To My friends on the left

[dags]

Funny thing fourtiesfun, your last three sentances in your post. Just this morning I was thinking the same thing.
You never know. If she really comes up with a really good campaign. She aint no dummy, give the people what they want and...

 

[Shelby]

And then there are the women who would under no circumstances vote for a woman president because they don't trust other women.

 

[tripod]

And then there are the women who would under no circumstances vote for a woman president because they don't trust other women.

And all of the Republican women who HATE Hillary with a passion!

 

[DC_DEEP]

<...>illegalize partisan gerrymandering, investigate and prosecute political corruption in both parties at all levels, institute radical campaign finance reform, repair the damage that has been done to the country's image internationally in the past several years... maybe even outlaw political parties while they're at it.

Geez, I've advocated all of the above, several times. I always get the crucifixion treatment for my effort, especially when I mention doing away with the two-party system. How do you get away with saying it, when I always get flamed?

 

[B_houugadunor]

Ok, im not a yank,

But damnit, I want Mrs Clinton as a president, how fun would that be?!?!

 

[fortiesfun]

Geez, I've advocated all of the above, several times. I always get the crucifixion treatment for my effort, especially when I mention doing away with the two-party system. How do[es he] get away with saying it, when I always get flamed?

You get a lot of lattitude when your screen name is NineInchCock_160IQ. (And you have photos to prove it.)

 

[tripod]

You both have excellent sentiment... but what corrupt democrats are you talking about? There are a few corrupt democrats, but it is usually on a pretty small scale and usually just involves bribery and personal gain. Republicans, on the other hand, have extorted, assasinated, bribed, have an inordinate control over the scheming CIA, and attempt to influence policy in order to benefit corporate greed and the gathering of wealth by a few! Really, lets get real here, detail democratic corruption for me... I'm puzzled as to what that actually is (beyond covering up the WACO incident, the innordinate growth of WAL-MART, Monica and fucking Whitewater... and no Bill Clinton did not commit treason by selling nuclear secrets to the Chinese).

 

[D_Gunther Snotpole]

Geez, I've advocated all of the above, several times. I always get the crucifixion treatment for my effort, especially when I mention doing away with the two-party system. How do you get away with saying it, when I always get flamed?

Good Rooseveltian that he is, he speaks softly and carries a very big stick, DC.

 

[dong20]

Geez, I've advocated all of the above, several times. I always get the crucifixion treatment for my effort, especially when I mention doing away with the two-party system. How do you get away with saying it, when I always get flamed?

Not always. I agree with you, for what that's worth.

The problem is, as Bismark said : "Politics is the art of the possible." Thus many second rate minds make it their life's career so any sense of power it gives them, whether through achievement or, all too often corruption is not lightly surrended by those that hold it. Or, as I've said once before here, in the words of Fish Hooks McCarthy: "Lord give me health and strength, we'll steal the rest."

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

Well, it's Democratic party polling, which I confess comes with some objectivity issues, but they have no real reason to want her to do better than anyone else in the party. I have no real affinity for her personally, and am not pleading her cause, just noting that the professionals put together many scenarios under which she could win. (I recognize the bias of this site, by the way. It is one of the reasons I like it. Surely you are aware that where you are situated is hardly predictive of the nation, however. Notwithstanding a notable new senator, Virginia is about as right wing as anywhere in the US except Georgia, Texas and Idaho. What you are hearing might be biased, as well.) I still contend that it is not how much baggage Hillary carries that matters. Who cares if all the Republicans and righties hate her? They weren't going to vote for a Democrat anyway. I think you underestimate how import the women's vote is, and how many of them will be energized by a female presidential candidate.

Curious about this, I went ahead and looked up multiple different poll results that do seem to agree with you more than me. So I'll concede the point, but I still don't think she can win. In those same polls I'm referring to, she has been demonstrated to be less popular in nearly every one versus McCain or Giuliani. I have a feeling that the chief reason she is leading among Democratic cantidates for the time being is name recognition, and I hope for her party's sake that in the intervening two years between now and the next presidential election they're able to drum up enough buzz and support for some other more viable cantidate, like perhaps Obama who, though still trailing Clinton in most polls, has a lot of momentum lately.

I live in the suburbs of DC. They vote Democrat something like 98%. I'm in Virginia about as much as Chicago is a farm in the middle of Illinois. I'm not in DC-proper, more on the cusp of where the metropolitan sprawl meets rural calm, giving this area a remarkable cross-section of ideas and opinions. I go to school at the most diverse campus in the country. You've grossly mischarachterized where I am from.

Democrats are going to need some support from conervatives and conservative-leaning moderates if they want to win the next election. This should almost go without saying. The Democrats have a lot of sympathy right now thanks to the unpopularity of the current president. If they nominate a cantidate popular only among the far-left, they'll have squandered most of that.

I don't think I've underestimated the importance of the women's vote. Though I know plenty of women who would not vote for Hillary Clinton. Keep in mind there are also plenty of sexists out there who would not vote for a woman regardless of her political affiliation. I think that's going to balance out any extra support a female cantidate would get from people who want to see a woman elected president.

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

Geez, I've advocated all of the above, several times. I always get the crucifixion treatment for my effort, especially when I mention doing away with the two-party system. How do you get away with saying it, when I always get flamed?

Mentos

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

You both have excellent sentiment... but what corrupt democrats are you talking about? There are a few corrupt democrats, but it is usually on a pretty small scale and usually just involves bribery and personal gain. [/quote]

We'll see more of them now that they have a little bit of power back. It's hard to be corrupt when you control nothing at all.

 

[Janey26]

Umm...Tony Blair!!!!

In the words of Jordan (aka Katie Price) during an interview with Frank Skinner in 2005, when asked what she thought of the Dubba and Tony:

"Where there is a bush, theres always an arsehole right next to it"

Enuff said I feel.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Am more than willing to open up a 'Tony B_Liar Emigration Fund' and make the first donation of £100 to get him shipping off our shores – America would be a great new home(plenty of miles to stop him coming back), but I like America and Americans and think you've probably had enough punishment with Bush than to be saddled with another lame duck "-)))))

 

[fortiesfun]

NIC: It was a gracious concession of my one point about polling. Here is mine in return: you made a half dozen good points in your rejoinder, all of which I think are unassailable. Can I get my ecstacy now?

 

[tripod]

Thats the thing... Fortiesfun, NineInch, and DCDeep are three of the smartest cats on the site. The rest of us always learn a great deal from you three. Cheers!:biggrin1:

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

NIC: It was a gracious concession of my one point about polling. Here is mine in return: you made a half dozen good points in your rejoinder, all of which I think are unassailable. Can I get my ecstacy now?

Is "your ecstacy" the pet name you've given to my johnson?

 

[GoneA]

Like, OMG ... K-Fed would totally rock out as Prez.

 

[BobLeeSwagger]

Don't forget, they Dems we have in the houses of congress right now ,are the most honest, capable politicians that the Democratic party has ever claimed. They take corporate money, and then vote how they want to vote, irregardless of the corporations wishes.

There is zero evidence for this claim. They've been less corrupt because they haven't been in power.

 

[tripod]

There is zero evidence for this claim. They've been less corrupt because they haven't been in power.

You know what Aloofman? I said 'Illustrate the corruption, go ahead and detail it... YOU CAN'T" The causation of the lack of corruption is not the fact that they have not been in power, that is a coincidence.This is mere speculation on your part.

You want me to prove a negative? That's ridiculous... it's the same crap conservatives have been pulling for years. You'll have to do better than that! You're just sounding off with no real substance.

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

You're just sounding off with no real substance.

and your claim that all current Democrat politicians are somehow angels has substance? The ridiculousness of this statement should be self-evident, it doesn't need to be proven.