No, with those guys you could see the damage before they got elected while Hilary is running circles around her attackers. I must admit I had a little concern but not after watching her brush your guys off like flies.
3 Likes
Oh dear Karl .
He had been managed by other people from the get go. It was just harder to hide it later. He never had a good grasp of truthfulness or reality.
5 Likes
If you want to know what brain damage looks like, go to youtube and search āKarl Rove Ohio.ā
3 Likes
āI would do what other candidates have done, absolutely,ā she told Sawyer.
She is so shrew and smart. She didnt say that sheād release her medical records (something no President in the last 30 years has done) they release a statement from their doctor attesting to their good health and fitness for the job, and thatās pretty much it.
Thatās all Hillary has to do either.
1 Like
Reagan was a successful candidate because he was a tall, good-looking actor with a deep voice who knew how to deliver jokes and finesse a script. But there was no intellect or depth behind the face. He was disconnected from actual humans, like his own children, for instance. A hollow puppet. Scary that we elected that guy.
9 Likes
The guy who promised to keep America so strong that no one would attack us and when the Beiruit barracks were bombed did little more than have one of our ships fire on a near by village. Ronnie was a total disaster.
Governor Brown is still dealing with leftover damage from Ronnie stint in California.
9 Likes
āit is also mindset.ā
Yes it is. Very important. So the question is, in 2016 do we want 8 more years of a Corporate Dem or are we ready to take a chance at real change?
1 Like
Iām not ready to have a Republican in the White House.
And Iām not ready to condemn Hillary Clintonāor insult herāby calling her a āCorporate Democrat.ā
She beats every other remotely electable candidate by a long chalk.
5 Likes
Itās such a good question, but can āreal changeā win in what may be the GOPās last real shot at the Presidency for a generation (assuming they keep the crazee front and center).
My thoughts are that Hillary, at this moment, has a great shot at steamrolling the GOP in 2016. To me, the key is her running mate ā¦ think if she chooses Julian Castro! Whether she goes one or two terms, he is the next generation. Watching him at the Dem convention, he is smart and charismatic ā¦ and think of the demographics in 2020 or 2024. He could usher in another first for president after first black and first woman.
The other big question, if not Hill, who?
4 Likes
Appreciate you saving me the keystrokes TN.
The nascent-Naderites who are swallowing another generationās worth of Paulist dogma- donāt seem to have a wide enough horizon to understand that making a progressive challenge to the 2-party status quo in 2016-- means possibly having a re-run-- or worse of Ā® rule for another 4-8yrs.
After Ā®s get their butts handed to 'em electorally in '16?
Iāll be committed to as much sensible progressive legislation as can be had.
But the task remains.
Ā®s have to suffer a horrendous defeat in 2016.
And a pie-in-the-sky attitude that a 3rd party candidate can win?
Would be simply ludicrous and as damaging to the future of our country-- or more so-- than Naderās ego-run in 2000.
jw1
5 Likes
Spot-on with the Clinton/Castro ticket.
I will damn near guarantee that ticket would carry Texas.
Carrying Texas means Ā®s have absolutely no avenue to 270 EVs.
jw1
.
2 Likes
He wasnāt declining for the most part, he was always a dim bulb waiting on a script and the directorās instruction as to where to stand, what to say, and when to say it.
He just started tuning out more and more (dozing, even) as time wore on. His movies simply didnāt drag on so long.
2 Likes
I so echo you on TX.
I donāt see how we can roll Texas any sooner without Hillary.
1 Like
If you didnāt know-- there was a UT statewide poll done maybe 12-18 months ago-- just after the 2012 election, I believe, which showed HRC bettering every Ā® hopeful-- by at least a decent margin.
In Texas.
Sheās actually popular here.
Sure, likely the major metro areas by-and-large-- but that was fairly telling to me.
President Clinton? Just add Julian!
jw1
2 Likes
I hope you meant shrewd. 
I was discussing Clinton yesterday within the context of the absence of challengers ā I donāt claim to have my finger on the pulse of things, but I see little sign of a credible challenger who is putting together the type of machine it would take to be a viable candidate in the Democratic primaries, let alone sufficient to take on Clinton. Increasingly, her candidacy looks inevitable. (Odds are thatās also what people like Rove are inferring, as they launch ābrain damageā-type smears.)
3 Likes
I guarantee you if she runs for President however, sheāll release more tax returns than Mittwit didā¦and unlike the MSM in his case, the media will demand seeing themā¦
Not wanting Hillary to be the nominee does not make one a Naderite. If she gets the nomination I will pull the lever (spin the stupid dial thing on those electronic machines we have in Texas). But there are other Democrats besides Hillary. And if she were to choose not to run, our bench would be real deep, real fast, with a number of great picks.
Allow me to explain why I resist seeing someone else of Hillaryās generation in the White House. The most important issue, bar none, of the last 30 years has been global climate change. It isnāt even close. It is a threat to our infrastructure, our food supply, our water supply and our national security. And how has Hillaryās generation handled the biggest crisis ever to face mankind? They have fāed it up thoroughly. The only way they could have done a worse job was if they started building machines that had no purpose other than to create CO2 (leaf blowers?). But look at what a younger president, Obama, did. With no more or different powers than Clinton had, he has made more progress in the fight against climate change than any president ever, because he had the gumption to do it. And that was with the most conservative SCOTUS since the Civil War and the most difficult and divided Congress ever. Another 8 years with Hillary will be another 8 years of doing jack squat for climate change. And we simply cannot afford that.
Two generations have been born and reached voting age (including mine) since the first UN report on climate change. The old political cliche of what will we tell our children if we donāt do something about X? For climate change, that time is now. What excuses can the previous generations give for their lack of action?
3 Likes
(As a side note BTS-- the Naderite comment was pointed at those who are fomenting a 3rd-party run; not those who might prefer a different (D) candidate if circumstance dictates.)
Iād like to provide a different tack as to what you feel HRC might do as POTUS.
First, she was the agent-provocateur of universal healthcare in the early 90s.
HRC and by relation WJC put their political capital into making that revelatory challenge to-- at the time-- an even larger issue that seemed-- again, at the time-- winnable.
Where the axis-alliance of Gingrich, Big Insurance, and the just-zombied MSM were able to keep it from fruition.
(But did open the door to BHOās later resuscitation of healthcare for all.)
Once that occurred?
HRC had little opportunity to play up the First Ladyās role into something other than traditional.
Follow that period with the ginned-up blowjob impeachment imbroglio-- and you have to admit that HRC had been effectively knee-capped.
Truth is? If she wins with a mandate in 2016?
I do believe youāll be surprised in a positive fashion with the direction of her agenda.
If Ā®s are degraded, and HRC goes to D.C. with the House and Senate?
There stands to be quite a bit of change in progressive direction.
Hey-- there are few who term BHO progressive (most label him a center-right (D)). Yet we have the genesis of a Single-Payer system of healthcare, DOMA struck down, states legalizing MJ, and now carbon-emission standards being set.
In this political clime? Pols as BHO and HRC have to play a role to strategically position themselves to expend their capital when most effective.
And I posit that HRC hasnāt been in position to affect policy domestically since her healthcare plan was shot down 20 years ago.
Thatās why I want HRC to have the opportunity-- to be HRC.
Not to be forever considered as WJC II.
jw1
5 Likes
I saw that poll also ā¦ Hill/Julian can crack that TX nut!
1 Like