Slog
News & ArtsFriday, September 3, 2010
Politics Hillary Clinton for President in 2012
Posted by Dan Savage on Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 8:32 AM
Discuss.
2
I always got the impression she was a fence-sitter until she figured out which position would garner her the most support. I was glad Obama got the nomination, because I thought he'd be different...sigh.
3
We could use a knight in shining armor. Not sure if she's it, but possibly.
I haven't counted out Obama - as you may recall, he is an excellent campaigner.
I haven't counted out Obama - as you may recall, he is an excellent campaigner.
5
Ain't gonna happen. African Americans are the most reliable constituency of the Democratic Party. No way they'll jettison Obama for an elderly white woman (which Hillary will be in 2012) and risk looking like racists.
6
@4: PS - Dan, might I suggest you are taking the possibility of a Republican sweep next year too lightly? These people are well organized authoritarian fanatics, and if they don't scare the shit out of you, you are being naive.
7
My first thought on seeing this is one of absolute sureness: there's the next president of the United States.
As much as I don't want the racists to win, at least we know the Democrats will have it in the bag come 2012. Am I wrong? Is there anyone running on the Republican side who isn't a crackpot?
As much as I don't want the racists to win, at least we know the Democrats will have it in the bag come 2012. Am I wrong? Is there anyone running on the Republican side who isn't a crackpot?
8
Ugh, if the economy is still in the tank Obama is out or will barely win reelection. Americans vote with their pocket books and we all know McCain lost in 2008 with the phrase "The fundamentals of the economy are sound". That was game over for McCain.
If Obama doesn't pull an economic wonder out of his ass in the next 12 months he is gone; no matter who the GOP nominates. (Remember Ronald Reagan who was considered a wack job and he was elected?)
Yeah, we are all fucked in 2012.
If Obama doesn't pull an economic wonder out of his ass in the next 12 months he is gone; no matter who the GOP nominates. (Remember Ronald Reagan who was considered a wack job and he was elected?)
Yeah, we are all fucked in 2012.
9
Hillary would be no different than Obama has been, let's not kid ourselves. And this is all moot -- we'll have President Palin in 2012.
10
@4: With his opinion on indefinite detention and his decision to not prosecute Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and ilk for war crimes, we should all want Obama as far away from the Supreme Court as possible.
@7: This country elected George W. Bush president (once). The side of reason never has it in the bag in America.
@7: This country elected George W. Bush president (once). The side of reason never has it in the bag in America.
13
Nope. Karl Rove let Obama win, knowing that Obama was unfit to fight the Fourth Reich, which would utterly demoralize the Dems, and that Obama's skin color would enrage enough of the Teabag Reich's membership to sweep a Republican back into the Oval Office in 2012.
14
1. Most unflattering image of her that they could find - seriously, look at those teeth!
2. "Where there's a Hill, there's a way"? That's, like, Tea-party-slogan embarrassing.
2. "Where there's a Hill, there's a way"? That's, like, Tea-party-slogan embarrassing.
15
I've heard more about Hilary for VP in 2012, not president.
Of course Obama will lose. We have all seen how he has no clue how to run a political campaign. It was a shame he didn't utilize the internet to revolutionize how politicians build and support grassroots campaigns while simultaneously raising tons of cash.
Let's be honest about his presidency too, Obama hasn't been up to much since in office.
Of course Obama will lose. We have all seen how he has no clue how to run a political campaign. It was a shame he didn't utilize the internet to revolutionize how politicians build and support grassroots campaigns while simultaneously raising tons of cash.
Let's be honest about his presidency too, Obama hasn't been up to much since in office.
16
@12: Obama looks weak until you compare him to the Republican contenders. Who do you think has enough appeal to beat him? Palin? Gingrich? No fucking way. Is there someone else I'm missing?
17
2012 is a long way away. If Obama wants the re-nomination, he will get it. I've also heard that Hillary is being considered for VP.
All of that aside, who will win in 2012 in the general remains to be seen. The GOP doesn't really have a bench, and the biggest threat at this point (Pawlenty) couldn't win the nomination (too lefty). We'll see who they trot out, and then predictions of how the general will go can be made.
All of that aside, who will win in 2012 in the general remains to be seen. The GOP doesn't really have a bench, and the biggest threat at this point (Pawlenty) couldn't win the nomination (too lefty). We'll see who they trot out, and then predictions of how the general will go can be made.
19
I'm pragmatic about such things. If Obama seeks reelection, he's the best hope we have of staving off a Republican Tea Party dismantling of government nationwide. So he's got me till he says otherwise.
If Obama didn't seek reelection I'd back Hillary in a heartbeat, even though she sold her soul to the health insurance industry back during her husband's administration. Obama hasn't been willing to fight for anything, and has won nothing more for us than chicken scratch anyway.
But I think she might be too weak, too. Maybe I'll write-in Allen Grayson.
If Obama didn't seek reelection I'd back Hillary in a heartbeat, even though she sold her soul to the health insurance industry back during her husband's administration. Obama hasn't been willing to fight for anything, and has won nothing more for us than chicken scratch anyway.
But I think she might be too weak, too. Maybe I'll write-in Allen Grayson.
20
If Obama comes into 2012 with a 35 public opinion poll I can see him doing an LBJ and not running again.
23
If Obama turned out to be the candidate sitting on the fence (which others thought would be Hillary), maybe Hillary will also turn out to be the candidate that does something (which others thought Obama would be). Who knows?
25
IMHO, her own ego cost her the VP slot in '08 - if she couldn't get the nom, she wasn't going to settle for 2nd best.
On the other hand, if it had been Obama/Clinton there never would have been McCain/Palin - we all realize in our heart of hearts that Palin was a last ditch attempt to show how "progressive" and "change oriented" the Republicans were trying to be by nominating a political nobody simply because of gender. And incidentally, that worked out really well for them, didn't it?
However we'd have gotten President McCain, because there's no way in Hell the powers that be would even begin to allow a Clinton near the White House again.
On the other hand, if it had been Obama/Clinton there never would have been McCain/Palin - we all realize in our heart of hearts that Palin was a last ditch attempt to show how "progressive" and "change oriented" the Republicans were trying to be by nominating a political nobody simply because of gender. And incidentally, that worked out really well for them, didn't it?
However we'd have gotten President McCain, because there's no way in Hell the powers that be would even begin to allow a Clinton near the White House again.
26
This is idiocy. Bill Clinton was a worse president than Obama has been. We're disappointed in Obama because our hopes for him would be that he'd be WAY better than ANY president we've had since FDR.
Sadly, that hope was as ridiculous as it reads in retrospect. But he's still been better than Bill Clinton was, and better than Hillary would be. If you think Obama capitulates to the right too much, Clinton would fight them even less than he does.
If you really wanna root for someone who would come in and fight for progressive values you should rally behind Kucinich, Grayson or Franken. Everyone besides those 3 seems to be very eager to give in to GOP bullshit at the earliest opportunity and make excuses about it later.
Sadly, that hope was as ridiculous as it reads in retrospect. But he's still been better than Bill Clinton was, and better than Hillary would be. If you think Obama capitulates to the right too much, Clinton would fight them even less than he does.
If you really wanna root for someone who would come in and fight for progressive values you should rally behind Kucinich, Grayson or Franken. Everyone besides those 3 seems to be very eager to give in to GOP bullshit at the earliest opportunity and make excuses about it later.
27
It's easy to fantasize about a parallel universe where Hillary Clinton was elected and didn't disappoint in the various ways Obama has, but it's a fantasy. She showed herself to be perfectly capable of caving on vital issues during her time as a senator, too.
And things can change quickly, but right now I don't see Obama losing in 2012, simply because there isn't a single credible Republican candidate. That could change, of course (where was Obama in 2006?), but that's where we are.
And things can change quickly, but right now I don't see Obama losing in 2012, simply because there isn't a single credible Republican candidate. That could change, of course (where was Obama in 2006?), but that's where we are.
28
@Seandr - Gingrich? Oh HELL to the no.
Thankfully, he's got enough verifiable baggage that there's no way that can happen.
Not to mention a couple of ex-wives who I'm sure would spilll all their secrets to make sure that won't happen.
Thankfully, he's got enough verifiable baggage that there's no way that can happen.
Not to mention a couple of ex-wives who I'm sure would spilll all their secrets to make sure that won't happen.
29
When was the last time the party with the control of the White House ditched their President after one term and won? If you only do one term, you turn the ball over to the other side.
30
15 - Love the facetious boostering of Obama, but many of the things he's done have been even right of where he campaigned. Don't even get me started on the criminal and horrendous defamation of civil liberties that is totally under his purview as Executive. He didn't need to be Jesus to close Guantanamo like he said he would, or stop illegal surveillance, or choose not to prosecute whistleblowers. BTW, let's also not be naive who's administration is behind the all-too-timely smearing of Julian Assange and Wikileaks, the escalation of wars, and the continuation of neo-liberal economic policies that are destroying any industry we have left. However, I think it's fair to say he campaigned as a down-the-center establishment moderate in the Clinton (both of them) mold and he's following through on that but moving to the right a tad.
The question remains: Would that really change with President HRC?
The question remains: Would that really change with President HRC?
31
10
still buttsore over Florida?
WHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
still buttsore over Florida?
WHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
32
31 - If there's one thing that unites conservative trolls across the spectrum it's gotta be anal.
33
poor poor Danny.
the bitter nasty taste of regret.
"why did I endorse that tool?" Danny asked himself 50 times a day. and then vomits in his mouth a little.....
yeah, Hill is quite a gal.
the bitter nasty taste of regret.
"why did I endorse that tool?" Danny asked himself 50 times a day. and then vomits in his mouth a little.....
yeah, Hill is quite a gal.
34
2012?
Mercy- Dan is never such a sad credulous ignorant little shit as when he discusses politics.
Think 1980.
Carter-Kennedy.
Even an inept boob like Carter/Obama is tough to unseat when they are the incumbent POOTUS.
A challenge would rip the Democrats a new one.
And would guarantee a GOP victory.
Except that a GOP victory is already guaranteed.
but it would still be fun to watch.....
Mercy- Dan is never such a sad credulous ignorant little shit as when he discusses politics.
Think 1980.
Carter-Kennedy.
Even an inept boob like Carter/Obama is tough to unseat when they are the incumbent POOTUS.
A challenge would rip the Democrats a new one.
And would guarantee a GOP victory.
Except that a GOP victory is already guaranteed.
but it would still be fun to watch.....
36
The realities preventing Obama from enacting progressive policies apply to everyone. Clinton would not be appreciably different, certainly not further to the left. The vitriol of the right wing would not be diminished with Clinton in office, nor would the corresponding obstructionism in Congress be lessened in the slightest.
Obama's administration is perfectly competent, as far as that goes. They are centrist because they've been paying attention, and one of their main lessons was the Clinton administration.
The reason things are a mess is not primarily about personalities. Even during the Bush administration this was the case -- people were so focused on the fact that Bush appeared to be dim that they overlooked the fact that his policy positions were exactly in line with the mainstream of Republican thought, and he was remarkably effective at translating them into law. And now, knowing Americans' propensity for focusing on the candidates' personalities while glossing over their policy positions, the Republicans are claiming that the problem with Bush's reign was simply that he was incompetent at furthering conservative policy goals, and not that the goals themselves were flawed. They are telling us that a better candidate with the exact same policy priorities would somehow cause a non-disastrous outcome.
Obama's administration is perfectly competent, as far as that goes. They are centrist because they've been paying attention, and one of their main lessons was the Clinton administration.
The reason things are a mess is not primarily about personalities. Even during the Bush administration this was the case -- people were so focused on the fact that Bush appeared to be dim that they overlooked the fact that his policy positions were exactly in line with the mainstream of Republican thought, and he was remarkably effective at translating them into law. And now, knowing Americans' propensity for focusing on the candidates' personalities while glossing over their policy positions, the Republicans are claiming that the problem with Bush's reign was simply that he was incompetent at furthering conservative policy goals, and not that the goals themselves were flawed. They are telling us that a better candidate with the exact same policy priorities would somehow cause a non-disastrous outcome.
37
She won't run. She is the freaking Secretary of State, not to mention a loyal Democrat. The incumbent runs unchallenged, that's just how it's done. (Ted Kennedy tried it against Carter in 1980 and failed; Reagan tried it against Ford in 76 and failed. It hasn't happened since because everyone learned their lesson.) If the Dem loses in 2012, it won't be because it is Obama, it will be because the economy sucks. Hillary is smart enough to know that.
39
I could actually envision the scenario that Obama willingly gives up the desire to go a 2nd term and crowns either Biden or Hillary as his replacement. Probably depends on the economy and poll numbers.
40
Anybody who thinks Obama can't win in 2012 is an idiot. An ocean of time, politically speaking, separates now from then...all sorts of shit can and will happen. It's simply not possible to be sure about anything yet. Also, people seem to be forgetting the awesome politcal machine that is Obama on the campaign trail.
41
You people are being dumb. #40 is right - 2012 is a long way off, and many people here are making the mistake of seeing the future as nothing more than an infinite prolongation of what's going on Right This Minute. Remember the '04 election, which was the beginning of the permanent Republican majority? How about the '08 election, which was the beginning of the permanent Democratic majority? Jesus, get a little perspective.
Even if the Republicans take congress this year, Tea Party Apocalypse Now is not inevitable.
Even if the Republicans take congress this year, Tea Party Apocalypse Now is not inevitable.
43
@40: I think it comes down to this year's elections. If the Democrats cut their losses decently and retain control of both houses (which should not be too hard, assuming that they do have a two-minute drill ready), then Obama will be able to rally the economy and hopefully institute that kind of real reform we've all been waiting for. If the Republicans win, we all know they'll just ramp up their "party of NO" performance, and that'll be the nail in the coffin for Obama's presidency, and possibly for the American economy for the next twenty years.
44
I think Hillary is much better served as Secretary of State and I honestly hope Dems don't need tap her for VP just to retain the WH for another four more years.
I am crossing my fingers that Obama will pick Grayson as VP and keep Clinton as SoS. She really is doing a phenomenal job what the clusterfuck she was handed.
I am crossing my fingers that Obama will pick Grayson as VP and keep Clinton as SoS. She really is doing a phenomenal job what the clusterfuck she was handed.
45
Whether Obama is re-elected in 2012 or not will likely depend, more than anything else, on the state of economy in the year leading up to the election.
46
#43. You have a lot more faith than I do in both Obama's ability to "rally the economy" (perhaps with a wave of his magic wand?) and the Rep's "party of no" strategy. I agree that it's unlikely that Congress is going to turn over completely (Senate - no way; House - maaaaaybe, but not by anything like an overwhelming margin), but even if that were to somehow occur, I don't think it means the end for Obama; heck, I think it would probably benefit him politically (which isn't the same as benefitting the country as a whole, necessarily). In this scenario, he'd have exactly three tasks for the next two years: 1) win a popularity contest against whatever constipated, half-educated mediocrities become the public face of the Republican congress, 2) claim that he'd LOVE to enact some kind of progressive agenda (maybe even "the real reform we've all been waiting for"!) but, god damn it, those lousy Tea Party nuts that really run the government are standing in his way and 3) veto whatever oddball "gotcha" legislation actually makes it to his desk. I seem to recall another recent Democratic president did pretty well for himself with this same strategy...hmmm...what was that guy's name...?
47
@43,
Except the exact opposite happened to Clinton. I'm not defending it since I have little use for the policies Clinton instituted after the Republicans took office, but he was in exactly the same boat as Obama except with profound failures (DADT and health care reform) under his belt.
Except the exact opposite happened to Clinton. I'm not defending it since I have little use for the policies Clinton instituted after the Republicans took office, but he was in exactly the same boat as Obama except with profound failures (DADT and health care reform) under his belt.
48
Hillary Clinton would not have been as cautious temperamentally as Obama, but given her campaign team her policies would have been just as half-assed, and the Republicans would have turned on her just as fervently. It's just that the tea-partiers would be emphasizing misogynistic talking points rather than racist ones.
And she's not going to run in 2012. She'll either switch over to Secretary of Defense when Gates leaves, or stay on at State until she can take on Biden's spot for 2012 (possibly switching with Joe so that he can have a plumb job as the last of his career). Win or lose as Obama's running mate, she becomes the presumptive Democratic front-runner in 2016. She'll either inherit Obama's reputation as a two-termer who turned things around eventually, or she'll be running against a one-term Republican disaster administration. Either way, that makes her the favorite. No, she won't be young, but women live longer and she'll have all her faculties through 2024. Part of me would prefer not to have another Clinton presidency, but if you look at her potential competition it's hard to see a better choice with any chance of winning.
And she's not going to run in 2012. She'll either switch over to Secretary of Defense when Gates leaves, or stay on at State until she can take on Biden's spot for 2012 (possibly switching with Joe so that he can have a plumb job as the last of his career). Win or lose as Obama's running mate, she becomes the presumptive Democratic front-runner in 2016. She'll either inherit Obama's reputation as a two-termer who turned things around eventually, or she'll be running against a one-term Republican disaster administration. Either way, that makes her the favorite. No, she won't be young, but women live longer and she'll have all her faculties through 2024. Part of me would prefer not to have another Clinton presidency, but if you look at her potential competition it's hard to see a better choice with any chance of winning.
49
General Patraeus will run as a Republican in 2012 - the talk around here for several months.
Why not?
Why not?
51
Anyone who tells you, in 2010, that they can predict if Obama will win or not in 2012 is talking out of their ass. 2 years is eons in politics.
Personally I think that, unless Obama is a total lame duck in 2012, not nominating him and choosing Clinton instead would be positively suicidal, in the sense that it would make a Republican win more likely,.
Personally I think that, unless Obama is a total lame duck in 2012, not nominating him and choosing Clinton instead would be positively suicidal, in the sense that it would make a Republican win more likely,.
52
Before considering anything other than disgust for this disgusting person, please remember that she:
- gave Bush her approval to invade Iraq
- supported the Patriot Act
- opposes gay marriage
- supports restrictions on video games and believes they cause violence
- supported anti-flag burning legislation
- lied to everyone's face about facing danger in Bosnia
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BfNqhV5h…
- OPPOSED banning the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas. These bombs continue to kill children decades after their use. So you can forget her claims that she's "worked for children."
- speaking of children, she supports our tactics in Afghanistan which blow up and burn alive innocent children and women and men on a regular basis.
How anyone other than a partisan loyalist could consider supporting this awful, awful person is amazing to me.
- gave Bush her approval to invade Iraq
- supported the Patriot Act
- opposes gay marriage
- supports restrictions on video games and believes they cause violence
- supported anti-flag burning legislation
- lied to everyone's face about facing danger in Bosnia
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BfNqhV5h…
- OPPOSED banning the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas. These bombs continue to kill children decades after their use. So you can forget her claims that she's "worked for children."
- speaking of children, she supports our tactics in Afghanistan which blow up and burn alive innocent children and women and men on a regular basis.
How anyone other than a partisan loyalist could consider supporting this awful, awful person is amazing to me.
53
The only way this could happen is if Obama voluntarily declines to run for re-election. That's so uncommon as to be a very long shot. I think this is wishful thinking by the politically naive.
54
well this country DOES miss the Clinton years.
I have kind of wondered, whether Obama might decide to resign early to allow another democrat to step up for the presidency. I mean he's been through so much shit and might even be thinking it would be best for this country. republicans hate his ass (for pretty ridiculous sometimes racist reasons), progressives have thrown their hands up in the air..
I have kind of wondered, whether Obama might decide to resign early to allow another democrat to step up for the presidency. I mean he's been through so much shit and might even be thinking it would be best for this country. republicans hate his ass (for pretty ridiculous sometimes racist reasons), progressives have thrown their hands up in the air..
55
And it seems like only yesterday that Capitol Hill Obama supporters were screaming at me at the neighborhood caucus that I was supporting a f-ing murderer and that I should f-ing move if I'm going to f-ing support her....
56
What a silly waste of money on DeJean's part.
Cato @8, then-Governor Ronald Reagan was not considered a "wack job" as a candidate in 1980. He won because he was charming and promised hope and National pride during his campaign, for a country mired in the "malaise" of the late 70s. I was just a sixth grader, but I remember what it was like that year.
I suppose if Secretary of State Clinton decided to make a run against her boss in 2012, there's a bit of a parallel in Ted Kennedy having made a failed primary run against incumbent President Carter back in 80, but it seems spectacularly unlikely.
One thing Reagan of the early 1980s had in common with the current President were his poll numbers during a long recession in the early part of that decade. They track virtually identically. Reagan was easily reelected in a landslide in 1984 against the lackluster former Vice President Walter Mondale.
Cato @8, then-Governor Ronald Reagan was not considered a "wack job" as a candidate in 1980. He won because he was charming and promised hope and National pride during his campaign, for a country mired in the "malaise" of the late 70s. I was just a sixth grader, but I remember what it was like that year.
I suppose if Secretary of State Clinton decided to make a run against her boss in 2012, there's a bit of a parallel in Ted Kennedy having made a failed primary run against incumbent President Carter back in 80, but it seems spectacularly unlikely.
One thing Reagan of the early 1980s had in common with the current President were his poll numbers during a long recession in the early part of that decade. They track virtually identically. Reagan was easily reelected in a landslide in 1984 against the lackluster former Vice President Walter Mondale.
57
"...To die, to sleep--
No more--and by a sleep to say we end
The heartache, and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to. 'Tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wished. To die, to sleep--
To sleep--perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub,
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause. There's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life.
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
Th' oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office, and the spurns
That patient merit of th' unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? Who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscovered country, from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?" ~ Hamlet
Just sayin'
No more--and by a sleep to say we end
The heartache, and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to. 'Tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wished. To die, to sleep--
To sleep--perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub,
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause. There's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life.
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
Th' oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office, and the spurns
That patient merit of th' unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? Who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscovered country, from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?" ~ Hamlet
Just sayin'
58
Yeah, not happening Hillary. Nice try.
Obama has a good shot to win the re-election because of his way of making speeches, the things he has accomplished while in office, and the lack of strong leadership on the republican side. But if he doesn't get us out of this recession, he has a good chance of getting canned.
Obama has a good shot to win the re-election because of his way of making speeches, the things he has accomplished while in office, and the lack of strong leadership on the republican side. But if he doesn't get us out of this recession, he has a good chance of getting canned.
59
The people who voted for Obama would vote for him again if he enacted a law that forced all citizens to eat their own shit. Seriously, the impetus that allowed him to become President was irrational to begin with. So why would the Democrats choose another candidate because he's screwing up now? Btw, if slog shuts down and The Stranger goes out of business suddenly, you'll know its because Dan posted this "racist" video.
60
god, dems do not have a back-bone!!! or a sense of reality... or a sense of unity! liberals and conservatives are all the same. short-sighted and all about me! me! me! except liberals are also self-righteous which, in my book, makes them worse than conservatives. liberals, if you thought the world would change overnight because of obama, you are naive. politics is not the way to enact ground-breaking change quickly or period. everyone is owned - you, me, obama, clinton etc... grow up, be an adult, think critically, folks.
61
god, dems do not have a back-bone!!! or a sense of reality... or a sense of unity! liberals and conservatives are all the same. short-sighted and all about me! me! me! except liberals are also self-righteous which, in my book, makes them worse than conservatives. liberals, if you thought the world would change overnight because of obama, you are naive. politics is not the way to enact ground-breaking change quickly or period. everyone is owned - you, me, obama, clinton etc... grow up, be an adult, think critically, folks.
62
god, dems do not have a back-bone!!! or a sense of reality... or a sense of unity! liberals and conservatives are all the same. short-sighted and all about me! me! me! except liberals are also self-righteous which, in my book, makes them worse than conservatives. liberals, if you thought the world would change overnight because of obama, you are naive. politics is not the way to enact ground-breaking change quickly or period. everyone is owned - you, me, obama, clinton etc... grow up, be an adult, think critically, folks.
65
I don't agree with Hillary's progressive politics, which includes much of what she seems to believe. I am much closer to Glenn Beck on that subject. That being said ...
During the 2008 campaign, someone asked Hillary what she would do if Iran attacked the US. In responding, she used the word "obliterate." That's when she won my vote. I have long believed Islamic terrorism to be the greatest threat to this country and our way of life; and McCain impressed me as too much of a politician for me to trust him to respond appropriately. Obama was clearly a fraud from the get-go. Funny, I would have said Hillary was more of a politician until she made that remark; I think she spoke from her gut, and I liked what she said. I had never voted for a Democrat for President before, but she is the candidate who should be sitting in the Oval Office today.
I don't think she got out as a calculated move, as someone as suggested. I think larger forces were at work to put Obama in the White House. Shortly before the Democratic convention, the head of the Democratic Party in Arkansas was organizing a floor vote to get her nominated when he was murdered in a bizarre act by someone he did not know and for reasons still not known. The "suspect" in that murder was himself conveniently killed while fleeing pursuit. Also dead shortly before the Democratic convention was a Representative from Ohio, a strong Hillary supporter on, I believe, the Rules committee. Said Rules committee made the unprecedented decision to take two of Hillary's Michigan delegate votes and give them to Obama, who had decided not to even be on the ballot in that state. While, in another bizarre act, there was no actual vote by the delegates from the floor, it is fascinating to know that, when the delegate votes are totaled, Obama beats Hillary by ... four votes. Gee. Some coincidence, eh?
I have also heard that shortly before the Democratic convention, Dianne Feinstein fell and broke a leg and shortly thereafter decided not to attend the convention. Feinstein was another Hillary supporter; remember the sudden impromptu meeting at her house between Hillary and Obama, late in the primary campaign? I wonder if Feinstein fell ... or was pushed.
I think Hillary quit because her life was threatened. I will never know, but that's what I believe.
Whether I would vote for her today is a complicated question; again, it's mostly a matter of who runs against her. As I said, I strongly disagree with much of her political philosophy. But I believe she would defend this country, and wouldn't dither and dillydally about it. As for Obama ...
Paper tiger
Paper tiger
Oh, how real that tiger seemed to be (but not to me)
But he's only
Imitation
He has smaller b*lls than Hillary
More...
During the 2008 campaign, someone asked Hillary what she would do if Iran attacked the US. In responding, she used the word "obliterate." That's when she won my vote. I have long believed Islamic terrorism to be the greatest threat to this country and our way of life; and McCain impressed me as too much of a politician for me to trust him to respond appropriately. Obama was clearly a fraud from the get-go. Funny, I would have said Hillary was more of a politician until she made that remark; I think she spoke from her gut, and I liked what she said. I had never voted for a Democrat for President before, but she is the candidate who should be sitting in the Oval Office today.
I don't think she got out as a calculated move, as someone as suggested. I think larger forces were at work to put Obama in the White House. Shortly before the Democratic convention, the head of the Democratic Party in Arkansas was organizing a floor vote to get her nominated when he was murdered in a bizarre act by someone he did not know and for reasons still not known. The "suspect" in that murder was himself conveniently killed while fleeing pursuit. Also dead shortly before the Democratic convention was a Representative from Ohio, a strong Hillary supporter on, I believe, the Rules committee. Said Rules committee made the unprecedented decision to take two of Hillary's Michigan delegate votes and give them to Obama, who had decided not to even be on the ballot in that state. While, in another bizarre act, there was no actual vote by the delegates from the floor, it is fascinating to know that, when the delegate votes are totaled, Obama beats Hillary by ... four votes. Gee. Some coincidence, eh?
I have also heard that shortly before the Democratic convention, Dianne Feinstein fell and broke a leg and shortly thereafter decided not to attend the convention. Feinstein was another Hillary supporter; remember the sudden impromptu meeting at her house between Hillary and Obama, late in the primary campaign? I wonder if Feinstein fell ... or was pushed.
I think Hillary quit because her life was threatened. I will never know, but that's what I believe.
Whether I would vote for her today is a complicated question; again, it's mostly a matter of who runs against her. As I said, I strongly disagree with much of her political philosophy. But I believe she would defend this country, and wouldn't dither and dillydally about it. As for Obama ...
Paper tiger
Paper tiger
Oh, how real that tiger seemed to be (but not to me)
But he's only
Imitation
He has smaller b*lls than Hillary
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: The Tell-Tale Handjob by Dan Savage
-
Foie Gras Tastes Like Cat Food by Callan Berry
-
Cap Hill Is Becoming a Little Like What? by Charles Mudede
-
Pizza Update: Breaking the 5-Minute Barrier by Goldy
-
President Obama Says NSA Spying Is "Transparent" by Paul Constant
-
SL Letter of the Day: Let Me Think... by Dan Savage
-
Slog Bible Study: Leviticus 20:9 by Goldy
-
The Daily Show on Poor, Bullied Christians by Paul Constant
-
In Which Peter Steinbrueck Peforms in Blackvoice by Goldy
-
The Monday Morning News by Goldy
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (65) RSS