PDA

View Full Version : Hillary's latest ad: Are you invisible too?



Gan
08-14-2007, 06:05 PM
http://www.hillaryhub.com/

_________________________________________

Discuss

Warriorbird
08-14-2007, 06:13 PM
Just like I tell my conservative classmates. All of you should be out campaigning your asses off for Hillary.

Tsa`ah
08-14-2007, 08:08 PM
I'm thankful that I live in IL ... I don't have to put up with Clinton campaign garbage. Unless of course she gains the Dem's nomination.

Jenisi
08-14-2007, 10:49 PM
Which, unfortunatly, she will.

Gan
08-14-2007, 11:56 PM
Go Hillary!

:rah:

Skeeter
08-15-2007, 10:35 AM
I hope the Dems aren't stupid enough to give her the nom. I expect she'll end up as the VP candidate.

Jessaril
08-15-2007, 11:32 AM
The grandstanding some of these candidates resort to makes my face hurt.

Gan
08-15-2007, 11:41 AM
I expect she'll end up as the VP candidate.

I seriously doubt she'll be a VP candidate with as much momentum and cash she has. She is a woman, and a Clinton, hear her roar. Would she be satisfied being 2nd chair (once again)?

So entertaining the thought of her as VP. Who would be the nom for president? Edwards? Obama? Would either of them feel secure with her pushing from 2nd chair?

I think Obama and Edwards would look over the governor list and select someone from outside Congress, especially since their ratings are so low.

Parkbandit
08-15-2007, 12:58 PM
Unless she really fucks up something, or another one of her skeletons escapes the Lockbox, she will be the nominee. She will select Obama as her running mate.. and what guilty liberal in this country doesn't want to be someone who voted for the first women President and first black Vice President?

Tea & Strumpets
08-15-2007, 01:04 PM
I hope the Dems aren't stupid enough to give her the nom. I expect she'll end up as the VP candidate.

The left jug (her right) appears to be bigger. Food for thought.

Jessaril
08-15-2007, 01:18 PM
The left jug (her right) appears to be bigger. Food for thought.

That's the way she's standing.

Gan
08-15-2007, 01:25 PM
Unless she really fucks up something, or another one of her skeletons escapes the Lockbox, she will be the nominee. She will select Obama as her running mate.. and what guilty liberal in this country doesn't want to be someone who voted for the first women President and first black Vice President?

I think Obama has too much of a penis for her to accept as a running mate. Edwards would be more her speed, he's already been a VP candidate and has proven to be able to play catcher in these types of arrangements. And he has nicer hair too.

Drew2
08-15-2007, 01:58 PM
I think for the first thing I ever vote for in my life, I will vote for her. Just because I think it will be hilarious if she actually wins.

Ilvane
08-15-2007, 03:27 PM
I still like her.

I've seen how well the joke of the prescription drug plan for seniors works, among other things Bush claims to be compassionate about.

He's a joke, and well, honestly..so are most politicians. They all say what they think people want to hear to get elected.

Nowadays it's sadly come down to the lesser of two evils..in the end.

Angela

Trouble
08-15-2007, 03:56 PM
Nowadays it's sadly come down to the lesser of two evils..in the end.


I know what you mean. Most of the presidential votes I've cast have been against certain candidates, not people I actually support.

Warriorbird
08-15-2007, 04:04 PM
Some NC Dem sources of mine say she's in heavy talks with Edwards already. They're as bothered by this as I am. Not to say she isn't in talks with Obama either but ugh. Way to lose the Democrats the White House.

TheEschaton
08-15-2007, 04:37 PM
Question: If you disregard Hillary's actual chances of winning the general election. Let's say she has, and she's being inaugurated tomorrow. How do you feel about her POLICIES, WB?

Warriorbird
08-15-2007, 04:50 PM
Oh god. Where to start? I disagree with her stance on Iraq. I'm disgusted at the idea of her giving concessions to Rupert Murdoch in return for his companies treating her less badly. I think she can say anything she wants about healthcare but I don't believe she can actually achieve it. I detest the DLC. Her economic policies make her just one in another series of constantly spendthrift Congress creatures. I think passing the wiretapping stuff recently was easier because of her support. I can't believe that she was for the Patriot Act both times.

Hmm...I agree with her pro choice status on abortion. I think she's decent on the environment. There isn't much else.

Tsa`ah
08-15-2007, 06:04 PM
I don't think it matters much on where she stands and how she plans to do anything.

She's had a big enough hand in tanking the overall confidence level in the current congress ... chances are there will be another complete shift come next election.

If she does attain the Dem's nomination, and she does win the general election ... I don't see how she'll be an effective administrator when one considers how she's incapable of any sort of unification between parties. If by some freak chance the population sees the Dems as fit enough to return to the congress and senate, she could have a chance of delivering a few promises ... but my faith in her old school tactics leads me to believe that any horse she's trying to sell is probably better off as glue.

If we're looking at a GOP controlled legislature, Hillary is not the person we want to see in the Oval office.

Gan
08-15-2007, 06:10 PM
Some NC Dem sources of mine say she's in heavy talks with Edwards already. They're as bothered by this as I am. Not to say she isn't in talks with Obama either but ugh. Way to lose the Democrats the White House.

I called a Clinton/Edwards ticket first.

:rah:

Ilvane
08-15-2007, 06:19 PM
Why would a Clinton-Edwards ticket lose the White House for the Dems?

Who do you all think would work better?

I don't think she and Obama, but maybe I'm wrong. I think if they are worried about polarizing, having she and Obama would be much worse than she and Edwards.

Angela

Jessaril
08-15-2007, 06:24 PM
Congress may do all the damage before they even get to declare.

DeV
08-15-2007, 06:28 PM
It also depends on who the Republicans nominate. It all comes down to that, IMO.

Gan
08-15-2007, 06:32 PM
It also depends on who the Republicans nominate. It all comes down to that, IMO.

But thats a standard play from the Democrat playbook. Lets see what the GOP does, and then we'll act. Thats sad.

It shouldnt be who will contrast better against the opponent, its who would be the best candidate to lead the country.

Put your best foot forward and let the voters decide.

DeV
08-15-2007, 06:44 PM
But thats a standard play from the Democrat playbook. Lets see what the GOP does, and then we'll act. Thats sad.

It shouldnt be who will contrast better against the opponent, its who would be the best candidate to lead the country.

Put your best foot forward and let the voters decide.By the way, my post was in reference to Ilvane's. So, really, that goes for both parties.

It's actually a standard play from the Independent voters playbook. Voters won't be as hesitant to vote across party lines as has been the case for the past few elections.

You already know the candidate you're voting for, but you have to remember that lots of people are still undecided. I believe that's part of the process though, especially for the undecided voters, who have had impacts on the last few elections.

Ilvane
08-15-2007, 06:47 PM
I wonder who the Republican's will put together, it's going to be curious to watch.

Angela

Keller
08-15-2007, 06:49 PM
Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney for the republicans.

Ilvane
08-15-2007, 06:55 PM
Mitt Romney..:gags:

He's awful.

I don't know what to think of Thompson, aside from he's really conservative.

Angela

Keller
08-15-2007, 06:59 PM
Mitt Romney..:gags:

He's awful.

I don't know what to think of Thompson, aside from he's really conservative.

Angela

You know how I know that's the GOPs ticket? Because 8 years ago Angela would have said,

Dick Cheaney . . . :gags:

He's awful.

I don't know what to think of Bush, aside from he's really conservative.

Tsa`ah
08-15-2007, 07:28 PM
I think the most annoying issue with the Clinton campaign, hell ... almost every Dems campaign at this point, is that they're still attacking an outgoing administration like it's an incumbent.

Please move on.

Warriorbird
08-15-2007, 10:39 PM
Fred Thompson/Mitt Romney sounds solid. Rudy will beat anything the Democrats post but I'm not sure he can win his own primary.

chillmonster
08-24-2007, 02:19 PM
All of the Republican candidates are empty suits. Romney is less principled than John Kerrry, and Guliani is a complete fraud who's running a moronic campaign. He's actually running TOWARDS Bush. He may win the nomination, but the comercials with him morphing into GWB are already in production.

And Fred Thompson is not Regan. Regan may not have been a deep thinker, but he was VERY charismatic and even though he was a Hollywood guy, he looked like the head of a wholseome, white bread, all-American family. Thomson - divorce, trophy wife- doesn't quite measure up. He is being smart though. He's so close to GWB as far as policy that if he were to begin running now, he'd be shooting himself in the foot during the general every time he opened his mouth.

I am concerned with the Dem nominees, however. I love the fact that the dems actually represent the diversity that is America, but are you telling me that at a time where there is such a great opportunity, all they can come up with is a woman, however qualified, and a black man, however charismatic and inspiring? Come the fuck on! :hammer: If Gore were to run, this campaign would be little more than a formality, but they're determined to make this a race. Great.

LazyBard
08-24-2007, 02:36 PM
I love the fact that the dems actually represent the diversity that is America, but are you telling me that at a time where there is such a great opportunity, all they can come up with is a woman, however qualified, and a black man, however charismatic and inspiring? Come the fuck on!

I dont even know where to start with this statment

Gan
08-24-2007, 02:37 PM
I dont even know where to start with this statment
You could include the whole paragraph and still be on target with your statement.

chillmonster
08-24-2007, 02:49 PM
How about, "You're totally on point, but..."

Gan
08-24-2007, 02:52 PM
Again, you're 9 days bumping a thread with useless drivel and baseless conjecture. You're not even hitting earth, much less on point.

Grats.

:clap:

chillmonster
08-24-2007, 03:09 PM
I actually thought for a very brief moment about putting something in there for you. Something to let you know beforehand how sorry I was for disrupting your busy message board schedule. Maybe add something about how much I respect your opinion and hope you approve of my point of view. :tumble:

Parkbandit
08-24-2007, 03:09 PM
People like Chillmonster, who can't spell a relatively easy word like REAGAN correctly, makes me think we should have a minimum IQ requirement to vote.

And the line: "If Gore were to run, this campaign would be little more than a formality" made me laugh out loud.

Gan
08-24-2007, 03:13 PM
Well, Scottsdale Arizona took an early poll and Gore won it.


GO GORE!!!

Parkbandit
08-24-2007, 03:16 PM
Gore's not dumb.. he's making alot more money playing the role of Chicken Little in the drama : "OMG! The Earth is Melting!"

chillmonster
08-24-2007, 03:17 PM
People like Chillmonster, who can't spell a relatively easy word like REAGAN correctly, makes me think we should have a minimum IQ requirement to vote.

And the line: "If Gore were to run, this campaign would be little more than a formality" made me laugh out loud.

Oh my fucking God! A TYPO!!!!

And it's, "People like Chillmonster MAKE ME THINK," genius.

Gan
08-24-2007, 03:17 PM
Gore's not dumb.. he's making alot more money playing the role of Chicken Little in the drama : "OMG! The Earth is Melting!"

Agreed. He's laughing all the way to the steakhouse.