• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: tryptakid | Foreigner

If Sarah Palin jumped into the race...

she won't run. she is not going to even run a pretend campaign like ron paul does.

she will hint at it in an attempt to stay relevant and to keep the checks rolling in. she is making orders of magnitude more money now than she would as president with the added bonus of not being answerable to anyone for anything.

she may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer but she is calculating enough to realize that, at least.
 
CoffeeDrinker said:
Don't get me wrong, I think Hillary is going to be a great president in 2016
Click to expand...

Agreed. The Republicans basically have until 2020 to fix their mistakes and find their next candidate to take a serious run at the White House again. Unfortunately, Bush's legacy is still sending shockwaves through the nation, and being that the Dems have great candidates lined up, while the Republicans can't even seem to get anyone serious to run, I think we'll be seeing a Democratic US for a long, long time.
 
kokaino said:
The Bible Belt WOULD be won by Palin - that's almost enough to win the entire nomination. Plus she'll get some northwestern states like Idaho and Wyoming and some southwestern states like Utah. That's my opinion on the issue.

You're Australian, what does American politics got to do with you, anyway?
Click to expand...

You are American and you are still underestimating the common sense of the American people in a horribly insulting way. She wouldn't win the bible belt. Sorry, she just wouldn't. America may be full of ignorant motherfuckers, but they are still outnumbered by the people with common sense... and no one with common sense on either side of the political fence would vote for Palin. She is a joke even among her own party.

It's almost like you WANT Palin to win just so you can thumb your nose at Obama for daring to hurt your precious Hilary's feelings.

For chrissake... not even McCain's people are as butthurt as you.
 
I'd lay very strong odds on the next president being a Republican even if Obama wins a second term; since 1950, only once has a two-term president been followed by one of the same party, and that was Bush 41.
 
Cyc said:
Agreed. The Republicans basically have until 2020 to fix their mistakes and find their next candidate to take a serious run at the White House again. Unfortunately, Bush's legacy is still sending shockwaves through the nation, and being that the Dems have great candidates lined up, while the Republicans can't even seem to get anyone serious to run, I think we'll be seeing a Democratic US for a long, long time.
Click to expand...

You are forgetting we are a "what have you done for me lately?" nation these days. No one is buying the "its Bush's fault" BS anymore. Sure, Obama is looking fine for re-election next year but he has hardly delivered on the so-called movement he was supposed to bring for this country. Nothing has changed which brings no hope for anything different than what we have been getting.
 
No one's buying "it's Bush's fault"? With all this focus on the deficit you'd think they remember why it got so bad in the first place. Clinton could legitimately point to her husband's term as a big success. What could the republicans legitimately claim? That they helped deregulate the banks?
I don't think the nation will mind putting two democratic presidents in a row. And I don't think any republican could out-campaign Hillary in any case.
Plus the Tea Party is a huge liability for any republican that could possibly do a half-way decent job as president. I thought the democrats had the market cornered on shooting themselves in the foot, but I was pleasantly surprised at the rise of the Tea Party.
 
Wyld 4 X said:
You are forgetting we are a "what have you done for me lately?" nation these days. No one is buying the "its Bush's fault" BS anymore. Sure, Obama is looking fine for re-election next year but he has hardly delivered on the so-called movement he was supposed to bring for this country. Nothing has changed which brings no hope for anything different than what we have been getting.
Click to expand...

Even mainline intellectuals say his spendthrift after 9/11 was the biggest mistake of his presidency and of the 21st century. Then...You have everything else. He was a brilliant fuck up.
 
^And the undeniably rubber-stamp republican Congress during that period.
...uggh don't get me started on Congress.... they are America's biggest embarrassment, a close second is Clarence Thomas.
 
Oh Clinton, I guess it has been forgotten about his reforming of CRA 1977? (What is that you say?) It only helped the housing bubble balloon out of control which, in case you need reminding, helped spur (in one way or another) the latest recession. Yes, Bush was fiscally terrible but he inherited bad policies as well. Clinton is no scared cow so let's not pretend that he should be one.
 
not saying he is, your right he sign that into law, but the provisions that were mostly responsible for the recession were crafted by republican senators Gramm and Leach.

The idea for those reforms were to stop banks discriminating against people from certain neighborhoods when it came to giving loans. Of course, instead of making it so people from the ghetto couldn't get loans, they made it so they could get loans WAY TOO EASILY....go figure, they're gonna find a way to fuck you over no matter what.
Clinton wanted to fix the problem and try to level the playing field for minorities, the republican congress wouldn't have it unless they repealed part of Glass Steagall. They always seem to take a good idea hostage by supplementing it with a terrible idea.

And I know about the legitimate criticisms against Clinton, but I'm just saying I think it'd be much easier for Hillary to come up with good talking points than any current republican contender. Now there might be some guy coming from left-field who's a good speaker and totally appeals to the Tea Party and independent voters alike, but I don't see how considering how the Tea Party hates anyone who's even slightly moderate.
 
Wyld 4 X said:
Oh Clinton, I guess it has been forgotten about his reforming of CRA 1977? (What is that you say?) It only helped the housing bubble balloon out of control which, in case you need reminding, helped spur (in one way or another) the latest recession. Yes, Bush was fiscally terrible but he inherited bad policies as well. Clinton is no scared cow so let's not pretend that he should be one.
Click to expand...

The financial crisis started back when financial "liberalism" took root. Republican, Democrat...These are just words. Clinton was indeed a fuck tard, yes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top