Jump to content

OMG! Hillary announces!


Ms. Spam
 Share

Recommended Posts

She's going to appeal to young people because young people will feel the world is unfair if a woman isn't president. If they can be bothered to vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She's going to appeal to young people because young people will feel the world is unfair if a woman isn't president.

Sadly, I know people like this. They're the same ones that were upset because the new Daily Show host wasn't a woman.

 

I loved CNN's reaction. "Breaking News: Hilary Clinton announces what the rest of us already knew. She's running for president in 2016."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She's going to appeal to young people because young people will feel the world is unfair if a woman isn't president. If they can be bothered to vote.

Bet you both still end up voting Democrat.

And who will the G.O.P field against her? Silly and tiresome as I find the U.S progressives, they're still light years better than the conservative republican tea party types.

 

In the valley of the blind, the one eyed man is king. Or in this case, the one eyed woman is queen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question regarding young people is never how they'll vote, it's will they vote. Those who vote will vote for Hillary because she's a woman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest El Chalupacabra

 

She's going to appeal to young people because young people will feel the world is unfair if a woman isn't president.

Sadly, I know people like this. They're the same ones that were upset because the new Daily Show host wasn't a woman.

 

I loved CNN's reaction. "Breaking News: Hilary Clinton announces what the rest of us already knew. She's running for president in 2016."

 

This is all true, but it won't just be limited to young people. A huge block of Hillary voters will be made up of 30-50 something female voters for the same reasons. I'm sure the subliminal message of the season will be that if you don't vote for Hillary, you must be a sexist neanderthal.

 

As to something everyone already knew, Hillary has been running since 2000, and I think anyone who doesn't know this, hasn't been paying attention. I think at this point the Dems are obligated to nominate Hillary Clinton, so unless she actually murders someone on live TV, she's a lock for the Dem side.

 

The thing that is the most disturbing is that if the best the GOP can offer is Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, and Ted Cruz, and the GOP puts up recycled nut jobs like Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, and Michelle Bachmann, we might as well swear Hillary in now.

 

 

Bet you both still end up voting Democrat.

If that is what you think, then you have no clue about me, and you are making a wild assumption there. Your assumption is so spurious, it's almost not even worth replying to, but for the record, I despise Hillary Clinton. Not that it matters anyway, because where I live, it's a guaranteed red state, and how I vote in a presidential election doesn't matter. I mainly show up to vote for the other elections and ballot propositions, and only pay attention to the presidential elections for the horse races and train wrecks that they are. It's about as close to enjoying reality TV as I get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is all true, but it won't just be limited to young people. A huge block of Hillary voters will be made up of 30-50 something female voters for the same reasons. I'm sure the subliminal message of the season will be that if you don't vote for Hillary, you must be a sexist neanderthal.

 

As to something everyone already knew, Hillary has been running since 2000, and I think anyone who doesn't know this, hasn't been paying attention. I think at this point the Dems are obligated to nominate Hillary Clinton, so unless she actually murders someone on live TV, she's a lock for the Dem side.

True, but I think it's more important with the youth vote. Most of the women who are going to be voting for Hillary are already going to vote and will vote for any Democrat. She might get a few more out for her as a woman, and maybe that'll sway a few who vote but stay completely uninformed, but I don't think it'll really help too much with that demographic. The real question is whether or not she can get the youth to come out at all. She's pretty much guaranteed the nod, so the question is really just how badly can the primary fight hurt her. If she acts presidential she'll stand a chance. If she comes across as being a power hungry bully, which she frequently does, it's going to hurt her in the long run. It's really not about convincing many people who to vote for, but more getting your base out to vote and convincing a small minority.

 

The thing that is the most disturbing is that if the best the GOP can offer is Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, and Ted Cruz, and the GOP puts up recycled nut jobs like Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, and Michelle Bachmann, we might as well swear Hillary in now.

It'll be interesting to see. Rubio's pretty much an unknown for most of the American public, so he doesn't have the same negative connotations that Cruz and Paul have. He's even tried to work on the immigration issue in a way that shows an ability to work with Democrats on bipartisan solutions, at least on some topics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just wish people would get their head out of their 'overly PC, easy to be offended, OMG Clorox tweeted what?' asses and vote for the person who is best for the job. Who cares if they are a man, woman, black, Latino, white, gay, straight, Republican or Democrat.

I'd also like it to start raining money...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just wish people would get their head out of their 'overly PC, easy to be offended, OMG Clorox tweeted what?' asses and vote for the person who is best for the job. Who cares if they are a man, woman, black, Latino, white, gay, straight, Republican or Democrat.

Identity politics based controversies are big $$$.

 

Welcome to dystopia, people. Not something from Orwell or Huxley, mind you. More like Geraldo Rivera or Jerry Springer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bet you both still end up voting Democrat.

And who will the G.O.P field against her? Silly and tiresome as I find the U.S progressives, they're still light years better than the conservative republican tea party types.

 

In the valley of the blind, the one eyed man is king. Or in this case, the one eyed woman is queen.

 

That wasn't really my point. I'm not arguing the GOP will win the election.

 

The point I was making, was at the end of the day, any grumblings from the Left about Hillary are window dressing. Chalup and Spam are pretty close, ideologically, to the median Democrat voter in the US. No, not perfectly, but probably the closest of anyone on the board. Now, I don't know precisely how Chalup and Spam will vote (so calm down guys, jeez), but what I do know is that the median Democrat voter, no matter how much they may whine and bicker about Hillary in public (probably so as to not seem so 'establishment' to their friends), at the end of the day, they're not going to vote for any other Democrat nominee than Hillary.

 

The Democrat Party knows this. Why do you think no one prominent is even tossing their hat in the ring? They should be- especially for the reason that you alluded to- because the GOP bench looks to be average, at best, and the demographics right now favor the Democrats in the electoral college. Any Democrat knows that this year the GOP can be beaten, so if someone actually thought they could beat Hillary, they would've gotten in the race by now.

 

This is especially true when you consider that it is unknown how much longer the Democrat majority will last. Even though both parties love to falsely claim they have a national mandate every time they win an election, the truth is that elections are won by coalitions, and coalitions rarely last for very many election cycles. The coalition that re-elected Obama in 2012 is still intact, but for how much longer? 5 years? 10? The Democrats are the big tent now (as the GOP was in the 80s), but big tents tend to fray since they contain interest groups that have little in common. In 10 years, the national mood may have changed on the GOP, and the coalition may have frayed, such that the GOP has an electoral college advantage again (as they did in say, 2000). The window is open right now. But for much longer? And yet... Hillary is basically the presumptive nominee.

 

Why? Because voters like Chalup, Spam (not necessarily them, per se), are at the end of the day, going to vote for HIllary no matter what other Democrat is in the primary. Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest El Chalupacabra

There are no democrats like me, CM. I might tick left on certain social issues, but I'm a registered independent, and have been since 2004.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest El Chalupacabra

 

True, but I think it's more important with the youth vote. Most of the women who are going to be voting for Hillary are already going to vote and will vote for any Democrat. She might get a few more out for her as a woman, and maybe that'll sway a few who vote but stay completely uninformed, but I don't think it'll really help too much with that demographic. The real question is whether or not she can get the youth to come out at all. She's pretty much guaranteed the nod, so the question is really just how badly can the primary fight hurt her. If she acts presidential she'll stand a chance. If she comes across as being a power hungry bully, which she frequently does, it's going to hurt her in the long run. It's really not about convincing many people who to vote for, but more getting your base out to vote and convincing a small minority.

 

 

 

Not that I am discounting the youth vote, and I do agree they will actively pursue it, I don't believe the youth vote is going to be a deal maker or breaker either way. At best in 2012, the youth vote only made up around 18 or 19%, and I don't see it being much different in 2016. So that means that they will have to pursue the other demographics more rigorously. The minority groups who traditionally vote democrat are a lock, so minimal lip service will be given there. I actually believe that women in particular, and across age and race demographics, will be the most significant group that decides the outcome, at least more so than in past elections. I believe it very likely that more women who would either not vote otherwise, or not otherwise vote for a democrat will vote Hillary, because I think we will see a huge media campaign that will get people, women in particular, riled up to vote for Clinton. It's not going to be just rile up the young to vote, though they will do that too, but I think they are going to go after the boomers real heavily, especially the menopausal women with the not so subliminal message of "the day you protested for in the 60s and 70s is finally here: vote Hillary."

 

I do agree with you on that Hillary is her own worst enemy and she could eff it up, especially if she fails to satisfactorily handle allegations of her alleged incompetence as Sec of State, Billy's blow jobs, and other scandals dujour. If she can't give satisfactory answers why those shouldn't matter, or she comes off as feeling entitled to the presidency (which I believe she does which is why I can't stand her), that could hurt her chances. I think it's also possible, but less likely some other democrat who thinks they can actually pull and upset and brings out the big guns and slings serious mud that affects Clinton, but I think that is an uphill battle because I think those type of candidates are going to be excluded or eliminated pretty early. The other candidates will more or less be to decide who Hillary's running mate will be.

 

It'll be interesting to see. Rubio's pretty much an unknown for most of the American public, so he doesn't have the same negative connotations that Cruz and Paul have. He's even tried to work on the immigration issue in a way that shows an ability to work with Democrats on bipartisan solutions, at least on some topics.

 

I don't know. I will be interested if only to see the carnage. But I have to say Rubio does stand a better chance than the rest of what is there, right now. I know the GOP sees Rubio as some sort of great Latino hope, and may do well in the primary, but I don't know if he is really all that electable in a general election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not much need to overthink this people. For the Dems, I think the message could be quite simple. "Yeah. It's Hillary. If you don't like it, you're free to vote for whomever the party of "legitimate rape" and "rape as something God intended to happen" offers up as an alternative. We look forward to seeing you on election day."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would think ALL the Democratic party needs to do to win the White House this time is run the footage of ALL the dinosaurs who have said inane crap like that over the past few years-even if they're unrelated to the presidency. The GOP is the party of the old, dusty, Ward Cleaver racist misogynists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.