RINO Tom]

Sad to see a Democrat be the first candidate to bring up this Bush/Clinton false equivalence.

Also Bill Clinton's Presidency was an objective success that Democrats tout whenever it's convenient. The GOP has 12 years of serious reasons to distant themselves from the Bush family.

Listening to the media you'd think the opposite were true. "The Clintons are so scandal-ridden/entitled/secretive! How can you trust them? Jeb is so different to the other Bushes - he has a Hispanic wife!"

What media do you listen to...?

[King]

Sad to see a Democrat be the first candidate to bring up this Bush/Clinton false equivalence.

Also Bill Clinton's Presidency was an objective success that Democrats tout whenever it's convenient. The GOP has 12 years of serious reasons to distant themselves from the Bush family.

Listening to the media you'd think the opposite were true. "The Clintons are so scandal-ridden/entitled/secretive! How can you trust them? Jeb is so different to the other Bushes - he has a Hispanic wife!"

What media do you listen to...?

Beltway bloggers love Jeb Bush

[Slander and/or Libel]

Tangentially related question: Most here seem to agree that the "dynasty" things is stupid, and that a candidate shouldn't be ruled out because they happen to be related to a previous President, as long as they're qualified.

How does that argument not also relate to electing a President to a third or fourth term? If the candidate is qualified and the people think he or she should be President, why should having been President for two previous terms be a disqualifier?

[Tender Branson]

O'Malley is the Butters of the 2016 Dems.

[Blair]

Tangentially related question: Most here seem to agree that the "dynasty" things is stupid, and that a candidate shouldn't be ruled out because they happen to be related to a previous President, as long as they're qualified.

How does that argument not also relate to electing a President to a third or fourth term? If the candidate is qualified and the people think he or she should be President, why should having been President for two previous terms be a disqualifier?

I don't think there should be term limits tbh, I can't think of any President who could have won three terms. Reagan was too old in 1988 and would have struggled to reach '92, Bush lost, Clinton's heart was ed, Bush had 22% approval rating and Obama is being a marxist

[Mr. Illini]

He might as well announce already if he is going to run. I would think you would want to do so ahead of Clinton.