Originally Posted by Guest

The 2016 contest will be about issues and not about personalities, and the winner will be the one who supports a woman's right to choose, the one who supports healthcare for all, the one who supports the voting rights act, the one who doesn't think that employers should decide what type of birth control a woman uses (or if she should even use birth control), if state mandated vaginal-probes are used, if the minimum wage is raised, if equal pay for equal work is the law, if violence against women is allowed, and many other equal rights issues.

Apparently this strange assemblage of concerns is important to you, but I hardly think most of your concerns are shared by more than a handful.

Healthcare is available to all. Simply sign up and pay the premium.

Voting - both sides agree

Birth Control - who knows what you're talking about? Hobby Lobby?

Vaginal-probes? Has to be a joke...???

Min wage raise - if $15/hr is good, why not really raise the poor out of poverty and raise it to $150/hr?

Equal pay for equal work - of course! Proven MYTH women earn less.

Violence against women? - LOL... um who's for beating women? Really?

Abortion - that's about the ONLY valid policy disagreement between parties. Think we're up to about 22 MILLION abortions since Roe v. Wade - CONGRATS!

Originally Posted by Guest

...and the Republican candidate of (insert any name) will be able to win the presidency over Sec. Clinton?

These two GOP candidates appear to be doomed.

https://youtu.be/fKJ1LNwtAcI

Originally Posted by Guest

That's only a possibility if she actually wins the nomination. And if she wins the nomination, all I have to say is, seriously, that's all you got?? How many years has this been going on and that's all you got?? There's actually no one else in the whole Democratic party that isn't as qualified or more qualified than her? Oh, I guess not, considering a virtual unknown, totally unqualified candidate beat her out the last time!! Now, either something is really messed up in the Democratic Party, or someone else is pulling all the strings.......which is it?

Well you're correct about the "totally unqualified candidate" who beat out Mrs Clinton ... and he has since indeed proven to be totally unqualified in myriad of ways

Originally Posted by Guest

Well you're correct about the "totally unqualified candidate" who beat out Mrs Clinton ... and he has since indeed proven to be totally unqualified in myriad of ways

Originally Posted by Guest

That's only a possibility if she actually wins the nomination. And if she wins the nomination, all I have to say is, seriously, that's all you got?? How many years has this been going on and that's all you got?? There's actually no one else in the whole Democratic party that isn't as qualified or more qualified than her? Oh, I guess not, considering a virtual unknown, totally unqualified candidate beat her out the last time!! Now, either something is really messed up in the Democratic Party, or someone else is pulling all the strings.......which is it?

Poll: Hillary Clinton still tops in 2016 - CNN.com


This is so amusing. Hillary Clinton is the worst candidate ever, and yet she trounces every possible GOP contender by at least 10% points. What does that say about the GOP candidates?

I know, I know the polls are skewed just like they were on election night 2012 when Mitt Romney believed he would win right up until the polls closed, based on his internal polling. Even then, Karl Rove was running around Fox News yelling "no, no this can't be happening". Who will ever forget that night?

Originally Posted by Guest

Poll: Hillary Clinton still tops in 2016 - CNN.com


This is so amusing. Hillary Clinton is the worst candidate ever, and yet she trounces every possible GOP contender by at least 10% points. What does that say about the GOP candidates?

I know, I know the polls are skewed just like they were on election night 2012 when Mitt Romney believed he would win right up until the polls closed, based on his internal polling. Even then, Karl Rove was running around Fox News yelling "no, no this can't be happening". Who will ever forget that night?

How can we forget THAT night when we are reminded evry day since what a horrible outcome. The nobody pied piper sucked in millions not once but twice. How can there be so many gullible people?

Originally Posted by Guest

How can we forget THAT night when we are reminded evry day since what a horrible outcome. The nobody pied piper sucked in millions not once but twice. How can there be so many gullible people?

That's easy ... continued illegal immigration, continued race baiting and making blacks perpetually dependent upon the democrat party and periodic hysteria that single women often buy into

Originally Posted by Guest

How can we forget THAT night when we are reminded evry day since what a horrible outcome. The nobody pied piper sucked in millions not once but twice. How can there be so many gullible people?

And this is from the party that gave us George Bush and Dick Cheney and 9/11, the Iraq war, 10% unemployment, total collapse of the financial markets, and the party that thinks Sarah Palin could be president. You betcha.

The good news for you folks is that Donald Trump announced today that he is forming an exploratory committee to gear up for a run for president in 2016.

Originally Posted by Guest

And this is from the party that gave us George Bush and Dick Cheney and 9/11, the Iraq war, 10% unemployment, total collapse of the financial markets, and the party that thinks Sarah Palin could be president. You betcha.

The good news for you folks is that Donald Trump announced today that he is forming an exploratory committee to gear up for a run for president in 2016.

I agree. Some people can't seem to stand peace and prosperity.

Originally Posted by Guest

That's easy ... continued illegal immigration, continued race baiting and making blacks perpetually dependent upon the democrat party and periodic hysteria that single women often buy into

Republicans just alienated Hispanics, African Americans, and women in one single post!

WOW!!!!

A single post qualifies to tar the entire group....convenient vrbiage to promote one's case no matter if it is accurate or not in this case.

And the crumbling of the "crush" continues:

Democratic support for Hillary Clinton softens: Reuters/Ipsos poll | Reuters

I can't wait to see how the response to this is re-stated.

Obama's rein over the kingdom show be cuff iciest reminder of what destruction to America can happen when an unqualified person trained in the letter of the law is elected.
The free lunch is not worth losing our freedoms and all that IS AMERICAN!

Originally Posted by Guest

Obama's rein over the kingdom show be cuff iciest reminder of what destruction to America can happen when an unqualified person trained in the letter of the law is elected.
The free lunch is not worth losing our freedoms and all that IS AMERICAN!

I need the ability to edit.......the underlined should read:

"...Obama's reign over the kingdom should be sufficient..."

The corruption of the Clintons continues … basically raking in millions of solicited “donations” (i.e. purchase of future access) … what could be wrong with that??

WSJ: “Some donors have direct ties to foreign governments. One is a member of the Saudi royal family. Another is a Ukrainian oligarch and former parliamentarian. Others are individuals with close connections to foreign governments that stem from their business activities… All told, more than a dozen foreign individuals and their foundations and companies were large donors to the Clinton Foundation in the years after Mrs. Clinton became secretary of state in 2009, collectively giving between $34 million and $68 million, foundation records show…After Mrs. Clinton left the State Department in 2013, the foundation resumed accepting donations from foreign governments. Just after she stepped down as secretary of state, it received a large donation from a conglomerate run by a member of China’s National People’s Congress. In response to questions about foreign donations, a foundation official said the individuals have given to a host of other major philanthropies.”

Originally Posted by Guest

The corruption of the Clintons continues … basically raking in millions of solicited “donations” (i.e. purchase of future access) … what could be wrong with that??

WSJ: “Some donors have direct ties to foreign governments. One is a member of the Saudi royal family. Another is a Ukrainian oligarch and former parliamentarian. Others are individuals with close connections to foreign governments that stem from their business activities… All told, more than a dozen foreign individuals and their foundations and companies were large donors to the Clinton Foundation in the years after Mrs. Clinton became secretary of state in 2009, collectively giving between $34 million and $68 million, foundation records show…After Mrs. Clinton left the State Department in 2013, the foundation resumed accepting donations from foreign governments. Just after she stepped down as secretary of state, it received a large donation from a conglomerate run by a member of China’s National People’s Congress. In response to questions about foreign donations, a foundation official said the individuals have given to a host of other major philanthropies.”

The Wall Street Journal...blah, blah, blah. Is that the best they got? The Clinton Foundation's books are open for anyone to see, as are the Gates Foundation, etc etc. How else would the WSJ get access to all these facts?

Does anyone think that the average working woman voter gives a rat's patootie about how much the CGI took in or where it went? Most voters are just trying to balance their own books.