Hillary Clinton for President

[smirnoff-ice]

He has turned out to be one of the biggest disappointments in his later years. By taking away votes from Gore as he did - he is one of the main reasons why Bush won. Nadar should have with drawn so that his votes could have been used successfully and not thrown down the drain like they were. Talk about being egocentric?

i think it's wrong to condemn someone just because he is taking part on an election, esp. not in times, where so little people go out and vote.
everyone saying that gore is so "green", very sophisticated in ecologic topics, but if that would be really the case why he was not able to make a deal with nader before the elections?

the argument that someone took away votes from another candidate is just a lame excuse for me. it would never happened if more people went to vote.

Dean would never make it. His 15 minutes of fame are long gone.

yes. still i would vote for him.

Nancy Pelosi, well i would have said two months ago, but some of the decisions she is making as the pending Speaker of the House, are giving me serious thought just how qualified she really is. I am a little nervous about her now.

here in most countries of europe (esp. nord and cent.europe) new "leaders" in high positions get sort of a timeline for their first 100 days, where others are very moderate and criticize very little.
more or less the same should go for pelosi. give her a bit of time until she gets more routine and experience - and at least she is taking decisions already instead of going for long holidays on a ranch in texas.

 

[snapcat]

Alfie & James, take your personal feud to PM if you must, but please don't litter this thread with constant bickering.

If I have to come back to this thread and clean it up again, points will follow.

 

[helms]

The electoral vote, which is all that counts, wasn't even close in the Kennedy-Nixon race (303 Kennedy, 219 Nixon). Hardly a nail-biter.

​

It's purely academic at this point, but if allegations of fraud in IL (27 electoral votes in 1960) and TX (24 electoral vote in 1960) are true and Nixon had won both states, Tricky Dick would have won 270 to 252. Both states were very close and I'm sure the Daley machine stuffed an extra 9000 votes in for JFK, but TX wasn't as close.
​

 

[james1200]

why does all my best stuff get deleted? what a waste of fantastic one-liners!

 

[JackFTwist]

It's purely academic at this point, but if allegations of fraud in IL (27 electoral votes in 1960) and TX (24 electoral vote in 1960) are true and Nixon had won both states, Tricky Dick would have won 270 to 252. Both states were very close and I'm sure the Daley machine stuffed an extra 9000 votes in for JFK, but TX wasn't as close.
​

[/CENTER]

Allegations about Illinois in 1960 are urban legends, not true, and yes I remember it well.

Chicago turned in its vote in it almost entirety very early in the evening. As an 8 year old boy in catholic Chicago, where the Kennedy family was well known - they owned the Merchadise Mart - and Sarge Shriver, Kennedy son in law was president of the Chicago Board of Education, I would suggest that the Chicago was overwhelming, massive, and as honest as anyone's vote. And I was always very antiMachine in Chicago and worked for any number of antiMachine candidates and causes (including unseating the Illinois delegation in 1972). But the 1960 Chicago vote was legitimately as overwhelming Kennedy as any place could be given the adopted son role of the Kennedys in catholic Chicago.

The reason the Illinois vote counting went into the early hours was the downstate Republicans were scrambling to find enough votes to manufacture/steal/create votes to try and steal Illinois, and they failed.

Royko covers it well in his book on Daley.

Now what happened in Texas I do not know.

 

[yuty]

Oh god no! If Hilary Clinton becomes president, I'll kill the bitch myself!

Yes, I threatened a presidential candidate on the web, you can go fuck yourself ya CIA dorks....

 

[herewego]

i would love to get my hands on whatever hallucinogenic you're smoking. if you think that anyone outside of new york and new england is going to vote for hilary, you've got your head buried in the same sand as george bush. she will not win one state in the mid-west, she will not win one mountain state and she certainly ain't getting a single southern state. the woman is despised by at least half the country...not disliked, despised. this is what i can't stand about my fellow democrats...their inablility to live in the same reality as 90% of the population. where does this suicidal impulse in our party (mcgovern in '72, mondale in '84, dukakis in '88, kerry in '04) come from? the whole country is not like massachussets and new york! don't think a 52/48 victory a few weeks ago means the country has changed...we had 40% voter turn out...in presidential years it's closer to 50% and you know what...that's when the loons come out to vote. and they ain't voting for hilary or anyone from the northeast, quite frankly. in fact, she'll go a long way to energize the republican base of evangelicals, sexists, homophobes and racists and we'll lose by a margin we haven't seen in 30 years.

one more fact for ya...the last north eastern democrat to win the white house was FDR in 1932. and that was because the great depression destroyed the republican party at the time.

now am i in the political loop?

Nice, you get you're information from cable news. Cute. Now reality, yes she can. The numbers are there. More people love and support her than hate her. She knows every play in the book. There is not one piece of new information they can throw. She knows it all. The public is fed up, and no gay marriage, bible thumping is going to change that. People are sick of the Republican Party. You also need to learn how to spell her name first before you try to debate. Don't throw the country is not this, the country is not that garbage. That's a political ploy. She knows very well how to reach out to people.

 

[herewego]

In support of James: that 45% - 48% of voters who say they would never vote for Hilary is only a few weeks old. Here in Oregon, Democrats I know don't want her, and won't vote for her in the primary. I don't know a single independent who would vote for her. Granted, the group of people I know doesn't comprise a scientific sampling, but it is nevertheless suggestive. I think Wesley Clark would be more likely to carry Oregon than Hilary would; with Iraq such a big deal, anyone with that "General" in front of the name gets an automatic boost.

The fact remains, you also have a VP and Wesley Clark or Bill Richardson are also being talked to run with her. It's a package. It's not just her. It's a slew of people. She will have a tougher time winning the primary than winning the presidency. We have to let these people lay out their case first. The great thing is, there's a ton of Democratic candidates this time.

 

[Kulindahr]

A veep pick won't make a difference; that was included in the poll question. With 45% - 48% of the people against you no matter what, and the usual 15% or so undecided, the odds are so far on the other side it isn't even funny. If Bush were allowed to run again, she might win -- but it would probably also be the worst turnout in U.S. history, with two candidates the majority of the people didn't want.

Which takes me back to a concept we need to implement: "None of The Above" should be on the ballot, and if NOTA wins, the candidates listed are ditched and the parties have to start over -- fast.

 

[smelter]

Oh god no! If Hilary Clinton becomes president, I'll kill the bitch myself!

Yes, I threatened a presidential candidate on the web, you can go fuck yourself ya CIA dorks....

I just visited a brand new website that you certainly will find interesting. It has video cartoons and everything negative about Hillary:

http://www.stophernow.com/

Here is their agenda from the About US page:

We founded a new organization, STOP HER NOW, to shed light on the REAL Hillary Clinton and the danger she and her ideas pose for America. You know that for eight years Bill Clinton disgraced America and degraded the Presidency. Now he's promoting his even more left-wing wife Hillary. And as you know, they ALWAYS smear anyone who disagrees with them or exposes them to the TRUTH.

That's why today Bill Clinton attacks one group in particular—us.

STOP HER NOW is an organization of concerned citizens that is dedicated to spreading the TRUTH about Hillary Clinton and her dangerous ideas and plans for our country. But in classic Bill Clinton fashion, he didn't defend his wife—he viciously attacked the messengers...

But STOP HER NOW will not be intimidated, and WE WILL NOT BACK DOWN in the face of such attacks!

STOP HER NOW is intent on revealing to the American public the TRUTH about just who Hillary Clinton really is. We're out to expose her as a confirmed left-wing radical and life-long liberal who long ago sold her soul to the divisive, radical and ultra-liberal special interest groups who see everyone as "victims" and want to use your tax dollars and the power of the state to make things right.

As an experienced political chameleon, Hillary Clinton is already beginning a massive makeover campaign where she will try to make her look "mainstream" while hiding her extreme left-leaning agenda of government-run national health insurance, sky high taxes, and giving felons the right to vote.

All of America has a tremendous stake in this effort, especially our courageous soldiers overseas. The Clintons national defense policies left us weak and vulnerable in a dangerous and hostile world.

That's why we need your help today...

We need you to help us finance a massive media blitz and public education campaign...

And we need your help now, before Hillary and Bill Clinton are able to pull the wool over America's eyes once again. Join STOP HER NOW today!

 

[chance1]

Hillary has one very big problem

She has morphed herself into a moderate - almost neutered herself

Her days of being Bill's conscience with no real authority have evolved into a professional politician who believes in nothing except getting ahead

Repubs are digging her a little more
Dems are digging her a little less

What does she really stand for?

She had positioned herself as a moderate when she sensed that liberalism was death - now - who knows?

She has oh so many consultants so they'll figure out how to repackage her

Meanwhile Barack Obama, who is like a HS kid playing in the NBA - no warts, no record, just a good smile and good orator - is a real threat

Politics are like Hollywood

Nothing is as it seems

 

[james1200]

if i was a republican, i'd be working overtime to get the bitch the democratic nomination. she'll be the cause of a republican tsunami in what should be another democratic year.

i really do belong to a party of suicidal idiots.

 

[crlcxll]

Looking at this from the outside of The United States:

Hillary does not have a chance of winning the presidential election in2008. Even Europeans do not think so. She may, in fact, be a good president; however, she has no chance of getting there. Most likely the Democratic party will talk her out of running. At least if they want a good chance of stying in power, that is what they will do. Otherwise, they are dead in the water.

The people of the United States are looking for principled leadership; and right now, the only person who can bring that to the office and successfully run for President is Al Gore with possibly Obama as his Vice President. Obama would be the lode stone which would assist Gore in being brought into the presidency. Obama speaks from principle, and that is exactly what the American people are seeking.

Too often, the Democratic party tends to run on issues only instead of principle. They won the mid-term elections because nearly everyone in the country was fed up with the so-called "fascist government" which Bush has been running, but that will not be the case in 2008.

 

[crlcxll]

...and one more comment....

Unfortunately, most Americans are simply not mature enough to elect a woman as president sad as it may be.

 

[Kulindahr]

Good point up there, crlcxll. It's one thing to campaign "against" a sitting president, another entirely to campaign against one who's gone no matter what.

 

[XxXholic]

Well, she sure was positive to invade Iraq and she always support Israel, no matter what they do.

So she will probably be an excellent president for America.