PDA

View Full Version : The real Hillary?



Drop1
11-03-2007, 02:57 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/20/us/politics/20poll.html?pagewanted=print

eg8r
11-03-2007, 07:53 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Forty percent of voters view her unfavorably, more than for any of the other major candidates for president (although they are not as well known). Neither men nor women fully trust that she is saying what she really believes, the poll found. <hr /></blockquote> The NY Times was being nice here. What they meant to say was she is the most disliked of all candidates and every one still believes she is the same liar she was the last time she was in the White House.

In the last debate her feelings were hurt when the rest of the field was picking on her. My favorite part was when she was asked why she had different views when talking to the press and when talking privately. She tried to recover but never made it.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
11-04-2007, 10:53 AM
Dear friend,
Just a thought. I do believe that when women go into that booth, since all women are part of the group which has been most consistantly abused, oppressed, and discriminated against, more than any other single group in history, they will pull the lever for Hillary. The majority of voters, are women, and women, as a group, are not happy with the way men have been running things since the God's, and their deciples, rendered women to the lowly position of being beholden to men.

I am no male hater, and frankly, enjoy my relationships with men, just as much as those I share with women, but there can be no doubt, that women have accepted a back seat to men for far, far too long, and I think that when push comes to shove, women, and may men, will vote for Hillary, knowing that the last reasonable foreign policy our country had, was during Bill Clinton's administration, and the he, in fact, accomplished a great deal in formulating fail safe's and intelligence operatives, to deal with the terrorist threat, which was, in fact, greatly brought about through Republican Administrations, previopus to the Clinton Administration.

Our troops, are, in fact, being killed by weapons which have been spread around the middle east by REagan, and two Bush's, and to this day, our troops are being killed with those very weapons. George, still arming terrorists, as I write. /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Love,
Gayle

pooltchr
11-04-2007, 05:10 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Dear friend,
Just a thought. I do believe that when women go into that booth, since all women are part of the group which has been most consistantly abused, oppressed, and discriminated against, more than any other single group in history, they will pull the lever for Hillary. The majority of voters, are women, and women, as a group, are not happy with the way men have been running things since the God's, and their deciples, rendered women to the lowly position of being beholden to men.

I am no male hater, and frankly, enjoy my relationships with men, just as much as those I share with women, but there can be no doubt, that women have accepted a back seat to men for far, far too long, and I think that when push comes to shove, women, and may men, will vote for Hillary, knowing that the last reasonable foreign policy our country had, was during Bill Clinton's administration, and the he, in fact, accomplished a great deal in formulating fail safe's and intelligence operatives, to deal with the terrorist threat, which was, in fact, greatly brought about through Republican Administrations, previopus to the Clinton Administration.

Our troops, are, in fact, being killed by weapons which have been spread around the middle east by REagan, and two Bush's, and to this day, our troops are being killed with those very weapons. George, still arming terrorists, as I write. /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Love,
Gayle <hr /></blockquote>

Gayle,
If what you say is true, it doesn't speak very highly of women in general. If the decision on who to vote for to lead our country comes down to whether it is a man or a woman, rather than who is best qualified to lead the country, we are in serious trouble.

Of course, taking your logic one step further, considering the history of the black community, what if all blacks decided to vote for the one black candidate, just because he is black? And it would be a tough call for black women...do I vote for the black candidate, or the female candidate?

Personally, I have more faith in the voting public than to think that gender or race would be the deciding factor in an election for the highest office in our country.
I could be wrong, but I sincerely hope not!
Steve

Drop1
11-04-2007, 09:30 PM
I think you are wrong. Women still are not given the same wages,as men,for the same work done. They are excluded from going to high in the corporate structure,and when every thing is equal for two women,applying for a job,hire the one with the biggest tits. That is the real world. Men lack the honesty gene,when it comes to women,in most situations. Would I vote for a woman,I think,is a sexist question,but being a sexist pig,more concerned with issues,than gender,and having known a number of hard very savy women,I would vote my wallet. I don't think Hillary gets my vote,but another women could.

LWW
11-05-2007, 04:29 AM
Gayle,

What you are claiming is that the average American female is so stupid that they will largely vote for the best candidate the Chinese Communists could buy strictly because of gender.

I don't believe this for a second.

Now, if what you are claiming is that the average American leftist is so stupid that they will largely vote for the best candidate the Chinese Communists could buy strictly because of this following her name on the ballot ---&gt; (D) I would agree.

LWW

pooltchr
11-05-2007, 05:18 AM
So how am I wrong? I said choosing a candidate based on gender or race was not the best way to pick a president. Choosing based on qualifications makes more sense. How can you argue that?
Steve

Chopstick
11-05-2007, 11:12 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Dear friend,
Just a thought. I do believe that when women go into that booth, since all women are part of the group which has been most consistantly abused, oppressed, and discriminated against, more than any other single group in history, they will pull the lever for Hillary. The majority of voters, are women, and women, as a group, are not happy with the way men have been running things since the God's, and their deciples, rendered women to the lowly position of being beholden to men.

<hr /></blockquote>

Have you ever actually met a woman? They, as a group, are and always have been, severely abusive and domineering towards men. There is no excuse for the way wives treat their husbands. I am not talking bout extreme cases. I am talking about the average household.

I realize that the above statement is challenging to something you firmly believe to be correct. There is however another point of view. There is something deeply wrong with the psychology of the modern American woman and I believe that the rhetoric that you just posted just makes things worse.

Would a man ever do something like this?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e8/ValerieSolanasSCUMCover.gif

LWW
11-05-2007, 11:17 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> So how am I wrong? I said choosing a candidate based on gender or race was not the best way to pick a president. Choosing based on qualifications makes more sense. How can you argue that?
Steve <hr /></blockquote>
Easy.

You didn't factor in any way to blame Bush or the US. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

So long as you can fit at least 1, and preferrably both, into your post you will have this crowd's adulation.

LWW

Gayle in MD
11-05-2007, 11:43 AM
Gayle,
If what you say is true, it doesn't speak very highly of women in general. <font color="blue">Maybe not in your interpretation of what I said, but you are assuming that the women that do vote for Hillary, will do so only because she is a woman. That isn't what I predicted. Since I think that the Democratic Party, has offered more than one qualified candidate, there will be more than one choice, but many people, women and men alike, who are convinced that the other party has done great damage, roughly 75% of Americans, and has become detrimental to our country, do go into the booth to vote for the candidate which they believe has the best chance of beating the top candidate from the incompetent, corrupt party. When that candidate happens to be a woman, many women will pull the lever more readily for a woman, than for a male candidate, who may be close in the polls. Notice, I said many, not all. But, let's not forget, that we are living in a time when women are still discriminated against in the workplace, being paid 26 to 30 cents less on the dollar, for performing the same job as the man next to her who performs equally to her. If you think that that won't play a factor in the next election, I surely don't agree. We already know that women who are single mothers, are for Hillary, both black and white women. </font color> If the decision on who to vote for to lead our country comes down to whether it is a man or a woman, rather than who is best qualified to lead the country, we are in serious trouble.

<font color="blue">Then I take it you won't be voting for a Republican? There surely isn't a single Republican candidate, qualified to run this country, unless you think that George Bush has put our country into a great situation, by and large, bogged down in a quagmire in Iraq, trillions of dollars in debt, to a communist country, a devalued dollar, outrageous gas prices, and the entire Middle East, at risk of regional war, and bin Laden, still at large. Now given your previous statement, you couldn't possibly be voting Republican, could you? Unless, of course, you intend to vote for Ron Paul, who doesn't have a chance in hell to win the nomination, any other Republican vote is like a vote for more of what we have seen for seven years. Is that really what you want? There isn't a single candidate, on the Republican side, with foreign affairs experience, other than John McCain, who would be like Bush, on steroids, and who is so incompetent, he can't even run his own campaign effectively. And Giuliani, has NO foreign affairs experience, at all, on the international front, and a long list of bad security decisions behind him, not to mention that he was a no show in the 9/11 investigation, and is just as much of a saber rattling thug, and George Bush has shown himself to be. We surely see what that arrogant, ignorant blustering style of dipmomacy has led us to, don't we?</font color>

<font color="blue"> We are definitely in serious trouble, that much we agree on, however, the trouble we are in, is obviously a result of decisions which have been made almost entirely, by men. Republican men, to be exact. Surely, you can't deny that? /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif</font color>

Of course, taking your logic one step further, considering the history of the black community, what if all blacks decided to vote for the one black candidate, just because he is black? <font color="blue">I'm quite sure some will. </font color> And it would be a tough call for black women...do I vote for the black candidate, or the female candidate? <font color="blue">Yes, that will be tough for black women, however, I think they will divide according to their personal economic circumstances, much more so than race. Obama, does not have the history of being a huge supporter of women's rights, as Hillary has been throughout her professional life. </font color>

Personally, I have more faith in the voting public than to think that gender or race would be the deciding factor in an election for the highest office in our country. <font color="blue">Again, you have mistaken my meaning. I did not say that either race, or gender, would be the only determining factor, but both will play a role.

Take my own vote, for example. There is no question in my mind that Joe Biden would make the very best president, of any candidate. Unfortunately, as we all know, the corporate fascists have taken our country over, and hence, they decide who the candidates, from each party, will be.

If, come election time, Biden has any chance at winning, according to the polls, he will definitely get my vote. If, one the other hand, Hillary is still the favorite, and leading all others in the polls, and Biden is far behind, then Hillary will get my vote. I would be happy with either, as both are qualified, intelligent, experienced, and have the tools to lead our country out of the total mess that both would inherit from yet another Republican attack against the best interests of our country. </font color>
I could be wrong, but I sincerely hope not! <font color="blue">Do you expect me to believe that you have never cast a vote for the candidate most likely to win, for partisan purposes, although that candidate was not your first choice? Or, that you have absolutely no gender related opinions toward women?

While I am not in favor of the way our election process is arranged, at all, I, as all other voters, must find the best possible choice, for my many varried concerns, and they ARE many. My top priority, is to see our country free of as much Republican influence, big spending, poor and dangerous foreign Policies, and tax policies which favor the rich, as possible. Since none of the Republican candidates would qualify to run this country anyway, it is not difficult at all to remove all of them from my list of possibles. Given that, only Biden and Clinton have the experience to provide a successful foreign policy that can undo all the damage which George Bush hath wrought against this country, and the Middle East, and hence, the world.

I do not think that Obama has the experience necessary to lead our country out of this mess. Edwards, has the right outlook, IMO, on many of our national issues, but he lacks foreign policy experience.

Although I like Biden, above all, like many other times in our history, it is the candidate with the most money behind him, or her, who is the frontrunner, hence, corporate influence, will be a necessary evil to deal with in every presidential election, as long as we continue to fail to demand public funded elections. This element of corporate fascism, within our electorial policy, is exactly what is wrong with our country, IMO, but what is a voter to do about it? It is what it is.

All of our votes, are compromised, regardless of what we believe in, or whom we would vote for, in any given election, IMO. My remark, is that given several top experienced candidates, some women will vote for Hillary, because she is a woman, and because she is as qualified, or in the case of a choice between Edwards, Obama, and Clinton, for example, she would be more qualified, having played a role in foreign affairs decisions throughout her years as first lady, and having served as a Senator, during a time of great foreign strife and loss of international influence.

All this assumes that most all Democrats, and Ind., by a very large margin, would have, first and foremost, a desire to avoid a Republican win, which I believe would be a fair statement to make. For many women, the opportunity to win, over the Republicans, and do so by voting for a woman, who is the frontrunner in the polls at election time, will be a double bonus. I believe that most black women will vote for the most qualified candidate to lead the country, and that surely isn't Obama.</font color>

Gayle in Md.

bamadog
11-05-2007, 12:02 PM
Sorry Gayle, your words speak for themselves:
"I do believe that when women go into that booth, since all women are part of the group which has been most consistantly abused, oppressed, and discriminated against, more than any other single group in history, they will pull the lever for Hillary."
In you own words you are saying women will vote for Hillary for no other reason than she's a woman. That is truly pathetic. But I wouldn't expect anything less from a far left victocrat.

Btw, since Hillary was involved with foreign policy during her husband's administration, why didn't SHE accept Bin Laden when he was offered by the Sudanese?

LWW
11-05-2007, 12:22 PM
Now Dawg,

Round here they say what they say and mean what they mean, but they don't often mean what they say or say what they mean.

It's all a matter of whatcha call poe-litic-lee corn venience.

Down home we calls it havin yer cornbread and eatin it both!

LWW &lt;---Finally getting a grip on forum rules.

pooltchr
11-05-2007, 06:41 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Gayle,
If what you say is true, it doesn't speak very highly of women in general. <font color="blue">Maybe not in your interpretation of what I said, but you are assuming that the women that do vote for Hillary, will do so only because she is a woman. <font color="red"> It sure came across that way. </font color> That isn't what I predicted. Since I think that the Democratic Party, has offered more than one qualified candidate, <font color="red"> We will have to agree to disagree here...I don't think either party has given us a choice that is truely qualified. I think both parties are trying to find the candidate they believe can win over the other team's candidate. Neither party cares about the country...only about winning the white house. </font color> there will be more than one choice, many women will pull the lever more readily for a woman, than for a male candidate, <font color="red"> Back to my original post...this is hardly a good reason to vote for any candidate. </font color> who may be close in the polls. Notice, I said many, not all. <font color="red"> OK, so all women aren't that dumb...just many of them????? </font color> But, let's not forget, that we are living in a time when women are still discriminated against in the workplace, being paid 26 to 30 cents less on the dollar, for performing the same job as the man next to her who performs equally to her. If you think that that won't play a factor in the next election, I surely don't agree. <font color="red"> From everything I read, it has been that way for years. It has also improved over the years, and continues to move in the right direction. And without a woman president. </font color> We already know that women who are single mothers, are for Hillary, both black and white women. </font color> <font color="red"> Then I guess they haven't studied her past actions very well. </font color> If the decision on who to vote for to lead our country comes down to whether it is a man or a woman, rather than who is best qualified to lead the country, we are in serious trouble.

<font color="blue">Then I take it you won't be voting for a Republican? <font color="red"> I don't vote for a party, I vote for a candidate. And since we don't know who the presidential candidates will be, I can't even begin to make that decision. I don't see many scenerios where I would vote for HC or Edwards, but I think Obama might be a better choice than several of the Republican contenders. </font color> Now given your previous statement, you couldn't possibly be voting Republican, could you? <font color="red"> Once again, I vote for the individual, not for the red team or the blue team. </font color> any other Republican vote is like a vote for more of what we have seen for seven years. Is that really what you want? <font color="red"> Gayle...the evil one /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif will be gone...I don't think a new president will follow the same path, regardless of party. </font color> There isn't a single candidate, on the Republican side, with foreign affairs experience, <font color="red"> And Hillery has foreign affairs experience? She's a freaking carpetbagging senator, whose agenda is all about socialized healthcare in this country. </font color> other than John McCain, <font color="red"> As stated in the past...not my choice for president. </font color> ?</font color>

<font color="blue"> We are definitely in serious trouble, that much we agree on, however, the trouble we are in, is obviously a result of decisions which have been made almost entirely, by men. Republican men, to be exact. Surely, you can't deny that? /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif</font color> <font color="red"> So you have ruled out men and republicans for your choice....doesn't leave many options for you, does it? </font color>

Of course, taking your logic one step further, considering the history of the black community, what if all blacks decided to vote for the one black candidate, just because he is black? <font color="blue">I'm quite sure some will. </font color> And it would be a tough call for black women...do I vote for the black candidate, or the female candidate? <font color="blue">Yes, that will be tough for black women, however, I think they will divide according to their personal economic circumstances, much more so than race. Obama, does not have the history of being a huge supporter of women's rights, as Hillary has been throughout her professional life. </font color> <font color="red"> So if half the black females vote for Obama and half for HC, they each lose quite a few votes </font color>

Personally, I have more faith in the voting public than to think that gender or race would be the deciding factor in an election for the highest office in our country. <font color="blue">Again, you have mistaken my meaning. I did not say that either race, or gender, would be the only determining factor, but both will play a role. <font color="red"> If race or gender plays a role in the election, then those who cast votes on that basis (even partially) would have to be considered either racist or sexist. </font color>

Take my own vote, for example. There is no question in my mind that Joe Biden would make the very best president, of any candidate. Unfortunately, as we all know, the corporate fascists have taken our country over, and hence, they decide who the candidates, from each party, will be.

If, come election time, Biden has any chance at winning, according to the polls, he will definitely get my vote. If, one the other hand, Hillary is still the favorite, and leading all others in the polls, and Biden is far behind, then Hillary will get my vote. <font color="red"> So you vote for the one you think has the best chance of winning? Why not take a real stand and vote for the one you believe in? </font color> I would be happy with either, as both are qualified, intelligent, experienced, <font color="red">That's debatable! </font color> and have the tools to lead our country out of the total mess that both would inherit from yet another Republican attack against the best interests of our country. </font color>
I could be wrong, but I sincerely hope not! <font color="blue">Do you expect me to believe that you have never cast a vote for the candidate most likely to win, for partisan purposes, although that candidate was not your first choice? <font color="red"> Difficult as the concept may be for you to comprehend, I vote for the candidate I believe is the best for the job. It's not a horse race where you place your bet on the one you think will win. It's the future of our country. </font color> Or, that you have absolutely no gender related opinions toward women? <font color="red"> Oh, I absolutely have gender related opinions toward women! That's why I married one! I would vote for any woman if I thought she was qualified for the job. I just haven't seen one in this pool of candidates. </font color>

While I am not in favor of the way our election process is arranged, at all, I, as all other voters, must find the best possible choice, for my many varried concerns, and they ARE many. My top priority, is to see our country free of as much Republican influence, big spending, poor and dangerous foreign Policies, and tax policies which favor the rich, as possible. <font color="red"> My top priority is to maintain our economy, which has taken a beating in the past few years, and secure our boarders from the illegal alien invasion that continues to take place. Your candidate wouldn't even take a stand during the debate regarding the state of Ney York (her adopted state!) giving legal documentation to illegal aliens! Yeah, that earned my respect! NOT!!! </font color> Since none of the Republican candidates would qualify to run this country anyway, it is not difficult at all to remove all of them from my list of possibles. Given that, only Biden and Clinton have the experience to provide a successful foreign policy <font color="red"> Please inform us of HC's extensive foreign policy experience! </font color> that can undo all the damage which George Bush hath wrought against this country, and the Middle East, and hence, the world.
(I left one rant against GW in this, just to keep you happy)

I do not think that Obama has the experience necessary to lead our country out of this mess. Edwards, has the right outlook, IMO, on many of our national issues, but he lacks foreign policy experience. <font color="red"> I wouldn't vote for Edwards for dog catcher! </font color>

Although I like Biden, above all, like many other times in our history, it is the candidate with the most money behind him, or her, who is the frontrunner, hence, corporate influence, will be a necessary evil to deal with in every presidential election, as long as we continue to fail to demand public funded elections. This element of corporate fascism, within our electorial policy, is exactly what is wrong with our country, IMO, but what is a voter to do about it? It is what it is. <font color="red"> I think you answered your own question. If the one with the most money is most likely to win, you vote for them. I prefer voting based on qualifications. </font color>

All of our votes, are compromised, regardless of what we believe in, or whom we would vote for, in any given election, IMO. My remark, is that given several top experienced candidates, some women will vote for Hillary, because she is a woman, <font color="red"> A very uninformed way to vote </font color> and because she is as qualified, <font color="red"> Qualified to take us closer to Socialism? </font color> or in the case of a choice between Edwards, Obama, and Clinton, for example, she would be more qualified, <font color="red"> The lesser of three evils, I think Obama is more qualified than either of the other two. </font color> having played a role in foreign affairs decisions throughout her years as first lady, <font color="red"> I never saw that...she was too focused on her healthcare plan. </font color> and having served as a Senator, during a time of great foreign strife and loss of international influence. <font color="red"> I will agree with one part of your comment...her experience in helping to sell out to Chine....er...conduct foreign relations with the Chinese, helped her learn how to work underhanded deals with foreign countries. </font color>

All this assumes that most all Democrats, and Ind., by a very large margin, would have, first and foremost, a desire to avoid a Republican win, <font color="red"> And we have gone full circle...right back to partisan politics. </font color> which I believe would be a fair statement to make. For many women, the opportunity to win, over the Republicans, and do so by voting for a woman, who is the frontrunner in the polls at election time, will be a double bonus. <font color="red"> If anyone can vote for her, knowing all the BS she has been involved in, then they deserve what they get. </font color> I believe that most black women will vote for the most qualified candidate to lead the country, and that surely isn't Obama.</font color> <font color="red"> It sure as Hell isn't ms clinton either. </font color>

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red"> All that being said, I think the Dem's have a chance at winning the white house. The best I can hope for is enough Dem's are afraid that she can't win the presidential election, and use your voting logic to select another candidate. Remember, yes, she is leading the polls with the election a year away, but she also has the highese disapproval rating of any Dem candidate.
Steve </font color>