For the dems, is Hillary the one?

[rudeguy]

Are you trying to say that Herman was the republican's "great white hope"?

I'm saying Obama would not have been able to play the race card and lost a good percentage of his votes. He really would have been in trouble if dead people and Disney characters were banned from voting as well.

 

[shortylickens]

She nailed Bin Laden, thats gotta count for something.

 

[hal2kilo]

I'm saying Obama would not have been able to play the race card and lost a good percentage of his votes. He really would have been in trouble if dead people and Disney characters were banned from voting as well.

Lol. Disney and dead people votes worth maybe 50 votes. Most election officials stop counting after the first Mickey, Pluto, ect. SERIOUSLY!

 

[rudeguy]

Lol. Disney and dead people votes worth maybe 50 votes. Most election officials stop counting after the first Mickey, Pluto, ect. SERIOUSLY!

LOL

I think Goofy should be worth at least 3 votes.

 

[bradly1101]

The only thing I'm sure about in the next presidential election is that I will not be voting for the neo-con known as Hillary.

Who would you vote for?

 

[hal2kilo]

Who would you vote for?

If the Dems insist on this "now it's a woman's turn" agenda, it would be Elizabeth Warren.


Otherwise, if pressed it would be Wydman from Oregon cause he's not on the big we are a nation of scairdy cats band wagon and will let the NSA "protect us".

 

[thraashman]

I liked Herman!

Here is a fun story: I was at Radio Shack a month or so ago getting some parts. There was an elderly couple in the store and 2 cashiers. The cashiers were 20 something chicks. The POS system crashed, so the cashiers had to kill time chatting with old people. Somehow Obama got brought up and suddenly everyone got mad. All 4 of those people had voted for Obama (according to what they said) and all 4 were pissed they had. After a good 5 minutes of complaining about Obama, one of the chicks said "I wish Herman Cane would have made it. I would have voted for him!"

I think the media intentionally set out to destroy Herman because they know Obama would have had a very tough time winning against him. The media obviously wanted Romney from the get-go and they got what they wanted.

Herman Cain would never have won against Obama and it would have been even more one-sided than against Romney. He was simply a horrible candidate. His "ubeki, beki, bekistan" comment made him look woefully inept in foreign affairs, his 9,9,9 plan was a joke, and he had a history of sexual harassment that would have driven women to Obama in droves. The only upside I can think of to him is that he wasn't insanely religious like Santorum.

If the Dems insist on this "now it's a woman's turn" agenda, it would be Elizabeth Warren.


Otherwise, if pressed it would be Wydman from Oregon cause he's not on the big we are a nation of scairdy cats band wagon and will let the NSA "protect us".

Elizabeth Warren would be a fine candidate but I don't think she's near well known enough to have a chance right now. Maybe by 2020 if Hillary loses in 2016 (which seems unlikely with just about anyone I expect the GOP to put up).

 

[PokerGuy]

H
Elizabeth Warren would be a fine candidate but I don't think she's near well known enough to have a chance right now.

Pocahontas? Hard to believe it, but even scum like hillary would be preferable.

 

[theeedude]

I don't want to appoint anyone "the one" at this point.
Hillary still has to prove her liberal bona fides. We need a populist president, not a corporatist one.
I like Brian Schweitzer quite a bit in this sense.

 

[thraashman]

Pocahontas? Hard to believe it, but even scum like hillary would be preferable.

It's funny the "scum like Hillary" are still so much less scummy than ANYONE the GOP can put up. I guess it's hard to tell how dirty you are if you never look at your own reflection.

 

[bradly1101]

I don't want to appoint anyone "the one" at this point.

Agreed, but with this massive PAC behind her, I'm afraid it might be inevitable. That's today's politics; it's all about the money.

Hillary still has to prove her liberal bona fides. We need a populist president, not a corporatist one.
I like Brian Schweitzer quite a bit in this sense.

Yes, but I'm afraid he's less well known than Warren.

Honestly the last hopeful I agreed with on virtually everything was Kucinich. Unfortunately he didn't have the charisma or the height for the job. I wish we could see beyond that stuff.

 

[theeedude]

Agreed, but with this massive PAC behind her, I'm afraid it might be inevitable. That's today's politics; it's all about the money.

Yes, but I'm afraid he's less well known than Warren.

Honestly the last hopeful I agreed with on virtually everything was Kucinich. Unfortunately he didn't have the charisma or the height for the job. I wish we could see beyond that stuff.

It's 3 years away. Schweitzer has the charisma. He ran as a pro socialist health care Democrat and won by 66% of the vote in Montana. Democrats need that.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Its too early to tell a lot can happen. I will support anyone who plans on bringing Bill Clinton back to the White House. Lets face it mid to late 90's were the best times

 

[bradly1101]

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/fox-news-unique-approach-polling

Take the results, for example, from the news network’s latest national survey, published this morning. It included this truly extraordinary gem:

“In the aftermath of the attacks on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Libya, the Obama administration falsely claimed it was a spontaneous assault in response to an offensive online video, even though the administration had intelligence reports that the attacks were connected to terrorist groups tied to al Qaeda.”
​

Remember, this is part of a question in a poll conducted by an ostensible news organization. It went on to ask respondents, “Which of the following do you think best describes why Obama administration officials gave false information?”

Got that? In a poll that’s supposed to be a legitimate measurement of public attitudes, Fox News tells respondents what to think and then asks them to reflect on the “facts” Fox News has presented to them in the least-objective way imaginable.

Respondents were then asked how much they blame former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for the attack in Benghazi, followed by a question about how much they blame President Obama

 

[sportage]

To me it looks like she is positioning herself to indeed make a run.
And when women, even republican women, realize this would be the first ground breaking history making woman in the whitehouse as president, I believe even republican women will sign on and give Hillary their vote.
Especially after how so many republican men in politics have so demonized and out right insulted women during the past years.
Insisting that men know better how a woman should control her body.
And rejecting the argument of wage inequality between the sexes.
Out right insulting of women.
Republican women might say they would never vote for Hillary, but alone with their thoughts in that voting booth? With no men standing over their shoulder? Hillary will get their vote hands down.
Just look at Barbara Bush.
A strong republican woman that also strongly believes in women's rights.
You think even Barbara will not pull that lever for Hillary?

Hillary running under that popular Clinton legacy is one thing, but the first woman president?
History making!!'
And she would win.
Think about it. Republicans will drag out old past attacks to get at Hillary, Bengazi, Monica, and on and on.
And with each and every attack against Hillary, women will look at this as an attack on not Hillary but an attack on women in general.
And thus a huge backfire against republicans and huge support for Hillary.
I'm sure Hillary is wondering, weighing if she wants to go thru the fire and brimstone attacks from the republican side, but when you think about it, if Hillary just plays up the woman card she could easily slide right into the whitehouse as the first woman president.
Republicans actually have already blew it for themselves when it comes to Hillary by how they have demonized women over the last several years.
Forced ultrasounds, failure to address wage inequality, on and on.
Republicans have already lost the fight for the whitehouse if Hillary should run.
Their only hope would be to also run a woman against Hillary.
And that they would never allow. Not that white male controlled Republican Party.
The party that still believes a woman's must submitt to the man.
Try selling that idea to republican women voters....

 

[CZroe]

To me it looks like she is positioning herself to indeed make a run.
And when women, even republican women, realize this would be the first ground breaking history making woman in the whitehouse as president, I believe even republican women will sign on and give Hillary their vote.
Especially after how so many republican men in politics have so demonized and out right insulted women during the past years.
Insisting that men know better how a woman should control her body.
And rejecting the argument of wage inequality between the sexes.
Out right insulting of women.
Republican women might say they would never vote for Hillary, but alone with their thoughts in that voting booth? With no men standing over their shoulder? Hillary will get their vote hands down.
Just look at Barbara Bush.
A strong republican woman that also strongly believes in women's rights.
You think even Barbara will not pull that lever for Hillary?

Hillary running under that popular Clinton legacy is one thing, but the first woman president?
History making!!'
And she would win.
Think about it. Republicans will drag out old past attacks to get at Hillary, Bengazi, Monica, and on and on.
And with each and every attack against Hillary, women will look at this as an attack on not Hillary but an attack on women in general.
And thus a huge backfire against republicans and huge support for Hillary.
I'm sure Hillary is wondering, weighing if she wants to go thru the fire and brimstone attacks from the republican side, but when you think about it, if Hillary just plays up the woman card she could easily slide right into the whitehouse as the first woman president.
Republicans actually have already blew it for themselves when it comes to Hillary by how they have demonized women over the last several years.
Forced ultrasounds, failure to address wage inequality, on and on.
Republicans have already lost the fight for the whitehouse if Hillary should run.
Their only hope would be to also run a woman against Hillary.
And that they would never allow. Not that white male controlled Republican Party.
The party that still believes a woman's must submitt to the man.
Try selling that idea to republican women voters....

You drank the kool-ade. You base all of your points on the false assumption that Republicans "don't believe in women's rights" and that women automatically think that only a woman can make the right choices for women's rights. Bigot.

 

[UberNeuman]

If she wants the spot, it's hers... I'd be surprised if she does, concerning her health and age...

 

[Vaux]

I've said this before and I'll repeat it... no matter what your politics are, there is absolutely no way that anyone named Bush or Clinton should ever be president again. Those families have had too much power for way too long.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I'm pulling for Elizabeth Warren.

 

[Anarchist420]

unless the Democrats have caucuses for every State, then Hillary clinton will be the DNC 2016 presidential nominee.

however, she wont win the popular vote and she may not win anything if she goes up against rand paul (who is currently the front runner). rand paul is the only one who would be likely to repeal the super-unpopular unaffordable care act and replace it with nothing (even though that wont be nearly enough to not eat up peoples savings or for 100% market level prices and quality)

and i just know ron paul is determined to see his son become a 2 term president even though ron paul should know by now that the presidency should be abolished and replaced with nothing.

 

[VRAMdemon]

Big LULZ to the guy who wants the holywood entertainer Hannity to run, this forum is hilarious...

 

[CZroe]

Big LULZ to the guy who wants the holywood entertainer Hannity to run, this forum is hilarious...

Read more good? The [rude]guy who suggested that called him a moron and clearly disagrees with his politics.

It was obviously facetious.

 

[Vic]

It'll probably be Hillary IMO. Not my first choice though. But the Democrats could run almost anyone and win as long as they stick to the middle.

 

[Vic]

You drank the kool-ade. You base all of your points on the false assumption that Republicans "don't believe in women's rights" and that women automatically think that only a woman can make the right choices for women's rights. Bigot.

Did you see what Huckabee said the other day?

 

[bradly1101]

To me it looks like she is positioning herself to indeed make a run.
And when women, even republican women, realize this would be the first ground breaking history making woman in the whitehouse as president, I believe even republican women will sign on and give Hillary their vote.
Especially after how so many republican men in politics have so demonized and out right insulted women during the past years.
Insisting that men know better how a woman should control her body.
And rejecting the argument of wage inequality between the sexes.
Out right insulting of women.
Republican women might say they would never vote for Hillary, but alone with their thoughts in that voting booth? With no men standing over their shoulder? Hillary will get their vote hands down.
Just look at Barbara Bush.
A strong republican woman that also strongly believes in women's rights.
You think even Barbara will not pull that lever for Hillary?

Hillary running under that popular Clinton legacy is one thing, but the first woman president?
History making!!'
And she would win.
Think about it. Republicans will drag out old past attacks to get at Hillary, Bengazi, Monica, and on and on.
And with each and every attack against Hillary, women will look at this as an attack on not Hillary but an attack on women in general.
And thus a huge backfire against republicans and huge support for Hillary.
I'm sure Hillary is wondering, weighing if she wants to go thru the fire and brimstone attacks from the republican side, but when you think about it, if Hillary just plays up the woman card she could easily slide right into the whitehouse as the first woman president.
Republicans actually have already blew it for themselves when it comes to Hillary by how they have demonized women over the last several years.
Forced ultrasounds, failure to address wage inequality, on and on.
Republicans have already lost the fight for the whitehouse if Hillary should run.
Their only hope would be to also run a woman against Hillary.
And that they would never allow. Not that white male controlled Republican Party.
The party that still believes a woman's must submitt to the man.
Try selling that idea to republican women voters....

Excellent points!