So, which of those is her ‘O’ face? I vote for left side, one down.
Pfft! I used to think like you do. But now I’ve done a 180 and I’ve come to the conclusion that the constitution should be amended such that ONLY Bushs and Clintons can run for president. With Jeb, Bill’s half brother Roger ( another actor, just like Ronald Reagan! ), Chelsea, Jenna, Barbara ( junior ) and Jeb and Roger’s spawn we easily have the next half century covered. I think it would be bitchin’! We’d be the wonder of the world!
And it would still be a democracy - you’d get to choose! But it would just be more like a high school cafeteria choice - overcooked spaghetti with cheese on top or the salad bar w/complementary grilled cheese sandwhich.
I tell you if he want BOLD, if we want CHANGE - this, THIS, will be the wave of the future.
Hold on a second, you’re saying the US can’t elect a woman president because she wouldn’t be able to deal with diplomacy to countries that have less respect for women? What countries? Pakistan? India? The Phillipines? Turkey? You can scroll down the list as well as I can.
You brought up the silly damn argument about “The time for change has come. If Hillary is elected and serves just one term, (unless my math is wrong) there will have been twenty four years that the US has been under the rule of only two families. That sounds much more like a monarchy than a democracy to me. Or, at least some sort of bastardization of a monarchy.” which is only brought up by either very stupid Obama-ites or dudes who hate Hillary.
I do not claim Hillary is the best Candidate.
Right, the two have nearly identical stands on the issues. HRC is a wheeler/dealer and a female, Obama is a charismatic speaker and black.That’s really the difference.
That and the quality of the campaigns they’ve run, which to me says a lot about what sort of executive they’d make, both in policy decisions and in selection of personnel.
What he said.
Not to mention that her health care plan is impractical.
Equating legitimate campaigning with stealing votes is dishonest and ridiculous.
Clinton probably can’t win at this point, and I wish she’d quit, but I don’t think she’s under any obligation to do so.
In January Obama and Clinton raised around 87 million dollars. McCain raised 15 million.
Bush has the lowest approval ratings - EVER. McCain believes that if he can just convince folks that the Iraq war is going well, America will be OK with staying the course everything else be damned. The polls say otherwise. The economy is going into the tank for the majority of Americans. A family of 4 has to pay something like $12,000 a year for health insurance (and still go tens of thousands of dollars into dept if they actuallyget sick because of crap their company is going to pull on them). The Republican’s answer is “Things are just swell.”
The Republicans are enamored with the TV show 24 scenarios and 24 values and judgement. Wasn’t the president black? If a black president was good enough for Jack Bauer, he’ll be good enough for America. And if being female was a real problem, why are all the Republicans jonesing for Condi Rice?
How can anyone think that a Republican is going to in '08? It’s just not going to happen.
The Obama Clinton match-uip is really pitting the two visions of the Demcratic party against each other. Obama represents the 50 state, Dean backed strategy. Building a huge base of support everywhere. Clinton is the 51%, swing state strategy of old school democrats.
(bolding mine)
So… other countries don’t feel as “we” do, because they don’t respect women… but “we” won’t vote for a woman, because we’re mysogynists. Right. Makes perfect sense.
Who gives a fuck how they’d view a female president? They don’t get a vote, you know.
The rest of the world hates Bush because of his policies. I couldn’t give a tinker’s toss if they hate Hilary because she’s a woman, and neither should you.
Oh, well in that case, she should certainly throw in the towel. After all, you obviously have the gift of precognition since you know that her prospective Presidency is going to be a disaster.
As this campaign season got underway, I wasn’t much of a fan of Clinton’s. I think Bill did a pretty good job, all things considered, but she’s too centrist for me. As time has worn on, though, Obama’s largely empty rhetoric has combined with the anti-Hillary camp’s generally unfounded hatred of her to push me closer and closer to her side.
“A woman can’t be President,” they say. “She’d be too nice.”
The fact that nothing would be better for the country than a President who won’t authorize random invasions notwithstanding, the record shows that female heads of government are rarely nice.
I’ve seen a lot of Hillary supporters bring this up but none of them are able to point out any of the things the Pubs could use against Obama or why they’d stop slamming Hillary when she’s adding new stuff to be attacked with all the time (her campaign money problems, her intention to bend the rules for MI and FL, her entitled attitude).
I fail to see the logic of “you aren’t supporting Hillary” therefore “you don’t think a woman should be president” and “you don’t respect women in general.” Did I miss something somewhere?
Legit attacks aren’t swiftboating. And, it’s not bending the rules if the Convention decides to make new rules and decides to seat the delegates. The Convention oftn makes changes in the rules. Perfectly legit. She can’t do it without a majority vote, so there’s no “rule bending” involved. :rolleyes: Don’t you guys know anything about how the Convention operates?
And no, we have no fucking idea of what the evil geniuses of Rove and company will come up with. No one could have predicted that the Candidate who was arguably a National Guard deserter could have attacked a genuine war hero on his military record. :eek:
But I am 100% sure they will. Obama’s only hope is that since McCain is a pretty honorable dude, McCain will move “swiftly” to repudiate any such attacks.
*
There will be swiftboat attacks.* Just becuase we are unable to predict exactly what they will be, doesn’t mean they won’t happen. :dubious:
OK fine. The Pubs will attack Obama on some stupidly unimportant point and IT WILL SINK HIS CAMPAIGN.
Or it won’t, because it’s four years later and I still have no fucking clue what the swiftboat thing was. I’d imagine that if you did a study, I’m not alone, and that it had only a tiny affect on votes cast for Bush or Kerry.
And Hillary is trying to bend the rules WRT MI and FL. If she really cared about “enfranchising” every voter, she’d encourage them to hold a do-over. She would not suggest using the obviously tainted results that are on the books now. You say tomato, I say cheater.
I think now that “swiftboating” has become part of the popular lexicon, attempts to do it are more likely to be seen as such and will have less impact this time around. I realize this may be dangerously overestimating the intelligence of the American people, though.
Ths Convention could do that, but it would be utter bullshit if they did. You can’t change the rules after the results, and hope to have any shred of credibility. Perhaps in Russia, but not here. At minimum, they should hold a caucus to tell the uncommitted delegates how to vote. However, this is flawed, because many people who would have taken a D ballot if there had been no controversy instead voted in the GOP, where it would at least count for half.
So it’s a choice between +1 happiness per city, -25% XP needed for unit promotions and +1 happiness from Monument and Broadcast Tower or free Combat I promotion of melee and gunpowder units and double production speed of Barracks and Drydock?
Great. Now her supporters can say how empathetic and caring she is, and just point.
Yeah, but who has the military experience to confront that bloodthirsty Mahatma Gandhi?