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.
I'm pretty positive she will run. She's very popular among Dems and Republicans are scared of her. And she will win if you nominate a tea party candidate.
Don't think scared is the word......
Hillary would be no better for America, I think she'll make it even worse.
Not speaking for the person to whom you addressed that question,
I can state emphatically, with all honesty, that Obama's race played no role, whatsoever.
I would have enthusiastically voted against anyone of any color who shared his views.
Agreed, and that poster was speaking to me. Actually, if gmagoo has some time, they can go back and look at all my posts preaching unity.
And I wonder if gmagoo has ever imaginged that someone voted for Obama ONLY because of his race which would be just as bad as not voting for him based on his race.
It is far better to vote on someone's level of competence and since Obama's experience was next to nothing when he got elected and he has been nothing but a dire disaster since taking office, I am sticking to what I believe.
Oh yeah, Christie dominated that election against a complete unknown. Had it been a guy like Booker, the election might of turned out differently which is why Christie was so desperate to make sure Booker's election wasn't the same day as his.
Let's not rewrite history here. Yes. He held the elections on different days in order to not deflect from his own race against Buono. But remember, the dems BEGGED booker to run for Governor, but Booker declined because he knew he couldn't beat Christie. Senator is Booker's consolation prize.
2. I have few, if any, problems in my life (if I do, they do not seem to concern me much)
The next president certainly will not be able to blame Obama for the disaster he has left him/her, as such an acknowledgement of reality would be considered "racist" by today's standards. This has been part of the problem with Obama. Few, if any, in his own party will question or criticize his views (regardless of how idiotic they might be), as they are trapped in the box of political correctness (designed to deter opposition statements) which has prevented them from guiding the Emperor in any fashion. One does not question or alter the plans of the current president, as to do so would be "racist". Every liberal has been conditioned to know and accept that, thus the uncomfortable position that nearly every senate and congressional democrat is in- blindly passing Obamacare and failure to alter it in any way six weeks ago. As a result, they now OWN this disaster of a piece of legislation. There are no republican fingerprints on Obamacare at all.
So........................ the next POTUS, even if marginally competent, will look outstanding. I do wonder, however, if Obama has ruined the chances of any other potentional black presidential candidates for a generation. Not being able to question the policies or views of a POTUS can be very disasterous, as we are seeing now.
The U.S. economy is getting as bad as Europe at bouncing back from recessions and generating jobs, and a decrease in societal trust may be a big factor, according to a research paper presented today at the Brookings Institution.
The paper is called “Amerisclerosis? The Puzzle of Rising U.S. Unemployment Persistence,” and it’s by Olivier Coibion of the University of Texas at Austin and Yuriy Gorodnichenko and Dmitri Koustas of the University of California at Berkeley.
Amerisclerosis is the economic version of atherosclerosis, also known as hardening of the arteries—a disease that contributes to heart attacks and strokes. In the 1980s, economists coined the term Eurosclerosis to describe Europe’s malfunctioning jobs market. The U.S. is going the same direction, the authors say.
we know liberals hate white men, and you think it must be a woman, to "progress." however, you seem fail to acknowledge that black men don't really like women in general, and black women don't really like white women. so good luck getting the blacks to come out and vote for a woman. especially one who is in her mid 90's with brain damage.
Wow... stereotype much?
For the record, I'm a white woman in an ethnically diverse and predominantly left-leaning region - yet don't recall ever experiencing these generalizations of which you speak. I seriously have to wonder where you learn this crap.
Oh yeah, Christie dominated that election against a complete unknown. Had it been a guy like Booker, the election might of turned out differently which is why Christie was so desperate to make sure Booker's election wasn't the same day as his.
I'm pretty positive she will run. She's very popular among Dems and Republicans are scared of her. And she will win if you nominate a tea party candidate.
Outside of Christie, there is no chance at all the GOP nominee could win. CC would be an underdog vs HC, but he wouldn't be the cannon fodder any other Repub would be.
I'm surprised the OP looks forward with such glee to the next likely POTUS, Hillary Clinton.
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.
