OMG Politics, I'm over it already.

Status
Not open for further replies.
jp_nyc said:
It’s the second way. The more likely one is that Clinton will run a terrible campaign and tank herself. She’s already leaning that way by wasting money on anti-Trump ads. Trump was pissing America off before anybody outside of Arkansas even knew who the Clintons are. Clinton doesn’t need to attack him. She needs to work on improving her own horrible negative image so that people will at least hold their noses and vote for her instead of just not voting.
Click to expand...
It concerns me that she does not seem very good at this. It sure seems like she should have some people on staff that could help her with it. As the primary race draws near its close, IMO she should be reaching out with something that resembles leadership to the Bernie supporters, and uniting the troops. Bernie will do the same once he is done giving it to the establishment.
 
sunvalleylaw said:
It sure seems like she should have some people on staff that could help her with it.
Click to expand...

I’m surprised Bill hasn’t convinced her to put someone else in charge. He was a great campaigner, so surely he must have noticed that her campaign is not improving her image. But maybe he’s just old and out of touch at this point.
 
Kerouac said:
Considering that Warren isn't a big fan of Clinton and has repeatedly said she's not interest in running, I doubt it.

IMO a Sanders/Warren ticket would have sealed the deal.
Click to expand...

You'd be surprised, Andy.

Anyway, it's about 1000 times more likely than some of the other possibilities for Trump discussed in this thread.

I am more pro-Hilary than most people in the thread. Anyway, I can't see there being much difference unless the Dems can take the House and Senate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tig
Flamencology said:
You'd be surprised, Andy.

Anyway, it's about 1000 times more likely than some of the other possibilities for Trump discussed in this thread.

I am more pro-Hilary than most people in the thread. Anyway, I can't see there being much difference unless the Dems can take the House and Senate.
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree it seems more likely. I think Warren realizes she's more effective in the Senate and that if she eventually decides to run it will be a big deal and generate a lot of interest. The fact that she still hasn't endorsed a candidate gives her options as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tig
Flamencology said:
You'd be surprised, Andy.

Anyway, it's about 1000 times more likely than some of the other possibilities for Trump discussed in this thread.

I am more pro-Hilary than most people in the thread. Anyway, I can't see there being much difference unless the Dems can take the House and Senate.
Click to expand...
I don't want to be viewed as too anti-Hillary. Some of her votes in the past bother me a lot. And that gives me some concern. but, I will sure vote for her over Trump. It would be nice if she could get Ms. Warren, or Bernie, to run with her.
 
Warren isn’t going to be vice president. She didn’t crawl through the muck into that senate seat just so she can spend eight years going to weddings and funerals.
 
335clone said:
You can replace Trump with Clinton and your argument is just as or more valid.
Click to expand...

Naming Sanders as the VP would be a great move by Clinton - it would indeed make the White House a certainty for her, but...

mongooz said:
i agree. bernie is far more likely to get asked to be vp by hill than trump. but i'm betting hill OWES some folks and that's going to drive the vp job.
Click to expand...

No, no way in hell. The Democratic party (the apparatus, not the voters) hates Sanders, and the money behind the party hates Sanders. Clinton is far too beholden to the party and the money for such a thing to be allowed to happen.
 
jp_nyc said:
It’s the second way. The more likely one is that Clinton will run a terrible campaign and tank herself. She’s already leaning that way by wasting money on anti-Trump ads. Trump was pissing America off before anybody outside of Arkansas even knew who the Clintons are. Clinton doesn’t need to attack him. She needs to work on improving her own horrible negative image so that people will at least hold their noses and vote for her instead of just not voting.
Click to expand...
Hillary did that the last time. There was infighting in her campaign over whether to appear commander-in-chief tough or soft to appeal the the femme vote.
 
sunvalleylaw said:
Idaho pays out $800,000 after losing lawsuits. (Here you can see a picture of our ass clown of a governor).

the harmed parties/plaintiffs got their attorneys fees. But the people of the state of Idaho don't get their money back for this tom foolery. Man I loathe Butch Otter.
Click to expand...
IF it makes you feel any better, North Carolina is going down the same path with HB2.
 
Flamencology said:
You'd be surprised, Andy.

Anyway, it's about 1000 times more likely than some of the other possibilities for Trump discussed in this thread.

I am more pro-Hilary than most people in the thread. Anyway, I can't see there being much difference unless the Dems can take the House and Senate.
Click to expand...

The vast importance of this election comes from the fact that the next president will pick certainly one, probably two, and maybe three SCOTUS justices. Given the recent voting by the conservatives in the Court, two or three more conservatives will put the US back into the dark ages.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top