Hillary still wants to be President and 2012 is her last chance because she'd be too old in 2016. She figures she's learned a lot from her 2008 campaign and in her four years as Secretary of State. Obama's left wing financial policies have been a disaster and his popularity has dropped significantly among independents and conservative Democrats. So I think Hillary is definitely going to run against Obama in 2012. What say you?
Irish Mike
OK folks, our phone lines are open and the tenth caller will win... The Nobel Peace Prize!
<ad7c...@webnntp.invalid> wrote: >Hillary still wants to be President and 2012 is her last chance because >she'd be too old in 2016. She figures she's learned a lot from her 2008 >campaign and in her four years as Secretary of State. Obama's left wing >financial policies have been a disaster and his popularity has dropped >significantly among independents and conservative Democrats. So I think >Hillary is definitely going to run against Obama in 2012. What say you?
I think it's a definite possibility.
I could understand why Obama would appoint here as SOS. My SWAG is that he thought it was a good way to get her out of his way and send her off on a world cruise to irrelevance.
My big question was why did she accept the job? She gave up a high visibility job in the Senate for that?
Well, maybe she thought she could do a better hatchet job on him working on the inside of administration than on the outside?
The State Department is notorious for having their own private agenda, and doing their own thing regardless of what a President wants to do.
Her recent comments in Pakistan couldn't have made Obama very happy.
The current administration bumbling, fumbling and stumbling their way along makes a second Obama administration less likely.
I dunno know, though.
A political party denying their President the nomination for a second term doesn't seem likely.
My fearless prediction on your question is a definite Maybe.
> On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 10:06:38 -0800, "Irish Mike" > <ad7c...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>>Hillary still wants to be President and 2012 is her last chance because >>she'd be too old in 2016. She figures she's learned a lot from her 2008 >>campaign and in her four years as Secretary of State. Obama's left wing >>financial policies have been a disaster and his popularity has dropped >>significantly among independents and conservative Democrats. So I think >>Hillary is definitely going to run against Obama in 2012. What say you?
> I think it's a definite possibility.
> I could understand why Obama would appoint here as SOS. > My SWAG is that he thought it was a good way to get her out of his way > and send her off on a world cruise to irrelevance.
> My big question was why did she accept the job? > She gave up a high visibility job in the Senate for that?
> Well, maybe she thought she could do a better hatchet job on him > working on the inside of administration than on the outside?
> The State Department is notorious for having their own private agenda, > and doing their own thing regardless of what a President wants to do.
> Her recent comments in Pakistan couldn't have made Obama very happy.
> The current administration bumbling, fumbling and stumbling their way > along makes a second Obama administration less likely.
> I dunno know, though.
> A political party denying their President the nomination for a second > term doesn't seem likely.
> My fearless prediction on your question is a definite Maybe.
It's a good question. I dunno.
As to why she took the SOS job, I suspect it was to gain experience and credibility in the executive branch before she runs again for President. But if Obama is still popular and things are OK in 2012, I don't see how she thinks she can win.
On Nov 1, 10:06 am, "Irish Mike" <ad7c...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> Hillary still wants to be President and 2012 is her last chance because > she'd be too old in 2016. She figures she's learned a lot from her 2008 > campaign and in her four years as Secretary of State. Obama's left wing > financial policies have been a disaster
Really??? That must be why GDP grew at an annual rate of 3.5% in the third quarter. That must also explain why the stock market has gone up over 3000 points since its lows earlier this year.
On Nov 1, 12:36 pm, ramashiva <ramash...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Nov 1, 10:06 am, "Irish Mike" <ad7c...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> > Hillary still wants to be President and 2012 is her last chance because > > she'd be too old in 2016. She figures she's learned a lot from her 2008 > > campaign and in her four years as Secretary of State. Obama's left wing > > financial policies have been a disaster
> Really??? That must be why GDP grew at an annual rate of 3.5% in the > third quarter. That must also explain why the stock market has gone > up over 3000 points since its lows earlier this year.
> Idiot.
> William Coleman (ramashiva)
But . . . . but . . . but Sean Hannity says Obama is terrible! .
> >>Hillary still wants to be President and 2012 is her last chance because > >>she'd be too old in 2016. She figures she's learned a lot from her 2008 > >>campaign and in her four years as Secretary of State. Obama's left wing > >>financial policies have been a disaster and his popularity has dropped > >>significantly among independents and conservative Democrats. So I think > >>Hillary is definitely going to run against Obama in 2012. What say you?
> > I think it's a definite possibility.
> > I could understand why Obama would appoint here as SOS. > > My SWAG is that he thought it was a good way to get her out of his way > > and send her off on a world cruise to irrelevance.
> > My big question was why did she accept the job? > > She gave up a high visibility job in the Senate for that?
> > Well, maybe she thought she could do a better hatchet job on him > > working on the inside of administration than on the outside?
> > The State Department is notorious for having their own private agenda, > > and doing their own thing regardless of what a President wants to do.
> > Her recent comments in Pakistan couldn't have made Obama very happy.
> > The current administration bumbling, fumbling and stumbling their way > > along makes a second Obama administration less likely.
> > I dunno know, though.
> > A political party denying their President the nomination for a second > > term doesn't seem likely.
> > My fearless prediction on your question is a definite Maybe.
> It's a good question. I dunno.
> As to why she took the SOS job, I suspect it was to gain experience and > credibility in the executive branch before she runs again for President. > But if Obama is still popular and things are OK in 2012, I don't see how she > thinks she can win.
By 2012 Hillary will be the first President of the New World Government and won't give a shit who the prez of the USA is.
--- RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
On Sun, 1 Nov 2009 12:36:52 -0800 (PST), ramashiva
<ramash...@earthlink.net> wrote: >That must be why GDP grew at an annual rate of 3.5% in the >third quarter.
"GDP grew at a 3.5 percent annual rate in the 3rd quarter, driven by a 22.4 percent jump in car sales, the result of the Cash for Clunkers (C4C) program. This increase in car sales accounted for 42.0 percent of the growth in the quarter... The surge in car buying will be reversed in the current quarter, as the main effect of the C4C was to pull car purchases forward. As a result, the auto sector will be a substantial drag on growth in the current quarter. Apart from the auto sector, consumption grew at a 1.0 percent annual rate. With disposable income falling due to continued job losses and declining hourly wages, and the reversal of the surge in car sales, consumption growth will almost certainly be negative in the 4th quarter."
"A report by Edmunds.com indicating that the Cash for Clunkers program cost some $24,000 per vehicle when the program's total cost is spread out over the number of "incremental" cars sold."
using all that chinese money to make it try and look good.
> She runs if the economy is bad in a couple of years. Otherwise it's no > use, imo.
> Howard Beale
What's the difference? The Repugs don't have anyone that can match anything the Democrats have. You have no shot. Stop whining. Maybe in 2016 George W. Bush's spanish nephew will run. He'll pick Megan McCain as his running mate and get stomped.
Proud to be one of the 69,000,000+ Americans who voted for Barack Hussein Obama. Scoreboard, mutha fuckas.
____________________________________________________________________ : the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
> > She runs if the economy is bad in a couple of years. Otherwise it's no > > use, imo.
> > Howard Beale
> What's the difference? The Repugs don't have anyone that can match > anything the Democrats have. You have no shot. Stop whining. Maybe in 2016 > George W. Bush's spanish nephew will run. He'll pick Megan McCain as his > running mate and get stomped.
> Proud to be one of the 69,000,000+ Americans who voted for Barack Hussein > Obama. Scoreboard, mutha fuckas.
What kind of reply is this? The question is does Hillary run against Obama, not how the Dems will do against Republicans.
HB
____________________________________________________________________ * kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
Hillary Clinton and Obama are both part of the Democrat/left wing and there's no way they'd let Hillary run against Obama under normal circumstances (as much as she'd love to run in 2012)
Bill Clinton stated that the VA and N.J. elections were a referendum on Obama. Coming from a Clinton, especially as an ex-Democrat-president and "married" to Obama's SoS, that's pretty strong language; designed as a deliberate show of non-support slam on Obama.
That's Bill's SWAG, which no doubt reflects Hillary's sentiments.
The only way Hillary gets to run is if the Democrats need a candidate for 2012. Which means that Obama would have to be so low in the polls that he couldn't possibly win. Before that could happen, the Democrats would prop-up a phony "moderate" third party strawman candidate to pull votes away from the Republican. (note: they did exactly that with the third party candidate in the latest N.J. governor race; although, it didn't work).
Commentators like to talk about Hillary running because it's interesting and suggests a horse race, etc, but the political process doesn't work that way at that level; it's not "individual candidate driven", it's a Democrat political machine decision.
Also, remember: Obama has the mainstream media as part of his campaign.
|
