Jeb Bush vs Hillary

[civvver]

And those "I don't recall" responses will echo through FoxNews so people who already wouldn't vote for her can marvel at them and speculate up some mad conspiracies...while everyone else will say "I don't know where I was at 2:17 on the afternoon of May 14, 2008 either...what a stupid question that congressman is asking,"... and change the channel.

Change the channel to what?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/30/fox-news-cable-news-ratings_n_6398220.html

The other networks are worse and nobody watches them.

This won't stop hillary from winning the nomination but I don't think she's winning the presidency. I don't think any democrat is actually, the last time we had back to back presidents from the same party was Reagan and bush sr and bush sr promptly lost re-election and probably only won the first time cus there wasn't much competition/most people loved Reagan at the time. So it's just not happening, the public hates whoever is in office generally and thus they will continually switch parties every 8 years cus they feel like it's lesser of two evils.

Of course if Romney is the republican nominee again I take this all back! He wouldn't stand a chance, third time is not the charm.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

You've missed his point on changing the channel, civvver.

He's stating that outside of the people who are already inclined to watch Fox News for realz, no one freaking cares about this.

 

[civvver]

I don't watch fox news and I care about this. I'll bet there's bhengazi cover up emails in there somewhere.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I don't watch fox news and I care about this. I'll bet there's bhengazi cover up emails in there somewhere.

Cover up of what? That the Republican congress was asked to fund additional security and refused? That's already been made public.

As to where they switch the channel to...Fox trumpets constantly about being the most watched cable news channel, but they try to make that mean that they are something other than a niche targeted service when it is actually the exact opposite.

People who want news have a lot of choices. People who want the Fox filtered version all watch Fox. They are united, but they are still a significant minority, so when "all the Fox watchers think this is important" it still in fact does not matter if all, or even most of, the non Fox watchers think that it isn't.

 

[Kaitzilla]

The scandal isn't about Benghazi cover up emails.

It's conducting classified official State Department business on the equivalent of a Hotmail account with the password 12345.

Politically, it is alarming in other ways.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...c0763a-c818-11e4-aa1a-86135599fb0f_story.html

Senior Democrats are increasingly worried that Hillary Rodham Clinton is not ready to run for president, fearing that the clumsy and insular handling of the nine-day fracas over her private e-mails was a warning sign about the campaign expected to launch next month.

Few Democrats believe that the revelations about her unorthodox e-mail practices as secretary of state are a substantive issue that would damage Clinton with voters, and many said she performed adequately in a Tuesday news conference defending herself.

But in interviews Wednesday with The Washington Post, current and former Democratic officeholders and operatives from across the country raised serious questions about her and her political team’s strength and readiness for a 2016 presidential campaign.

“She’s tried to put the day of reckoning off, but it’s come now, and I don’t think she can stand another couple of weeks of this without her structure in place,” said Jim Hodges, a former governor of South Carolina.

Some Democrats said Clinton’s initial refusal to provide answers in the growing e-mail controversy smacked of arrogance and a worrisome bunker mentality — and that the controversy was a self-inflicted wound.

“Had this story been responded to in two or three days instead of in eight days, it would not be as big,” said Robert Gibbs, a former White House press secretary under President Obama. “They are the ones who put air in this balloon in a way that was not necessary at all. . . . It’s clear they lack an apparatus. She’s a candidate without a campaign.”

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Had this story been responded to in two or three days instead of eight the Republican campaign machine would have whipped up another one five days sooner than they will. They will fill the teapot with as many tempests as they can drum up, and any Democratic candidate that thinks it is important to clear one out to make way for the next with alacrity is just being silly.

A tempest that no one really cares about can perk in the teapot forever, as far as any candidate with sense is concerned. Keep this e-mail thing brewing a while and maybe Donald Trump will drag half the Republican campaign effort and funding down another rabbit hole like the birther thing.

 

[Kaitzilla]

There's no such thing as media bias.


But some people get a halo.



And others get horns

 

[useless]

Imagine the misogyny that will come about if Hilary actually wins.

 

[onejayhawk]

The problem from the Republican camps is that their candidates have been taking howitzer blasts for every paper cut Hillary has been taking. Science deniers, "homosexuality is a choice because prisons", #47traitors, being super fat, etc.

Bill's term in office will only help her because women will tend to sympathize with her, & if she pulls in the majority of women, it's over.

Yes, but supporters will make jokes & yet... remain supporters. Again, see Bill.

The Republicans have not taken any big hits. The ones you cite matter to those who would never consider them in the first place.

Climate change is a religious conviction with much of the left, to the point that anyone that doubting urgency is called a denier. That does not work outside the faithful.

The super fat comment is inappropriate.

Bill's term is not the primary issue, though it is no help. Hillary's behavior during that time is going to be in bright focus. Take, for example, the first national health care bill. The secretive way the draft was compiled mirrors the secretive way she is dealing with information requests.

J

 

[Timsup2nothin]

The Republicans have not taken any big hits. The ones you cite matter to those who would never consider them in the first place.

Climate change is a religious conviction with much of the left, to the point that anyone that doubting urgency is called a denier. That does not work outside the faithful.

The super fat comment is inappropriate.

Bill's term is not the primary issue, though it is no help. Hillary's behavior during that time is going to be in bright focus. Take, for example, the first national health care bill. The secretive way the draft was compiled mirrors the secretive way she is dealing with information requests.

J

Started two wars the last time they were in office. Required their last presidential candidate to hire the same team and espouse the same foreign policy. Show no signs they will not do the same thing again. That's not a paper cut, that's a mortal wound.

Crashed the entire world's economy the last time they were in office. Required their last candidate to espouse the same failed economic policies. Continue to spout them in any public forum that gives them an opportunity to speak. Again, not a paper cut but a mortal wound.

 

[Sommerswerd]

There's no such thing as media bias.


But some people get a halo.



And others get horns

Wow! Good catch! Its an undeniable Angel / Devil reference... It's not even subtle TBH

Did you notice that Hillary has 2 sets of horns? Little blue ones and big white ones...

Nvm Pres Obama has the white horns too... so those don't count I guess... I guess they could be kitty cat ears

 

[onejayhawk]

Imagine the misogyny that will come about if Hilary actually wins.

No need. Just look at Saudi Arabia, or UAE, or Egypt, or.... It won't be as bad as ISIL.

J

 

[onejayhawk]

Started two wars the last time they were in office. Required their last presidential candidate to hire the same team and espouse the same foreign policy. Show no signs they will not do the same thing again. That's not a paper cut, that's a mortal wound.

Crashed the entire world's economy the last time they were in office. Required their last candidate to espouse the same failed economic policies. Continue to spout them in any public forum that gives them an opportunity to speak. Again, not a paper cut but a mortal wound.

I'm guessing you are not supporting Scott Walker of Ted Cruz.

J

 

[hangman]

Started two wars the last time they were in office. Required their last presidential candidate to hire the same team and espouse the same foreign policy. Show no signs they will not do the same thing again. That's not a paper cut, that's a mortal wound.

Crashed the entire world's economy the last time they were in office. Required their last candidate to espouse the same failed economic policies. Continue to spout them in any public forum that gives them an opportunity to speak. Again, not a paper cut but a mortal wound.

You're missing the possibility that people might actually be blind to all the elephants in the room. It's not really an issue of who's better qualified; elections are the epitome of a popularity contest.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

You're missing the possibility that people might actually be blind to all the elephants in the room. It's not really an issue of who's better qualified; elections are the epitome of a popularity contest.

No doubt...just following on to that paper cuts vs howitzers thing. It is going to be really hard to campaign as a Republican for the foreseeable future, because there is almost no way to be popular carrying the albatrosses the party has come to represent. As I said before, when the debate comes down to "your policies allowed an unauthorized e-mail device" vs "your policies stuck us in two foreign civil wars for a decade" no amount of charisma can carry the day.

 

[onejayhawk]

You're missing the possibility that people might actually be blind to all the elephants in the room. It's not really an issue of who's better qualified; elections are the epitome of a popularity contest.

Freudian slip?

J

 

[hangman]

I didn't notice until you mentioned it hehe

 

[Sommerswerd]

It's not really an issue of who's better qualified; elections are the epitome of a popularity contest.

And there it is... What Republican is more of a well known celebrity than Hillary Clinton?

On the issue of qualification - I always laugh about this, because President of the US is not like any other job in the country. Therefore, no one is qualified to be President except someone who has actually been President.

I remember people talking about Romney's "business experience" (as a venture capitalist w/Bain Capital), and trying to suggest that made him more qualified than President Obama.

Let me give an example: If you and I are betting money on a baseball game where we pick between two teams and you get to pick first... Team 1 - Has the greatest athletes in the world, Lebron James, Vladimir Klitschko, Usain Bolt, Calvin Johnson, Venus Williams, Lionel Messi, etc... but NO baseball players, and Team 2 has a motley collection of 2nd string, Minor league, and college BASESBALL players you've never heard of.

Which team do you want? The baseball players right? Why? Because we are playing baseball, that's why. And the only experience or skillset that matters is the experience doing exactly the task at hand. Not some "related" task, the actual task at hand.

Michael Jordan is one of, if not the greatest athlete in history, but he absolutely sucked as a Pro baseball player. And don't forget MJ had "experience" playing small time baseball. But small time experience can measure up to the real thing. MJ's experience is about as helpful to being a pro as being a Governor is to being President... And, you can be the "Michael Jordan" of venture capital, or any business for that matter... and it doesn't say squat about your qualification to be President. I would pick a "scrub" President over and "All-Star" businessman any day of the week in terms of "qualification" to be President.

 

[onejayhawk]

I didn't notice until you mentioned it hehe

In all seriousness, it has been easy to ignore the Republicans under their current leadership, even though they have Congress and seem poised to retake the White House. They are running a commercial with a clip of Sean Hannity saying the next Republican nominee will win the election, but everyone still tries to pretend they don't exist.

J

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Huh??