This is the worst part of it. I don’t want anyone running right now to be President. It’s pretty much that way every election, but this one has topped the charts. Trump is at least intelligent and competent, I just don’t know who he really is. Bernie has no significant executive experience. Hillary is as unqualified as a candidate has ever been, might as well vote for a Kardashian. None of the other GOP candidates are worth consideration to mow my lawn.
I’m no fan of hers, but this statement is nonsense.
On what basis would you have Hillary be president? Really, if someone can give me a reasonable answer it might sway my opinion, but the top 10 reasons I hear are this:
- She’s a woman
- She’s not a Republican
- Bill will tell her what to do
For someone so well known and connected she is remarkably unaccomplished.
Let’s see: four years as Secretary of State, eight years as US senator, deeply involved with the running of government as First Lady for eight years, active in setting and debating policies regarding child welfare, education, and civil liberties at state and federal levels…
What would a **qualified **candidate look like, I wonder?
Oversized sodas. He’ll campaign on eliminating the “supersize” sodas.
If that really is your list of qualifications for her, then I’m afraid there is no point to discussing. Listen, I don’t want to have to vote for her, but you’re lying to yourself if you call her the least qualified presidential candidate ever.
Agreed.
Not that it matters, but the official Google result I get is 1.73m which is 5’8". But most of us tend to lose height as we age and I would imagine some of this apparent discrepancy might be that the 5’8" was measured a long time ago and he’s never seen a need to update the public record with news of his shrinkage. The same marvelous information source tells me Bloomberg is worth $37.2 billion, so at a height of 68.112 inches – for those keeping track – he’s worth $546 million per inch, more if he’s shrunk.
Part of it has to be on the basis of not scrutinizing her long history and her current policy shifts I would say. The amount of baggage she has is significant.
Someone who had done those things and accomplished something. She was not deeply involved in running of government as First Lady for eight years. In her first year she so badly mishandled her public healthcare plan that we had to wait 16 more years for anything at all to be done, and after that she had to stay in the basement. Her big accomplishment in the Senate was to help Bush the Moron invade Iraq, destroy our economy, not to mention the innumerable deaths and destruction. And what has happened as a result of whatever debating policies you think she has set? Let’s also add in that nobody knows what she stands for except for whatever the latest polls show, and her purely negative campaigns so far, and she’s a demonstrated the same kind of disregard for the publics sense of responsibility that her husband had which resulted in the aforementioned cretin ending up as president for her to support in the worst decision made by any president ever.
Maybe the Republicans are realizing with the candidates they have to offer the only way they could win the White House is to split the votes of the Democrats. Did they hire Boomberg to run? Would he split the votes of the Democrats the way Nader did?
Yeah, Bloomberg had 5’10" on a driver’s license which was clearly a bit of a fantasy but in the media frenzy that followed that story his true height was felt to be 5’7" to 5’8". Sanders is reported to be 5’8". James Madison was 5’4" FWIW.
So a Jewish Socialist born in Brooklyn; A Jewish banker, whose name virtually means Wall Street, born in Boston and former mayor of New York; and a trombenik, paskudnik, billionaire, celebrity New Yorker born there, all 70plus on election day, all run for President against each other … Oy. Where do we start? I’m fartshadet. Es a meshuge velt!
Who really represents New York values?
And people wonder why Trump has a chance.
I don’t much like Hillary but in the real world you have to go with what you’ve got, and she’s infinitely better than anyone on the Republican side. On the Dem side I’d much prefer Sanders or Biden but neither of those is an option, and Bloomberg isn’t a realistic option, either.
But IMO your criticisms of Hillary are really unfounded …
Are you suggesting she should have been? She was certainly far more active and visible than many other First Ladies, like the Librarian who preceded the Obamas.
It seems inconsistent to first claim that she wasn’t much involved in government, then claim that despite that non-involvement she totally botched a national health care plan. The fact of the matter is that Bill Clinton’s health care plan failed because it was viciously attacked by the predictable usual sources – Republicans, libertarian nutjobs, and the almighty health insurance lobby – remember the disgraceful “Harry and Louise” ads that the insurance lobby flooded the airwaves with at that time? Don’t blame Hillary, and never mind 16 years – you’ve been waiting more than 100 years for meaningful health care reform, and you’re still waiting. If it wasn’t for Obama, you’d have nothing at all.
It’s disappointing that she supported the invasion of Iraq, but so did the majority of Congress. The biggest shame in it wasn’t the Congressional vote, it was the criminal malefeasance of the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld cabal who orchestrated it.
No I am not. But since she wasn’t then there’s no reason to ask.
I said she was not deeply involved with the running of government, and her one bit of involvement being a failure after which she did nothing proves that out. It wasn’t his Healthcare plan, he left it to her and she failed. She gave the enemies of public healthcare plenty of ammunition to attack her plan because it was awful and she demonstrated her incompetence by trying to make one. Bill and the Democrats abandoned her plan without regrets. And I’m glad Obama did something, but Hillary was not involved in that at all, and I believe she was selected for SoS by Obama specifically to keep her out of domestic affairs.
Hey he’s huuge: six foot two! And would be only 70! Bloomberg is three years older! And Bloomberg is not tall at all. Maybe even shorter than Sanders!
“You just don’t go running a little short man like that against a tall man.” - Mrs. Bowles in Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451.
Really. Don’t even bother having an election.
Anyway. I highly doubt Bloomberg will run, even in Sanders v Trump match-up, and if he did run the votes he’d get would mostly be among those who otherwise would have stayed home - mainstream GOPers who could not stomach voting for Trump but couldn’t pull for Sanders either and some socially liberal while authoritarian and Wall Street-centric Democrats who would find “socialist” a stopper but would never vote for Trump either. I’m not sure he’d bleed from either one really, just increase turn-out even more.
As much as I hate Bloomberg he would get my vote over Sanders or Trump.
Can we just have eight more years of Obama?
This is the worst part of it. I don’t want anyone running right now to be President. It’s pretty much that way every election, but this one has topped the charts. Hillary is at least intelligent and competent, I just don’t know who she really is. Cruz has no significant executive experience. Trump is as unqualified as a candidate has ever been, might as well vote for a Kardashian. None of the other GOP candidates are worth consideration to mow my lawn.
Getting rid of the 22nd would be ideal.
I thought the deadlines to register had long passed? That was a factor in Biden having to decide back in Oct. The timing was wrong. He was still grieving and not ready to run.
How can Bloomberg suddenly get on all the state ballots this late? iirc the candidate needs petitions with a certain number of signatures thats submitted before the deadline?
This is the way I see it.
I really hate elections where you end up voting against instead of for a candidate.