Hillary Makes It Official?

[candycorn]

Except she starts with the following in her pocketbook:

The GOP has to flip 64 electoral votes. No math formula worth it's salt gets you there without Florida, Ohio, AND 17 more votes. The only problem is that the 17 (unless you win PA) has to come from more than one other swing state. So basically Bevis, you have to flip 4 states out of that beautiful picture up there.....Care to list which 4? No? Didn't think so.

Well, Ming, she starts with nothing. That was last election,not the next one.

Only a moron actually believes that.

Wi, OH, NC, FL and probably CO go to the GOP.

Based on what exactly?

I am sure there will be others

Again, based on what?

Hillary might be the most has-been politician with the least achievments to show since Joe Biden, another Dem contender.


But it is irrelevant. The Obama Party, because that is what the Democrats are, will never allow Obama to be succeeded by a white Southerner, female or no. Look at his appointments. Yeah, all black.

Justice Hagan is black? Doesn't sound like a black name. Oh, you must mean Sotomayor.

The next nominee will be too. They wont support Hillary.

Yeah okay.

Meanwhile back in reality...

 

[tinydancer]

It would seem as though the Democratic party bet on the right horse having trounced the GOP in 2 consecutive elections.

As for long Clinton memories; this is the last go-round for the family politically speaking so there will be full court presses in place; not sure about referencing Schumer (I guess that is "chuckie") who I think was on one of the Sunday shows this past week (not sure, been on vacay).

I'm 90+% sure Clinton will run. The only 10% caveat is her health outlook. Naming Warren will be a game-changer of sorts, energize the base, exploit the favorable gender gap, place the GOP in an even more defensive position for being on the side of big business, balance the ticket culturally if not geographically, and pushes the nutty GOP faction (giggle) into a further orbit of crazy. When they get crazy, they get loud and when they get loud, they do things like talk to chairs, come to the aid of homophobes, stand in line for hours to eat chicken sandwiches, and set up statutory rapists as their heroes.

There was no "trouncing" and I know this game really well. Oh and by the way Obama is going to go down as the worst president ever. It's all been a shell game and we know it. It's just a matter of time before the Clinton's strike and oh it won't be pretty and I won't blame them either.

Back to Hillary.

I think she'll rock. And this is from a conservative. I think she is capable (Benghazi aside and I have my thoughts on why she wasn't involved and how far up it goes)

Most importantly though, I believe with all my heart that Bill and Hillary care deeply about America. And her future.

So who ever wins in 2016, it will be a win win for the American people. To get back to pro America instead of pro Obamas.

I want some of what you've been smoking. If you think she's not just as radical as her former gutter trash boss you must have some good shit. Bill was the leat radical of the two and I don't think any thing has changed.

Of course she's a radical left winger. BUT and this is a big but she has learned to be practical.

I'm pulling a Sophia.

We had this most wonderful soul up here called Jack Layton. Mega left winger who I could respect. He was straight forward, so honest you could count on him for anything, his wife the same way.

My very very conservative Prime Minister gave Jack a State funeral. That is how much we loved and respected him from every political corner.

He was a left winger who was practical. Could work with every side. He never how would you say it "park his ideals" at the door, but knew not to drag them into every day real life.

I think the Clinton's are cut from the same cloth now.

I know I know somewhere in cyberspace nails are coming down a chalkboard and I'm dragging myself across a finish line but I think she's fit to serve BUT ONLY if she can really tell us about Benghazi.

ETA:For me Benghazi had Jarret'ts hands all over this. A Clinton would not have let this go down. My opinion only.

 

[Redfish]

that would be better than anything your party has to offer

yeah, keep thinking that

 

[Papawx3]

My choice is Julian Castro.

Oh yes, please. Why? Because I don't think there's a single democrat with a brain that would want anyone named Castro in the White House.

 

[Sawbriars]

What would it take for the Republicans to win the next Presidential Election?

One thing for sure neither the mainstream republicans nor the tea party has a clue.....not because they are stupid but simply because they are so obsessed with their personal agendas they are unable to properly analyze the political situation in America objectively and in a coherent manner.......thus as of now they are doomed to lose again.

 

[Sunshine]

Irregardless if it is true or not>>>>>>(DRUDGE: HILLARY MAKES IT OFFICIAL?<BR><BR>) as of now any democratic candidate will be able to defeat any likely Republican Candidate.

This is true simply because the big wig republicans had rather have a democratic president than a Real Conservative President.

First, there is no such word as "irregardless". Second, Hillary would be more than adequate as a president. But she won't be able to beat Paul Ryan if he runs. Cute beats competent every day of the week.

 

[The Rabbi]

What would it take for the Republicans to win the next Presidential Election?

One thing for sure neither the mainstream republicans nor the tea party has a clue.....not because they are stupid but simply because they are so obsessed with their personal agendas they are unable to properly analyze the political situation in America objectively and in a coherent manner.......thus as of now they are doomed to lose again.

Tell us how you can analyze the political situation objectively. This ought to be rich.

 

[tinydancer]

Irregardless if it is true or not>>>>>>(DRUDGE: HILLARY MAKES IT OFFICIAL?<BR><BR>) as of now any democratic candidate will be able to defeat any likely Republican Candidate.

This is true simply because the big wig republicans had rather have a democratic president than a Real Conservative President.

First, there is no such word as "irregardless". Second, Hillary would be more than adequate as a president. But she won't be able to beat Paul Ryan if he runs. Cute beats competent every day of the week.

Our issue to face is how to get rid of Bill Because whether we like it or not he'll still drag in the female middle of the road vote.

Crazy as it is, tis the truth. No and we best face it now. Many votes for Hillary will all be coming from people who are voting for Bill again.

 

[aaronleland]

I don't understand the right's dismissal of Warren. She has a certain amount of credibility, but lack's some of Clinton's baggage. She also comes across as likeable to a certain degree. There's just something about Hillary that some people (Dems included) can't stand.

 

[candycorn]

I don't understand the right's dismissal of Warren. She has a certain amount of credibility, but lack's some of Clinton's baggage. She also comes across as likeable to a certain degree. There's just something about Hillary that some people (Dems included) can't stand.

I am hard pressed to come up with a better VPOTUS candidate for the Dems 3 years out.

 

[Politico]

Irregardless if it is true or not

It's not. Moving on.

 

[The Rabbi]

I don't understand the right's dismissal of Warren. She has a certain amount of credibility, but lack's some of Clinton's baggage. She also comes across as likeable to a certain degree. There's just something about Hillary that some people (Dems included) can't stand.

Warren? She comes across as a shrill haridan and an enormous hypocrite, not to mention liar. I want to see the Dems run Fauxcohontas. Please.

 

[Sunshine]

Irregardless if it is true or not>>>>>>(DRUDGE: HILLARY MAKES IT OFFICIAL?<BR><BR>) as of now any democratic candidate will be able to defeat any likely Republican Candidate.

This is true simply because the big wig republicans had rather have a democratic president than a Real Conservative President.

First, there is no such word as "irregardless". Second, Hillary would be more than adequate as a president. But she won't be able to beat Paul Ryan if he runs. Cute beats competent every day of the week.

Our issue to face is how to get rid of Bill Because whether we like it or not he'll still drag in the female middle of the road vote.

Crazy as it is, tis the truth. No and we best face it now. Many votes for Hillary will all be coming from people who are voting for Bill again.

I dunno. He'll take a run at all the women who work in the WH. I don't see him as a political asset for her.

 

[Redfish]

First, there is no such word as "irregardless". Second, Hillary would be more than adequate as a president. But she won't be able to beat Paul Ryan if he runs. Cute beats competent every day of the week.

Our issue to face is how to get rid of Bill Because whether we like it or not he'll still drag in the female middle of the road vote.

Crazy as it is, tis the truth. No and we best face it now. Many votes for Hillary will all be coming from people who are voting for Bill again.

I dunno. He'll take a run at all the women who work in the WH. I don't see him as a political asset for her.

they would BOTH be taking runs at all the women in the WH.

 

[Sawbriars]

Remember how many Americans Reagan got killed in Lebanon? Do you still blame him?

Well, let's see stupid. Those were Marines at a Marine Barracks who hadn't begged for added security only to be turned down by the SOS and the CiC only to be attacked by terrorists later and then refused requests for a rapid response team.

That worthless bitch knew of the repeated request and turned them down. Those men were left to fend for themselves because of that no good whore. Remember that when you bow to her altar - clown.

Typical response from a right wing nut. You accept the fact that Reagan absolutely blew it in Lebanon. Marines standing guard at the entrance to the Marine barracks were not even permitted to have weapons with live ammo. They were sitting ducks because of some fucked up policy. You have just proven how much of an idiot you truly are. And you call me stupid? LMAO!!!!

I always thought Reagan was over-rated.....he was a good actor though. But realistically speaking there is some doubt as to who was actually running the country...Nancy or Ron?

Reagan tricked a lot of people...actors can do that. The truth of the matter is that we have had very few good Presidents..........and as of lately they seem to be getting worse and worse and at a critical time in our History when we really need the best leadership possible.

Reagan is another very good example of the media covering up for a President.....it was well known Reagan was mentally incompetent long before it was reported by the media.

There have been many examples of the media covering up for Presidents....why do they do it? It would take pages to explain that.

However I think no President has been protected like Obama....he takes the cake.

But in defense of Reagan regarding Lebanon........we were very naive at that time regarding Muslim Terrorists....we had essentially no experience with that. But since 9-11 there is no excuse for Hillary's behavior regarding the Benghzi incident. She should have been held accountable....but our cowardly congress let her slide....just like they have in regards to Eric Holder....not even to mention Obama.

 

[Sawbriars]

What would it take for the Republicans to win the next Presidential Election?

One thing for sure neither the mainstream republicans nor the tea party has a clue.....not because they are stupid but simply because they are so obsessed with their personal agendas they are unable to properly analyze the political situation in America objectively and in a coherent manner.......thus as of now they are doomed to lose again.

Tell us how you can analyze the political situation objectively. This ought to be rich.

If you paid attention you would have noticed I have already done that..........perhaps it went over your head.....but it is not rocket science....perhaps you are just a dumbass???

 

[Sawbriars]

Irregardless if it is true or not>>>>>>(DRUDGE: HILLARY MAKES IT OFFICIAL?<BR><BR>) as of now any democratic candidate will be able to defeat any likely Republican Candidate.

This is true simply because the big wig republicans had rather have a democratic president than a Real Conservative President.

First, there is no such word as "irregardless". Second, Hillary would be more than adequate as a president. But she won't be able to beat Paul Ryan if he runs. Cute beats competent every day of the week.

Of course 'irregardless' is a word....if you want to be more than a 'wanna be grammar cop' you should study up before you expose your ignorance like that.

Yes, 'Irregardless' Is a Word | Jonathon Owen

Irregardless.....care to explain why one can always tell how lame a message board is by the number of 'grammar cops' trying to prove how intelligent they are?

Most veteran message board posters understand that when some moron tries to make an issue of 'bad grammar' they are just covering up their lack of intellectual ability to adequately address the topic under consideration. Deal wid it chump!

 

[Sawbriars]

Irregardless if it is true or not

It's not. Moving on.

You would do better to 'move out'.....altogether! heh heh