Lakhota
Diamond Member
IF Hillary wants it, I have no doubt that she'll be the superstar in 2016. I'd love to see Hillary and Bill spend their golden years in the White House. Hillary would be younger than Reagan when he became president.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Hillary Clinton - and she probably will be in 2016 after Obama leaves the White House. I look forward to Bill roaming the halls once again.
She'll be 69, which is an age dis qualifier for liberals.
Anyone else?
Nope, just Hillary. She was cheated in 2008. I want her in the White House even if she's in a wheelchair.
I did a similar thread shortly after obama won, and some dems had plenty of air time to get popular.
I know obama has the nod and is running, but if it wasn't him;
Who would you like seeing up for President as a (D).
odd
Alan Grayson was the run away winner last time.
Hillary barely got a mention.
I'm thinking this is buyers remorse.
odd
Alan Grayson was the run away winner last time.
Hillary barely got a mention.
I'm thinking this is buyers remorse.
Link?
Nope, just Hillary. She was cheated in 2008. I want her in the White House even if she's in a wheelchair.
I think she would have done a much better job and not have kept the economy in such a terrible condition.
I didn't vote for Obama in 2008 - but I am in 2012.
She'll be 69, which is an age dis qualifier for liberals.
Anyone else?
Nope, just Hillary. She was cheated in 2008. I want her in the White House even if she's in a wheelchair.
It worked for our greatest President.
Lieberman, Zell, someone like them.
Willard could make a try as a democratic candidate after he loses.
Lieberman, Zell, someone like them.
Lieberman maybe, lots of baggage.
Zell?
How much do you know about Tom Hanks' politics? I know absolutely nothing about him. He doesn't seem like the activist type but more like the Obama let's-get-along type, which is exactly what the left needs no more of.[...]
For some reason, I don't see the downside of someone like Tom Hanks making a bid.
Thoughts?
I think Woody Harrelson is more like what is needed -- someone who is not afraid to toss a metaphorical brick. In order to get the right-wing power structure to budge we need to make trouble for them, so it stands to reason what we need are some radical troublemakers in high political office. Obama is the diametric opposite of that.
Hillary Clinton - and she probably will be in 2016 after Obama leaves the White House. I look forward to Bill roaming the halls once again.
Hillary Clinton - and she probably will be in 2016 after Obama leaves the White House. I look forward to Bill roaming the halls once again.
She'll be 69, which is an age dis qualifier for liberals.
Anyone else?
Nope, just Hillary. She was cheated in 2008. I want her in the White House even if she's in a wheelchair.
Lieberman, Zell, someone like them.
Lieberman maybe, lots of baggage.
Zell?
It has nothing to do with the convention or anything and it's a wild idea but lets look at it from outside of the box:
In 2016, there is a guy who will be turning 60 during that July. Prime time to be running for President. He hasn't been a politician before but has become more and more political as he has aged. He has solid liberal credentials; has broad popularity both in red as well as blue states. He would have no problem raising millions upon millions of dollars to finance the bid.
We'll be coming out of 8 years of Obama that followed 8 years of Bush. I support President Obama's re-election four square however I think we'll be $20 Trillion in Debt at that time with no end in sight; both parties have over spent incredible amounts of money; Presidents of both parties have signed every spending bill. It's a total sham so thinking outside the box would probably be not rejected out of hand.
For some reason, I don't see the downside of someone like Tom Hanks making a bid.
Thoughts?
How much do you know about Tom Hanks' politics? I know absolutely nothing about him. He doesn't seem like the activist type but more like the Obama let's-get-along type, which is exactly what the left needs no more of.[...]
For some reason, I don't see the downside of someone like Tom Hanks making a bid.
Thoughts?
I think Woody Harrelson is more like what is needed -- someone who is not afraid to toss a metaphorical brick. In order to get the right-wing power structure to budge we need to make trouble for them, so it stands to reason what we need are some radical troublemakers in high political office. Obama is the diametric opposite of that.
And Hanks just doesn't seem to have that kind of pepper in him.