Yeah, well you know what? I AM a stupid fuck! Who completely misunderstood what you were saying! So there!
[sub]Sorry.[/sub]
Democrats didn’t really reject Dean. His supporters didn’t show up to caucus for him in Iowa. He had a very limited appeal to independents in New Hampshire, and there was no Republican challenger.
Am I the only one who thought that the juxtaposition of these images was a bit … unfortunate? 
Why you motherless son of … Wait, what? Sorry? Misunderstanding?
Oh, have you come here for an argument? This is abuse. You are supposed to exchange in a series of inceasing profanity laden invective intended to achieve nothing but spleen venting. Argument is four doors up the hall.
I support Obama even while I think that HRC’s healthcare reform proposals make much more sense. My main fear of HRC’s is that it will have little chance of passing and that she will just poison the well all over again. I’d rather have incremental improvement than none at all.
You’re assuming that the opposition party will be less automatically oppositionist for Obama than they would be for Clinton.
That is the audacity of hope.
NOW they tell me.
Fuck.
I’ll just get my hat.
BTW - I don’t like Clinton. It’s nothing real, I guess - her policies seem OK, she’s NOT BUSH ™, and whilst I don’t really like her AUMF vote, it’s not like she was the lone Democrat supporting it. I just don’t like her. She seems mean-spirited, unecessarily harsh, perhaps even cold or brittle. She’s just seems so controlled, so fake. And as an American living abroad, her international experience is a bit short for me to take her too seriously, because regardless of how that polls with the flyover states, foreign relations is a huge part of the President’s job. And I really don’t like how she turned on the tears when it was politically convenient to do so - that doesn’t speak to me of leadership, because I can’t imagine some Islamic Fundamentalist or despotic dictator being too strongly swayed by a few tears; I see them taking that as a sign of weakness and pushing for more. Bill is a hell of a lot of voltage in a non-elected spot, and I worry that he would overstep dramatically his place, much as Hillary did - I recall the Hillary Rodham health care plan for the US, not the Bill Clinton plan - not that she wasn’t capable, but SHE WASN’T ELECTED!!! She didn’t have the authority to make policy!
I guess the biggest reason I don’t like her, though, is she doesn’t inspire me to do anything. Bill did, I voted for him twice. But Hillary just don’t do it for me.
Not that Obama is much better on the international front, but at least he’s got some personality and charm to him, and he’s a hell of a lot more inspirational to me than Hillary is. I can see him actually charming foreign leaders, while I can only see Clinton harranging them into a compromise that they fail to comply with as soon as they leave the office. And I can see him standing up to some pretty nasty people, not running to his spouse or turning on the waterworks when things got rough.
Brand me as a sexist for this if you must, but I’d like to think it is because of character, not sex. YMMV.
And in 2017 both Chelsea Clinton and the Bush Twins will be eligable to run for President. 
We could arrange for a ful 52 years of nothing but Bushes and Clintons! :eek: