Absolutely. I could really, really live without a(nother) Clinton in the White House (again). Apart from most issues of social policy, they're both much too "neo-Liberal" for my political taste. ((Note the capital letter. In case it's not clear to some readers of this thread, I certainly do not mean too "left-wing", a term which doesn't even remotely apply to either one of them except in the minds of what was until not that long ago generally considered the "lunatic fringe" of the American conservative movement, let alone ordinary "Repblicans".)
To give her her due, I will say I'm pretty sure I'd have preferred Hillary to Bill - for whatever that's worth - the first time around, but through no fault of mine, that wasn't an option...
This. Absent anything else, sure, I'd take this decent, honorable man so unjustly villified by dead-ender slime junkies, with race providing that lovely extra undercurrent of despicable ugliness.
Maybe Repubs will treat her better. At least she's not black...
I remember Rush getting apoplectic about Clinton's killing Foster & Whitewater. Nothing came of any of it and yet it is held up as PROOF! Benghazi nothing but used as PROOF!
Wall street speeches are PROOF! All smoke and mirrors. No substance whatsoever.
Learn from the past or be prepared to repeat it.
Descent back into?now that you mention it, Hillary as POTUS might be worth it just to watch Rush's descent back into drug addiction.
Descent back into?
When he isn't going on sex tourist trips to South America, I'm pretty sure he's still using.
