2008 = Female President! - Page 3 - Eternal Allegiance

Kattie · 02-24-2005, 07:24 PM

If Democrats are smart then they won't touch a Hilary nomination with a 50-foot pole. Hilary has too much baggage from her days as First Lady and now as Senator. Not only that but she alienates the progressive wing in her own party. Democrats would be better off nominating a governor (not from the northeast) in 2008.

I don't see Condi Rice running ,but she would be a poor choice for Republicans. Nominating her will dredge up her oil past and 9/11 blunders. Not to mention that she comes off as having a stiff Al Gore-like personality. Republicans would do well to nominate another Southern governor.

As long as the person meshes with my views, then it doesn't matter what sex, race, whatever the person is. However, i think it is stupid to vote/not vote for a person only or mainly because of sex or color.

Overprotected 1 · 02-24-2005, 07:46 PM

I don't have a problem with voting for a woman, I just don't know if Hilary would be the first one I'd opt to vote for.

And sure, 81% say they would, but what happens at the polls is usually a lot different than what's said. For example, wasn't Kerry winning in a lot of the polls, but come election day, Bush wins. I think it's probably the same situation here.

Teemu · 02-25-2005, 05:27 AM

I'm not American but I'd be happy to see Clinton as a president again. We got our female president 5 years ago and I think she's done great job.

Duffyboy · 02-25-2005, 05:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kat
If Democrats are smart then they won't touch a Hilary nomination with a 50-foot pole. Hilary has too much baggage from her days as First Lady and now as Senator. Not only that but she alienates the progressive wing in her own party. Democrats would be better off nominating a governor (not from the northeast) in 2008.

I don't see Condi Rice running ,but she would be a poor choice for Republicans. Nominating her will dredge up her oil past and 9/11 blunders. Not to mention that she comes off as having a stiff Al Gore-like personality. Republicans would do well to nominate another Southern governor.

As long as the person meshes with my views, then it doesn't matter what sex, race, whatever the person is. However, i think it is stupid to vote/not vote for a person only or mainly because of sex or color.

Well Howard Dean would have been my second choice. What about him?

ForeverInLoveWithJus · 02-25-2005, 11:51 AM

I didnt like Bill after his acts but Hillary is awesome.

Kattie · 02-25-2005, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Duffyboy
Well Howard Dean would have been my second choice. What about him?

Howard Dean would be a good choice ,but since he is head of the DNC now, it is highly unlikely he will run.

Lemons · 02-25-2005, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Duffyboy
Well Howard Dean would have been my second choice. What about him?

Howard Dean would have been even worse for the Democrats. This year's contenders were very weak for Democrats. There shoud have been a better canidate and Dean wasn't one of them IMO. Either way Dems were gonna lose this election. Howard Dean is waaaay to Left for someone who is a more conservative Democrat, or a moderate Democrat. You have to mend whichever way the country is at. If its more conservative, you change your veiws to be that way, if its more liberal, you change your veiws to be that way. Howard Dean's views were way to left to change. Therefore, he didn't win in any state but his, but he almost lost his state. Heh.

FantaOrSprite · 02-25-2005, 07:39 PM

I don't think you should change you're views in order to gain more people. If you believe in something, you stick to it, you don't bend under pressure.

And if you don't recall the dems were very close to winning the election. They didn't need THAT many more votes to overtake in Ohio. If the Democrats were bound to lose, I wonder why so many republicans were launching silly Swift Boat smear campaigns?

Lemons · 02-25-2005, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RaInBoW_bRiTe
I don't think you should change you're views in order to gain more people. If you believe in something, you stick to it, you don't bend under pressure.

And if you don't recall the dems were very close to winning the election. They didn't need THAT many more votes to overtake in Ohio. If the Democrats were bound to lose, I wonder why so many republicans were launching silly Swift Boat smear campaigns?

2 States Switched from voting Democrat to Republican. BTW, The Swift Boat ads weren't against democrats. They were against John Kerry.

FantaOrSprite · 02-25-2005, 09:42 PM

And John Kerry was the Democratic nominee running for President, no? They would have launched a smear campaign for any damn Democrat that had ran for President, so don't try to hide behind that "It's against one person" BS, they did the same thing with Bill Clinton. And my WHOLE POINT was that if they were so confidant in winning the election they wouldn't have taken the time to launch the Swift Boat ads at all. Get it?