Time to put the brakes on the Hillary express

O

Onceler

New member
What a nightmare. She is the candidate on the Dem side that represents the LEAST change, and would cause the MOST damage to Dem chances further down the ticket.

Why are primary voters even considering Clinton? Just when the Dems could cement a majority for a decade, they go with the most polarizing figure. Nominating Clinton is like throwing a life preserver to the GOP when they're on the verge of drowning:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20237246/

If I'm a Republican, I'm very, very happy that Clinton continues to lead in the polls....
 
I really think that the best change ticket would be Edwards/Obama, or Obama/Edwards. What's Hillary going to do about the war and stuff? Sure, her hubby is great, but she's so unpopular... I don't see how she could get any real change by congress even if she was elected. She's not tough as nails like the first great women leader of past times - Margaret Thatcher. She also doesn't have supreme support of her party.
 
I mean, what I'm really thinking of would be a weak version of what would happen whenever independents are elected in most states. The independent pushes a few great reforms... maybe one or two get through. But the people, after a while, say "Too much", and abandon the independent, leaving him without support. It is therefore easy for both parties to distance themselves from the independent, and you have a lame duck in office for a few years until the next election. I think that's the reason why Bloomberg isn't running.

But the end message is that you have to be VERY popular, and not very objectionable, to get any real change passed.
 
Onceler said:
What a nightmare. She is the candidate on the Dem side that represents the LEAST change, and would cause the MOST damage to Dem chances further down the ticket.

Why are primary voters even considering Clinton? Just when the Dems could cement a majority for a decade, they go with the most polarizing figure. Nominating Clinton is like throwing a life preserver to the GOP when they're on the verge of drowning:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20237246/

If I'm a Republican, I'm very, very happy that Clinton continues to lead in the polls....
Click to expand...


It's just dumb. All the whitewater, filegate, Juanita Broderick-gate will all come back up. The bitch is toast. A newby would be better. Plus, she's a total globalist.
 
Onceler said:
What a nightmare. She is the candidate on the Dem side that represents the LEAST change, and would cause the MOST damage to Dem chances further down the ticket.

Why are primary voters even considering Clinton? Just when the Dems could cement a majority for a decade, they go with the most polarizing figure. Nominating Clinton is like throwing a life preserver to the GOP when they're on the verge of drowning:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20237246/

If I'm a Republican, I'm very, very happy that Clinton continues to lead in the polls....
Click to expand...
There have been several republicns, both here and on another board that echoed your sentiments, hoping that Ilary would get the nod as the demo candidate--- the only way the republicans could win.
 
Last edited:
AssHatZombie said:
It's just dumb. All the whitewater, filegate, Juanita Broderick-gate will all come back up. The bitch is toast. A newby would be better. Plus, she's a total globalist.
Click to expand...

Oh she was president before ?

hillary is being pushed becuse the dems in congress have been corrupted by the repubs.
 
Watermark said:
I really think that the best change ticket would be Edwards/Obama, or Obama/Edwards. What's Hillary going to do about the war and stuff? Sure, her hubby is great, but she's so unpopular... I don't see how she could get any real change by congress even if she was elected. She's not tough as nails like the first great women leader of past times - Margaret Thatcher. She also doesn't have supreme support of her party.
Click to expand...
At the present tome, I would have to go with Richardson on the demo side. Unfortunitely, the on with the best Ideas seems to be Kucinich But he could never be nominated or electected. He is too much like Perot
 
Watermark said:
I really think that the best change ticket would be Edwards/Obama, or Obama/Edwards. What's Hillary going to do about the war and stuff? Sure, her hubby is great, but she's so unpopular... I don't see how she could get any real change by congress even if she was elected. She's not tough as nails like the first great women leader of past times - Margaret Thatcher. She also doesn't have supreme support of her party.
Click to expand...
At the present tome, I would have to go with Richardson on the demo side. Unfortunitely, the on with the best Ideas seems to be Kucinich But he could never be nominated or elected. He is too much like Perot
 
uscitizen said:
Oh she was president before ?

hillary is being pushed becuse the dems in congress have been corrupted by the repubs.
Click to expand...


You mean in the sense of her being a globalist candidate who will complete their agenda, or because they think she will definitely lose?
 
Hillary will not totally shoot the Republicans plans down.
This will be a reson that republicans that do not suffer from hillaryphobia will vote for her if bush has nauseated them. Ie female Republicans.
 
uscitizen said:
Hillary will not totally shoot the Republicans plans down.
This will be a reson that republicans that do not suffer from hillaryphobia will vote for her if bush has nauseated them. Ie female Republicans.
Click to expand...
It is the women who are most vehement.
 
uscitizen said:
I only referred to his rabid hillaryphobia.
Not sure on coulter have not watched or listened to her much. too nauseating.
I used to be subjected to rush by a cube neighbor at work.
Click to expand...
The women who dislike Hillary are more vehement than any republican man.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top