Elections Hillary will be President.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 457759
  • Start date Start date
This coming presidential election is scary. What a shallow talent pool. I think this is the first time in my life that I've been genuinely concerned for the future of US politics. I mean, sure we all have our politicians we like and don't like but to think we might be seeing Hillary vs Trump? Would anyone have believed this could come to pass 5 years ago?

Really? I'd say last cycle sucked and this cycle is a dream-team line up of potential candidates. Not all of them, but most of them are interesting.

Not a single good choice on the Dem side though.
 
I rather have Obama be prez x3 or any running candidate right now then Hillary. She would lead the collasp of the country in an record breaking rate.
 
I rather have Obama be prez x3 or any running candidate right now then Hillary. She would lead the collasp of the country in an record breaking rate.

Well, Hillary would be an absolute catastrophe, but so would another Obama term, or a Sanders term (or Biden, O'Malley, etc). The only hope we have is that their whole side (Democrats & Socialists; one in the same) get voted the fuck out of power.

But with all the illegals able to vote, Obama's scam may have tipped the scales in favor of his side. We'll see if justice can prevail.
 
Last edited:
Elizabeth messes up Hiliary's chances but I think Rand Paul could beat her if he goes back to being the old Rand Paul but not the tough acting conservative who is trying to cater to the base.

Of course I dont mind if he does it to win the republican nom. but he shoudl not do something he cannot escape from in the general election.
 
Really? I'd say last cycle sucked and this cycle is a dream-team line up of potential candidates. Not all of them, but most of them are interesting.

Not a single good choice on the Dem side though.

Jim Webb, Sanders "Even if you don't care for his politics" I also believe some others will join in as pressure on Hillary increases.
 
So many crystal balls in here. It's a LOOOOOOOOONNNG way until election day.
 
I'm being honest, Jack. Lets not go there.
Hillary's current position and rhetoric doesn't jive with her record.
And having a "liberal" voting record doesn't mean she isn't part of the establishment or even pro-establishment (which she is).

How is it not? A liberal voting record does, by definition, mean she is anti-establishment. And her platform is very anti-establishment. What do you even mean when you refer to her record being pro-establishment?

Its in the article. Read it.

I read it, and I'm pretty sure you didn't.

Arbitrary at best. Cherry picked is probably the better term. Ultimately meaningless.

Wait, you think that using the current election is "cherry picking" which election to look at for the purpose of gauging support? WTF?

See my post above. Who is Wall Street's darling, now?
She has more donations than Bush and Rubio.

Wall Street donations are 2-1 to Republicans (not as extreme as 2012, but a bigger proportion than any other presidential election). They are opposing Clinton. But Clinton has no real competition in the Democratic primary (I mean, I like O'Malley, though he has some issues, and I like Biden, but it's questionable if he's running and Sanders is OK; but in terms of the perception of the race being competitive) so all Democratic donations are going to her.

The reality is her rhetoric doesn't jive with her actions.

What actions are you referring to? Why do you completely dismiss her voting record and platform?

For you? Sure, it probably is personal. I'm just being objective.

Oh, that's ridiculous. I'm using a consistent standard. If we want to know where someone stands, look at their positions, platform and record. You're basically saying that you don't like her so she must be pro-establishment (which is odd because you liked one of the most extreme pro-establishment candidates in the last election).
 
When you're running for the democratic nomination, failing to "get" the fact that Hillary is the establishment candidate would be political suicide. You get to pretend she's not establishment on the internet because embracing that fiction doesn't cost you anything in the real world.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/5/bernie-sanders-vermont-senator-calls-hillary-the-c/

You're passing on a right-wing propaganda outlet quoting one of her primary opponents calling her the candidate of the "Democratic establishment," meaning she's getting endorsed by most Democrats (is that a bad thing or in any way relevant to policy?). What I'm saying is that she's an anti-establishment candidate.
 
Did not read the article and just jumping in but how is voting for the Iraq war anti establishment?
 
Those pics of her posing with celebrities hasn't helped her with recent polls.

And the concept is insulting to Democrat primary voters.

'I don't trust her, but oh, she spent time hanging out with Kim and Kanye! I'm so voting for her now!'

Havent you learned? Polls mean nothing. She will win

Just like the people doubted obama based off poll numbers.

#hillaryforpresident! Never underestimate celeb power. Also in due time Americans and white women will see that Hillary in their best choice. Just wait until huff post, jebezel, salon and all other major leftist sites embrace Hillary.
 
Did not read the article and just jumping in but how is voting for the Iraq war anti establishment?

I hope JVS is joking. I wouldn't vote for Hillary if she was 'anti-establishment'. One huge reason I want her to be president is because she seems to support the current establishment. For f#ck sakes she is a Democrat in the Obama administration as Secretary of State.


Anti-Establishment to me is conspiracy theorists or retard politicians like Rand Paul, Ron Paul, and Bernie Sanders. Ron/Rand paul want to destroy government and undo everything, where as someone like Bernie Sanders is way too radically left to do anything. Furthermore, Bernie Sanders is part of the 'bank' conspiracy crowd who thinks a bank being big is 'evil'.
 
Did not read the article and just jumping in but how is voting for the Iraq war anti establishment?

You're talking about one vote literally more than a decade ago (that really has very little to do with "establishment" issues anyway). It's just weird that people have this image that isn't based on anything solid that they're holding onto so tightly.

Anti-Establishment to me is conspiracy theorists or retard politicians like Rand Paul, Ron Paul, and Bernie Sanders. Ron/Rand paul want to destroy government and undo everything, where as someone like Bernie Sanders is way too radically left to do anything. Furthermore, Bernie Sanders is part of the 'bank' conspiracy crowd who thinks a bank being big is 'evil'.

There is a lot of equivocating going on here (Ultra's post is a good example), but the real difference does come down to definitions. If people are just saying that she's getting a lot of endorsements from Democrats and most of the people who are giving money to Democrats are giving it to her, duh. But I don't equate "popular" with pro-establishment. Her voting record, historical stances, and current platform are all very anti-establishment.
 
I would vote for Jeb over Hillary. That's saying a lot.
 
I would vote for Jeb over Hillary. That's saying a lot.

Agreed.

Also, kind of shocking that the same guy who typed this:

The Democrats view humanity as selfish, evil, and beneath them, and they don't understand how capitalism works. So they view the government as the device by which they can take control of the population and force them to be as wise and kind as they are, and create a utopia where they save the poor from what they imagine is cruel isolation and death.

...is now considering voting Republican.
 
Last edited:
This election is like a joke you'd see on a movie set in the future. It ain't getting any better for us Americans.
 
Back
Top