Hillary won't get the nomination

[Damocles]

Poor leaders, but still leaders.

See by saying poor leaders you admitted they are leaders.

Because earlier I stated, "Fine. If that is how you want to say it." Then restated the fricking original statement. Can't you remember even ten minutes?

Man, you must be older than I thought!



P.S. Nothing makes it more clear you haven't even read what I posted than this particular 'joke'.

 

[uscitizen]

Hence bac's point. Change must come from the people. We have the "pile of crap politicos we have now" because the people put them there. We will not get better ones according to bac until the people change who they put into office. You understand that correct?

Yep, but I see none of them I Want as president. some are just less scary than others.
If you have a heard of scrub cattle, all you can pick from are scrubs.

 

[Damocles]

I can only speak for myself. I voted for Bush in 2000 and I'm not saying its Gore's fault. My whole point this thread has been Gore was the leader going into the race and he did not win. I specifically point to his home state where had he won Tennessee he would have been the President. That is just my comment on the race. It has nothing to do with me wanting Gore to win or me blaming Gore for having Bush as President.

I haven't blamed anybody for having Bush as President. I voted for Bush because I believed he agreed more often with me than Gore on policy. Then he went crazy on me, I did not vote again for him because I knew he agreed with me on policy almost never.

I didn't vote for Kerry because he agreed with me on policy in even less instances than Bush, and he was stupid enough to be "fooled" by Bush into voting for authorization to attack and then believed I would be stupid enough to fall for it when he pretended that he didn't understand that he was voting for authorization for him to attack.

 

[BRUTALITOPS]

i haven't read this thread so I don't know what anyone has said.. but let me just say you guys are IDIOTS if you don't think shes getting the nomination. She's double digits ahead of anyone else. She has this thing already locked up. She has the nomination, get over it.

 

[Topspin]

and her lead in polls and money is increasing not decreasing.
The race is for the VP slot

 

[BRUTALITOPS]

Sometimes I am aghast how some of you can claim knowledge of political campaigns. Toatally inane. This is by far the most obvious thing to know. There is no way Hilary is not getting this nomination. No way.

 

[Jarod]

He didn't have to 'focus' there, but ignoring it the way he did was a mistake. I believe his campaign advisors assumed victory in the home state, they didn't assume defeat there and work on Florida because of that. I believe that they made a mistake. They realized their mistake near the end, but didn't have enough time. He was stretched too thin at that point and his few trips right at the end of the campaign to TN were not enough to win back the constituency who felt abandoned.

You are entitled to your opinion, it sure is easy to armchair quarterback!

 

[Jarod]

i haven't read this thread so I don't know what anyone has said.. but let me just say you guys are IDIOTS if you don't think shes getting the nomination. She's double digits ahead of anyone else. She has this thing already locked up. She has the nomination, get over it.

Same could have been said about Howard Dean!

 

[BRUTALITOPS]

No.. howard dean would have been a loose cannon. Rove was giddy with excitement at the prospect of dean running. They had books and books prepared for the guy to smear him completely.

 

[Jarod]

No.. howard dean would have been a loose cannon. Rove was giddy with excitement at the prospect of dean running. They had books and books prepared for the guy to smear him completely.

And they dont have books on Senator Clinton?

 

[Cypress]

I haven't blamed anybody for having Bush as President. I voted for Bush because I believed he agreed more often with me than Gore on policy. Then he went crazy on me, I did not vote again for him because I knew he agreed with me on policy almost never.

I didn't vote for Kerry because he agreed with me on policy in even less instances than Bush, and he was stupid enough to be "fooled" by Bush into voting for authorization to attack and then believed I would be stupid enough to fall for it when he pretended that he didn't understand that he was voting for authorization for him to attack.

Fair enough.

IMO, when you vote for president, you’re voting for someone who has the capacity to be the leader of the free world, and (hopefully) to be a transformational figure in addressing the public interests of the country.

If I just wanted someone who agreed with me on policy I would be happy to vote for some college professor for president, some guy from a liberal Think Tank, or maybe for Mike Gravel. None of those guys are going to be an effective and competent leader.

What do I see in Bush? Yeah, maybe I see a guy whose rhetoric matches 80% of what conservatives believe in. But, I also see a guy who was consistently a failure at virtually every business venture he tried, a guy who got by in life on a family name, and a guy who could barely utter a paragraph of standard, coherent English standing next to Al Gore throughout the 2000 debates. In fact, I knew within 5 minutes of the start of those debates, that this Bush guy was not qualified to be president-- That we would be taking an enormous risk putting a guy with his limited abilities into the most powerful office on the planet.

 

[Damocles]

You are entitled to your opinion, it sure is easy to armchair quarterback!

It is. However I tend to do the "back testing" thing. I predict things based on strategies of campaigns, then see how close I get. I then work on how I would have done it differently and base it on how successful campaigns of the past are run.

I find politics fascinating and campaign strategy even more so.

 

[blackascoal]

Hence bac's point. Change must come from the people. We have the "pile of crap politicos we have now" because the people put them there. We will not get better ones according to bac until the people change who they put into office. You understand that correct?

Exactly

America deserved George Bush

 

[Damocles]

Fair enough.

IMO, when you vote for president, you’re voting for someone who has the capacity to be the leader of the free world, and (hopefully) to be a transformational figure in addressing the public interests of the country.

If I just wanted someone who agreed with me on policy I would be happy to vote for some college professor for president, some guy from a liberal Think Tank, or maybe for Mike Gravel. None of those guys are going to be an effective and competent leader.

What do I see in Bush? Yeah, maybe I see a guy whose rhetoric matches 80% of what conservatives believe in. But, I also see a guy who was consistently a failure at virtually every business venture he tried, a guy who got by in life on a family name, and a guy who could barely utter a paragraph of standard, coherent English standing next to Al Gore throughout the 2000 debates. In fact, I knew within 5 minutes of the start of those debates, that this Bush guy was not qualified to be president-- That we would be taking an enormous risk putting a guy with his limited abilities into the most powerful office on the planet.

IMO, you take the people who are running and work with the tools you have. Pretending that bad policy is a good thing when run by a guy who is "smarter" would be just fooling myself. However, when bad policy follows promise for good policy then it takes another special piece of dumb to continue in that direction. It was why, when it got right down to it, although I intended to vote "against" Kerry I wound up voting for the guy that I agreed with far more often than either of them.

 

[blackascoal]

You touched upon a whole lot of stuff here.

Yes, no political constituency - whether it be african-americans or another one - should be taken for granted.

Yes, the democratic party leadership, has been relatively lame at challenging the war, confronting voter suppression, and standing for economic and social justice.

Anyone who wants to vote Green or Libertarian is fine by me.

The criminal justice system in this country is a joke. The racial disparities are really a crime in and of itself.

Here's my take, however: you can't have social justice, without having economic justice first. The drug war, the criminal justice system, the failure of adequately funding urban and poor rural schools are all critical issues. But, without economic fairness and justice, those issues will never get any significant traction. Reactionaires understand this: keep people on the edge of desparation, keep them worried about losing their healthcare and pensions, keep them worried about their jobs getting outsourced, keep them worried about making it to the next paycheck, and they are going to pay little attention to the inequalities in the prisons or in the urban schools. Broadly speaking, of course.

Here's the deal, IMO: Economic empowerment leads to self empowerment. And to political empowerment. A political constituencie's weakest link in the chain, is the fear that comes with economic anxiety and despair. You address working americans (e.g., poor white americans, working hispanic and african americans) concerns about adequate health care, you protect their pensions, you pay them a living wage, you unlink the government from the stranglehold of multinational corporate interests and alleged "free" trade crap and outsourcing, and you free people up to be more concerned about social change. Do you think its a coincidence that some of the greatest social change came about in the 1950s 1960s when the nation was fat and happy; when labor unions were strong; when the public interest at least played a strong role in policy making? I don't think it was a coincidence.

I don't disagree with what you've said, but while we're waiting on better economic days, innocent people are being mass-murdered, families and entire communities are being torn apart, and evil at the hands of the plutocrats reigns supreme over this nation.

Some of us can't wait for better days, we have to fight from where we stand. In fact, the world can't wait for better days in America .. which, if we continue on the path we're on, may never come again.

 

[AnglScarlett]

and her lead in polls and money is increasing not decreasing.
The race is for the VP slot

Top you are too stupit for RJS to bother with usually, I would not want my responding to you to raise your stock here, with everyone looking on and seeing me talk to you and start to think you are hot shit, when in truth, you are barely remainder bin material, butt, I am getting tired of your stupitity on this Hillary thing? I have never known a man so desperate for a shag (that is English for a Monica) that he would follow around a woman with The Hillarys pug like face? Now if it was Gennifer Flowers, I would be able to see it, she was just my type, and Monica would be a beauty after RJS put her on the treadmill for a couple of weeks? The Hillary will never be President, sorry, touche.

 

[Epicurus]

Ha RJS is hilarious with his superiority complex.

 

[Topspin]

Rj
you such a sorry cold calling loser that you have to post under 2 names.
your almost as bad as toothless UCS.
I know you won't man up
I got $1,000 on Hillary who's your pick

 

[AnglScarlett]

Rj
you such a sorry cold calling loser that you have to post under 2 names.
your almost as bad as toothless UCS.
I know you won't man up
I got $1,000 on Hillary who's your pick

See, one post made to you by the top-tier poster RJS and already we see you think you are the cock of the walk, butt, I see you as a hen-pecked weenie, sorry? I will let my readers decide, my cyber-neilson ratings are legendary I doubt anyone has ever heard of you, touche mf.

 

[Topspin]

I knew a cold calling loser like you could do nothing but spew garbage, quick go rip off another blue haired old lady superfreak.