That's what she's counting on and the MSM will do their best to make it happen.
Is Hillary A Lock?
- Thread starter bamacon
- Start date
I thought the same thing about Obama the 2nd time around. Stupid is as stupid does.
Presidents Teddy Kennedy, Gary Hart, Joseph Liebermann, and Hillary herself send their regards
Remember how she was going to face off against Giuliani in 2008? Remember how that went?
She is the prohibitive favorite due to ONE REASON - name recognition that's it. Idiots who know nothing about it want to act like they keep up with it and say, "I'm for Hillary," and they don't know whether they are or not. Flimsy polls based on name recognition.
Now she might well win, but I recall the last time she had a boat ride to the White House, she got creamed. I reiterate - she is NOT that good of a candidate and lost the only CONTESTED race (don't try to persuade yourself Lazio ever had a shot) she's ever entered. Granted, there's no sweet-talking Obama out there to torpedo her but the truth is that nobody knows.
Remember when GHW Bush was going to coast to re-election, an outcome so obvious that the BIG NAME Democrats - Cuomo, Bradley, Gore Gephardt, and Rockefeller - all said, "nah, we'll run in 1996." The guy who won, Bill Clinton, didn't even register in the polls until October 1991, when he announced his candidacy.
It may turn out "obvious" but there is NO "obvious" at this point. besides - remember Gore going to cream Bush early on by anywhere from 8-15 points because of the booming economy?
I don't think she can win, but I have not found the marbles to bet against her yet.
http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/other-politics/us-politics?ev_oc_grp_ids=791149
I don't see how see is electable with all the baggage she brings, what am I missing?
You are missing the fact that most voters don't care about her baggage or her husband's. She has name recognition, good or bad doesn't matter. That plus there will probably be 8-10 Republicans with no discernible differences vying for the ticket's top billing. 2008 was about electing a minority, 2016 will be about electing the first female.
Her sullied reputation and tarnished track record alone should be reason enough for her to lose the election.
But there are so many sheep in our country - you can no longer count on individual thinking.
I still can't believe she even has the cojones to run for the highest office in land, given her propensity for dishonesty.
But there are so many sheep in our country - you can no longer count on individual thinking.
I still can't believe she even has the cojones to run for the highest office in land, given her propensity for dishonesty.
P
Baz, I think the HRC Volunteers will be after you for using one of their off limit words "dishonesty".
Gray.....I welcome the opportunity to have a dialogue with them.....but I don't think the feeling is mutual.
I see old as dirt, establishment, white lady. I think the Clinton fatigue sets in soon.
It can, but only if the GOP has the right candidate, and I haven't seen him/her yet.
Yes and no.
What I mean is this: we may not have seen that person yet BUT.....someone may turn into a whiz bang candidate, we never know.
I agree with you AT THIS POINT but it's still early.
"We hate Hillary" is not going to be enough to get anyone elected. Folks hated Reagan, Clinton, and Bush 43 and all three got re-elected after tanking in the ratings early on (Bush much less so due to 9/11).
I agree....like I say in all the game threads...it's early...lot of time left!
The problem for the Republicans isn't even what is often said ("the party of old white men"). Their bigger problem is that the guy who gets elected is the one who exudes optimism even if misplaced. When it seems all your party can do is say "no" to - literally - everything, it doesn't help. Reagan made goof after goof in the 1980 campaign, particularly in August and early September, and if he did this today it would probably cost him the election with the Internet news cycle. But he gave off a ray of hope during a tough time. So did Clinton. And so did Obama. (It mattered much less with Bush in 2000 because times had been good for awhile, but he was more optimistic sounding than Kerry in 2004).
Be "for" something besides tax cuts. I mean..... SOMETHING!!!!
Btw - when the SCOTUS legalizes SSM this summer, it will actually help the GOP by getting that issue off of the table. None of them is going to take the fight to "unlegalize" something like that (it's not abortion where one can at least argue harm to the unborn child).
But be FOR something other than "we ain't Hillary."
Be "for" something besides tax cuts. I mean..... SOMETHING!!!!
Btw - when the SCOTUS legalizes SSM this summer, it will actually help the GOP by getting that issue off of the table. None of them is going to take the fight to "unlegalize" something like that (it's not abortion where one can at least argue harm to the unborn child).
But be FOR something other than "we ain't Hillary."
Well she's more attractive than Ted Cruz.
It's too early for Hillary to be a lock.
I'm not voting for Cruz regardless.Well she's more attractive than Ted Cruz.
With all respect to your memory, SBTF, I'm sure you also recall that Ross Perot cost George Bush I re-election.
That, and some recession numbers, later "corrected" after the election to show that it actually ended during Bush's time in office. "It's the economy, stupid," crowed the all-knowing Clintons, whereas the economy was actually getting better under the then-current administration.
In 1992, Bill Clinton was the sacrificial lamb governor of an inconsequential state, thought to have potential for 1996 and later. The Dems had no idea he could really beat Bush in 1992. And if it hadn't been for Perot, he would never have won. As it was, he won the presidency with only 43% of the popular vote.
He was every bit as accidental as John Tyler.
Hard to say if a Bush I win would have been a good thing for the country or not. Things seem to run better when Congress is in different hands from the White House. Maybe that's because nothing gets done, and the people essentially rule themselves.
But, as usual, I digress. I still don't think Hillary's a lock for the nomination, let alone the top job. Lots of baggage, a harsh and mercenary personality, easy to vilify, and without the personal charm to knock that down. The wife of a womanizing man who very clearly made a business deal about that a long time ago.
Aside from the accumulation of personal power and money, she has no heartfelt principles. Everything about her is for sale. Everything.
I'm a life long conservative. Obama is incompetent and arrogant. But he's not scary. This woman is scary.
Last edited:
Latest threads
-
US Army replacing 5.56mm rifle with a 6.8mm for infantry- Started by Tidewater
- Replies: 5
-
-
Game One of Alabama-Texas A&M Alabama Series Moved to Friday as Part of Doubleheader- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
Bama Game Thread: Bama Gymnastics - NCAA Championship Semi-finals (ESPN2 | 4/18 @ 8pm CT)- Started by BamaNation
- Replies: 32
-
No. 1 Visits Tuscaloosa for Second Straight Week as Alabama Hosts Top-Ranked Texas A&M
- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-