I don’t understand why so many women seem to support her. She’s an embarrassment to women everywhere. What kind of woman stands by her husband despite the fact that he has habitually broken their marriage vows and has repeatedly humiliated her on both the public stage and in private?
What kind of values does a woman have if she’s willing to put up with such humiliation and disrespect?
[quote]Sifu wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Sifu wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]Sifu wrote:
At this point Hillary is so deep into her lies I can’t wait to see her finally go before the Benghazi committee and testify under oath about her email server. A couple of days ago Trey Gowdy gave an interview in response to her claim that she was never served a subpoena for her emails. She is going to have to completely contradict what she has been telling everyone or get charged with perjury like her husband. Hopefully she is going to end up facing criminal charges for spoliation of evidence.
…
[/quote]
I agree, but I can wait for the hammer to drop. Let’s make sure she has secured the nomination first. Then everybody can out her as much as they want.
I don’t want to end up with another asshole like obama. I’d MUCH rather have President Hillary than obama. No 2008 repeats please.[/quote]
That is the risk that Kerry and the Obama administration are taking right now by dragging out the release of documents from the State Department. Their best move would be to get this over and done with so they can figure out if she can continue or get her replacement in as soon as possible to build their own support.
Fortunately it is not in the character of the Democrats to deal with problems pro-actively. They will always wait for events to get out ahead of them, then try to reactively perform damage control.
I don’t think it needs to go all the way until she gets the nomination before taking her down can be disastrous for the Democrats. It would do the most damage at that point. But I think that even just prior to it would be very damaging because except for Bernie Sanders, the Democrats really don’t have a credible plan B candidate who is out there building their own base of support.
[/quote]
Tell me I didn’t just read you calling Bernie Saunders a “credible plan B”.
Should he get the democratic nomination he would go down to defeat by one of the largest margins in Presidential history.
He would probably win Vermont, DC maybe California depending on how far that state has fallen.
[/quote]
I don’t think an avowed socialist has an ice cube’s chance in hell in this country. Certainly not after Obama. I think his ideas on policy are divorced from reality. But that doesn’t change the fact that Bernie is the only Democrat who is seriously trying to beat Hillary. If Hillary goes down he is the next in line. The Democrat bench is that shallow.
Who else is going to run? Biden and Kerry are the highest profile possibles but both have serious baggage from their time in the Obama administration. Look at how Kerry’s state department has been stonewalling the turnover of documents to the Benghazi committee or the bad nuclear deal he is begging for from Iran. How is he going to defend that record? [/quote]
I think you have a good handle on the topic.
This is going to be a republican year. Unlike four years ago when I was worried right down to the wire (and for good reason). The democrats are dead in the water for 2016. Their very best candidate must rent a dump truck to carry all of her baggage along. The number two candidate is an old socialist. Biden comes off as an old fool and John Kerry has already lost to Bush back in 2004 and has all the charisma of a broken watch.
On the other side of the fence we currently have 16 candidates running for the GOP nomination. This is the strongest field of republican candidates to ever run! Granted the media tries very hard to make them all look like clowns simply because of the numbers but that is not the case. We have more Governors, former Governors and legitimate Senators than ever before. In addition to that we have two business people and a doctor. And in that group one woman, one black and two of Hispanic decent. Plus two from Florida and one from Ohio, two must win states for the GOP.
Also, I’m not the slightest bit concerned about when Hillary’s hottest scandal hits the main page. Now, 12 months from now three weeks from next Wednesday, matters not. She is such a horrible candidate she couldn’t win if she had no baggage. From her annoying voice to her inability to answer very basic questions without twisting the truth. The GOP has been given a real gift this time around.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
With Hillary it sounds like she is saying whatever this weeks focus group told her would be a vote getter, but she has no base values or convictions that would lead her to follow through on any of it. [/quote]
It’s called being politically tone deaf. Ironically, the exact opposite of her husband.
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
I don’t understand why so many women seem to support her. She’s an embarrassment to women everywhere. What kind of woman stands by her husband despite the fact that he has habitually broken their marriage vows and has repeatedly humiliated her on both the public stage and in private?
What kind of values does a woman have if she’s willing to put up with such humiliation and disrespect?[/quote]
That woman only values one thing, being POTUS. She’s been in the shadow of one of the most skilled politicians in modern times, and all she wants is the Oval Office for her self.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Sanders has no chance, and never did. His role is to impact the narrative to try and pull (perceived as corporatist) Hillary to the left by forcing her to address the kinds of issues Sanders thinks important.
Problem is, Hillary has flopped out of the gate, and Sanders finds himself with a bigger voice than expected. So, why not keep talking?
But he has no shot at the Presidency.[/quote]
I agree TB.
But, isn’t it wonderful that he is still in the race? This forces Hillary to say and do things that will cause her to lose votes in the general election. For example, most understand the relationship between the Clintons and Wall Street. But just the other day she had to give a speech slamming Wall Street and talking about how she is going to take down the fat cats.
This was great to hear because every time she makes a speech like that she may attract several more left wing loons to vote for her in the primary, but she also loses financial support from the very people who helped elect Bill Clinton.
I’m loving this Presidential race!
Oh I agree Bernie will most likely not be the nominee (can’t say never the way Hillary stumbles repeatedly). But, as Hillary pulls ever more to the left she continues to look like one more left wing wacko by the time the general election rolls around.
And most should keep in mind that Obama didn’t win because he was a lefty. He won in spite of the fact that he was a lefty. He won on charisma and him being the first black nominee from either party. Yes, Hillary will be the first woman, but she has none of the other positive traits that Obama has…not one. So as she paints herself into the left wing corner of the room she will freeze out most of the independent voters, and many senior citizens. Two voting blocks that are a must for a democrat to win the Presidency.
Also, how excited do you think the youth vote will be about electing Hillary? I am predicting they will turn out about half of what Obama did. This too is a major problem for Hillary. While the feminists will flock to her in record numbers, only something like 23% of women call themselves feminists. And as I’ve said no doubt she’ll win the female vote but that’s nothing new. The dems have been winning the female vote since 1992, every single Presidential race.
She needs more than females to pull this one off.
Where will the rest of her support come from? It isn’t there!
May God Bless Bernie Saunders.
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
I don’t understand why so many women seem to support her. She’s an embarrassment to women everywhere. What kind of woman stands by her husband despite the fact that he has habitually broken their marriage vows and has repeatedly humiliated her on both the public stage and in private?
What kind of values does a woman have if she’s willing to put up with such humiliation and disrespect?[/quote]
That may have helped her with women because so many of them have been through what she went through.
But as I’ve said it will take more than women for her to win the Presidency. She is a very polarizing figure with very high negative ratings. No one has ever been elected to the Presidency with their negatives even near 50%. And in a June CNN poll her negatives were at 50%. And it seems that every time she is exposed to the public in a big way those numbers only climb.
If you were a strategy advisor on the Clinton team what do you tell the candidate to do?
If she stays behind closed doors she loses ground to the eventual republican nominee. If you push her out there to do interviews she handles key questions poorly or out right lies as what just occurred. If you send her out to big rally’s she comes off as shrill and a bit on the fringe. And her voice, when raised as one would during a rally, sounds like nails on a chalk board. In fact, that’s what they think they did wrong last time vs Obama. Too many rallies.
Her team has plenty of tough decisions ahead of them. I wouldn’t want that job Ha.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
I don’t understand why so many women seem to support her. She’s an embarrassment to women everywhere. What kind of woman stands by her husband despite the fact that he has habitually broken their marriage vows and has repeatedly humiliated her on both the public stage and in private?
What kind of values does a woman have if she’s willing to put up with such humiliation and disrespect?[/quote]
That may have helped her with women because so many of them have been through what she went through.
But as I’ve said it will take more than women for her to win the Presidency. She is a very polarizing figure with very high negative ratings. No one has ever been elected to the Presidency with their negatives even near 50%. And in a June CNN poll her negatives were at 50%. And it seems that every time she is exposed to the public in a big way those numbers only climb.
If you were a strategy advisor on the Clinton team what do you tell the candidate to do?
If she stays behind closed doors she loses ground to the eventual republican nominee. If you push her out there to do interviews she handles key questions poorly or out right lies as what just occurred. If you send her out to big rally’s she comes off as shrill and a bit on the fringe. And her voice, when raised as one would during a rally, sounds like nails on a chalk board. In fact, that’s what they think they did wrong last time vs Obama. Too many rallies.
Her team has plenty of tough decisions ahead of them. I wouldn’t want that job Ha.
[/quote]
The moment Hillary wins the primary, the media is going to run to her defense like nothing you have ever seen.
Don’t fall for this masked scrutiny, the media is in the tank for Hillary.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
I don’t understand why so many women seem to support her. She’s an embarrassment to women everywhere. What kind of woman stands by her husband despite the fact that he has habitually broken their marriage vows and has repeatedly humiliated her on both the public stage and in private?
What kind of values does a woman have if she’s willing to put up with such humiliation and disrespect?[/quote]
That may have helped her with women because so many of them have been through what she went through.
But as I’ve said it will take more than women for her to win the Presidency. She is a very polarizing figure with very high negative ratings. No one has ever been elected to the Presidency with their negatives even near 50%. And in a June CNN poll her negatives were at 50%. And it seems that every time she is exposed to the public in a big way those numbers only climb.
If you were a strategy advisor on the Clinton team what do you tell the candidate to do?
If she stays behind closed doors she loses ground to the eventual republican nominee. If you push her out there to do interviews she handles key questions poorly or out right lies as what just occurred. If you send her out to big rally’s she comes off as shrill and a bit on the fringe. And her voice, when raised as one would during a rally, sounds like nails on a chalk board. In fact, that’s what they think they did wrong last time vs Obama. Too many rallies.
Her team has plenty of tough decisions ahead of them. I wouldn’t want that job Ha.
[/quote]
The moment Hillary wins the primary, the media is going to run to her defense like nothing you have ever seen.
Don’t fall for this masked scrutiny, the media is in the tank for Hillary.[/quote]
Oh most certainly and I have never said otherwise. The republicans always run against the democrat nominee and the media…ALWAYS.
But, again you have to have a reasonably good product to promote…like Obama for example. He might be a lousy President (well that’s obvious) but he was a great candidate and that’s all that matters in a race. Whereas, Hillary is absolutely no question the worst candidate that the democrats have fielded since 1988 when Dukakis ran against H. W. Bush.
So, sure the main stream liberal media is in the democrats hip pocket. But, they still have to try to sell Hillary as a fudge sickle when in fact Hillary Clinton is shit on a stick. The public might not keep track of the issues very well, but they know who they like and who they don’t like. And “Shit On A Stick” is never going to sell as a Fudgy.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
I don’t understand why so many women seem to support her. She’s an embarrassment to women everywhere. What kind of woman stands by her husband despite the fact that he has habitually broken their marriage vows and has repeatedly humiliated her on both the public stage and in private?
What kind of values does a woman have if she’s willing to put up with such humiliation and disrespect?[/quote]
That may have helped her with women because so many of them have been through what she went through.
But as I’ve said it will take more than women for her to win the Presidency. She is a very polarizing figure with very high negative ratings. No one has ever been elected to the Presidency with their negatives even near 50%. And in a June CNN poll her negatives were at 50%. And it seems that every time she is exposed to the public in a big way those numbers only climb.
If you were a strategy advisor on the Clinton team what do you tell the candidate to do?
If she stays behind closed doors she loses ground to the eventual republican nominee. If you push her out there to do interviews she handles key questions poorly or out right lies as what just occurred. If you send her out to big rally’s she comes off as shrill and a bit on the fringe. And her voice, when raised as one would during a rally, sounds like nails on a chalk board. In fact, that’s what they think they did wrong last time vs Obama. Too many rallies.
Her team has plenty of tough decisions ahead of them. I wouldn’t want that job Ha.
[/quote]
The moment Hillary wins the primary, the media is going to run to her defense like nothing you have ever seen.
Don’t fall for this masked scrutiny, the media is in the tank for Hillary.[/quote]
Absolutely, no doubt about it.
Good article about Hillary the liar:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Good article about Hillary the liar:
http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/has-hillary-told-1-lie-too-many/[/quote]
Do you believe that high level policymakers should be held to the same ethical standards as laymen? Interpersonal politics =/= intergroup ethics.
I’d rather have Machiavelli’s effective and unscrupulous Prince than an incompetent but “upright” idealist.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
I don’t understand why so many women seem to support her. She’s an embarrassment to women everywhere. What kind of woman stands by her husband despite the fact that he has habitually broken their marriage vows and has repeatedly humiliated her on both the public stage and in private?
What kind of values does a woman have if she’s willing to put up with such humiliation and disrespect?[/quote]
That may have helped her with women because so many of them have been through what she went through.
But as I’ve said it will take more than women for her to win the Presidency. She is a very polarizing figure with very high negative ratings. No one has ever been elected to the Presidency with their negatives even near 50%. And in a June CNN poll her negatives were at 50%. And it seems that every time she is exposed to the public in a big way those numbers only climb.
If you were a strategy advisor on the Clinton team what do you tell the candidate to do?
If she stays behind closed doors she loses ground to the eventual republican nominee. If you push her out there to do interviews she handles key questions poorly or out right lies as what just occurred. If you send her out to big rally’s she comes off as shrill and a bit on the fringe. And her voice, when raised as one would during a rally, sounds like nails on a chalk board. In fact, that’s what they think they did wrong last time vs Obama. Too many rallies.
Her team has plenty of tough decisions ahead of them. I wouldn’t want that job Ha.
[/quote]
The moment Hillary wins the primary, the media is going to run to her defense like nothing you have ever seen.
Don’t fall for this masked scrutiny, the media is in the tank for Hillary.[/quote]
Oh most certainly and I have never said otherwise. The republicans always run against the democrat nominee and the media…ALWAYS.
But, again you have to have a reasonably good product to promote…like Obama for example. He might be a lousy President (well that’s obvious) but he was a great candidate and that’s all that matters in a race. Whereas, Hillary is absolutely no question the worst candidate that the democrats have fielded since 1988 when Dukakis ran against H. W. Bush.
So, sure the main stream liberal media is in the democrats hip pocket. But, they still have to try to sell Hillary as a fudge sickle when in fact Hillary Clinton is shit on a stick. The public might not keep track of the issues very well, but they know who they like and who they don’t like. And “Shit On A Stick” is never going to sell as a Fudgy.
[/quote]
I am deeply offended by your comparison.
Sincerely,
Shit On A Stick
[quote]Bismark wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Good article about Hillary the liar:
http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/has-hillary-told-1-lie-too-many/[/quote]
Do you believe that high level policymakers should be held to the same ethical standards as laymen? Interpersonal politics =/= intergroup ethics.[/quote]
No, I believe they should be held to a higher standard than a layman. They are given a great deal of power in so very many important areas. The abuse of that power is far scarier to me than any terrorist organization. With the lying clown that currently inhabits the white house I am more afraid of my own government than Isis. NSA spying, using the IRS to attack political opponents. Yes I do want the truth. I don’t want a President telling me I can keep my own doctor under Obamacare and then finding out months later that he lied.
All we have had is lies layered on top of lies. Hillary Clinton would continue this travesty of justice.
There is absolutely no replacement for good character. A great charismatic speaker who is able to influence most he/she meets does not impress me if the truth is not his first language.
By virtue of her continuously lying tongue I feel that Hillary Clinton has given up the right to become President of The United States. And every woman who considers a vote for her better understand that she is first a liar and a woman second!