Promise everything the audience wants to hear....while saying nothing.....and doing nothing.

My Way News - Clinton kicks off 2016 bid, embracing chance to make history

She is NOT qualified.....she just is not. She is phony. She is yesterday's news (all bad). Her track record is one of dodge and weave. She is not genuine. Past her prime. Is a product of and architect of the broken, does not work crony system.

And as for helping her make history by electing the first woman president....who does that do anything for? Nobody but Clinton.

The only thing she has going for her is the party (maybe) and the loyalists that will go with and defend the party candidate....no matter who or no matter what.

Originally Posted by Guest

Promise everything the audience wants to hear....while saying nothing.....and doing nothing.

My Way News - Clinton kicks off 2016 bid, embracing chance to make history

She is NOT qualified.....she just is not. She is phony. She is yesterday's news (all bad). Her track record is one of dodge and weave. She is not genuine. Past her prime. Is a product of and architect of the broken, does not work crony system.

And as for helping her make history by electing the first woman president....who does that do anything for? Nobody but Clinton.

The only thing she has going for her is the party (maybe) and the loyalists that will go with and defend the party candidate....no matter who or no matter what.

Get out the vote is important, especially in this election. President Obama had a lot of young, energetic, excited people. Ms. Clinton will not have that large group.

She has easy sailing until next year. The Democratic Party will not allow her to be shredded in the primary.

Important, to me, will be the debates between the two candidates. If the Republicans have someone aggressive, I think Ms. Clinton will show poorly in the debates.

Long way to go

Say what you want but you have to admit that Mrs. Clinton would win against any Republican candidate at this point.

Long ways to go before either convention so settle in for a bumpy ride.

I hope this campaign will be about the issues facing the middle class and seniors. Just this week the Dems revolted on the trade bill because it included a clause, inserted by the Senate, which would have cut $700 million dollars Medicare.

Pensions underfunded, or not at all, by companies using them as a piggy banks. Company takeovers freezing pensions and cutting retiree healthcare... That happened to me when I was 63.

Trade bills which undercut the American worker....

I could go on....

Originally Posted by Guest

I hope this campaign will be about the issues facing the middle class and seniors. Just this week the Dems revolted on the trade bill because it included a clause, inserted by the Senate, which would have cut $700 million dollars Medicare.

Pensions underfunded, or not at all, by companies using them as a piggy banks. Company takeovers freezing pensions and cutting retiree healthcare... That happened to me when I was 63.

Trade bills which undercut the American worker....

I could go on....

Will not argue any of this. I, also hope it is about issues but here is the problem.

Ms. Clinton, and I speak of her because she is certain to be one of the candidates..we do not know the other, will have a difficult time convincing me of her integrity on the issues you mention.

It is my belief, we need someone in the WH who has demonstrative leadership skills and can act as the "adult in the room" with congress. Second we need congressional leadership that is not named Reid, Boehner, or Pelosi to assist in leading a forward movement.

Most of what you mention, and including immigration and most of the issues can be undertaken, if we have LEADERS who are not constantly politicking. Press briefings by both parties have become predictable...THEY did it, and now that same rhetoric emanates from the WH where we used to, at least publicly, get a break from politicking.

Originally Posted by Guest

Promise everything the audience wants to hear....while saying nothing.....and doing nothing.

My Way News - Clinton kicks off 2016 bid, embracing chance to make history

She is NOT qualified.....she just is not. She is phony. She is yesterday's news (all bad). Her track record is one of dodge and weave. She is not genuine. Past her prime. Is a product of and architect of the broken, does not work crony system.

And as for helping her make history by electing the first woman president....who does that do anything for? Nobody but Clinton.

The only thing she has going for her is the party (maybe) and the loyalists that will go with and defend the party candidate....no matter who or no matter what.

Hillary Clinton adopting President Obama's campaign strategy seems like it would be a no-brainer. Why would a candidate not follow a strategy that resulted in two landslide victories, both with over 50% of the popular vote, something not done since President Eisenhower?

On the other hand, Mitt Romney met with six republican hopefuls in Utah this week-end. Apparently to tell them what NOT to do in an election.

Originally Posted by Guest

Hillary Clinton adopting President Obama's campaign strategy seems like it would be a no-brainer. Why would a candidate not follow a strategy that resulted in two landslide victories, both with over 50% of the popular vote, something not done since President Eisenhower?

On the other hand, Mitt Romney met with six republican hopefuls in Utah this week-end. Apparently to tell them what NOT to do in an election.

Except using the addage that you can fool some of the people some of the time.....Obama has used up those chits....I do not think the same folks would bite a third time.

Is she the one we the people want in the WH in the event of a major catastrophe is struck in one of our US cities? Self centered politicians like Obama and Clinton will not make the correct decision when it has to be made....everything would be weighed against who gets what out of it while the USA and it's people suffer.

No Thanks.

Originally Posted by Guest

Hillary Clinton adopting President Obama's campaign strategy seems like it would be a no-brainer. Why would a candidate not follow a strategy that resulted in two landslide victories, both with over 50% of the popular vote, something not done since President Eisenhower?

On the other hand, Mitt Romney met with six republican hopefuls in Utah this week-end. Apparently to tell them what NOT to do in an election.

First of all, she is NOT President Obama. She is from a generation well before his. She is rich, he was not. He had a rabid base because of ethnicity, she does not. She is preaching an udealogogy that even Denocrats admit, she cannot stand up against....She IS the rich.

Now explain what Romney has to do with this thread ? It was about Ms Clintons strategy, was it not.

Originally Posted by Guest

First of all, she is NOT President Obama. She is from a generation well before his. She is rich, he was not. He had a rabid base because of ethnicity, she does not. She is preaching an udealogogy that even Denocrats admit, she cannot stand up against....She IS the rich.

Now explain what Romney has to do with this thread ? It was about Ms Clintons strategy, was it not.

No doubt Hillary Clinton is not Barack Obama, but they are running on the exact same issues, and the 2016 election will be all about the issues, not about personalities. Clinton's speech yesterday in NYC could have been Obama's state of the union speech.

What exactly was Obama's rabid base? He received 95% of the black vote, 75% of the Hispanic vote, and won the women's vote by 20%.

Originally Posted by Guest

No doubt Hillary Clinton is not Barack Obama, but they are running on the exact same issues, and the 2016 election will be all about the issues, not about personalities. Clinton's speech yesterday in NYC could have been Obama's state of the union speech.

What exactly was Obama's rabid base? He received 95% of the black vote, 75% of the Hispanic vote, and won the women's vote by 20%.

Well, you quickly identified that rabid base.

My concern, and this is sincere, is the Democratic party's dramatic turn left. They seem to be going so very far left. Social issues seem to dominate the party, and they are the home of all the movements.

This was at the very core of President Obama' goal, and he has succeeded and is dramatically enhancing that left/socialist view each day of the balance of his term.

Just me, but the emphasis on social issues, and this is not to demean those issues, but the sheer weight of that push versus our foreign policy for example greatly concerns me.

A statement like that brings the expected responses from the far left calling Hawks, warmongers or whatever the term of the day might be.

It is not anything like that. I believe we need to make a fundemental decision in this country. We are either in or out on issues of the world.

I am reading Erik Larsons wonderful book," Dead Wake; The Last Crossing of the Lusitania", and in exploring the world scene at the outset of WW1, there is a quote by a British statesman concerning the USA not being involved at that time. He basically said he understood that we were isolated and because we had no enemies as neighbors, and thus he understood us not getting involved in the affairs of Europe. This was 1914.....,

It is now 2015, and the world is much smaller. That aura of being safe because of our location is gone. Technology allow that we are neighbors of the world.

Thus, foreign affairs, to me, is important, and the Democratic Party seems, perhaps I am reading it wrong and perhaps that move to socialist leftist is good, but I think it will hurt our country very badly.

The social issues are important, but not in my opinion, enough to pull us so far left as to cease to be what made this country great.

We always were a free enterprise democracy of sorts, but seem to be moving so far away as to have lost our way. The thud we will hear, if this left turn is wrong, will be a thud that is NOT REVERSABLE by our children or grandchildren, thus we better examine ourselves and make that tough decision....either in or out in the smaller and smaller world.

Originally Posted by Guest

Well, you quickly identified that rabid base.

My concern, and this is sincere, is the Democratic party's dramatic turn left. They seem to be going so very far left. Social issues seem to dominate the party, and they are the home of all the movements.

This was at the very core of President Obama' goal, and he has succeeded and is dramatically enhancing that left/socialist view each day of the balance of his term.

Just me, but the emphasis on social issues, and this is not to demean those issues, but the sheer weight of that push versus our foreign policy for example greatly concerns me.

A statement like that brings the expected responses from the far left calling Hawks, warmongers or whatever the term of the day might be.

It is not anything like that. I believe we need to make a fundemental decision in this country. We are either in or out on issues of the world.

I am reading Erik Larsons wonderful book," Dead Wake; The Last Crossing of the Lusitania", and in exploring the world scene at the outset of WW1, there is a quote by a British statesman concerning the USA not being involved at that time. He basically said he understood that we were isolated and because we had no enemies as neighbors, and thus he understood us not getting involved in the affairs of Europe. This was 1914.....,

It is now 2015, and the world is much smaller. That aura of being safe because of our location is gone. Technology allow that we are neighbors of the world.

Thus, foreign affairs, to me, is important, and the Democratic Party seems, perhaps I am reading it wrong and perhaps that move to socialist leftist is good, but I think it will hurt our country very badly.

The social issues are important, but not in my opinion, enough to pull us so far left as to cease to be what made this country great.

We always were a free enterprise democracy of sorts, but seem to be moving so far away as to have lost our way. The thud we will hear, if this left turn is wrong, will be a thud that is NOT REVERSABLE by our children or grandchildren, thus we better examine ourselves and make that tough decision....either in or out in the smaller and smaller world.

Some excellent and thoughtful points ...

The move to the extreme Left by the Dems is troubling. It's like a tantrum of sorts and will last up and until we have a major foreign policy issue (war) or 911 repeat here at home.

We are in trouble. We need new leadership and a fresh face. Ironically, Hillary's line of attack about "yesterday" was unintentionally humorous. She is the epitome of yesterday.

Originally Posted by Guest

Some excellent and thoughtful points ...

The move to the extreme Left by the Dems is troubling. It's like a tantrum of sorts and will last up and until we have a major foreign policy issue (war) or 911 repeat here at home.

We are in trouble. We need new leadership and a fresh face. Ironically, Hillary's line of attack about "yesterday" was unintentionally humorous. She is the epitome of yesterday.

The move to the left for DEMS is equally troubling as the hard right turn for the Repubs.

We need a government that can actually GOVERN rather than just thwart each other!!

Originally Posted by Guest

No doubt Hillary Clinton is not Barack Obama, but they are running on the exact same issues, and the 2016 election will be all about the issues, not about personalities. Clinton's speech yesterday in NYC could have been Obama's state of the union speech.

What exactly was Obama's rabid base? He received 95% of the black vote, 75% of the Hispanic vote, and won the women's vote by 20%.

...and Mrs. Clinton will win all of those votes as well. Florida is a key state. The I-4 corridor from Orlando to Miami is a very large and very strong Democrat base.

Originally Posted by Guest

...and Mrs. Clinton will win all of those votes as well. Florida is a key state. The I-4 corridor from Orlando to Miami is a very large and very strong Democrat base.

so the premise is the dems have the numbers and it does not matter to anybody who the candidate is they will all click their heels and vote for the party!

How terribly sad if true.

Originally Posted by Guest

so the premise is the dems have the numbers and it does not matter to anybody who the candidate is they will all click their heels and vote for the party!

Y es verdad por los Republicanos, tambien.

Nosotres vote! No por Rubio.