• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Hillary the Neocon. How is the Left going to package and sell her?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Texashiker said:
He has proven himself to be a warmonger. The people are tired of conflict.
Click to expand...

The people don't matter. We are bombing Iraq once again as we speak, something we have been doing since 1990. Is America or the world better off because of it? No. Are we making more enemies? Yes.
 
dank69 said:
I do? :hmm:
Click to expand...

Well...

I was thinking of the largest accomplishment in recent years, Obamacare.

A hypothetical, and not . just for you. If the Republican were against that and war but the Democrat for both, who would you choose? The same question can be asked of both sides Of course.
 
Hayabusa Rider said:


Well...

I was thinking of the largest accomplishment in recent years, Obamacare.

A hypothetical, and not . just for you. If the Republican were against that and war but the Democrat for both, who would you choose? The same question can be asked of both sides Of course.
Click to expand...
Obamacare has already been passed. I figured you were referencing the future.
 
Hillary has other issues as well:

Hillary Clinton didn't refrain from supporting same-sex marriage for political reasons—before last year, she earnestly believed that marriage equality should be denied to gays and lesbians. That's the story the 66-year-old Democrat settled on when NPR host Terry Gross pressed her on her views.

...
Most famously, the Silicon Valley left forced the ouster of Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich for a 2008 donation he made to an anti-gay-marriage ballot initiative. That same year, Clinton ran for president while openly opposing gay marriage. If she is to be believed, she also opposed gay marriage as recently as 2013, long after a majority of Americans already held a more gay-friendly position. Would the subset of Democrats who thought 2008 opposition to gay marriage should prevent a man from becoming CEO in 2013 really support the 2015 presidential campaign of a woman who openly opposed gay marriage until last year?
Click to expand...
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/06/hillary-clintons-gay-marriage-problem/372717/
 
I'm less interested in Hillary than in whom the Republicans will run against her.

Christie? Already implicated in scandal.
Romney? He's a proven loser, although he might have a better shot against Hillary (who lacks Obama's charisma).
Jeb Bush? His last name alone will give Hillary a massive handicap whether it should or not.

Who else is there? Maybe some magical moderate Republican will make it through and dominate Hillary... when pigs fly. Maybe the Tea Party can nominate Rick fucking Perry, Hillary can win in a landslide, and we can finally shut down those idiots with their Gadsen flags and 3 pointed hats.

Honestly I'm even less optimistic about 2016 than I was about 2012. Hillary is almost certainly the Democrat's choice, which immediately pushes me right, only to find out that the Republicans have no one and are fighting a civil war with the Tea Party. Hate to say it, but barring some awesome Republican dark horse we're probably going to have 4 years of Aristocratic Sandy Vagina in chief.
 
Texashiker said:
Jon Huntsman Jr.

He has the foreign policy experience.
Click to expand...

And he got laughed out of the primaries last time. Don't get me wrong I liked Hunstman, I'd vote him over Hillary in a heartbeat, but so long as the Tea Party and even mainstream but radical Conservatives dominate the primaries he has no chance.
 
Jeb Bush it will be. Like I mentioned, there was this great piece on Daily Show recently blasting the dynastic politics.
 
131117195232-zelizer-warren-clinton-story-top.jpg


Democrats trading their leading female candidate in for a younger model?
 

Victorian Gray said:
For the record, Warren is 65, Clinton is 66.
Click to expand...

You are, of course, correct. And intellectually, I can accept that.

Its just when I see their photos next too each other, to me Hillary appears so much older ....

Anyway, thanks for setting record straight...

Uno
 
Last edited:
unokitty said:



You are, of course, correct. And intellectually, I can accept that.

Its just when I see their photos next too each other, to me Hillary appears so much older ....

Anyway, thanks for setting record straight...

Uno
Click to expand...

Even the dog looks old.
 
squarecut1 said:
You wonder what drives such people. Hillary has had so much fame and power and influence. She and Bill make millions off the speaking circuit. She is not a spring chicken either and perhaps not in the best of health as well

Most people in her place would take it easy. Spend time with their kid(s) and grandkid(s). Yet she is willing to put herself through the gruesome demands and schedule of a presidential election. There has to be this immense greed for power within such people. Definitely not normal human beings.
Click to expand...

Are you really so naive to believe that the quest for power doesn't drive just about anyone who runs for office?!? Not sure why you are singling out the Clintons here.
 
Thebobo said:
I would like to see Howard Dean run again.
Click to expand...

Would love to see him put his hat in the ring. God, I sure hope he doesn't commit the sin of being over exhuburent in exclaiming his victories again. I mean that's a definate gauge of how someone is going to perform in office.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top