Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,693 posts)
1. They'd never take him.
Tue Jul 14, 2015, 01:21 AM
Jul 2015

He's way too conservative for my liking but he's not a criminally insane Bible-banger so they won't want him. He might have made it as a Republican 40 years ago but the current GOP would consider him a flaming lefty.

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
2. He's a registered Democrat, is he not?
Tue Jul 14, 2015, 01:49 AM
Jul 2015

Notice the hysteria over Bernie Sanders not being a "real" Democrat even though he has caucused with Democrats his entire political career. His officially being an independent has lots of people in an uproar.

Webb? He's a Democrat. Too conservative for my taste, but nonetheless he's a Democrat and won an election under that banner. He's not right-wing enough to switch parties, and even if he did he's not going to be remotely acceptable to Republicans in the v-p slot.

Pretty much every election cycle there's some fantasy about someone switching parties and running as president or v-p with the other party, but it will never happen. In 2004 there was a lot of nonsense out there about McCain switching parties and becoming Kerry's running mate, but that was always just about pure fantasy. For reasons I've never quite understood there was a myth about McCain that he was some sort of liberal, and that was never true.

Party politics operate at a very different level from the way most of us here do our politics.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
3. Sanders IS now officially a Democrat, not an Independent.
Tue Jul 14, 2015, 03:57 AM
Jul 2015
http://www.democraticunderground.com/128018753

The OP seems more concerned with the left right divide than technicalities. In the highly unlikely event that Webb becomes the party's nominee,ead of us will have to decide whether we can vote for him or not, simply because he changed party registrations before running for the Senate. Until then, we can admit that he may be far more akin to Reagan than to FDR or LBJ.

asjr

(10,479 posts)
5. I never liked Webb. Something did not seem likeable about him. He
Tue Jul 14, 2015, 09:19 AM
Jul 2015

only had one term as senator and when he did not re-up it made me think he just is not ready for prime time.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
6. Former Reagan Republican, speaks of "white culture, has seemed sexist to some in the past.
Tue Jul 14, 2015, 09:39 AM
Jul 2015

As soon as I heard him mention "white culture" whille publicizing one of his books, I winced. However, he was running against Allen, who had called an Indian "macaca" then lied about the meaning of the word. Never thought he'd run for President.

He thought the Tailhook scandal was a "spun up" witch hunt.

http://www.jameswebb.com/articles/military-and-veterans/witch-hunt-in-the-navy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tailhook_scandal.

His wikipedia doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Webb

See also http://thinkprogress.org/election/2014/11/21/3595651/jim-webb-2016/

Anyway, which serious candidate for POTUS announces via a post on his blog?

Obviously, my primary vote is FOR Sanders, but I don't mind that is also against Webb.

asjr

(10,479 posts)
8. I have always been a Hillary fan but I would be
Tue Jul 14, 2015, 10:29 AM
Jul 2015

just as pleased with Sanders. Looking at the slate of dumb and dumber on the Republican side scares me to death!

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
10. Party registration isn't just a technicality.
Tue Jul 14, 2015, 11:13 AM
Jul 2015

It's central to being elected.

Which is why Bernie Sanders is such an anomaly, and why his caucusing with Dems all these years really does matter. If he'd been a total independent, caucusing with neither party, he'd never have any influence of any kind, and his attempt to run for President now would be a joke. Instead, his independent stance has allowed him to speak his mind over the years, while his association with the Democratic Party makes his running as one possible.

Party registration when you run for office matters a great deal. Elected officials sometimes change parties and go on to win elections again, but it's not very common, and almost never happens at high levels.

Jim Webb has pretty much zero chance of winning the Democratic nomination, and probably even less of a chance of the the Republican vp slot.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
12. Either you did not read the material to which I linked you or you did not understand it.
Tue Jul 14, 2015, 11:45 AM
Jul 2015

It's literally impossible for anyone who lives in Vermont--and a number of other forward-looking states--to register as a Democrat, or as anything but simply as a voter.

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
15. I am referring to the party affiliation/registration
Tue Jul 14, 2015, 03:26 PM
Jul 2015

of those running for office.

There are several states that don't require party registration to vote, or where the primaries are totally open. That's not what I mean.

It's the party that the candidate is registered or affiliated with.

I think you didn't understand what I thought I'd clearly stated.

MiniMe

(21,716 posts)
4. Yes, he is a registered Democrat
Tue Jul 14, 2015, 09:03 AM
Jul 2015

But he used to be a Republican, was even in Reagan's cabinet. George Bush "made" him a democrat because of the Iraq/Afghanistan war, but he still thinks like a republican.

MisterP

(23,730 posts)
14. I've heard this before, in fact--that the '10 and '14 losses were because Rahm wasn't in charge
Tue Jul 14, 2015, 01:38 PM
Jul 2015

of the party any more ...

 

NorthCarolina

(11,197 posts)
9. Webb is in this race for one reason, and one reason only.
Tue Jul 14, 2015, 10:37 AM
Jul 2015

That is to have a candidate in the field that will work to build the idea that Hillary is a Liberal. Nothing more. He will undoubtedly make comments to the effect that the Democratic Party has moved too far to the left, and that Hillary is a part of that movement. It's all political manipulation carefully choreographed to combat the "Hillary is a centrist " talk, and convince folks to think she 'must be a Liberal' because Webb says so.

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
11. Are you suggesting Webb is running
Tue Jul 14, 2015, 11:14 AM
Jul 2015

to help Hillary? I find that rather implausible.

People run for office because they honestly think they can win it.

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
16. I think you don't quite understand why anyone ever runs for office.
Tue Jul 14, 2015, 03:27 PM
Jul 2015

They do it to win. On rare occasions they're hoping that some particular stand of theirs gets noticed. But they don't do it to benefit someone else.

 

NorthCarolina

(11,197 posts)
17. Oh, I understand
Tue Jul 14, 2015, 06:24 PM
Jul 2015

completely and in some cases, probably MOST cases you're logically correct. But it's not inconceivable that the Bernie phenomenon caught them with their pants down when their usual "go to" memes they typically use to brush liberals off as an afterthought weren't catching on, he continued to gain in the polls. Anyway, this is simply MY theory...you certainly don't have to subscribe to it.

hatrack

(59,587 posts)
18. A Blue Dog president is the absolute last fucking thing we need . . .
Tue Jul 14, 2015, 08:06 PM
Jul 2015

To say nothing of the fact that he has the charisma of a damp turnip.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Video & Multimedia»Jim Webb Stealth Republic...