![]() |
I wish I'd been there
rw wrote in news:sW56g.735$Ae1.548
@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net: However, she's way, way down on my list of preferences, mainly because she's cynically moved to the right to position herself for the race. She's down on my list just because I think she's too divisive a character to be electable. I could be wrong, as the talking heads have been saying that the 35 year old waitresses making $20000 a year will turn out for her in droves. I can tell you she's been a pretty good Senator from the upstate NY point of view. I could give two ****s about her left/right position, and some silly ass flag burning bill. Hell, I could even vote for certain Republicans under certain situations. -- Scott Reverse name to reply |
I wish I'd been there
"Scott Seidman" wrote in message . 4... rw wrote in news:sW56g.735$Ae1.548 @newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net: However, she's way, way down on my list of preferences, mainly because she's cynically moved to the right to position herself for the race. She's down on my list just because I think she's too divisive a character to be electable. I could be wrong, as the talking heads have been saying that the 35 year old waitresses making $20000 a year will turn out for her in droves. I can tell you she's been a pretty good Senator from the upstate NY point of view. I could give two ****s about her left/right position, and some silly ass flag burning bill. Hell, I could even vote for certain Republicans under certain situations. -- Scott Reverse name to reply If she is nominated by the Dems, you can figure another 4 years of neo-con control! Op |
I wish I'd been there
"Opie" wrote in
: If she is nominated by the Dems, you can figure another 4 years of neo-con control! Op Not every republican is a neo-con. Let's say Guliani wins. Personally, I think there are some real problems with him, in that many of his "quality of life" law enforcement issues may have had some real problems with civil liberties, and I think he might lean toward Ramboism during war. But, he can get things done, he's fairly fiscally responsible, and the Christian Conservatives would be essentially out of the loop. Do you consider him a neo-con? I would have though McCain would be a reasonable candidate, as well, but I've lost a ton of respect for him in recent months. I think even Republicans realize that the current level of partisanism is doing bad things to our country. I also think that the current admin has been trying to keep things this way, for God knows what reason. If the Republicans don't choose wisely, they could hand over the White House keys, even to a Hillary. BTW, I can even understand the vitriolic hatred of Kerry more than I can understand the knee jerk reaction to Hillary. In any case, thank God for term limits. This thread started off by calling for a rally behind the Pres to show the world something. I think the most positive thing we can show the world at this point is how quickly a strong representative democracy can recover from this train wreck of an Administration. -- Scott Reverse name to reply |
I wish I'd been there
"Scott Seidman" wrote in message . 1.4... "Opie" wrote in : If she is nominated by the Dems, you can figure another 4 years of neo-con control! Op Not every republican is a neo-con. Let's say Guliani wins. Personally, I think there are some real problems with him, in that many of his "quality of life" law enforcement issues may have had some real problems with civil liberties, and I think he might lean toward Ramboism during war. But, he can get things done, he's fairly fiscally responsible, and the Christian Conservatives would be essentially out of the loop. Do you consider him a neo-con? I would have though McCain would be a reasonable candidate, as well, but I've lost a ton of respect for him in recent months. I meant exactly what I said. If Hillary is the Dems candidate, then we can look forward to another four years so neo-con control. The Republicans won't pick a relative moderate to run against her. Karl Rove will trot out and beat the drums for some neo-con religious fanatic to combat the homo-loving, anti-christian elites. Rooty ain't goin' nowhere. And neither is Hillary. McCain's a has been. Op I think even Republicans realize that the current level of partisanism is doing bad things to our country. I also think that the current admin has been trying to keep things this way, for God knows what reason. If the Republicans don't choose wisely, they could hand over the White House keys, even to a Hillary. BTW, I can even understand the vitriolic hatred of Kerry more than I can understand the knee jerk reaction to Hillary. In any case, thank God for term limits. This thread started off by calling for a rally behind the Pres to show the world something. I think the most positive thing we can show the world at this point is how quickly a strong representative democracy can recover from this train wreck of an Administration. -- Scott Reverse name to reply |
I wish I'd been there
|
I wish I'd been there
Opie wrote:
If she is nominated by the Dems, you can figure another 4 years of neo-con control! Especially if Nader runs again. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
I wish I'd been there
"rw" wrote in message nk.net... Opie wrote: If she is nominated by the Dems, you can figure another 4 years of neo-con control! Especially if Nader runs again. Get you a good mirror and a decent set of forceps, and pull that Nader bug out of your swollen ass! If the Dems want to shout themselves in the head--again--they should go ahead and nominate Hillary. I certainly won't vote for her, and I'm far from a Republican. I'm registered "Unaffiliated." the Dems will lose fro the same reasons that they lost the last two times--they ain't got no decent candidates to run up against an electorate that can be led around by bible thumping, security scare fanatics! Go ahead Putz, get her nominated. Op |
I wish I'd been there
"Mr. Opus McDopus" wrote in news:qo96g.9777
: I certainly won't vote for her, May I ask why? -- Scott Reverse name to reply |
I wish I'd been there
wrote in message ... In article , says... "Scott Seidman" wrote in message . 4... I can tell you she's been a pretty good Senator from the upstate NY point of view. I could give two ****s about her left/right position, and some silly ass flag burning bill. Hell, I could even vote for certain Republicans under certain situations. -- Scott Reverse name to reply If she is nominated by the Dems, you can figure another 4 years of neo-con control! Op I'm pondering changing my voter registration to Democrat (from not affiliated with any party) just to try to get the Dems to run somebody decent. They have to realize that they are going to get stomped on if they run Hillary. Right? - Ken Do it. Hopefully it will be someone with some executive and leadership experiences. Considering who the R likelies are right now, and R control of the Congress and the judiciary, I could consider voting for Hillary (without joy) as a vote against the "One party State." RWs list is plausible. Dave |
I wish I'd been there
"Scott Seidman" wrote in message May I ask why? I can't answer for Op, but will state clearly that I will not ever vote for her, as I feel she is an unprincipled, power hungry, shallow politician(using "politician" here as a perjorative). Literally, I would refuse to vote for her, even if she ran against Santorum, and I am a lifelong Democrat. Tom |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:09 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2006 FishingBanter