Toast

[Jarhead]

and the only one that required her to show leadership skills was the 4 years as Sos.
And during those 4 years, she failed as a leader...by her own admittance for all intents and purposes....
paraphrased...
I did not know it was a bad idea to have lower level staffers that I hand picked to deny extra security to an embassy in the most volatile region in the world.
I did not know it was a bad idea to have an independent server seeing as someone may send me classified information.
I did not know something may be ultimately be deemed classified until it was labeled as classified.
I did not know it was a good idea to hire tech people around me that know...well...technology.

Wow, she should be easy to beat then.

So all you have is her resume of jobs....but nothing concrete to say why you support her.

Oh, you're asking me a question to why I support her. After reading all of your comments, I doubt she knows how to feed or clothe herself.

As long as she will appoint center-left jurists to the high court, I'll support her. If you were to look at my reasons for supporting Obama in 2012, it was for the same reasons. Both parties are out to lunch fiscally. Both are needlessly partisan. Both are equally beholden to special interests.

Anyone telling you that they are different are telling you a story.

That's a diversion. I strictly showed you how she failed as a leader...I did not say she is a failure as a mother, a wife (oops) or even as a senator. to the contrary, I liked her as my Senator.

I said she was given an opportunity to show her abilities as a leader and she failed. Not all are able to be good leaders...but can still be outstanding individuals and major contributors to society.

Anyone currently running on the democratic ticket will choose center left jurists. Why are you supporting Hillary...a proven failure as a LEADER? Why not someone who has not yet proven to be a poor leader?

You still have not explained that to me...or anyone.

 

[Claudette]

the democrats are behind Hillary? Why? Lets see....

She required an independent review board to advise her that she should not allow lower level state department employees to make unilateral decisions as it pertains to embassy security in the most volatile region in the world. That's a leader?

As secretary of state she apparently did not recognize what will be deemed as classified information before it was deemed classified. That is someone,as President, you want to determine what should be classified information ?

She allowed a high level state department employee (herself) to use an independent server from the government server knowing the possibility existed that someone would send that person classified and or "top secret" information. That is the person you want to be make\ing very sensitive decisions as it pertains national security?

She nor any of the people she hand picked were aware that you can have more than one email address on any handheld device...something 10 years olds know. That is the person you want hand picking cabinet members?

Now, sure, many other candidates may not have the credentials to be president. Some of them we just don't know....others have failures in their background so we do know.

But you don't see the above as failures that prove she is not worthy of the presidency of the United States?

Really?

Shit ingot, otherwise known as Candy Corn, is a supporter of Hilbat and doesn't care that the woman isn't competent to be POTUS.

She will support her to the bitter end and doesn't want to hear about how incompetent the woman is or how she failed in every position she's ever held. Shit Ingot doesn't care.

In fact she will tell you Hilbat's campaign is kicking ass.

Putting Candycorn aside.......I just don't get it.

All I hear about is Hillary's leadership skills...

But when we look at her experience as a leader we have "I didn't know about the request for more security" and "in retrospect, it was a bad idea" and "How can I know something WILL be deemed classified before it is"...

I mean.....she keeps admitting she was not a good leader....yet being a good leader seems to be her selling point.

I don't get it.

It's not hard JH. She wants to be POTUS and doesn't give a shit that she's not qualified. She's never been a leader but she thinks she can do the job. The presidency isn't the place to learn how to be a leader. You must be a leader to be POTUS.

How folks can support her knowing she's not leader is beyond me. The woman has proven time and time again that she's isn't a leader and has no clue how to be one. She also doesn't seem to have a lick of common sense.

Yet people like CC and others will support her no matter what.

8 years FLOTUS
6+ years as Senator
4 Years as Sec of State.

Rubio was right; she is the most qualified person running. As for being "beyond you", we can add hygiene to that list.

LMAO once again. You're a comedy routine Shit Ingot. You'd be a hit on SNL.

Hilbat isn't qualified no matter what Rubio has to say. Oh and since when do you believe anything a Rep has to say??

Oh and now you're in to personal Hygiene?? WOW whatever floats your stinking boat.

Asswipe.

 

[candycorn]

Oh look a troll with no substance to speak of of their own has to dig up old threads to come up with something to talk about.

Is anyone surprised?

.
332-206.
Care to talk about that?

I don't have serious discussions with dumbass trolls. I had to unignore the ignored just to figure out who was bumping the old irrelevant thread.
Not the least bit surprised it was a loser like you.
Still have that SLUT as your avatar I see.

Gee, and you're complaining about Donald Trump destroying the GOP. Listen to yourself...calling a woman a "slut" whom you'll never meet, never will meet, and will never meet anyone who has met her.

IF you want to see why the GOP is circling the drain, you and Claudette should look in the mirror. You're both idiots.

She is not a woman. She is a leech on society who needs you & me to pay for her sexual encounters because she has them so often she can't afford them herself.

No surprise that you hide behind the pussy coward.

I've explained how wrong you are a number of times. You're simply too ignorant to understand it and too republican to admit you're wrong.

"She's not a woman"....oh; okay.

 

[candycorn]

and the only one that required her to show leadership skills was the 4 years as Sos.
And during those 4 years, she failed as a leader...by her own admittance for all intents and purposes....
paraphrased...
I did not know it was a bad idea to have lower level staffers that I hand picked to deny extra security to an embassy in the most volatile region in the world.
I did not know it was a bad idea to have an independent server seeing as someone may send me classified information.
I did not know something may be ultimately be deemed classified until it was labeled as classified.
I did not know it was a good idea to hire tech people around me that know...well...technology.

Wow, she should be easy to beat then.

So all you have is her resume of jobs....but nothing concrete to say why you support her.

Oh, you're asking me a question to why I support her. After reading all of your comments, I doubt she knows how to feed or clothe herself.

As long as she will appoint center-left jurists to the high court, I'll support her. If you were to look at my reasons for supporting Obama in 2012, it was for the same reasons. Both parties are out to lunch fiscally. Both are needlessly partisan. Both are equally beholden to special interests.

Anyone telling you that they are different are telling you a story.

That's a diversion. I strictly showed you how she failed as a leader...I did not say she is a failure as a mother, a wife (oops) or even as a senator. to the contrary, I liked her as my Senator.

I said she was given an opportunity to show her abilities as a leader and she failed. Not all are able to be good leaders...but can still be outstanding individuals and major contributors to society.

Anyone currently running on the democratic ticket will choose center left jurists. Why are you supporting Hillary...a proven failure as a LEADER? Why not someone who has not yet proven to be a poor leader?

You still have not explained that to me...or anyone.

Because she will win. Bernie won't. O'Malley won't. Webb won't. And Biden likely would not.

As for being a leader; can you point to any SoS who distinguished themselves as a great leader and how they did that? Try to limit it to the last 30 years or so if you can....please.

 

[bodecea]

the democrats are behind Hillary? Why? Lets see....

She required an independent review board to advise her that she should not allow lower level state department employees to make unilateral decisions as it pertains to embassy security in the most volatile region in the world. That's a leader?

As secretary of state she apparently did not recognize what will be deemed as classified information before it was deemed classified. That is someone,as President, you want to determine what should be classified information ?

She allowed a high level state department employee (herself) to use an independent server from the government server knowing the possibility existed that someone would send that person classified and or "top secret" information. That is the person you want to be make\ing very sensitive decisions as it pertains national security?

She nor any of the people she hand picked were aware that you can have more than one email address on any handheld device...something 10 years olds know. That is the person you want hand picking cabinet members?

Now, sure, many other candidates may not have the credentials to be president. Some of them we just don't know....others have failures in their background so we do know.

But you don't see the above as failures that prove she is not worthy of the presidency of the United States?

Really?

Shit ingot, otherwise known as Candy Corn, is a supporter of Hilbat and doesn't care that the woman isn't competent to be POTUS.

She will support her to the bitter end and doesn't want to hear about how incompetent the woman is or how she failed in every position she's ever held. Shit Ingot doesn't care.

In fact she will tell you Hilbat's campaign is kicking ass.

Putting Candycorn aside.......I just don't get it.

All I hear about is Hillary's leadership skills...

But when we look at her experience as a leader we have "I didn't know about the request for more security" and "in retrospect, it was a bad idea" and "How can I know something WILL be deemed classified before it is"...

I mean.....she keeps admitting she was not a good leader....yet being a good leader seems to be her selling point.

I don't get it.

It's not hard JH. She wants to be POTUS and doesn't give a shit that she's not qualified. She's never been a leader but she thinks she can do the job. The presidency isn't the place to learn how to be a leader. You must be a leader to be POTUS.

How folks can support her knowing she's not leader is beyond me. The woman has proven time and time again that she's isn't a leader and has no clue how to be one. She also doesn't seem to have a lick of common sense.

Yet people like CC and others will support her no matter what.

We keep hearing from RWrs that President Obama wasn't qualified...that Hillary Clinton isn't qualified.

OK...who IS qualified and what is it that makes them qualified while President Obama and Secretary Clinton are not?

 

[candycorn]

the democrats are behind Hillary? Why? Lets see....

She required an independent review board to advise her that she should not allow lower level state department employees to make unilateral decisions as it pertains to embassy security in the most volatile region in the world. That's a leader?

As secretary of state she apparently did not recognize what will be deemed as classified information before it was deemed classified. That is someone,as President, you want to determine what should be classified information ?

She allowed a high level state department employee (herself) to use an independent server from the government server knowing the possibility existed that someone would send that person classified and or "top secret" information. That is the person you want to be make\ing very sensitive decisions as it pertains national security?

She nor any of the people she hand picked were aware that you can have more than one email address on any handheld device...something 10 years olds know. That is the person you want hand picking cabinet members?

Now, sure, many other candidates may not have the credentials to be president. Some of them we just don't know....others have failures in their background so we do know.

But you don't see the above as failures that prove she is not worthy of the presidency of the United States?

Really?

Shit ingot, otherwise known as Candy Corn, is a supporter of Hilbat and doesn't care that the woman isn't competent to be POTUS.

She will support her to the bitter end and doesn't want to hear about how incompetent the woman is or how she failed in every position she's ever held. Shit Ingot doesn't care.

In fact she will tell you Hilbat's campaign is kicking ass.

Putting Candycorn aside.......I just don't get it.

All I hear about is Hillary's leadership skills...

But when we look at her experience as a leader we have "I didn't know about the request for more security" and "in retrospect, it was a bad idea" and "How can I know something WILL be deemed classified before it is"...

I mean.....she keeps admitting she was not a good leader....yet being a good leader seems to be her selling point.

I don't get it.

It's not hard JH. She wants to be POTUS and doesn't give a shit that she's not qualified. She's never been a leader but she thinks she can do the job. The presidency isn't the place to learn how to be a leader. You must be a leader to be POTUS.

How folks can support her knowing she's not leader is beyond me. The woman has proven time and time again that she's isn't a leader and has no clue how to be one. She also doesn't seem to have a lick of common sense.

Yet people like CC and others will support her no matter what.

8 years FLOTUS
6+ years as Senator
4 Years as Sec of State.

Rubio was right; she is the most qualified person running. As for being "beyond you", we can add hygiene to that list.

LMAO once again. You're a comedy routine Shit Ingot. You'd be a hit on SNL.

Hilbat isn't qualified no matter what Rubio has to say. Oh and since when do you believe anything a Rep has to say??

Oh and now you're in to personal Hygiene?? WOW whatever floats your stinking boat.

Asswipe.

Ass wiping is something you can no longer do from what I hear...you're need 9 foot arms. Rubio also voted for her as SoS I believe. He's right, she's superior to anyone running.

Just telling you the truth. Please keep melting down. Its fun to watch.

 

[bodecea]

Oh look a troll with no substance to speak of of their own has to dig up old threads to come up with something to talk about.

Is anyone surprised?

.
332-206.
Care to talk about that?

I don't have serious discussions with dumbass trolls. I had to unignore the ignored just to figure out who was bumping the old irrelevant thread.
Not the least bit surprised it was a loser like you.
Still have that SLUT as your avatar I see.

Gee, and you're complaining about Donald Trump destroying the GOP. Listen to yourself...calling a woman a "slut" whom you'll never meet, never will meet, and will never meet anyone who has met her.

IF you want to see why the GOP is circling the drain, you and Claudette should look in the mirror. You're both idiots.

She is not a woman. She is a leech on society who needs you & me to pay for her sexual encounters because she has them so often she can't afford them herself.

No surprise that you hide behind the pussy coward.

I've explained how wrong you are a number of times. You're simply too ignorant to understand it and too republican to admit you're wrong.

"She's not a woman"....oh; okay.

No RW war on women here.

 

[candycorn]

Oh and my problem with Trump goes much deeper than your shallow perception can perceive.

Hack

That you have deep dark hidden problems is no secret. Remember after Obama handed you your ass in the last election, you came on (to your credit) and said you must reach out to minorities and women.

And here you are calling total strangers "sluts". It would be funny if it were not so sad.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

.
332-206.
Care to talk about that?

I don't have serious discussions with dumbass trolls. I had to unignore the ignored just to figure out who was bumping the old irrelevant thread.
Not the least bit surprised it was a loser like you.
Still have that SLUT as your avatar I see.

Gee, and you're complaining about Donald Trump destroying the GOP. Listen to yourself...calling a woman a "slut" whom you'll never meet, never will meet, and will never meet anyone who has met her.

IF you want to see why the GOP is circling the drain, you and Claudette should look in the mirror. You're both idiots.

She is not a woman. She is a leech on society who needs you & me to pay for her sexual encounters because she has them so often she can't afford them herself.

No surprise that you hide behind the pussy coward.

I've explained how wrong you are a number of times. You're simply too ignorant to understand it and too republican to admit you're wrong.

"She's not a woman"....oh; okay.

No RW war on women here.

Go eat some pussy & shut up. It's not like you understand the proper roles of man and woman anyhow

 

[candycorn]

.
332-206.
Care to talk about that?

I don't have serious discussions with dumbass trolls. I had to unignore the ignored just to figure out who was bumping the old irrelevant thread.
Not the least bit surprised it was a loser like you.
Still have that SLUT as your avatar I see.

Gee, and you're complaining about Donald Trump destroying the GOP. Listen to yourself...calling a woman a "slut" whom you'll never meet, never will meet, and will never meet anyone who has met her.

IF you want to see why the GOP is circling the drain, you and Claudette should look in the mirror. You're both idiots.

She is not a woman. She is a leech on society who needs you & me to pay for her sexual encounters because she has them so often she can't afford them herself.

No surprise that you hide behind the pussy coward.

I've explained how wrong you are a number of times. You're simply too ignorant to understand it and too republican to admit you're wrong.

"She's not a woman"....oh; okay.

No RW war on women here.

It's second nature to call women names. The only difference between rap stars and the GOP is the jewelry.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Oh and my problem with Trump goes much deeper than your shallow perception can perceive.

Hack

That you have deep dark hidden problems is no secret. Remember after Obama handed you your ass in the last election, you came on (to your credit) and said you must reach out to minorities and women.

And here you are calling total strangers "sluts". It would be funny if it were not so sad.

She is not a total stranger. She fucking stood before my congressman and asked him to reach into my pockets to pay for her sexual promiscuity.

Fuck her & fuck you

 

[Jarhead]

the democrats are behind Hillary? Why? Lets see....

She required an independent review board to advise her that she should not allow lower level state department employees to make unilateral decisions as it pertains to embassy security in the most volatile region in the world. That's a leader?

As secretary of state she apparently did not recognize what will be deemed as classified information before it was deemed classified. That is someone,as President, you want to determine what should be classified information ?

She allowed a high level state department employee (herself) to use an independent server from the government server knowing the possibility existed that someone would send that person classified and or "top secret" information. That is the person you want to be make\ing very sensitive decisions as it pertains national security?

She nor any of the people she hand picked were aware that you can have more than one email address on any handheld device...something 10 years olds know. That is the person you want hand picking cabinet members?

Now, sure, many other candidates may not have the credentials to be president. Some of them we just don't know....others have failures in their background so we do know.

But you don't see the above as failures that prove she is not worthy of the presidency of the United States?

Really?

Shit ingot, otherwise known as Candy Corn, is a supporter of Hilbat and doesn't care that the woman isn't competent to be POTUS.

She will support her to the bitter end and doesn't want to hear about how incompetent the woman is or how she failed in every position she's ever held. Shit Ingot doesn't care.

In fact she will tell you Hilbat's campaign is kicking ass.

Putting Candycorn aside.......I just don't get it.

All I hear about is Hillary's leadership skills...

But when we look at her experience as a leader we have "I didn't know about the request for more security" and "in retrospect, it was a bad idea" and "How can I know something WILL be deemed classified before it is"...

I mean.....she keeps admitting she was not a good leader....yet being a good leader seems to be her selling point.

I don't get it.

It's not hard JH. She wants to be POTUS and doesn't give a shit that she's not qualified. She's never been a leader but she thinks she can do the job. The presidency isn't the place to learn how to be a leader. You must be a leader to be POTUS.

How folks can support her knowing she's not leader is beyond me. The woman has proven time and time again that she's isn't a leader and has no clue how to be one. She also doesn't seem to have a lick of common sense.

Yet people like CC and others will support her no matter what.

We keep hearing from RWrs that President Obama wasn't qualified...that Hillary Clinton isn't qualified.

OK...who IS qualified and what is it that makes them qualified while President Obama and Secretary Clinton are not?

I said Obama was not qualified because he had yet to demonstrate leadership skills. Leadership skills, more than anything else, is key to a successful presidency. If you can not lead your staff, your cabinet, your people around you, you will fail.

I reviewed then senator Obama's resume. He had never led in a situation where finances and accountability were key. He never authored legislation that received bi partisan support. He never chaired a major committee. His only private sector job was with a law firm where, after 3 years, he was still not promoted to junior partner status and was still doing what he was originally hired to do....contract review.

Hillary Clinton had the chance to show us her leadership skills and as I laid out in an earlier post, she failed at the leadership part. She made some very questionable decisions that she, herself, admits were wrong.

As for Republican candidates....

Rubio was considered by BOTH sides of the aisle as an outstanding speaker of the House in Florida where he passed a multitude of bi partisan legislations....that takes great leadership skills.

Firorina, although very articulate and intelligent (like Obama), failed as a leader at HP...thus why she is off my list.

Jeb Bush did an outstanding job working with a spilt state as Governor...he showed great leadership skills. His name is his worst enemy.

Kasich has proven to be a great leader....as has Walker who did not kick scream and cry when the opposition tried to run him out of town.

Sorry...Hillary is not a great leader. She proved that to all of us. Yo9u can not cite a single thing she did as SoS that proved she was a great leader...I can (and have) cited several proving she wasn't.

 

[candycorn]

Oh and my problem with Trump goes much deeper than your shallow perception can perceive.

Hack

That you have deep dark hidden problems is no secret. Remember after Obama handed you your ass in the last election, you came on (to your credit) and said you must reach out to minorities and women.

And here you are calling total strangers "sluts". It would be funny if it were not so sad.

She is not a total stranger. She fucking stood before my congressman and asked him to reach into my pockets to pay for her sexual promiscuity.

Fuck her & fuck you

Surely you can quote her saying that. Oh wait, no you can't. Your problem (of many) is that you're simply an idiot. Seriously. No smack there. You're dumb. At no point did Sandra Fluke ask you or anyone else to pay for her contraceptives. She asked that they be made available on insurance plans (that she paid for).

Those are the facts and they are not in dispute expect from people who are willfully ignorant such as yourself. Look it up if you do not believe me.

What is most idiotic about you(and it's quite a menu) is that contraceptives have many uses--you DO know that right? I'm guessing not. Hormonal imbalance is a real condition and these products can help correct that. I'm not sure what she uses her contraceptives that she pays for through her insurance for but, of course, your contention is that it is for sex and--gee a woman having sex--makes her a slut in your words.

Your congressman is probably just as dumb as you are.

 

[candycorn]

the democrats are behind Hillary? Why? Lets see....

She required an independent review board to advise her that she should not allow lower level state department employees to make unilateral decisions as it pertains to embassy security in the most volatile region in the world. That's a leader?

As secretary of state she apparently did not recognize what will be deemed as classified information before it was deemed classified. That is someone,as President, you want to determine what should be classified information ?

She allowed a high level state department employee (herself) to use an independent server from the government server knowing the possibility existed that someone would send that person classified and or "top secret" information. That is the person you want to be make\ing very sensitive decisions as it pertains national security?

She nor any of the people she hand picked were aware that you can have more than one email address on any handheld device...something 10 years olds know. That is the person you want hand picking cabinet members?

Now, sure, many other candidates may not have the credentials to be president. Some of them we just don't know....others have failures in their background so we do know.

But you don't see the above as failures that prove she is not worthy of the presidency of the United States?

Really?

Shit ingot, otherwise known as Candy Corn, is a supporter of Hilbat and doesn't care that the woman isn't competent to be POTUS.

She will support her to the bitter end and doesn't want to hear about how incompetent the woman is or how she failed in every position she's ever held. Shit Ingot doesn't care.

In fact she will tell you Hilbat's campaign is kicking ass.

Putting Candycorn aside.......I just don't get it.

All I hear about is Hillary's leadership skills...

But when we look at her experience as a leader we have "I didn't know about the request for more security" and "in retrospect, it was a bad idea" and "How can I know something WILL be deemed classified before it is"...

I mean.....she keeps admitting she was not a good leader....yet being a good leader seems to be her selling point.

I don't get it.

It's not hard JH. She wants to be POTUS and doesn't give a shit that she's not qualified. She's never been a leader but she thinks she can do the job. The presidency isn't the place to learn how to be a leader. You must be a leader to be POTUS.

How folks can support her knowing she's not leader is beyond me. The woman has proven time and time again that she's isn't a leader and has no clue how to be one. She also doesn't seem to have a lick of common sense.

Yet people like CC and others will support her no matter what.

We keep hearing from RWrs that President Obama wasn't qualified...that Hillary Clinton isn't qualified.

OK...who IS qualified and what is it that makes them qualified while President Obama and Secretary Clinton are not?

I said Obama was not qualified because he had yet to demonstrate leadership skills. Leadership skills, more than anything else, is key to a successful presidency. If you can not lead your staff, your cabinet, your people around you, you will fail.

I reviewed then senator Obama's resume. He had never led in a situation where finances and accountability were key. He never authored legislation that received bi partisan support. He never chaired a major committee. His only private sector job was with a law firm where, after 3 years, he was still not promoted to junior partner status and was still doing what he was originally hired to do....contract review.

Hillary Clinton had the chance to show us her leadership skills and as I laid out in an earlier post, she failed at the leadership part. She made some very questionable decisions that she, herself, admits were wrong.

As for Republican candidates....

Rubio was considered by BOTH sides of the aisle as an outstanding speaker of the House in Florida where he passed a multitude of bi partisan legislations....that takes great leadership skills.

Firorina, although very articulate and intelligent (like Obama), failed as a leader at HP...thus why she is off my list.

Jeb Bush did an outstanding job working with a spilt state as Governor...he showed great leadership skills. His name is his worst enemy.

Kasich has proven to be a great leader....as has Walker who did not kick scream and cry when the opposition tried to run him out of town.

Sorry...Hillary is not a great leader. She proved that to all of us. Yo9u can not cite a single thing she did as SoS that proved she was a great leader...I can (and have) cited several proving she wasn't.

Kasich and walker are "great" leaders. Oh...okay.

Well, you vote for Kasich and Walker and I'll (and millions more) will vote for Hillary. Good luck. You'll need it.

 

[Jarhead]

and the only one that required her to show leadership skills was the 4 years as Sos.
And during those 4 years, she failed as a leader...by her own admittance for all intents and purposes....
paraphrased...
I did not know it was a bad idea to have lower level staffers that I hand picked to deny extra security to an embassy in the most volatile region in the world.
I did not know it was a bad idea to have an independent server seeing as someone may send me classified information.
I did not know something may be ultimately be deemed classified until it was labeled as classified.
I did not know it was a good idea to hire tech people around me that know...well...technology.

Wow, she should be easy to beat then.

So all you have is her resume of jobs....but nothing concrete to say why you support her.

Oh, you're asking me a question to why I support her. After reading all of your comments, I doubt she knows how to feed or clothe herself.

As long as she will appoint center-left jurists to the high court, I'll support her. If you were to look at my reasons for supporting Obama in 2012, it was for the same reasons. Both parties are out to lunch fiscally. Both are needlessly partisan. Both are equally beholden to special interests.

Anyone telling you that they are different are telling you a story.

That's a diversion. I strictly showed you how she failed as a leader...I did not say she is a failure as a mother, a wife (oops) or even as a senator. to the contrary, I liked her as my Senator.

I said she was given an opportunity to show her abilities as a leader and she failed. Not all are able to be good leaders...but can still be outstanding individuals and major contributors to society.

Anyone currently running on the democratic ticket will choose center left jurists. Why are you supporting Hillary...a proven failure as a LEADER? Why not someone who has not yet proven to be a poor leader?

You still have not explained that to me...or anyone.

Because she will win. Bernie won't. O'Malley won't. Webb won't. And Biden likely would not.

As for being a leader; can you point to any SoS who distinguished themselves as a great leader and how they did that? Try to limit it to the last 30 years or so if you can....please.

Your question should be...

What other SoS also proved to be a poor leader.

This is a discussion about how she made serious leadership errors as SoS. A SoS has two responsibilities (in a nutshell)....one is to represent the president of the united states as it pertains to foreign affairs. That does not require leadership skills....and nowhere did I say she failed at it.

The other is to LEAD the department of state....that is where she failed. Too much happened due to her poor decision making as the leader of the department.

As for your reason why Hillary over the others...I respect that answer.

 

[Mac1958]

November 2012 really was amazing.

The GOP had so convinced themselves that they were going to win going away that they damn near had me convinced too.

.

 

[Jarhead]

Shit ingot, otherwise known as Candy Corn, is a supporter of Hilbat and doesn't care that the woman isn't competent to be POTUS.

She will support her to the bitter end and doesn't want to hear about how incompetent the woman is or how she failed in every position she's ever held. Shit Ingot doesn't care.

In fact she will tell you Hilbat's campaign is kicking ass.

Putting Candycorn aside.......I just don't get it.

All I hear about is Hillary's leadership skills...

But when we look at her experience as a leader we have "I didn't know about the request for more security" and "in retrospect, it was a bad idea" and "How can I know something WILL be deemed classified before it is"...

I mean.....she keeps admitting she was not a good leader....yet being a good leader seems to be her selling point.

I don't get it.

It's not hard JH. She wants to be POTUS and doesn't give a shit that she's not qualified. She's never been a leader but she thinks she can do the job. The presidency isn't the place to learn how to be a leader. You must be a leader to be POTUS.

How folks can support her knowing she's not leader is beyond me. The woman has proven time and time again that she's isn't a leader and has no clue how to be one. She also doesn't seem to have a lick of common sense.

Yet people like CC and others will support her no matter what.

We keep hearing from RWrs that President Obama wasn't qualified...that Hillary Clinton isn't qualified.

OK...who IS qualified and what is it that makes them qualified while President Obama and Secretary Clinton are not?

I said Obama was not qualified because he had yet to demonstrate leadership skills. Leadership skills, more than anything else, is key to a successful presidency. If you can not lead your staff, your cabinet, your people around you, you will fail.

I reviewed then senator Obama's resume. He had never led in a situation where finances and accountability were key. He never authored legislation that received bi partisan support. He never chaired a major committee. His only private sector job was with a law firm where, after 3 years, he was still not promoted to junior partner status and was still doing what he was originally hired to do....contract review.

Hillary Clinton had the chance to show us her leadership skills and as I laid out in an earlier post, she failed at the leadership part. She made some very questionable decisions that she, herself, admits were wrong.

As for Republican candidates....

Rubio was considered by BOTH sides of the aisle as an outstanding speaker of the House in Florida where he passed a multitude of bi partisan legislations....that takes great leadership skills.

Firorina, although very articulate and intelligent (like Obama), failed as a leader at HP...thus why she is off my list.

Jeb Bush did an outstanding job working with a spilt state as Governor...he showed great leadership skills. His name is his worst enemy.

Kasich has proven to be a great leader....as has Walker who did not kick scream and cry when the opposition tried to run him out of town.

Sorry...Hillary is not a great leader. She proved that to all of us. Yo9u can not cite a single thing she did as SoS that proved she was a great leader...I can (and have) cited several proving she wasn't.

Kasich and walker are "great" leaders. Oh...okay.

Well, you vote for Kasich and Walker and I'll (and millions more) will vote for Hillary. Good luck. You'll need it.

Still wont address her lack of leadership skills.

Wonder why that is.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Shit ingot, otherwise known as Candy Corn, is a supporter of Hilbat and doesn't care that the woman isn't competent to be POTUS.

She will support her to the bitter end and doesn't want to hear about how incompetent the woman is or how she failed in every position she's ever held. Shit Ingot doesn't care.

In fact she will tell you Hilbat's campaign is kicking ass.

Putting Candycorn aside.......I just don't get it.

All I hear about is Hillary's leadership skills...

But when we look at her experience as a leader we have "I didn't know about the request for more security" and "in retrospect, it was a bad idea" and "How can I know something WILL be deemed classified before it is"...

I mean.....she keeps admitting she was not a good leader....yet being a good leader seems to be her selling point.

I don't get it.

It's not hard JH. She wants to be POTUS and doesn't give a shit that she's not qualified. She's never been a leader but she thinks she can do the job. The presidency isn't the place to learn how to be a leader. You must be a leader to be POTUS.

How folks can support her knowing she's not leader is beyond me. The woman has proven time and time again that she's isn't a leader and has no clue how to be one. She also doesn't seem to have a lick of common sense.

Yet people like CC and others will support her no matter what.

We keep hearing from RWrs that President Obama wasn't qualified...that Hillary Clinton isn't qualified.

OK...who IS qualified and what is it that makes them qualified while President Obama and Secretary Clinton are not?

I said Obama was not qualified because he had yet to demonstrate leadership skills. Leadership skills, more than anything else, is key to a successful presidency. If you can not lead your staff, your cabinet, your people around you, you will fail.

I reviewed then senator Obama's resume. He had never led in a situation where finances and accountability were key. He never authored legislation that received bi partisan support. He never chaired a major committee. His only private sector job was with a law firm where, after 3 years, he was still not promoted to junior partner status and was still doing what he was originally hired to do....contract review.

Hillary Clinton had the chance to show us her leadership skills and as I laid out in an earlier post, she failed at the leadership part. She made some very questionable decisions that she, herself, admits were wrong.

As for Republican candidates....

Rubio was considered by BOTH sides of the aisle as an outstanding speaker of the House in Florida where he passed a multitude of bi partisan legislations....that takes great leadership skills.

Firorina, although very articulate and intelligent (like Obama), failed as a leader at HP...thus why she is off my list.

Jeb Bush did an outstanding job working with a spilt state as Governor...he showed great leadership skills. His name is his worst enemy.

Kasich has proven to be a great leader....as has Walker who did not kick scream and cry when the opposition tried to run him out of town.

Sorry...Hillary is not a great leader. She proved that to all of us. Yo9u can not cite a single thing she did as SoS that proved she was a great leader...I can (and have) cited several proving she wasn't.

Kasich and walker are "great" leaders. Oh...okay.

Well, you vote for Kasich and Walker and I'll (and millions more) will vote for Hillary. Good luck. You'll need it.

Poll Bernie Sanders surges ahead of Hillary Clinton in N.H. 44-37 Boston Herald

 

[candycorn]

and the only one that required her to show leadership skills was the 4 years as Sos.
And during those 4 years, she failed as a leader...by her own admittance for all intents and purposes....
paraphrased...
I did not know it was a bad idea to have lower level staffers that I hand picked to deny extra security to an embassy in the most volatile region in the world.
I did not know it was a bad idea to have an independent server seeing as someone may send me classified information.
I did not know something may be ultimately be deemed classified until it was labeled as classified.
I did not know it was a good idea to hire tech people around me that know...well...technology.

Wow, she should be easy to beat then.

So all you have is her resume of jobs....but nothing concrete to say why you support her.

Oh, you're asking me a question to why I support her. After reading all of your comments, I doubt she knows how to feed or clothe herself.

As long as she will appoint center-left jurists to the high court, I'll support her. If you were to look at my reasons for supporting Obama in 2012, it was for the same reasons. Both parties are out to lunch fiscally. Both are needlessly partisan. Both are equally beholden to special interests.

Anyone telling you that they are different are telling you a story.

That's a diversion. I strictly showed you how she failed as a leader...I did not say she is a failure as a mother, a wife (oops) or even as a senator. to the contrary, I liked her as my Senator.

I said she was given an opportunity to show her abilities as a leader and she failed. Not all are able to be good leaders...but can still be outstanding individuals and major contributors to society.

Anyone currently running on the democratic ticket will choose center left jurists. Why are you supporting Hillary...a proven failure as a LEADER? Why not someone who has not yet proven to be a poor leader?

You still have not explained that to me...or anyone.

Because she will win. Bernie won't. O'Malley won't. Webb won't. And Biden likely would not.

As for being a leader; can you point to any SoS who distinguished themselves as a great leader and how they did that? Try to limit it to the last 30 years or so if you can....please.

Your question should be...

What other SoS also proved to be a poor leader.

This is a discussion about how she made serious leadership errors as SoS. A SoS has two responsibilities (in a nutshell)....one is to represent the president of the united states as it pertains to foreign affairs. That does not require leadership skills....and nowhere did I say she failed at it.

The other is to LEAD the department of state....that is where she failed. Too much happened due to her poor decision making as the leader of the department.

As for your reason why Hillary over the others...I respect that answer.

No, I'm happy with my question. The one you can't answer.

What you're doing is holding her to a higher standard because you support her opposition. So you're demanding great leadership out of a secretary position which is mainly a management position. She had 34,000 employees under her. I'm sure she gets zero credit for that...right?

As for her leadership of the State Department....I'm happy with her performance as SoS. We had a lot of fence mending to do after Bush. I'm sure she'll take that experience with her into the Oval Office.

 

[bodecea]

I don't have serious discussions with dumbass trolls. I had to unignore the ignored just to figure out who was bumping the old irrelevant thread.
Not the least bit surprised it was a loser like you.
Still have that SLUT as your avatar I see.

Gee, and you're complaining about Donald Trump destroying the GOP. Listen to yourself...calling a woman a "slut" whom you'll never meet, never will meet, and will never meet anyone who has met her.

IF you want to see why the GOP is circling the drain, you and Claudette should look in the mirror. You're both idiots.

She is not a woman. She is a leech on society who needs you & me to pay for her sexual encounters because she has them so often she can't afford them herself.

No surprise that you hide behind the pussy coward.

I've explained how wrong you are a number of times. You're simply too ignorant to understand it and too republican to admit you're wrong.

"She's not a woman"....oh; okay.

No RW war on women here.

Go eat some pussy & shut up. It's not like you understand the proper roles of man and woman anyhow

No RW war on women here.