Clinton vs Bush the sequels?

 

Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Obama, Obama, well Bush is one up so Clinton could be the next one in the ongoing US political dynasties, where any millionaires' child can dream of becoming President one day.

 

I'll take Clinton over Bush anyday (the man who helped his brother into the white house, the one that cocked up the world bigtime), which would then leave Michelle Obama as the first black female president after Hilary.

 

 

Clinton vs Bush the sequels?

 

Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Obama, Obama, well Bush is one up so Clinton could be the next one in the ongoing US political dynasties, where any millionaires' child can dream of becoming President one day.

 

I'll take Clinton over Bush anyday (the man who helped his brother into the white house, the one that cocked up the world bigtime), which would then leave Michelle Obama as the first black female president after Hilary.

Except that Bill Clinton was not a millionaire's child. As far as I know, neither was Hillary Rodham Clinton. Of course, Bill wasn't short of a bob or two by the time he ran for president.

She's virtually synonymous with dying on the altar of healthcare reform in the 90s. Hardly standing for nothing.

 

You're right that she won't excite black voters anywhere near as much as Obama did, but the Obama coalition was never just black voters - it also relied on women and young voters. She kind of has a historical appeal which'd get out a few of those, which is why Warren would be her only risk. Not to mention that a fair few Obama supporters feel pretty let down and realise that promising big isn't always worth it if you can't deliver - she's got a record of bipartisanship that a lot have reconciled themselves to.

Show me a single ex-Senator who isn't rich and I'll show you a failed person. Of course Hillary's rich. It's almost impossible not to be when your wealth of experience is enough to command six figure speaking fees.

She's virtually synonymous with dying on the altar of healthcare reform in the 90s. Hardly standing for nothing.

 

You're right that she won't excite black voters anywhere near as much as Obama did, but the Obama coalition was never just black voters - it also relied on women and young voters. She kind of has a historical appeal which'd get out a few of those, which is why Warren would be her only risk. Not to mention that a fair few Obama supporters feel pretty let down and realise that promising big isn't always worth it if you can't deliver - she's got a record of bipartisanship that a lot have reconciled themselves to.

 

Women ok, but I doubt she's going to get young people out in anywhere near the same numbers. For groups that don't care about politics, you simply need to have something strong and distinctive to say to even get them to bother going out to vote.

 

I'm a bit confused by what you said about "who she'd add to the Obama coalition", because I genuinely can't see why anyone who didn't vote for Obama would vote for Hillary.

Edited April 12, 201510 yr by Danny

Women ok, but I doubt she's going to get young people out in anywhere near the same numbers. For groups that don't care about politics, you simply need to have something strong and distinctive to say to even get them to bother going out to vote.

 

I'm a bit confused by what you said about "who she'd add to the Obama coalition", because I genuinely can't see why anyone who didn't vote for Obama would vote for Hillary.

Well, the Clinton states for one. Pains me as it does to say it, there are white, rural voters in the likes of Arkansas and West Virginia that are open to an economically populist 'on your side' message who just would not vote for a black man, full stop.

Well, the Clinton states for one. Pains me as it does to say it, there are white, rural voters in the likes of Arkansas and West Virginia that are open to an economically populist 'on your side' message who just would not vote for a black man, full stop.

 

Definitely, but Clinton doesn't look like she's going to be giving an economically populist message, and tbh, even if she did, it would be undermined by Republican attacks that she was elitist and too rich and aloof from those poor people to understand what they're going through anyway. Admittedly that would also be a problem for Elizabeth Warren too, I'm not sure her over-academic way of presenting things would go down too well in those types of places.

 

John Edwards would've been what the Democrats needed had he not self-destructed.

Well, a bit more than 'any chance'...

 

It was a genuine question in not up to date at all with us politics and always found it hard to understand due to the lack of ideology!

"Americans have fought their way back from tough economic times," she said, "but the deck is still stacked in favour of those at the top.

"Everyday Americans need a champion and I want to be that champion," she added.

 

Nah, she doesn't look like she's going to be giving an economically populist message at all.

Definitely, but Clinton doesn't look like she's going to be giving an economically populist message, and tbh, even if she did, it would be undermined by Republican attacks that she was elitist and too rich and aloof from those poor people to understand what they're going through anyway. Admittedly that would also be a problem for Elizabeth Warren too, I'm not sure her over-academic way of presenting things would go down too well in those types of places.

 

John Edwards would've been what the Democrats needed had he not self-destructed.

Are there any potential Republican candidates who are significantly less rich than Hillary Clinton? Certainly not Jeb Bush.

Scott Walker didn't go to university and he's going for the blue collar vote. He's the closest I think the Republicans could come to setting up a Gore-Bush rematch.

I absolutely adore Hillary. Aside from the slight niggle of her age she's the perfect candidate. It's about bloody time we had a woman President.

 

 

Me too.

 

Here's to Hillary - go get em!

Women ok, but I doubt she's going to get young people out in anywhere near the same numbers. For groups that don't care about politics, you simply need to have something strong and distinctive to say to even get them to bother going out to vote.

 

I'm a bit confused by what you said about "who she'd add to the Obama coalition", because I genuinely can't see why anyone who didn't vote for Obama would vote for Hillary.

 

You're saying the first female president, aligned with the first black president, doesn't hae history making appeal among the millenials??

 

Republicans are terrified of her, particularly because of the making history thing, like Barack's campaign.

Me too.

 

Here's to Hillary - go get em!

 

Hillary Clinton !! :cheer: :cheer:

Who do you think can beat her to the nomination? I hoped Elizabeth Warren would run, but apparently she's not going to.

 

I agree that she's unlikely to win the election itself though.

 

 

As a matter of interest why do you think she won't win? I think she will.

In other election news, a Large Pile of Cash has just announced its election bid.

As a matter of interest why do you think she won't win? I think she will.

 

I think she will too.

 

But she's always had these comments, including comments like 'a woman will never be president - but I remember the same people saying this was saying Barack would never be president.

 

However, there are crazies who were saying pre-2008 saying that 'either a woman or black man president will be the anti-christ' lool. Well, I guess it HAS been a shock to patriarchal systems, having people who aren't white middle class men as candidates :ooo

You're saying the first female president, aligned with the first black president, doesn't hae history making appeal among the millenials??

 

I'm not sure. Obama had an extra dimension because the US had such a history of racism in the recent past, which made it all the more groundbreaking/remarkable -- I'm not sure a woman president would be seen as such a great groundbreaking move that would in itself be enough to make people enthusiastic about Hillary. It certainly wasn't seen as that in Hillary's 2008 campaign, anyway, the argument was all about her "experience" rather than because she'd be making history as the first female president.

Edited April 13, 201510 yr by Danny

Well, it was a challenge between first female president v first black president, so it seemed smaller. There's no such challenge this time in primaries or the contest, especially as awful Jeb Bush (who got his bro into the WH the first time, talk aboot nepotism) will likely be the eventual opposite candidate.

Except that Bill Clinton was not a millionaire's child. As far as I know, neither was Hillary Rodham Clinton. Of course, Bill wasn't short of a bob or two by the time he ran for president.

 

yes I was just being cynical, as usual B-) , to make a point about political dynasties in the land of the free where the best rise to the top purely because they are the most able and not through nepotism - though it's a fact you tend to be a millionaire to be president, can't recall the last one who wasn't rich....if there ever has been one who wasn't rich. Anyone know?

 

To be powerful in life, money helps...