chipwhich Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 When this board explodes (again) as Hillary wins the nomination in 11 months and the Presidency in 15 months and 3 days...I am absolutely going to rub it in. Not because I like her..or that I am even a fan of her..mainly because I think she is the only candidate that has a real shot at winning this. And most of you don't want to acknowledge it. So really..you all can obsess over email servers/thumbdrives/$600 haircuts/inheritance tax avoidance/hit lists/hummers or whatever the soon to be First Dude still enjoys...and I'll be here practicing my bwahahahahas. And if I'm wrong. So be it. I'll be stunned. But it won't be the first or last time. Who on this board says she can't win. Hillary is the next president. Nothing to rub in. It's sad that our 3 of a kind we are holding is Clinton, Bush, Trump. What a poker hand that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Who on this board says she can't win. Hillary is the next president. Nothing to rub in. It's sad that our 3 of a kind we are holding is Clinton, Bush, Trump. What a poker hand that is. There is quite a few posters in this thread that have claimed she is unelectable. And that she won't even get the D nomination. Personally, I think Hillary will make a good president. That said, I cannot help but feel that both Kerry and Gore would have been a heck of a lot better. But there time came and went. Looking at 2020 (I don't know if a 73yo Clinton would be the best choice then)...I wonder if the Dems are looking at Andrew Cuomo and Martin O'Malley...or will they focus more on Corey Booker and Joaquin Castro (or heck..Hillary might open the doors for even someone like Kirsten Gillibrand)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Thanks to all who answered my questions. For the record, I don't have a horse in this race on either side. I'm a registered Democrat, but consider myself Independent. If a good Republican candidate came along, I wouldn't hesitate to vote for them. I rarely tow the party line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 It's a shame Rick Perry didn't make the cut. He always lends a much needed intellectual gravitas to these events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Something to keep in the back of your mind when hearing the war on women stuff during the election cycle http://money.cnn.com/2015/08/05/news/economy/some-young-women-outearn-men ... Women ages 22 to 27 who have a bachelor's degree get paid almost as much as their young male peers. Sometimes, they even get paid more. Among recent college graduates from 2009 to 2013, women earn roughly 97 cents for every dollar young men earn for doing the same job and having similar qualifications ... But there's a lot of variation. Men still earn way more than women in some fields -- a whooping 21% more in agriculture, for example. But young females who majored in social services, treatment therapy and industrial engineering actually beat men by 10% or more. .... "According to our estimates, newly minted female college graduates earn as much as, or more than, men in 29 of the 73 majors," economists Jaison Abel and Richard Deitz found. Women who major in these fields are paid particularly well (more than men) after graduation: engineering, treatment therapy, art history, construction services, or business analytics. The Federal Reserve of New York research is more evidence that young women are closing the pay gap, but it remains to be seen if pay will stay about equal throughout their lifetimes. ... It goes on to talk about people halfway through (or more) their career and the gap, but keep in mind the article starts by saying that younger women are the ones equaling the gap. It seems reasonable they'll continue their ability to do that as they progress through their career, we'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 It goes on to talk about people halfway through (or more) their career and the gap, but keep in mind the article starts by saying that younger women are the ones equaling the gap. It seems reasonable they'll continue their ability to do that as they progress through their career, we'll see. Or they'll have a kid, and never make the same again. Still, it's interesting. Glad you found it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Or they'll have a kid, and never make the same again. Still, it's interesting. Glad you found it. Yeah, that's hard to measure though. What should the cost be for missing that time? I know people that left their career for 20 years (waited until second kid was graduated from high school), went back and couldn't find a job. I felt bad for her because I like her, she's a good person, and I personally think she has the kind of attitude to be a great employee... but how can you expect an employer to overlook 20 years out of the field? In some fields, that would basically make you worthless... in many it puts you at entry level. How does that count in the pay gap statistics? Is everyone counting it the same? Is that really a problem? *shrug* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 There is quite a few posters in this thread that have claimed she is unelectable. And that she won't even get the D nomination. Personally, I think Hillary will make a good president. That said, I cannot help but feel that both Kerry and Gore would have been a heck of a lot better. But there time came and went. Looking at 2020 (I don't know if a 73yo Clinton would be the best choice then)...I wonder if the Dems are looking at Andrew Cuomo and Martin O'Malley...or will they focus more on Corey Booker and Joaquin Castro (or heck..Hillary might open the doors for even someone like Kirsten Gillibrand)? Quite a few???? I've seen one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Who on this board says she can't win. Hillary is the next president. Nothing to rub in. It's sad that our 3 of a kind we are holding is Clinton, Bush, Trump. What a poker hand that is. I actually think Jeb Bush is probably the best potential candidate from any party since Reagan left office. That said his name cripples him and I just don't see enough voters being able to get by that last name to enable him to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Scanning the past few pages of this thread, it feels like there are two conversations happening. 1. What some posters THINK is/will happen. 2. What some posters HOPE happens, but framed as that is where things are trending. anywho..... Head Of Rand Paul Super PAC Indicted WASHINGTON -- Three former staffers for the 2012 presidential campaign of then-Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) -- including one who currently heads the super PAC of Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Ron Paul's son -- were indicted on Wednesday. The three allegedly engaged in a conspiracy to conceal payments made to an Iowa state senator in exchange for his support of the elder Paul's campaign, according to prosecutors. The three former staffers -- Jesse Benton, John Tate and Dimitrios Kesari -- have been charged with "conspiracy, causing false records to obstruct a contemplated investigation, causing the submission of false campaign expenditure reports to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and engaging in a scheme to make false statements to the FEC," according to the Justice Department. Benton is also charged with making a false statement to the FBI, while Kesari is charged with obstruction of justice. The staffers allegedly negotiated with Iowa state Sen. Kent Sorenson ® -- who had been supporting the presidential campaign of then-Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) -- to switch over and back Ron Paul's campaign instead. The payments totaled $70,000, and were allegedly made in monthly installments of about $8,000 each. Federal prosecutors allege that the payments were hidden as audiovisual expenditures. "I am not splitting hairs: Sorenson was not getting paid off," Benton allegedly told the FBI in July 2014. Federal prosecutors say that was a lie. more from the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hersh Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 More from the link. Yes he misspoke...and it won't hurt him now in the primary season where most are to the right of him. And they say Joe Biden is gaffe prone. Every month he is needing to clarify a statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Bill Clinton called Donald Trump ahead of Republican’s 2016 launch Former president Bill Clinton had a private telephone conversation in late spring with Donald Trump at the same time that the billionaire investor and reality-television star was nearing a decision to run for the White House, according to associates of both men. Four Trump allies and one Clinton associate familiar with the exchange said that Clinton encouraged Trump’s efforts to play a larger role in the Republican Party and offered his own views of the political landscape. Clinton’s personal office in New York confirmed that the call occurred in late May, but an aide to Clinton said the 2016 race was never specifically discussed and that it was only a casual chat. The talk with Clinton — the spouse of the Democratic presidential front-runner and one of his party’s preeminent political strategists — came just weeks before Trump jumped into the GOP race and surged to the front of the crowded Republican field. The revelation of the call comes as many Republicans have begun criticizing Trump for his ties to Democrats, including past financial donations to the Clintons and their charitable foundation. More from the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Conspiracy!!! Dang, this just gets funnier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sea Bass Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 "The idea that they have left out the runner-up for the 2012 nomination, the former four-term governor of Texas, the governor of Louisiana, the first female Fortune 50 CEO, and the 3-term Senator from South Carolina due to polling seven months before a single vote is cast is preposterous," Rick Santorum communications manager Matt Beynon said in a statement Tuesday. Leaving them out is the right thing to do. It's letting the other guys IN that's preposterous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Leaving them out is the right thing to do. It's letting the other guys IN that's preposterous. "Did you bring a horse for me?" "Looks like we're shy one horse." "You brought two too many." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Conspiracy!!! Dang, this just gets funnier. Oooh a rich guy called another rich guy. Oooh a rich guy donated to both parties. Must be real juicy stuff. Hint, you pad both pockets to get a seat at the table post election. I just dropped 100K on Hillary and 100K on Jeb. Making moves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 gotta cover Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Well at least she isn't a total Narcissist. I really don't get why anyone would vote for her. But they elected her in New York without any ties there. They were also close to electing a crook and a guy that snap chats his penis. So New Yorkers might be the worst when it comes to voting. http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/hillary-clinton-confronts-her-negatives-121070.html There aren’t any outward signs of panic, but the Clinton campaign has made a $2 million, early-state ad buy featuring biography-heavy commercials. Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/hillary-clinton-confronts-her-negatives-121070.html#ixzz3i05yOI22 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted August 6, 2015 Author Share Posted August 6, 2015 A look at tonight's debates & who can improve to make it to the 9/15 CNN debate: The 5pm forum 1. Lindsey Graham- He's running to make sure national security/foreign policy issues are discussed. I think other than Rand Paul, the other 16 would have the same solutions. I don't see him really doing anything in this debate that would help his candidacy or get him into the main debate next time. He's gone after South Carolina. 2. George Pataki- Why on earth is he running? The Repubs ran that type of governor in 2012. I don't see anything he can say that would boost his poll numbers or get into the the second main debate. Frankly, it will not shock me; if he drops out before the second debate. 3. Rick Santorum- He's yesterdays news. They are plenty of candidates in the main debate that would take up the social issues he cares about. Trump is already appealing to that working class angst. He's already had to drop staff. He won't make it to the second main debate. I think he's gone by late September. 4. Jim Gilmore- What on earth convinced him to run. He has zero chance and nothing he can say, will get him into the second main debate. Frankly, his candidacy will probably be real short. I don't see him even making it to the next debate. 5. Bobby Jindal- Too many social conservatives already there. He could probably say something that get hims some TV coverage but he would need some of the other candidates in the first tier. I only see him in the secondary debate next time around. 6. Rick Perry- I think, there's still a chance Perry can make it to the main debate next time around. He really needs to erase that image of 2012 and show voters he's competent. A strong showing can boost his campaign. A poor showing and he's done. 7. Carly Fiorina- I also think Carly could do make an impact in this debate that could boost her numbers some. If she does well, people may give her a second look and she could possibly have a surge?? I know the party insiders would love to have her at the next debate. If she performs poorly, she's probably done. So, from the early forum; I think Rick Perry and Carly Fiorina are the 2 candidates who have the best chance to help their campaigns. The Main 9pm Debate 1. Ted Cruz - Ted will be Ted. I think he needs to show the Trump voters, that he's the one they should be supporting. As long as he makes no errors; he should be able to wait it out, until Trump inevitably drops out. 2. Rand Paul- His campaign is slowly dying. There's a natural constituency for him but he's acting to much like a regular Republican and it is costing him support of his father's voters. He really needs to show people why he is different, to boost his campaign. He seems like the guy that cold make a fatal error and sink his campaign. 3. Marco Rubio- This guy is dropping fast, when he was soaring earlier. He really needs to standout tonight, to give his campaign a boost. He also seems like a candidate that could make a fatal error and end his campaign. 4. Dr. Ben Carson- A fav among social conservatives and Tea Partiers. He has enough support, to make it into the early primaries. I think he will say something real stupid but I don't think it will hurt his campaign. He'll make his mark and then be gone by Super Tuesday: 3/1/16. 5. Mike Huckabee- I don't think he can expand beyond his evangelical base. He will say some stupid things but he will probably be there for Super Tuesday. 6. Jeb Bush- He's got the money but Jeb really doesn't seem that good of a candidate to me. He's still the fav for the nomination; though I think someone else will get it. As long as he doesn't have a major error, he will be fine and will be one of the finalists. 7. Donald Trump- I think he will be boom or bust tonight. IF Trump bombs tonight; those poll numbers will sink. All eyes will be on him and if he doesn't look competent, that will kill him. He can do his bombastic style that has given him supporters but he needs to look like he belongs there. 8. Chris Christie - He's already said stupid things. He'll probably just chug along. His only legit hope is that Bush implodes. I think the establishment has a better alternative; should that happen. 9. Scott Walker- He's been fading some, with Trump's rise. Still my favorite to be the nominee, he needs show why, he should be the nominee. 10. John Kasich- First step, getting into the main debate. IT would've been fatal; if he couldn't get into a debate being held in his state. I think, he has potential to show himself as an alternative to Bush. Baring a Perry 2012- Oops moment; all 10 of these guys should be able to make it into the next debate. Though there is potential for some of them, including Trump, to really hurt their campaigns. Should be a fun night tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted August 6, 2015 Author Share Posted August 6, 2015 Well at least she isn't a total Narcissist. I really don't get why anyone would vote for her. But they elected her in New York without any ties there. They were also close to electing a crook and a guy that snap chats his penis. So New Yorkers might be the worst when it comes to voting. http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/hillary-clinton-confronts-her-negatives-121070.html NY has a history of electing outsiders. Wasn't RFK a Senator from NY? I think Hillary is nothing but Arkansas trash. Yeah, she was raised in Chicago but she spent enough time in Arkansas. I think Bill and her are mostly interested in making money. What kind of president would she be? It depends on what path she follows. She follows OBama's path; she will be lousy. If she follows her husband's path; she could be a decent president. Will she be more in tune with her party and govern more to the left? Will she be more centrist like her husband? I also think she will be impeached. There is something very Nixonian about her personality and I think; she will end up doing something that could have her face impeachment and maybe even removed from office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 NY has a history of electing outsiders. Wasn't RFK a Senator from NY? I think Hillary is nothing but Arkansas trash. Yeah, she was raised in Chicago but she spent enough time in Arkansas. I think Bill and her are mostly interested in making money. What kind of president would she be? It depends on what path she follows. She follows OBama's path; she will be lousy. If she follows her husband's path; she could be a decent president. Will she be more in tune with her party and govern more to the left? Will she be more centrist like her husband? I also think she will be impeached. There is something very Nixonian about her personality and I think; she will end up doing something that could have her face impeachment and maybe even removed from office. Summary: "Hilary Clinton is nothing but Arkansas trash, only interested in making money. She is likely a crook who will likely be impeached and removed from office." Thank you for that reasoned analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hersh Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Summary: "Hilary Clinton is nothing but Arkansas trash, only interested in making money. She is likely a crook who will likely be impeached and removed from office." Thank you for that reasoned analysis. You left out my favorite part...If she follows Obama's path, she will be lousy. Is the suggestion that Obama has been lousy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Summary: "Hilary Clinton is nothing but Arkansas trash, only interested in making money. She is likely a crook who will likely be impeached and removed from office." Thank you for that reasoned analysis. It's as if Trump himself is posting here at ES. Telling it like it is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Mad Magazine.....you've done it again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 So, anybody cheering for/against anything in the debate, tonight? Me, I think it would be OK if this marked the end of Trump. Yeah, he's entertaining. (In a dangerous "hey, this is really happening" kind of way.) But frankly, I expect people like Cruz and Cristie and Paul to be just as entertaining. In ways that I think will be much harder for the GOP to disclaim. And I'd like for the media to be paying more attention to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.