We use cookies to give you the best possible experience on our site. Click here to find out more. Allow cookies
x
LOG IN HERE
Username
Password

arrow Register here

Forgotten password?

THE CHATTER BOX

 
  
  
  The Chatter Box : Blathering On
  
  
  
 
Messages 1 2 

Hillary vs. Condi by tucsonmike on 28 December 2005 8:19pm
 
This is the subject of a new book by former Clinton political advisor Dick Morris. He thinks this WILL be the 2008 matchup. Condi may not be a bad choice. You do have to take the book with a grain of salt, because he is tougher on Hillary. No question, ax to grind there. Would be an interesting race.
See the website, Americans for Condi
http://americansforrice.com/
 
Re: Hillary vs. Condi by Helen on 28 December 2005 9:29pm
 
I respect your opinion Mike. Thanks for the info.

But, Condi for Prez? My opinion is NO. No. No. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

That's just me, though. In case you were wondering. :)
 
Re: Hillary vs. Condi by canaveralgumby on 29 December 2005 12:30am
 
Nightmare. Friggin' nightmare. I'm moving to Iceland.
 
Re: Hillary vs. Condi by tucsonmike on 29 December 2005 12:58am
 
LOL! I said may NOT be a bad choice. Remember, I am comparing her with some of the OTHERS we have. Anyone for a grassroots campaign a la Howard Dean and the Internet? Let me hear it from some of the other Yanks out here? Thinking of who can do the job, forget political considertations, (who would not just be competent, but would thrive and excel and would get a grassroots campaign behind them).
 
Re: Hillary vs. Condi by sighthound on 29 December 2005 8:50am
 
As much as I would absolutely rejoice in two female candidates for the US Presidency, Condi vs Hillary is a total nightmare.

If we hope to be able to live as a free people, doing our best to insure the best interests of our citizens and of the rest of the world, the U.S. MUST free itself from the vested, totally intrenched, political/industrial/financial interests that insist on an imperial view of the world. Condi is totally controlled by those interests and Hillary is so hated that she could never accomplish anything.

I'd like to see Obama vs McCain. It's probably early for Obama to be thrust into control of the national spotlight but he has not yet been corrupted and McCain has proved himself, time and again, to look at reality rather than to succumb to political expediency as all his colleagues inevitably do.

I changed my registration to Republican to be able to vote for McCain when he opposed the Shrub in his first Presenditial bid (in vain, sob, sob.) Then I moved to Arizona and, again, I crossed political lines to vote for McCain for Senator.

Don't get me wrong - I'd vote for Obama over McCain but McCain is probably the best bet this country has to overcome the insidious polarization that Newt Gringrich infested this country with. We ignore the fact that "politics is the art of compromise" to our great peril. Thomas Jefferson believed that there should be a revolution every generation - we are long over-due....
 
Re: Hillary vs. Condi by Helen on 29 December 2005 2:10pm
 
sighthound wrote:
Thomas Jefferson believed that there should be a revolution every generation - we are long over-due....

AMEN.

I want more than "not a bad choice." I want a GOOD choice. No, a GREAT choice.

Only a great choice can save the USA now.

Oh, and say bye bye to our first amendment rights. Condi is behind this foolishness all the way.


 
Re: Hillary vs. Condi by tucsonmike on 29 December 2005 5:08pm
 
Well, Obama vs. McCain. Now THAT would be an interesting race. Obama himself has said he isn't ready yet. Dick Morris had an interesting point in his book.
Rudy Giuliani and John McCain could be elected in the general election. They would never get the Republican nomination.

Howard Dean's campaign was the first Internet campaign. It is missing a step, though. What a grassroots campaign (which I would support and push under the right circumstances) needs is:
What attributes does the excellent candidate need to have? Attributes that average citizens can agree on? Think of it as a job interview for the most important job. Sight, for those entrenched interests, what would make Americans want to defeat those?
I am asking questions here. I wonder. What would it take vis a vis an Internet campaign to push Americans buttons as it were?
In other words, I am not wholeheartedly for Condi, but see her as the most competent. Notice I didn't say I would agree with everything she did. I also wonder if the U.S. Presidency has now become a job the best and brightest wont go near.

We are well on our way to having our main function in the world be world cop. After reading Jarhead, I thought that even more. Is our "product" going to be to send kids from mountain hollows in Kentucky and Tennessee to serve overseas?
Sight, I am not picking on you. I am asking. What do we do to change it? To make it work for the average citizen and so for the rest of the folks on here, Americans aren't hated by everyone. I know I don't want to travel overseas and have folks hate me for that. If you know me and hate me, fine. If you don't know me and hate me...
Having said that, what do Americans really want and how do we get it?
 
Re: Hillary vs. Condi by canaveralgumby on 29 December 2005 7:12pm
 
Tuscon, can you tell us anything - specifics - about Bill Richardson? I'm asking you because you are from the region. For those not in the know, Richardson is the Governor of New Mexico, a Democrat. Despite the Anglo name, he is Hispanic. He has been more and more visible with each passing Democratic convention/national activity. He looks like a great candidate, but I never hear that discussed.

Right now I just want McCain. That's what I want. I wrote him a letter BEGGING BESEECHING IMPLORING him to change his party affiliation to Independent. He could win as an Ind. That would break open the current (already broken) two-party structure. He has been loyal and faithful to the Republican Party, and they have not given him the support he deserves.

In my dreams, this would bring about a Centrist Party, which is where most of the populace really is. There's just never a Centrist candidate anymore.

I changed MY party affiliation from Democrat to Independent this year. IMO The Democrats have rolled over and played dead and totally let us down.

Al Gore chose to be the "big person" and bring concilliation to the 2000 election. First mistake.

********

The Founding Fathers, or whatever you want to call them, set up a government with a Legislative branch which the Executive is supposed to answer to. The Executive has to get things approved by the Legislature.

They instituted a multi-party system so that the Commander-in-Chief would NOT bring us into war on a whim. The opposing parties in Congress are SUPPOSED to have a long, drawn-out, down and dirty debate about all aspects of the proposal. This is how our government is DESIGNED. The long slow deliberation over war is SUPPOSED to happen.

In 2001-2002 this would have made Democrats unpopular with their electorate because of how high emotions were running at the time. ("We just want to bomb SOMEBODY. Let God sort 'em out.") So the Democrats did the good-feeling thing instead of the right thing.

As far as I'm concerned, blood is on the Democrats' hands, too.

Funnily enough, while the other Democrats in Congess were concerned about their upcoming re-election campaigns and voting FOR the war to be popular, Hillary was in the tiny minority who voted against. Was this on principle, OR clever strategizing - "thinking ahead" on the part of the Democratic National Committee? "Let's see, by the time the next presidential election rolls around, there will be anti-war sentiment. This will look GREAT on her resume and in the debates!"

Makes me go hmmmmmmmmm.

-- Cori

 
Re: Hillary vs. Condi by tucsonmike on 29 December 2005 8:29pm
 
Cori, read the Hillary vs. Condi book. You are right. McCain can only win as an Independent.
You know I never thought of Bill Richardson. He'd be excellent!
The reason we don't have centrist candidates? It's the activists who vote in the primaries and that determines things.

Bill Richardson would be excellent and I would vote for him. I would vote for Arizona's Governor Janet Napolitano. Time Magazine called her one of the five top Governors in the nation. Well, Bill Richardson can be tied in with Richard Branson (see other post).
 
Bill Richardson IS Running Re: Hillary vs. Condi by tucsonmike on 29 December 2005 8:55pm
 
Hi folks, Check out the blog
http://www.billrichardsonblog.com/

I found this out on a Wikipedia blurb. He is running. That's how I found the blog.
He is a great negotiator. He is sent to International hotspots. Saddam was one person he negotiated with. I used to bring up his negotiating skills in the public speaking classes I taught. I may mention him in my public speaking book.
As the blog says, he is too big for New Mexico!
Mike
 
Messages 1 2 




  Reply to this post:
 
 
  Username 
 
 
  Password 
 
 
 
 
  Register here
 

INSTRUCTIONS

Select a discussion theme.
Register (or log in if you have not yet done so).

To start a new discussion topic:

Write the name of the topic in the 'Subject' box.
Type your message in the larger box to contribute.
Click 'Submit'.

To join a discussion topic:

Click on the discussion topic of your choice.
Type your message in the larger box to contribute.
Click 'Submit'.

To edit your message:

You can edit a message at any time after posting it as long as you're signed in.
Click on the 'Edit your message' link above the message.
Make your desired changes.
Click 'Submit'.

If you find you don't want to change the message after all, click on 'Return without changes'.

To set a chatmark:

Register (or log in if you have not yet done so).
Click on the "Set chatmark" link on the Chatter Box pages. This will set the time at which you have logged in.
Click on the "Go to chatmark" link to see all messages posted since you set your chatmark.

You can set your chatmark at any time and as often as you like.