Why do the Dems have only ONE candidate atm?

[Scorpion]

Any of them have baggage like Rasputin Jarrett is off the list.

 

[bripat9643]

Who besides Shrillary will be running? I thought this was a the Party of the "big tent"? Why are they running the same rehashed white, rich woman who has been in politics for 30 years? No new blood? No young blood? No fresh ideas? What gives? The cons have at least 10 serious candidates.

The Clintons threatened to kill any Dim who said they were going to run against Hillary.

 

[BULLDOG]

Who besides Shrillary will be running? I thought this was a the Party of the "big tent"? Why are they running the same rehashed white, rich woman who has been in politics for 30 years? No new blood? No young blood? No fresh ideas? What gives? The cons have at least 10 serious candidates.

The Clintons threatened to kill any Dim who said they were going to run against Hillary.

That's it. Crank up the crazy and rip off the knob.

 

[BULLDOG]

Who besides Shrillary will be running? I thought this was a the Party of the "big tent"? Why are they running the same rehashed white, rich woman who has been in politics for 30 years? No new blood? No young blood? No fresh ideas? What gives? The cons have at least 10 serious candidates.

At least 10 seriously flawed candidates.

 

[Pedro de San Patricio]

They don't need another. Hillary's already been chosen by the people whose votes matter. We're simply waiting for the election as a meaningless formality.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Who besides Shrillary will be running? I thought this was a the Party of the "big tent"? Why are they running the same rehashed white, rich woman who has been in politics for 30 years? No new blood? No young blood? No fresh ideas? What gives? The cons have at least 10 serious candidates.

Big government is what Dems are all about at all levels. Nobody dares to step out of line in that party.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Mrs Bill Clinton is a curious mixture of Pat Nixon and H.R. Haldeman.
Any democrat over 55 who votes for her is a hypocrite deluxe. Those under 55 who vote for her should have their voting privileges revoked for being so ignorant.

 

[The Rabbi]

Remember when Dems bashed the GOP as the party of old white guys? So the Democrat field consists of old white men and a woman. The GOP is filled with younger whties and Hispanics.
Looks like the GOP is the real party of diversity. The Dems are the sham party of lies.

 

[Mac1958]

Who besides Shrillary will be running? I thought this was a the Party of the "big tent"? Why are they running the same rehashed white, rich woman who has been in politics for 30 years? No new blood? No young blood? No fresh ideas? What gives? The cons have at least 10 serious candidates.

If she wins, it won't matter how many candidates they had.

.

 

[The Rabbi]

Who besides Shrillary will be running? I thought this was a the Party of the "big tent"? Why are they running the same rehashed white, rich woman who has been in politics for 30 years? No new blood? No young blood? No fresh ideas? What gives? The cons have at least 10 serious candidates.

If she wins, it won't matter how many candidates they had.

.

That's irrelevant.
Why is it Hillary is not only the best the Dems can come up with, she is the only serious candidate they can come up with? What does that say about the health of the party?

 

[Mac1958]

Who besides Shrillary will be running? I thought this was a the Party of the "big tent"? Why are they running the same rehashed white, rich woman who has been in politics for 30 years? No new blood? No young blood? No fresh ideas? What gives? The cons have at least 10 serious candidates.

If she wins, it won't matter how many candidates they had.

.

That's irrelevant.
Why is it Hillary is not only the best the Dems can come up with, she is the only serious candidate they can come up with? What does that say about the health of the party?

The Dems as a party certainly aren't any worse off than the Republicans, and the fact that the GOP has so many candidates doesn't mean they're good candidates.

Yes, the partisan conservatives think all these people are wonderful, but they're a little biased.

The GOP has obviously been strong in localized elections recently, but the presidential election is its own animal.

My guess would be that she has pretty much sucked all the air out of the room for potential Dem candidates for years now, so maybe some are just gonna wait. This is gonna be a circus, maybe they don't want to be a part of it.

.

 

[The Rabbi]

Who besides Shrillary will be running? I thought this was a the Party of the "big tent"? Why are they running the same rehashed white, rich woman who has been in politics for 30 years? No new blood? No young blood? No fresh ideas? What gives? The cons have at least 10 serious candidates.

If she wins, it won't matter how many candidates they had.

.

That's irrelevant.
Why is it Hillary is not only the best the Dems can come up with, she is the only serious candidate they can come up with? What does that say about the health of the party?

The Dems as a party certainly aren't any worse off than the Republicans, and the fact that the GOP has so many candidates doesn't mean they're good candidates.

Yes, the partisan conservatives think all these people are wonderful, but they're a little biased.

The GOP has obviously been strong in localized elections recently, but the presidential election is its own animal.

My guess would be that she has pretty much sucked all the air out of the room for potential Dem candidates for years now, so maybe some are just gonna wait. This is gonna be a circus, maybe they don't want to be a part of it.

.

You're joking, right?
The GOP has a crop of prominent TP senators and at least one governor, with several more people yet to announce. They are accomplished people in their own right, very articulate and brimming with new ideas. They are a diverse group as well.
You are right about Hillary sucking. She is known for an enormous Rolodex and the ability to raise money. No one has wanted to challenge her on those grounds. But that's all she has. Putting all your eggs in one basket at the start of a primary season is a recipe for disaster. What happens if she has a stroke? What happens if some scandal explodes? I mean, I know so far she has been scandal free and it is tough to think of somethign worse than what's been put out there so far. But what if she craps out with voters like her book crapped out with readers? The Dems are totally screwed.

 

[LoneLaugher]

The Rabbi believes his shit. It's amazing.

 

[Mac1958]

Who besides Shrillary will be running? I thought this was a the Party of the "big tent"? Why are they running the same rehashed white, rich woman who has been in politics for 30 years? No new blood? No young blood? No fresh ideas? What gives? The cons have at least 10 serious candidates.

If she wins, it won't matter how many candidates they had.

.

That's irrelevant.
Why is it Hillary is not only the best the Dems can come up with, she is the only serious candidate they can come up with? What does that say about the health of the party?

The Dems as a party certainly aren't any worse off than the Republicans, and the fact that the GOP has so many candidates doesn't mean they're good candidates.

Yes, the partisan conservatives think all these people are wonderful, but they're a little biased.

The GOP has obviously been strong in localized elections recently, but the presidential election is its own animal.

My guess would be that she has pretty much sucked all the air out of the room for potential Dem candidates for years now, so maybe some are just gonna wait. This is gonna be a circus, maybe they don't want to be a part of it.

.

You're joking, right?
The GOP has a crop of prominent TP senators and at least one governor, with several more people yet to announce. They are accomplished people in their own right, very articulate and brimming with new ideas. They are a diverse group as well.
You are right about Hillary sucking. She is known for an enormous Rolodex and the ability to raise money. No one has wanted to challenge her on those grounds. But that's all she has. Putting all your eggs in one basket at the start of a primary season is a recipe for disaster. What happens if she has a stroke? What happens if some scandal explodes? I mean, I know so far she has been scandal free and it is tough to think of somethign worse than what's been put out there so far. But what if she craps out with voters like her book crapped out with readers? The Dems are totally screwed.

Well, full disclosure, I'm lousy at predicting political stuff.

My memory still works well, however, and I'm already seeing shades of 2012 in the GOP predictions.

I guess we'll see.

.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Rabbi believes his shit. It's amazing.

You have something substantive to refute it with? You have some explanation as to why Hillary should be unopposed in this election? Do you have any thoughts beyond "is this edible" at all?

 

[The Rabbi]

Who besides Shrillary will be running? I thought this was a the Party of the "big tent"? Why are they running the same rehashed white, rich woman who has been in politics for 30 years? No new blood? No young blood? No fresh ideas? What gives? The cons have at least 10 serious candidates.

If she wins, it won't matter how many candidates they had.

.

That's irrelevant.
Why is it Hillary is not only the best the Dems can come up with, she is the only serious candidate they can come up with? What does that say about the health of the party?

The Dems as a party certainly aren't any worse off than the Republicans, and the fact that the GOP has so many candidates doesn't mean they're good candidates.

Yes, the partisan conservatives think all these people are wonderful, but they're a little biased.

The GOP has obviously been strong in localized elections recently, but the presidential election is its own animal.

My guess would be that she has pretty much sucked all the air out of the room for potential Dem candidates for years now, so maybe some are just gonna wait. This is gonna be a circus, maybe they don't want to be a part of it.

.

You're joking, right?
The GOP has a crop of prominent TP senators and at least one governor, with several more people yet to announce. They are accomplished people in their own right, very articulate and brimming with new ideas. They are a diverse group as well.
You are right about Hillary sucking. She is known for an enormous Rolodex and the ability to raise money. No one has wanted to challenge her on those grounds. But that's all she has. Putting all your eggs in one basket at the start of a primary season is a recipe for disaster. What happens if she has a stroke? What happens if some scandal explodes? I mean, I know so far she has been scandal free and it is tough to think of somethign worse than what's been put out there so far. But what if she craps out with voters like her book crapped out with readers? The Dems are totally screwed.

Well, full disclosure, I'm lousy at predicting political stuff.

My memory still works well, however, and I'm already seeing shades of 2012 in the GOP predictions.

I guess we'll see.

.

2012 should have been a GOP win. It would have been without massive voter turnout in inner city districts in key states. That wont happen this time.

 

[LoneLaugher]

The Rabbi believes his shit. It's amazing.

You have something substantive to refute it with? You have some explanation as to why Hillary should be unopposed in this election? Do you have any thoughts beyond "is this edible" at all?

Dude......you are delusional. What new ideas are brimming from the. GOP field? They don't have a single new ******* idea.

I don't think Clinton should run unopposed in the primary. Those are your words. And.....unless you know something I don't the Democratic nominee will certainly not run unopposed.

The best thing about you is the lack of awareness. I've provided my thoughts here for several years now.....and you've never been able to handle the fact that they are measured and presented with clarity. I insult you because you deserve derision.

 

[gallantwarrior]

J. Edgar Hoover had a file on everyone in politics. All the dirty little secrets.

Hillary has her files too. No real Democrat contender would dare challenge her.

.

'Specially after the way she was blindsided by Barry "The Messiah" Soetoro in 2008.

 

[LoneLaugher]

If she wins, it won't matter how many candidates they had.

.

That's irrelevant.
Why is it Hillary is not only the best the Dems can come up with, she is the only serious candidate they can come up with? What does that say about the health of the party?

The Dems as a party certainly aren't any worse off than the Republicans, and the fact that the GOP has so many candidates doesn't mean they're good candidates.

Yes, the partisan conservatives think all these people are wonderful, but they're a little biased.

The GOP has obviously been strong in localized elections recently, but the presidential election is its own animal.

My guess would be that she has pretty much sucked all the air out of the room for potential Dem candidates for years now, so maybe some are just gonna wait. This is gonna be a circus, maybe they don't want to be a part of it.

.

You're joking, right?
The GOP has a crop of prominent TP senators and at least one governor, with several more people yet to announce. They are accomplished people in their own right, very articulate and brimming with new ideas. They are a diverse group as well.
You are right about Hillary sucking. She is known for an enormous Rolodex and the ability to raise money. No one has wanted to challenge her on those grounds. But that's all she has. Putting all your eggs in one basket at the start of a primary season is a recipe for disaster. What happens if she has a stroke? What happens if some scandal explodes? I mean, I know so far she has been scandal free and it is tough to think of somethign worse than what's been put out there so far. But what if she craps out with voters like her book crapped out with readers? The Dems are totally screwed.

Well, full disclosure, I'm lousy at predicting political stuff.

My memory still works well, however, and I'm already seeing shades of 2012 in the GOP predictions.

I guess we'll see.

.

2012 should have been a GOP win. It would have been without massive voter turnout in inner city districts in key states. That wont happen this time.

Yeah! If only all "those" people hasn't voted......Romney would have won!!

At least you didn't do what you normally do and blame it on the media and voter fraud. Progress, I suppose.

 

[rightwinger]

Who besides Shrillary will be running? I thought this was a the Party of the "big tent"? Why are they running the same rehashed white, rich woman who has been in politics for 30 years? No new blood? No young blood? No fresh ideas? What gives? The cons have at least 10 serious candidates.

Big government is what Dems are all about at all levels. Nobody dares to step out of line in that party.

Why is it that Republicans never cut the size of Government once they get elected?