US President 2016 - the Great Horse Race

[Ford]

She never would have gotten either job had she not been married to Bill. Claiming every criticism of the Hildebeest as sexist is getting old -

I don't even need to respond.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

1) "Great" as in "big", not "excellent".

But it is a bunch of little men up there.

That doesn't change the fact that there are a lot of them. It's a big race of midgets.

2) I don't think Ayn Rand would approve of any of the elephant pack.

I think each of them think Fountainhead is spanking material.

Economically, yes. Not their religion, though.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Pshaw Loren.

James Taggart and Orren Boyle were villains in her last book. Their business plan was use the government to strangle competition. They're perfect Republicans, corporatists through and through.

 

[Bacillus anthracis]

It is a corporation's religious right to be allowed to influence politics!

- - - Updated - - -

BS. In her case it applies, but that doesn't mean it applies to all women.

For example, Condoleeza Rice was Secretary of State as well but she didn't get the job because she was married to the former president.

You seem to imply that the only reason she did was because her hubby gave Obama a phone call.

Or the only reason she became a senator was because her hubby called every New Yorker and told them they had to vote for Hillary.

I don't think it's unfair to say that Hillary got the opportunity to be where she is because of Bill. And there's nothing wrong with that. Because she was first lady she gained notoriety and popularity, and then had the ability to capitalize on it to become a Senator and eventually get to where she is now. I don't see that as a knock against her.

George Bush Sr. got the opportunity to become President because he was Reagan's VP. Dubbya got to fuck us for 8 years because his dad was President. Etc. Everyone is where they are because they were in some kind of close contact with someone else.

So when someone says, "Hillary only got to where she is because of Bill," it is true to a certain degree. But it doesn't diminish what she's been able to do with the opportunity.

Conversely, what's Laura Bush up to these days?

 

[James Brown]

Talking about male candidates' appearance is ok, talking about female candidates' appearance is "sexist".

On another board I frequent, one poster wrote the following about Hillary Clinton:

No amount of plastic surgery is going to help chillary clinton, aka the old hag, look more likable, feminine, and socially adept

The 'press' like the NY SLimes and her press photos might retouch all the wrinkles out of the pictures.......but the internet won't.

and

Sorry, CHillary Clinton is a 67, going on 68 year old wrinkled old crone. Birthday in Oct

I asked him if that was why he voted for Obama, who is younger than both Mitt Romney and John McCain.

He didn't respond...

She would be 69 before she would take office in Jan 2017.....one of the oldest presidents if elected.

I asked him if that was why he didn't vote for Ronald Reagan, since he was 69 when he was first inaugurated, and turned 70 just three weeks later, to be THE oldest president.

He didn't respond...

SHe's already looking like an old hag, and there's a million miles of travel that have taken it's toll.
Then there is her concussion.....likely permanent damage.
And she is OLD, ....face it.....an old senior citizen collecting SS...or soon will be.....

and

Have you seen an un retouched photo of her lately? She's really ugly.

Yep, that's some insightful political analysis, right there. And definitely NOT sexist or misogynist at all.

 

[angelo]

Roll on 2016. It promises to be one hell of a horse race!

 

[Frikki]

BS. In her case it applies, but that doesn't mean it applies to all women.

For example, Condoleeza Rice was Secretary of State as well but she didn't get the job because she was married to the former president.

The fact that she's been a Senator and Secretary of State is irrelevant to the He-Man Woman Haters Club.

She never would have gotten either job had she not been married to Bill. Claiming every criticism of the Hildebeest as sexist is getting old - we've seen enough bullshit like that in the 2008 campaign.
If you say anything bad about Hillary's appearance, you are "sexist". Never mind that male candidates are exposed to criticism of their appearance all the time as well, like weight (Christie, Huckabee), expensive (Edwards, Kerry) or wild (Sanders) hair etc. Talking about male candidates' appearance is ok, talking about female candidates' appearance is "sexist". Same with nepotism. Mentioning Bush being related to former presidents is ok, mentioning Hillary is married to a former president is "sexist". Typical of the Left wing hypocrisy.

You just can´t help yourself.

 

[Cerberus]

Roll on 2016. It promises to be one hell of a horse race!

I'm dreading the US election big-time. Our own are banal beyond belief, but yours puts them in high-intellect territory!

 

[KeepTalking]

Roll on 2016. It promises to be one hell of a horse race!

I'm dreading the US election big-time. Our own are banal beyond belief, but yours puts them in high-intellect territory!

Just to be clear, what do you mean by 'ours', and 'yours'?

 

[4321lynx]

I'm dreading the US election big-time. Our own are banal beyond belief, but yours puts them in high-intellect territory!

Just to be clear, what do you mean by 'ours', and 'yours'?

I, for one, find it perfectly clear (to borrow a phrase from your Tricky Dicky President.

He is in the SE of the UK, ie Kent, or perhaps Essex in England (That's on an Island lying West of Europe which is... never mind).His elections are those in the UK.
Your elections without a doubt, IMO, in the context of this thread, are the US Presidential ones, with a few Dems standing as candidates, and a mob of Redneck Republican arseholes (the spelling is from England, which is an Isl... never mind again) running or hoping to run to lead these Confederate... ooops..., I mean lead these disUnited States and thus the Free World.
That is only my opinion, so you are free to disregard it especially as in comes from the Frozen North, the disUnited country of Canada.
Perhaps his assumption that most people here know what the disUnited Kingdom is, was rather presumptious, but it is an advance on some of his recently departed countrymen ancestors, who were liable to talk about 'England' when they meant the UK, and who thought that God was an Englishman anyway.

 

[KeepTalking]

Just to be clear, what do you mean by 'ours', and 'yours'?

I, for one, find it perfectly clear (to borrow a phrase from your Tricky Dicky President.

He is in the SE of the UK, ie Kent, or perhaps Essex in England (That's on an Island lying West of Europe which is... never mind).His elections are those in the UK.
Your elections without a doubt, IMO, in the context of this thread, are the US Presidential ones, with a few Dems standing as candidates, and a mob of Redneck Republican arseholes (the spelling is from England, which is an Isl... never mind again) running or hoping to run to lead these Confederate... ooops..., I mean lead these disUnited States and thus the Free World.
That is only my opinion, so you are free to disregard it especially as in comes from the Frozen North, the disUnited country of Canada.
Perhaps his assumption that most people here know what the disUnited Kingdom is, was rather presumptious, but it is an advance on some of his recently departed countrymen ancestors, who were liable to talk about 'England' when they meant the UK, and who thought that God was an Englishman anyway.

Ah, see, now that makes it clear. I had thought he meant conservative vs. liberal, and had not noticed that he was posting from the UK. A little bit of specificity now and then works wonders.

 

[bilby]

..

 

[bilby]

I, for one, find it perfectly clear (to borrow a phrase from your Tricky Dicky President.

He is in the SE of the UK, ie Kent, or perhaps Essex in England (That's on an Island lying West of Europe which is... never mind).His elections are those in the UK.
Your elections without a doubt, IMO, in the context of this thread, are the US Presidential ones, with a few Dems standing as candidates, and a mob of Redneck Republican arseholes (the spelling is from England, which is an Isl... never mind again) running or hoping to run to lead these Confederate... ooops..., I mean lead these disUnited States and thus the Free World.
That is only my opinion, so you are free to disregard it especially as in comes from the Frozen North, the disUnited country of Canada.
Perhaps his assumption that most people here know what the disUnited Kingdom is, was rather presumptious, but it is an advance on some of his recently departed countrymen ancestors, who were liable to talk about 'England' when they meant the UK, and who thought that God was an Englishman anyway.

Er... Essex is not, officially, a part of South East England (although Kent is).

South East England is one of nine official regions of England at the first level of NUTS for statistical purposes. It consists of Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, East Sussex, Hampshire, the Isle of Wight, Kent, Oxfordshire, Surrey and West Sussex

Source

Technically, Essex is in the East of England.

'Greater London' is a region in its own right, but is often included in 'London and the South East' for reporting purposes.

A more casual definition of 'South East England' is the 'Home Counties', which is an umbrella term for the counties that are closest to London. No official definition exists, but the Home Counties are usually considered to include Essex and Kent, along with Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Hertfordshire, and Surrey, all of which border Greater London. Sussex, Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Hampshire and Oxfordshire are also often included as part of the Home Counties.

Historically, the Home Counties were those that included suburbs of London, prior to the creation of Greater London as a new county in 1974.

 

[Derec]

You just can´t help yourself.

Help myself doing what? Use non-flattering nicknames for politicians? Or is that only acceptable for male politicians like Tricky Dick or Slick Willie but somehow becomes "sexist" or "misogynist" when applied to a female politician?
Yet another double standard from the Left.

 

[Derec]

On another board I frequent, one poster wrote the following about Hillary Clinton:

No amount of plastic surgery is going to help chillary clinton, aka the old hag, look more likable, feminine, and socially adept

The 'press' like the NY SLimes and her press photos might retouch all the wrinkles out of the pictures.......but the internet won't.

Appearance has long been important in politics, especially presidential politics. As Doc Brown said "No wonder your president has to be an actor. He's gotta look good on television." I also recall the different perception between TV and radio audiences of the Kennedy-Nixon debate in 1960.
There have been discussions of male presidential candidates' looks, so why is it unacceptable to talk about Hillary's.
She should be treated just the same as male candidates, and that means no special kid glove treatment.

I asked him if that was why he voted for Obama, who is younger than both Mitt Romney and John McCain.

Indeed, I am sure relative youth and good looks helped Obama get elected.

I asked him if that was why he didn't vote for Ronald Reagan, since he was 69 when he was first inaugurated, and turned 70 just three weeks later, to be THE oldest president.

Well in my case I didn't vote because I was 1 and also not yet a citizen.

SHe's already looking like an old hag, and there's a million miles of travel that have taken it's toll.
Then there is her concussion.....likely permanent damage.
And she is OLD, ....face it.....an old senior citizen collecting SS...or soon will be.....

Her health should indeed be closely scrutinized give that many people have serious health challenges by the time they enter their late 60s and also due to the fainting/concussion/blood clot episode from a few years ago. Has she released all her medical records yet or does she plan to ignore them thinking herself inevitable anyway?

Have you seen an un retouched photo of her lately? She's really ugly.

Yep, that's some insightful political analysis, right there. And definitely NOT sexist or misogynist at all.

First off, no it is not sexist or misogynist at all to point out that she is ugly, since it's ok to talk about physical appearance of male candidates.
Second, it is a well known fact that presidents visibly age in office much faster than they otherwise would have. Imagine 4 or 8 years of accelerated aging of this face!

You'd likely get something like the Crypt Keeper

And no, don't pretend similar ridicule hadn't been directed at people like McCain before, so why should Hillary be exempt? Because she has a vagina?

 

[Derec]

George Bush Sr. got the opportunity to become President because he was Reagan's VP.

But he wasn't selected as running mate because he was married to Barbara but because of his extensive experience (DCI, congressman, RNC chair, various diplomatic posts) and because he finished 2nd in 1980 primaries.

Dubbya got to fuck us for 8 years because his dad was President.

He is a more apt comparison to Hillary than 41 and look how that turned out ..

So when someone says, "Hillary only got to where she is because of Bill," it is true to a certain degree. But it doesn't diminish what she's been able to do with the opportunity.

What really grinds my gears is when her sycophants overcompensate for her dearth of real experience (I do not count 16 years as first lady as real experience) by claiming that she is the most qualified candidate in a long time when she is realistically not even in the top quintile among recent (say since WWII) major party nominees.

Conversely, what's Laura Bush up to these days?

Most politician spouses don't have high political admissions, and that's good so I think. Joachim Sauer is not likely to try to become Chancellor of Germany either, so it's not about gender.

 

[Derec]

I don't even need to respond.

Yes you do. What's wrong with using nicknames for politicians? Male politicians get nicknames all the time, often unflattering ones.
Were nicknames "Tricky Dick" and "Slick Willie" sexist? Note that both of these feature a double entendre of male anatomy while Hildebeest doesn't include "cunt" or anything, although this pic kinda does.

Just for you, Ford, just for you.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I don't even need to respond.

Yes you do. What's wrong with using nicknames for politicians? Male politicians get nicknames all the time, often unflattering ones.
Were nicknames "Tricky Dick" and "Slick Willie" sexist?

Neither referred to anything sexual, so umm... no! Dick was Richard.

Note that both of these feature a double entendre of male anatomy while Hildebeest doesn't include "cunt" or anything, although this pic kinda does.

Just for you, Ford, just for you.

Thanks. I always like it when you can provide images stored at the Misogynist's Only Website.

- - - Updated - - -

And no, don't pretend similar ridicule hadn't been directed at people like McCain before, so why should Hillary be exempt? Because she has a vagina?

McCain had know health problems. That and his age were reasons of concern. Then the dipshit he made his VP candidate sealed that deal. Do you remember anything without a misogynistic historical filter?

 

[Ford]

I don't even need to respond.

Yes you do. What's wrong with using nicknames for politicians? Male politicians get nicknames all the time, often unflattering ones.
Were nicknames "Tricky Dick" and "Slick Willie" sexist? Note that both of these feature a double entendre of male anatomy while Hildebeest doesn't include "cunt" or anything, although this pic kinda does.

Just for you, Ford, just for you.

The issue is not the nickname, though thanks for classing up the joint.

No, the issue is that you're demonstrating that you see everything through the lens of your own - shall we say - quaintly outdated view of women.

And it isn't just the regurgitated right wing slurs against Hillary. It isn't just the claim that she'd be nothing without her husband. It isn't the unflattering photos. I could give you a break if your posting history was even remotely equally littered with vicious attacks against men in general, but it isn't, so I can't.

I get it. You could only hate her more if she were black and accusing a man of rape.


There are plenty of things about Hillary I don't care for, but I'm going to make a note to myself that - if the election turns out so - I'm going to respond to your little photo up there with one of her taking the oath of office, just because I know it will piss you off.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Derec, your posts amuse me.

You sometimes go a little over the mark and it is clear where you are coming from, but damn... you do often make some very good points, that many here just balk at, can't respond to, and instead call you names.

Keep it up. It makes me laugh out loud sometimes.