It’s looking like the answer to that question is yes…
The swirl of controversy surrounding Clinton has not only called her inevitability into question but also given much of the media an excuse to focus on optics rather than policy coverage, which is just one of the reasons O’Malley’s emergence is a positive development. A contested Democratic primary will be good for the country, good for the party, good for democracy and good for driving issues that might otherwise be ignored into the election.
Since leaving office in January, O’Malley has been traveling the country and laying the groundwork for a presidential campaign. During recent visits to Kansas, New Hampshire and elsewhere, O’Malley has delivered a progressive populist message. Specifically, he has called for reinstating Glass-Steagall banking regulations, hiking the capital gains tax, increasing the minimum wage, raising the threshold for overtime pay and strengthening collective bargaining rights. And while he is far more comfortable discussing his policies than his potential opponents, O’Malley took a perceived shot at Clinton in South Carolina when he declared, “Triangulation is not a strategy that will move America forward.”
While many Democrats may be ready for a coronation of Hillary Clinton as the next Democratic presidential nominee, I’d love to see a progressive challenge to her presumptive nomination. After all, Hillary Clinton is decidedly not a progressive, having made a career out of triangulation and finding a middle road, and I’m ready for a Democratic presidential nominee who isn’t afraid to fight for the poor and middle class in our country, instead of serving as nothing more than a shill for Wall Street and corporate interests.
Amen…………….somebody in the Democratic party has to stand up for the 99% of us. Shooting for the middle hasn’t brought us anything in terms of economic gain over at least the last 20 years. We’ve gone backwards and it’s going to be worse for the next generation unless the people take this country back.
In a word yes. I personally have never believed Ms. Clinton would even win the nomination. She is way to much of a Republican to run as a Democrat. Voters who back her and support her do not truly care about Progressive values-they only are voting on celebrity.
Once people hear that Mr. O’Malley is a no drama and no nonsense guy, once they see he is a reasonable intellectual, and once they hear a populist Progressive message-people will turn on Hillary.
Why would you want a President that is so secretive she sets up her own email server in her own house? I certainly wouldn’t trust such a Nixon minded person with the power of the NSA.
Why would you want a President who can’t even name an accomplishment as SOS? Because getting the most frequent flier miles isn’t an accomplishment.
Why would you want to vote for someone who is so hawkish we will likely be in 3 more wars if elected? She voted for Iraq, she was the chief advocate for the attack on Libya which led to a failed nation state, and she has always supported boots on the ground in Syria. Don’t worry, she will lie to you during the election-but I promise you when elected President she will have boots on the ground.
Why would you vote for someone who doesn’t care about NSA civil liberties violations? Why would you vote for someone who get $400,000 in speaking fees from Goldman Sachs and takes money while Secretary from regimes that oppress women? Why? If you support those things are you a Democrat?
The people in the party who rally around Clinton do so because they care more about access to power than they do about Liberal principles or the lives of the American people.