Today's polls suggest that the two top candidates Clinton and Trump are separated by 6 points.

I hope that we are not going to have to choose from the two worst contenders for out next president. America is in a way too precarious position right now to have to "settle for" two power hungry celebrities just to provide for good media coverage for the next four years.

Clinton: Untrustworthy, liar, cold and uncaring, and greedy

Trump: Flip-flopping loose cannon.

Can't the two parties come up with better representatives to run for their party? The Dems have an excuse. They have no one that believes enough in their party. The Republicans have plenty of good, viable candidates but the voters are so angry at the last 8 years that they want revenge more than course correction for the country. Ideologies aside, America better get back on a moral and ethical track or Obama's efforts to destroy our way of life is going to succeed. There used to be a very fine line separating the ideologies of the two parties. Republicans have become more moderate and Dems have become more left leaning semi-socialists. In order to become a strong, leader of countries again Americas are going to have to be more strong and independent. They are going to have to start pulling their own weight and quit leaning on - demanding more from the rest of the country. If those that CAN will start pulling their own weight, then those that can't will not have to worry so much about surviving on the left overs. There are way too many that can, that have given up hope and decided that it is better to say they can't than to have to struggle and work to pull themselves up. What happened to American pride? What happened to those that had too much pride to take welfare and food stamps when they qualified, and instead, worked two or three jobs to support their families?

Are we going to settle for one of the two worst possible candidates for our next leader?

Are you going to choose the one that has to defend her ethical behavior and disregard national security with a "what difference does it make." Or, are you going to choose the bull in a china shop, that may have good intentions but alienates even those that would support him? Why do we have to "settle for?"

We don't!!

The GOP's 'deep bench' turns out to be a House of Cards.

Before anyone goes "high fiving elections are a long way off".

Personal Best Regards:

Originally Posted by Guest

The GOP's 'deep bench' turns out to be a House of Cards.

And Hilary is what? Methinks she is a grifter, just like her hubby.

The RNC is using the Trump card against the DNC?

Originally Posted by Guest

And Hilary is what? Methinks she is a grifter, just like her hubby.

Hillary Clinton has been a champion for women's rights and human rights her entire life. Have you heard the speech she gave in Beijing in 1993 on human rights while taking a great risk. Google it and read it. She is an inspiration to young women in the US and around the world.

Originally Posted by Guest

Hillary Clinton has been a champion for women's rights and human rights her entire life. Have you heard the speech she gave in Beijing in 1993 on human rights while taking a great risk. Google it and read it. She is an inspiration to young women in the US and around the world.

Tell that to the women that spilled the beans on her hubby Bill. She tried to discredit them at ever turn. Hillary cares about one person - Hillary!

Originally Posted by Guest

Hillary Clinton has been a champion for women's rights and human rights her entire life. Have you heard the speech she gave in Beijing in 1993 on human rights while taking a great risk. Google it and read it. She is an inspiration to young women in the US and around the world.

First of all it was in 1995 and not 93.

Also, the bottom line...this was written in 2008...on Politifact...

"In an interview on CNN's American Morning on March 5, 2008, Clinton said, "I've been standing up against . . . the Chinese government over women's rights and standing up for human rights."

Clinton has made similar claims in campaign speeches.

""In no way was this (Clinton's speech) a major confrontation with the Chinese government, or did it in any way resemble a crisis," said Thomas Carothers, vice president for studies-international politics and governance at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. "It was a good speech that set out principles but didn't go outside the bounds of the relatively mild approach to China the U.S. was taking at the time. It was one of many pushes from the outside ... it couldn't be said to change the direction of China's legal reform."

Yes, Clinton delivered a tough speech implying Chinese policies were unacceptable at a global gathering in that nation's capital city. But the Clinton campaign has failed to show she has been involved in the long-term commitment for improvements in China that her statement suggests. We find her claim to be Half True."


A great speech, but what else? | PolitiFact

As always it was a political speech with no substance or follow up.

Please read completely, NOT just selected things sent to you.

Originally Posted by Guest

Tell that to the women that spilled the beans on her hubby Bill. She tried to discredit them at ever turn. Hillary cares about one person - Hillary!

"Paula Jones, Gennifer Flowers, Juanita Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey, Sally Perdue, Linda Tripp and Monica Lewinsky, names that once dominated conversations, enlivened front pages and lit up television screens across the land, are ancient history now, names as remote as Mary Pickford, Aimee Semple McPherson and Amelia Earhart.

But everything that goes around comes around, and Kathleen Willey, a particularly embarrassing name from the Clinton family past, announced this week that she is putting up a website to remind everyone of Bill's gory days and Hillary's unsavory supporting role."

The article then goes on to tell how President Clinton came on to Kathleen Willey, and she has this to say about the hero of all women....


But it's not Bubba from whom she seeks vengeance, retribution and further accountability. She's after Hillary for what she calls, with considerable evidence, her complicity in her husband's sexual abuses and scandals.

"She is the war on women, as far as I am concerned," the widow Willey says, "... she's made it a point to find out ... every woman ... who's crossed his path over the years. She's orchestrated a terror campaign against every one of these women, including me."

If you wish to know more about the woman who some want in the WH acting as President and obviously has a short memory...

"Hillary called Monica Lewinsky, the object of the president's dalliance that led to his impeachment, "a narcissistic loony toon," and dismissed Gennifer Flowers, Bill's mistress when he was governor of Arkansas, as "trailer trash." Flowers alleged in a lawsuit in the year 2000 that Hillary ran a "war room" during the Clinton presidential campaign of 1992 to "smear, defame and harm" women such as herself. Juanita Broadrick, who credibly accused Bill of violently raping her in a Little Rock hotel room when he was the state attorney general, said that in the days after she made the accusation in a television interview, Hillary threatened her face-to-face. Not exactly solidarity in the sisterhood."

Hillary Clinton's Unsavory Past Returns--With Sharp New Teeth | RealClearPolitics

And this article written by a woman. Lots more in there to read about this wonderful leader of women !!

Women's rights and human rights are a foreign concept to most posters on this forum. If Hillary Clinton is able to pull this off and win the presidency, she will do something that no woman has been able to do in 241 years and finally break that glass ceiling.

Originally Posted by Guest

Women's rights and human rights are a foreign concept to most posters on this forum. If Hillary Clinton is able to pull this off and win the presidency, she will do something that no woman has been able to do in 241 years and finally break that glass ceiling.

I assume your read your posts before you send them ? I also assume you read about backgrounds before saying things like this that are patently not true and has been proven over and over.

You saying all this stuff does not make you or her honest...simply naive in your case and in her case, the same as always...entitled, arrogant and non caring about anything but her.

I also, on behalf of the many posters that I know on this board take GREAT EXCEPTION to your insensitive, inaccurate, invalid comment on posters on this board.

I assume then that you mean YOU and YOU ALONE are sensitive to human rights and women's rights.

I suggest to you with a pack of your posts to back it up that your sensitivity to any of these rights are based on POLITICS, pure and simple.

There are posters on this form with MUCH MUCH more sensitivity than you have or have shown and it is not based on a political party or a political position. They simply are better informed and much more honest with how they feel than you.

Holier than thou posters should just stay on the sidelines....read what is sent to you from the various sites that totally guide how you feel and do not try to discuss anything because discussion requires you to have accurate, non biased information.

Nothing wrong with disagreeing with anyone on issues Right versus Left...nothing at all. BUT it is wrong to simply pronounce yourself as the annointed one on human rights and women's rights.........

From the New York Times in March questioning Ms Clinton's record on human rights...

"But the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation has accepted tens of millions of dollars in donations from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Algeria and Brunei — all of which the State Department has faulted over their records on sex discrimination and other human-rights issues.

The department’s 2011 human rights report on Saudi Arabia, the last such yearly review prepared during Mrs. Clinton’s tenure, tersely faulted the kingdom for “a lack of equal rights for women and children,” and said violence against women, human trafficking and gender discrimination, among other abuses, were all “common” there.

Saudi Arabia has been a particularly generous benefactor to the Clinton Foundation, giving at least $10 million since 2001, according to foundation disclosures. At least $1 million more was donated by Friends of Saudi Arabia, co-founded by a Saudi prince."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/09/us...omen.html?_r=0

She now embraces Cuba, the country that had the sanctions placed on them by her husband and who is a notorious killer of human rights, but now it is ok to embrace them even though they have said they are not going to change.

Originally Posted by Guest

Women's rights and human rights are a foreign concept to most posters on this forum. If Hillary Clinton is able to pull this off and win the presidency, she will do something that no woman has been able to do in 241 years and finally break that glass ceiling.

And you really believe if that were to happen she would be accomplishing something for women's rights.....youare kidding right.....

Is breaking the glass ceiling what matters? Are you not concerned about her dishonesty? Her lack of ethics? How hard up can some be to worry about the glass ceiling that they are willing to compromise and let a haggered, dishonest, unethical person do it!!

First of all given her current trajectory she will not be the democratic candidate.

She has become not electable.....AGAIN!!!

She was a better candidate () in 2008 when the party loyals dumped her!