Hillary

[greg775]

Democrats do what's necessary to win. Republicans try to pander to their base and lose. It will be the end of the Republicans if they don't adapt and survive. That's all anyone has been saying.

 

Yes, but my point is the democrats could lose by default. Picking Hillary would be a good recipe for the democrats leaving office. She's incapable of getting support, unless, like I said she just doesn't campaign and runs on her name. That would be very very very smart, unprecedented strategy. Put her name in the booth and she might win if people just forget what an annoying, mean person she appears to be on TV and when she speaks. I think Dole is a good comparison.

[Reddy]

Yeah, I really look forward to the Hillary presidency so i can be called a sexist instead of a racist for a change every time i disagree with her.

 

the irony is that the post I was quoting had nothing to do with her policies and everything to do with her personality.

 

so your post is completely off-topic. Greg wasn't DISAGREEING with her, he was calling her a b**** because she's a strong woman who doesn't put up with bulls***.

[Reddy]

Yes, but my point is the democrats could lose by default. Picking Hillary would be a good recipe for the democrats leaving office. She's incapable of getting support, unless, like I said she just doesn't campaign and runs on her name. That would be very very very smart, unprecedented strategy. Put her name in the booth and she might win if people just forget what an annoying, mean person she appears to be on TV and when she speaks. I think Dole is a good comparison.

 

greg you're just wrong about this. Hillary - whether you believe it or not - is the most probably the most popular politician in America right now.

[EvilMonkey]

greg you're just wrong about this. Hillary - whether you believe it or not - is the most probably the most popular politician in America right now.

In the small circle you run around in perhaps.

[EvilMonkey]

the irony is that the post I was quoting had nothing to do with her policies and everything to do with her personality.

 

so your post is completely off-topic. Greg wasn't DISAGREEING with her, he was calling her a b**** because she's a strong woman who doesn't put up with bulls***.

It didn't have to be in direct response to your post. Consider it a prediction. Every criticism of her job at State and any mention of Bengazi, or Monica or Travelgate or Hillarycare will be construed somehow as a 'war on women'.

[StrangeSox]

In the small circle you run around in perhaps.

 

Hillary's approval ratings have been net-favorable basically since 2001, excluding the 2007-2008 primary season when Obama-supporting Democrats would have said they had an unfavorable view. Post-2009 she's been viewed as highly favorable.

 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/162986/hillary-...s-slightly.aspx

[mr_genius]

Yeah, I really look forward to the Hillary presidency so i can be called a sexist instead of a racist for a change every time i disagree with her.

 

[Reddy]

Hillary's approval ratings have been net-favorable basically since 2001, excluding the 2007-2008 primary season when Obama-supporting Democrats would have said they had an unfavorable view. Post-2009 she's been viewed as highly favorable.

 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/162986/hillary-...s-slightly.aspx

 

shhh, they dont care about facts

[mr_genius]

Duke you are missing the point. Their party is littered with clowns like that. I'm not saying Cruz and Rand fit the bill but when you have people in your party saying stupid s*** like that, it brings the whole base down, especially among independent voters.

 

Democrats say crazy s*** too. The GOP needs to focus on the white vote and start offering them more free stuff. Easy win.

 

Hillary is VERY beatable with the correct strategy.

Edited August 23, 2013 by mr_genius

[farmteam]

If the GOP wants to run a ticket that won't slam marriage equality, and to a lesser extent scream "ABORTION SUCKS!" then I would consider voting for them. But if they want to keep alienating millennials, then Democrat is my only real voting option.

 

On pretty much any major issue that isn't considered "socially liberal" (which, like I implied above, is really not just "liberal" anymore among the younger generation but just what >75% of said generations think), I can be swayed to either side. I want the GOP to give me a viable option so I actually have a real choice to make.

[DukeNukeEm]

If the GOP wants to run a ticket that won't slam marriage equality, and to a lesser extent scream "ABORTION SUCKS!" then I would consider voting for them. But if they want to keep alienating millennials, then Democrat is my only real voting option.

 

On pretty much any major issue that isn't considered "socially liberal" (which, like I implied above, is really not just "liberal" anymore among the younger generation but just what >75% of said generations think), I can be swayed to either side. I want the GOP to give me a viable option so I actually have a real choice to make.

So the country can be repeatedly run against the rocks with out of control spending and a culture of surveillance as long as gays get married and the status quo on abortion is kept? Are you f***ing kidding me?

[Reddy]

So the country can be repeatedly run against the rocks with out of control spending and a culture of surveillance as long as gays get married and the status quo on abortion is kept? Are you f***ing kidding me?

 

yep.

 

because treating people like human beings is more important than economics. every time.

 

EDIT: also, I think it was GWB who created the Patriot Act. Am I wrong?

Edited August 23, 2013 by Reddy

[DukeNukeEm]

Hillary's approval ratings have been net-favorable basically since 2001, excluding the 2007-2008 primary season when Obama-supporting Democrats would have said they had an unfavorable view. Post-2009 she's been viewed as highly favorable.

 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/162986/hillary-...s-slightly.aspx

Same goes for John McCain... until he ran for president.

[DukeNukeEm]

yep.

 

because treating people like human beings is more important than economics. every time.

 

EDIT: also, I think it was GWB who created the Patriot Act. Am I wrong?

With this philosophy there could not be an America left to get married in, but you'd be OK with that because if there were at least gays would be allowed to get married in it. You're being tricked, bro. They run off with trillions of dollars every year from right under our noses because they've got us caring about issues like abortion (which is going absolutely nowhere if you haven't noticed) and gay marriage.

[Reddy]

With this philosophy there could not be an America left to get married in, but you'd be OK with that because if there were at least gays would be allowed to get married in it. You're being tricked, bro. They run off with trillions of dollars every year from right under our noses because they've got us caring about issues like abortion (which is going absolutely nowhere if you haven't noticed) and gay marriage.

 

enjoy that tinfoil hat.

 

if the government actually had the best interest of its people in mind, socially, economically, educationally etc, we'd be a much more successful country. Unfortunately as it stands, regardless of who's in control, we're seeing the decline and eventual end of America as a superpower due to the corporate control of congress and the SCOTUS.

 

At least the Dems dont straight up HATE a huge chunk of our population like the GOP does. They may be wrong about a number of things, but equality and civil rights are not among them, and to me those are more important.

[farmteam]

So the country can be repeatedly run against the rocks with out of control spending and a culture of surveillance as long as gays get married and the status quo on abortion is kept? Are you f***ing kidding me?

The easiest response to this is, "Are you f***ing kidding me?"

 

I desperately want to get at the issues you describe. But yeah, first I'd like to get those (what I consider to be on a policy level) basic rights taken care of, but that's been made preposterously difficult.

[Reddy]

The easiest response to this is, "Are you f***ing kidding me?"

 

I desperately want to get at the issues you describe. But yeah, first I'd like to get those (what I consider to be on a policy level) basic rights taken care of, but that's been made preposterously difficult.

 

welcome to the world of Duke. it's just banging your head against a wall.

[pettie4sox]

Democrats say crazy s*** too. The GOP needs to focus on the white vote and start offering them more free stuff. Easy win.

 

Hillary is VERY beatable with the correct strategy.

 

Democrats say their crazy s*** but it's not the super crazy s***. I'm no democrat or republican, I tend to shy away from voting for the two major parties come election time. I'm a independent, you know only the voter that really matters. Republicans can be extremely off putting and that's not going to sway independents.

[Jake]

The last two elections, the Republicans trotted out complete jokers. Yes, the republicans alienated just about every non white you can think of. Look at an RNC event, it's a sea of white people. Hispanics and blacks for the matter could easily identify themselves as conservative, since they are mostly a religious bunch. Republicans have to get these hateful bigoted assholes out of their party and welcome whomever with open hands.

 

I will tell you about an incident that occurred in my life. If you don't know, I'm black. My Dad is an Republican. He ran for office down in my hometown in central Illinois. One day, I went to a republican breakfast social with my dad. When we walked in, everyone pretty much stared us down like we didn't belong there or something. Needless to say, it was super awkward. They were cordial but you could get the sense that they were thinking that this was the white people's club and that some negro trash had just crashed the party.

 

Granted, that was just one example but this type of behavior is probably more common than you would like to believe. Democrats just pander to everyone and that's why they keep winning.

 

I pretty much understand what you mean, but isn't that what we ask of democratic government?

 

His problem with the Civil Rights Act was about government dictating the use of private property, which is a slippery slope. And I know the traditional way of discrediting anyone who isn't head-over-heels for the Federal Government is just to call them "bats*** crazy", but you're going to have to do more than that. You really think after all the damage Obama has done to the USA, the way people feel tricked and misled by him, that they're really going to keep falling for the same s*** from Democrats?

 

And of course there's a lot of people who want to old times back again. All those people losing their homes, out of work, scared of terrorists killing them and scared of their government (WHO YOU HAVE TO BE BATs*** CRAZY NOT TO LOVE RIGHT?) spying on them; they see it as an innovation of modern times and whether that judgment is true or not the one constant over time in this country has been the rampant growth of government.

 

That feeling of betrayal/rampant destruction/etc is far less widespread than you think it is. Obama is far more well-liked than his predecessor, for instance. You are basically describing the way a much larger portion of people felt about GWB

 

Leaving personalities and names aside, because it is way too early to see who will run and how they will do in the primaries... here are some interesting mechanical dynamics that will be a big part of things in 2016 that we CAN look at now...

 

1. The SCOTUS decision on the Voting Rights Act, and its effect on voter ID laws... depending on how much suppression the GOP in certain states gets away with, that could take a very real chunk out of the Democrat's chances. In their corner is the fact that most of the places this is going on are not going to go for a Dem Prez candidate anyway, most likely. But it WILL have an effect on House and Senate races, and people keep forgetting that whatever you think of Obama's Presidency, it is clearly Congress (both parties) that has more thoroughly f***ed us over than the President has. So how the following investigations and court cases on voter ID laws go will have some importance.

 

2. Part of the reason Obama won more thoroughly than many projected in 2013 is their very, very solid and even innovative technology usage was in their ground game strategy. Those tools were huge. Now, any Dem candidate will probably have similar resources at their disposal, which favors them. But, you can bet your ass the GOP will be looking to do something similar, and the gap will close to some extent. So keep an eye on GOP efforts in this arena (statistical analysis, etc.) to see how they may fare.

 

3. Where will the economy stand in 2016? No other issue will matter more. Ironically, if the economy is going well, it will matter a little less, but will still be key. So watch the UE numbers, markets, housing market, etc.

 

4. Obamacare will finally be in full, deep effect by that time - and like it or not, the Dems need to live with that mixed (at best) bag around their necks. So it will be key to see how the health care world for the average Joe/Mary looks at that time.

 

5. The Republicans continue to wrestle with an internal schism - the establishment GOP is being pulled apart from not just one, but two directions: The Tea Partiers (aka "I'm more conservative! No, I'm more conservative!" which is what it has become), and then the Libertarian types. Both groups have only been getting frothier as time goes on, which will make it very difficult for the party to come up with any sort of cohesive set of policy thoughts. This could make things very messy for them going into 2016.

 

6. Finally, the 2014 midterms - cannot ignore this, it is a referendum on not only ObamaCo, but the current and historically useless Congress. This will set a tone.

 

So, lots to discuss... the individual people running isn't even among my top 6 things worth watching right now.

 

SS has covered my first thing with the bolded, which is that political scientists were right on the money and it would have been a huge surprise if Romney had won that election. What we know about polling and statistics made it fairly obvious that he would probably win and win comfortably.

 

Also, the Obama people have not been eager to share much from their campaign infrastructure with the party or other candidates. They have cited a couple reasons thus far:

1. He wants to use these things as a way to be a potent political voice after he leaves office.

2. They claim that these things are not as simple as a mailing list - they are tailored to BO and specific interests of people and their interest in BO rather than being liberals/Dems in general. The current stance has been that this is not stuff one can simply give to another candidate or group because it was particular to a particular time, place, and person.

 

She is the female version of Dole on TV. Just mean and b****y if that's the right word. I predict she'll be the hot early leader, she'll get the magazine covers and the long stories, "It's Hillary Time" but she doesn't stand a chance.

UNLESS she just doesn't campaign. The less she opens her mouth, the more she could just win on her name. As a CONCEPT, Hillary, Clinton II, is a great idea. The reality is she flat out doesn't pass the popularity TV test.

 

And cmon now. Don't tell me you don't believe in superficiality regarding candidates. Obama is handsome, knows exactly how to play the camera. They've always said guys like Humphrey, Dole, etc., who looked horrible on TV didn't stand a chance. I don't think Hillary is capable of doing all those campaign speeches again and appearances without exploding. She is a strong woman. I love that. But she also comes across as a big b****. She'll never ever win.

 

Hillary has a very high approval rating (as seen in someone's link posted earlier) and beats all potential Republican challengers in polls right now. She is VERY popular - though that by no means guarantees a win as much can change. There is a huge luck factor in the nominating/electing game.

Edited August 25, 2013 by Jake

[Jake]

Democrats say their crazy s*** but it's not the super crazy s***. I'm no democrat or republican, I tend to shy away from voting for the two major parties come election time. I'm a independent, you know only the voter that really matters. Republicans can be extremely off putting and that's not going to sway independents.

 

Oftentimes Republicans will seem to win independents because there are many people that tell pollsters they are independent when they actually vote as or more consistently Republican than self-identified Republicans. I haven't looked at recent data if self-identified Ds outnumber self-identified Rs as much as they typically do (this usually holds up despite which party is winning elections)

[greg775]

Hillary has a very high approval rating (as seen in someone's link posted earlier) and beats all potential Republican challengers in polls right now. She is VERY popular - though that by no means guarantees a win as much can change. There is a huge luck factor in the nominating/electing game.

 

I don't mind Obama, even though he's done nothing of note except orchestrate a horrific economy, but Hillary really truly scares me.

I think the USA may be in big trouble if she wins. I mean Obama at least is capable. He's a run of the mill, normal politician. He's not going to do things so stupid they'll crush our country completely. I mean I trust Obama to basically do the right thing, except regarding the economy where IMO he is overmatched.

 

Hillary ... I mean I may be off base here, but doesn't she seem mighty power hungry? At least Bill has a lighter side. Remember it was HIS SPEECH, not Hillary's that was so amazing at the last convention.

Hillary just comes across as a mean bitter lady and she's going to be an elderly lady in her 2 terms, most definitely her second term.

Can somebody make me feel better that we're going to be OK if she wins? I really, truly sense trouble. I'd rather have Al Gore come back and win than Hillary.

 

I will say this ... I'd rather have Hillary than Sarah Palin. That's all I can say good about Hillary. How educated people could think Sarah Palin was a suitable Veep candidate (one breath from the button) is beyond comprehension.

Edited August 25, 2013 by greg775

[Quin]

I have never seen a more fascinating poster than Greg.

[Reddy]

I have never seen a more fascinating poster than Greg.

I couldn't agree more. He flabbergasts me in the same way as Duke does, but at least he's nicer about it.

[iamshack]

I have never seen a more fascinating poster than Greg.

I'm not sure if that is a good thing, Q...

[Jake]

I used to get annoyed by Greg, but I really don't now. I honestly look forward to hearing what he has to say about things on Soxtalk. Not necessarily because I think they'll be "right" but they will always be....stimulating