Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-21-2016, 05:56 AM
 
Location: Georgia
3,987 posts, read 2,113,422 times
Reputation: 3111

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MetroWord View Post
Didn't you guys say the same about an Obama win? America is still great last time I checked.
It is still great, but not because of Obama. Because of him, we are moving in the opposite direction of greatness.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-21-2016, 05:58 AM
 
Location: Georgia
3,987 posts, read 2,113,422 times
Reputation: 3111
Quote:
Originally Posted by merv1225 View Post
Ridiculous. I'm old enough to remember hearing "A Nixon win in 1968 means doom for America" and then hearing the same thing about every successive candidate for president.

We're still here!
So is Bangladesh- being here does not mean we are doing well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2016, 05:59 AM
 
12,265 posts, read 6,475,781 times
Reputation: 9440
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryan85 View Post
It is still great, but not because of Obama. Because of him, we are moving in the opposite direction of greatness.
We were greater when we were losing 745,000 jobs a month and killing thousands of our own searching for wmds? Seriously?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2016, 06:00 AM
 
Location: In an indoor space
7,685 posts, read 6,198,631 times
Reputation: 5154
IMO: A Clinton win would usher in GOD ending this world as we would have failed GOD.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2016, 06:34 AM
 
Location: Florida
76,971 posts, read 47,651,295 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Clinton win in 2016 means GOP win in 2020
Probably.

Unfortunately it would also mean fou years of complete silliness and partisan witch-hunting from GOP Congress, so they might win the WH, but lose the Congress.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2016, 08:59 AM
 
Location: Georgia
3,987 posts, read 2,113,422 times
Reputation: 3111
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmagoo View Post
We were greater when we were losing 745,000 jobs a month and killing thousands of our own searching for wmds? Seriously?
We can all find statistics and spin them to support our position. I believe our country is on a fast track downhill. You are entitled to disagree.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2016, 03:18 PM
 
Location: Inyokern, California
111 posts, read 50,087 times
Reputation: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike View Post
You are only half right about Nixon.
The reason he shielded his people is only because he needed them to protect him from being revealed.
When Nixon didn't need someone, anyone was instantly disposable to him. Nixon threw everyone who was ever close to him under the bus sooner or later. By the end of his life, that was why he has so few friends left.

You probably wouldn't like most of her friends, but she has a lot of them. And they are not all women.

Clinton has done nothing criminal. And she's not 360 degrees in the opposite direction of Nixon, either.

Clinton's flaw is the same as Nixon's- an oversensitive need for privacy in a very public career that has lasted for decades. That's a great internal conflict in a profession where a hide as thick as an elephant's is increasingly a necessity. Clinton deals with hers a lot better than Nixon ever did.

For both, their sensitivity led them to do some truly great things, while lots of ire upon them at the same time.

Their greatest difference is their inner self confidence. Clinton does not have the same overwhelming self confidence her husband possesses, but she is very much more self confident than Nixon was.
Nixon was pathologically insecure, and that's what brought him down. His lack of self confidence caused such a strong need for control it led him to commit the crime that eventually brought him down.

As to only being concerned about herself... well, you are entitled to your beliefs, but millions of women will quickly disagree with you on that one. She is the strongest women's rights advocate America has ever nominated by far, and that's why she has commanded the female voters from the very first.

You need to study the Clinton's history...both of them. They leave a terrible trail every where they go.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top