President Hillary, The Nightmare Draws Near

[abudabit]

It seems like such a surreal concept. Hillary Clinton of all people as President Of The United States Of America. The same cunt with that sloppy healthcare plan everyone made fun of in the 90s. Ack ack ack ack. The woman who was booed during a 9/11 commemoration ceremony. The woman who picks up a southern accent everytime she speaks in front of black people. President.

What will the first few days be like for you? Will you mourn? Will you celebrate? Will the surrealness of the situation detach you from it all? What juices will flow through your mind?

[Treat_Yourself]

I don't think that will ever happen. The Dems who think she can win are out of touch with the rest of the country. She's not trusted or well liked by any Republicans or independents.

On the off chance she is elected I'll ride it out like I rode out the G. W. Bush presidency. At least it will make sure I'll still have something to bitch about on the internet.

[Your_Moms_Box]

I would much prefer Obama or Edwards.

But if she wins, I will simply thank god that george bush is gone, and hope she does half as good a job as her husband did.

[abudabit]

I used to think she couldn't win either.


Guiliani | Hillary


Cook Political Report/RT Strategies Poll.
9/13-16/07
43 | 45


NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll
9/7-10/07
42 | 49


CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll
9/7-9/07
46 | 50

[sniper2323]

I will just build my bomb shelter and wait because I know it is the last sign of the end of time.

[d0uche_n0zzle]

She's a lippy CUNT that should have been corrrrrrected a long time ago.

[NoSurviivors]

anyone but bush.

[kimothee]

I would much prefer Obama or Edwards.

But if she wins, I will simply thank god that george bush is gone, and hope she does half as good a job as her husband did.

x2

[LiddyRules]

Yes. We know. She gets into office and I spend my last days with my private property since I'll have to give up my tv and apartment because she's going to make us into a communist state. :icon_roll

I still don't think she'll win. And if she does, the country will pretty much continue down the same pathetic path it would go down no matter who is in office.

[WhiskeyWhispers]

My New Campaign Poster For My Favorite Cunt In The Whole Wide World:

http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/7691/evilhillaryoy3.jpg

[fandango86]

I used to think she couldn't win either.


Guiliani | Hillary


Cook Political Report/RT Strategies Poll.
9/13-16/07
43 | 45


NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll
9/7-10/07
42 | 49


CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll
9/7-9/07
46 | 50

I know these numbers are scary, but I assume they are national numbers, and as Al Gore can attest winning the popular vote doesn't mean a got-dam thing.

[mikeybot]

There isn't one candidate that I remotely get behind. Having said that, I'm not actually against all the Republican candidates for a change. At least for the time being they're keeping the bible thumping to a minimum.

-disclaimer
I'm utterly disinterested in pretty much all of them so I haven't really done any research. I'll wait on that til it gets whittled down to a few and it is actually the year that the election will be held in. Still time for dark horse candidates to appear

[Plunkies]

I'd sooner vote for Al Sharpton.

[abudabit]

There isn't one candidate that I remotely get behind. Having said that, I'm not actually against all the Republican candidates for a change. At least for the time being they're keeping the bible thumping to a minimum.

-disclaimer
I'm utterly disinterested in pretty much all of them so I haven't really done any research. I'll wait on that til it gets whittled down to a few and it is actually the year that the election will be held in. Still time for dark horse candidates to appear

Could you get behind a candidate (http://www.ronpaul2008.com)who wants to legalize marijuana, keep church and state seperated, reduce our military interventionism, reduce taxes and spending, and protect the constitution?

[mikeybot]

Pot I don't care about, church and state check, as far as the military goes, as long as it is something that is justified, I'm ok with intervention(ie not Iraq) and I don't want them slashing military spending with how fucked up things seem to be getting, taxes and spending very much depend on what their plan is, and definitely to leaving the constitution alone.

My point was more that it's over a year and a month til the election and who knows what candidates are going to be around next summer. It isn't that I'm disinterested in the process, I just won't register for a party, so I'm pretty sure I can't participate in a primary, plus the fact that I'm in Jersey almost guarantees that a Dem will the the electoral votes anyway.

[kimothee]

Could you get behind a candidate (http://www.ronpaul2008.com)who wants to legalize marijuana, keep church and state seperated, reduce our military interventionism, reduce taxes and spending, and protect the constitution?

All that, in theory, is great, but he's also staunchly pro-life, and in his discussion of pro-life issues, he doesn't address that being pro-life means pro ALL life, not just anti-abortion.

I'm not a one-issue voter, however, being a woman who holds a uterus and is still of child-bearing age, I don't want any interference in my decision making. Also, I think that if one is truly pro-life, they should support stem-cell research which can help lives of people of all ages.

[Kris_LTRMa]

She's not going to be president. I'd be surprised if she wins the Democratic primary. Somehow I think that votes for her & Obama are going to cancel each other out and we're going to wind up with Edwards by default.

[Vyce]

She's not going to be president. I'd be surprised if she wins the Democratic primary. Somehow I think that votes for her & Obama are going to cancel each other out and we're going to wind up with Edwards by default.

Oh god. That's the worst possible outcome.

As much as I dislike Hillary, I actually WANT her to get the nomination. Because I'm all about who I consider the best person for each party getting the nomination for that party. And sadly, given the current crop of Democrats, IMO, that's Hillary.

[CM Mark]

Well, if Hillary wins, at least we'll finally have a president who isn't afraid to pull over and ask for directions! Am I right folks? Gimme them ribs you!

[abudabit]

She's not going to be president. I'd be surprised if she wins the Democratic primary. Somehow I think that votes for her & Obama are going to cancel each other out and we're going to wind up with Edwards by default.

You are aware that votes for Hillary and Obama don't "cancel each other out", right? For Edwards to win he would have to get more votes than Hillary and more votes than Obama.

[Stormrider666]

The one problem I have with Hillary is this: 4 years of Bush senior, 8 years of Bill, 8 years of GW, and then 4 possibly 8 years of Hillary. Sounds a little too monarchial. That is why I'm really pulling for Obama.

[Vyce]

Well, if Hillary wins, at least we'll finally have a president who isn't afraid to pull over and ask for directions! Am I right folks? Gimme them ribs you!

Someone get me a needle & some thread, cause my sides just split!

[Sinn Fein]

I still believe she is disliked by too many different types of people, and just too many people, period. Thus, I don't think we have to worry too much about it.

[Myhairygrundle]

anyone but bush.


He's not running ya know...

I can't think of too many folks that are pleased with GWB right now, so the argument of "anybody but Bush" holds no water.

.

[MJMANDALAY]

I can't wait.
Shits and Giggles thats what I say.

[weakside]

Not much would change. Does it ever really with all the extremists in Washington not willing to budge on an issue? Red state, blue state, bullshit is destroying moderate views.

[Jolie]

You are aware that votes for Hillary and Obama don't "cancel each other out", right? For Edwards to win he would have to get more votes than Hillary and more votes than Obama.

I could be wrong, but I think by "cancel eachother out" he means that of the people NOT voting for edwards, half will be for hillary, half will be for obama, and because of that, even if a minority votes for edwards (ie, less than half) it will still be enough to put him over either hillary or obama.

[queeby]

Electing Hillary is basically like re-electing bush. Nothing will change, she is not a liberal, she has basically been a rubber stamp for the Bush administration for the past 8 years.

[Balogny Tits]

I just hope Bill is running everything from behind the scenes. Regardless of who gave him blow jobs, the world felt comfortable with him as president.

[Your_Moms_Box]

I still don't understand all the edwards haters, he's my #2, with Obama at number 1.

I honestly can't see Hillary getting the nomination.



And for all the Ron Paul fans, what do you honestly think he would accomplish?

He has the same problems as Nader and Perot, in that he would have 0/None/Nada support for his agenda in the house and senate.

Even if he is running as a republican, he is a libertarian.

You don't transform the government in leaps and bounds. Any serious alternatives have to start at the local levels, then get some house and senate seats, THEN get a presidential candidate.

I'd love to see a serious national third party effort in our system, but they all shoot for the stars instead of trying to actually reform the system the way it needs to be done.

[Begbie]

I just hope Bill is running everything from behind the scenes. Regardless of who gave him blow jobs, the world felt comfortable with him as president.

Oh yeah, that'd be great...maybe he can finally get his opportunity to get bin Laden! :icon_roll Or maybe they can bring Sandy Berger back to stuff more confidential documents (docs that were likely damaging to the administration) in his pants and have them destroyed.

We may have been "comfortable" while Clinton was President, but there was some bad shit going down behind the scenes. As for Hillary, she is a ruthless, power-hungry cunt and things will certainly be either status quo or even slightly worse than they are now with her running the country.

[queeby]

And for all the Ron Paul fans, what do you honestly think he would accomplish?

He has the same problems as Nader and Perot, in that he would have 0/None/Nada support for his agenda in the house and senate.

Even if he is running as a republican, he is a libertarian.

You don't transform the government in leaps and bounds. Any serious alternatives have to start at the local levels, then get some house and senate seats, THEN get a presidential candidate.

I'd love to see a serious national third party effort in our system, but they all shoot for the stars instead of trying to actually reform the system the way it needs to be done.

He could scale back some of the executive power that the past few presidents have taken for themselves. He could get us out of Iraq and not get us into anymore foriegn entanglements. He could get some of the transparency in government back.

Putting Ron Paul in office would send a message to both Republicans and Democrats that we are still paying attention, and that we are a FREE country. He definatley has a chance, this is a LONG race and it is far from decided, especially on the Republican side, Dr. Paul is picking up steam.

ALL of the candidates scare me, I don't think that Hillary is anymore scary than Giulani, Mitt Romney, Obama, McCain, or Edwards. None of them are fans of the constitution.

[kimothee]

Oh yeah, that'd be great...maybe he can finally get his opportunity to get bin Laden! :icon_roll

Um...he TRIED, but the Repugs were too fascinated by his blow jobs to take it seriously.

Face it, life was very different in the US pre-9/11. Sure, we were comfortable, but why shouldn't we have been? We had no reason to believe otherwise.

At least no one was eroding our civil liberties and trying to shove Christianity down our throats.

[Begbie]

Um...he TRIED, but the Repugs were too fascinated by his blow jobs to take it seriously.

Face it, life was very different in the US pre-9/11. Sure, we were comfortable, but why shouldn't we have been? We had no reason to believe otherwise.

At least no one was eroding our civil liberties and trying to shove Christianity down our throats.

Oh, yes it was the "repugs" who prevented Clinton from doing his job in getting bin Laden when we had him on several occasions...sure. :icon_roll Were the "repugs" also responsible for letting the designs of US nuclear warheads get into the People's Republic of China's hands too?

http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.htm

Doesn't sound like he TRIED hard enough to me.

Clinton and his administration are SO guilty of ignoring the threat bin Laden posed. And this is even after the 93 WTC bombing, 2 embassy bombings (which bin Laden then declared a holy war on the US), the Cole bombing, and the failed millenium bombing...all under the Clinton presidency. America was too comfortable pre-9/11 because we didn't know how serious the threat of terrorism was. But the Clinton and Bush adminstration's did, and they did nothing about it.

I guess we'll never know just how guilty the Clinton administration was in ignoring Al Qaida's threat. I mean, since Sandy Berger was able to destroy some of the evidence (ironically right before he was to testify before the 9/11 Commission). Some of the evidence was recovered, but it's believed that Berger did destroy primary evidence that showed the Clinton administration's failures. Maybe that's the "repugs" fault, too!

[kimothee]

I can throw up a ton of links supporting my thoughts, too, that's the glory of the internet.....we can all find shit which supports our own opinions.

I've heard your arguements about the Clinton administration before (not by you personally, but in general), and Bush 1 wasn't all that innocent, either. I'm just so sick and tired of the republicans blaming Clinton for everything, when they were actually the ones holding the Congress (which they conveniently forget except for when they want to crow about something).

I'm fairly disgusted with the Republican party because it has strayed so far from its origins. Yes, the same can be said for the Dems, but I never thought it would be the Republicans who were the ones trying to turn us all into good Christian soldiers.

I'm not all that thrilled with the way our Dem held Congress is behaving these days, either, for the record.

[Fr. Dougal]

they should support stem-cell research which can help lives of people of all ages.

You do know there's 2 other (and more successful) stem-cell sources besides embryonic, right? There's no reason to destroy embryoes when there's 2 other more successful sources.

You do know our current president gave more money to stem cell research than Clinton did, right?

Hell, didn't someone just post a story about viable stem cells from nutsacks? lol

[Fr. Dougal]

I'm just so sick and tired of the republicans blaming Clinton for everything, when they were actually the ones holding the Congress (which they conveniently forget except for when they want to crow about something).

If Clinton wanted to go to war, then yes, you could blame Congress if they didn't approve. But he could have gone after Bin Laden without a Congressional vote. That's what being the leader of the armed forces is all about. You have heard of the term "Commander in Chief," right?

[DoucheMeister]

As a Canadian, I hope she doesn't win, because that push you guys into a recession, and we'll be dragged down as well.

[TrybalRage]

And for all the Ron Paul fans, what do you honestly think he would accomplish?

He has the same problems as Nader and Perot, in that he would have 0/None/Nada support for his agenda in the house and senate.

Even if he is running as a republican, he is a libertarian.

You don't transform the government in leaps and bounds. Any serious alternatives have to start at the local levels, then get some house and senate seats, THEN get a presidential candidate.



You make a good point, there is much he couldn't accomplish alone. But he has said himself that he believes he could be the start of a great amount of change.

All of the government organizations that he wants to get rid of, he admits that there just can't be a vacuum because we have become dependant on much of those systems.

[kimothee]

If Clinton wanted to go to war, then yes, you could blame Congress if they didn't approve. But he could have gone after Bin Laden without a Congressional vote. That's what being the leader of the armed forces is all about. You have heard of the term "Commander in Chief," right?

Yes sir I have, however I also know that previous to current Bush, there was much more respect for the cooperation of congressional and presidential actions since we're not in a dictatorship.

[kimothee]

You do know there's 2 other (and more successful) stem-cell sources besides embryonic, right? There's no reason to destroy embryoes when there's 2 other more successful sources.

You do know our current president gave more money to stem cell research than Clinton did, right?

Hell, didn't someone just post a story about viable stem cells from nutsacks? lol

Actually yes, I have heard of using adult stem cells and other procedures. The biggest problem with embryonic research is because people are all hung up on the fact that they are "killing babies". That's completely untrue. Many of the cells which would be used for stem cell research are embryos harvested from fertility treatments which would otherwise be discarded. In other words, no one is trying to continue the development of said embryos.

[Begbie]

I can throw up a ton of links supporting my thoughts, too, that's the glory of the internet.....we can all find shit which supports our own opinions.

What opinion? I gave you one link to an LA Times article by a former Clinton aide that gave detailed accounts of the Clinton administration's ignorance when it came to capturing bin Laden. Maybe Clinton was too distracted receiving oral treats in the Oval Office to worry about some terrorist organization desire to attack American targets here and abroad.

I'm just so sick and tired of the republicans blaming Clinton for everything, when they were actually the ones holding the Congress (which they conveniently forget except for when they want to crow about something).

What does the republican congress have to do with Clinton failing to get bin Laden when he could've? We weren't going to war with bin Laden...we were just going to capture him. Clinton, and Clinton alone, does have the authority to nab bin laden and other individuals in the terror network. And he failed on multiple occasions.

I'm fairly disgusted with the Republican party because it has strayed so far from its origins. Yes, the same can be said for the Dems, but I never thought it would be the Republicans who were the ones trying to turn us all into good Christian soldiers.

I'm not all that thrilled with the way our Dem held Congress is behaving these days, either, for the record.

So to sum it up...politicians are power hungry, lying scumbags. Hear, hear!

[WhiskeyWhispers]

In all honesty, I just can envision an America where I look at the president and think "They have had a penis in their mouth".

Call me old-fashioned.

[Begbie]

In all honesty, I just can envision an America where I look at the president and think "They have had a penis in their mouth".

Call me old-fashioned.

McGreevey's running? :)

[WhiskeyWhispers]

McGreevey's running?

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/471/mcgreevyzm1.jpg

[droogie]

I would much prefer Obama or Edwards.

But if she wins, I will simply thank god that george bush is gone, and hope she does half as good a job as her husband did.

x3

[B54]

All that, in theory, is great, but he's also staunchly pro-life, and in his discussion of pro-life issues, he doesn't address that being pro-life means pro ALL life, not just anti-abortion.

I'm not a one-issue voter, however, being a woman who holds a uterus and is still of child-bearing age, I don't want any interference in my decision making. Also, I think that if one is truly pro-life, they should support stem-cell research which can help lives of people of all ages.

Supreme Court decides that, not the President. I doubt the next President will even get to pick one new Justice.

I could be wrong, but I think by "cancel eachother out" he means that of the people NOT voting for edwards, half will be for hillary, half will be for obama, and because of that, even if a minority votes for edwards (ie, less than half) it will still be enough to put him over either hillary or obama.

1/2 + 1/2 + 1/4 = "whaa"

I still don't understand all the edwards haters, he's my #2, with Obama at number 1.

Obama's skin color is #2.

[Budyzir]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v676/Budyzir/logo.jpg

[Jolie]

1/2 + 1/2 + 1/4 = "whaa"



OK work with me here...

3 candidates - if they all get equal # of votes, thats 33.33333% for each.

So if Edwards gets 34%, and Obama and Hillary split the rest of the vote, they each get 33% and 34 > 33. So, overall, Obama and Hillary combined = more popular, but they "cancel eachother out" by splitting the remainder of the votes in half.

[Jolie]

Actually yes, I have heard of using adult stem cells and other procedures. The biggest problem with embryonic research is because people are all hung up on the fact that they are "killing babies". That's completely untrue. Many of the cells which would be used for stem cell research are embryos harvested from fertility treatments which would otherwise be discarded. In other words, no one is trying to continue the development of said embryos.

This is what scares me - a lot of people don't see this as the beginning of the end of fertility treatments - And they should. Set a precedent that unused embryos CAN'T be used like this because its "unethical" and suddenly, any fertility treatment that produces more embryos than are used also becomes "unethical" and eventually that sets a precedent for why fertility treatments should be illegal. Or, something more dangerous happens, and women transfer ALL viable embryos at once, so they don't have extras, and end up with significantly more high order multiples than we see now, which increase medical costs astronomically, raise insurance for all, and cause a far bigger healthcare crisis than we are currently seeing. But more likely, fertility treatments would get banned.

[Sinn Fein]

In all honesty, I just can envision an America where I look at the president and think "They have had a penis in their mouth".

Call me old-fashioned.

I don't think she has.. Hence the shenanigans with Paula Jones, Gennifer Flowers, and Monica Lewinsky...

[Begbie]

x3

Yay! Droogie's back! That means the election year must be coming soon!

[Glenn Dandy]

AS If.

[Sinn Fein]

Yay! Droogie's back! That means the election year must be coming soon!

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

You made me chuckle with that one. Nicely done, sir.

[RMM46]

In all honesty, I just can envision an America where I look at the president and think "They have had a penis in their mouth".

Good thing you weren't around for the Taft Administration!