Based on their previous performance, why in the hell would we put these two back in charge of the

[Skwmom]

country?

As pointed out in another post:

Those of us who lived through the 90s remember when Hillary was “co-president"—NAFTA, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, the Defense of Marriage Act, the End of Welfare As We Know It, mass incarceration, deregulation of telecommunications, and deregulation of Wall Street, were just a few Clintonian Greatest Hits.

Haven't they done enough damage?

To think about putting these two back in charge is insane.

[redstateblues]

1. It was awful. 8 years of peace and prosperity for starters.

Hillary fought for universal healthcare and they paid dearly for it. It wasn't perfect for sure but all these revisionists are amazing. It's the same bunch that trash our Democratic President who has taken the disaster handed to him by the Republicans and gotten us on the right track. The Puritopians would be trashing Bernie in six months after Congress throws his pie in the sky proposals back in his face.

[Skwmom]

2. Not perfect? This country is still feeling the affects of their disastrous governing.

[TTUBatfan2008]

3. Prosperity in a bubble...

We seem to have these boom and bust bubbles. Clinton helped lead to the crash of 2008. Not all his fault but he helped. It was very much a team effort between Democrats, Republicans, and the financial industry. Question is were the boom times worth the down times? It's a good question and I'm sure everyone has a different perspective depending on individual experiences.

[libdem4life]

4. And if Hillary gets in ...the second Clinton ... has anyone noticed that Chelsea is around a bit

these days. She trying to sound like a pol, just like Mom and Dad. Ready for Clinton III? Not me. I'd like Sr. Abuelo and Sra. Abuela to enjoy their abuelitos and walk off into the sunset hand in hand. Mexico comes to mind.