That's a smoke-screen. Her health care plan is nationalized health care by
stealth. What she will do is make the government-run health plan (funded by
massive increases in payroll taxes) way more appealing than any other
option, and almost everyone will opt into it.
She's a hawk, but so was FDR, t
well Bush has certainly highlighted his strengths by contrast. But
Clinton just well, gives me a nagging feeling I am being conned.
Except in person -- I did go see him once and he comes across as
extremely sincere and down-home. Which may explain a lot.
But there is no question that with Hillary
On 9/25/07, Dana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The problem with Hillary is that Bill comes with her. And even if he
> is a sleaze who has a clue how the other half lives, he is still a
> sleaze.
Yeah but only the right wingers REALLY care. I'd bank that Bill
Clinton would have been re-elected if
> RoMunn wrote:
> Hillary is just another
> plodding, big government liberal.
>
I hate to be put in the position of defending Ms. Clinton, but I don't
agree. I think she WAS a 70/80s style big gov't liberal.
The best way to see that is to look at the complaints from her party:
she's a hawk; she
Please. Bill is the one with the teflon skin and superstar personality.
Hillary is a plodding fuddy-duddy in comparison. Bill is the one with the
record of achievement at the national level. Hillary is just another
plodding, big government liberal.
On 9/25/07, Gruss wrote:
>
>
>
> I LOVE these pre
You know... I think you may be right. Maybe. It would not be my first
choice either -- I still think that's Richardson -- but it's better
than a lot of what we COULD get.
The problem with Hillary is that Bill comes with her. And even if he
is a sleaze who has a clue how the other half lives, he is
> RoMunn wrote:
> three words- down in flames...
>
I LOVE these predictions ... you don't even know who her competition
is, but because you don't like her you're convinced the rest of the US
wouldn't vote for her either. And, of course, just like the Bible,
there's a poll to justify your feelings
three words- down in flames...
On 9/25/07, Gruss wrote:
>
>
> Ms. Clinton proved beyond a doubt this weekend that she's up to the
> task: she took on 5 Sunday interviews and there was no Monday
> headline. She's a fabulous debater, an excellent small room speaker,
> and can deliver a decent spee
"Almost Flawless" is right. Apparently there is some infighting going on
with her staffers, and GQ magazine was going to run a story about it
with Slick Willy on the cover, but she had the story killed -
threatening GQ that if they run the story, they lose the cover and
pictorial of her beloved
> Rick wrote:
> I don't agree with this at all. John Kerry lost the election because
> he had poor public speaking skills and couldn't connect with voters.
> Not because he was less competent than GWB.
>
Different times. Then only a few of us knew how truly moronic Bush
was. Now that's differe
: Monday, September 24, 2007 7:55 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Obama - not electable
also if Colene Powell threw his hat in, he would be my first pick in
ANY election
~|
Check out the new features and enhancements in the
On 9/24/07, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So all the next winning candidate has to do is:
>
> (1.) Get nominated, and
> (2.) Appear more competent than the other candidate.
>
> You implicit point, that people don't like minorities, doesn't apply
> because people that ridiculous are usua
On 9/25/07, Robert Munn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Republicans would pummel Edwards endlessly with a snapshot of him with a
> "Two Americas" banner overlaid against that great aerial shot of his zillion
> dollar mansion. Yeah, Edwards knows there are two Americas, and guess which
> one he is
Dude, come on, you are way more cynical than that. ;-)
The next election will be about the same thing as the last election-
convincing 50.1% of the voters in enough states to carry the Electoral
College that the candidate in question will give those voters more than they
take away- be it money, va
I can't tell you whether or not that is the reason, but I can speak for
myself. I would vote a woman or minority into office as long as I liked what
they had to say and I believed them, and they are a member of the Republican
Party.
As I replied to Paul just a minute ago, Colin Powell would have
I agree. I was anxious for COLIN Powell to run after DS but he did not. He
would have had my vote for sure.
-Original Message-
From: Paul Ihrig
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 4:55 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Obama - not electable
also if Colene Powell threw his hat in, he would
also if Colene Powell threw his hat in, he would be my first pick in
ANY election
~|
ColdFusion 8 - Build next generation apps
today, with easy PDF and Ajax features - download now
http://download.macromedia.com/pub/labs/coldfusio
1. because he could probably talk to world leaders, with out making the "evil".
2. she has the balls to use military force as it was intended to be
used [force - atomic if need be]
3. he is black & that would be cool.
4. she is a 'chick' that to would be cool.
5. they probably would not cut benafi
> Bruce wrote:
> Does anyone on this list "seriously" think that if a woman or minority
> were to run for President, would actually stand a chance of winning?
Without a doubt. The next election will be about competence. It's
always about the thing the previous guy didn't have and, for Bush,
that
I heard the same comments 3 years ago :)
On 9/24/07, Judah McAuley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> elected. George Bush is doing his best to take the Republican Party down
> with him in a giant flaming ball. If Iraq continues to go poorly, I
> think any Democrat nominated stands a good chance of winn
From: Paul Ihrig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 4:57 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Obama - not electable
man.. i would so vote the two of them.
i know at least 20 out of 30 people who wou
Why?
Bruce
Paul Ihrig wrote:
> man.. i would so vote the two of them.
> i know at least 20 out of 30 people who would as well..
>
>
~|
Enterprise web applications, build robust, secure
scalable apps today - Try it now ColdFu
man.. i would so vote the two of them.
i know at least 20 out of 30 people who would as well..
~|
ColdFusion 8 - Build next generation apps
today, with easy PDF and Ajax features - download now
http://download.macromedia.com/pub/l
Yes, I honestly think they would stand a decent chance and probably get
elected. George Bush is doing his best to take the Republican Party down
with him in a giant flaming ball. If Iraq continues to go poorly, I
think any Democrat nominated stands a good chance of winning, minority
or not. In
Here is a question regarding Hillary and Obama:
Does anyone on this list "seriously" think that if a woman or minority
were to run for President, either now or in the next few elections,
would actually stand a chance of winning? Or better yet, a woman
Presidential candidate and minority VP cand
> Rick wrote:
> that may be true, but Obama is far from obscure. especially not in
> this day and age!
>
Most voters don't pay attention until there are nominess, and a
plurality probably don't pay attention until a month before the
election; so I'd say just about anyone can win no matter how kno
On 9/24/07, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Gov Clinton was an obscure southern politician. All these polls don't
> mean crap until a month before the election.
that may be true, but Obama is far from obscure. especially not in
this day and age!
> On the other hand if Obama wins or p
> Rick wrote:
> It also supports my belief that Obama is unelectable.
>
Gov Clinton was an obscure southern politician. All these polls don't
mean crap until a month before the election.
The only game in town right now is getting the nomination and that's a
function of Iowa for Sen Obama. If Ed
28 matches
Mail list logo
