Hillary For President

[djv8ga]

Originally Posted by finnbow

It could stay that way unless she comes out and addresses the substance of these issues directly rather than having surrogates poo-poo them by attacking the author and not addressing the substance.

If she tries, it will backfire IMO.

[bobabode]

FiveThirtyEight...

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...its-a-toss-up/

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by bobabode

I don't give a crap in Nate Silver's hat about polls 18 months before the election. Other than for entertainment value, they're meaningless.

Please don't take this personally, but if you have to defend Hillary's candidacy this early on, imagine the effort you will need to put forth say a year from now. Give me your address and I will send a few keyboards your way. You will need them.

IMO, Hillary is risking the CGI brand which is capable of raising tons of money and doing very good work globally and for what? After watching her campaign once and then lose to a novice like Obama, she just does not look very presidential to me. In one word, shifty.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by djv8ga

If she tries, it will backfire IMO.

You've got a point there, DJ. If I was the 'decider' I'd tell the NY Times to go piss up a rope from here on out. That was a helluva book review masquerading as journalism last week.

[djv8ga]

Originally Posted by bobabode

You've got a point there, DJ. If I was the 'decider' I'd tell the NY Times to go piss up a rope from here on out. That was a helluva book review masquerading as journalism last week.

I wish you were running the old woman's campaign.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by BeamOn

Please don't take this personally, but if you have to defend Hillary's candidacy this early on, imagine the effort you will need to put forth say a year from now. Give me your address and I will send a few keyboards your way. You will need them.

IMO, Hillary is risking the CGI brand which is capable of raising tons of money and doing very good work globally and for what? After watching her campaign once and then lose to a novice like Obama, she just does not look very presidential to me. In one word, shifty.

No worries, Rajoo. Feel free to send me an Apple laptop, I've already worn off the lettering on this shitty Acer laptop.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by icenine

so many smoking guns, so few indictments lol

Sadly, an indictment, or even proof of culpability, is unnecessary where the Clintons are concerned.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by glen65

"Currently", that's who I would put my bet on. But there are bound to be others to enter the race.

If, as seems likely, the Kochs plan to put the majority of their promised $800,000,000.00 behind Scott Walker, meanwhile twisting the arms of other donors through their dark money operations, Bush or anyone else wull have a very tough time.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by djv8ga

I wish you were running the old woman's campaign.

I don't wanna end up in a shallow grave out in the Mojave...

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Sadly, an indictment, or even proof of culpability, are unnecessary where the Clintons are concerned.

And why is that? Seriously your take on it. I am not anti-Hillary by any means nor resorting to Hillary bashing. Just that she is shifty like Nixon.