Clinton's lead begins to wilt?

[Guest]

Really? Is this a surprise? it should not be; nothing more than 2008 happening all over again? We shall see. We all know the dig up the past machine on her has been going strong and just waiting for her to declare she is running and then watch the past before your eyes;

2016 Presidential Swing State Polls Poll - April 9, 2015 - Paul Blooms As Clinton Wilts I | Quinnipiac University Connecticut (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2184)

[Guest]

http://www.monmouth.edu/assets/0/32212254770/32212254991/32212254992/32212254994/32212254995/30064771087/597ba39c-825d-4da6-9fe8-ab47201b82fe.pdf


Things are looking great for Rand Paul. The Monmouth University poll released just this week of likely republican voters has him almost catching up with Donald Trump. Trump is at 7%, Paul is at 6%.

[Guest]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/rand-paul-campaign-sends-cease-and-desist-to-stations-runnin?utm_term=.ufx4jqDLoK#.bnLm4aW4G


Nothing says "I'm a supporter of liberty" like threatening to sue the people who advertise against you on day two of your campaign.

[Guest]

I believe there is a growing feeling that she has acted in a fundamentally dishonest manner on multiple occasions. Democrats, by and large, don't care and Republicans will not vote for her. Independents will move away as more evidence comes out. She carries an enormous amount of baggage.

Really? Is this a surprise? it should not be; nothing more than 2008 happening all over again? We shall see. We all know the dig up the past machine on her has been going strong and just waiting for her to declare she is running and then watch the past before your eyes;

2016 Presidential Swing State Polls Poll - April 9, 2015 - Paul Blooms As Clinton Wilts I | Quinnipiac University Connecticut (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2184)

[Guest]

I believe there is a growing feeling that she has acted in a fundamentally dishonest manner on multiple occasions. Democrats, by and large, don't care and Republicans will not vote for her. Independents will move away as more evidence comes out. She carries an enormous amount of baggage.

The reason there is a growing feeling is there's a growing body of increasingly obvious evidence she is fundamentally dishonest-- even to the liberal deniers.

[Guest]

The reason there is a growing feeling is there's a growing body of increasingly obvious evidence she is fundamentally dishonest-- even to the liberal deniers.

Accurate and concise.
:BigApplause:

[Guest]

I believe there is a growing feeling that she has acted in a fundamentally dishonest manner on multiple occasions. Democrats, by and large, don't care and Republicans will not vote for her. Independents will move away as more evidence comes out. She carries an enormous amount of baggage.

Well, you had better get used to Mrs. Clinton as YOUR President. :BigApplause:

The only ones who will not vote for her are the Fox News viewers and statistics show their ilk are dying off. A new day for America has risen and progressive liberalism is it's name.

Fox News viewers can slink back into their caves and just quietly die off.

[Guest]

Well, you had better get used to Mrs. Clinton as YOUR President. :BigApplause:

The only ones who will not vote for her are the Fox News viewers and statistics show their ilk are dying off. A new day for America has risen and progressive liberalism is it's name.

Fox News viewers can slink back into their caves and just quietly die off.

You seem to have a common theme in many of your posts ... about Fox New viewers, or "old white men" or some combination of that dying off. You've said it multiple times ... dying off etc. It's offensive and, in addition, twisted.

It also puts you in the sick puppy category. We can have a lot of give and take on this board, but you should honestly reconsider some of your phraseology when making your points.

[Guest]

She did not make the cut last time and with all the additional scandals she certainly will not make it to the convention.
Also don't rule out a better dem candidate.

[Guest]

Looks like Sunday is announcement day. Let the games begin.

[Guest]

You seem to have a common theme in many of your posts ... about Fox New viewers, or "old white men" or some combination of that dying off. You've said it multiple times ... dying off etc. It's offensive and, in addition, twisted.

It also puts you in the sick puppy category. We can have a lot of give and take on this board, but you should honestly reconsider some of your phraseology when making your points.

It only makes sense that Fox News viewers are dying off since their average is 78.

[Guest]

It only makes sense that Fox News viewers are dying off since their average is 78.

Where do you get these erroneous stats that you post? Or is it just wishful thinking on your part?

[Guest]

Where do you get these erroneous stats that you post? Or is it just wishful thinking on your part?

In the dem playbook if it is not listed then just make something up.

[Guest]

Where do you get these erroneous stats that you post? Or is it just wishful thinking on your part?

The original poster, as mentioned earlier, is a sick puppy and enjoys the prospect of the death of her opponents ... by that definition she would be an excellent prospect for Islam ... but I digress

[Guest]

Well, you had better get used to Mrs. Clinton as YOUR President. :BigApplause:

The only ones who will not vote for her are the Fox News viewers and statistics show their ilk are dying off. A new day for America has risen and progressive liberalism is it's name.

Fox News viewers can slink back into their caves and just quietly die off.

:1rotfl:

"But in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary campaign, her championship of women did not translate into automatic support by women for her candidacy. Clinton barely won 50 percent of the women's vote in the Democratic primary fight against Barack Obama. She also did not receive unanimous support among women elected leaders, with several of her female Senate colleagues, such as Amy Klobuchar and Claire McCaskill, endorsing Obama.

Polling showed a generational divide where Hillary captured more older women voters while Obama captured the younger generation. Women in the middle split between the two. The younger woman voter didn't feel a sense of obligation to vote for the first "one of their own," but instead felt more passion for Obama's message of hope and his vision for the future."


:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:


Hillary Clinton Can't Count on the Women's Vote in 2016 - US News (http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/penny-lee/2013/04/04/hillary-clinton-shouldnt-count-on-the-womens-vote-in-2016)

[Guest]

Well, you had better get used to Mrs. Clinton as YOUR President. :BigApplause:

The only ones who will not vote for her are the Fox News viewers and statistics show their ilk are dying off. A new day for America has risen and progressive liberalism is it's name.

Fox News viewers can slink back into their caves and just quietly die off.

:1rotfl:

"But in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary campaign, her championship of women did not translate into automatic support by women for her candidacy. Clinton barely won 50 percent of the women's vote in the Democratic primary fight against Barack Obama. She also did not receive unanimous support among women elected leaders, with several of her female Senate colleagues, such as Amy Klobuchar and Claire McCaskill, endorsing Obama.

Polling showed a generational divide where Hillary captured more older women voters while Obama captured the younger generation. Women in the middle split between the two. The younger woman voter didn't feel a sense of obligation to vote for the first "one of their own," but instead felt more passion for Obama's message of hope and his vision for the future."


:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:


Hillary Clinton Can't Count on the Women's Vote in 2016 - US News (http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/penny-lee/2013/04/04/hillary-clinton-shouldnt-count-on-the-womens-vote-in-2016)

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1043436]:1rotfl:

"But in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary campaign, her championship of women did not translate into automatic support by women for her candidacy. Clinton barely won 50 percent of the women's vote in the Democratic primary fight against Barack Obama. She also did not receive unanimous support among women elected leaders, with several of her female Senate colleagues, such as Amy Klobuchar and Claire McCaskill, endorsing Obama.

Polling showed a generational divide where Hillary captured more older women voters while Obama captured the younger generation. Women in the middle split between the two. The younger woman voter didn't feel a sense of obligation to vote for the first "one of their own," but instead felt more passion for Obama's message of hope and his vision for the future.QUOTE]

While this may be true, the women of this great country go for the Democratic candidates in far greater numbers than for the Republican candidate.

Even if Mrs. Clinton is not the Democrat Presidential candidate, women will vote for that candidate rather than for the Republican candidate.

So, basically, Democrats win with having the strongest voting base of thinking women, educated males, most young people, minorities, and the GLBT voters.

However, chances are that Mrs. Clinton will be the next President of the USA.

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1043436]:1rotfl:

"But in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary campaign, her championship of women did not translate into automatic support by women for her candidacy. Clinton barely won 50 percent of the women's vote in the Democratic primary fight against Barack Obama. She also did not receive unanimous support among women elected leaders, with several of her female Senate colleagues, such as Amy Klobuchar and Claire McCaskill, endorsing Obama.

Polling showed a generational divide where Hillary captured more older women voters while Obama captured the younger generation. Women in the middle split between the two. The younger woman voter didn't feel a sense of obligation to vote for the first "one of their own," but instead felt more passion for Obama's message of hope and his vision for the future.QUOTE]

While this may be true, the women of this great country go for the Democratic candidates in far greater numbers than for the Republican candidate.

Even if Mrs. Clinton is not the Democrat Presidential candidate, women will vote for that candidate rather than for the Republican candidate.

So, basically, Democrats win with having the strongest voting base of thinking women, educated males, most young people, minorities, and the GLBT voters.

However, chances are that Mrs. Clinton will be the next President of the USA.

Now that is funny! Thanks for the morning chuckle!

[Guest]

[quote=Guest;1043452]

Now that is funny! Thanks for the morning chuckle!

Obviously, with that inane comment, you fit perfectly into the ranks of the Republicans. I am going with the uneducated male category for you. Thanks for showing that the Democratic Party base is safe from you.

[Guest]

[quote=Guest;1043491]

Obviously, with that inane comment, you fit perfectly into the ranks of the Republicans. I am going with the uneducated male category for you. Thanks for showing that the Democratic Party base is safe from you.

I think you have a problem with sentence construction when trying to insult someone, and thus often fall short when trying to express yourself.

[Guest]

I believe that many voters do not take for gospel what one polls say, one political pundit, political analyst etc. In that they digest what was said and what actions candidates have taken past, present and projected into the future to arrive at their own conclusions. If Fox News which I watch suggested XYZ candidate I may or may not agree.

I knew that I did not want Obama because his past and past associates and his lack of experience/expertise frightened the bejesus out of me.

I knew I did not want Hillary because she has shown a continue disdain for honesty integrity and people since her days in Arkansas

I made the same analysis with each of the Republicans and my choice had always been Mitt Romney because he is a man of humility, excellent bona fides honesty moral and had a desire to serve...vis a vis being served as is the character of both Hillary and Obama (elitist )

Given the Clinton Foundation scandal and the personal e-mail scandal and Benghazi waiting in the background its clear if Americans can't trust her then how can America and the rest of the world trust her now. I mean haven't we had enough of that from Obama.

I know that Rand Paul Jeb Bush Mike Huckabee Chris Christy, Rick Perry, Donald Trump Rick Santorium are not at the top of my list...at least as the facts present themselves at this time.

I cannot and will not vote for any Democrat for one primary reason because the world as we know it is coming apart and the Democratic Party is terrible at foreign policy and can never bring itself to do what is necessary to defend this country this is especially so because the leftist of the left wing of the Democratic Party has control

Obama is leaving a legacy of destruction, despair and strategic impossibilities in his wake especially in the Middle East and has exacerbated it all with Russia and Cuba

Obama laughed in the face of Mitt Romney following Romney's admonition concerning Russia in one presidential debate. Well we find that Obama whispered to Russia that he had more flexibility after the election and he found that his comments concerning Russia not being an existential threat wrong

And the coup d'eat Hillary's firm belief that a reset with Russia was a good thing

Simply stated my focus is going to be on the candidate that has the expertise and the intestinal fortitude to restore America's greatest among nations. Because contrary to liberals, while we are imperfect, claiming America as warmongers is disgraceful because we are a nation devoted to seeing democracy take seed in every country........


Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

For those of you who are interested in polls, it might be worth checking out Nate Silver's website, fivethirtyeight.com. Nate is a sports statistician who turned his attention to politics for the 2008 presidential race. He takes all the polls, weights them according to whether they tend to slant left or right, and arrives at his own conclusions. He called every state but one (Indiana) correctly in 2008, and called them all correctly in 2012. He and his team still do sports analysis as well.

[Guest]

I don't think even Obama, for all his faults, arrogance and narcism would have had the cahones to say something like, don't you want to someday see a black man president of the United States?

By now we have all heard her speech where she blows her own horn:

"...don't you someday want to see a woman president of the United States of America..."

The usual, self serving, front and center, forget all my transgressions, lies and decietful actions.....look at my big smile.....my bountiful warmth......my unending caring for the little people......who certainly must forgive me all as they realize by now I should be their president......

offmike.....do you think they bought it?

[Guest]

I believe that many voters do not take for gospel what one polls say, one political pundit, political analyst etc. In that they digest what was said and what actions candidates have taken past, present and projected into the future to arrive at their own conclusions. If Fox News which I watch suggested XYZ candidate I may or may not agree.

I knew that I did not want Obama because his past and past associates and his lack of experience/expertise frightened the bejesus out of me.

I knew I did not want Hillary because she has shown a continue disdain for honesty integrity and people since her days in Arkansas

I made the same analysis with each of the Republicans and my choice had always been Mitt Romney because he is a man of humility, excellent bona fides honesty moral and had a desire to serve...vis a vis being served as is the character of both Hillary and Obama (elitist )

Given the Clinton Foundation scandal and the personal e-mail scandal and Benghazi waiting in the background its clear if Americans can't trust her then how can America and the rest of the world trust her now. I mean haven't we had enough of that from Obama.

I know that Rand Paul Jeb Bush Mike Huckabee Chris Christy, Rick Perry, Donald Trump Rick Santorium are not at the top of my lijtst...at least as the facts present themselves at this time.

I cannot and will not vote for any Democrat for one primary reason because the world as we know it is coming apart and the Democratic Party is terrible at foreign policy and can never bring itself to do what is necessary to defend this country this is especially so because the leftist of the left wing of the Democratic Party has control

Obama is leaving a legacy of destruction, despair and strategic impossibilities in his wake especially in the Middle East and has exacerbated it all with Russia and Cuba

Obama laughed in the face of Mitt Romney following Romney's admonition concerning Russia in one presidential debate. Well we find that Obama whispered to Russia that he had more flexibility after the election and he found that his comments concerning Russia not being an existential threat wrong

And the coup d'eat Hillary's firm belief that a reset with Russia was a good thing

Simply stated my focus is going to be on the candidate that has the expertise and the intestinal fortitude to restore America's greatest among nations. Because contrary to liberals, while we are imperfect, claiming America as warmongers is disgraceful because we are a nation devoted to seeing democracy.

In succint terms, why didn't you JUST say that you are going to vote for the Republican candidate - WHOEVER it will be? :popcorn:

[Guest]

I don't think even Obama, for all his faults, arrogance and narcism would have had the cahones to say something like, don't you want to someday see a black man president of the United States?

By now we have all heard her speech where she blows her own horn:

"...don't you someday want to see a woman president of the United States of America..."

The usual, self serving, front and center, forget all my transgressions, lies and decietful actions.....look at my big smile.....my bountiful warmth......my unending caring for the little people......who certainly must forgive me all as they realize by now I should be their president......

offmike.....do you think they bought it?

I realize that many Dems will vote the ticket if Hillary is the nominee, just like many Republicans (like me) will vote the ticket when Walker or Cruz get the nod.

But, I think many thoughtful Dems still have to be a bit embarrassed by Hillary. I mean, some of the stuff she says and does is such a crock of obvious bs ... and she is absolutely motivated by the glory and power to herself. Any bloviating about the people is just that ... hot air and all but the credulous know that's there something rotten in Chappaqua.

I mean ... you have to be pretty dumb to fall for the story she is pushing.

[Guest]

Oh, how us progressives hope that The Canadian Anchor Baby gets the Presidential ballot.

That would make for even more jokes than Sara Palin.

[Guest]

Oh, how us progressives hope that The Canadian Anchor Baby gets the Presidential ballot.

That would make for even more jokes than Sara Palin.

Like it or not, at least we tell you why we do not like your candidate, or not like what they stand for, or they just happen to be the opposing party and that is why we vote for the other guy.

All you seem able to do is make fun of, label, name call, belittle not only the opposing candidate but just as nasty beligererant toward anybody who does not roll over and accept your party.

Do they only allow you to throw sticks and stones and call names......school yard level?

[Guest]

I am all for a qualified Woman as President she does not meet the QUALIFIED in my statement.

[Guest]

And the "wilting" continues:

Oh Hill no! Clinton’s stale presidential plan wrong for nation | New York Post (http://nypost.com/2015/04/11/oh-hill-no-clintons-presidential-plan-is-growing-stale/)

It was best said in an eralier post a qualified woman could run for POTUS...so far there has yet to be a viable, qualified candidate.

At some point the DNC will have to spring into action. They certainly are not going to bet the WH on whether Clinton can turn the numbers around. They know that as soon as she announces that she is running, the gloves will come off and she can at best hope to not lose anymore support and stay even. That is not the likely outcome.

She is so yesterday's "tired looking" news that I am a bit surprised other candidates have not come forward yet.

Those who are betting that being a woman will carry her may find that to not be as true as they would like it to be.

[Guest]

If Ted Criuse becomes the GOP front runner, it will show how silly the right has became in heir selection process. I would vote for Hillary over TC.

[Guest]

If Ted Criuse becomes the GOP front runner, it will show how silly the right has became in heir selection process. I would vote for Hillary over TC.

How does CRUZ show silliness?
Why would you vote for Hillary VS Cruz?

Personally to be beating out gums with more than 18 months to go is a waste of time. By this time next year it will be obvious who the real choices are.

Remember Clinton could not carry her own party to the nomination for 2008. When she started there was all the same jargon of heir apparent, she was the only candidate able to win. And then outta the back of the pack she was knocked out of dem first place by a virtually unkown candidate.

She will soon be running officially. Then the more she talks the easier it will become to determine she is way past her prime to be able to represent ANUBODY but Hillary!

She will get knocked out again this time. All we can hope for is that it happens sooner than later.

[Guest]

I mean no offense, but Ted Cruz?
The GOP has many qualified men and women, but to select the Green Eggs and Ham silly boy would prove to be a terrible mistake. He has shown time and time again to be a childish puppet to the off the charts hard right nuts. When the campaign gets into high gear, you will see a more centric Hillary. We republicans need a serious candadite to be competitive for 2016.

[Guest]

I mean no offense, but Ted Cruz?
The GOP has many qualified men and women, but to select the Green Eggs and Ham silly boy would prove to be a terrible mistake. He has shown time and time again to be a childish puppet to the off the charts hard right nuts. When the campaign gets into high gear, you will see a more centric Hillary. We republicans need a serious candadite to be competitive for 2016.

Apparently that serious candidate would be Jeb Bush.

[Guest]

Apparently that serious candidate would be Jeb Bush.

...and what country would THIS Bush have the USA invade - and have American soldiers killed for absolutely no reason - except for his own ego trip?

[Guest]

Apparently that serious candidate would be Jeb Bush.

With over 18 months to go and he has not yet stated he will run, how do you reach this conclusion?

Mitt Romney also said he would not run. Will he?

18 months is too early to even have a hint of how things will play out.

[Guest]

Oh, how us progressives hope that The Canadian Anchor Baby gets the Presidential ballot.

That would make for even more jokes than Sara Palin.

Canadian anchor baby? I didn't realize we had a lot of illegal aliens sneaking across the border from Canada so thanks for the heads up.

But regarding Cruz, are you referring to the same guy who

- was valedictorian of his high school class?
- graduated cum laude from Princeton
- won top speaker and US National Debate contest?
- graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School
- and the same guy who Alan Dershowitz described as "off the charts brilliant?

[Guest]

Canadian anchor baby? I didn't realize we had a lot of illegal aliens sneaking across the border from Canada so thanks for the heads up.

But regarding Cruz, are you referring to the same guy who

- was valedictorian of his high school class?
- graduated cum laude from Princeton
- won top speaker and US National Debate contest?
- graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School
- and the same guy who Alan Dershowitz described as "off the charts brilliant?


No, we're talking about the Ted Cruz that singlehandedly shut down the government to repeal Obamacare. How did that work out?

[Guest]

I am all for a qualified Woman as President she does not meet the QUALIFIED in my statement.

I would love to see Carly Fiorina debate Hillary Clinton mano-a-mano (so to speak).

That would be interesting to watch as Carly would destroy Hillary in about 10 minutes with logic and reasoning, vs the empty platitudes that Hillary peddles incessantly

[Guest]

No, we're talking about the Ted Cruz that singlehandedly shut down the government to repeal Obamacare. How did that work out?

Actually we're talking about a leader who stood on principle ... a word which is not in Hillary's vocabulary I might add.

[Guest]

This cartoon sums things up ...

[Guest]

This cartoon sums things up ...


It's been a long day for older white men who vote Republican. Don't think we can underestimate just how terrifying it is for certain GOP voters to realize USA may go from black president to woman president.

[Guest]

It's been a long day for older white men who vote Republican. Don't think we can underestimate just how terrifying it is for certain GOP voters to realize USA may go from black president to woman president.

There you go again ... playing the race card. How predictable is that?

[Guest]

There you go again ... playing the race card. How predictable is that?

Between continual need for race to be an issue along with the need to refer to old white men methinks we have a female racist attempting to rattle the liberal keys.....gender no matter still very predictable.

[Guest]

I sometimes wonder why some here cannot carry on a conversation without referring to race, gender, religion or sexual orientation with the usual mix of dissing, belittling and name calling........I wonder what axe they have to grind.
And I am being generous by giving them credit for "conversation ".

Issues can be discussed, debated, argued, agreed or disagreed without such references.

Stretch one's ability......try it sometime.

[Guest]

I sometimes wonder why some here cannot carry on a conversation without referring to race, gender, religion or sexual orientation with the usual mix of dissing, belittling and name calling........I wonder what axe they have to grind.
And I am being generous by giving them credit for "conversation ".

Issues can be discussed, debated, argued, agreed or disagreed without such references.

Stretch one's ability......try it sometime.
Sad truth is no one on this forum gives a crap about opposition points. It's all about MY way and that is the destruction of our government and way of life as we see it. It's the TEA Party!

[Guest]

I sometimes wonder why some here cannot carry on a conversation without referring to race, gender, religion or sexual orientation with the usual mix of dissing, belittling and name calling........I wonder what axe they have to grind.
And I am being generous by giving them credit for "conversation ".

Issues can be discussed, debated, argued, agreed or disagreed without such references.

Stretch one's ability......try it sometime.

Agree with your post. I am not an older white male, but find that particular poster's references to this phrase as extremely offensive. It is probably one of the same posters that will call someone else out for being a racist or bigot or whatever, yet she is actually the one who appears to be just that. IMO it is a reflection of someone who has nothing of consequence to say. In saying that, I feel sorry for those who seem to have no original thoughts of their own to express........but they'll still vote - UGH!!

[Guest]

Sad truth is no one on this forum gives a crap about opposition points. It's all about MY way and that is the destruction of our government and way of life as we see it. It's the TEA Party!

And you would be wrong! Unfortunately, the posters who come on here solely for the purpose of name calling and/or flame throwing turn off many posters who would like to continue on this forum for discussion purposes, but it can get wearisome reading through said posts and many people just move on. So I would suggest we all take a look in the mirror - are you one of those people? Do you really want some back and forth discussion? Just because someone disagrees with your opinions doesn't mean it isn't valid discussion. Opposition viewpoints are great - to open one's mind and expand one's horizons - just don't take it so personally and don't name call. I THINK we're all adult enough here to refrain from that! Or am I asking for too much? BTW, I agree with the second sentence in your post - we certainly see way too much of that today. But your reference to NO ONE and TEA PARTY is what spurred me to respond to your post.

[Guest]

And you would be wrong! Unfortunately, the posters who come on here solely for the purpose of name calling and/or flame throwing turn off many posters who would like to continue on this forum for discussion purposes, but it can get wearisome reading through said posts and many people just move on. So I would suggest we all take a look in the mirror - are you one of those people? Do you really want some back and forth discussion? Just because someone disagrees with your opinions doesn't mean it isn't valid discussion. Opposition viewpoints are great - to open one's mind and expand one's horizons - just don't take it so personally and don't name call. I THINK we're all adult enough here to refrain from that! Or am I asking for too much? BTW, I agree with the second sentence in your post - we certainly see way too much of that today. But your reference to NO ONE and TEA PARTY is what spurred me to respond to your post.

Bullseye!!
I bet these same folks don't say two words when they are eye to eye with another person.
The goal? Angonize and disrupt.
Ever an original thought? Never. Nothing but parroting and dissing.
Something obviously missing in their lives.

[Guest]

And you would be wrong! Unfortunately, the posters who come on here solely for the purpose of name calling and/or flame throwing turn off many posters who would like to continue on this forum for discussion purposes, but it can get wearisome reading through said posts and many people just move on. So I would suggest we all take a look in the mirror - are you one of those people? Do you really want some back and forth discussion? Just because someone disagrees with your opinions doesn't mean it isn't valid discussion. Opposition viewpoints are great - to open one's mind and expand one's horizons - just don't take it so personally and don't name call. I THINK we're all adult enough here to refrain from that! Or am I asking for too much? BTW, I agree with the second sentence in your post - we certainly see way too much of that today. But your reference to NO ONE and TEA PARTY is what spurred me to respond to your post.

Bullseye!!
I bet these same folks don't say two words when they are eye to eye with another person.
The goal? Angonize and disrupt.
Ever an original thought? Never. Nothing but parroting and dissing.
Something obviously missing in their lives.

[Guest]

Fox News obliterates the other cable news channels in the ratings in all age demographics.

Well, you had better get used to Mrs. Clinton as YOUR President. :BigApplause:

The only ones who will not vote for her are the Fox News viewers and statistics show their ilk are dying off. A new day for America has risen and progressive liberalism is it's name.

Fox News viewers can slink back into their caves and just quietly die off.

[Guest]

You really should do your research before posting wrong information as it reflects badly on you. Here is the correct information:

Nielsen TV data through mid-Januray shows that the average age of Fox viewers is 68
The average viewers at MSNBC and CNN are 60, and the average is 62-64 for the broadcast network

Read more: The average age of Fox News viewers is 68 and a majority of them are politically conservative and white | Daily Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2550377/The-average-age-Fox-Viewers-68-majority-politically-conservative-white.html#ixzz3XCEVJ3oY)
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


It only makes sense that Fox News viewers are dying off since their average is 78.

[Guest]

What most people want is competence. This "black" and "woman" thing you are trying to peddle is really pathetic.

It's been a long day for older white men who vote Republican. Don't think we can underestimate just how terrifying it is for certain GOP voters to realize USA may go from black president to woman president.

[Guest]

What most people want is competence. This "black" and "woman" thing you are trying to peddle is really pathetic.

I agree ... most people want competence and few if any care how it's packaged.

However, liberals want their ideology above all else ... most of which is based upon envy and greed, coupled with misplaced forms of compassion. Hence, and ironically enough, racism and sexism becomes an attractive strategy for them.