Would a Hilary run give cons the election?

[Lumpy 1]

And that is what I am talking about in the Republicans inability to beat Clinton. She is beatable...its just that Republicans cannot do it

If Republicans try to photoshop their way into the WhiteHouse they will be laughed off as asshole Republicans being asshole Republicans

Turn Hillary into a victim and you lose

Aren't you the guy who thinks Obama is a phenomenal success...

Obama is not running.....he has already kicked GOP butt twice

What success is the Republican Party going to run on?
Obstruction?

Democrats give Clinton all the credit for the successes in the 90's, yet, he only had 33.3% of the federal elected power most of the time..

To whine about obstructionism is pure chickenshit..Negotiation is the key and the 66.6% are like spoiled brats that only want it their way, no apparent leadership qualities in a time of great need.

 

[JakeStarkey]

the GOP will have to put constructive proposals to the electorate

if we can't do that, we will lose if run against a man who is not running for office again

 

[Kosh]

Aren't you the guy who thinks Obama is a phenomenal success...

Obama is not running.....he has already kicked GOP butt twice

What success is the Republican Party going to run on?
Obstruction?

Democrats give Clinton all the credit for the successes in the 90's, yet, he only had 33.3% of the federal elected power most of the time..

To whine about obstructionism is pure chickenshit..Negotiation is the key and the 66.6% are like spoiled brats that only want it their way, no apparent leadership qualities in a time of great need.

That is why the DNC media put all that attention on Clinton's affairs. They did not want the DNC base to see that Clinton was working with the opposition.

 

[Kosh]

the GOP will have to put constructive proposals to the electorate

if we can't do that, we will lose if run against a man who is not running for office again

Says the far left Obama drone that will vote Clinton in 2016 no matter who is on the ticket.

 

[rightwinger]

Aren't you the guy who thinks Obama is a phenomenal success...

Obama is not running.....he has already kicked GOP butt twice

What success is the Republican Party going to run on?
Obstruction?

Democrats give Clinton all the credit for the successes in the 90's, yet, he only had 33.3% of the federal elected power most of the time..

To whine about obstructionism is pure chickenshit..Negotiation is the key and the 66.6% are like spoiled brats that only want it their way, no apparent leadership qualities in a time of great need.

We are talking about an eight year period. What do Republicans have to show for it?

Republicans are a fractured party terrified of the TeaTards. What vision for the future do Republicans hold for 2016?

More tax cuts for the wealthy?

 

[bendog]

the GOP will have to put constructive proposals to the electorate

if we can't do that, we will lose if run against a man who is not running for office again

Perry's talking about running again, and I suppose Herman Cain is available. (-:

Seriously, the problem will be that a guy like Rand Paul is taken seriously on things like getting rid of the fed, and letting rates rise or fall on whims of the markets. He's actually selling this as "good for growth." It's akin to snake oil salesmen: you feel bad, take this and don't worry what's in it, it'll fix you right up.

 

[rightwinger]

the GOP will have to put constructive proposals to the electorate

if we can't do that, we will lose if run against a man who is not running for office again

Perry's talking about running again, and I suppose Herman Cain is available. (-:

Seriously, the problem will be that a guy like Rand Paul is taken seriously on things like getting rid of the fed, and letting rates rise or fall on whims of the markets. He's actually selling this as "good for growth." It's akin to snake oil salesmen: you feel bad, take this and don't worry what's in it, it'll fix you right up.

The problem for Republicans is that non-credible candidates like Paul and Cruz will stay in the campaign spouting their extreme rhetoric up until the convention.
Like in 2012, they will tar the eventual winner with positions that won't fly in the general election

 

[Katzndogz]

obama won because he lied. Hillary will have a very difficult time distancing herself from a regime noted mostly for corruption when she was such a part of that corruption. Abortion and gay rights only go so far.

 

[Lumpy 1]

Obama is not running.....he has already kicked GOP butt twice

What success is the Republican Party going to run on?
Obstruction?

Democrats give Clinton all the credit for the successes in the 90's, yet, he only had 33.3% of the federal elected power most of the time..

To whine about obstructionism is pure chickenshit..Negotiation is the key and the 66.6% are like spoiled brats that only want it their way, no apparent leadership qualities in a time of great need.

We are talking about an eight year period. What do Republicans have to show for it?

Republicans are a fractured party terrified of the TeaTards. What vision for the future do Republicans hold for 2016?

More tax cuts for the wealthy?

The Tea Party represents the growing health of the Republican Party. Being Democrat lite is obviously a failing policy.

Democrats lock step (no critical thought allowed) can win elections but their policies are devastating to the country, that's obvious.

The rich will still be rich regardless of which party is in control.. Both Democrat and Republican leaders suck-hole the rich, we're nothing to them in reality but a necessary manipulation for election day.

btw. Do you hate Hillary & Bill Clinton because their wealthy?

 

[Meister]

Yeah yeah yeah, we all know what the cons would say. This is a question for the libs. After eight years of Obama, wouldn't Hilary be too much more controversy for the electorate? Does this country want four more years of obstructionism from the cons? Would feminism be the obsession? Aren't men already feeling taken over, with women getting the majority of jobs?
I think Obama has done a good job of staying away from the "poor blacks" issues, focusing more on more popular stuff, like healthcare and immigration and unemployment.
But I think the electorate is ready for less "special" focus, and more inclusive issues for the country as a whole. Of course the cons tunnel vision for the "special treatment for the rich" is going to sink them again, because they never learn.
But no matter which lib runs against Hilary, it's probably who I'll root for. And if she gets the nomination, I doubt I'll vote for her.

Would a Hilary run give cons the election?

Not once the liberal media gets done with whoever runs against her.

 

[Lumpy 1]

the GOP will have to put constructive proposals to the electorate

if we can't do that, we will lose if run against a man who is not running for office again

Perry's talking about running again, and I suppose Herman Cain is available. (-:

Seriously, the problem will be that a guy like Rand Paul is taken seriously on things like getting rid of the fed, and letting rates rise or fall on whims of the markets. He's actually selling this as "good for growth." It's akin to snake oil salesmen: you feel bad, take this and don't worry what's in it, it'll fix you right up.

The problem for Republicans is that non-credible candidates like Paul and Cruz will stay in the campaign spouting their extreme rhetoric up until the convention.
Like in 2012, they will tar the eventual winner with positions that won't fly in the general election

You believe the official, "liar of the year" B. Obama is actually credible?

Your desperation is showing.

 

[Redfish]

the GOP will have to put constructive proposals to the electorate

if we can't do that, we will lose if run against a man who is not running for office again

Perry's talking about running again, and I suppose Herman Cain is available. (-:

Seriously, the problem will be that a guy like Rand Paul is taken seriously on things like getting rid of the fed, and letting rates rise or fall on whims of the markets. He's actually selling this as "good for growth." It's akin to snake oil salesmen: you feel bad, take this and don't worry what's in it, it'll fix you right up.

right, and government manipulation of the economy has worked so well that we are not 17 trillion in debt with no end in sight. Rand Paul has it right.

 

[Lumpy 1]

the GOP will have to put constructive proposals to the electorate

if we can't do that, we will lose if run against a man who is not running for office again

Perry's talking about running again, and I suppose Herman Cain is available. (-:

Seriously, the problem will be that a guy like Rand Paul is taken seriously on things like getting rid of the fed, and letting rates rise or fall on whims of the markets. He's actually selling this as "good for growth." It's akin to snake oil salesmen: you feel bad, take this and don't worry what's in it, it'll fix you right up.

Pleased to meet you, I noticed you have a blind side..

 

[bendog]

the GOP will have to put constructive proposals to the electorate

if we can't do that, we will lose if run against a man who is not running for office again

Perry's talking about running again, and I suppose Herman Cain is available. (-:

Seriously, the problem will be that a guy like Rand Paul is taken seriously on things like getting rid of the fed, and letting rates rise or fall on whims of the markets. He's actually selling this as "good for growth." It's akin to snake oil salesmen: you feel bad, take this and don't worry what's in it, it'll fix you right up.

The problem for Republicans is that non-credible candidates like Paul and Cruz will stay in the campaign spouting their extreme rhetoric up until the convention.
Like in 2012, they will tar the eventual winner with positions that won't fly in the general election

Cruz is a nut. He's a bully too. The cruzathon and the shutdown was his last gasp. Sure, he'll make some noise and gum up the primary, but in the end, he's Rick Perry with a hispanic name. I think Rand Paul's more dangerous. He spouts crazy shit with a very sincere smile. Somebody with facts actually point out stuff like .... ah before the fed reserve we had recessions where PEOPLE ACTUALLY STARVED. He'll just smile with a knwoing grin, "well you SAY so."

A person can say, "Rand, Milton Friedman the father of Reaganomics, won a noble prize showing how the reduction in monetary supply and failure of the fed to expand credit in 1929 led to the Great Depression." Knowing grin, "well, you SAY so."

I don't know. I think that crap can win a nomination. LOL It did in 2012. A dem will be running on a campaign of "I can fix obamacare." And that's really a terrible thing for the country, because ... by and large ... Obama's fiscal policies (WHICH BEGAN AT THE END OF BUSHII'S TERM) have brought us back to moderate growth, and the unemployment rate should be back to around 6% ... which historically ain't so bad.

Would I prefer a sensible goper, who'd advocate stuff like containing costs on medicare by putting higher copays on stuff like pedicure or more than six yearly visits because of urinary incontinence. Hell yeah. But I think sanity left town and aint' coming back for awhile.

 

[Lumpy 1]

Perry's talking about running again, and I suppose Herman Cain is available. (-:

Seriously, the problem will be that a guy like Rand Paul is taken seriously on things like getting rid of the fed, and letting rates rise or fall on whims of the markets. He's actually selling this as "good for growth." It's akin to snake oil salesmen: you feel bad, take this and don't worry what's in it, it'll fix you right up.

The problem for Republicans is that non-credible candidates like Paul and Cruz will stay in the campaign spouting their extreme rhetoric up until the convention.
Like in 2012, they will tar the eventual winner with positions that won't fly in the general election

Cruz is a nut. He's a bully too. The cruzathon and the shutdown was his last gasp. Sure, he'll make some noise and gum up the primary, but in the end, he's Rick Perry with a hispanic name. I think Rand Paul's more dangerous. He spouts crazy shit with a very sincere smile. Somebody with facts actually point out stuff like .... ah before the fed reserve we had recessions where PEOPLE ACTUALLY STARVED. He'll just smile with a knwoing grin, "well you SAY so."

A person can say, "Rand, Milton Friedman the father of Reaganomics, won a noble prize showing how the reduction in monetary supply and failure of the fed to expand credit in 1929 led to the Great Depression." Knowing grin, "well, you SAY so."

I don't know. I think that crap can win a nomination. LOL It did in 2012. A dem will be running on a campaign of "I can fix obamacare." And that's really a terrible thing for the country, because ... by and large ... Obama's fiscal policies (WHICH BEGAN AT THE END OF BUSHII'S TERM) have brought us back to moderate growth, and the unemployment rate should be back to around 6% ... which historically ain't so bad.

Would I prefer a sensible goper, who'd advocate stuff like containing costs on medicare by putting higher copays on stuff like pedicure or more than six yearly visits because of urinary incontinence. Hell yeah. But I think sanity left town and aint' coming back for awhile.

Can you imagine Obama talking for what 21+ hours without a teleprompter, he's a complete babbling idiot after 10 seconds....

 

[bendog]

For all of obama's ego, I doubt the though of talking to a teleprompter for days to shut down the govt would ever occur to him.

 

[kaz]

For the most part, I agree with you

I think Hillary has become stale. She has been in the public eye for too long. She is no longer the dynamic Hillary, she comes off as a tired old lady

If Republicans can exploit that, I think she is beatable. But Republicans and their FoxNews propaganda arm will beat Benghazi to death and try to play the blowjob, Whitewater, Vince Foster nonsense they overplayed twenty years ago

Make Hillary a victim and remind America what shameless assholes Republicans can be and Hillary will be unbeatable

.. There's to many butt-ugly pictures of Hillary floating around, she's accomplish very little in reality, Democrats rejected her when a toothy smile showed up, she's no lady she's a horses pa-toot, She just too old and should be put out to pasture..Yup, I hope she runs.

And that is what I am talking about in the Republicans inability to beat Clinton. She is beatable...its just that Republicans cannot do it

If Republicans try to photoshop their way into the WhiteHouse they will be laughed off as asshole Republicans being asshole Republicans

Turn Hillary into a victim and you lose

The only ones who victimize liberals are liberals, and you do self victimization endlessly. And it works because the media report it that way.

Fox "propaganda" yeah. The left wing media give no other voice but yours. Even though the "propaganda" station that has you people on all the time, to you, "propaganda" is when any voice but yours is presented, even when yours is presented. Poor baby, you have to hear a voice now other than your own liberal one. Here's a tissue.

 

[Lumpy 1]

For all of obama's ego, I doubt the though of talking to a teleprompter for days to shut down the govt would ever occur to him.

Well, if Obama/Democrats and Republicans had negotiated in the first place several months before it never would have come to that in the first pace but revel in the bullshit, find someone else to blame, I find it amusing.

You do realizes of course that for every dollar spent 33 some odd cents are borrowed.

Try that on your home budget, blame is bullshit and the true reality of the situation truly sucks but it's a fun distraction for far too many.

 

[Redfish]

For all of obama's ego, I doubt the though of talking to a teleprompter for days to shut down the govt would ever occur to him.

Cruz did not shut down the government, one senator does not have that power. Obama shut down 15% of the government to make a point that he would not negotiate on the implementation of his only accomplishment---then unilaterally ignored the implementation schedules in the law by delaying them and exempting his supporters.

 

[freedombecki]

Yeah yeah yeah, we all know what the cons would say. This is a question for the libs. After eight years of Obama, wouldn't Hilary be too much more controversy for the electorate? Does this country want four more years of obstructionism from the cons? Would feminism be the obsession? Aren't men already feeling taken over, with women getting the majority of jobs?
I think Obama has done a good job of staying away from the "poor blacks" issues, focusing more on more popular stuff, like healthcare and immigration and unemployment.
But I think the electorate is ready for less "special" focus, and more inclusive issues for the country as a whole. Of course the cons tunnel vision for the "special treatment for the rich" is going to sink them again, because they never learn.
But no matter which lib runs against Hilary, it's probably who I'll root for. And if she gets the nomination, I doubt I'll vote for her.

Would a Hilary run give cons the election?

Not once the liberal media gets done with whoever runs against her.

Lady Macbeth, I mean First Lady Hillary Clinton has been on the Judicial Watch's "10 most corrupt politicians" list since 2007 for her foul balls in business that brought her wealth at the expense of people losing their life's savings on a number of deals, not to mention withholding public records before elections. That's some serious obstruction of justice going on in my book.

So I'm saying, conservatives need to clean sweep the liberals out of power and clean up their dismantling of the constitution while we still can, passing laws prohibiting powerful people from this type of obstruction that goes unnoticed by the public.

Obstruction and lying on the part of politicians truly needs to end this election cycle.

If we don't, we will be forced to separate and start over in smaller parcels than before. Too few people have too much power. The people need to take their power back and remove career criminals out of office for once and for all. The people are electing people who have no morals, and they're destroying the country with lies and obfuscations.

Earlier in American history, you got rid of liars, cheaters, bilkers, and thieves.

Today they celebrate themselves and their unanswered crimes in the White House Rose Garden.