Hillary Clinton Poll

[Googer]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: DAGTA

Originally posted by: aidanjm
Clinton is a life-line back to sanity - economic good times, a withdrawal from the insanity of Iraq, international respect. But most of you act as if a Hillary Clinton Presidency would be worse than Dumbya's. This thread makes me realize how terribly, terribly lost Americans really are.


"And don't you wonder
Why in Estonia they say
Hey you, Big fat pig
You fat pig, You fat pig"

(America is not the world/ Morrissey)

Bill Clinton deserves ZERO credit for the economy at the time of his presidency. It was the result of the tech boom.

Prove it.

It's been well doccumented and mentioned in various news reports that the economy started taking off during the last few months of George Bush Sr residency in the White House.

 

[Hecubus2000]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: DAGTA

Originally posted by: aidanjm
Clinton is a life-line back to sanity - economic good times, a withdrawal from the insanity of Iraq, international respect. But most of you act as if a Hillary Clinton Presidency would be worse than Dumbya's. This thread makes me realize how terribly, terribly lost Americans really are.


"And don't you wonder
Why in Estonia they say
Hey you, Big fat pig
You fat pig, You fat pig"

(America is not the world/ Morrissey)

Bill Clinton deserves ZERO credit for the economy at the time of his presidency. It was the result of the tech boom.

Prove it.

Proof in not necessary. Any basic economics course will provide more than enough logic to support his statement.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: Hecubus2000

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: DAGTA

Originally posted by: aidanjm
Clinton is a life-line back to sanity - economic good times, a withdrawal from the insanity of Iraq, international respect. But most of you act as if a Hillary Clinton Presidency would be worse than Dumbya's. This thread makes me realize how terribly, terribly lost Americans really are.


"And don't you wonder
Why in Estonia they say
Hey you, Big fat pig
You fat pig, You fat pig"

(America is not the world/ Morrissey)

Bill Clinton deserves ZERO credit for the economy at the time of his presidency. It was the result of the tech boom.

Prove it.

Proof in not necessary. Any basic economics course will provide more than enough logic to support his statement.

i.e., "believe me because I said so".

 

[cHeeZeFacTory]

Hmm..maybe Oprah might have a better chance

 

[ForumMaster]

no. i hate hillary. she is way too annoying to be president.

 

[yhelothar]

As extreme as she is to the left, she would not really have much power with a predominately republican congress. If she was voted, it would actually do good because it would make america more moderate. Her extreme laws would not get passed. But if someone like GWB continued in office, america would move to the extreme right. And everyone knows that extremists are bad.

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: montanafan
What about this? What if the democrats decided that their best strategy was to focus on the past, the pre-George W. years? What if they decided that a Al Gore for President and Hillary as his running mate would be the best ticket? Do you think they would be able to sell a "remember the good old days" campaign? An unknown Bill Clinton was able to defeat Bush, Sr. by focusing on, "It's the economy, stupid?" when they were able to convince voters that Bush, Sr. just didn't get it when it came to how difficult things were for the average person. We're in pretty much the same sort of situation now and a lot of people feel that George W. cares a lot less about the average person and favors his wealthy peers like those in the oil business. The republicans would of course focus on the, who's going to keep you safe from terrorism, campaign, but the democrats could say that we were as safe from terrorism during the Clinton/Gore administration as we are now.

How do you think a bring back the Gore/Clinton administration would go over?

Your analysis of the 1992 election leaves out a couple of major factors that contributed to the Clinton win: Ross Perot and Bush's very controversial breaking of his "read my lips" promise. If the Republicans run a moderate conservative candidate like John McCain then I think they will be tough to beat unless the Democrats counter with a similar candidate like Evan Bayh. The problem in that scenario as I see it is that McCain has a lot more national name recognition than Bayh at this time. Al Gore is damaged goods for voters not part of the MoveOn/Daily Kos universe so I really don't see him as a realistic candidate and I don't see Hillary as being willing to pay her dues in the vice presidency before taking her shot at being President.

 

[Taggart]

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
As extreme as she is to the left, she would not really have much power with a predominately republican congress. If she was voted, it would actually do good because it would make america more moderate. Her extreme laws would not get passed. But if someone like GWB continued in office, america would move to the extreme right. And everyone knows that extremists are bad.

I don't buy this argument at all. Even if Congress is GOP controlled she can still do plenty of damage. A Democratic president will appoint liberal justices to the Supreme Court, which is the most powerful branch of government. Then we get rulings like the one recently for eminent domain :disgust:

 

[crisscross]

Stephen Colbert/Jon Stewart FTW!

 

[yhelothar]

Originally posted by: Taggart

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
As extreme as she is to the left, she would not really have much power with a predominately republican congress. If she was voted, it would actually do good because it would make america more moderate. Her extreme laws would not get passed. But if someone like GWB continued in office, america would move to the extreme right. And everyone knows that extremists are bad.

I don't buy this argument at all. Even if Congress is GOP controlled she can still do plenty of damage. A Democratic president will appoint liberal justices to the Supreme Court, which is the most powerful branch of government. Then we get rulings like the one recently for eminent domain :disgust:

Just admit it, you're a patriotic bush lovin neocon. Your avatar proves it.

 

[daveymark]

The only democrat I might vote for is Obama, but he is still a political newbie. He has no voting record on iraq etc. because he wasn't a senator then. it's be interesting to see how he votes in the next few years.

 

[Taggart]

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

Originally posted by: Taggart

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
As extreme as she is to the left, she would not really have much power with a predominately republican congress. If she was voted, it would actually do good because it would make america more moderate. Her extreme laws would not get passed. But if someone like GWB continued in office, america would move to the extreme right. And everyone knows that extremists are bad.

I don't buy this argument at all. Even if Congress is GOP controlled she can still do plenty of damage. A Democratic president will appoint liberal justices to the Supreme Court, which is the most powerful branch of government. Then we get rulings like the one recently for eminent domain :disgust:

Just admit it, you're a patriotic bush lovin neocon. Your avatar proves it.

:laugh:

You respond to an argument with a personal attack! BRILLIANT! :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

[Red Dawn]

She couldn't possibly be worse than Bush but that's not saying a whole hell of a lot for her!

 

[JulesMaximus]

Depends entirely on who is running against her.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster
The way I see it is:


"just because you married the 'it' guy and carpetbagged your way into the senate doesn't mean you deserve your husbands merit or credentials. Prove yourself worthy of the office and I will vote for you. Hell, whoever properly shows that they have credentials to make a great president will get my vote in the end."

Well, we haven't had a president who meets those credentials in the last 6 years.

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: Taggart

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
As extreme as she is to the left, she would not really have much power with a predominately republican congress. If she was voted, it would actually do good because it would make america more moderate. Her extreme laws would not get passed. But if someone like GWB continued in office, america would move to the extreme right. And everyone knows that extremists are bad.

I don't buy this argument at all. Even if Congress is GOP controlled she can still do plenty of damage. A Democratic president will appoint liberal justices to the Supreme Court, which is the most powerful branch of government. Then we get rulings like the one recently for eminent domain :disgust:

Only 2 of the majority in that horrid decision were Democratic presidential appointments.

Stevens - Ford
Kennedy - Reagan
Souter - GHW Bush
Ginsburg - Clinton
Breyer - Clinton

 

[Taggart]

Originally posted by: Linflas

Originally posted by: Taggart

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
As extreme as she is to the left, she would not really have much power with a predominately republican congress. If she was voted, it would actually do good because it would make america more moderate. Her extreme laws would not get passed. But if someone like GWB continued in office, america would move to the extreme right. And everyone knows that extremists are bad.

I don't buy this argument at all. Even if Congress is GOP controlled she can still do plenty of damage. A Democratic president will appoint liberal justices to the Supreme Court, which is the most powerful branch of government. Then we get rulings like the one recently for eminent domain :disgust:

Only 2 of the majority in that horrid decision were Democratic presidential appointments.

Stevens - Ford
Kennedy - Reagan
Souter - GHW Bush
Ginsburg - Clinton
Breyer - Clinton

Stevens, Kennedy and Souter have proven to be liberal justices. They are supposed to be conservative, but they are not, Souter being the strongest example.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: DAGTA

Originally posted by: aidanjm
Clinton is a life-line back to sanity - economic good times, a withdrawal from the insanity of Iraq, international respect. But most of you act as if a Hillary Clinton Presidency would be worse than Dumbya's. This thread makes me realize how terribly, terribly lost Americans really are.

Bill Clinton deserves ZERO credit for the economy at the time of his presidency. It was the result of the tech boom.

Prove it.

You can't be serious... about the economy OR Hillary...

I'm inclined to say you're just baiting, because no one is that insane...

Clinton's "economic success", if you can call it that, was the result of an artificially inflated economy combined with a technological explosion; neither of which he had a hand in. I certainly don't hold him responsible for the fallout, but it's laughable to even suggest the upswing was his doing.

As for Hillary, someone else pointed out that she is as authoritarian as they come. If you think you're losing your country to the Bush neo's, you may be right... but the last solution to the problem of "big government" is Hillary Stalin Clinton! I can think of eleventy billion other Republicans, Democrats, and Satan Worshipers that are more fit for the job than she is.

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: DAGTA

Originally posted by: aidanjm
Clinton is a life-line back to sanity - economic good times, a withdrawal from the insanity of Iraq, international respect. But most of you act as if a Hillary Clinton Presidency would be worse than Dumbya's. This thread makes me realize how terribly, terribly lost Americans really are.

Bill Clinton deserves ZERO credit for the economy at the time of his presidency. It was the result of the tech boom.

Prove it.

You can't be serious... about the economy OR Hillary...

I'm inclined to say you're just baiting, because no one is that insane...

Clinton's "economic success", if you can call it that, was the result of an artificially inflated economy combined with a technological explosion; neither of which he had a hand in. I certainly don't hold him responsible for the fallout, but it's laughable to even suggest the upswing was his doing.

As for Hillary, someone else pointed out that she is as authoritarian as they come. If you think you're losing your country to the Bush neo's, you may be right... but the last solution to the problem of "big government" is Hillary Stalin Clinton! I can think of eleventy billion other Republicans, Democrats, and Satan Worshipers that are more fit for the job than she is.

You've never read much of what aidanjm posts? No doubt that he is "baiting" because people are responding to him.

 

[Injury]

Oh come on. How is this NOT P&N?

 

[Looney]

Nope, there are much better choices than Hillary. Like Al Gore!

It would be so awesome if he made a comeback.

 

[torpid]

WTF? Hilary is not far left...

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: torpid
WTF? Hilary is not far left...

Correct. 'Far left' would imply that she's still on the chart. Kerry is far left (unless he's talking to a moderate group, but I digress).

Hillary is on the fscking moon.

 

[FelixDeCat]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: DAGTA

Originally posted by: aidanjm
Clinton is a life-line back to sanity - economic good times, a withdrawal from the insanity of Iraq, international respect. But most of you act as if a Hillary Clinton Presidency would be worse than Dumbya's. This thread makes me realize how terribly, terribly lost Americans really are.

Bill Clinton deserves ZERO credit for the economy at the time of his presidency. It was the result of the tech boom.

Prove it.

You can't be serious... about the economy OR Hillary...

I'm inclined to say you're just baiting, because no one is that insane...

Clinton's "economic success", if you can call it that, was the result of an artificially inflated economy combined with a technological explosion; neither of which he had a hand in. I certainly don't hold him responsible for the fallout, but it's laughable to even suggest the upswing was his doing.

As for Hillary, someone else pointed out that she is as authoritarian as they come. If you think you're losing your country to the Bush neo's, you may be right... but the last solution to the problem of "big government" is Hillary Stalin Clinton! I can think of eleventy billion other Republicans, Democrats, and Satan Worshipers that are more fit for the job than she is.

Amen brothah. Amen.

 

[phantom309]

I've said this before in P&N, but the Democrats really need a new direction. Hillary is exactly the kind of candidate the Republicans know how to beat.