By adamg on Mon., 8/8/2016 - 12:53 pm
Now that he no longer has to worry about running a company down in Rhode Island, Schilling tells his fans:
I am going to run, soon. ... State office first, white house in 8 years. :-). Or 4 if by some amazing illegal event this country elects another clinton.
Draft Curt Schilling for Congress.
Via Politico.
Topics:
Free tagging:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Ortiz/Shilling for Mayor?
By *facepalm*
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 12:58pm
Ortiz/Shilling for Mayor?
Their campaign could be, "This is our f*cking city!"
Schilling - the wanna be Bostonian
By SoBo-Yuppie
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 5:59pm
Born in Alaska,grew up in Arizona, lives in Medfield, MA
All he did was work in Boston a few years.
Schilling (like ortiz) was never a Bostonian.
Go Orioles!
- The Original SoBo Yuppie.
Ortiz isn't a Bostonian?
By anon
Tue, 08/09/2016 - 8:05am
Ortiz isn't a Bostonian? Gtfoh. Maybe not born here but he certainly gets a pass.
Nope
By SoBo-Yuppie
Tue, 08/09/2016 - 8:54am
He lives in Weston. Not Boston.
No pass.
Ahh, I see he is one of those
By Kinopio
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 1:00pm
Ahh, I see he is one of those Trumpers who think the only way Hillary will win is if the election is somehow rigged in her favor. Shouldn't be surprised he buys into this conspiracy theory. He is seriously nuts.
It's all there to see
By Michael
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 1:29pm
It's going to be very suspicious when swing states like
Pennsylvania and MichiganNevada and North CarolinaIndiana and GeorgiaMontana and Tennessee suddenly show Clinton within striking distance.
Today's Monmouth poll
By erik g
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 2:45pm
has Clinton 50, Trump 37. The last time there was a spread that large, it was Reagan/Mondale, and Massachusetts went red. Mississippi is in play for the Democrats. Hilary is putting boots on the ground in TEXAS. That's how badly Trump is currently doing. But I'm sure it's all part of an elaborate electoral fraud.
Dems
By Bugs Bunny
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 3:29pm
I mean why bother voting. HRC is going to win.
I'm voting anyway
By noahproblem
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 6:50pm
I know Hillary is virtually a stone cold lock to win MA, but I still feel it's important to exercise my right to let it be known whom I feel is best qualified to run the country or Commonweath or city or whatever.
(FYI - I don't think it's the Donald either - I'm definitely one of those "pox on both houses" types who will be looking for someone else even remotely viable come November 8th - neither of them is IMO).
And, if nothing else, there's bound to be at least one ballot question where I'll have a strong opinion.
Plenty of other elections
By SwirlyGrrl
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 9:55pm
Some local things, ballot questions ... still worth voting even if you leave that part blank.
tl;dr
By tachometer
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 11:57pm
That was an awfully long-winded way to avoid saying that you're going to the polls so that you can get your reefers legally.
3 short paragraphs = tl?
By noahproblem
Tue, 08/09/2016 - 12:15pm
Really?
P.S. I've never smoked so much as a single cigarette, let alone marijuana.
FiveThirtyEight
By ElizaLeila
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 3:32pm
I"m pretty fond of Nate Silver and his group at http://fivethirtyeight.com/politics/
Unfortunately statistics don
By MattyC
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 4:32pm
Unfortunately statistics don't show crazy. He's been very very bad with respect to divining the polls around Trump since last summer. I still love the guy, but he doesn't know what the hell is going on with this election.
Want to explain?
By BostonDog
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 6:39pm
Nate Silver's data was pretty spot on. It got all but three of the primaries wrong (out of 100+ contests).
He was personally skeptical of Trump early on but if you just look at his election models (the graphs) they were accurate from the state. His problem is that he didn't belive his own data.
It's also worth noting he (and others like him) just use the poll data which is available to anyone. If Nate's model calls the election incorrectly it's because the polling data did too.
We can start with this
By MattyC
Tue, 08/09/2016 - 9:59am
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-i-acted-li...
[quote]We didn’t just get unlucky: We made a big mistake, along with a couple of marginal ones.
The big mistake is a curious one for a website that focuses on statistics. Unlike virtually every other forecast we publish at FiveThirtyEight — including the primary and caucus projections I just mentioned — our early estimates of Trump’s chances weren’t based on a statistical model. Instead, they were what we “subjective odds†— which is to say, educated guesses. In other words, we were basically acting like pundits, but attaching numbers to our estimates.3 And we succumbed to some of the same biases that pundits often suffer, such as not changing our minds quickly enough in the face of new evidence. Without a model as a fortification, we found ourselves rambling around the countryside like all the other pundit-barbarians, randomly setting fire to things.[/quote]
Like I said, I still love the guy, but he was very very wrong, and admitted as much.
Yup
By ElizaLeila
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 11:43pm
And he's publicly acknowledged it. (NPR a couple of weeks ago)
One can still appreciate what his group does.
And the fact that they know now to factor in the crazy and/or point out the margin of error makes me like them more. Actually, it was the interview on NPR that made me appreciate this stuff.
The issue fivethirtyeight had
By anon
Tue, 08/09/2016 - 9:58am
The issue fivethirtyeight had was writers who didn't want to believe the polls, so they kept trying to come up with reasons why the polls were wrong about trump. The polls were right; the adjustments the analysts made as "educated guesses" were wrong.
Maybe, just maybe ...
By anon
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 3:17pm
If the GOP hadn't been engaging in wholesale voter suppression tactics in large areas of the united states, and paying their friends big money to install and run "electronic voting" machines that tend to vote all on their own, we wouldn't be worrying so much about "stealing" elections, now would we?
Basically, show him a right
By kate
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 5:14pm
Basically, show him a right-wing conspiracy, and he's a believer.
A fervent one.
Ah Curt
By SwirlyGrrl
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 1:04pm
Ya so special!
Aw, how cute.
By whyaduck
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 1:09pm
He is assuming that he is a shoe in for state office.
Shoe in?
By Elmer Fudd
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 1:34pm
Surely you meant sock in!
Couldn't run a company
By FredQuimby
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 2:41pm
Now wants to
Ruinrun the country.Trumpism 101 - Bankrupt yourself all the way to the top.
(While blaming everyone else for your failures)
Oh dear... another
By anon
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 1:23pm
Oh dear... another millionaire who screws over the little guy running for office: just what this country needs. And when is he going to repay Rhode Island taxpayers? { crickets }
Why should he repay?
By Irma la Douce
Tue, 08/09/2016 - 7:21am
As he so eloquently posts on Facebook, it was stupid voters who elected corrupt public officials who in turn stupidly voted him the money who are to blame for the fiasco. Maybe he can save us from turning into another Seattle, which he notes is basically "Canada South". (Canada being evil, apparently).
Stupid voters
By Sock_Puppet
Tue, 08/09/2016 - 8:52am
HL Mencken:
Platform
By BostonDog
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 1:28pm
One can only hope his platform consists of proposals that would prevent people like him and his company from ever receiving goverment funding.
Nothing makes me smile like people who rail on about the ills of goverment spending and then promptly ask for public funds.
UGH.
By S.K.
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 1:30pm
Because America need more shitty businessmen with delusions of grandeur running for office.
He also threatened to punch my friend in the throat for criticizing Trump.
Class-freakin'-act.
Wave the bloody sock
By Sock_Puppet
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 1:41pm
Is the same guy who told him he could be a businessman telling him he can be a politician?
i see schilling at the local convenience store quite often..
By bostnkid
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 1:49pm
and he's a really nice guy in person. what he did for the red sox was epic. congress? I don't think so homie.
2013
By Steeve
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 2:00pm
Thank goodness for the 2013 Red Sox, so I can watch Red Sox World Series highlights without having to look at his stupid fucking face.
Hasn't Schilling defrauded enough states already?
By bibliotequetres...
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 2:48pm
..
Last laugh
By JohnAKeith
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 3:47pm
Finally, a retort to those people who have asked me, "Why would anyone vote for you??"
"Well, you could do worse."
Now, Now...
By APB
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 10:17pm
There's ALWAYS Doug Bennett.
He taped a bunch of fliers on our door the other day. Straight into the trash they went. And then I washed my hands.
Were they hand painted?
By tachometer
Tue, 08/09/2016 - 12:01am
You should've held on to them if so, Antique Roadshow 2099 here we come!
Amazing
By anon²
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 4:55pm
I think this is the first time I've seen the universal hub community agree on one single thing.
Get OFish in here and it might even be unanimous
Why not?
By Waquiot
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 5:32pm
I'm a big fan of democracy. If he thinks he can do a good job at whatever he is thinking about running for, he should go for it. Most people just like to gripe about government, but he wants to do something about it.
Now, the part of me that likes democracy also says that he has to explain why I should vote for him before I do so. I have a sneaky feeling that he won't be too successful, but who would have thought, on Thanksgiving 2009, that that state senator from Wrentham would have had a chance against any one of the heavyweight Democrats looking to succeed Ted Kennedy?
go for state senate, or something.
By kate
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 5:43pm
I'd prefer he'd get some experience at a slightly lower level first.
Probably the best first step
By Waquiot
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 7:33pm
But something tells me his ego will get in the way.
It already is
By SwirlyGrrl
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 10:34pm
If he had a lick of sense, he'd step aside so his wife could run. She's the one who knows how to do a the fund raising and foundation running stuff.
Then again, Shonda Schilling would actually be able to run things, and the GOP isn't terribly interested in running things - they are all about posturing and dictating as a substitute for governing.
Ignore my eye roll
By Waquiot
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 11:01pm
Your sons were born after 1990, right? That means that for their whole lives the Commonwealth was governed by either a Republican or Deval Patrick. That's 20 out of 28 years (going out to 2018.) So yeah, the Massachusetts GOP does kind of like governing.
Eye roll back at you
By SwirlyGrrl
Mon, 08/08/2016 - 11:09pm
You know what: I actually canvassed for Weld! I even registered R so that I could help him get past Knuckledragger Pierce and take out Cowboy Satan Silber.
The modern GOP, however, is a shitshow of posturing, faith-based routines, and not doing shit. Exceptions like Baker are marginalized for being sensible about individual rights (while towing other lines) - even Weld was punished for being socially sensible.
I stand by my statements.
So, when did you move out of Massachusetts?
By Waquiot
Tue, 08/09/2016 - 12:16am
Baker, Romney, Swift, Cellucci, and, yes, the current Libertarian candidate for Vice-President were all Republicans that were the standard bearers for the GOP in Massachusetts and were voted in by the citizenry (except Swift.) Meanwhile, the Democrats were so gung ho about regaining the corner office that they put up Coakley (who once lost a primary for State Rep to a 20 something Martin Walsh), O'Brien (and her butt tattoo), Luther Scott Harshbarger, the One Armed Bandit from BU, and whoever Cellucci destroyed.
So yeah, the GOP certainly is on the ropes in Massachusetts, just ask Martha.
The corneRRRR office
By ckd
Tue, 08/09/2016 - 12:47am
1990: Weld def. Silber
1994: Weld def. Mark Roosevelt
1998: Cellucci def. Harshbarger
2002: Romney def. O'Brien
Mark Roosevelt, that's the guy
By Waquiot
Tue, 08/09/2016 - 9:06am
And a relative of the First Lady of the Commonwealth whose then husband trounced him. Boy the bench was bare that year.
Somehow you missed something
By anon
Tue, 08/09/2016 - 10:49am
Scott Brown went to DC a moderate Republican.
He returned a blithering idiot foaming at the mouth, dragging his knuckles, pet boy Zombie of Karl Rove.
That's what you are missing: the GOP is full of blistering idiocy and obstruction. Just because a handful of MA GOPers get elected now and again means NOTHING in the face of such NUCLEAR BURNING STUPID.
Funny how you can't see beyond the borders of a tiny state to even notice that.
I'm sorry
By Waquiot
Tue, 08/09/2016 - 12:16pm
We are talking about someone running for office in Massachusetts. We could also have a discussion about the Democratic Party and officeholders from said party in West Virginia and Montana, but since we are on a website dedicated to local news discussing a local person theoretically running for a local post, I'm passing on that.
Swirly made some generalizations about the Massachusetts Republican party. I was pointing out some holes in her theory. The fact that for 5 of the last 7 gubernatorial elections the GOP has won is somehow lost on people, but it is a fact.
Not Different at All
By anon
Tue, 08/09/2016 - 3:44pm
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/03/16/charl...
Baker is a Koch Puppet.
Sigh
By Waquiot
Tue, 08/09/2016 - 3:56pm
Baker is the Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, elected by the voters, just like Deval Patrick, Willard Mitt Romney, Jane Swift (sort of), Argeo Paul Cellucci, and William Weld before him.
The political and economic connections of any of these people is immaterial. It's still 5 for 7 for the GOP in Massachusetts.
Pages
Add comment