Are we ready for a Jewish president?
Are we ready for a Jewish president?
Pooh, do you keep you wife locked in the closet? Is she literate? This is 2015. Nobody gives a shit about gender. They just want the best person for the job. Want your proof? In 2008, Amercans elected a black man president.Originally Posted by Pooh
Sure, we already allegedly have a Muslim president.
I won't lie: kinda giddy to bet on GOP candidate (getting odds) next election vs Hillary.
Cross-over appeal to Republicans
(long before there was a PFA i had my Grenade & Crossbones avatar at DD)
If you actually look at the public perception of Hillary Clinton, it's very favorable. I know you just tossed that out there how you do, but if you look at the latest You Gov polls her honesty and integrity levels are as high or higher than anyone running for either party. Sometimes it pays to research your argument.
I retract my statement. Evidently, old bitter white republicans (and Islamic extremists) still consider gender an important qualification.Pooh, do you keep you wife locked in the closet? Is she literate? This is 2015. Nobody gives a shit about gender. They just want the best person for the job. Want your proof? In 2008, Amercans elected a black man president.
I'm not just tossing things out there. From the CNN article I posted:If you actually look at the public perception of Hillary Clinton, it's very favorable. I know you just tossed that out there how you do, but if you look at the latest You Gov polls her honesty and integrity levels are as high or higher than anyone running for either party. Sometimes it pays to research your argument.
But I didn't have to read the article to know that.But if regular voters aren't paying attention, the Democratic power brokers who hold sway over the nomination process in key states — the legislators, local party chairmen and plugged-in activists — most definitely are. The questions some of them are raising are less about the specifics of the stories and more about the long-established narratives they feed: That the secretive Clintons, enabled by unquestioning loyalists, play by their own rules.
The Clintons have been dogged by a perception of shiftiness for decades. I'm surprised that you don't think Hillary's integrity will be an issue during the election. Even if she wins, it will be one of the bigger things she'll have had to overcome.
Barack Obama didn't have to deal with this. Sure, there were a few wackos claiming he wasn't born in the US or that he was a Muslim, but there were no credible reports about Obama during either election indicating wrongdoing. He was a clean candidate, even if you didn't agree with his politics. He was also assisted by the fact that he was viewed as an outsider in '08 (which was a huge advantage during that troubled year), and then enjoyed incumbent status in 2012 (and also faced a lousy Republican candidate). Plus, most of the fails of the Obama Presidency either occurred or came to light after the 2012 election, so honestly he didn't have that hard of a time winning twice.
The Republicans have a thick book of Hillary Clinton scandals to choose from, dating back 25 years or so, and it's a consistent pattern of shady behavior.
Even her personal life is weird.
It is well known that Bill cheated on her countless times. Obviously Monica Lewinsky and Gennifer Flowers weren't the only ones. Why would an intelligent, successful, empowered woman stay with a man like that? Clearly it was for political reasons, and the public recognizes that. So while you look at Barack Obama or George W. Bush and basically see a normal family man who loves his wife, you look at Hillary and see her in a marriage of convenience, marred by repeated infidelity in a tradeoff for political aspirations.
The bottom line is that there's an endless amount of legitimate material that can be used against Hillary in an election, and she had better be prepared for it.
Oh, and there is still an anti-political-establishment sentiment among voters, in case you haven't noticed. That definitely won't help Hillary.
What about the poll you talked about? I haven't looked at it, but was it taken before or after the recent e-mail scandal? And what are her numbers among non-Democrats?
I can tell you that, as a Republican, candidate Barack Obama scared me from the start. Hillary never scared me, because she carries so much baggage.
Pooh's wife saw what happened to Pooh's dad
Druff let's be real here. It will take an exceptional candidate from the GOP side to win a presidential election under current conditions. As long as the Dems keep promising n-words and poor people free shit they will stay in office. They bus these people in (a fact) to vote for president but not during mid terms. Let's examine. n-words and poor people voted Obama in 2008 as well as Dems house and senate. Horrible shit happened that will haunt us maybe forever. Mid terms n-words are too lazy to vote. Republicans took back house. Obama re-elected when n-words and poor people were bused back in. Mid terms n-words too lazy to vote. Republicans take Senate and expand house leadership. Now Boehner and Mitch the bitch have power of the purse yet are the two biggest pussies in the Republican party.I'm not just tossing things out there. From the CNN article I posted:
But I didn't have to read the article to know that.But if regular voters aren't paying attention, the Democratic power brokers who hold sway over the nomination process in key states — the legislators, local party chairmen and plugged-in activists — most definitely are. The questions some of them are raising are less about the specifics of the stories and more about the long-established narratives they feed: That the secretive Clintons, enabled by unquestioning loyalists, play by their own rules.
The Clintons have been dogged by a perception of shiftiness for decades. I'm surprised that you don't think Hillary's integrity will be an issue during the election. Even if she wins, it will be one of the bigger things she'll have had to overcome.
Barack Obama didn't have to deal with this. Sure, there were a few wackos claiming he wasn't born in the US or that he was a Muslim, but there were no credible reports about Obama during either election indicating wrongdoing. He was a clean candidate, even if you didn't agree with his politics. He was also assisted by the fact that he was viewed as an outsider in '08 (which was a huge advantage during that troubled year), and then enjoyed incumbent status in 2012 (and also faced a lousy Republican candidate). Plus, most of the fails of the Obama Presidency either occurred or came to light after the 2012 election, so honestly he didn't have that hard of a time winning twice.
The Republicans have a thick book of Hillary Clinton scandals to choose from, dating back 25 years or so, and it's a consistent pattern of shady behavior.
Even her personal life is weird.
It is well known that Bill cheated on her countless times. Obviously Monica Lewinsky and Gennifer Flowers weren't the only ones. Why would an intelligent, successful, empowered woman stay with a man like that? Clearly it was for political reasons, and the public recognizes that. So while you look at Barack Obama or George W. Bush and basically see a normal family man who loves his wife, you look at Hillary and see her in a marriage of convenience, marred by repeated infidelity in a tradeoff for political aspirations.
The bottom line is that there's an endless amount of legitimate material that can be used against Hillary in an election, and she had better be prepared for it.
Oh, and there is still an anti-political-establishment sentiment among voters, in case you haven't noticed. That definitely won't help Hillary.
What about the poll you talked about? I haven't looked at it, but was it taken before or after the recent e-mail scandal? And what are her numbers among non-Democrats?
I can tell you that, as a Republican, candidate Barack Obama scared me from the start. Hillary never scared me, because she carries so much baggage.
Let's fast forward to 2016. n-words and poor people will be bused in to vote. We can only pray they don't take the senate and house back. I don't think they will. After Hilary I believe there is a good shot the Republicans can get back into the White House.
you cant become a GOP front runner without being balls deep in the tea party, and you cant win an election if you dont outright disavow the tea party as everything dark and wrong with america.
"Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky
"America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs
the democrats could put frank zappas ghost in the white house running against even the most moderate realistic GOP front runner.
"Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky
"America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs
Far left is as bad as far right. Give me a moderate and I'd be content.
what exactly is the tea party for?
I hear a lot of hyperbole about how they are racist homophobes who want to keep out illegal aliens...but that's about all I hear.
The thing the hippies don't like is the phrase 'freedom of religion, not freedom from religion'.
I'm not just tossing things out there. From the CNN article I posted:
But I didn't have to read the article to know that.But if regular voters aren't paying attention, the Democratic power brokers who hold sway over the nomination process in key states — the legislators, local party chairmen and plugged-in activists — most definitely are. The questions some of them are raising are less about the specifics of the stories and more about the long-established narratives they feed: That the secretive Clintons, enabled by unquestioning loyalists, play by their own rules.
The Clintons have been dogged by a perception of shiftiness for decades. I'm surprised that you don't think Hillary's integrity will be an issue during the election. Even if she wins, it will be one of the bigger things she'll have had to overcome.
Barack Obama didn't have to deal with this. Sure, there were a few wackos claiming he wasn't born in the US or that he was a Muslim, but there were no credible reports about Obama during either election indicating wrongdoing. He was a clean candidate, even if you didn't agree with his politics. He was also assisted by the fact that he was viewed as an outsider in '08 (which was a huge advantage during that troubled year), and then enjoyed incumbent status in 2012 (and also faced a lousy Republican candidate). Plus, most of the fails of the Obama Presidency either occurred or came to light after the 2012 election, so honestly he didn't have that hard of a time winning twice.
The Republicans have a thick book of Hillary Clinton scandals to choose from, dating back 25 years or so, and it's a consistent pattern of shady behavior.
Even her personal life is weird.
It is well known that Bill cheated on her countless times. Obviously Monica Lewinsky and Gennifer Flowers weren't the only ones. Why would an intelligent, successful, empowered woman stay with a man like that? Clearly it was for political reasons, and the public recognizes that. So while you look at Barack Obama or George W. Bush and basically see a normal family man who loves his wife, you look at Hillary and see her in a marriage of convenience, marred by repeated infidelity in a tradeoff for political aspirations.
The bottom line is that there's an endless amount of legitimate material that can be used against Hillary in an election, and she had better be prepared for it.
Oh, and there is still an anti-political-establishment sentiment among voters, in case you haven't noticed. That definitely won't help Hillary.
What about the poll you talked about? I haven't looked at it, but was it taken before or after the recent e-mail scandal? And what are her numbers among non-Democrats?
I can tell you that, as a Republican, candidate Barack Obama scared me from the start. Hillary never scared me, because she carries so much baggage.
So, your "information" comes from an article where anonymous sources are worried about Hillary's integrity. That amounts to "the public perception of her being dishonest" to you?
https://today.yougov.com/news/2014/0...llary-clinton/
Here 59% of the people believe she is more honest or as honest as most politicians. I'm not making it up, it's a legit poll.
How can you study politics in this country at all and think that "scandals" from 25 years ago are going to be anything at all. You can't be serious.
I'm not arguing for Hillary, I think she sucks. You just seem to be projecting your wishes here and are not really presenting a reality based argument. 25 years of scandals sounds impressive until you remember that she ran in 2008 and bringing up issues from when Bill C was president was stale then. You think Whitewater is going to get some traction with an undecided? You think a PAC is going to run a Vince Foster piece and get some traction? That big Monica Lewinsky ad going to sink her? Please.
Last edited by ToasterOven; 03-07-2015 at 03:48 PM.
So, Obama?Far left is as bad as far right. Give me a moderate and I'd be content.
Continuation of Bush foreign policy.
Supports Cap and Trade, a 90's Republican proposal.
ACA, a health care plan originating from Heritage, a right wing think tank and first implemented by a Republican governor (Romney in MA).
Careful what you wish for.
Looks like toastercunt is quite the politico
Just common knowledge, Elliot. Most sycophants on this site don't realize that Druff pulls a large percentage of his info out of his ass.
The moral of this thread is that ToasterOven is a political made nigga and its best to avoid sloppy assertions in his company.
"Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky
"America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote
