Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The amount of things Clinton has done has definitely made her ready for 2016 if she chooses to run again.
Where are you? Can you read what the conversation is about. The post I was referring to was about Warren, not Clinton. I already reminded you of that and now you are back on the Clinton band wagon. And btw, she (as in Clinton) looks very old and tired. Reagan was a very young 69 when elected. I think you are basing your comments more on personal political views than reality. Just go back and find a picture that was taken when he was running....
And did I ever say she wasn't ready for 2016? Of course I didn't. I have said, she might have more melt downs that hurt her in 2007/08 and would again. I don't happen to like her political views and I don't think she was a stand out Sec of State, but yes, she does have a background to run on.
I would love to see someone as progressive as Warren as president, but Clinton is more pragmatic and knows how to get things done. I would vote for Clinton.
I probably know Senator Warren better than anyone on this board (although we are not close friends), and she is sharp as a tack and is dead set on making life better for the average Joe and making life worse for the big banks if they play outside the rules.
Trust me, she didn't run for office to get rich or make a name for herself. She was plenty accomplished before she was elected to the Senate. She really is passionate about leveling the playing field and that has been shown in her track record in the Senate since she was elected.
Where are you? Can you read what the conversation is about. The post I was referring to was about Warren, not Clinton. I already reminded you of that and now you are back on the Clinton band wagon. And btw, she (as in Clinton) looks very old and tired. Reagan was a very young 69 when elected. I think you are basing your comments more on personal political views than reality. Just go back and find a picture that was taken when he was running....
And did I ever say she wasn't ready for 2016? Of course I didn't. I have said, she might have more melt downs that hurt her in 2007/08 and would again. I don't happen to like her political views and I don't think she was a stand out Sec of State, but yes, she does have a background to run on.
Are you sexist?
The reason I'm saying this is because you seem to imply that because she looks"her age" and is a woman that she can't handle it.
Reagon was 69 too,but because he was a man he was a "young 65"?
Since when do elections come down to looks? I bet you didn't say the same thing about Mccain.
I don't give damn if she looks old or tired,if she can work miracles with the economy,then I'm choosing her.
The reason I'm saying this is because you seem to imply that because she looks"her age" and is a woman that she can't handle it.
Reagon was 69 too,but because he was a man he was a "young 65"?
Since when do elections come down to looks? I bet you didn't say the same thing about Mccain.
I don't give damn if she looks old or tired,if she can work miracles with the economy,then I'm choosing her.
reagan did not have brain damage at that time. clinton does. elections always come down to looks. last time I checked, I think there has only been one bald president.
Boy -- the left is sure having to scrape the bottom for it's candidates. You guys seriously have no one better?
Who you got thats going to beat either one of them.?
For me it doesnt matter who wins the election as long as they are Democrat i vote for the party not the individual...
The reason I'm saying this is because you seem to imply that because she looks"her age" and is a woman that she can't handle it.
Reagon was 69 too,but because he was a man he was a "young 65"?
Since when do elections come down to looks? I bet you didn't say the same thing about Mccain.
I don't give damn if she looks old or tired,if she can work miracles with the economy,then I'm choosing her.
I am not saying anything about her because of her looks as to whether I would support her: I am pointing out, she is showing her age and that might be a serious issue as people get ready to cast a ballot, especially in the primaries. No, I am certainly not a sexist, would I be pulling for Susanna Martinez to jump in if I were. I am being realistic and pointing out Hillary might not have clear sailing like so many think she will. There also is the question, because of her looks, is her health ok?
Who you got thats going to beat either one of them.?
For me it doesnt matter who wins the election as long as they are Democrat i vote for the party not the individual...
How can you vote period, aren't you a Canadian? As for voting the party, it is pretty sad when people do vote strictly party line. Wouldn't you agree that is pretty narrow minded?
How can you vote period, aren't you a Canadian? As for voting the party, it is pretty sad when people do vote strictly party line. Wouldn't you agree that is pretty narrow minded?
I dont see voting party line as narrow minded, i believe in certain political ideolgies/principles that dont change depending on which face is running for elected office. As for being Canadian? i'm also American, its called dual citizenship.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
