If Clinton Wins

Bill is the best part. He will even get us out of Afghanistan.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

If Hill wins, you get Bill as part of the team. This would put the country back on track to prosperity and fairness. Obama would be a good Veep.

A major portion of the prosperity during Clinton's administration was due to the dot com bubble which later burst, and tech industry profits from hype over the Y2K scare.

In what way do you foresee a Clinton presidency duplicating that bubble and hyped scare for prosperity?

0 Replies

I think that Hill/Bill will again balance the budget, and really begin to pare down the debt. This will help the dollar.

They will also address the balance of trade by insisting that the the Chinese, et al., play fairly with their currency and trade practices. They will also work bring about universal healthcare, which will help start new business (which bring about job growth) and help business overall.

They will take many more steps to improve the economy, and not sit back like the laissez-faire Bush did.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

I think that Hill/Bill will again balance the budget, and really begin to pare down the debt. This will help the dollar.

They will also address the balance of trade by insisting that the the Chinese, et al., play fairly with their currency and trade practices. They will also work bring about universal healthcare, which will help start new business (which bring about job growth) and help business overall.

They will take many more steps to improve the economy, and not sit back like the laissez-faire Bush did.

It's impossible for her to balance the budget and implement her universal health care plan simultaneously. Now, it's impossible for Obama to do that as well. But let's be realistic here. Next years' budget is already 400 billion down and the deficit is right around 10 trillion. If we really are moving into a recession, we aren't going to catch up any time soon.

Don't look for balanced budgets from any candidate before 2011.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Let's forget about the Obama as VP thing.

There is no way that this would happen any more than Hillary would accept the VP position-- which would be more appropriate since Obama will soon take the delegate lead.

Obama and Hillary are both fine candidates for the job (and I will support either one in the general election)... but they represent different directions for the party. Democrats are going to have to make a choice.

Advocate... One of Clinton's weaknesses is her support of "free trade" and NAFTA in particular. I am surprised that this isn't enough to make you an Obama supporter-- or do I not understand your political stances well enough.

0 Replies

Bill produced surpluses in almost no time, and Hill/Bill would do the same. There can be tremendous savings by eliminating the tax cuts for the wealthy, and reducing our presence in the ME. Universal healthcare would not run up the deficit. Developed countries that have it spend less than half we do per capita, and people have a longer life expectancy.

0 Replies

"I refuse to accept the view that mankind is
so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism
and war that the bright daybreak of peace
and brotherhood can never become a reality....
I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word. ~Martin Luther King, Jr.

0 Replies

Just a helpful pointer.... I understand that you think Bill is an asset, but I don't think the phrase "Hill/Bill" is flattering to Hillary.

In fact if I were a supporter of Hillary Clinton, I would avoid using that term at all cost (it does not put her candidacy in a good light). If a non-supporter used the same phrase, I would see it as a slight.

Not that I mind (since I like Obama), I wouldn't use the term because I want to be positive about my candidate rather than negative about the other one.

But I am just trying to be helpful.

0 Replies

Where does the failing social security system mess fit into that scenario of longer life expectancy and a renewed prosperity?

0 Replies

Butrflynet wrote:

Where does the failing social security system mess fit into that scenario of longer life expectancy and a renewed prosperity?

Are you pointing out that a shorter life expectancy is the best thing for the social security system?

((This is true... but I am not sure it is a good political slogan)).

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

Just a helpful pointer.... I understand that you think Bill is an asset, but I don't think the phrase "Hill/Bill" is flattering to Hillary.

In fact if I were a supporter of Hillary Clinton, I would avoid using that term at all cost (it does not put her candidacy in a good light). If a non-supporter used the same phrase, I would see it as a slight.

Not that I mind (since I like Obama), I wouldn't use the term because I want to be positive about my candidate rather than negative about the other one.

But I am just trying to be helpful.

There are many people who are a bit more sophisticated than you who would look at Bill's association as a tremendous asset. At least that is my unstudied viewpoint.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

ebrown_p wrote:
Just a helpful pointer.... I understand that you think Bill is an asset, but I don't think the phrase "Hill/Bill" is flattering to Hillary.

In fact if I were a supporter of Hillary Clinton, I would avoid using that term at all cost (it does not put her candidacy in a good light). If a non-supporter used the same phrase, I would see it as a slight.

Not that I mind (since I like Obama), I wouldn't use the term because I want to be positive about my candidate rather than negative about the other one.

But I am just trying to be helpful.

There are many people who are a bit more sophisticated than you who would look at Bill's association as a tremendous asset. At least that is my unstudied viewpoint.

At least you admit that you are unstudied on the issue.

Eliminating the tax cuts for the rich and ending the war in Iraq won't balance the budget, let alone an added health insurance mandate which is heavily subsidized.

You just don't seem to have studied the actual costs or benefits of any of these things, Adv.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

"It's not just enough to change the players. We've gotta change the game."

-Barack Obama

Sorry Obama
game is a wrong word and SYSTEM is the correct one.
I wish not carry coal to the new castel.
Your mother-tongue is AMERICAN english whereas mine is a different English.
Wait for four more years and avoid the billion dollar election show.

0 Replies

Advocate,

What is your opinion of NAFTA which Bill Clinton fought for, and signed?

What do you think of Bill Clinton's inability to keep Congress in Democratic hands (not this was pre-Monica)?

What did you think of "Don't ask, Don't tell" (the silliest "compromise" ever concocted)?

Yes, Bill Clinton was a Democratic president who did some good things and presided over prosperous times-- he wasn't the Jesus... and he there were many things he did that frustrated the progressive wing of the Democratic party.

There are many Democrats, particularly progressive Democrats, who think we can do better than that.

0 Replies

eb, please first give me your views with detailed reasons.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

eb, please first give me your views with detailed reasons.

Why should anyone? You claim to know all about the 90's and why it was good for America. You should be able to answer these questions - without seeing someone else's answers first.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

My concern is less with what kind of a job Bill did as president per se as much as the weird, undefined role he would have in the government. He wouldn't be an elected official yet he'd have a whole lot of power. What if he did something weird and contrary to the preferences of Hillary if she was president, like the whole Boratgate thing? What if she told him to stop doing something and he didn't? What he does another stupid thing (affair etc.) that gets a ton of media attention and makes it harder for her to do her job? What if the immediately preceding "what if" happens and she decides she's tired of him and wants a divorce and he makes that -- and giving up the power he's gotten by virtue of a marriage certificate -- extremely difficult?

Nobody seems to think that he would stay in the shadows and not do much of anything. Everyone is assuming that he would be involved, it's just a question of whether that would be a good or a bad thing. While I outline some of the possible ways I think it could be a bad thing above, I also object to the end-run around the constitution that this involves. Presidents are supposed to be limited to two terms. This would be a third term in too many ways, and that bothers me.

As ebrown alludes to, it also bothers me as a feminist. If we're going to have a female president, can she at least get there on her own power, rather than because people like her husband?

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Advocate wrote:
eb, please first give me your views with detailed reasons.

Why should anyone? You claim to know all about the 90's and why it was good for America. You should be able to answer these questions - without seeing someone else's answers first.

Cycloptichorn

Of course I could answer the questions. But I would like to first see his answers, and see him exert himself a bit before I do.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

eb, please first give me your views with detailed reasons.

NAFTA created hardships for workers in both Mexico and in the United States... the obvious winners being the corporations. It has increased poverty in the agricultural sector of Mexico (particularly for corn farmers) and has puts a downward pressure on US wages as well.

I think Bill Clinton was a great politician when it came to his own candidacy... but he did little to help his party. He went with the Republicans on issues like welfare and would not stand up for progressives in issues like gay rights. He certainly did not help the Democrats in Congress (who didn't do very well during his term).

I would have had mixed feelings about the Clinton presidency if it weren't for the sex scandal (that whatever you want to say about the detestable conduct of the Republicans was his own fault).

I think we can do better.

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

Butrflynet wrote:
Where does the failing social security system mess fit into that scenario of longer life expectancy and a renewed prosperity?

Are you pointing out that a shorter life expectancy is the best thing for the social security system?

((This is true... but I am not sure it is a good political slogan)).

No. Like Obama has said many times, all these various entities are inter-connected. You can not consider only one of them without looking at the bigger picture of how they all work together.

It isn't going to be a very prosperous time for anyone no matter who is president. The best we can hope for is not to make it worse while coming up with plans to fix the whole thing.

0 Replies

If Clinton Wins

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know