If voters paid attention to the problems this nation has and then compares them to the likely presidential candidate that can solve them then there is not a candidate on either side. Unfortunately there are far too many voters with a Kim Kardashian mentality and they consider themselves bright just to remember their favorite candidates name and the country will continue to suffer as it has for the last 6.5 years.

I wrote an editorial opinion long ago explaining that the Dems would push the "its time to elect a woman , president". And when your only qualification is that you are a woman I can see why the Dems would hype up that non sequitur issue.

Obama wants to make voting mandatory. I would readily agree with his proposal with one caveat that all voters be required to take a civics exam before they are allowed to vote. I'll wager better than half the voters would fail.

The country missed an opportunity when they rejected Mitt Romney. Romney lost because establishment Republicans failed to back him. Romney's analysis has proven accurate to both domestic an international issues. He is an honest and gifted businessman with a moral imperative and the intestinal fortitude to lead this nation .

It is sad to see such curt remarks by some posters who apparently cannot see the ultimate consequences of another inconsequential president


Personal Best Regards:

Originally Posted by Guest

If voters paid attention to the problems this nation has and then compares them to the likely presidential candidate that can solve them then there is not a candidate on either side. Unfortunately there are far too many voters with a Kim Kardashian mentality and they consider themselves bright just to remember their favorite candidates name and the country will continue to suffer as it has for the last 6.5 years.

I wrote an editorial opinion long ago explaining that the Dems would push the "its time to elect a woman , president". And when your only qualification is that you are a woman I can see why the Dems would hype up that non sequitur issue.

Obama wants to make voting mandatory. I would readily agree with his proposal with one caveat that all voters be required to take a civics exam before they are allowed to vote. I'll wager better than half the voters would fail.

The country missed an opportunity when they rejected Mitt Romney. Romney lost because establishment Republicans failed to back him. Romney's analysis has proven accurate to both domestic an international issues. He is an honest and gifted businessman with a moral imperative and the intestinal fortitude to lead this nation .

It is sad to see such curt remarks by some posters who apparently cannot see the ultimate consequences of another inconsequential president


Personal Best Regards:

I agree with you wholeheartedly about Mitt Romney. Although ideologically, he did not fit "my agenda" 100%, I admired his integrity, his experience, and his proven leadership enough to happily vote for him. I felt it was a vote in the right direction for the future of our country. I too believe that our country missed the opportunity to experience true leadership when we most needed it when he was not elected.

All the drum and chest beating over Hillary. So she fits the it is time for a women president attitude.

And I guess it is fruitless to continue to ask what her qualifications are just like it was a waste of time asking about Obama's qualifications.

One thing he has that Clinton does not. He has more than amply demonstrated what happens when a non qualified heretofore unkown become POTUS.

Sounds some some are willing to take that gamble again because it is a woman?

I really don't think so. I think if the dem's party line said they wanted Nancy Pelosi for POTUS.....you all would be touting how she is the heir apparent.

I think it is pretty embarassing to not even have another candidate or two.

Must be nobody wants to follow Obama in the job except Clinton. She presents more of the same and that should be what becomes her down fall. In addition to her suffering credibility.

Originally Posted by Guest

All the drum and chest beating over Hillary. So she fits the it is time for a women president attitude.

And I guess it is fruitless to continue to ask what her qualifications are just like it was a waste of time asking about Obama's qualifications.

One thing he has that Clinton does not. He has more than amply demonstrated what happens when a non qualified heretofore unkown become POTUS.

Sounds some some are willing to take that gamble again because it is a woman?

I really don't think so. I think if the dem's party line said they wanted Nancy Pelosi for POTUS.....you all would be touting how she is the heir apparent.

I think it is pretty embarassing to not even have another candidate or two.

Must be nobody wants to follow Obama in the job except Clinton. She presents more of the same and that should be what becomes her down fall. In addition to her suffering credibility.

It sounds like Hillary Clinton is the worst candidate ever, so how come she beats every GOP contender by double digits? What does that say about the republican candidates?

If Hillary weren't running, there would be at least a dozen candidates vying for the job, but it is hard work and requires a lot of money to win the presidency. Who would put out all that effort when they are certain to lose?

BTW: there's been no answer to the question 'who can beat Hillary'?

All you Mitt Romney fans should get a draft Romney PAC started, or doesn't he want to lose for the third time?

First of all, HILLARY HASN'T BEAT ANYONE YET........so knock off the "she beats every GOP contender yadda, yadda, yadda..."! The fact is, she hasn't even beat a Democrat contender YET!! It would be nice to talk FACTS here instead of theory.....and polls are just that - here today, gone tomorrow - pretty meaningless at this stage of the game. As a female, I too am tired of the "it's time for a woman president attitude". LET THE BEST MAN/WOMAN WIN!! I don't care the gender, race, religion, or anything else......let's just vote in a real leader who loves this country and ALL it's people!!

Originally Posted by Guest

First of all, HILLARY HASN'T BEAT ANYONE YET........so knock off the "she beats every GOP contender yadda, yadda, yadda..."! The fact is, she hasn't even beat a Democrat contender YET!! It would be nice to talk FACTS here instead of theory.....and polls are just that - here today, gone tomorrow - pretty meaningless at this stage of the game. As a female, I too am tired of the "it's time for a woman president attitude". LET THE BEST MAN/WOMAN WIN!! I don't care the gender, race, religion, or anything else......let's just vote in a real leader who loves this country and ALL it's people!!

It's so true that polls are just a snapshot in time, but it would be nice to see one sometime that is not lopsided. And who is that 'LET THE BEST MAN/WOMAN WIN?

Last summer (July), MS Clinton said the following on CNN....

" I believe strongly that it's really important for there to be so little enrichment or no enrichment, at least for a long period of time."

Should she become the nominee, it will be interesting to hear her responses, since the President, is taking close to a total opposite approach.

Originally Posted by Guest

It's so true that polls are just a snapshot in time, but it would be nice to see one sometime that is not lopsided. And who is that 'LET THE BEST MAN/WOMAN WIN?

Now that's a good question, and I'll admit, I can't answer it. Still researching and studying the situation myself. And of course, why dwell on who that person might be when we don't even know who is running yet? The point is NO ONE person in my mind will be perfect enough to suit everyone's needs/desires. For that matter, I never expect that I will find a candidate who will perfectly suit all that I want, need, or desire. It's always a compromise because that is just life. My point in previous posts is to try to examine and select a candidate NOT just based on your own ideology - sure, that will factor in, but character traits like integrity, honesty, and disposition under pressure are all much more important to me. Also, someone who will listen to both sides of a discussion and work to bring people together. To me anyway, these are the signs of a good leader (BEST MAN/WOMAN). After all, the POTUS is supposed to be representative of ALL Americans, not pushing just their own ideology and trying to make a cult out of the American people. Of course, this is all JMHO. I'm pretty sure we are still free to express that in this country .

Leadership.
That quality of attribute significantly missing in current politics.
In the 2016 election one should exclude anybody who is a lawyer by profession....period....across the board....no matter who the candidate.

Originally Posted by Guest

Sen. Ted Cruz will announce White House bid at Liberty University - The Washington Post


How great will it be that the first two candidates out of the gate for the GOP will be Ted Cruz and Donald Trump?

Go to tedcruz.com for a message.

Originally Posted by Chi-Town

Go to tedcruz.com for a message.

There will be those who will quickly zero in on Ted Cruz.

How can anybody argue with the message?

Hillary is a liar a loser and a fake she would be as bad as obama.

Originally Posted by Guest

There will be those who will quickly zero in on Ted Cruz.

How can anybody argue with the message?

Ted Cruz Just Laid Out The Most Anti-Woman Agenda Yet | ThinkProgress


Ted Cruz just laid out the most anti-woman agenda yet. He may get the evangelical vote, but that pales in comparison to the women's vote. Republicans lost women by 12% in 2012. They seem to need some help with that voting bloc. Ted Cruz is not the answer to that problem.

Ted Cruz as VP would make Sarah Palin look like Queen Elizabeth.

Originally Posted by Guest

Ted Cruz as VP would make Sarah Palin look like Queen Elizabeth.

Even the panel members of "The Five" on Fox today agreed that while Cruz had some good points, he was unelectable. That kind of statement from Fox about a Republican says this candidate is dead in the water.