Reply With Quote
Seems prophetic now, doesn't it?
I will not lie and say it hasn't crossed my mind, that's for sure.
they picked the wrong one?
Seems prophetic now, doesn't it?
I will not lie and say it hasn't crossed my mind, that's for sure.
Well unless Obama learns how to be an effective leader really soon you may get a second chance when she challenges him in 2012.
I'd probably still vote for her unless a really good republican appears.
Obama will get what he needs which is a GOP House. He needs that foil. And the country needs divided government, of the Dem WH, GOP Congress variety - the only combo to give us any fiscal sanity in our lifetime. Obama can use his hope and change show all day long. The Congress has just killed Obama, putting way too pressure on him and pulling him off the course he'd like to take. This is '93-'94 all over again.
I think McCain would have beaten Hillary. So no, the dems definitely picked the right one.
Hillary would've hit 60.
Last I heard Hillary was part of Obama's cabinet.....McCain would have been an even worse failure....we'd be heavily in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, Pakistan and that's just starters....the financial bailouts would have been bigger, there wouldn't be even a mention of health-care reform, unless it benefited the GOP lobbyists...the rich would get a tax cut, leading to a even larger redistribution of wealth to the top than under the Bush tax cuts, the budget deficit consequently would be larger because of higher spending and lower revenues..
....Contrary to wing-nut belief, the people of Massacusetts weren't voting Democrat or Republican, they were voting 'vote the bums out', and they will continue to vote to 'vote the bums out' till they start seeing real reform on capital hill, this election was about anti-in bency, just like the next election will be.....it's not dem or rep beware, it's in bent beware, that's the real message on capital hill...
If Clinton was up against McCain, I would have voted for her.
I've come across Hillary a few times pronouncing as Secy of State.
NOT impressive, robotic boilerplate, content-free, classic, bland diplo-speak, ugh.
This is all assuming Obama is as pragmatic as Clinton.
I don't know if he knows how to be pragmatic. He seems to be a one trick pony. All he knows how to do is campaign against "The Villian". Worked when Bush was the bad guy and ever since he has been looking for a new bad guy (Rush, Fox News, etc.). His reaction to Brown winning has been to go out on the road and back to campaigning against another bad guy, this time the banks. Somebody needs to tap him on the shoulder and inform him that he has to govern.
Everyone one thought his strategy on healthcare was to let congress take the lead. Turns out he just can't lead.
He just finished his "I'm a Populist too" speech. Doesn't he know you can become the boss by by being one of the employees but once you are the boss you can't be one of the employees anymore.
not even close to true.
infact i know of plenty dems who either switched to mccain or just abstained because they couldn't vote for a black dude.
That was my plan until the kool-aid drinkers picked The One.
Hardly a convincing argument, but whatever. It's an opinion, you're free to disagree with it. We'll never know for sure what would have happened.
brb Looking forward to the internet boom and Newt helping us out of this recession.
I'm not sure Hillary would have gotten minorities and young voters out like Obama. Also, if Hillary gets the nomination, I think it's likely there's no Sarah Palin as VP. Say Romney get the VP spot, and the economy collapses, McCain has a lot more credibility on that issue. Too many variables to know what would have happened.
BTW, is this OP a rhetorical question?
More than likely he would have picked Huckabee to get the right-wing base and religious cooks on board.. I'm still not sure why McCain didn't pick the Huckster, maybe it was because of Hillary....I remember wing-nut radio was declaring Hillary the President-in-waiting for almost two years before the 08 election...we all know how that worked out for them.....
As Jon Stewart pointed out: Obama is perhaps the first president in history who is simultaneously doing nothing and at the same time working tirelessly to completely destroy the government brick by brick.
The schtick is tired. And in light of Bush "Mission Accomplished" Jr. and John "My Friends" McCain -- stating that Obama has only one ace up his sleeve is perhaps the most ridiculous assessment possible in this situation.
You do realize that Jay Leno, Larry the Cable Guy, AND Carrot Top all disagree with Jon Stewarts analysis.
No.
You're right. Our other news networks are far less partisan and more reliable.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
