HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Hillary can't win.....per...

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:25 PM

 

Hillary can't win.....period

why wont the Hillary hangers on face it? She has too much baggage and she will be destroyed if we make her the nominee.

Do you really think they wont bring up the e-mail thing and all the donations to the foundation from Saudi Arabia and other foreign countries?

She will be DESTROYED if we nominate her.

Lets start a movement for anyone else

133 replies, 9880 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 133 replies Author Time Post
Reply Hillary can't win.....period (Original post)
backwoodsbob Mar 2015 OP
davidsilver Mar 2015 #1
namastea42 Mar 2015 #35
davidsilver Mar 2015 #90
JimDandy Mar 2015 #102
Art_from_Ark Mar 2015 #130
davidsilver Mar 2015 #131
leveymg Mar 2015 #2
AtomicKitten Mar 2015 #81
leveymg Mar 2015 #82
AtomicKitten Mar 2015 #89
JaneyVee Mar 2015 #3
Man from Pickens Mar 2015 #24
mythology Mar 2015 #31
Man from Pickens Mar 2015 #37
Marr Mar 2015 #57
uponit7771 Mar 2015 #52
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #111
Man from Pickens Mar 2015 #115
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #121
NYC_SKP Mar 2015 #123
MineralMan Mar 2015 #4
awake Mar 2015 #7
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #8
nichomachus Mar 2015 #41
gcomeau Mar 2015 #67
Tarheel_Dem Mar 2015 #83
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #85
leveymg Mar 2015 #87
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #88
leveymg Mar 2015 #116
MillennialDem Mar 2015 #112
muriel_volestrangler Mar 2015 #133
NCTraveler Mar 2015 #32
Marr Mar 2015 #58
uponit7771 Mar 2015 #53
Cali_Democrat Mar 2015 #5
nichomachus Mar 2015 #43
The_Casual_Observer Mar 2015 #6
RiverLover Mar 2015 #11
The_Casual_Observer Mar 2015 #46
Marr Mar 2015 #60
WhiteTara Mar 2015 #127
Marr Mar 2015 #129
Savannahmann Mar 2015 #12
GoneFishin Mar 2015 #54
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #51
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Mar 2015 #80
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #97
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Mar 2015 #103
Major Hogwash Mar 2015 #118
OKNancy Mar 2015 #9
cwydro Mar 2015 #10
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #15
cwydro Mar 2015 #16
Name removed Mar 2015 #13
JoePhilly Mar 2015 #14
Calista241 Mar 2015 #17
brooklynite Mar 2015 #18
AtomicKitten Mar 2015 #19
namastea42 Mar 2015 #47
AtomicKitten Mar 2015 #76
NYC_SKP Mar 2015 #120
Prism Mar 2015 #20
Man from Pickens Mar 2015 #25
namastea42 Mar 2015 #39
BeyondGeography Mar 2015 #21
Man from Pickens Mar 2015 #44
BeyondGeography Mar 2015 #48
MelungeonWoman Mar 2015 #22
jeff47 Mar 2015 #23
stillwaiting Mar 2015 #77
Orsino Mar 2015 #26
MohRokTah Mar 2015 #27
A HERETIC I AM Mar 2015 #42
hrmjustin Mar 2015 #28
Capt. Obvious Mar 2015 #29
truebluegreen Mar 2015 #38
NCTraveler Mar 2015 #30
Dawgs Mar 2015 #33
Capt. Obvious Mar 2015 #40
NanceGreggs Mar 2015 #101
SidDithers Mar 2015 #34
ieoeja Mar 2015 #69
android fan Mar 2015 #105
underpants Mar 2015 #36
questionseverything Mar 2015 #64
underpants Mar 2015 #66
android fan Mar 2015 #106
BainsBane Mar 2015 #45
FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #50
liberal N proud Mar 2015 #49
Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #55
Vinca Mar 2015 #56
Lil Missy Mar 2015 #59
hamsterjill Mar 2015 #61
NaturalHigh Mar 2015 #62
randr Mar 2015 #63
SheilaT Mar 2015 #65
Rex Mar 2015 #68
Cosmic Kitten Mar 2015 #70
Kingofalldems Mar 2015 #71
LanternWaste Mar 2015 #72
Proud Public Servant Mar 2015 #73
NightWatcher Mar 2015 #74
Starry Messenger Mar 2015 #75
digonswine Mar 2015 #84
NYC_SKP Mar 2015 #93
Starry Messenger Mar 2015 #95
NYC_SKP Mar 2015 #96
Starry Messenger Mar 2015 #98
CreekDog Mar 2015 #108
Major Hogwash Mar 2015 #117
leftofcool Mar 2015 #78
Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #79
Tarheel_Dem Mar 2015 #86
great white snark Mar 2015 #91
Tarheel_Dem Mar 2015 #94
treestar Mar 2015 #125
NYC_SKP Mar 2015 #92
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #99
NYC_SKP Mar 2015 #100
KMOD Mar 2015 #104
CreekDog Mar 2015 #107
TeeYiYi Mar 2015 #109
NYC_SKP Mar 2015 #110
JonLP24 Mar 2015 #113
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #114
IsItJustMe Mar 2015 #119
Lil Missy Mar 2015 #122
treestar Mar 2015 #124
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #126
fredamae Mar 2015 #128
classof56 Mar 2015 #132

Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:29 PM

1. While I don't support Hillary I do believe virtually any Democratic nominee will win in 2016

 

The electoral math doesn't favor the Teapublicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidsilver (Reply #1)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:54 PM

35. I agree. The Blue Wall is real and it would be a real shame not to take

 

the opportunity to elect someone to the left of Clinton. It's an opportunity of a life time and it should not be squandered.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to namastea42 (Reply #35)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 07:37 PM

90. Yes, I agree.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidsilver (Reply #1)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 09:11 PM

102. +1 n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidsilver (Reply #1)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 11:25 AM

130. But the precedent does favor the Republicans

The only time the Democrats have held the White House for at least 3 consecutive terms since Martin van Buren won in 1836 after two terms of Andrew Jackson, was in the FDR/Truman era of 1933-53.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Art_from_Ark (Reply #130)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 02:08 PM

131. I agree but we live in a new age with new electoral math

 

I can't imagine any Teapublican getting by the Big Blue Wall. I also believe that after the 2020 Census and corresponding redistricting, the Teapublicans will never again hold a majority in either house of congress.

In the future, the battle will be between true progressive left Democrats and the corporatist, 3rd Way, so called "centrist" Democrats who will be supported by the Republican minority.

That fact is the Republicans are in a death spiral that they themselves are unaware of. All of them are talking like Ronald Reagan circa 1980.

Our true opponents in the future will be the corporatist a in our own party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:30 PM

2. And, on foreign affairs, she has an enormous handicap - Hillary is Bibi. "There is no daylight"

between them on Iran. Those were her own words.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #2)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 05:34 PM

81. Handicap? I'm afraid some think it's a plus.

 

It's mindblowing how far the Democratic party has drifted to the right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #81)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 05:39 PM

82. On Israel, actually, there is a clear split between the "maximalists" (HRC, AIPAC, GOP) and Obama

on issues such as negotiation with Iran.

• On the “maximalist” (all or nothing) position with regard to negotiation with Iran and other parties in the Middle East over nuclear enrichment and related issues. http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/08/hillary-clinton-failure-to-help-syrian-rebels-led-to-the-rise-of-isis/375832/

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: It seems that you’ve shifted your position on Iran’s nuclear ambitions. By [chief U.S. negotiator] Wendy Sherman’s definition of maximalism, you’ve taken a fairly maximalist position—little or no enrichment for Iran. Are you taking a harder line than your former colleagues in the Obama administration are taking on this matter?
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: It’s a consistent line. I’ve always been in the camp that held that they did not have a right to enrichment.

For his part, Obama stated in an August 8 interview with the NYT’s Thomas Freidman: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/09/opinion/president-obama-thomas-l-friedman-iraq-and-world-affairs.html
“Our politics are dysfunctional,” said the president, and we should heed the terrible divisions in the Middle East as a “warning to us: societies don’t work if political factions take maximalist positions. And the more diverse the country is, the less it can afford to take maximalist positions.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #82)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 07:30 PM

89. He has a nuanced view particularly in light of that of the hardliners.

 

I fear unless we nominate and elect someone else, we are going to war with Iran.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:31 PM

3. Have you seen recent polls? Double digit leads.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #3)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:37 PM

24. Eric Cantor's polls said the same thing

 

He managed to lose those leads in the space of weeks.

The only person this country wants less than Hillary Clinton is Jeb Bush, and it's looking like the Repubs are NOT going to be dumb enough to nominate him, he's getting no traction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Man from Pickens (Reply #24)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:48 PM

31. The difference is Cantor's polls were internal polls

 

Those are generally less accurate than external polls.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mythology (Reply #31)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:57 PM

37. it's not a material difference in this case

 

if you asked pretty much anybody in politics three weeks out whether there was a chance Cantor was going to lose his seat, they would have laughed at you.

I think he's a great analogue for Clinton, as an entrenched longtime politico tied at the hip to Wall Street, so heavily favored to win that people didn't even bother polling the race.

Perceived leads can evaporate in a flash when the candidate is fundamentally weak and out of touch, and that's what we have here. The electorate picks up very well on candidates who have contempt for the average person, and Hillary oozes it out of every pore and can't convincingly fake otherwise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Man from Pickens (Reply #37)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:37 PM

57. Agreed. /nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mythology (Reply #31)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:32 PM

52. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Man from Pickens (Reply #24)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 11:15 PM

111. There wasn't nearly as much polling on the Cantor campaign.

And suggesting Eric Cantor is a proxy for Hillary Clinton is an assertion in search of reality...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #111)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 12:30 AM

115. well, the best proxy for Hillary 2016 is...

 

Hillary 2008

don't think there's any argument that can be seriously made about that

and I expect the same outcome - Democrats will vote for any decent alternative, even taking a chance on someone with light experience if we have to

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Man from Pickens (Reply #115)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 10:05 AM

121. Ronald Reagan lost the 1976 Republican primary and won the presidency twice by landslides.

George Herbert Walker Bush lost the 1980 Republican primary and was elected president in 1988 so there's modern precedent for candidates losing primaries and becoming president in subsequent elections...


There is no substitute for persistence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Man from Pickens (Reply #115)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 10:05 AM

123. Totally. I'll take an activist actor over a self-serving sneaky politician any day. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:31 PM

4. The polls are saying something quite different.

You've given us your opinion. What is it based on? Why should people listen to your opinion? What's your background in creating and running a campaign? What polling have you done?

Everyone has an opinion. Not everyone's opinion is correct.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #4)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:33 PM

7. Democratic support for Hillary drops 15 points since February

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awake (Reply #7)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:40 PM

8. Polls show Hillary Clinton beating all her Republican challengers by double digits





And since I eschew cherry picking polls here is a link to all of them:





http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential_race.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #8)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:01 PM

41. In 2007, Hillary led all the polls

In January of 2008, the roof fell in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nichomachus (Reply #41)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 04:02 PM

67. Against a Democratic challenger.

 

Not against a Republican opponent.

Completely different things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gcomeau (Reply #67)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 05:41 PM

83. Shhhh!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nichomachus (Reply #41)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 06:02 PM

85. Is she running against Barack Obama?/NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #85)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 07:07 PM

87. Yes, and she has been since Dec. 2012. She runs to his right, enabling Bibi.

For the most part, though, unquestioning support for Israel has remained dominant in Washington. Even before she left the administration, Clinton essentially shed any pretense that she was still playing the role of impartial arbiter. As Israel flouted her own government’s demand that it not build more settlements in East Jerusalem, Clinton spoke so effusively about Netanyahu at a December 2012 conference that political observers considered the speech tantamount to a presidential announcement. Since then, Clinton has further distanced herself from her job as secretary of state, making light of her role as Netanyahu’s disciplinarian for Obama and calling herself the president’s “designated yeller.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/21/magazine/can-liberal-zionists-count-on-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #87)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 07:13 PM

88. Your accusation that she is running against President Obama because of a three year old...

Your accusation that she is running against President Obama because of a policy difference under different circumstances is specious and your suggestion that she would support Netanyahu after he threw in his lot with the Congressional Republicans in defiance of President Obama before she even speaks to the current situation borders on libelous.


Actually she did speak to the situation, ergo:





Hillary Clinton @HillaryClinton · Mar 11
GOP letter to Iranian clerics undermines American leadership. No one considering running for commander-in-chief should be signing on

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #88)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 01:03 AM

116. Who is she running against, then? Hillary is still running with Bibi against Obama.

What's changed? Have you heard her come out and condemn Bibi for his address to Congress - no. Her UN statement merely put distance between herself and the letter of the seditious 47, not daylight between herself and Bibi.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nichomachus (Reply #41)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 11:19 PM

112. An attack on her LEFT flank (though Obama is still too centrist). She is republican kryptonite.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nichomachus (Reply #41)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 11:05 AM

133. In 2007, her share varied from 22% to 53%; mostly around 35-40%

In 2008, it was mostly 40-45%. The roof didn't fall in on her; it was that as other candidates dropped out, most of their support went to Obama.

In 2015, she already has over 50% of the support. If all the rest coalesced behind one candidate, she'd still be leading.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Democratic_Party_2008_presidential_candidates

In the 2 way contests of Hillary v. Obama listed there, up to March 2007 (ie the equivalent time to now), her lead over Obama had sometimes been as small as 8% (47% to 39%). He was already a realistic challenger by this time

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awake (Reply #7)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:49 PM

32. How long do you think people will tout this poll.

 

The online poll. lol. A handful of republicans wet themselves when they read it this morning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #32)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:40 PM

58. As long as her supporters claim great support.

 

And as I understand it, that poll wasn't an 'online poll' in the sense of some unreliable, CNN homepage widget. It used the internet as a means of collecting data, but was traditional in the sense of targeting a representative sample.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awake (Reply #7)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:32 PM

53. ... and independents love her... go hillary !!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:32 PM

5. So we should ignore all the polls showing her beating every potential GOP candidate.

 

We must not nominate her because some anonymous poster on a message board says she has no chance to win the Presidency.

OK...you've convinced me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #5)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:02 PM

43. Yup

We must not nominate her because some anonymous poster on a message board says she is an unbeatable front runner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:32 PM

6. Ok run some other slob against Jeb Bush and what have you got? 8 more years of

Middle East invasions/'occupations and a big fat recession.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The_Casual_Observer (Reply #6)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:44 PM

11. We can run an actual Democrat this time & win,

And maybe finally end the middle east invasions that seem never-ending at the moment and avoid another 2008 which was brought on by the other Clinton's propensity to "reach across the aisle" & work "with" republicans~

In 1992, the Democratic-controlled 102nd Congress under the George H. W. Bush administration weakened regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac with the goal of making available more money for the issuance of home loans. The Washington Post wrote: "Congress also wanted to free up money for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to buy mortgage loans and specified that the pair would be required to keep a much smaller share of their funds on hand than other financial institutions. Whereas banks that held $100 could spend $90 buying mortgage loans, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could spend $97.50 buying loans. Finally, Congress ordered that the companies be required to keep more capital as a cushion against losses if they invested in riskier securities. But the rule was never set during the Clinton administration, which came to office that winter, and was only put in place nine years later."[146]

Some economists have pointed to deregulation efforts as contributing to the collapse.[147][148][149] In 1999, the Republican controlled 106th Congress U.S. Congress under the Clinton administration passed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed part of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933. This repeal has been criticized by some for having contributed to the proliferation of the complex and opaque financial instruments which are at the heart of the crisis.[150] However, some economists object to singling out the repeal of Glass–Steagall for criticism. Brad DeLong, a former advisor to President Clinton and economist at the University of California, Berkeley and Tyler Cowen of George Mason University have both argued that the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act softened the impact of the crisis by allowing for mergers and acquisitions of collapsing banks as the crisis unfolded in late 2008.[151]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_Great_Recession



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #11)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:04 PM

46. No "real" Democrat is ever going to win and haven't for a long long time.

But plenty of real republicans have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #11)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:42 PM

60. Yep-- there's no excuse for compromising so severely this time, much less pre-primary.

 

The Republicans have moved so far to the right that they're no longer a national party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #60)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 10:41 AM

127. Gosh is that you Ralph Nadir? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WhiteTara (Reply #127)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 11:15 AM

129. You know, I don't begrudge our party's right-wing for claiming to be Dems.

 

The thing that does irritate me is when they profess to define the party, and suggest that it's traditional Democrats who don't belong in the party. It's a bit like walking into someone else's house and demanding your host get out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The_Casual_Observer (Reply #6)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:47 PM

12. I couldn't agree more.

 

That's why we need Hillary. So we can claim credit for the wars and recessions. I mean, it's way better to be screwed by your friends than your enemies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Savannahmann (Reply #12)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:35 PM

54. Yep. She may be a corporatist trollup to Wall Street and war profiteers, but she is OUR corporatist

trollup to Wall Street and war profiteers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The_Casual_Observer (Reply #6)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:31 PM

51. Run HRC against Bush and you will get the same results. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #51)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 05:25 PM

80. Where have we heard that before?

2000 no difference between Bush and Gore

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Reply #80)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 08:33 PM

97. I didn't say that, in fact no one ever said that. It's a Strawman.

 

Here's how the discussion went. A poster said, "Ok run some other slob against Jeb Bush and what have you got? 8 more years of Middle East invasions/'occupations and a big fat recession." And I responded "Run HRC against Bush and you will get the same results", results meaning "8 more years of Middle East invasions/'occupations and a big fat recession."

HRC and Jeb Bush are not the same, the Democratic Party and the Republicon Party are not the same. However, HRC agrees with the Bush family on middle east invasions, economic power of Wall Frackin Street, and a un-regulated NSA/CIA Security State.

When Gore was run against Bush, Gore lost. If we run another DLC'er H.Clinton against Bush, I think we will have the same results. But the centrists won't be able to blame Nader. If you want Jeb, then nominate HRC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #97)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 09:19 PM

103. Sorry Rhett I've heard that kind of shit from you before

Have you even been paying attention to Jeb Bush? Recently he called for the repeal of the federal minimum wage. Never mind that even some conservative states have raised their minimum wage.

I get it. You don't like Hillary Clinton. But your argument that we'll get Bush instead if we nominate her is not based in reality.

And for what it's worth I wouldn't mind seeing a challenger for this reason. A healthy debate is good for the party. In addition having more candidates is good for the party's future and will keep it from getting stagnant.

But if Clinton gets the nomination I will gladly vote for her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Reply #103)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 01:16 AM

118. Yeah, but it's good shit.



Chill out, Francis.

You're not the big toe, not yet anyway.

Do you remember the movie "Stripes"?
I thought it was very funny.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:41 PM

9. You are wrong

Not much more to say about it. She will not be destroyed. She will win all the Obama states and maybe add a few.
Count on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:42 PM

10. I'm curious as to why Biden is never considered?

Is it the foot-in mouth thing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #10)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:48 PM

15. He's my second choice. It is , imho, a testament to HRC's strength that she handily defeats him ...

And a person can't say it's because he's unknown.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #15)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:50 PM

16. Good point.

I'm a Hillary supporter too.

I've always liked Biden. He seems to be a genuinely good guy. (no doubt that means he could never win!)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:47 PM

14. Should have started to develop this "anyone else" you speak of about 4 years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:56 PM

17. Everyone assumes people will turn out for her the way they did for Obama.

I just don't think she's as compelling a candidate as Obama. She's hard to like, and i can't think of anyone who comes off as more elitist and self-absorbed.

Many Republicans will tell you that on a personal level, Obama is super cool and very likable. How many people will tell you the same about Hillary?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 01:57 PM

18. Name someone who wasn't already in the Republican camp who would reject Hillary over the email story

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:06 PM

19. Oh pish posh. Everybody lies. Why should Hillary be held to a higher standard?

 



So she broke her word to the White House regarding disclosure. BFD. It's not like she had a job that required staying clear of conflicts of interest.

Everybody goes back on their word. Why should she be required to keep hers? It's really unfair to put an extra burden on her when everybody else is doing it.

And no worries about the baggage because she can afford the best. She's got an awesome set of Louis Vuitton’s Leather Monogrammed Luggage. And being the visionary she is, she has planned ahead for the 2016 election by purchasing a stylish Louis Vuitton Vintage Authentic Monogram Steamer Trunk.

No worries, Democrats. She's got this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #19)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:06 PM

47. Here is an opinion piece from the LA Times on luggage and baggage:

 

Hillary Clinton and us - a portrait of an abusive relationship
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-daum-hillary-clinton-relationship-voters-abusive-20150319-column.html

Like a suitcase on the world's longest luggage carousel, Hillary Rodham Clinton's all-but-assured presidential candidacy is now drifting back toward us, begging to be claimed whether or not we still want — or even remember — what is packed inside.

Oh, right. Dirty laundry. Some of it dating back decades. And much of it so stained it damages everything it touches.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to namastea42 (Reply #47)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 04:38 PM

76. Funny stuff. /nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #19)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 10:03 AM

120. "Republicans do it all the time, why is everyone picking on Hillary Clinton?"

 

I'm hearing this a lot.

As if acting like a republican is somehow a defense and not a red flag.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:11 PM

20. I think Hillary's campaign leaked the email story

 

By doing it now when no one cares, it becomes pointless during the rigorous final stretch. She will be immunized.

Secretary Clinton isn't my choice, but I have a hard time seeing anyone caring about the email story a year from now. And I think that was by design.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Prism (Reply #20)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:39 PM

25. normally I would agree

 

but she did not at all look prepared to handle the situation. If this were planned, the planning was very poor since her handling of it made it worse than just keeping her mouth shut

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Man from Pickens (Reply #25)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:59 PM

39. good point. She was not very convincing or comfortable.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:11 PM

21. She's not that bad...sheesh

This is why we need a primary challenge. So some who of you who are salvageable can be reminded that Hillary actually has some talent. Full mastery of the issues, good on her feet in debates (very good), great resume (unless you've lost all objectivity) and a tough competitor. She even has a personality that comes out from time to time when she isn't playing it too safe.

I'm not fired up either by the thought of more MSM Clintonfests, the specter of the same First Family that went into the WH 20-plus years ago having at it again and I worry that some our own voters will tune her out and stay home, but she won't be destroyed by the GOP ca. 2016. Not even close.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #21)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:03 PM

44. "great resume"?

 

Had me going up to that point. Her resume is horrible, most especially her catastrophic performance at her last job. She left Obama with diplomatic crises all over the place, which were largely caused by her arrogant bullying approach to other nations.

Her legacy at State is a world full of nations quickly scrambling to find alternatives to dealing with the United States. Look at how even our closest allies are now giving Obama the middle finger and joining China's new banking scheme. Nobody wants to end up like Libya or Honduras. When people from multiple other countries print your face on banners in revolutionary protests of sizes never before seen, you've failed as a diplomat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Man from Pickens (Reply #44)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:11 PM

48. The world's a mess and it's all her fault!

Most voters simply won't see it that way. The fact is, "she's not qualified," by virtue of her resume is off the table. You couldn't say that for Warren, who has zero FP experience, or someone like O'Malley.

The contest is with the Republicans. I don't see "arrogant bullying" as an effective line of attack coming from them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:31 PM

22. I look forward to the primaries.

For some bizarre reason I feel that people will finally wise up and choose non-corporate candidates in both major parties this time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MelungeonWoman (Reply #22)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:36 PM

23. I don't. There's going to be post after post attacking non-Clinton voters

"Why are you hurting our nominee by voting for someone else?" will be a recurring theme.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MelungeonWoman (Reply #22)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 05:06 PM

77. There's non-corporate Republicans?!?! Please enlighten me. Who are they?!?! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:40 PM

26. Clinton will be inaugurated in 2017.

The media and voter suppression will try to make it look like a horse race, but woe to the Republucan nominee who dares to face her in a debate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:40 PM

27. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

 












Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #27)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:02 PM

42. Beat me to it.

All I can add is...


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:40 PM

28. Lol.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:42 PM

29. PRESIDENT TRUMP THANKS YOU

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Capt. Obvious (Reply #29)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:58 PM

38. Hyperbole much?

 

Even if Hillary is not the nominee, on what planet would Trump win the nomination, let alone the general?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:45 PM

30. Save the Jimmy Jihad Carter right wing bullshit for a different board.

 

Right wingers went nuts over that shit. Still do to this day. Damn foreigners. We know nutty right wingers are going to try to attach her to brown people and try to link her to supporting terrorism. No need to do that here. Your fears are unfounded.

"Do you really think they wont bring up the e-mail thing and all the donations to the foundation from Saudi Arabia and other foreign countries?"

I hope they do stick with the email thing. Where were Clintons numbers when Starr was done?

I would respect a Hillary can't win post if it had thought behind it. They take money from brown people and republicans are going to be mean is a pretty shitty argument.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:50 PM

33. It's amazing how many Democrats don't realize how much she's hated by much of America. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dawgs (Reply #33)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:01 PM

40. THAT'S WHAT PRESIDENT CARSON IS COUNTING ON

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dawgs (Reply #33)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 09:10 PM

101. That's probably because she isn't.

And endless posts claiming how hated she is won't make it a fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:53 PM

34. Bookmarking for Nov 9, 2016...nt

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #34)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 04:11 PM

69. Bookmarking for March 2, 2016...nt

 


Me

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ieoeja (Reply #69)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 09:56 PM

105. Bookmarking for April of 2015

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 02:55 PM

36. Sorry but none of that matters. It's all about the OFA database.

If she's gets a hold of that she wins. Period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underpants (Reply #36)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:49 PM

64. what is the ofa database?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to questionseverything (Reply #64)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 04:01 PM

66. Obama For America now called Organize For America

The have a fantastic database of emails, donors, volunteers, etcetera.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underpants (Reply #36)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 10:00 PM

106. She emails me

 

She gets blacklisted on my server for unwanted spam.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:03 PM

45. I'm guessing if you were a great political strategist or clairvoyant

you would be somewhere else right now. So . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #45)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:28 PM

50. +1

I'd be curious how much they make leading campaign strategies due to their clairvoyance and intelligence? My guess...a big fat goose egg.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:15 PM

49. OK but the polls say otherwise at this point.

But as far as I know, she has not "Officially" announced that she is running.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:36 PM

55. A clear majority in all the polls support Senator/Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

against everyone. She is liked by a majority of women, and Democrats.

Rather than exclude her as Republicans want, we should hold primaries and see what the voters say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:36 PM

56. I'm not a big Hillary fan, but at this point I'm certain she'll be elected if she runs.

I think Elizabeth Warren could capture the "Obama" magic and be the nominee instead, but I take her at her word she's not running. Other than those 2, I don't see any Democrats out there who get me too terribly excited.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:41 PM

59. I'll alert the media n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:43 PM

61. It's still early on yet.

Remember Howard Dean?

But, it looks like it will be Hillary, and I'm all for Hillary. I would love to see a woman be President of the United States and I cannot think of any other woman (with all due respect to Elizabeth Warren, whom I really like) that is better qualified to serve as President than Hillary Clinton.

If she is the Democratic nominee, she will have my support and my vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:44 PM

62. Is this supposed to be a joke?

I can currently see three most likely Republican nominees - Bush, Walker, or Christie. Secretary Clinton will win the race against any of them walking away.

I'll put good money on that and take any odds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:48 PM

63. I believe Hillary can win

My problem is that if she does the same gridlock will continue. Both sides will spend more time taking pot shots and defending ridiculous charges rather than cooperating to resolve important issues.
I am ready to move on and if we can find a candidate that has no baggage I am ready to listen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 03:51 PM

65. I'm inclined to agree with you.

 

I think the Hillary Clinton supporters simply don't understand how intensely disliked she is outside of a core of loyal followers. They don't get how many out there in the fundamentalist world absolutely don't think a woman should be President, and they will surely show up to vote against her.

There is not an enormous untapped yearning for a woman President that will make millions of otherwise Republican voters come over and vote for the woman nominee. Think about it. If the Republicans nominated a woman, would any of you reading this jump ship and vote fo9r her just to see the first woman President?

I didn't think so.

And as stupid as the flap over Benghazi or the email thing might be, do you really think the Republicans, if she's the nominee, will for one minute not bring those up?

If she gets the nomination, we can only hope the Republicans nominate someone even easier to hate, maybe Bobby Jindal, and I'm going to guess that the turnout will be incredibly low.

More to the point, I think it would be a huge mistake to go back to the same political family, for either party, to select a nominee. What we need more than anything is some new people to be running.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 04:08 PM

68. Are you serious? Who will destroy her? Rick Perry? He can't even count to 3.

 

One of the Paul moonbats? Jeb Bush? She will eat Jeb Bush alive in front of the cameras. You need to come up with a viable option. Warren? Sanders? What you got?

I was saying the same thing a few months ago, but the more I thought about it the more I realized I was wrong. She has this thing in the bag, only HRC can hurt HRC's chances of winning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 04:14 PM

70. Republicans don't disagree with HRC on money/war issues

Republicans own Congress.

Of the issues that will be on the table
in 2016, Hillary and repubs aren't that far apart.

IF she is elected...
They will use her "socially liberal" positions
to bash her and excite their base.
Then they will agree go along with Hillary
on Wall st, and War hawk policies in the
"spirit of bipartisanship", of course.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 04:15 PM

71. I'm ascared!

Nice try.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 04:17 PM

72. Your prophecies will be given all the credibility they indeed, warrant.

Your prophecies will be given all the credibility they indeed, warrant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 04:27 PM

73. Ok, take a breath

Last edited Fri Mar 20, 2015, 05:01 PM - Edit history (1)

The email thing isn't going to matter, per se. The taking money from foreign countries isn't going to matter, per se.

To the extent they matter, they matter because they show a penchant for secrecy and hypocrisy; they will create problems only to the extent that pointing that out brings out her prickliness, her disdain for being questioned, her contempt for the press, and her seeming belief that the rules don't apply to her.

That's not great, but it just makes her our Nixon -- and he won twice.

Beyond that, though, look at the 2012 election, then 2016 GOP field, and then do the math. The GOP has to pick up Florida AND Ohio AND Virginia AND another state in order to get to victory. Could a GOP candidate do that? Possibly. Could anyone running for the GOP ticket in 2016 do that? I'm not seeing it.

To be sure, Hillary could lose. But to suggest she can't win is nuts. I'm not a fan, and don't plan to vote for her in the primary, but I can't remember the last politician who showed her resilience and grim determination.

Oh wait, yes I can. Our Nixon -- count on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 04:32 PM

74. Baggage? If the other side can run a Bush, we can run a Clinton and win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 04:34 PM

75. Aww, she's lost the dog-shooter vote?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #75)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 06:02 PM

84. They are a hard lot to please!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #75)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 08:16 PM

93. So classy. Where does such classiness come from? Mom's side, Dad's?

 

Hillary's a loser, let's face it.

No need to shoot the messenger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #93)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 08:31 PM

95. I don't know--I didn't know a propensity for murdering animals was hereditary.

Perhaps you can let us know!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #95)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 08:32 PM

96. I'm so glad I'm me and not a mean person who likes to bully and intimidate. That's so weak.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #96)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 08:37 PM

98. I'm glad I don't shoot dogs either!

It's terrible to do something to make a creature suffer that can't understand. That is sociopathic, something I am glad I am not. But then, I don't worship guns and post about how much I love them after little children get murdered! That's just me tho!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #93)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 11:02 PM

108. Yes, do tell us how it's not classy to bring up past dog killings

while telling us to pay attention to the person interviewed by congress about the sexual relations of Bill Clinton.

do explain how the former lacks class while the latter doesn't.

or better yet, don't lecture me in order to try to get me to let Republicans pick my nominee for me.

no matter who we nominate, Republicans will say they are nun-beating, Israel hating, gun grabbing, abortion forcing, ISIS-belonging, reverse racisting communists.

so since that's baked into the cake anyway, i might as well worry about how much i like our nominee and less about how much Republicans like our nominee.

and i like Hillary and i like other candidates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CreekDog (Reply #108)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 01:07 AM

117. Unfortunately . . .

MacArthur's Park is melting in the dark
All the sweet, green icing flowing down
Someone left the cake out in the rain

I don't think that I can take it
'Cause it took so long to bake it
And I'll never have that recipe again, oh noooooo


so since that's baked into the cake anyway, . . .


That's what brought that on, in case you were wondering.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 05:21 PM

78. Oh goody! Another anti-Hillary thread for the trash bin!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 05:22 PM

79. I got the sign Hillary will run and win. As I went through the check out line

Tabloid headline "Hillary will not be President in 2017". Whatever they post is the opposite.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 06:04 PM

86. Why not leave Hillary out of it? If you've got someone else in mind, talk about them. Of course,

they would have to declare that they're actually running for the office. No fantasy candidates please. And here's another thought, how 'bout we let Democrats decide who we want to represent us, not Republicans...or Greens....or Paulites....or Larouchies....or hardline Communists and the like.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #86)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 07:51 PM

91. Problem is whoever they want to run would rather eat a urinal cake than deal with the far left.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to great white snark (Reply #91)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 08:18 PM

94. !!!





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #86)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 10:10 AM

125. +1

The right wants us to run someone very leftist so they can take advantage of that and win. They have enablers here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 08:13 PM

92. I've heard Katherine Willey on the radio twice this week.

 

We need anybody else and we need them, him or her, NOW!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #92)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 08:49 PM

99. "Kathleen Willey", really...

I would tell you what I think of your little brickbat but I would get definitely get a deletion and mar my stellar record.

Do you have a fertile imagination, NYC-SKP?


If you do, use it to imagine what I think of your little brickbat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #99)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 08:56 PM

100. Brickbat! I'll look that up!

 

And my apologies to Ms Willey for typing the wrong name.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 09:24 PM

104. What backwoodsbob said

 

Hillary can't win.....period

why wont the Hillary hangers on face it? She has too much baggage and she will be destroyed if we make her the nominee.

Do you really think they wont bring up the e-mail thing and all the donations to the foundation from Saudi Arabia and other foreign countries?

She will be DESTROYED if we nominate her.

Lets start a movement for anyone else


What I hear:

Hillary can't win....

I just can't face it, I will be destroyed if we make her the nominee.

C'mon, she like, sends emails and stuff.

I will be DESTROYED if we nominate her.

I hate her. I hate her guts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 10:38 PM

107. Based on your dog stories, she'd probably have to disavow your support

And return any contributions anyway.

So this just simplifies her path.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 11:07 PM

109. If Hillary can't win...

...she won't run.

If she runs, it's because she can win; and I'll vote for her.

TYY

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 11:09 PM

110. I've got one phrase that fits what a Clinton campaign will be: A "Hot Mess".

 

A big pile of WTF.

There's so much ammunition for the RW, and her skills at fending it off are, well, pathetic.

We'll be mired in bullshit from all directions and the Democrat Party brand will be ruined forever.

Hot Mess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 11:22 PM

113. She can win

I just don't think she is the sure thing other people think she is. She has more than a few times, put her foot in her mouth "dodging sniper fire". There was a little bit of donor controversy in '08, there is some stuff with the Clinton Foundation that doesn't sound good, & this latest e-mail thing... meaning for whatever reason -- a lot of low information voters will likely associate scandal with Hillary Clinton. Besides, there was the cable leak where she called for spying of UN members. However, it is saddening not just with this but with anything, especially when it comes to the Bush administration -- it is impossible to get an independent investigation of anything.

She is so polarizing so almost anyone else has a better chance of capturing the conservative vote.

If she can win Ohio & Florida she wins the election, that's what it basically comes down to anymore. Rest belt states as well, Republicans winning Pennsylvania would be very problematic for instance. Early voting is huge, Republicans cut back over half the early voting days since 2008. Obama won about 70% of the early vote and both states had around 30 days of early voting in '08.

ID laws, Republicans are quite public about trying to steal the election. ACORN? Just one of the first casualties in the GOP War on Voting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Fri Mar 20, 2015, 11:33 PM

114. I suspect she isn't very popular with the backwoods Duck Dynasty crowd...

So I'll give you that...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 02:27 AM

119. Barn Burner huh?

My crystal ball doesn't work. Must be nice knowing the future there bud.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 10:05 AM

122. That's wishful thinking, not fact. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 10:06 AM

124. Email thing has already been out there

It's not sexy enough. It's going to be a Benghazi like exaggeration nobody will want to keep hearing about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 10:15 AM

126. "Hillary can't win.....period,"

"A dream is a wish your heart makes."


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 10:48 AM

128. What "baggage"?

Seriously, what real baggage can HRC possibly have? She and Bill have had So many "Personal and Political Colonoscopy's" there is little to nothing Serious left to discover.

While I too am not a HRC supporter - I'm not buying the bs "they're" spreading.
She Can win....that's Why the Left wants a good Primary Before the Dems POTUS candidate is finalized, imo.
And that's also Why the GOP is trying Soooooo hard to knock her out Now by manufacturing whatever crises they can imagine......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backwoodsbob (Original post)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 03:23 PM

132. Okay, I don't agree with you, but if those of us who are "Hillary hangers on" should "face it"...

who's the "anyone else" you suggest we start a movement for? Any strong candidates you can recommend?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread