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

Merc14
19 hours ago, Astra. said:

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.  

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.    

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

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.    

Great stuff Astra but I was at a business related party tonight and maybe had a bit much.   Still on ttravel but I willtry and answer tomorrow and if I don't PLEASE pm and remind me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Montmorency the Dog
7 hours ago, Area201 said:

But I think a new comer Mark Cuban would kick the Putin Puppet's ass. Any of those three. Hillary was done in 08. 

I know Democractic supporters believe all the "Putin Puppet" nonsense as an article of faith, but is that the conclusion you've arrived at after careful study of the evidence? Is it the only possible explanation for the inexplicable defeat of the Beloved-Leader-Who-Should-Have-Been? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
godnodog

When someone loses an election against an opponent of such low caliber as Trump, its time to pack up and go home.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
On 11/26/2017 at 3:51 PM, Astra. said:

Ok, putting horrible Hillary aside for the moment. 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. 

I'd vote for a woman, if her interests mirrored my own. Or, if she was the lesser of two evils. Just like I'd do with a male candidate. I think those who say misogyny helped Hillary lose are grasping at straws. Out of all the people I talked to, and all of those I interacted on the internet with, only a bare few thought her being a woman was any kind of real reason to vote against her.

Quote

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 ? 

Honestly, I think you are right with what you said there at the end. I think the vast majority of woman who go into politics do so to try to help their local community/state. I think it is very much rarer in woman to have that drive to control power, which is what we generally see in the top candidates in national politics. Men tend to be more aggressive and desire power more, which is why I think that more men enter higher levels of politics.

Quote

Even so, I wonder if after a 227 year old legacy of men being in the Presidential position, a woman one day may join the league with other nations who have generally embraced women leadership. I suppose only time will tell. 

I'd simply like a "real", and genuinely good person to run and yet still have the skills and desire to serve that would get them into the presidency. If that person was a woman, or a man, I'd vote for them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myles
1 hour ago, DieChecker said:

I'd vote for a woman, if her interests mirrored my own. Or, if she was the lesser of two evils. Just like I'd do with a male candidate. I think those who say misogyny helped Hillary lose are grasping at straws. Out of all the people I talked to, and all of those I interacted on the internet with, only a bare few thought her being a woman was any kind of real reason to vote against her.

Honestly, I think you are right with what you said there at the end. I think the vast majority of woman who go into politics do so to try to help their local community/state. I think it is very much rarer in woman to have that drive to control power, which is what we generally see in the top candidates in national politics. Men tend to be more aggressive and desire power more, which is why I think that more men enter higher levels of politics.

I'd simply like a "real", and genuinely good person to run and yet still have the skills and desire to serve that would get them into the presidency. If that person was a woman, or a man, I'd vote for them.

I'm in agreement.   I don't think women are suffering from gender bias in politics.   In fact, in some ways they have an advantage.   I came across more people that voted for Hillary because she was a woman than voted against her because she was a woman.  

I think it all starts at the bottom.   At city/county local levels, the majority of candidates are men.  So that usually means that at the state levels, it is mostly men.   This ultimately leads to more men being in position to run for president.   I think almost any woman but Hillary would have beaten Trump handily.   

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
3 minutes ago, Myles said:

I'm in agreement.   I don't think women are suffering from gender bias in politics.   In fact, in some ways they have an advantage.   I came across more people that voted for Hillary because she was a woman than voted against her because she was a woman.  

Ill own it, I'm a sexist. Not so much that it would make me vote for a male with differing political views over a woman with similar views ( I voted for Jill Stein in 16) but if there are two qualified and similar candidates I'm gonna choose the male. 

Although As I'm typing its hit me that post Trump a female president might be a really great change of pace. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myles
1 hour ago, Farmer77 said:

Ill own it, I'm a sexist. Not so much that it would make me vote for a male with differing political views over a woman with similar views ( I voted for Jill Stein in 16) but if there are two qualified and similar candidates I'm gonna choose the male. 

Although As I'm typing its hit me that post Trump a female president might be a really great change of pace. 

I don't know that it would bother me.   It depends on their character and the issues.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Montmorency the Dog
1 hour ago, Myles said:

It depends on their character 

almost universally vile.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther
21 hours ago, Likely Guy 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.

I should have used a different word, but I did say that I was ignorant on politics in Canada. It's not like I said that you (and I) were dumb and stupid. The fact that you didn't seem to know that Clinton thrusted herself into the news on a routine basis, after she lost, made it seem like you weren't informed on the situation. You very well could be better informed on other facets of our political situation.

Share this post


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

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”.

Those "firsts" sometimes come in last. They can come in first with a "first" if that "first" is *not* an identity politician who highlights tribalism at the expense of the bread and butter issues that really matter to most Americans. If they were smart, they would prioritize the latter over the former. Something tells me that they won't. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther
11 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Ill own it, I'm a sexist. Not so much that it would make me vote for a male with differing political views over a woman with similar views ( I voted for Jill Stein in 16) but if there are two qualified and similar candidates I'm gonna choose the male. 

Although As I'm typing its hit me that post Trump a female president might be a really great change of pace. 

Yet another progressive Democrat makes me look like a feminist. ;) I just look at the character and the competence of each individual candidate who shares my views. I'm cool with chicks in leadership positions if they're good at what they do. I'm certainly not one of those MGTOW guys. What's up with that? It sometimes sounds like the Klan for guys who hate girls and women. I can't stand *radical* feminists, but those guys need to get a grip! They really should look in the mirror if they wonder why they can't get dates.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
13 hours ago, DieChecker said:

I'd vote for a woman, if her interests mirrored my own. Or, if she was the lesser of two evils. Just like I'd do with a male candidate. I think those who say misogyny helped Hillary lose are grasping at straws. Out of all the people I talked to, and all of those I interacted on the internet with, only a bare few thought her being a woman was any kind of real reason to vote against her.

Honestly, I think you are right with what you said there at the end. I think the vast majority of woman who go into politics do so to try to help their local community/state. I think it is very much rarer in woman to have that drive to control power, which is what we generally see in the top candidates in national politics. Men tend to be more aggressive and desire power more, which is why I think that more men enter higher levels of politics.

I'd simply like a "real", and genuinely good person to run and yet still have the skills and desire to serve that would get them into the presidency. If that person was a woman, or a man, I'd vote for them.

Well it's good to know that your're not a total sexist DieChecker, and ones genitalia wouldn't influence your decision on who you would vote for. The reason that I had asked you what your general views were concerning females that may run for leadership (in spite of Hillary being a horrible candidate) was because you said this....

Quote

I think she was a horrible candidate that was only allowed to get as far as she did,

because she has a vagina...

All in all, yes..a candidate should only be chosen on merit....what lies between their legs should have nothing to do with it. 

 

Edited by Astra.
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Great stuff Astra but I was at a business related party tonight and maybe had a bit much.   Still on ttravel but I willtry and answer tomorrow and if I don't PLEASE pm and remind me.

All's good, and I hope you had an enjoyable time Merc, without the hangover :-*..

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I should have used a different word, but I did say that I was ignorant on politics in Canada. It's not like I said that you (and I) were dumb and stupid. The fact that you didn't seem to know that Clinton thrusted herself into the news on a routine basis, after she lost, made it seem like you weren't informed on the situation. You very well could be better informed on other facets of our political situation.

I left it alone until you pushed the issue.

Conduct unbecoming.

Edit: By the way, I voted 'No'. She was a horrible candidate.

Edited by Likely Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gunn
On 11/28/2017 at 4:34 PM, .ZZ. said:

@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...

 

Yeah she was my first pick too, before she dropped out. I went with John Kasich after that.

I'd support her again though, if she decided to run again. Still better then Trump, I think.

 

@Thread - voted "NO" on Clinton. But I doubt Clinton is going to run again anyway. God I hope not. I'd hate to have to vote for Trump again. <_<

 

Edited by Purifier
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
13 minutes ago, Purifier said:

Yeah she was my first pick too, before she dropped out. I went with John Kasich after that.

I'd support her again though, if she decided to run again. Still better then Trump, I think.

 

@Thread - voted "NO" on Clinton. But I doubt Clinton is going to run again anyway. God I hope not. I'd hate to have to vote for Trump again. <_<

 

Kasich, I thought was the most electable of the lot, left and right.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
On 11/29/2017 at 3:12 AM, Astra. said:

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.

It was and then it got long winded for reasons given. :D

On 11/29/2017 at 3:12 AM, Astra. said:

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.  

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 ?..

Oh no, they will most assuredly be back.  They may be coming back now but I am astounded that the same old dinosaurs are still in place!  The reason they are rising from the dead is the republicans hate Trump as much as teh democrats and they have done nothing while in power. 

On 11/29/2017 at 3:12 AM, Astra. said:

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.    

Sorry, i should have explained, Mitch McConnell is the head of the republican senate and he has been absolutely stagnant passing anything like replacing obamacare, tax relief etc.  All the things promised.  

On 11/29/2017 at 3:12 AM, Astra. said:

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

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.    

Yes, there is that but it is more that the press, whose job it is to police these criminals in congress, are completely compromised and fully in bed with the democrats which allows them to get away with their many crimes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
6 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

Yes, there is that but it is more that the press, whose job it is to police these criminals in congress, are completely compromised and fully in bed with the democrats which allows them to get away with their many crimes

In your opinion American law enforcement only follows after journalistic investigations? Both of which are souly captive to the Democrats?

Those are questions, not statements.

Edited by Likely Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
7 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

Kasich, I thought was the most electable of the lot, left and right.

I was hoping Jim Webb would've won the primary, I'd have voted democrat

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
1 minute ago, Merc14 said:

I was hoping Jim Webb would've won the primary, I'd have voted democrat

Maybe next set, Kasich vs. Webb? Maybe some vitriol can boil down in the meanwhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
46 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

Maybe next set, Kasich vs. Webb? Maybe some vitriol can boil down in the meanwhile.

Webb seems wedded to the DNC and he will NEVER win anything there given how far left that party has gone. I believe he thinks it is still the party of Kennedy but it most certainly is NOT, they are pretty much socialists now

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
5 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

Webb seems wedded to the DNC and he will NEVER win anything there given how far left that party has gone. I believe he thinks it is still the party of Kennedy but it most certainly is NOT, they are pretty much socialists now

Well, like I said, maybe some vitriol can boil down in the meanwhile..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
14 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

It was and then it got long winded for reasons given. :D

;)..

14 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

Oh no, they will most assuredly be back.  They may be coming back now but I am astounded that the same old dinosaurs are still in place!  The reason they are rising from the dead is the republicans hate Trump as much as teh democrats and they have done nothing while in power.

Yep, they are a bunch of dinosaurs..that's for sure. Some fresh blood is what's needed. Idk, now that the Clinton's are a spent force and not so prominent now (apart from her still licking her wounds after the loss, and by still popping up in the media) it may now give the Democratic party a time to think where they went wrong, so as to begin to get their act together. As far as Trump is concerned, well I still think he can be his own worst enemy at times, by leaving himself open for ridicule. But, he does what he does soooo..  

14 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

Sorry, i should have explained, Mitch McConnell is the head of the republican senate and he has been absolutely stagnant passing anything like replacing obamacare, tax relief etc.  All the things promised.

Oh ok, thanks for shedding some light on him. 

14 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

Yes, there is that but it is more that the press, whose job it is to police these criminals in congress, are completely compromised and fully in bed with the democrats which allows them to get away with their many crimes

Well, I understand that the press can certainly influence the viewers perception on things. But I don't think it's really their job to actually police politicians, and I don't think they're all bad apples. Most are there to simply report the news by doing their job.

I have to say, that I do find Fox News to be rather bias at times. I do know that Donald thinks they are pretty cool tho, and has been known to shower them with accolades in his little tweets from time to time, because they mostly say 'good' things about him. So it does make me wonder sometimes (cuts both ways) as in who is really sleeping with who.... that's only my opinion though.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
15 minutes ago, Astra. said:

;)..

Yep, they are a bunch of dinosaurs..that's for sure. Some fresh blood is what's needed. Idk, now that the Clinton's are a spent force and not so prominent now (apart from her still licking her wounds after the loss, and by still popping up in the media) it may now give the Democratic party a time to think where they went wrong, so as to begin to get their act together. As far as Trump is concerned, well I still think he can be his own worst enemy at times, by leaving himself open for ridicule. But, he does what he does soooo..  

The problem they have is that the bench has been obliterated over the last 8 years.  There are NO up and comers so there best hope for 2020 is soon to be  octogenarian Joe Biden and the lady who faked being a native American lizzy warren, a near socialist.

15 minutes ago, Astra. said:

Oh ok, thanks for shedding some light on him. 

Well, I understand that the press can certainly influence the viewers perception on things. But I don't think it's really their job to actually police politicians, and I don't think they're all bad apples. Most are there to simply report the news by doing their job.

Actually, in the federalist papers, the freedom of the press is explained and their main reason for being given constitutional rights was to hold the government accountable.  Our press and media, in general, is now completely corrupted and irretrievably progressive.  They have lost millions, if not billions, of dollars but the management, who are fellow travelers and working for billion dollar corporations, don't care as they will take the loss rather than the bad  press, which they own.  Are you confused yet?  Well don't feel bad because it is inexplicable unless you think of progressives as a religion rather than a political party.  Do that, in your head and it all snaps into place (think 13th-15th century century catholicism and heretics, etc.)

Astra, by far, the most interesting thing about the US right now is the sudden emergence of women coming forward and exposing these people for what they are, misogynists who spew the politically correct verbiage on air and then abuse women under their power off air while management pretends it isn't happening. 

i still hold doors open for ladies and give my seat up so I am a dinosaur but I read what these guys have been doing and I know how we handled it in the Navy and I am amazed they could report are transgressions with such glee yet had no guilt for what they did after the cameras shut down. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AnchorSteam
20 hours ago, godnodog said:

When someone loses an election against an opponent of such low caliber as Trump, its time to pack up and go home.

Because the Dems are just high "caliber" folks, and run such clean campaigns? 

 

Heal thyself, physician. 

 

  • Like 1

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.