34
   

Are We Ready For a Woman President? Really?

 
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 01:28 pm
@revelette2,
nope
revelette2
 
  0  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 01:30 pm
@ehBeth,
In what way is it nope?

maxdancona
Quote:
If you objectively compare the criticism she is receiving with most other candidates, it is more or less equivalent. If you compare the criticism of Hillary Clinton with the exceptional nastiness launched at Barack Obama (some of which was from Hillary supporters), Hillary doesn't even come close.


snood
Quote:
If you think you're totally objective in these discussions then you're deluded.


ehbeth
Quote:
yup

calling her Killary is just the norm. all presidential candidates have been called murderers Rolling Eyes


ehbeth
Quote:
The poster snood was responding to said something about the criticism being equivalent. That wasn't snood.


me
Quote:
No, he just said max was not objective after max said the level of criticism Hillary receives is no where near what Obama receives, then you agreed by saying "Yep".


ehbeth
Quote:
nope


Yep, It was like I said, if not please explain. Or not as you choose.
woiyo
 
  0  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 01:55 pm
@glitterbag,
Based upon her poor performance as a Senator, Head of State , she would not get my vote. I did not appreciate how she used NY as a launch pad to the Senate. She is a liar and has no credibility and can not be trusted with sensitive information.

She is past her prime and the Democratic Party should be ashamed to have her as a candidate when her time past 8 years ago.

It appears the Democratic Party is now the party of no new ideas, but no new candidates.

hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 02:10 pm
@woiyo,
Quote:

It appears the Democratic Party is now the party of no new ideas,

That has been clear for a very long time. With as silly as the R's are at times they at least are trying some new things at the state level. Also the imminent implosion of the EU is going to be a very big problem for D ideology, this idea that the little people can be muscled into good order by an authoritarian state. If the D's want to stay relevant they best get their brains in gear.
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 02:15 pm
@hawkeye10,
I'd argue that the Democrats are trying a lot more things at the state level including things that are more experimental and far reaching. Legalized drugs, higher minimum wages, physician assisted suicide, etc.
snood
 
  2  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 02:23 pm
@revelette2,
I was simply saying that anyone with opinions that passionate either for or against a candidate is deluded if they think they are totally objective. You read that to mean I was commenting on whether it was correct that the criticisms of the two candidates are alike. I was not commenting on that at all.
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 02:28 pm
@revelette2,
Objectively speaking, I am the most objective person here.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 02:29 pm
I'm as nervous as a cat on a hot tin roof.
snood
 
  0  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 02:30 pm
@Lash,
Lash wrote:

I'm as nervous as a cat on a hot tin roof.

Lash! where you been?!? Yup, I bet you are nervous. Bernie has a lot he could gain from this. I don't see Hillary as having as much to gain, but a whole lot to lose. You see it like that?
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 02:37 pm
@engineer,
I suspect that you dont know what you think you know. Colorado is a pretty R state, and support for legal pot in Washington got wide support from the Right.

Large min wage hikes we dont how good or bad an idea that will turn out to be. Get back to me in three years on that but my guess is that long term it will be on par with Merkel inviting all the world to come live in Germany, that it will be seen by the historians and the people both to have been a very bad idea.

Re suicide, it is the R's who are pushing to keep guns legal, dont tell me that they are against state facilitated suicide, they simply demand that the citizen decide for himself, that the state should not have the power to decide.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 02:41 pm
@snood,
Hillary has been doing so badly that frankly if she seems to be human, easy-going and not partially complicit in the Holocaust, she can gain. If she is mildly deferential to Bernie, she scores. Depending on how she explains her left-ward shifts, she can score or tank. She's married to the nerviest "explain-er" in contemporary American politics...

If the wider voting public sees an old Jew and knows nothing about the man- we take a hit in polls before digging out. Anything can happen. 😳
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 02:42 pm
@Lash,
Thrilling!
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 02:51 pm
@Lash,
I am thinking, sadly, you might be right. All she has to do really is not do too badly, which she won't.
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 02:54 pm
@snood,
OK, understood. However, aside from his passionate beliefs, do you think he was right or wrong about the level of criticism being much higher for Obama than it has for been for Hillary (which was his main point after all).
Lash
 
  2  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 03:36 pm
Here's the low and dirty as I see it: Hillary's to lose. Bernie would have to be the second coming to win this first contest polling-wise.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/13/opinions/gergen-hillary-advice-from-sam-snead/index.html

Tonight's introduction may be a great start for Bernie, but the first messy step on to an uphill climb is most likely.

I know he can do it. I have faith that he might shine tonight, but my instincts are tonight is Hillary's to lose.
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 03:47 pm
@Lash,
Sanders wins if he pulls Clinton to the left. Without him, she would be tacking right for the general election instead of taking lefty stands that will be hard to repudiate later.
Lash
 
  0  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 04:32 pm
@engineer,
She'll repudiate it in a second without a thought. So says me.
0 Replies
 
NSFW (view)
NSFW (view)
snood
 
  2  
Reply Tue 13 Oct, 2015 05:11 pm
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:

OK, understood. However, aside from his passionate beliefs, do you think he was right or wrong about the level of criticism being much higher for Obama than it has for been for Hillary (which was his main point after all).

Yes, yes, yes! Okay? - I think Obama had more negative, disrespectful, nasty, racist, degrading, defamatory **** heaped on him than on any president or candidate for president ever.

BUT I hesitate to concede that point in this particular discussion because I don't want to obfuscate or otherwise dilute the point of this thread - which was asking the question of whether we as a country are ready to elect a WOMAN as the POTUS. To me, comparisons to Obama seem moot in that context.

The comparison with Obama seems to be being forced here, I think, to minimize the fact that (even though the strength of numbers of misogynists is arguable) there still remains a contingent that won't vote a woman into power just because of her gender.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 10:53:42