Shorty
Boomer Boy
Voting for Hillary would be like voting for Sepp Blatter. I would vote for Bernie Sanders before I'd vote for Hillary. In a heart beat.
I don't understand why in a primary you wouldn't want a candidate that represents what you want as your nominee. Hillary isn't running against Jeb bush yet. She is running against other democrats.
There is a big difference. I just think it is sad all of you have pretty much accepted the inevitable even though none of you like her.
I do t disagree with you FMR. My point all along is that people know Hillary is slippery. They know she lies. They know she hides. Yet they still support her simply because she has power. I saw her compared to Nixon and it is a pretty apt comparison.
Brilliant and talented politician. Very smart. But also incredibly deceptive. At what point does a lifetime of deception count? That is why I think she loses. Not sure if it happens in the primary or the GE, but Hillary is pretty much everything the democrats hate about republicans. Other than her power, I can't figure out why yall support her.
Most of the left on this board would say they don't like her, yet in the primary my bet is the large majority of you still vote for her. Why? If the electoral college advantage is as good as most of you make it out to be then it almost shouldn't matter who the D's run. The demographics are the same. Pubs still have a huge uphill road to climb regardless of who is on the ticket.
Outside of my grandmother, who loves Hillary Clinton, I have yet to find a single person in my entire swath of relationships that is fired up about Hillary. I have a family member that ran for governor in a state under the Democratic ticket, so that includes a very WIDE sample. Everyone says the same thing. We don't like her, but we will hold our nose and vote for her. That is a terrible principle.
The majority of us on the board have already said we're voting for someone else in the primary. But unless the Pubs run Paul, which they won't, there is not another Pub in the field who is remotely worth voting for, and so yes, I'll hold my nose in the general and vote for Hillary. I vote based on policies, not personalities.
And I agree with dv7 that Wrangor is being cunty.
Because there is a huge difference between either and hrc with pubs controlling both houses of congress. See you would like alot of the social conservative bullshit legislation that wouldn't get vetoed by an R, but D's wouldn't. And hrc can actually win. Not sure what is so hard to understand. Idealism is a loser in November.What about Rand Paul? And Christie is definitely not worse than Clinton. He is extremely moderate (outside of not liking weed). Or you could choose Clinton, whose policies to be honest will mirror exactly what we have been doing the past two decades that hasn't been working. Everyone makes their own choices, I am just tired of hearing people complain about Washington and then elect the same families to run Washington. Expecting different results from the same action is insanity I hear.
If what FMR (Rube) says about there possibly being 3 supreme court nominations up in the next 4 years, there is no way in hell the Pubs need to be in charge when that happens.
I assume there are notable policy differences that cause you to prefer Webb, or Chaffee over Hillary.
I favor switching to the metric system, was against the 2nd Iraq War and want to see us legalize pot, so yes. In the primary I tend to vote for whose policies I support most and who I like most. I like Chafee and Webb and am not a fan of the Clintons personally, though I do recognize Bill's political skill. Hillary is smart but lacks Bill's skill and charm. But when it gets to the general, and it's Hillary against a climate change denying, anti abortion, neocon, anti immigration, anti gay marriage, protect the rich, Fox loving, drill baby drill Pub, yeah, I'll vote for Hillary.
Christie and rand don't fit either of your preconceived definitions of hillarys opponent. What will you do if it is one of them?
If Ginsburg were purely politically motivated, she'd announce her retirement this Fall. Obama would then nominate another woman to replace her and let the 'Pubs destroy the nominee while the 2016 primaries play out. Just another chance for the GOP to alienate the single largest voting bloc in the electorate.
Imagine what kind of brawl would ensue if Scalia or Kennedy had to be replaced by Obama?