Hillary Clinton is Done

Status
Not open for further replies.
Giz said:
Why is "Democrat party" so annoying? It seems like a micro - aggression at most. Seems like adults would just ignore it...
Click to expand...

I find it annoying in the same way I find "nucular" annoying. It gives me the impression that a person saying those things is dumb.
 
Jrrarglblarg said:
I agree. A Hillary ticket will be a sure-fire way to get the casual voter/dedicated Faux News viewer off the couch.
Click to expand...
Sure, but that would happen for any worthy Democratic candidate. They are going to vote Republican no matter what, and I doubt the GOP will have any trouble scaring up another issue to get their supporters 'off the couch'. But will it be enough? Not unless democrats stay home.

This election will be decided by democrats, not republicans. It is they who Hillary has to get on her side. Last time it was a split between her and Obama. This time she will probably stand unopposed. If she wants to win then she just has to convince her base to get out and vote.

Republicans can scream as much as they like about Hillary's supposed failings, but it won't help unless they convince democrats. I hope they go completely completely over the top so we can all see just how rabidly partisan and irrational they are, causing even more democrats to get 'off the couch' for her. So keep it up fellas - the more you try, the more you fail!
 
Roger Ramjets said:
Republicans can scream as much as they like about Hillary's supposed failings, but it won't help unless they convince democrats. I hope they go completely completely over the top so we can all see just how rabidly partisan and irrational they are, causing even more democrats to get 'off the couch' for her. So keep it up fellas - the more you try, the more you fail!
Click to expand...

I am starting to get the idea that they simply do not care that Hillary is a serial liar.

Breaks a vow to Obama not to accept foreign donations, basically admits they are going to continue to accept foreign donations, destroys emails, files fake tax returns?

That is just Hillary being Hillary!
 
thaiboxerken said:
I find it annoying in the same way I find "nucular" annoying. It gives me the impression that a person saying those things is dumb.
Click to expand...

"Let him who is without sin cast the first stone." Sometimes there is good advice in the Bible.

Anyway, I think Clinton will have a hard time recovering from this onslaught of negative coverage she's received but I wouldn't totally count her out. She is benefitting from the fact that it's still very early in the election cycle. And don't forget all the brouhaha before her husband was elected about affairs and Whitewater...not even the Lewinsky scandal has tarnished the Clinton name.
 
Before Hillary is done the opponents are going to have to offer compelling reasons to want to vote for them. I still don't see any.

Anyone want to sell the other folks to me in a way that would make them more appealing than Hillary?
 
Travis said:
Before Hillary is done the opponents are going to have to offer compelling reasons to want to vote for them. I still don't see any.

Anyone want to sell the other folks to me in a way that would make them more appealing than Hillary?
Click to expand...

How about Bernie?!

https://berniesanders.com/issues/

As a Clinton supporter in 2007, I'm thinking about Bernie next year.
 
Last edited:
Travis said:
Before Hillary is done the opponents are going to have to offer compelling reasons to want to vote for them. I still don't see any.

Anyone want to sell the other folks to me in a way that would make them more appealing than Hillary?
Click to expand...
They don't elicit automatic, visceral, disgust in a very large minority of the country.
 
DavidJames said:
If he were to get the Democratic nod, the 2016 election will make the Reagan Mondale landslide look like Bush - Gore. Voting for Bernie might make one feel good, but it's effectively a vote for the Republican.
Click to expand...

Republican, Republican-lite, they're all a bunch of conservidiots, what difference does it make?
 
Trakar said:
Republican, Republican-lite, they're all a bunch of conservidiots, what difference does it make?
Click to expand...
I think that's true only to a certain extent. People who supported Nader said the same thing, but even if you don't think Gore was much different from Bush, I doubt he'd have started a war in Iraq, among other things. There are differences even if there aren't enough. Little as I like Hillary I think it would be a mistake to think there's no difference between her and another Bush, or Ted Cruz, or whoever the Republicans choose. I wish the Democrats could come up with a better candidate, and I think Bernie would make a pretty good president. He's done pretty well here in Vermont. But I must agree that realistically, I can't see him as electable, and I hope that he doesn't decide to run.
 
Trakar said:
Republican, Republican-lite, they're all a bunch of conservidiots, what difference does it make?
Click to expand...

You don't think Hillary and Ted Cruz have differences on, say, public transportation funding? I somehow doubt Cruz would be in favor of spending $60 billion on the NEC.
 
Trakar said:
With that group, they do if they run as a Democratic candidate.
Click to expand...
To a certain extent, yes.
My experience is that they have a reaction towards her (in particular, as opposed to any random Democrat) that is on par with the hypothetical response of a liberal to a third GWBush term.
She is extremely disliked by conservative and right leaning voters- and not popular enough with the left to motivate enthusiasm for her election- or even strong turnout.

Some, like me, may even sit this out from a " fed-upness " with political dynasties.
 
Travis said:
You don't think Hillary and Ted Cruz have differences on, say, public transportation funding? I somehow doubt Cruz would be in favor of spending $60 billion on the NEC.
Click to expand...

The differences don't scare me, the similarities do. The differences can be remedied and corrected when over-reach (because they control all three branches of government) rouses public reaction. The similarities are problematic because there is no alternative!
 
16.5 said:
I am starting to get the idea that they simply do not care that Hillary is a serial liar.
Click to expand...
It's not that I don't care, it's that two other things dominate my views. First, I think "serial liar" is way overblown. And for a politician - on either side of the aisle - to be able to fib effectively is a requirement for the job. Thinking otherwise is to be naive.

Second, and far more important, all I have to do is look out over the next 4-8 years and I see as many as 4-5 Supreme nominations coming up. This is more important than any other issue I can see. So, for the sake of this post, I'll assume that HRC is a serial liar then ask myself: who do I want making Supreme Court nominations? HRC (a known serial liar) or Cruz? Jindal? Bush? Paul? Or any of the others. That's easy: HRC. If for no other reason the alternatives are also experienced liars.

I believe I am not the only one who views the contest this way which is also why the thread title is just dumb.
 
theprestige said:
I have no problem calling the party Democratic and its members Democrats. However, the progressive members here seem to attach great importance to the term "Democrat Party", and I try to be mindful of that when posting in this forum.
Click to expand...

16.5 said:
Really, i find it monumentally insipid, juvenile and embarrassing for the author.
Click to expand...
Thank you, 16.5
 
Trakar said:
The differences don't scare me, the similarities do. The differences can be remedied and corrected when over-reach (because they control all three branches of government) rouses public reaction. The similarities are problematic because there is no alternative!
Click to expand...

The differences do scare me. I don't think Hillary thinks she needs to prepare America for the rapture. Ted Cruz likely does.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom