Hillary is Toast

[bodecea]

Ah an excellent photoshop. You've sure convinced me!

 

[TheOldSchool]

Someone bookmark this quote for 2016 after the Democrat candidate wins the youth vote.

Will you agree to psychotherapy if she doesn't?

Sure

 

[bodecea]

The history of presidential elections in this country are pretty consistent. The younger upbeat fresh-faced/fresh ideas candidate beats out the older establishment candidate.
Jimmy Carter beat Ford
Reagan beat Carter
GHW Bush won but mostly on Reagan's coattails.
Clinton was the young upstart with the cool saxophone so he won
GW Bush was the outsider from Texas against the insider dour Gore
Obama the fresh audacious guy from outside beat McCain, the crabby old guy
Obama won a second time mainly due to vote suppression and fraud.
So this time it's Hillary, in public life for over 25 years with no ideas and a history of scandal wider than her tuchas vs whoever the GOP picks. And virtually all the GOP candidates are fresh, young faces with new ideas and enthusiasm.
It wont be a contest.

Reagan (1911) was older than Carter (1924).

GW Bush (1946) is older than Gore (1948).

HW Bush (1924) is older than Dukakis (1933).

In sum, you're full of crap.

In sum you dont know what the fuck you're talking about.
It isnt chronological age, dipshit. Bush was 2 years older than Gore. Big deal.
It is the upbeat optimistic candidate from the outside beats the sober establishment candidate. Reagan was Mr Optimism with Morning in America etc. Bush was all about compassionate conservatism and a thousand points of light. Gore was all about polar bears were going to have us for lunch. GHW Bush I already explained as riding on Reagan's coattails but he wasnt so lucky against Clinton.

Well if it isn't about chronological age....you might consider using terms other than "Younger" and "Older" .....you know, might cause a bit of confusion somewhere.

And if you want "Fresh Faced" I don't think it gets much more fresh than being the first female nominee in history next to a bunch of (mostly white) men.

At least the Democrats have "something" to run on, the GOP are just flying blind and screaming "stop Obama" every turn.

By "something to run on", you mean a vagina?
WOW!

I believe you've found a wonderful Bumpersticker saying for the anti-Hillary person to put up. Well done!

 

[SwimExpert]

Hillary is Toast

While I'm sure that you would love to eat her, your claim lacks anything more than wishful thinking.

The Democrats seem hellbent on nominating her, but early front runners don't typically get nominated. I'm still expecting someone else to join in on the Democratic side and to Bill Clinton Mrs. Clinton. But if I am wrong, Clinton stands a strong chance of success in a G.E. She has name recognition and strong appeal to swing voters. And none of the GOP candidates so far seems particularly strong.

Either way, it's far too early.

 

[Ernie S.]

The history of presidential elections in this country are pretty consistent. The younger upbeat fresh-faced/fresh ideas candidate beats out the older establishment candidate.
Jimmy Carter beat Ford
Reagan beat Carter
GHW Bush won but mostly on Reagan's coattails.
Clinton was the young upstart with the cool saxophone so he won
GW Bush was the outsider from Texas against the insider dour Gore
Obama the fresh audacious guy from outside beat McCain, the crabby old guy
Obama won a second time mainly due to vote suppression and fraud.
So this time it's Hillary, in public life for over 25 years with no ideas and a history of scandal wider than her tuchas vs whoever the GOP picks. And virtually all the GOP candidates are fresh, young faces with new ideas and enthusiasm.
It wont be a contest.

Reagan (1911) was older than Carter (1924).

GW Bush (1946) is older than Gore (1948).

HW Bush (1924) is older than Dukakis (1933).

In sum, you're full of crap.

In sum you dont know what the fuck you're talking about.
It isnt chronological age, dipshit. Bush was 2 years older than Gore. Big deal.
It is the upbeat optimistic candidate from the outside beats the sober establishment candidate. Reagan was Mr Optimism with Morning in America etc. Bush was all about compassionate conservatism and a thousand points of light. Gore was all about polar bears were going to have us for lunch. GHW Bush I already explained as riding on Reagan's coattails but he wasnt so lucky against Clinton.

Well if it isn't about chronological age....you might consider using terms other than "Younger" and "Older" .....you know, might cause a bit of confusion somewhere.

And if you want "Fresh Faced" I don't think it gets much more fresh than being the first female nominee in history next to a bunch of (mostly white) men.

At least the Democrats have "something" to run on, the GOP are just flying blind and screaming "stop Obama" every turn.

By "something to run on", you mean a vagina?
WOW!

I believe you've found a wonderful Bumpersticker saying for the anti-Hillary person to put up. Well done!

What have you got?. WHAT HAS hILLARY DONE?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Hillary is Toast

The Democrats seem hellbent on nominating her...

LOL! And how pathetic is THAT?

Monica Lewinsky's Ex-Boyfriend's Wife?

The only US Sec O'State to sit over the over-throw of numerous key US Allies and get a US Ambassador killed... ?

LOL! Talk about an embarrassment born out of a LACK OF OPTIONS!

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

What have you got?. WHAT HAS hILLARY DONE?

Now... LOL! Now THAT'S JUST CRUEL!

 

[bodecea]

Reagan (1911) was older than Carter (1924).

GW Bush (1946) is older than Gore (1948).

HW Bush (1924) is older than Dukakis (1933).

In sum, you're full of crap.

In sum you dont know what the fuck you're talking about.
It isnt chronological age, dipshit. Bush was 2 years older than Gore. Big deal.
It is the upbeat optimistic candidate from the outside beats the sober establishment candidate. Reagan was Mr Optimism with Morning in America etc. Bush was all about compassionate conservatism and a thousand points of light. Gore was all about polar bears were going to have us for lunch. GHW Bush I already explained as riding on Reagan's coattails but he wasnt so lucky against Clinton.

Well if it isn't about chronological age....you might consider using terms other than "Younger" and "Older" .....you know, might cause a bit of confusion somewhere.

And if you want "Fresh Faced" I don't think it gets much more fresh than being the first female nominee in history next to a bunch of (mostly white) men.

At least the Democrats have "something" to run on, the GOP are just flying blind and screaming "stop Obama" every turn.

By "something to run on", you mean a vagina?
WOW!

I believe you've found a wonderful Bumpersticker saying for the anti-Hillary person to put up. Well done!

What have you got?. WHAT HAS hILLARY DONE?

Hillary Clinton biographical timeline. - Hillary Clinton Quarterly Hillary Clinton Quarterly

http://www.historynet.com/hillary-rodham-clinton

 

[The Rabbi]

The history of presidential elections in this country are pretty consistent. The younger upbeat fresh-faced/fresh ideas candidate beats out the older establishment candidate.
Jimmy Carter beat Ford
Reagan beat Carter
GHW Bush won but mostly on Reagan's coattails.
Clinton was the young upstart with the cool saxophone so he won
GW Bush was the outsider from Texas against the insider dour Gore
Obama the fresh audacious guy from outside beat McCain, the crabby old guy
Obama won a second time mainly due to vote suppression and fraud.
So this time it's Hillary, in public life for over 25 years with no ideas and a history of scandal wider than her tuchas vs whoever the GOP picks. And virtually all the GOP candidates are fresh, young faces with new ideas and enthusiasm.
It wont be a contest.

so Reagan was "young and upbeat" Can't you EVER start a non-hack thread? EVER?!!!

He was certainly upbeat, Mr Optimistic, Morning i America.
Of course you werent an itch in your daddy's pants then so you wouldnt remember it.

 

[The Rabbi]

The history of presidential elections in this country are pretty consistent. The younger upbeat fresh-faced/fresh ideas candidate beats out the older establishment candidate.
Jimmy Carter beat Ford
Reagan beat Carter
GHW Bush won but mostly on Reagan's coattails.
Clinton was the young upstart with the cool saxophone so he won
GW Bush was the outsider from Texas against the insider dour Gore
Obama the fresh audacious guy from outside beat McCain, the crabby old guy
Obama won a second time mainly due to vote suppression and fraud.
So this time it's Hillary, in public life for over 25 years with no ideas and a history of scandal wider than her tuchas vs whoever the GOP picks. And virtually all the GOP candidates are fresh, young faces with new ideas and enthusiasm.
It wont be a contest.

Reagan (1911) was older than Carter (1924).

GW Bush (1946) is older than Gore (1948).

HW Bush (1924) is older than Dukakis (1933).

In sum, you're full of crap.

In sum you dont know what the fuck you're talking about.
It isnt chronological age, dipshit. Bush was 2 years older than Gore. Big deal.
It is the upbeat optimistic candidate from the outside beats the sober establishment candidate. Reagan was Mr Optimism with Morning in America etc. Bush was all about compassionate conservatism and a thousand points of light. Gore was all about polar bears were going to have us for lunch. GHW Bush I already explained as riding on Reagan's coattails but he wasnt so lucky against Clinton.

Well if it isn't about chronological age....you might consider using terms other than "Younger" and "Older" .....you know, might cause a bit of confusion somewhere.

And if you want "Fresh Faced" I don't think it gets much more fresh than being the first female nominee in history next to a bunch of (mostly white) men.

At least the Democrats have "something" to run on, the GOP are just flying blind and screaming "stop Obama" every turn.

Dems have something to run on? A name and a vagina? Yeah, that'll work well.

 

[The Rabbi]

Hillary is Toast

The Democrats seem hellbent on nominating her...

LOL! And how pathetic is THAT?

Monica Lewinsky's Ex-Boyfriend's Wife?

The only US Sec O'State to sit over the over-throw of numerous key US Allies and get a US Ambassador killed... ?

LOL! Talk about an embarrassment born out of a LACK OF OPTIONS!

They're not hellbent on nominating her. They're scared not to. They have no one else. 6 years of Obama have destroyed the up and coming stars of the Democrat party. Look at the last election: Mark Udall, Kay Hagan, and Mary Landrieu were all up and coming stars in the Dem Party. All of them sacrificed on the altar of Obama's agenda.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Hillary is Toast

The Democrats seem hellbent on nominating her...

LOL! And how pathetic is THAT?

Monica Lewinsky's Ex-Boyfriend's Wife?

The only US Sec O'State to sit over the over-throw of numerous key US Allies and get a US Ambassador killed... ?

LOL! Talk about an embarrassment born out of a LACK OF OPTIONS!

They're not hellbent on nominating her. They're scared not to. They have no one else. 6 years of Obama have destroyed the up and coming stars of the Democrat party. Look at the last election: Mark Udall, Kay Hagan, and Mary Landrieu were all up and coming stars in the Dem Party. All of them sacrificed on the altar of Obama's agenda.

LOL! Isn't it cool how the feminization of the Democrat Party has resulted in their being unable to run anything approaching a MAN?

They're an embarrassment to the SPECIES.

I mean the most feminine America woman, is more of a man than the most BUTCH example of the Ideological Left.

 

[Ernie S.]

In sum you dont know what the fuck you're talking about.
It isnt chronological age, dipshit. Bush was 2 years older than Gore. Big deal.
It is the upbeat optimistic candidate from the outside beats the sober establishment candidate. Reagan was Mr Optimism with Morning in America etc. Bush was all about compassionate conservatism and a thousand points of light. Gore was all about polar bears were going to have us for lunch. GHW Bush I already explained as riding on Reagan's coattails but he wasnt so lucky against Clinton.

Well if it isn't about chronological age....you might consider using terms other than "Younger" and "Older" .....you know, might cause a bit of confusion somewhere.

And if you want "Fresh Faced" I don't think it gets much more fresh than being the first female nominee in history next to a bunch of (mostly white) men.

At least the Democrats have "something" to run on, the GOP are just flying blind and screaming "stop Obama" every turn.

By "something to run on", you mean a vagina?
WOW!

I believe you've found a wonderful Bumpersticker saying for the anti-Hillary person to put up. Well done!

What have you got?. WHAT HAS hILLARY DONE?

Hillary Clinton biographical timeline. - Hillary Clinton Quarterly Hillary Clinton Quarterly

Hillary Clinton Facts Summary Accomplishments

1968 — Hilary watches on television as the Democratic Convention in Chicago disintegrates into chaos when thousands of anti-war protesters are attacked with tear gas and billy clubs. Rev. Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy assassinated. Protests grow against Vietnam War.

Woop de Do!
I watched that too. Should I run?

 

[Rambunctious]

 

[gipper]

hahaha......

 

[g5000]

Isn't this the sixty-second "Hillary is Toast" topic in the past few years?

I actually had to check the date on the OP. Not kidding.

 

[g5000]

Dateline yesterday:

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters finds Clinton picking up 47% of the vote to Kentucky Senator Rand Paul’s 37% if the 2016 presidential election was held today.

Paul ran slightly closer to Clinton in a hypothetical matchup last June, 46% to 39%.

So the email scandal hasn't hurt Clinton at all when matched up against Rand Paul.

Clinton leads Texas Senator Ted Cruz by nine points - 47% to 38%.

In the latest matchups, Clinton is backed by 82% of Democrats, while about 70% of Republicans back Paul and Cruz.

As for Walker vs Clinton:

Forty-six percent (46%) of Likely U.S. Voters say they would vote for Clinton in a matchup with Walker if the 2016 presidential contest were held today. But a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that nearly as many (41%) would choose Walker instead.

 

[The Rabbi]

Isn't this the sixty-second "Hillary is Toast" topic in the past few years?

I actually had to check the date on the OP. Not kidding.

No. It's the first since she announced. And she is done.

 

[The Rabbi]

Dateline yesterday:

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters finds Clinton picking up 47% of the vote to Kentucky Senator Rand Paul’s 37% if the 2016 presidential election was held today.

Paul ran slightly closer to Clinton in a hypothetical matchup last June, 46% to 39%.

So the email scandal hasn't hurt Clinton at all when matched up against Rand Paul.

Clinton leads Texas Senator Ted Cruz by nine points - 47% to 38%.

In the latest matchups, Clinton is backed by 82% of Democrats, while about 70% of Republicans back Paul and Cruz.

As for Walker vs Clinton:

Forty-six percent (46%) of Likely U.S. Voters say they would vote for Clinton in a matchup with Walker if the 2016 presidential contest were held today. But a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that nearly as many (41%) would choose Walker instead.

Polls are irrelevant at this point as voters are reacting to name recognition.

 

[g5000]

She's ahead of the whole pack.

None of this will really matter until there is a GOP nominee.