Well debate is not bad. It is what this country was founded on really. the founders debated and fought like cats and dogs sometimes. And I would say they did a pretty good job. Villified, hmmm, not sure if you mean members of congress or some of the right wing nuts we have, who the media love to quote. I don't recall any members of Congress putting him down to bad. Some others, outside Congress, I really don't pay that much attention to them. Kinda like watching a game on TV, got to learn to tune the announcers out, , all they want to do is talk, talk, talk and never say much. About what the kooks do in politics, both parties, except the left wing media call the dimm-o-craps experts and the Pubs analysis.When in reality neither know much about which they speak. A whole lot like what we get on this forum from some. Like you know when Fox news guy was standing on the freeway in N.O. couldn't go anywhere, but trying to make up a story and you and I more than likely knew as much as he did and we didn't know anything.
Mookie posted something that is factual. If they want to go on "electability":I hope she doesnt, because she'll probably lose
1. They didn't know what that actually entailed the last time around;
2. Too many people violently hate Hillary Clinton, and that coupled with the 1st woman to run for President isn't helping. The first women who gets elected for president is going to be one popular lady.
Demos better nominate Clarke. He's the only one that most people don't hate or love.
i dont think its mainly the hatred
more people hate Bush
but naturally the first woman that gets a big two nom, will lose
no doubt about it
this election is too important
so the with Hillary
I'm not gonna feel bad because I want to beat a Grand Ol Nominee
^mookie understands^
Mookie, don't let your feeling color what you think. Most people really don't hate Bush. You may, but, many don't and they do support him in his efforts. I know you may not realize it, but what he is doing is right for the country. We have been in a war for many years and nothing was done to those who would destroy our way of life and country. This was taken as weakness of will on our part. I know by your many post how you feel. But finally we, USA, is doing something. Pulling our troops out of Iraq would stop nothing. Witness Russia yesterday. They don't and didn't support us, but it hasn't stopped them there. And don't be fooled, they, the terrorist are all tied in together.
whatever you say
but he is the most hated prez of my generation by far
reagan
bush sr
clinton
Bush jr
no comparison
Don't sell Slick Willie short...
But yeah, they hate his guts. It's actually fun, you can get violent, explosive reactions by just saying "George W. Bush".
I know people hated him
but not with so much passion
Rush Limbaughs entire show was "bashing" him
did anyone call him anti-american?
I am in the camp that thinks Hillary is too "polarizing" to win.
There is an argument though that Bush is very divisive as well and he managed to win, barely.
So it would not be unreasonable to make a case that Hillary could win a national election, barely. She won't have a Johnson ''64, Nixon '72 or Reagan '84 type of landslide.
I just want the two parties to advance two tickets that don't include a Clinton or Bush on them. If the corruption and scandals continue throughout the rest of the Bush presidency, the country will be ready for the "outsider" whoever that may be.
I read recently that only two presidents have been elected directly from the Senate (Harding and Kennedy). Look for the trend to continue........
Sorry, Hillary, Brownback, George Allen, Feingold, Biden, Santourem, et al..
Bush was polarizing in '04. BClinton was polarizing in '96.
"Polarizing" to their political opponents, that is.
She would be the worst nominee since John Kerry.
Hillary could win the election. Only time...and votes or the courts will tell.
Amount of money ExxonMobil claims it will spend on pollution controls at seven U.S. oil refineries: $571 million
Actually, she'd be the best since her husband for the Demos. Like it or not, their crew knows how to win presidential elections. The country, for better or worse, has a net positive view of her husband. She would be a media darling as the 1st serious female presidential candidate as well as the fact that she stirs such raw emotions among her political opponents.
The Clintons have proven that they know how to make a Democrat presidential candidate compe ive in between the west and east coasts.
Also, if the GOP attempts to respond to her with CRice as the nominee, then tokenism will be in full effect. Rice also does not have demonstated political pull among the evangelicals.
Unless the GOP is hiding a badass somewhere, I'd say at this point that they are going to lose in '08.
Re: Rice there are questions about her stand on issues such as choice/life by cultural conservatives. Thing is, the three leading Repubs at this point (Rudy, Rice and McCain) only McCain is pro-life for sure. Who will emerge as the darling of the cultural conservatives from the party?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote