questionmark Posted February 26, 2014 #1 Share Posted February 26, 2014 WASHINGTON, Feb. 26 (UPI) -- According to a New York Times/CBS poll, more than 80 percent of self-described Democrats want former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to run for president in 2016. Read more: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2014/02/26/Most-Democrats-want-Hillary-Clinton-to-run-in-2016/7811393430227/#ixzz2uRloDuTj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted February 26, 2014 #2 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Most Democrats want Hillary Clinton to run ... off the end of a pier, wearing concrete overshoes? 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremiah65 Posted February 26, 2014 #3 Share Posted February 26, 2014 She's what?...soon to be 67 years old? by 2016 elections (if in November like usual)...she'll be 69. I think the Dem's need to be a little more considerate of the old girl, she's not in the best of health...in two years she might be even worse off. Remember the fall and bump on the head? The so called headaches and mini seizures? They want to elect someone on the edge of infirmity?...who is her VP going to be? I "get" their dedication...she would be first female pres...she's a big fan of social programs....they think she will do something profound and make everything roses and rainbows... Don't see it as being a smart move on their part... 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted February 26, 2014 #4 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Hilary Clinton is an immoral cow. Not presidential material. She has a record of lying clear back to her earliest days as a lawyer in watergate where she was fired for concealing evidence. She's been involved in land scams, money laundering, and her biggest debacle and shame is not accepting her due blame for the disaster that was Benghazi. Unelectable. Too easy to smear. No matter how many times they try to convince us that we want her to run we know damn well we don't. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted February 26, 2014 Author #5 Share Posted February 26, 2014 She's what?...soon to be 67 years old? by 2016 elections (if in November like usual)...she'll be 69. I think the Dem's need to be a little more considerate of the old girl, she's not in the best of health...in two years she might be even worse off. Remember the fall and bump on the head? The so called headaches and mini seizures? They want to elect someone on the edge of infirmity?...who is her VP going to be? I "get" their dedication...she would be first female pres...she's a big fan of social programs....they think she will do something profound and make everything roses and rainbows... Don't see it as being a smart move on their part... That still would be a year younger than Ronald Reagan in '81.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunn Posted February 26, 2014 #6 Share Posted February 26, 2014 She's what?...soon to be 67 years old? by 2016 elections (if in November like usual)...she'll be 69. I think the Dem's need to be a little more considerate of the old girl, she's not in the best of health...in two years she might be even worse off. Remember the fall and bump on the head? The so called headaches and mini seizures? They want to elect someone on the edge of infirmity?...who is her VP going to be? I "get" their dedication...she would be first female pres...she's a big fan of social programs....they think she will do something profound and make everything roses and rainbows... Don't see it as being a smart move on their part... Naw, she's got better health care than the rest of us, Jeremiah. They'll keep her alive for a Presidency, even if they haft to turn her into a cyborg with a mechanical heart or give her organ transplants. Besides, look at Bill Clinton and all the heart trouble he had. The man is still going like a politician, but on a world-wide scale. Also, don't let her "I'm not running for President" comments fool you. She maybe just saying that to try and keep the right off her back for a while, until she does decide to run. At least that's what the conservatives suspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztek Posted February 26, 2014 #7 Share Posted February 26, 2014 (edited) what matters more, your vote or electorial vote? what vote can be bought, yours or electorial? from wiki; The United States Electoral College is the institution that officially elects the President and Vice President of the United States every four years. The President and Vice President are not elected directly by the voters. Instead, they are elected by "electors" who are chosen by popular vote on a state-by-state basis.[3] - - - The candidate that receives an absolute majority of electoral votes (currently 270) for the offices of President or Vice President is elected to that office. The Twelfth Amendment provides for what happens if the Electoral College fails to elect a President or Vice President. If no candidate receives a majority for President, then the House of Representatives will select the President, with each state delegation (instead of each Representative) having only one vote. If no candidate receives a majority for Vice President, then the Senate will select the Vice President, with each Senator having one vote. yea, your votes matter. Edited February 26, 2014 by aztek 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted February 26, 2014 Author #8 Share Posted February 26, 2014 what matters more, your vote or electorial vote? what vote can be bought, yours or electorial? from wiki; The United States Electoral College is the institution that officially elects the President and Vice President of the United States every four years. The President and Vice President are not elected directly by the voters. Instead, they are elected by "electors" who are chosen by popular vote on a state-by-state basis.[3] - - - The candidate that receives an absolute majority of electoral votes (currently 270) for the offices of President or Vice President is elected to that office. The Twelfth Amendment provides for what happens if the Electoral College fails to elect a President or Vice President. If no candidate receives a majority for President, then the House of Representatives will select the President, with each state delegation (instead of each Representative) having only one vote. If no candidate receives a majority for Vice President, then the Senate will select the Vice President, with each Senator having one vote. yea, your votes matter. Well, then let me quote Madison in the Federalist # 39: If we resort for a criterion to the different principles on which different forms of government are established, we may define a republic to be, or at least may bestow that name on, a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure, for a limited period, or during good behavior. It is ESSENTIAL to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from an inconsiderable proportion, or a favored class of it; otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppressions by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of republicans, and claim for their government the honorable title of republic. It is SUFFICIENT for such a government that the persons administering it be appointed, either directly or indirectly, by the people; and that they hold their appointments by either of the tenures just specified; otherwise every government in the United States, as well as every other popular government that has been or can be well organized or well executed, would be degraded from the republican character. According to the constitution of every State in the Union, some or other of the officers of government are appointed indirectly only by the people. According to most of them, the chief magistrate himself is so appointed. And according to one, this mode of appointment is extended to one of the co-ordinate branches of the legislature. According to all the constitutions, also, the tenure of the highest offices is extended to a definite period, and in many instances, both within the legislative and executive departments, to a period of years. According to the provisions of most of the constitutions, again, as well as according to the most respectable and received opinions on the subject, the members of the judiciary department are to retain their offices by the firm tenure of good behavior. read more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merc14 Posted February 26, 2014 #9 Share Posted February 26, 2014 She was an utter failure as Secretary of State and the Benghazi attack and follow-up would be the death knell for any poltician other than a liberal democrat. Hell, that idiot Joe Biden got 42% hope he runs. I wonder what the newly minted young democrat voters think of all this? After getting their fannies kicked with the Obamacare debacle they have to be wondering why the DNC is pushing this dinosaur. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted February 26, 2014 #10 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Naw, she's got better health care than the rest of us, Jeremiah. They'll keep her alive for a Presidency, even if they haft to turn her into a cyborg with a mechanical heart or give her organ transplants. Besides, look at Bill Clinton and all the heart trouble he had. The man is still going like a politician, but on a world-wide scale. Also, don't let her "I'm not running for President" comments fool you. She maybe just saying that to try and keep the right off her back for a while, until she does decide to run. At least that's what the conservatives suspect. And her "injury" probably was just a dodge to keep from testifying anyway. If she runs my guess is she will be elected. And that will be the last nail unless there is an actual armed revolt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted February 26, 2014 #11 Share Posted February 26, 2014 what matters more, your vote or electorial vote? what vote can be bought, yours or electorial? from wiki; The United States Electoral College is the institution that officially elects the President and Vice President of the United States every four years. The President and Vice President are not elected directly by the voters. Instead, they are elected by "electors" who are chosen by popular vote on a state-by-state basis.[3] - - - The candidate that receives an absolute majority of electoral votes (currently 270) for the offices of President or Vice President is elected to that office. The Twelfth Amendment provides for what happens if the Electoral College fails to elect a President or Vice President. If no candidate receives a majority for President, then the House of Representatives will select the President, with each state delegation (instead of each Representative) having only one vote. If no candidate receives a majority for Vice President, then the Senate will select the Vice President, with each Senator having one vote. yea, your votes matter. Can you imagine a nation so divided that the veep was elected by the opposition party? THAT would be like a cage death match for four years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztek Posted February 26, 2014 #12 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Can you imagine a nation so divided that the veep was elected by the opposition party? THAT would be like a cage death match for four years yea, that would be fun to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
preacherman76 Posted February 28, 2014 #13 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Hilary Clinton is an immoral cow. Not presidential material. She has a record of lying clear back to her earliest days as a lawyer in watergate where she was fired for concealing evidence. She's been involved in land scams, money laundering, and her biggest debacle and shame is not accepting her due blame for the disaster that was Benghazi. Unelectable. Too easy to smear. No matter how many times they try to convince us that we want her to run we know damn well we don't. Yea all true. But if the republicans put another Romney out front, she could win it. I know there are many like myself who refuse to vote for a lesser of two evils. At this point, the only republicans with a chance is Rand Paul, or Ted Cruz. I dont fully trust either of them, but Id cast a vote for either if they got in. But they aint getting in. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundew Posted February 28, 2014 #14 Share Posted February 28, 2014 The problem is that while the media did not vet Barrack Obama properly and the voters knew very little about him, we know a great deal about Hilary, or Shrillery as I prefer to call her. We know for instance that then Hilary Rodham worked as part of the prosecutorial team on Richard Nixon's Watergate and was of questionable ethics regarding the case. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/925684/posts We know that the Rose Law Firm's billing records pertaining the Whitewater investigation went missing, taken from the First Lady's book room, only to show up in the White House much later. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/arkansas/docs/recs.html We know that a case was brought against Hilary asking for disbarment as a lawyer in Arkasas. http://www.wnd.com/2000/04/4471/ We know that she wanted to nationalize health care in much the same way as Obama and is one record saying she want's a "single payer" system. We know that her staff handled the so-called "bimbo eruptions" whenever Bill was womanizing. We know that four people are dead in Benghazi and that many, including Sec. of State Hilary were out parroting the line "it's a video" that caused the attack when it was acknowledged that it was terrorism. And don't forget the famous, "What difference does it make?" comment. She was also rumored to have had a stoke of some sort not too long ago when she disappeared from the public eye for several months, which if true, is quite a health concern for a President in an ever changing and dangerous world landscape. At least the ACA covers pre-existing conditions. So Hilary has a record, she not likable and she's getting old. She is not unbeatable, unless the GOP gives voters another Bob Dole, or John McCain. Then all bets are off. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremiah65 Posted February 28, 2014 #15 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Yea all true. But if the republicans put another Romney out front, she could win it. I know there are many like myself who refuse to vote for a lesser of two evils. At this point, the only republicans with a chance is Rand Paul, or Ted Cruz. I dont fully trust either of them, but Id cast a vote for either if they got in. But they aint getting in. Nope...they ain't. This is the darker side that people ...for some reason...are not seeing. The parties pick a handful of candidates to put in the primaries and tell the people "this is your choices"...and generally, even at that stage my thoughts are "how about none of the above?" It is just a slick way for the special interest groups to get who they want to dance with in office...all the while providing the illusion that the people have a choice and a voice...you don't...well...you do...your choice is a giant d0uche or a terd sandwich... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundew Posted February 28, 2014 #16 Share Posted February 28, 2014 I musty be prescient, this article about her possible heath worries just came out on Drudge: http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/28/rumors-persist-that-hillary-wont-run-because-health-is-worse-than-disclosed/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremiah65 Posted February 28, 2014 #17 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Lol...I been saying that for months...I might be crazy but I am NOT stupid. She's old, she has health issues...if they put her out as the front runner for the Dems, you better check up on who is coming in behind her as VP. Maybe that is the plan...get a real stinker on as her VP and when she takes office she steps out or croaks and the planted VP takes the big chair. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted February 28, 2014 #18 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Lol...I been saying that for months...I might be crazy but I am NOT stupid. She's old, she has health issues...if they put her out as the front runner for the Dems, you better check up on who is coming in behind her as VP. Maybe that is the plan...get a real stinker on as her VP and when she takes office she steps out or croaks and the planted VP takes the big chair. Well, that was the Repubs' plan with McCain, wasn't it .... ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremiah65 Posted February 28, 2014 #19 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Well, that was the Repubs' plan with McCain, wasn't it .... ? Lmao...yes! I think it was! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yamato Posted February 28, 2014 #20 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Right you guys, but let's take that thought to its natural conclusion: We should not only Not-Vote for Hillary, we should also Not-Vote for Republicans. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted February 28, 2014 Author #21 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Right you guys, but let's take that thought to its natural conclusion: We should not only Not-Vote for Hillary, we should also Not-Vote for Republicans. Whatsyabeenasmoking? Like that is going to happen! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunn Posted February 28, 2014 #22 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Also, seems like the Presidential candidate with the most popularity wins the election. I don't think regular voting counts anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted February 28, 2014 Author #23 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Also, seems like the Presidential candidate with the most popularity wins the election. I don't think regular voting counts anymore. Remember the last time there was collaboration instead of bickering in Washington? That was because Ross Perot (now almost forgotten) got 13% of the popular vote. That was enough to scare the establishment sh!tless and running around with wet pants for 4 years. If only that can be repeated it might be worth it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yamato Posted February 28, 2014 #24 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Whatsyabeenasmoking? Like that is going to happen! Are you suggesting that this board is 18-1 republican? I'm going to have to spray again... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted February 28, 2014 Author #25 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Are you suggesting that this board is 18-1 republican? I'm going to have to spray again... Not Republican, but 18-1 against Obama could fit the bill, and everybody in the same party is "Guilty by Association"... in facts even some Republicans are (see Chris Christie) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now