Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 56

Thread: If Hillary is picked as running mate (VP)

  1. Top | #21
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Lots of planets have a North
    Posts
    6,539
    Archived
    5,115
    Total Posts
    11,654
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer View Post
    I think that Clinton would be doused in gasoline and set on fire if she tried to get anywhere near the ticket.
    Wouldn't work. She's so cold that if you poured boiling water down her throat she'd piss ice cubes.

  2. Top | #22
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Lots of planets have a North
    Posts
    6,539
    Archived
    5,115
    Total Posts
    11,654
    Rep Power
    61
    Hillary would be a logical selection for many positions but not for VP. Too close to the seat of power.

    Someone pointed out that Secretary of State was close to the seat of power, so I responded with "President, Vice President, Speaker of the House, President pro tempore of the Senate, Secretary of State".

  3. Top | #23
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    18,490
    Archived
    15,686
    Total Posts
    34,176
    Rep Power
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Harvestdancer View Post
    Hillary would be a logical selection for many positions but not for VP. Too close to the seat of power.
    Ambassador to Antactica far enough?

  4. Top | #24
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    18,490
    Archived
    15,686
    Total Posts
    34,176
    Rep Power
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by Koyaanisqatsi View Post
    Yeah, repeating the same fallacy doesn't make it true. She not only won,
    Hey, fanboy, it's a fallacy to say she won when she clearly lost. Get over it already. 2016 was 4 years ago!

    And she beat him by almost three million votes. You literally cannot expect anything more in an ELECTION than for the largest number of voters to vote for you.
    In a US presidential election you need 270 electoral votes. Them's the rules. You may not like it but it is what it is.
    And besides, she only won 48.2% of the popular vote. Even in a popular vote system like in France that means you have to go to the runoff election.

    Lastly, we do not know what the votes would have been had the popular vote rule been in place as both would have campaigned and strategized differently. Or at least Trump - there was not much evidence of strategy in the Hillary camp. More like complacency and measuring the drapes.

    He is a big asshole. She beat him.
    Except she didn't.

    The fact that he is POTUS is a completely different matter.
    It is not. It is a direct consequence of him winning the presidential election, according to rules written in the Constitution. You should read it sometime.

  5. Top | #25
    Administrator Mumbles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,505
    Archived
    5,536
    Total Posts
    7,041
    Rep Power
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by Jolly_Penguin View Post
    How do you think it would effect the general election of the Democrat nominee picks Hillary Clinton as running mate for the VP spot.

    Will she hurt the ticket or will she help it, in bringing out people to vote who failed to in 2016 as an act of repentance?
    Oh, for the love of basketball...

    Y'all really need to stop screaming and raging out every time she shows up with some exercise video for seniors or whatever. She's nowhere near as bad as many people insist she is, she's not interested in being VP, she likely quit for good after Comey spiked her campaign at the last second, she's likely having a wonderful time being a grandma who occasionally gets interviewed or writing books.

    She's like Oprah and Michelle Obama - they keep saying "I'm not interested, I'm not running", and everyone else simply refuses to listen. She's not even working on election integrity like, say, Abrams, Schwartzenegger, and Holder are.

  6. Top | #26
    Formerly Joedad
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    PA USA
    Posts
    6,491
    Archived
    5,039
    Total Posts
    11,530
    Rep Power
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Harvestdancer View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer View Post
    I think that Clinton would be doused in gasoline and set on fire if she tried to get anywhere near the ticket.
    Wouldn't work. She's so cold that if you poured boiling water down her throat she'd piss ice cubes.
    I voted for Clinton because I'm a democrat and her platform was - and is - my platform. But I wanted her to start showing some emotion at some point, be sincere and not political. I admire self control in a person and I also admire the ability to emotionally express yourself. She was completely unable to do this and it cost her in the battleground states like Pennsylvania. It's why she lost, because of her lack of emotion, empathy, whatever you want to call it. Bill had it but she didn't. Trumpo had it and is why he's POTUS.

    I didn't want her to become another Trumpo asshole, but she lost for the same reason Trumpo beat the rest of the GOP contenders. Maybe the next democratic candidate will have learned something from this. Let's hope so.

  7. Top | #27
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    28,203
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    70,676
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by T.G.G. Moogly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Koyaanisqatsi View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Treedbear View Post
    The Clinton name is a rallying cry to bring out the Republican vote.
    And about ten million more Democrats than Republicans can muster, even with cheating.
    No one is gonna touch Clinton unless they're trying to lose again. She showed us how to not debate and run a campaign against Trump.
    I disagree on the debate. Had Clinton allowed herself to be trolled, she'd have come off as 'a woman being a woman'. I thought she came out very well in the debates.

  8. Top | #28
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    NOT laying back and thinking of England
    Posts
    10,659
    Archived
    3,655
    Total Posts
    14,314
    Rep Power
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by T.G.G. Moogly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Harvestdancer View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer View Post
    I think that Clinton would be doused in gasoline and set on fire if she tried to get anywhere near the ticket.
    Wouldn't work. She's so cold that if you poured boiling water down her throat she'd piss ice cubes.
    I voted for Clinton because I'm a democrat and her platform was - and is - my platform. But I wanted her to start showing some emotion at some point, be sincere and not political. I admire self control in a person and I also admire the ability to emotionally express yourself. She was completely unable to do this and it cost her in the battleground states like Pennsylvania. It's why she lost, because of her lack of emotion, empathy, whatever you want to call it. Bill had it but she didn't. Trumpo had it and is why he's POTUS.

    I didn't want her to become another Trumpo asshole, but she lost for the same reason Trumpo beat the rest of the GOP contenders. Maybe the next democratic candidate will have learned something from this. Let's hope so.
    The thing is, if Clinton had shown emotion, if she had allowed herself to show anger or to have a single tear glisten in her eyes, she would have been derided even more endlessly as an overly emotional out of control WOMAN,the worst thing anyone can possibly be in some people's eyes. Not overly emotional--a bunch of them voted for Trump. I meant an overly emotional woman--the kind who isn't allowed to get angry, much less spew spittle like Bernie, or shed a tear like Boehner

  9. Top | #29
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    28,203
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    70,676
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by T.G.G. Moogly View Post

    I voted for Clinton because I'm a democrat and her platform was - and is - my platform. But I wanted her to start showing some emotion at some point, be sincere and not political. I admire self control in a person and I also admire the ability to emotionally express yourself. She was completely unable to do this and it cost her in the battleground states like Pennsylvania. It's why she lost, because of her lack of emotion, empathy, whatever you want to call it. Bill had it but she didn't. Trumpo had it and is why he's POTUS.

    I didn't want her to become another Trumpo asshole, but she lost for the same reason Trumpo beat the rest of the GOP contenders. Maybe the next democratic candidate will have learned something from this. Let's hope so.
    The thing is, if Clinton had shown emotion, if she had allowed herself to show anger or to have a single tear glisten in her eyes, she would have been derided even more endlessly as an overly emotional out of control WOMAN,the worst thing anyone can possibly be in some people's eyes. Not overly emotional--a bunch of them voted for Trump. I meant an overly emotional woman--the kind who isn't allowed to get angry, much less spew spittle like Bernie, or shed a tear like Boehner
    ...or whine during a Presidential debate about how unfair those campaign ads were. Had Clinton said that, it'd been the end, and hardly just on right-wing media. CNN would have headlines "Can Clinton Remain Professional Enough for the Presidency". "I love my wife and daughter clearly, and I'm not saying all women are emotional and can't be professional... But when Clinton complained about how campaign ads impacted her emotionally, it exposed a weakness that can indicate she doesn't have what is required to be President... After all, if she can't handle campaign ads, how will she handle national emergencies or sending the military to war?"

  10. Top | #30
    Super Moderator Bronzeage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Deep South
    Posts
    7,044
    Archived
    7,568
    Total Posts
    14,612
    Rep Power
    44
    This all reads like a Republican wet dream. The GOP Half Truth All Lie committee would have to go back to work, crafting new memes which half the party knows are false, but pass them on because they believe the other half will believe without question. Truth is of no importance, if it solidifies the base. I've seen this in action, too many times.

    This didn't start when Trump appeared. The conservative willingness to accept lying for the good of the cause is the chief reason they have been saddled with Trump, and like any animal wearing a saddle, they can either go where the rider goads them to go, or buck him off.

    I suspect all the Hillary for Anything 2020 talk is coming directly out of the GOP. They need a bugaboo to distract from their own boogeyman who inhabits the White House.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •