Reply With Quote
I'd much rather have Obama for a third term than this lady
I'd much rather have Obama for a third term than this lady
They both have the same chance of becoming president in 2016
doubt it. clinton already has america pressed under her thumb because of her gender and husband. she's just coasting at this point. the only thing that stopped her in 2008 was an equally PC demographic. I don't think obama was actually that bad of a president despite the whole Patriot Act extension, labor laws, complete healthcare up and diplomatic flubs. He is more of a neo-con than bush was imo.
i've been terrified of hillary trying to be president since the 90s...seems like it was one of those things that was only a matter of time tbh.
I would say HRC has name recognition, a little more experience and a lot of cash. Her political ambition has been plain since she rose to national prominence in the 1990s.
HRC was lucky to lose to Obama, she'd not have another chance next year had she lost to McCain. It's unsurprising she's running again.
besides HRC being a woman, what's so scary, may I ask?
her being a woman has nothing to do with her being scary. the scary part is that people will vote on her just for being a woman, which has nothing to do with competence. i wish other women like Ann Richards continued to be involved in politics.
she botched healthcare reform in the 90s and resigned her position as SoS amid criticism. do you think she'd be able to take the weight of criticism that the pres has these days?
also, a true president is commander in chief first and foremost. I prefer presidents to have at least a little military experience (imagine clinton commanding troops...) and a solid diplomatic record. If she resigns from the top diplomatic position in the country, what does that say about her ability to be the face of the US on an international scale?
lastly, she's not transparent. but no administration ever is, so that is sadly no longer a factor.
i think you can agree with me that she is in it for herself. at least Bill was like-able as a grass roots guy, but there's really not much connecting her to blue collars anymore.
furthermore, the idea that aristocracy is coming back is scary. Bush v Clinton for president, who would have thought?
put Huntsman back on the ballot. that's a guy with the pull and experience and ability to compromise. he might not have the military experience, but he knows China better than anyone else in the States....that's who we should always be concerned about.
Last edited by The Reckoning; 04-23-2015 at 10:42 AM.
saw this one coming from way back, but yeah, dynastic succession is a bug, not a feature.furthermore, the idea that aristocracy is coming back is scary. Bush v Clinton for president, who would have thought?
anyway, my idea of a true liberal, democratic candidate is a commander in chief who's pro-military from a career training standpoint. the military has so many tactile benefits it can provide that college classrooms and professional certifications cannot.
also someone who puts the environment first. invest in green tech and curb dependence on foreign energy. we need to override energy alternatives asap, and that demand for alternative energy will keep gas prices low.
we're killing our environment and all of our non-renewable resources and here we are debating about non-issues like gun laws and prayer in schools.
wake the up people. we won't be here much longer if we keep this up.
withstanding the flames of an adversarial press corps and being a credible commander are two desirable traits for POTUS to have. resigning in adversity does not serve HRC well for the innuendos about reliability and toughness that were going to be made anyway.
thanks for picking out points you agree with WH. it's refreshing compared to the usual ankle-biting of other posters over meaningless details.
short of the annihilation of the species, there's no limit to how much worse things can get, and there's no guarantee we won't continue to it up for a good while longer.wake the up people. we won't be here much longer if we keep this up.
lets just say big-fish stocks have fallen 90% since 1950
that means in the ocean, only 10% of fish like cod and halibut are left. the ocean isn't endless. out of sight, out of mind.
mass extinction of this kind has never been seen in the history of the world. yet we want to talk about racism and sexism and whateverism instead. our oceans are dead, and we keep repopulating.
the only solution is to use some of that american ingenuity and overhaul all of the backwash from the industrial age.....or find another planet and terraform it. our attention is too focused on he said/she said rather than taking a good hard look at the future.
those in charge don't care. they'll be long gone before we see any of the true results.
Last edited by The Reckoning; 04-23-2015 at 11:23 AM.
Did you read the article? This is pretty damning IMO.
Do you think the Clinton machine can spin this?
Is this unelectable bad?
overfishing is real for sure. I read the Kurlansky COD book.lets just say big-fish stocks have fallen 90% since 1950
that means in the ocean, only 10% of fish like cod and halibut are left. the ocean isn't endless. out of sight, out of mind.
friend of mine wants to put lionfish on his menu. ever had any?
oh yeah they're good. and also an invasive specie without any natural compe ion. i'd highly recommend making a cuisine out of it because they really are a pest.
i had one stick me good while I was diving actually. not a great feeling.
as laid out in the article, no.
does it look bad? yes.
does it prove anything? no.
does it make HRC unelectable? that's wishful thinking, tbh.
maybe somebody else will find real dirt. between now and election day there's bound to be a bunch of articles like this, painting a big picture and inviting readers to draw their own conclusions.
The GOP needs a new hobby horse. Clinton Foundation might be the next Benghazi.
LOL...
Are you saying it's like the lottery?
Your chances are only slightly improved if you play?
But what has she accomplished in any of her positions?
I disagree.
What is scary is that the left will nominate her just because they see it as a woman's turn to hold office. Just look at what happened because they thought it was a minority's turn...
it doesn't matter. accomplishments and qualifications don't mean much to voters unless they're carrying a grudge against somebody.But what has she accomplished in any of her positions?
What happened?
did America, godliness, capitalism and war cease to exist, like you warned us 8 years ago?
Some will be calling this treason!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
