Jump to content

Hillary


greg775
 Share

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 03:27 PM)
I'll almost certainly be voting against her in the primaries but in a post citizens united world I can't see anyone having a shot at her. The Obama campaign in 2008 was plenty wall street friendly and that helped them a lot, but I think the level of support she'll now be able to get financially will be unprecedented.

That depends if she hires someone as incompetent as Mark Penn again and her strongest challenger has a campaign team that understands and exploits the delegate selection process. That's how Obama got a foothold in 2008.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 497
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 04:27 PM)
That depends if she hires someone as incompetent as Mark Penn again and her strongest challenger has a campaign team that understands and exploits the delegate selection process. That's how Obama got a foothold in 2008.

 

 

If her husband didn't screw up South Carolina with his comments, and the Kennedy's, Kerry and Oprah didn't jump on board right around that time of "anti-Bill" backlash, history would tell a different story.

 

Because the Clintons had an almost perfect record with African-Americans until that caucus.

Edited by caulfield12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 03:12 AM)
If her husband didn't screw up South Carolina with his comments, and the Kennedy's, Kerry and Oprah didn't jump on board right around that time of "anti-Bill" backlash, history would tell a different story.

 

Because the Clintons had an almost perfect record with African-Americans until that caucus.

 

This is "politico history". The anti-bill backlash was why Obama was powerful in the first place. It didn't start in south carolina. People didn't want to rehash the womanizing and perpetual scandals of his eara.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 10:40 AM)
This is "politico history". The anti-bill backlash was why Obama was powerful in the first place. It didn't start in south carolina. People didn't want to rehash the womanizing and perpetual scandals of his eara.

I'd also strongly ad the Iraq war to that list. One candidate voted for the worst political decision of my lifetime, one didn't have a chance to but was on record speaking against it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 09:52 AM)
I'd also strongly ad the Iraq war to that list. One candidate voted for the worst political decision of my lifetime, one didn't have a chance to but was on record speaking against it.

I'm not entirely sure Obama wouldn't have voted for it, but the bottom line is he didn't even have a choice so he was better off than Hillary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (farmteam @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 10:01 PM)
I'm not entirely sure Obama wouldn't have voted for it, but the bottom line is he didn't even have a choice so he was better off than Hillary.

For a state senator, keeping your mouth shut on national issues is the version of playing it safe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 09:24 PM)
For a state senator, keeping your mouth shut on national issues is the version of playing it safe.

Right, I'm not saying he should have said anything. Just that, whether he would have voted the same was in Hillary in her position or not, the fact that he didn't have to make the vote was an advantage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (farmteam @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 09:47 PM)
Right, I'm not saying he should have said anything. Just that, whether he would have voted the same was in Hillary in her position or not, the fact that he didn't have to make the vote was an advantage.

yeah, he would have just voted 'present' anyway. That seemed to have been his favorite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read a good op/ed column tonight saying the mean spirited asshole Republicans who desperately want to impeach Obama ought to go try and do it.

It said it will show the Republicans for what they are, incapable of trying to lead, just to make life hell on Obama.

It challenged the Repubs saying, "You know you want to do it; just do it. Impeach him at your own risk cause the public will see you for what you are." I think it was NY Times columnist but I forget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 14, 2014 -> 01:46 AM)
Read a good op/ed column tonight saying the mean spirited asshole Republicans who desperately want to impeach Obama ought to go try and do it.

It said it will show the Republicans for what they are, incapable of trying to lead, just to make life hell on Obama.

It challenged the Repubs saying, "You know you want to do it; just do it. Impeach him at your own risk cause the public will see you for what you are." I think it was NY Times columnist but I forget.

 

They won't try to impeach Obama because the alternative that would take office if they were successful is even worse. Need I remind people that Joe Biden is his successor in the case of impeachment or otherwise? I don't care how much a person dislikes Obama, for legit reasons or otherwise, NOBODY would prefer Joe Biden over him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They won't try to impeach Obama because the alternative that would take office if they were successful is even worse. Need I remind people that Joe Biden is his successor in the case of impeachment or otherwise? I don't care how much a person dislikes Obama, for legit reasons or otherwise, NOBODY would prefer Joe Biden over him.

 

You are using logic there, and the Republicans in Congress don't respond to logic because their biggest donors are right-wing nutjobs who hate Obama so much they want him impeached and aren't even thinking about the consequences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Nov 14, 2014 -> 09:33 AM)
You are using logic there, and the Republicans in Congress don't respond to logic because their biggest donors are right-wing nutjobs who hate Obama so much they want him impeached and aren't even thinking about the consequences.

 

Their biggest donors actually are cheap labor enthusiasts and support Obama's executive action on immigration, they especially like the mega increase in guest workers that are tied directly to an employer. If the GOP tries to stop Obama on this, it is because they are afraid of voters turning on them if they don't.

Edited by mr_genius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
QUOTE (Tex @ Mar 14, 2015 -> 08:14 AM)
So TIME creates a cover that will get people to notice their magazine. Will this help or hurt Hillary?

 

Loved the subtlety of making her look like the devil with the placement beneath the M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 14, 2015 -> 08:30 AM)
Loved the subtlety of making her look like the devil with the placement beneath the M.

Yeah, no complaints when they did it to Bush, etc. Time released a statement showing where that effect happened to over 20 different people.

http://news.yahoo.com/time-magazine-respon...-162415175.html

 

This list includes former U.S. presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, several popes, actor John Travolta, former U.K. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and “Star Wars” villain Darth Vader.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Mar 14, 2015 -> 11:41 AM)
Yeah, no complaints when they did it to Bush, etc. Time released a statement showing where that effect happened to over 20 different people.

http://news.yahoo.com/time-magazine-respon...-162415175.html

 

This list includes former U.S. presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, several popes, actor John Travolta, former U.K. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and “Star Wars” villain Darth Vader.

 

Actually I remember very well outrage at Bush's picture as well. Back then it was further proof about the media bias against conservatives. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Tex @ Mar 14, 2015 -> 11:48 AM)
Actually I remember very well outrage at Bush's picture as well. Back then it was further proof about the media bias against conservatives. :P

I meant to complaints from liberals when it was done to Bush. WhIle I can believe the 'horns' part can be a complete accident, given the logo, there have been many other times they have manipulated photos to appear one way or another. Darkening McCain with shadows to appear evil-like, making sure that the lights around Obama's head look like a halo, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Mar 14, 2015 -> 02:23 PM)
I meant to complaints from liberals when it was done to Bush. WhIle I can believe the 'horns' part can be a complete accident, given the logo, there have been many other times they have manipulated photos to appear one way or another. Darkening McCain with shadows to appear evil-like, making sure that the lights around Obama's head look like a halo, etc.

 

Cheney Rumsfeld and wolfowitz were evil...no need for artistic enhancements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Mar 14, 2015 -> 03:23 PM)
I meant to complaints from liberals when it was done to Bush. WhIle I can believe the 'horns' part can be a complete accident, given the logo, there have been many other times they have manipulated photos to appear one way or another. Darkening McCain with shadows to appear evil-like, making sure that the lights around Obama's head look like a halo, etc.

 

Right, which is why I didn't think twice about the Time cover.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...