cre8tiff Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 As if we didn't get that with the last candidate they had.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 So what, you're gonna have to support hitlery cause she is getting the dem nom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 So what, you're gonna have to support hitlery cause she is getting the dem nom. No Chit. the dems are gonna get Hillary FOR SURE. Bush don't look so bad when you think about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted July 17, 2007 Author Share Posted July 17, 2007 So what, you're gonna have to support hitlery cause she is getting the dem nom. Gotta give ya props B8Tank, Hitlery is pretty damn good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 <dan rather> al bore has won florida! <dan rather> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted July 17, 2007 Author Share Posted July 17, 2007 <dan rather> al bore has won florida! <dan rather> Good point, with your magic voting machines, ANYONE can run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 Good point, with democratic voters too stupid to punch the right hole, ANYONE can run. fixed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 Does it really matter who the Repubs put up there if Hillary is the Dems candidate? While there are many Repubs that are really turned off by the current administration to the point they might even consider a moderate Dem if nominated, they will turn out in droves to vote down Hillary. It appears as though once again the Repubs are going to hand up the Whitehouse on a silver platter, and the Dems are going to split their britches before they take the platter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 Does it really matter who the Repubs put up there if Hillary is the Dems candidate? While there are many Repubs that are really turned off by the current administration to the point they might even consider a moderate Dem if nominated, they will turn out in droves to vote down Hillary. It appears as though once again the Repubs are going to hand up the Whitehouse on a silver platter, and the Dems are going to split their britches before they take the platter. I agree with Perch. A Hillary nomination will bring out every republican to the polls. It appears that the repubs don't like Hillary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 I agree with Perch. A Hillary nomination will bring out every republican to the polls. It appears that the repubs don't like Hillary. i would even go and vote against her Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 This election needs a credible outsider 3rd party candidate. Position on abortion: Who cares? Republicans had control for 6 years and changed almost nothing. Lets all agree that it's a nasty business and make a serious effort not to accidentally knock up women. Position on Iraq: I pledge to use my brain to develop a strategy that effectively uses our taxes to bring about the greatest benefit to the US and the Iraqi people. No more blank checks. No hasty withdrawl. No foolish retread of tactics without diplomatic efforts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 <dan rather> al bore has won florida! <dan rather> Good to see you finally admiting the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoog Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 As if we didn't get that with the last candidate they had.... Yup! This about sums it up. But I would go out and vote against Hill Clint! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 If you voted for Bush, I have a hard time figuring out why you wouldn't vote for Hillary (and vice versa) unless you are total diehard party line voter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Sacrebleu Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 Many many people in the US have a visceral hatred fro Hillary. One of the reasons I thought she would not run in the first place, not win the nomination in the second place, and not win the WH in the third place. I was obviously wrong on item #1, probably wrong on item #2. But it begs the question of why people have such strong negatives about her. What is it that she does that people fnd repugnant while finding it merely distasteful in other candidates? Truly curious. All thoughtful answers apreciated. Bush at this point probably elicits as much vitriol, but he has been president, and a very very bad one at that, for 6 years. He certainly benefited from a positive, if not great image while he was running and for a few years after that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Front Row Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 1. Her social policies scare the hell out of me. She will tax and spend like crazy. You will see more social programs than ever imagined.2. There is very little about her that is genuine. Everything is calculated. And she is not very good at hiding it. 3. I question her motives. I feel she wants to be POTUS for all of the wrong reasons. She is competing with her husband. Of course that is a competition she can not win. Neither could Gore. They both feel they are smarter than Bill and if given the chance they would show the world how smart they are. 4. She also has that elitist attitude. Good info here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 Good info here. Actually, it's just more dim-witted GOP BS. As for #1. Considering that Bush is spending like mad, the right for GOP honks to use "tax and spend" when insulting Dems should be revoked. Fiscal responsiblity, long a bragging right of the GOP is laughable with the current admin. As for #2. I recall that Frenchie wanted to know what was worse about her than the rest. She isn't genuine? Name the last candidate that made it out of his home town that was. With 3 and 4, you actually have some points. Well, with the exception of claiming some inside knowledge of someone that you have likely never listened to much of. Of course, being very smart or even an elitist doesn't make you a bad president, it just doesn't make the average idiot want to vote for you. The most successful people in America are often both and they wouldn't have made it that far if they weren't. Why we champion those elements in our leaders of business but feel like we need to elect some "regular guy" that you'd like to share a beer with as POTUS is very regrettable indeed. Being able to get the first pitch of the baseball season over the plate should not be the most important trait of a candidate. Honestly, she does repulse me more than most, but, like Doc, I really don't know why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 Actually, it's just more dim-witted GOP BS. As for #1. Considering that Bush is spending like mad, the right for GOP honks to use "tax and spend" when insulting Dems should be revoked. Fiscal responsiblity, long a bragging right of the GOP is laughable with the current admin. As for #2. I recall that Frenchie wanted to know what was worse about her than the rest. She isn't genuine? Name the last candidate that made it out of his home town that was. With 3 and 4, you actually have some points. Well, with the exception of claiming some inside knowledge of someone that you have likely never listened to much of. Of course, being very smart or even an elitist doesn't make you a bad president, it just doesn't make the average idiot want to vote for you. The most successful people in America are often both and they wouldn't have made it that far if they weren't. Why we champion those elements in our leaders of business but feel like we need to elect some "regular guy" that you'd like to share a beer with as POTUS is very regrettable indeed. Being able to get the first pitch of the baseball season over the plate should not be the most important trait of a candidate. Honestly, she does repulse me more than most, but, like Doc, I really don't know why. Generally agree except for #2, Hillary is transparently a poll-watching straw in the wind. I get the very strong impression she has no real positions other than winning this race. The POTUS thing is dead on - I'd rather we had an elitist intellectual titan in office than the drooling drunk from the end of the bar, which is what we've got. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 Generally agree except for #2, Hillary is transparently a poll-watching straw in the wind. I get the very strong impression she has no real positions other than winning this race. Believe me, I'm not saying she isn't that. I'm just not so sure she has a monopoly on that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 If you voted for Bush, I have a hard time figuring out why you wouldn't vote for Hillary (and vice versa) unless you are total diehard party line voter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 FWIW wyd, I wasn't insulting you, just disagreeing with Front Row's assessment of your points. Really, I think you're swell. This country needs salesmen so your type should be honored. Doc was looking for some fresh insight and you reached right into the bag of predictability. Once again, after the last 6 years, any GOP honk who wants to be immediately dismissed as someone who is simply not paying attention needs to do nothing more than use the phrase "tax and spend". That the GOP had control of both branches of the government and managed to spend as they did goes a long way to discredit that age old battle cry. As far as spending, do you realize how hard it would be to match what we are dumping into Iraq with increases to all the touchy feely programs that you guys hate? They could hand out freaking escalades at the welfare office and not even come close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Front Row Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 As far as spending, do you realize how hard it would be to match what we are dumping into Iraq with increases to all the touchy feely programs that you guys hate? They could hand out freaking escalades at the welfare office and not even come close. Let's see "touchy feely social programs" or continue to fund the war aginst terror. Those Escalades, are pretty nice . Will they come with spinners? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 Doc was looking for some fresh insight and you reached right into the bag of predictability. Once again, after the last 6 years, any GOP honk who wants to be immediately dismissed as someone who is simply not paying attention needs to do nothing more than use the phrase "tax and spend". That the GOP had control of both branches of the government and managed to spend as they did goes a long way to discredit that age old battle cry. What programs has he expanded? What budgets other than military have been increased? I'm sure there are a few, but can't think of any off the top of my head. While you may agree or disagree about going to war, the fact is we are at war, and wars are expensive. The left complains about the our soldiers not having everything that they need on one hand and then on the other hand they complain about military spending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 What programs has he expanded? What budgets other than military have been increased? well, medicare is a big one. but you're right that in general, outside of defense, intelligence, iraq/afghanistan, and katrina, federal spending growth has been fairly mild the last several years. obviously, however, most republicans and small-government advocates can only have hoped for a LOT more from the republican control 2001-2006. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 What programs has he expanded? What budgets other than military have been increased? I'm sure there are a few, but can't think of any off the top of my head. While you may agree or disagree about going to war, the fact is we are at war, and wars are expensive. The left complains about the our soldiers not having everything that they need on one hand and then on the other hand they complain about military spending. It would be useful to separate the soldier's equipment issue from the no-bid, $100-per-laundry-bag, wrong-$700,000-computer-system-so-just-bulldoze-and-set-fire-to-it, flying-pallets-of-Benjamins-to-Iraq-then-lose-it-all issues. That's where the issue is - the soldier equipment issue is pennies, the wastage and corruption issue is billions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.