Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
6
... LastLast
  1. #61
    Hillary will not win if she runs in 2020. No "ifs" or "buts" about it.

    Her end-game strategy for the 2016 election left her far too muddied, and the DNC is still running damage control on the exposure to their own corruption. She lacks the strength within her own party to make a second push; the DNC will have no choice but to pick someone new for their 2020 nominee. That's just the truth of things.

  2. #62
    Chelsea would have a better chance than Hillary. Also, minimum age is 35 to run for president, for those thinking 30-somethings are too young.

    Maybe Bernie would run again?

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by Tygor View Post
    Maybe Bernie would run again?
    As an independent, maybe. He's engaged in a formal legal battle with the DNC. They aren't exactly going to welcome him with open arms when it's voting season again.

  4. #64
    Legendary! Collegeguy's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Antarctica
    Posts
    6,955
    Quote Originally Posted by Tumaras View Post

    Elizabeth Warren or Cory Booker would be the most likely early names to actually run but it's a quite a while yet before the 2020 race starts winding up.
    You mean the guy who thinks Canadian pharmaceutical drugs are hazardous for your health? That guy would get ate more than Clinton.

    https://twitter.com/CoryBooker/statu...32712453652482

  5. #65
    Merely a Setback Kaleredar's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    phasing...
    Posts
    25,556
    Quote Originally Posted by PrimaryColor View Post
    I'm sure the DNC will manage to push through an even worse candidate despite what the average Democrat wants.
    Seeing as the average democrat, and more and more the average American, seems to just want "not Donald Trump," that's some shaky reasoning.

    Quote Originally Posted by Collegeguy View Post
    You mean the guy who thinks Canadian pharmaceutical drugs are hazardous for your health? That guy would get ate more than Clinton.
    Unfortunately, Trump has proven that people's unfounded and bat-shit insane opinions about things they're thoroughly uneducated upon and completely unqualified to talk about are something some voters celebrate.
    “Do not lose time on daily trivialities. Do not dwell on petty detail. For all of these things melt away and drift apart within the obscure traffic of time. Live well and live broadly. You are alive and living now. Now is the envy of all of the dead.” ~ Emily3, World of Tomorrow
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Kaleredar is right...
    Words to live by.

  6. #66
    Banned Hammerfest's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    United States of America
    Posts
    7,995
    Considering she could barely stay on her feet during this last campaign, I doubt she'd put her body through that again.

  7. #67
    If she can't beat donald trump what makes you think third time would be the charm? Aren't there better choices in the democratic party than a two time loser?

  8. #68
    Epic! Uoyredrum's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Middle of Nowhere, USA
    Posts
    1,714
    No and no. Why would people vote for a two time loser who handed a sentient cheetoh the presidency on a silver platter?

  9. #69
    Nope. She won't run, she wouldn't win if she did.

    If you can lose against the worst of the worst of the USA - then you have a problem.

    Challenge Mode : Play WoW like my disability has me play:
    You will need two people, Brian MUST use the mouse for movement/looking and John MUST use the keyboard for casting, attacking, healing etc.
    Briand and John share the same goal, same intentions - but they can't talk to each other, however they can react to each other's in game activities.
    Now see how far Brian and John get in WoW.


  10. #70
    She would lose again. Americans made it very clear they don't trust Hillary. Nothing she can do in the next four years will change that perception.

    On a different note. I would bet the first female president will be either have prior military experience or be heavily family oriented. Someone like Hillary or worse, Warren have no chance.

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by Tygor View Post
    Chelsea would have a better chance than Hillary. Also, minimum age is 35 to run for president, for those thinking 30-somethings are too young.

    Maybe Bernie would run again?
    LOL

    What basis is there for Chelsea to run for president? I don't even....but....wait...what now?

  12. #72
    Legendary! Collegeguy's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Antarctica
    Posts
    6,955
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaleredar View Post
    Unfortunately, Trump has proven that people's unfounded and bat-shit insane opinions about things they're thoroughly uneducated upon and completely unqualified to talk about are something some voters celebrate.
    True, but lying through your teeth to say people can have nice things works better than telling them they can't have nice things.

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by Khaza-R View Post
    She would lose again. Americans made it very clear they don't trust Hillary. Nothing she can do in the next four years will change that perception.

    On a different note. I would bet the first female president will be either have prior military experience or be heavily family oriented. Someone like Hillary or worse, Warren have no chance.
    Although I am often critical of modern feminists, there is a very fair critique to be made of societies requirements that women in leadership need to be tough, military hawk types. (see UK female PMs)

    It's far more likely the first female US president is a Republican, than a Democrat.

  14. #74
    Deleted
    Well, if establishment Democrats push again for Hillary, you know they aren't serious about winning the White House.
    She lost against Obama, she lost against trump, and if not for the primaries' rigging, she would lose against the socialist Jew from Vermont.
    What makes you think she would win this time??

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by Uoyredrum View Post
    No and no. Why would people vote for a two time loser who handed a sentient cheetoh the presidency on a silver platter?
    That's not nice. An ACTUAL cheeto is smarter.

    And you just insulted them.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Tijuana View Post
    LOL

    What basis is there for Chelsea to run for president? I don't even....but....wait...what now?
    Have you even paid attention to what's happened with the current President? Not sure if this was sarcasm or not, but the fact that she has started tweeting much more political things has piqued the interest of several people.

    I think the first female president is likely to be a VP who takes over the role due to the 25th Amendment. There are A LOT of men who simply will not vote for a woman for that office.

  17. #77
    I said it the last few times when someone tried this and I will say it again:
    There are some jokes that are just too distasteful to be told. This is one of them.

  18. #78
    Old God Vash The Stampede's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Better part of NJ
    Posts
    10,939
    She lost to Trump. TRUMP! A trained monkey could win an election against Trump. Bernie though would have won against Trump.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Tygor View Post
    Have you even paid attention to what's happened with the current President? Not sure if this was sarcasm or not, but the fact that she has started tweeting much more political things has piqued the interest of several people.

    I think the first female president is likely to be a VP who takes over the role due to the 25th Amendment. There are A LOT of men who simply will not vote for a woman for that office.
    I mean, sure Trump is a novice. But he was first asked by the public to run for president in 1980! It's not like he had zero name recognition of his own, until he ran. This is not true of Chelsea. The public knows exactly ONE thing about her, who her parents are. And even that, comes with MASSIVE baggage. The Clinton's are pretty battered, from a PR stand point.

  20. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by Tijuana View Post
    I mean, sure Trump is a novice. But he was first asked by the public to run for president in 1980! It's not like he had zero name recognition of his own, until he ran. This is not true of Chelsea. The public knows exactly ONE thing about her, who her parents are. And even that, comes with MASSIVE baggage. The Clinton's are pretty battered, from a PR stand point.
    Wiki leaks released some e-mails where Doug Band, (an aid to Bill Clinton), was complaining about Chelsea taking money from the Clinton Foundation to pay for her wedding so there's that too.

    "“The investigation into her getting paid for campaigning, using foundation resources for her wedding and life for a decade, taxes on money from her parents…,” Band wrote to John Podesta, now Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •