Hillary By A Landslide! (Al Gore, vote, polls, politician)
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.
Hilary is fine as long as she keeps extremely quiet under the radar and exists only as an idealized concept burnished by memories of the Clinton '90s, but eventually The Scowl will have to emerge and engage.
Sure she's got the "female cred" bonus multiplier that will help her like Obama's "black cred", but even then Barack had charm and looks on his side in a way that Hilary certainly does not.
Reading these comments have depressed the hell out of me. The Republicans lost the last two elections because they produced RINOs as candidates. Like Ronald Reagan once said, "We need bold colors, not pale pastels". How anyone could vote for the Butcher of Benghazi and be proud of having BJ Bill as the "first husband" in the WH is enough to make me want to cry.
No more Bushes, no more Clintons.
If our country even survives 3 more years of Obama, we need a candidate who will truly uphold the Constitution and restore America. I don't have much hope. Personally, I like John Thune.
That's why it isn't fair to measure, though. You can't put a single person (Hillary Clinton) against a collective when that collective has a range of ideas. If the poll was Hillary versus Chris Christie, it wouldn't be a landslide. If the poll was Hillary versus Paul Ryan, it wouldn't be a landslide. If the poll was Hillary versus Bobby Jindal/Rand Paul/ Scott Walker, you might see more of a landslide.
Not to mention that the most prominent Republican in the media right now is Ted Cruz. When someone as controversial as that guy is presently the face of the party, of course Hillary would look like the strongest contender.
I'm praying that Chris Christie sticks to his politics and doesn't pull a Romney, where he panders to the far-right for votes, because I really want to vote for him as our next president. And I think that others who are also registered Independent, as I am, would feel more comfortable voting for Christie than Clinton.
Whatever. If Christie runs, the Democrats will smear him as "far right" as they falsely did with McCain and Romney, and you'll dutifully vote for the Democrat candidate who is actually far left as you did twice for Obama. You "independents" are nothing if not predictable.
No, us conservatives are not nominating another "moderate" only to have "independents" like you just vote for the Democrat anyway. We'll either win or lose with an actual conservative and it will be without taking pap like your post into account.
I believe that a woman president would be a good thing. Women are generally more reasonable than men and more prone to seeking peaceful solutions to problems. Women have proven themselves capable heads of state around the world.
After a decade of war and a six-trillion dollar unbudgeted and deferred bill for what accomplished as much as a fireworks display in the desert would have, I'd say that a woman would have to work day and night to try to outdo the idiocy of her predecessors.
Not necessarily. If working with female bosses surrounded by men is any indication, Hillary is going to be a warmonger to the extreme (she already is), trying to "prove" herself that she can fill a man's shoes. Not good at all. Either the House or Senate needs to be pretty progressive in order to reign her blood thirst in. Hillary would be the worst female candidate on the Democrats' side. Warren would be much more preferable, as she is also taking an active role in reigning in the Fed, unlike our Libertarian Heroes of the Night
Not necessarily. If working with female bosses surrounded by men is any indication, Hillary is going to be a warmonger to the extreme (she already is), trying to "prove" herself that she can fill a man's shoes. Not good at all. Either the House or Senate needs to be pretty progressive in order to reign her blood thirst in. Hillary would be the worst female candidate on the Democrats' side. Warren would be much more preferable, as she is also taking an active role in reigning in the Fed, unlike our Libertarian Heroes of the Night
nothing more aggressive and unstable than a liberal woman , id be ok with a woman running for the republicans , the old type matron who has a strong hand beneath a velvet glove
"Hillary Clinton would defeat Republicans by a landslide margin for the Presidency in 2016 if the election were held today. That’s the finding of a new national poll released by Quinnipiac University on October 3."
Poor republicans. No candidates, no prospects of one.
First of all, like usual, you are using as reference, a very unproven blog and one that leans way to the left. Of course we all know these polls are totally ridiculous. Second, anyone or any poll that would even begin to suggest who will win or would win, before candidates have even announced should never to taken seriously by anyone with much intelligence.
She's at about 10% from the polls I've seen. Not bad since she is essentially regional.
Compare that to 17% for Cruz after he had a full day's exposure on the media and zillions of words written about him, and she looks all that much stronger.
10%, what polls, taken when and by whom? She not only has little appeal, she isn't well known throughout the country. I think you said something similar a few weeks ago..??
Hillary vs Chris Christie (Hillary/Christie: 49/36 - Hillary +13) - still a landslide
Hillary vs Paul Ryan (Hillary/Ryan): 46/46 - Tie
Hillary vs Rand Paul (Hillary/Paul: 53/36 - Hillary +17)
Hillary vs Ted Cruz (Hillary/Cruz: 54/31 - Hillary +23)
All that CAN change of course, but as of RIGHT NOW, Hillary would cream the most likely GOP contenders (with the exception of Ryan).
Ken
This still means absolutely nothing. I think you are smart enough to know that. You can't get an accurate poll, by having several choices. and you can't begin to predict something like this when no one has even entered the race or given much indication if they are going to. Plus most of these polls are a sample of very few and may or may not be taken country wide. And I don't care which poll it is. I am betting right now, if it were Paul Ryan and Hillary she would do better than a tie, but if it were, say, Rand Paul she would not fair as well. Remember it has to do with name recognition, as much as anything. I don't think anyone in his/her right mind really believes any candidate is going to win by 20% or the popular vote.
I would love to see Killery in a landslide, hopefully deep enough even the search dogs can't find her. It would certainly improve her looks...
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.
