The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Hillary Clinton for President

Among Democrat potential candidates, who would you vote for in 2008?

  • Total voters
    50
Well, just for shits and giggles, let's just pretend that Giulliani just captured the GOP nomination.

How safe would New Hampshire or Maine, or even Delaware be? Just how much money would the Dems have to pour into New York - money funneled from other states - to ensure a Dem wins New York and Pennsylvania?

I think Giulliani could flip a few Blue States. And again, we're just playing for shits and giggles.

So, how much more important would Iowa, Oklahoma, and the South be? I don't think conservatives from the South could vote for Giulliani even if they hold their noses.

So if the GOP can flip some Blue States, we have to be prepared to battle to flip some red states.

The GOP is going to be coming at us full throttle in '08. We have to stick to a winning strategy.

Did anyone see John Testor on the Sunday talk shows. He did his live shot from his kitchen! You could clearly see that his kitchen looks like yours and mine. He connected with the audience. We have to do more of that.
 
i love tester...and mccaskill. i'm reading all i can about them...especially her. she's an amazing woman and sooooo well spoken. i wish she'd run for president. democrats were once very good at running people like tester in conservative areas and hopefully they've rediscovered that.

as for a giuliani...i think the republican right would rather lose with a buchanan type (who i actually kind of respect cause he's not a hypocrite) than win with a giuliani so it will never happen. but if jesus himself comes down and tells them to nominate giuliani and he gets it, then yes, he'd be competitive up here. i actually don't think the democrats could stop giuliani because he would take so many blue states while keeping the red ones.

giuliani by the way, is a really, truly ugly person (i mean on the inside). he's just a complete asshole...i have many friends in NYC and the tales they tell...
 
Snaps point is well taken. The Republicans will have to moderate if they are going to survive (Dems too), Rove's formula isn't working anymore and can only lead to disaster, Bush will go into exile, and the south is moderating. The Republicans cannot afford to be either a regional party or an ideological party, no power=no money.

I don't know where the bigots, racists, and Christian wackos will go, but the parties can't afford them. Maybe there's room in that back table at Applebee's.
 
snapcat said:
We have to compete in all 50 states, and I think Dean's 50 state strategy is the biggest reason that Dems are in control in the Senate. Had we not fielded candidates in Montana or Virginia we would not have the Senate.
Click to expand...


for the record - Dean's so-called 50-state strategy was for money at the local levels and as one who serves on a local level, we never saw the money.

The candidates that fan for Congress and Senate were Emanuel's and Schumer's candidates - Schumar recruited Virginia and I may be wrong that his candidate in Montana lost to Tester in the primary - but Dean was adamently opposed to the major effort to take Congress and Rahm called him an asshole among nicer words before stalking out of Dean's office and all the congressional and senate committees did was without Dean's help and in fact with his opposition

Dean will be gone, soon, very soon - I know one state convention where it is going to come up -
 
i would, absolutely, support Hillary. She's hardworking and savvy. she would use the presidency as a bully pulpit for the advancement of education and healthcare. i believe the next election will be largely about the domestic agenda.
 
naa

been saying thizs for a while

Clinton / Obama Vs Giullianni / Rice

there really arent alot of other real options for either side.
 
I like Bill Richardson.

And as far as Giuliani v. Clinton, a recent poll by U.S. News showed Giuliani edging out Clinton by just a couple of percent. That was in an article that cited the same "I'll never vote for another Clinton!" figure of 45% that James gave, and another that put it at 48%.
 
Kurn said:
If nominated, Hilary Clinton will win. She will win by a landslide.
Click to expand...

lots of time

she could - if the Repubs put up a right wing candidate - they might just do that

if McCain or Rudy gets in, it could be a nail biter

a lot depends on what Ms. Pelosi does in the next 2 years

so many ifs

it will be fun

not sure Hillary is a lock to get the nomination
 
I just don't think Hillary is as viable a candidate as some people believe. Her name recognition probably helps her out a lot in the polls. But I still feel that the electorate is looking for a fresh face, a DC outsider.
 
THe time is not right for Sen. Clinton or Obama there is still to much sexism and racism in this country I think a Edwards _ Clark ticket might be a wining ticket
 
To win in 2008, the Democrats need New Faces with New Ideas.
Serious Candidates for Serious Times.
Candidates with Domestic Policy Experience AND Foreign Policy Experience.
Candidates with Military Experience AND Diplomatic Experience.
Candidates who can't be written off as "Hopelessly Liberal."
Candidates who can win in the "Red States" of the American South and West.
Candidates who can win the Latino vote - America's fastest growing minority.
Candidates who can regain the Trust of our Allies.
Candidates who can regain the Respect of our Enemies.

My suggestion: Governor Bill Richardson and General Wesley Clark.
 
I'd take former Governor Warner of Virginia.

I think the Democrats can only win the presidency with a popular Democratic governor in the race. (Richardson, as some have suggested, would also be a good choice... but there's just something about the guy that bugs me).

There is only one instance of a Senator making a successful run for the White House, and that was JFK and the 1960 election was one of the closest races in American history. Senators just won't do and for that very reason Clinton and Obama are out. As for Al... do I even need to say why Al Gore shouldn't run again?
 
epicAdam said:
I'd take former Governor Warner of Virginia.

I think the Democrats can only win the presidency with a popular Democratic governor in the race. (Richardson, as some have suggested, would also be a good choice... but there's just something about the guy that bugs me).

There is only one instance of a Senator making a successful run for the White House, and that was JFK and the 1960 election was one of the closest races in American history. Senators just won't do and for that very reason Clinton and Obama are out. As for Al... do I even need to say why Al Gore shouldn't run again?
Click to expand...
i think he's pulled himself out of the running for 2008,thus clearing the field for Hillary against the more traditional Democratic southern governor trend.I've heard about the Iowa governor perhaps getting in,but don't know much about him.Vilnack I think .Though I usually tend to vote Republican(Registered Democrat,just not an observant one)...if the Republicans stay right and choose a candidate who is backed by the religious right,I would like an interesting Democratic option,and Hillary don't do it for me.
 
Vilsack is likely a nice guy, but he doesn't seem to have the charisma needed for wins in the primaries.

I think Edwards is jumping back into the race, and I've been hearing rumours that Gore may run. I'm torn on Gore, although he seems to be riding a positive wave at the moment.

I'm real interested in seeing if Romney will evolve into the conservative choice for the GOP. McCain may be hard to beat, but the match-up with Giulliani would be interesting to see play out.

I've heard rumblings that Newt would jump in and challenge Romney to be the conservative choice.

Who knows, it's way too early to even predict. I just hope that neither party has a coronation for a candidate.
 
One of the problems with Gore is the baggage. Some people still react VERY negatively to him; I even know Democrats it has infected. It's bad enough that a few people I know decided that if he'd done a movie about global warming, then it really must not be true.....


BTW: does anyone know of a web site where information on all the possibles' stands on things can be found?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top