When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ?

Even if all that were true, in my opinion she's still a better choice than anyone the Republicans are offering.

I know you don't agree, Baldimo...and I respect your right to do so.

How a person with mental issues can be considered a "better candidate" running for president?

Several times Hillary Clinton has showed no mistakes but symptoms of being a delirious woman.

Her mind goes nuts when she is under pressure, and this is a fact that Democrats are evading to confront just because they want to continue in power.

Sadly, with impartial judgment, the verdict is that Hillary Clinton can't perform as the president of the USA because her mind will crossover the limits of rationality as soon she is under high pressure.

We need a president who will be a good speaker as Obama of Hillary Clinton are when no responsibilities are in play, like her appearances in front of audiences and talk whatever she wants to say, but watch her when deliberations were put in front of her, Libya was one of the cases, and she messed it up.

The worst threat for the USA won't be terrorists but Hillary's nuts mind if she comes to be the next president.

I'm sure she will be the Queen of transparency.

You want a more honest and up front political system and you still insist Hillary would be a good president?

I wonder which of the GOP candidates have turned over all their emails.....

Hmmm.......


Ah, the double standard is huge. Most Americans can see that pretty clearly.

How many of the current candidates were Sec of State? Apples and oranges Parados but I don't expect you to see that.

I do think Hillary will make a fine president, Baldimo...but that was not what I said in the comment to which you linked.

I said she is a better choice than anyone the Republicans are offering.

And she is...BIG TIME.

Saying it repeatedly and louder isn't itself a persuasive argument. I don't think anyone here doubts or is unaware of your opinions on the matter.

I believe the stresses in Clinton's candidacy are growing and the likelihood of her making a misstep that could start the unravelling of the twisted structure supporting it is fairly high. Her greatest political asset now is the fact that the Democrat establishment doesn't have a viable alternative to her. I suspect my views on the matter are just as evident as are yours. However, I believe thie Clinton campaign is also fairly obviously a situation with important elements of built in instability . As the campaign continues and the scrutiny on the Clinton enterprises goes on her vulnerability will grow. The tough issues for her are all ahead.

If I keep being asked, George...I will continue to answer. I am not repeating myself just to repeat myself. I was asked.

I consider Hillary Clinton to be head and shoulders above any choice the Republicans are offering. I also think she is the best choice of the Democrats thinking about a run.

Obviously folk like you feel she is damaged goods...and will be a snap to beat.

So...you should be hoping she is the candidate.

I know I am hoping against hope that Ted Cruz and Sarah Palin will be the Republican candidates...because I think the worst thing that could happen to this country right now is for a Republican to get the Oval Office...and I feel Cruz and Palin are snaps to beat.

But who knows? We'll see what happens a year from this November. In any case, I know who I am rooting to head the tickets for both major parties.

Really Apples and Oranges? So only the Sec of State needs to give up all personal emails?

I see Apples and Oranges but it's you that is calling an apple an orange by setting a standard for ONE person that no other person needs to meet.

At this point goerge, Clinton has been attacked so many times by the GOP without facts that the facts would have to be pretty convincing to change people's minds. You aren't going to change minds by attacking her without extremely strong evidence. You are only going to make her more sympathetic.

If you can prove that the GOP candidates did their govt business exclusively over their private email servers, then you might have a point. I never said she had to give over her private emails. She needed to let the govt confirm that she handed over all of her govt emails. We were told to take her word for it, and then when proof was asked for, she had the server deleted. Anything close to this happening with the GOP people?

Facts? We already know the Dems don't deal in facts. Harry Reid telling lies on the Senate floor about Romney and his taxes? Please Parados get off of the Dem high horse. There was ZERO evidence of Romney not paying his taxes but that didn't stop the Dem attack machine and Harry Reid.

Well, you seem to completely ignore the US Constitution and the rights guaranteed to citizens under that as well as the time line for when things occurred.

How do you propose finding out she handed over all her emails concerning government business if she doesn't hand over all her emails? She can't prove she handed them all as far as you are concerned until she hands over all her private emails.

It is standard practice to delete ANY server that is no longer being used that may contain sensitive government information. It is required under government regulations. If she hadn't scrubbed the server then people would be complaining that it was a security risk. She can't win with you guys.

So, you are all against someone making claims without facts but are all for you making claims without facts?

I never supported Reid's statements as being truth or as evidence of any wrongdoing on the part of Romney. We were left to take Romney's word on his tax returns. Perhaps you should apply the same standard now.

Who said turn over private emails? It was the server that is in question. I guess the question should be asked then. Why did she use a private email server for her govt emails? I do not think the Constitution covers systems that were used for govt business, those are not private.

You are taking her word that all govt emails were turned over? Because she said so? No way to prove it now as they deleted the server. If they used it for personal email, then that would mean it was still in use? Hell she lied about having 2 phones and was only busted because there are pic's out there of her with 2 phones.

Egad...she is so easy to beat. Almost anyone you guys put up will beat her. Why are you trying to get the Dems to put forth a better candidate?

Could it be that you realize she can beat damn near anyone you put up for competition????

How are you going to tell what is on the server and which emails are private? This is pretty simple stuff Baldimo. The only way to do it is to read every email unless you take the word of Hillary and her staff which you have already said you won't do.

Why did Colin Powell use a non governmental account? Frankly, Hillary's server was probably better protected than many government servers as we have already seen WH and State Department have been hacked as has Congressional servers. Her server was housed in a building protected by the Secret Service.

Private email SERVER... used for govt business...

She deleted the server instead of letting a 3rd party verify all govt emails were handed over. The govt has no way to prove the emails were handed over other than her word. The govt doesn't take people's word for it.

Hey Baldi, can I check your server in order to make sure you arnt hiding secret government information. I want them all, not just the ones you claim to be personal. After all you have been known to lie on this site numerous times.

Sorry Rabel, I don't have a personal email server. I have 2 email accounts, 1 for work and one for personal. I use them for what they are for. No business gets done on my personal email and vise versa. I'm smart enough, unlike Hillary, to keep them separated and apart.

What have I lied about Rabel? Please be specific. This is usually the charge from you guys who wouldn't know the truth if it landed on your face and began to wiggle.