Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
DieChecker

A case for Hillary Clinton to run in 2020

A case for Hillary Clinton to run for 2020 election  

44 members have voted

  1. 1. Vote "YES" if you would like Clinton to run in 2020, and "NO", if you would not.

    • YES! The article is correct and she would be Great, and should run for President.
      5
    • NO! This article is lame and she's just a bad candidate, and she should not run for President.
      36
    • Meh? I don't care. She'd probably be OK, but probably not fantastic.
      3


179 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Tatetopa

 

On 11/26/2017 at 3:51 PM, Astra. said:

. I'm curious as to know what your opinion is on any other female candidate (on either side of the isle) that may one day run for the US Presidency and actually become successful. 

Apparently, the first woman who stood for Presidential elections was Victoria Woodhull in 1872 from Equal Rights Party, followed by Belva Ann Lockwood in 1884 from National Equal Rights Party, thereafter followed by a few more female candidates. But no woman of yet has been able to land the top job in the WH.

I'm just wondering why that is, as the US has one of the oldest democracy's in the world, and has yet never had a female leader like other countries have. Do you think DieChecker, that this may have something to do with gender bias...or that many women are simply not interested in running for an array of reasons ? 

  Good question.  I would vote for a woman if we shared similar views. Maybe that is Elizabeth Warren, I think she at least supports the common man over Wall Street and the elite, but there may be others.   I believe Iceland is the oldest democracy in the world, and they seem OK with powerful women as do the other Scandinavian nations.  As you might surmise from some of the recent harassment revelations, we might not be there yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome
8 hours ago, Paranormal Panther said:

Let's make a deal. I won't comment on Canadian politicians if you won't comment on American politicians.

I'd agree; however, the reason that  everyone has such a fascination with the U.S. President is that what they do has a very big effect on the entire rest of the world. For instance, China or Russia or N. Korea have good reason to take a great deal of interest in the doings of American politicians, don't they. Canadian or Australian politicians, say, don't tend to have so much influence. (They may go along with whatever the President may do, out of sycophancy/loyalty, but they don't have the power or influence to be able to initiate things themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

Good question.  I would vote for a woman if we shared similar views. Maybe that is Elizabeth Warren, I think she at least supports the common man over Wall Street and the elite, but there may be others.

Thank you for responding Tatetopa. I don't know a great deal about Elizabeth Warren, or what her basic political views are. I'm aware about her claimed Native American heritage though, and how she has come under certain fire about it. I know that Donald Trump likes to refer to her as Pochahontas though...which of course (in normal Trump fashion) comes over as being derogatory :rolleyes: 

1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

 I believe Iceland is the oldest democracy in the world, and they seem OK with powerful women as do the other Scandinavian nations.

Thanks, I wasn't aware that Iceland is /or has the oldest democracy in the world. If I get the time, I'm going to read up on that later. It's always good to learn new things. 

1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

  As you might surmise from some of the recent harassment revelations, we might not be there yet.

Yep, sometimes it might take a while to start making changes in a more positive way when it comes to gender equality.    

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
39 minutes ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

 Canadian or Australian politicians, say, don't tend to have so much influence. (They may go along with whatever the President may do, out of sycophancy/loyalty, but they don't have the power or influence to be able to initiate things themselves.

Are you taking a swipe at Canada and Australia are you Manfred ? No offence, but you would have to be one of the biggest "stick your beak" into American politics, more than any other member on these boards. People in glass houses Manfred.... :rolleyes:  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Derek Willis

Does anyone reckon it will be Chelsea Clinton who runs next time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome
3 minutes ago, Astra. said:

Are you taking a swipe at Canada and Australia are you Manfred ? No offence, but you would have to be one of the biggest "stick your beak" into American politics, more than any other member on these boards. People in glass houses Manfred.... :rolleyes:  

no not at all, I'm just saying what's surely undeniable, that what the US President does has a great deal of effect on the rest of the world, while Canadian or Australian, say, leaders (or most European leaders even) don't take it upon themselves to be the Leader of the Free World or if they do they don't decide to do so unilaterally, and that's why the rest of the world has a very great interest in what the US President does.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bee

 

Fly on The Wall Report continued - (no not THAT wall, another wall at a secret location -
possibly in a plush room with very comfy armchairs in the House of the Temple Washington DC - 
dunno - the Fly can't reveal too much or it might get squashed )

Informal chat between three Globalist Puppet Masters ----

GPM One ~  how are we going to shut bloody Hillary up -- jeeeesus she just won't go away -

GPM Two ~~ She is getting her knickers in a twist about Michelle becoming the first Woman President -

GPM Three ~~ Wait till she hears about Oprah simmering nicely on the back burner -

GPM One ~~ hell hath no fury etcetera ....

GPM Two ~~ Oprah would come with risks but her skeletons could be turned to advantage -

GPM Three ~~  I talked to John yesterday - poor schmuck - putty in my hands... he's going to help -

GPM One ~~~ with the Hillary problem ? 

GPM Three ~~~ Yep ... he's got some media interviews lined up - Man he hates Trump so much he would do ANYTHING -

* merry laughter and chinking of brandy glasses*


Fly on the Wall report to be continued (sometime)

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Derek Willis
43 minutes ago, Astra. said:

Thanks, I wasn't aware that Iceland is /or has the oldest democracy in the world. If I get the time, I'm going to read up on that later. It's always good to learn new things.     

Iceland's parliament - the Althing - was founded in 930 AD. The nature of this "democracy" is sometimes romanticized. This is because only free men were allowed to attend the Althing and vote. In other words, the women and the slaves were not allowed to attend.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
13 hours ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

no not at all, I'm just saying what's surely undeniable, that what the US President does has a great deal of effect on the rest of the world, while Canadian or Australian, say, leaders (or most European leaders even) don't take it upon themselves to be the Leader of the Free World or if they do they don't decide to do so unilaterally, and that's why the rest of the world has a very great interest in what the US President does.

Fair enough, that would also include the UK where the US president also has a great deal of effect on. As the saying goes; 'If America sneezes, the world catches a cold'....ripple effect in other words. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.ZZ.

@Astra.

Carly Fiorina i8xgZfsF.jpg

Had some good ideas I thought early in the campaign, and I even thought about voting for her. Things went sideways however after more details of her failed leadership  time at HP came to light. Then, she got real cozy with Cruz...

 

Edited by .ZZ.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther
19 hours ago, Astra. said:

Hmm!.. well I might chime in once and a while too about the goings-on with your politicians Para. And so do other folk who reside outside the US. It's a bit difficult not to sometimes, as we do get the latest news and all of the drama to boot. I guess also, that since it is an international forum, well folk from far and wide will obviously comment. 

In saying that tho, you are always welcome to comment about Australian politicians / politics. Mind you though, they're a damn boring lot, and you'd probably doze off after 2 minutes :tu:

Anyway's getting quickly back on track, surely Hillary C. wont try again to make a grab for the presidency. I think her goose is well and truly cooked in that department. I read somewhere that Bernie Sanders might give it another shot among a few other familiar faces. Idk, maybe the D's need some fresh blood, as they appear to be getting rather tired and stale IMHO. 

I'm ignorant on politics in Canada, and he's ignorant on politics in the USA, so.... Anyway, it's a free forum. As for the Democrats, middle-aged blood would be great for a transfusion at this point. They have been monopolized by fossils and relics for a long time. They've consistently doubled down on the mistakes and problems that lead to failures. They've consistently chosen old folks, some of whom are octogenarians, as well as relatively younger people with old ideas, over truly fresh blood. If they were smart, they would have picked a person like Ryan (not Paul) for their presidential campaign, a forty-something Ohioan who put economic issues before tribalistic divides. He likely would have beaten Trump.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther
16 hours ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

I'd agree; however, the reason that  everyone has such a fascination with the U.S. President is that what they do has a very big effect on the entire rest of the world. For instance, China or Russia or N. Korea have good reason to take a great deal of interest in the doings of American politicians, don't they. Canadian or Australian politicians, say, don't tend to have so much influence. (They may go along with whatever the President may do, out of sycophancy/loyalty, but they don't have the power or influence to be able to initiate things themselves.

I agree. That's why it's good to be *informed* about the subject. I'm fascinated with AI and robots. I'm not informed enough about the technology behind them to adequately comment about it, even though I'm free to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS
32 minutes ago, Paranormal Panther said:

I agree. That's why it's good to be *informed* about the subject. I'm fascinated with AI and robots. I'm not informed enough about the technology behind them to adequately comment about it, even though I'm free to do so.

We have a bunch of threads on robots. Everybody usually mentions Skynet, gets scared and leaves but feel free to chime in!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
On 11/28/2017 at 5:48 PM, Astra. said:

Sure, I can understand why you must feel frustrated and angry because of those two. The thing is tho, what's really the point, when it's out of your hands anyway. You think that they even care how you and probably many, many other people feel about them.

In saying that, what became of the FBI field officers that were suppose to be digging into / investigating the Clinton Foundation etc. Because as far as I'm aware, it's only been the sound of crickets. 

Idk, it's starting to look fairly obvious that they just want the Clinton's to simply go away. Basically, (and only in my opinion) they've got off scot free for any wrong doing. So best go punch a pillow if it helps Merc, but I doubt it will change anything.  

Nah, not my nature Astra.  I won't go down easy and will keep fighting.  Folks like me (and obviously tens of millions of others), here in the states have absolutely destroyed the democrat party.  They have lost so many federal, sate and local seats that they are now not even a national party but a regional one.  The states they "own" are financial, racial and infrastructure debacles/disasters.   The only people who could screw this up are the republicans and   they are doing that, namely the senate under Mitch McConell.  

If the media weren't fellow travelers and true believers to the point that Joseph Goebbels would be proud then the DNC would have been overthrown and rebuilt but the  media supports all their failed policies by refusing to report the bad news as "bad". A 1%-3% max GDP became  the new normal instead of the worst GDP record over 8 years in US history because Obama was in office and even more unbelievably, smart people bought into it because their political beliefs are their religion.

*snip*Obama's 8 years of failed policy was the worst performance in US history stymies me   Syria was a debacle. Yemen, his model for how to handle terrorist nations, is a disaster of epic proportions and Libya turns my stomach as it is so gut wrenchingly horrible for no reason other than Hillary's hubris. "We came, we saw, he died!" (laughs like a cackling witch) ranks right up there with "What difference does it make!" in my book.  I flew there and a quiet Libya s a good thing.

Bush actually made a good deal with Libya (one of his few) and achieved everything we wanted without a bomb being dropped.  Obama, at Hillary's urging (admittedly, Obama did not want to go into Libya but folded under Hillary's assault) overthrow that wack job  after he had acceded to everything we had demanded and more.  Now there is absolute anarchy there including advanced weapons shipped to terrorists, a dead ambassador, open air slave markets like we haven't seen since 1805 when we sent the Marines into Tripoli to destroy the Barbary pirates and total chaos.  The media is silent so ask yourself why and then watch the news..

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/11/27/clinton-ponders-2020-run-lets-not-forget-her-real-libya-scandal-glenn-reynolds-column/895853001/

Edited by Kismit
Derogatory remarks towards a poster.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
3 hours ago, Merc14 said:

Nah, not my nature Astra.  I won't go down easy and will keep fighting.

Oh, so no punching a pillow to let out your alpha male frustrations on  ?

I thought your earlier post was concerning your anger about Hill and Bill being let go, only because their time is over, and what a serious injustice it's been to your country because they seem to be immune to the laws, in which you and others adhere to. In which I understand and also agree with.

Frankly, I didn't expect so much more input that covers much of your stance in regards to the whole democratic party. All in all, I think that most posters here who are familiar with you Merc, certainly know how heated you can get when it comes to the Democrats.  

3 hours ago, Merc14 said:

 Folks like me (and obviously tens of millions of others), here in the states have absolutely destroyed the democrat party.  They have lost so many federal, sate and local seats that they are now not even a national party but a regional one.  The states they "own" are financial, racial and infrastructure debacles/disasters.   The only people who could screw this up are the republicans and they are doing that, namely the senate under Mitch McConell.

Ok, so since folk like yourself and (tens of millions of others) have absolutely 'destroyed' the democrat party, you have given the impression that there is no hope of them ever forming again. Would it be correct for me to assume this ?..

But then you go on and say, that the people who 'could' mess this up are the republicans, but they 'are' messing it up anyway under this Mitch McConell?...in which I take, you are not very happy about.    

3 hours ago, Merc14 said:

If the media weren't fellow travelers and true believers to the point that Joseph Goebbels would be proud then the DNC would have been overthrown and rebuilt but the  media supports all their failed policies by refusing to report the bad news as "bad". A 1%-3% max GDP became  the new normal instead of the worst GDP record over 8 years in US history because Obama was in office and even more unbelievably, smart people bought into it because their political beliefs are their religion.

Obama's 8 years of failed policy was the worst performance in US history stymies me   Syria was a debacle. Yemen, his model for how to handle terrorist nations, is a disaster of epic proportions and Libya turns my stomach as it is so gut wrenchingly horrible for no reason other than Hillary's hubris. "We came, we saw, he died!" (laughs like a cackling witch) ranks right up there with "What difference does it make!" in my book.  I flew there and a quiet Libya s a good thing.

I think what Hillary Clinton did was disgraceful, especially when it came to Libya, among other things that she got away with. 

3 hours ago, Merc14 said:

Bush actually made a good deal with Libya (one of his few) and achieved everything we wanted without a bomb being dropped.  Obama, at Hillary's urging (admittedly, Obama did not want to go into Libya but folded under Hillary's assault) overthrow that wack job  after he had acceded to everything we had demanded and more.  Now there is absolute anarchy there including advanced weapons shipped to terrorists, a dead ambassador, open air slave markets like we haven't seen since 1805 when we sent the Marines into Tripoli to destroy the Barbary pirates and total chaos.  The media is silent so ask yourself why and then watch the news..

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/11/27/clinton-ponders-2020-run-lets-not-forget-her-real-libya-scandal-glenn-reynolds-column/895853001/

Thank you for all of that and more (link included) which is simply terrible. I suppose the only consolation that I can give. Is at least she's not being called Madam President.    

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
On ‎11‎/‎25‎/‎2017 at 6:52 AM, DieChecker said:

https://www.salon.com/2017/11/24/heres-your-leftover-turkey-the-case-for-hillary-clinton-2020/

I really hope that this doesn't come to pass. I think she was a horrible candidate that was only allowed to get as far as she did, because she has a vagina, and Identity Politics is in full swing in the Democrat party today. Otherwise her baggage would have very early on tossed her out of contention. Some say that is a misogynistic view, but from my perspective it is sexist to support her over better candidates just because she is a woman.

Mind you that if your are a politician, and have a (D) next to your name, then Salon will support you in any and all ways..... (not sarcasm BTW)

Please vote in the poll, and let's see how the UM citizens feel about Sec (Sen?) Clinton running again.

EDIT: I voted "No", but then that probably isn't a surprise. :lol:

I really don't want her to run for a couple of reasons. A - shes a horrible person and B - that would basically ensure a second Trump term . 

The ONLY positive that could come from her running would be if she won and was then forced to deal with special counsels investigating her decades' worth of corruption. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
17 hours ago, Paranormal Panther said:

I'm ignorant on politics in Canada, and he's ignorant on politics in the USA, so.... Anyway, it's a free forum.

You don't think that living next door to the USA we haven't been fed an inordinate amount of American politics in our news feed? And yes, it is a free forum.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome
2 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

I really don't want her to run for a couple of reasons. A - shes a horrible person and B - that would basically ensure a second Trump term . 

The ONLY positive that could come from her running would be if she won and was then forced to deal with special counsels investigating her decades' worth of corruption. 

who';d you prefer, Farmer? To run next time I mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
19 minutes ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

 who';d you prefer, Farmer? To run next time I mean.

Man that's a great question. This will be the first time I ever vote for a democrat president and just typing those words has my head spinning a little. 

Right now I gotta say Bernie or  Warren . Bernie would have killed Trump last year but I think 4 years later he's becoming too old to be marketable , "Pocahontas" wouldn't be a bad swing of the pendulum away from the Trumpster and I could look at myself after pulling the level for her. 

Strategically speaking if I were in charge I would pull an Obama part deux and find the whitest looking smoothest talking latino I could and at least run him/her as VP if not pres. 

 

 

 

Edited by Farmer77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther
22 hours ago, F3SS said:

We have a bunch of threads on robots. Everybody usually mentions Skynet, gets scared and leaves but feel free to chime in!

I don't insult robots. I want to be on their good side when they take over the world.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther
6 hours ago, Likely Guy said:

You don't think that living next door to the USA we haven't been fed an inordinate amount of American politics in our news feed? And yes, it is a free forum.

You've been fed a lot of something. Enough said.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Area201

Well obviously if you are voting Republican or want a Republican in office you want Hillary to run, duh.

She had her chance in 08, a very good run and clearly people chose bi-racial Obama over the first female President (for Dem ticket even). 

Orangutan is a complete self-absorbed narcissist **** show and whatever comes out of his mouth an embarrassment. 

Romney was very Presidential but just ran wrong time. With the Dems I'm thinking Warren or Sanders. But I think a new comer Mark Cuban would kick the Putin Puppet's ass. Any of those three. Hillary was done in 08. 

What I don't get with my Republican friends is why they don't just say "hey I own my own business and I don't want to pay taxes. I'll vote for anyone, and I mean anyone, who will decrease or eliminate my taxes." I don't want to hear all the other bull**** reasons. 

Edited by Area201

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
2 hours ago, Paranormal Panther said:

You've been fed a lot of something. Enough said.

You're more informed than I am of American politics, probably so, but to declare me ignorant is just rude.

I don't agree with you politically, that's your problem, and you're afraid to admit that.

And you've fed me with enough of your dismissive conjecture. Enough said.

Edited by Likely Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Area201

mark-cuban.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS

I like Mark Cuban but I’ve seen enough Shark Tank to know that he too can be hot headed, stubborn, arrogant and not above insults. I don’t know that he’s smarter than Trump but I’m sure he is sharper and more articulate. He’s also got a million different businesses he’s have to let go of and probably doesn’t have the type of family Trump has to give them away to. Plus he’s very young and letting go of all those achievements may not come as easily as it would for a man in his 70’s. I don’t know much of his politics besides that he supported Hillary and a few of his reasons why. It would be an old, incumbent, billionaire fresh off a reality tv show vs. a young and far less famous billionaire fresh off of a reality tv show. 

Right now though I think the only white guy the dnc will throw their weight behind is dirty old Joe (who can’t keep his mits to himself). They’re probably going to push hard for identity politics somehow. It’s got to be another “first”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.