Would Hillary Clinton have made a better President?

[Industrialsize]

If Obama had kept his campaign promises of "transparency", "reaching across the isle", "balancing the budget", he may have had a chance. Given he has gone back on his promise of closing Guantanamo, has led us into a war against an enemy that was no threat to US interests and has racked up deficits larger than all previous Presidents, in addition to spitting in the face of the US Constitution, I think and hope he has no chance of re-election. We (the US) is a country of laws and not a country of egos and Czars!!! Again, Congress is the only body allowed and enabled to declare war!!!

There are so many de-bunked right wing talking points here it would be pointless to respond.

And btw BF2K: this thread is about Hillary Clinton.

 

[BF2K]

"de-buck" me industrialsize!! Please refer to the Constitution or legal precedence in your response.

 

[Industrialsize]

"de-buck" me industrialsize!! Please refer to the Constitution or legal precedence in your response.

I don't feel like de bunKing your post. it's a nice sunny day and I have things to do. And as I said, the topic of this thread is Hillary Clinton and what kind of President she would have made had she been elected.

 

[BF2K]

"Facts" are hard to come by when there aren't any!!

 

[hypoc8]

"Facts" are hard to come by when there aren't any!!

Isn't it funny how that happens?

 

[idesofmarch]

Yes I believe she would have done a good job but could a woman get elected? I still believe with the nutzzz on the right it still might be difficult.

I think, most people held their breath, when it was obvious, that the one to succeed GWB would be female or black.

The result was good.

I still don't understand why you woted GWB for a second period. Most of you didn't...

 

[Rikter8]

sorry Rikter8, "respected" by who? by which country? by which people? I'm not sure Iran and Syria count as "friends."

No need to apologize - It's just my opinion, and observation. I don't remember other worldwide organizations joining hands with the previous to get something done.
(I still think your photos are fuckin hot!)

Per an article on CNN the Egyptians were the start of the revolution, and were said to be influenced by Obama. For once in a lifetime, a president of a Free country isn't White from a big money family. For once, he's bi-racial/multi-racial and these poor countries are standing up and saying - Hey...this is possible, we can't live like this anymore - boom, revolt.

The point is that he may not influence the locals here, but Obama does influence others that have not made the success americans have.

Put political affiliation aside - If you had a leader, say a bi-racial, black, white, or woman Leader of a country that was out of the "Norm" - and you were part of that group, wouldn't you be influenced in a positive way if they were the same as you?

And on top of all that jibber jabber, most places recognize that americans don't have their head up their ass as much as we used to when electing the common white from money leaders. We're willing to diversify, you know...all that american way stuff we preach.
He represents the great melting pot. We're all muts - no matter how "American" anyone calls themselves...we all have a mix from different areas of the world.

 

[Rikter8]

Could a black man get elected?

As long as he holds absolutely ZERO ties to Kilpatrick, Jessee Jackson, and Al Sharpton we'll be all set.

 

[houtx48]

I don't feel like de bunKing your post. it's a nice sunny day and I have things to do. And as I said, the topic of this thread is Hillary Clinton and what kind of President she would have made had she been elected.

Some have difficult time staying focused on subject and wander off into trollina land

 

[B_VinylBoy]

Isn't it funny how that happens?

It's even funnier when the person saying it hasn't provided a single fact of his own either. Talk about the ultimate hypocrisy. But hey, since BF2K only views things as "Obama vs. The World", why bother with the specifics?

Obama is not perfect and has made moves that I would question. However, when it comes to the issue of transparency he has been much more open and honest about his actions in office than anyone our beloved "anti-Liberal" could ever dream of over the last few decades. Nobody is ever 100% transparent in politics. Anyone expecting that needs to excuse themselves from this discussion and banish themselves to the "Fictitious Stories" section for the rest of their stay on LPSG.

But hey, don't let reality cloud your ideology. We all know what one "believes" is much more important than what can actually be proven.

Put political affiliation aside

Asking BF2K to put "political affiliation aside" would be like asking a Kardashian not to fuck a pro athlete. You know it ain't ever gonna happen.

 

[FuzzyKen]

I was a strong supporter at one time of Hillary Clinton. My Choice was taken away by many coincidental bad choices. If McCain had not been saddled with Palin I could have been more accepting of him.

My biggest fear with Obama is that he is weak and doesn't want to displease anyone and by so doing displeases everyone. He was elected on ideals and promises for a better future in time. He has a strange viewpoint in that he compromises everything to such a point that it is worthless, gets worthless passed, and then thinks he's won something.

His weakness and willingness to not get out a very heavy baseball bat and knock a few extremist heads together or expose them for what they are is an indicator that has spurred the extremist conservative opposition to literally go nuts in their assault against the lower income citizenry while trying to bring back "Bush-esque" thinking that placed this country in jeopardy to begin with.

Do I think Hillary would have made a better President? Yes, I feel that many extremists would have found her to be strong and uncompromising while smart enough to have lit their asses on fire before they noticed. Obama is thrown piles of cow dung by his detractors, accepts it with grace and diplomacy and thanks the opposition for sending it to him.

 

[B_RedDude]

I'm afraid that there's too much truth in this analysis.

I was a strong supporter at one time of Hillary Clinton. My Choice was taken away by many coincidental bad choices. If McCain had not been saddled with Palin I could have been more accepting of him.

My biggest fear with Obama is that he is weak and doesn't want to displease anyone and by so doing displeases everyone. He was elected on ideals and promises for a better future in time. He has a strange viewpoint in that he compromises everything to such a point that it is worthless, gets worthless passed, and then thinks he's won something.

His weakness and willingness to not get out a very heavy baseball bat and knock a few extremist heads together or expose them for what they are is an indicator that has spurred the extremist conservative opposition to literally go nuts in their assault against the lower income citizenry while trying to bring back "Bush-esque" thinking that placed this country in jeopardy to begin with.

Do I think Hillary would have made a better President? Yes, I feel that many extremists would have found her to be strong and uncompromising while smart enough to have lit their asses on fire before they noticed. Obama is thrown piles of cow dung by his detractors, accepts it with grace and diplomacy and thanks the opposition for sending it to him.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

His weakness and willingness to not get out a very heavy baseball bat and knock a few extremist heads together or expose them for what they are is an indicator that has spurred the extremist conservative opposition to literally go nuts in their assault against the lower income citizenry while trying to bring back "Bush-esque" thinking that placed this country in jeopardy to begin with.

That's one of my main grievances with the current president. As much as being diplomatic and level headed is commendable even among the extreme lunatics, there are moments where I thought he should have been more forceful with some legislation. Things like Health Care reform wouldn't have been such a fiasco if he was more willing to take a side instead of playing the middle throughout the entire process. At the same time, I recognize that being this judicious shows unbelievable strength and resilience in other ways. Clinton with her experience and connections in government may have been able to pull the right strings to get a more effective Health Care law (and other important pieces of legislation) passed, especially since that was something she wanted to get done even before Obama got into office. That's why I was initially hoping for a Clinton/Obama ticket during the primary, alas what's done is done and it could have been a LOT worse for us if the incompetent duo of McCain/Palin were in the White House. Better we have something that addresses some of the problem instead of legislation that makes the problem even bigger.

Right now, unless the GOP or any other third party manages to put together some miracle candidate with the right track record and intellectualism Obama's re-election in 2012 is set in stone. With all of the quotes and sound bites of ultra lunacy from the opposition about birth certificates, Muslims and other chicken-little style "doomsday predictions" amongst an economy and unemployment rate that is slowly and steadily getting better as we move forward, they sound more like a bunch of disingenuous cry babies instead of problem solvers. I'll say it again because it deserves repeating, they should have picked Romney for VP in 2008. People would have taken the GOP much more seriously if McCain did that. But that's enough of a digression for now. :wink:

 

[Hoss]

Just suppose that she would have been elected by the US electorate.

I have kept out of US politics since our friend Mr. Bush left office, but outside the US we are now seeing HRC in action and imho she cuts it.

Will she get another chance?

Have I mised something about her?

If trolls come here to feed, please resist.

Ask the question, "If the election were held today and the choice was between Clinton and Obama, which would I select?"

She's smart, she knows her stuff, the problems she faced in2008 were many. Her husband made verbal blunders as she campaigned and she was a harder looking person than Obama. Sadly much of voting is based on looks instead of ideas and Obama just looked friendlier.

Here we are at the edge of the 2012 election & things are uncertain. If there's a major blunder or a few in the next several mnths. then Obama may face a challenger, would Clinton step in? Strong possibility, she has stated she doesn't want & doesn't plan on serving another term as Secretary of State and her diplomatic interaction puts her firmly on a players stage. Many that voted for Obama are disillusioned that things aren't all perfect yet, a symptom of the times we are in, expecting it all yesterday.


It will be interesting to see what happens.

 

[BF2K]

OK, here I go with my opinion - Chris Christie for President, Herman Cain as VP - people aren't quite ready yet for a female VP, especially with the dirt the MSM will bring up against Michelle Bachmann, Sarah has far too much influence where she is to take a step down to run - would be kind of difficult to slam Herman for potentially being the first "black" man in the White House, but I'm certain the left will figure out some reason why he isn't really "black." The Dems have no choice to put Obama in there and sorry guys - he's looking like Jimmy Carter more and more!!! BTW, despite campaign promises Obama has taken away more "human rights" and has intruded more on our civil liberties (assassination of Americans abroad that may have terrorist ties) than any previous President. Remember that the only two times US Germans and US Japanese citizens were interned on US Soil (depriving them of all rights afforded them by the US Constitution) were during "Progressive" Presidencies - Roosevelt and Wilson (Lincoln has to be forgiven as the "enemy" was from within our borders.) I will defend your right to free speech to the death, but I may not agree with you.

 

[B_RedDude]

Republicans are holding back progress in this country (and in my State) -- often in a reactionary way.

I'm disappointed in Obama, but I'm more disappointed in my country because it keeps electing the Republicans who hold us back. And it's some voters' lack of education that causes them to vote for these people.

OK, here I go with my opinion - Chris Christie for President, Herman Cain as VP - people aren't quite ready yet for a female VP, especially with the dirt the MSM will bring up against Michelle Bachmann, Sarah has far too much influence where she is to take a step down to run - would be kind of difficult to slam Herman for potentially being the first "black" man in the White House, but I'm certain the left will figure out some reason why he isn't really "black." The Dems have no choice to put Obama in there and sorry guys - he's looking like Jimmy Carter more and more!!! BTW, despite campaign promises Obama has taken away more "human rights" and has intruded more on our civil liberties (assassination of Americans abroad that may have terrorist ties) than any previous President. Remember that the only two times US Germans and US Japanese citizens were interned on US Soil (depriving them of all rights afforded them by the US Constitution) were during "Progressive" Presidencies - Roosevelt and Wilson (Lincoln has to be forgiven as the "enemy" was from within our borders.) I will defend your right to free speech to the death, but I may not agree with you.

 

[BF2K]

"Holding you back from what"? As Margaret Thatcher once said: "the problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." there is wealth that is created (Steve Jobs, Apple Computer - Henry Ford, mass production automobiles, for example - neither of them "stole" but created something that others were willing to give up their own wealth for) and that which is stolen from others (Kennedy wealth that came from bootlegging liquor during prohibition). If we don't understand the difference we will all be poor and the "wealth" will only be controlled by those in power (Stalin, Lenin, current Communist army leaders in China, most other dictator regimes). I understand the "poetry" of the left but my future ex is worth over USD 1 million and lives in government housing and things she has the "right' to not work. Go figure!!

 

[SilverTrain]

"Holding you back from what"? As Margaret Thatcher once said: "the problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." there is wealth that is created (Steve Jobs, Apple Computer - Henry Ford, mass production automobiles, for example - neither of them "stole" but created something that others were willing to give up their own wealth for) and that which is stolen from others (Kennedy wealth that came from bootlegging liquor during prohibition). If we don't understand the difference we will all be poor and the "wealth" will only be controlled by those in power (Stalin, Lenin, current Communist army leaders in China, most other dictator regimes). I understand the "poetry" of the left but my future ex is worth over USD 1 million and lives in government housing and things she has the "right' to not work. Go figure!!

Can I borrow this to fertilize my flowerbeds?

 

[B_RedDude]

For whom, and to whose benefit?

there is wealth that is created

 

[B_VinylBoy]

OK, here I go with my opinion - Chris Christie for President

Chris Christie has been telling everyone since June of last year that he is not running for President.

Chris Christie for President | Chris Christie on Meet The Press | Video | Mediaite
RealClearPolitics - Video - Gov. Chris Christie On Running For President: "Not Going To Happen"
Christie again denies 2012 presidential run | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment

Herman Cain as VP - people aren't quite ready yet for a female VP, especially with the dirt the MSM will bring up against Michelle Bachmann,

Considering the noise generated around Hillary Clinton in 2008, the idea of a female president or VP shouldn't surprise or worry anybody. The issue is having the right woman for the job and not necessarily "a woman" just for symbolic reasons. That's why Michelle Bachmann would be the worst of candidates for 2012, and also why Palin lost in 2008.

Sarah has far too much influence where she is to take a step down to run - would be kind of difficult to slam Herman for potentially being the first "black" man in the White House, but I'm certain the left will figure out some reason why he isn't really "black."

All stereotyping aside, Obama will go down in history as the first "black" president regardless of being bi-racial. Just because someone may be more "street" does not mean that someone is more "black".

The Dems have no choice to put Obama in there and sorry guys - he's looking like Jimmy Carter more and more!!!

The Democrats will go with Obama in 2012 because he is the incumbent. History has shown that most political parties do not run candidates against their incumbents since the majority of them wind up winning re-election anyhow regardless if they're Democrat or Republican. No politician is ever going to feel so ideologically superior within their own party to run against an incumbent for if they lose it would be on par with committing political suicide. So whether or not Obama is "looking" like Jimmy Carter right now is irrelevant.

BTW, despite campaign promises Obama has taken away more "human rights" and has intruded more on our civil liberties (assassination of Americans abroad that may have terrorist ties) than any previous President.

Prove it with details we can all research and dispute or shut up.

Can I borrow this to fertilize my flowerbeds?

Hee Hee Hee!!! :biggrin: