Forum Thread

Will Hillary run.

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 15 Posts
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    I said Hillary will run in 2020.

    Mark Penn, a pollster and senior adviser to Bill and Hillary Clinton from 1995 to 2008, wrote this week in The Wall Street Journal that, "Hillary will run again." In fact, Penn suggested that America won't see a 2.0 version, but instead a refurbished "Hillary 4.0" release that is firing on all cylinders.

    google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/opinion/ca...

    Biggest donors are funded by Trumps Tax Cut. Trump takes the bite out of Hillary's 1.2 billion dollar loss.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet, if so then the Dem's are nuts. Then we will be back into the Bernie situation and never will win. We need some fresh blood with stamina and new idea's to bring this patient back from near death. Hillary has way too many skeletons in the closet, so forget it. Out of 325 million people there should be at least one person with brains and be able to "act" as President. I guess we've seen enough circus by now.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Is there anything that would be more embarrassing than losing to DT twice ? We shall see. I won't vote for her a second time.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote: Chet, if so then the Dem's are nuts. Then we will be back into the Bernie situation and never will win. We need some fresh blood with stamina and new idea's to bring this patient back from near death. Hillary has way too many skeletons in the closet, so forget it. Out of 325 million people there should be at least one person with brains and be able to "act" as President. I guess we've seen enough circus by now.
    Dutch, I said she wouldn't win the first time, but it's about another Billion dollar party. It's about spending $2,500,000 day for $480 days.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    That is bold prediction Chet. I have no doubt that she would like to run a second time, and personally I think she would make good president. Sadly I don't think its going to happen, she just too polarizing and hated by Trump republicans, and I don't think the democrats want to take another chance having an upset and we get another MF like Trump.

    However, it very likely she will have another powerful position in the democratic administration. I would go as far as saying she could be nominated to be an AG.

    I agree with Micheal Moore, Democrats win best, and win big, when they have somebody that is universally "Likeable". Moderate Republicans will vote for a democratic president if they perceive the candidate is honest, decent, and fair. If they perceive the person as anti-Republican, then that Democratic candidate will get very few cross over votes.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    wwjd Wrote:

    That is bold prediction Chet. I have no doubt that she would like to run a second time, and personally I think she would make good president. Sadly I don't think its going to happen, she just too polarizing and hated by Trump republicans, and I don't think the democrats want to take another chance having an upset and we get another MF like Trump.

    However, it very likely she will have another powerful position in the democratic administration. I would go as far as saying she could be nominated to be an AG.

    I agree with Micheal Moore, Democrats win best, and win big, when they have somebody that is universally "Likeable". Moderate Republicans will vote for a democratic president if they perceive the candidate is honest, decent, and fair. If they perceive the person as anti-Republican, then that Democratic candidate will get very few cross over votes.

    I am basing my prediction on the people that benefited from her first run. Money is a powerful aphrodisiac. There were multiple stories of how people spent the 1.2 billion to advance their own positions. Spending 2.5 million dollars a day in a short term campaign has to be wrought with personal abuses.

    the Panama Papers, and the death of American kleptocracy

    Posted: April 18, 2016 - 7:47 PM

    google.com/amp/www2.philly.com/philly/b...

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    wwjd, It's never been about the people.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Wwjd, I entirely agree that she's got much to offer and would be amazing in a cabinet position. That happens after election and the R polarization would not be exposed.

    If she's bored she can write a book or volunteer somewhere. Anything she would add would be negative and disastrous. If party leadership can do no better then they deserve to lose as they show their absolute incompetence. Old school politics needs to change and improve drastically.

    In '16 a brash reality Tv star was elected. People were screaming that they don't just want more of the same.

    I have voted for elections for nearly 40 years. I voted for her in '16. I won't repeat that. I would leave that section of my ballot blank. That said, I know she can offer so much. She's been painted as old school evil Democrats by the opposition. Cabinet is where she can do the most.

    Time for serious changes.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    TJ, Change is needed badly. The scheming in money circles is beyond comprehension and beyond comprehension of those suffering. It is difficult to track down. I tried to find out the influence on drug costs, healthcare costs and college costs on inflation. I know how much I spend on over the counter drugs and it has at least quadrupled in the last 5 years.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: TJ, Change is needed badly. The scheming in money circles is beyond comprehension and beyond comprehension of those suffering. It is difficult to track down. I tried to find out the influence on drug costs, healthcare costs and college costs on inflation. I know how much I spend on over the counter drugs and it has at least quadrupled in the last 5 years.

    Yes, change is needed badly; but since the present law system likely won't change then we will continue on the same path.

    As long as our system stays as corrupt as it is now , as well no stringent "oversight" on our leaders, a two party system, billions of corrupt money injected into manipulated elections, no "proper vetting" for our leaders; antique misinterpreted antique laws etc., then only an revolution can be the solution.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Insulin is skyrocketing also. One of those buy it or die drugs. Little to no changes except the prices. We all struggle daily. A politician who suggested they would fight really hard for the people would instantly have my full attention. Is that a simple enough statement to understand (Mr. Perez) ? Maybe a few Democrats will remember they're supposed to be fighting to help voters. An absolute promise to fight hard for patients rights might be a solid path.

    Pharma costs and insurance costs are way out of control. Citizens are grist for the mill.

    cbsnews.com/news/the-rising-cost-of-ins...

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    TJ Wrote:

    Insulin is skyrocketing also. One of those buy it or die drugs. Little to no changes except the prices. We all struggle daily. A politician who suggested they would fight really hard for the people would instantly have my full attention. Is that a simple enough statement to understand (Mr. Perez) ? Maybe a few Democrats will remember they're supposed to be fighting to help voters. An absolute promise to fight hard for patients rights might be a solid path.

    Pharma costs and insurance costs are way out of control. Citizens are grist for the mill.

    cbsnews.com/news/the-rising-cost-of-ins...

    I'll vote for you TJ:

    "Is that a simple enough statement to understand (Mr. Perez) ? Maybe a few Democrats will remember they're supposed to be fighting to help voters. An absolute promise to fight hard for patients rights might be a solid path".

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    I can express my view point with the David vs Goliath story.

    Dems = David. Smaller, but smarter, swifter, ethical with empathy for those who struggle for a better life.
    Reps = Goliath. Big, strong, but a total moron. Only one rule. Win; all other priorities are rescinded.

    • If David tries to beat Goliath at being bigger & stronger, David looses every time.
    • If David uses his intelligent, David beats Goliath as long as David stays smart and does not get cocky thinking he can out muscle Goliath

    So what happened in 2016?

    Dems thought they could beat Reps at their own game. Dems beleived they were bigger and stronger, and could beat Goliath in a physical battle of brute force, and they were shocked when the biggest and dumbest MF on the planet kicked their F'ing ass.

    If Dem think they can beat Trump by adopting his methods, they will loose 110% of the time. Question: Would Trump waterboard a child if it guaranteed him a win? You bet he would in a NY minute, and he would not loose any sleep over that choice. Would Dems cross that line? I don't think so. Trump is willing to do and say things no others would even consider if it means he will win. For Trump, there is no line that can not be crossed if it means he gets to win. Just can't beat him doing that.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    wwjd Wrote:

    I can express my view point with the David vs Goliath story.

    Dems = David. Smaller, but smarter, swifter, ethical with empathy for those who struggle for a better life.
    Reps = Goliath. Big, strong, but a total moron. Only one rule. Win; all other priorities are rescinded.

    • If David tries to beat Goliath at being bigger & stronger, David looses every time.
    • If David uses his intelligent, David beats Goliath as long as David stays smart and does not get cocky thinking he can out muscle Goliath

    So what happened in 2016?

    Dems thought they could beat Reps at their own game. Dems beleived they were bigger and stronger, and could beat Goliath in a physical battle of brute force, and they were shocked when the biggest and dumbest MF on the planet kicked their F'ing ass.

    If Dem think they can beat Trump by adopting his methods, they will loose 110% of the time. Question: Would Trump waterboard a child if it guaranteed him a win? You bet he would in a NY minute, and he would not loose any sleep over that choice. Would Dems cross that line? I don't think so. Trump is willing to do and say things no others would even consider if it means he will win. For Trump, there is no line that can not be crossed if it means he gets to win. Just can't beat him doing that.

    wwjd, learn about charisma. Not the colloquial conversational definition. The clinical definition. The dangerous side of true charisma is that it is an unexplained compelling attraction. It has no explanation!!! Nothing to do with charm or appearance or personality. Unexplained. Attacking a charismatic person is like attacking a mother's child. As soon as Trump announced his candidacy in 2015 I said he was going to be a very formidable candidate because he was charismatic. Then when he came out with his biggest bold faced lie promising good paying jobs after first saying American wages were too high I said he would probably win. Good paying jobs should have been and would have won for Hillary. The only thing that will do Trump in is Trump. Unless Democratics wizen up they may save Trump from himself by turning him into a Martyr. The way out is to out promise Trump. Then Democratics won't be attacking and strengthening Trump. Good paying jobs is a made for Democratics Crusade.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Can a person who is indicted for alleged improper use of emails/servers run for president? Republicans recently subpoenaed Comey, Lynch and Yates. Is this the republican version of a witch hunt?

    politico.com/story/2018/09/25/gop-comey...