Will Hillary Clinton Be The Next U.S. President?

Originally posted by plugandplay


I am not sure exactlly what will happen but when the Globalist make a mistake that everyone sees and they can just pass it off, that is when we will be out in the streets.

I agree that certain people who are in control, be it globalist or the bankers, will be controlling the election. However should a mistake be made, one that is big enough to make the people go into the streets, I think the change will be some what smaller then you were leading toward. I think should something like that happen there will be one or two patsies that will end up taking the fall. I see that as a much more likely chain of events.

Here is some of the latest from what is being called the Democradic front runner.

Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton said Sunday she won't vote for any more money to support the four-year-old war in Iraq without a plan to start bringing U.S. troops home.




"I've reached the conclusion that the best way to support our troops is begin bringing them home," the New York senator and former first lady told CNN's "Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer."

sorce

reply to post by RedGolem


OK, Ms R/G, you have a one-upmanship on me. Mr Hsu is really in deep do-do. I made a wrong assumption. Even smart people do dumb things.

Hillary has returned the $800,000, but to who? Mr Hsu? He was on the run. Or was he bundling? Hmm? Of course, those “bundled” donors may still want to support Hillary and so she may get $800,000 back by return mail? Aside: A more intimate form of bundling was practiced in 18th and 19th century America when young men courting a girl would stay overnight. Both slept in the same bed, but were separated by a ‘bundling board’ to keep them honest and her not pregnant. End.

As for globalists. Although I never paid the annual dues, I have in the past subscribed to the Foreign Affairs Quarterly. The CFR has represented the best thinking in America much too long for me to remember. Because it is generally pro internationalist, the Republican Party - after the 1912 election steadfastly anti-internationalist - and its standard bearers - excluding Eisenhower and Nixon - have most frequently taken the position opposite to that taken by the CFR. There has followed a lot of gratuitous slander hurled by people who knew better. Which is disappointing. Poorly informed voters are befuddled and have often voted against their own long term best interest thinking they were doing just the opposite. Voters tend to be checker players, high level politicians prefer chess.

Globalism neither can be nor should be reversed. Almost all of the West or Euro states have morphed from industrial giants into service economies.

I equate wealth with material things. Unless you create something I can hold or see, you have not created wealth. Instead, you - the generic - are mystified by the stacks of money paid for shuffling assets. I deny a service economy can be permanent because it creates NOTHING. It is not clear to me how long it - a service economy - can exist before the FINAL accounting comes. A service economy most closely resembles the illegal Ponzi schemes. But as the adage goes, you “Never Look A Gift Horse In The Mouth!” Or, if that is not right on point, try "Never Bite the Hand That Feeds You."

The vexing issue is how to convert from a manufacturing base to a service base in a way that is fair to all the people involved. I cannot offer any help on that.

[edit on 9/25/2007 by donwhite]

reply to post by donwhite


Donwhite
Thanks for the comment. As to the eight hundred thousand dollars I some how think it will find its way back to Clinton's campaign with out to much trouble. As I said at the start of the thread she does control the money or at least the biggest chunk of it.
As to the service economy being fair to everybody, I don't any society with a hierarchy will ever be fair. As who ever is at the top will always have more then the thralls. That is the extreme. But the point is we live in a complex society with those who will always have more then others.

And Clinton yet again increases her lead over the others in the race for the exectuive office. Or at least acording to this report.

Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton has significantly increased her lead over rival Barack Obama in the crucial early-voting state of New Hampshire, according to a CNN/WMUR poll conducted by the University of New Hampshire released Tuesday.


The New York Democrat registered 43 percent in the latest poll, 23 points more than Obama, an Illinois senator. In a similar poll conducted in July, only 9 points separated the candidates, with Clinton then at 36 percent and Obama at 27 percent.
sorce

reply to post by RedGolem


I’m guessing. I think Hillary is 60 years old. She was an honors grad from Wellesley College. She graduated from law school and began practice in a prestigious Arkansas firm. From the first day she took that job until today she has been in politics. I believe her husband ran for attorney general of Arkansas. He won once and lost once. He went on to be governor 3 terms. 2 years each. Then he ran for the presidency in 1992. He must have started that run 2-4 years earlier. She’s got 30 years experience in and around politics. 8 years in the WH put her at the very center of power in America. The place where America’s Movers and Shakers meet to eat.

I believe Barack is in his early 40s. He has terms of service in the Illinois state senate. That is an important post and comes into contact with a lot of big problems in a big state with a big city. You could call it a microcosm of America. But still, he’s far short of the experience Hillary has acquired. She’s hosted more state dinners than Barack has time in government.

John Edwards is a highly successful trial lawyer. Although many people dumbly denigrate lawyers, it is ONLY lawyers who can get them a DAY in court. Republicans have tried from Ronnie Reagan to Bush43 to get lawyer BARRED from the courtroom. Stymied class-action suits. Limited legal fees. Shortened statute of limitations. Republicans are always trying to make BIG Money exempt from answering in Court to the little guy they exploit and bring harm to. A one term US senator, he too has experience but not to equal Hillary’s. Or Barack's. And John suffers from one malady he cannot seem to get over: He is a populist.

Populism does not resonate in America.

November 4, 2008 is 1 year, 1 month and 4 days off. 399 days. IF Hillary can avoid a faux pas for that terribly long period of time, then she will be our next president. A FIRST for America! And I predict Barack will be her vice president. ANOTHER FIRST for America. Say Hello Democrats! Say good by to Republicans of the dinosaur-type.

[edit on 9/30/2007 by donwhite]

reply to post by donwhite


Donwhite,
Thanks for your post. You made some very good points, and you could be right that Hillery could be the next president with Obama as the running mate. However there is one more point that some one else pointed out. That the U.S. has never had a female president or a black one, those two points could work against them. It was pointed out that could be the very situation the republicans want, as that is the situation that will keep the republicans in office.

reply to post by RedGolem


Yes, there is a very good line of thinking that goes DON’T push the public TOO far TOO fast. But sometimes you have to DO right and let the Devil take the hindmost.

From another thread: Early on I believed Bill Richardson - an unlikely Hispanic - from the West and a small state too, would be an ideal counterbalance to Hillary from NY and so on. But Barack has done TOO well to be ignored. America’s blacks have been true and faithful to the Dems since 1932. With Barack running a strong 2nd and for a long time it is inconceivable the Dems will not offer him the VP slot. Sure, you could argue Barack will not get more black votes than the Dems would have without him, but surely blacks are due a reward? And a lot of whites would vote for him, I believe. Well, maybe not in TN but elsewhere.

reply to post by donwhite


I don't particular like the idea of letting the devil take the coarse, you said it something like that I think.
Something else I think needs to be thought of, is not will Obama, be the running mate, but if he is the running mate will Hillery draw the ethnic vote.

reply to post by RedGolem


RedGolem I don't particular like the idea of letting the devil take the coarse, you said it something like that I think. Something else I think needs to be thought of, is not will Obama, be the running mate, but if he is the running mate will Hillary draw the ethnic vote.

OK, assume for whatever reason Barack is not the VP nominee on the Dems ticket. It does not matter for this speculation who the #2 slot goes to. The question is will the black voters still support Hillary? I say YES!

The black voter can’t go anywhere else. The real question is HOW many black voters will turn out? For very understandable reasons blacks do not vote in the same percentages as white or Hispanic voters. Republicans are hard at work all around the country to block black voters. They have the picture ID requirement in 17 states that is in the Supreme Court this session. Disguised as an anti-fraud measure, it reality it is one more attempt by the GOP to stop blacks from voting.

Yes, Hillary will get the ethnic vote.

reply to post by donwhite


Ok so you think Hillery will still get the ethnic vote. Fine and I am sure all the experts will probably agree with you. I however don't think the photo ID is any way to keep any one group of people from being able to vote. Or if it is a way to keep any one group from voting I would have to think it would be the Hispanics, as they are the largest portion of people who are here illegally.

reply to post by RedGolem


RedGolem I however don't think the photo ID is any way to keep any one group of people from being able to vote. Or if it is a way to keep any one group from voting I would have to think it would be the Hispanics, as they are the largest portion of people who are here illegally.

It is claimed that many blacks who are eligible to vote do not have a car or a driver’s license, which is the most common photo ID. This is the same situation with old people, many who have quit driving. Lack of a photo ID is predominately a minority, poor and old people phenomenon.

I don’t think many illegal immigrants will be voting. Only citizens and Green Card holders - permanent resident status - are entitled to vote. The undocumented persons here know that and don’t want to bring attention to themselves. I don’t think the photo ID issue will effect them.

[edit on 10/1/2007 by donwhite]

reply to post by donwhite


A state issued photo id is also very easy to get. I just renewed my licence and I did it all on there web site. Did not half to go to try to find there building.
Any way as I said at the start of the thread, I think Hillery will win because she controls the money, or the biggest chunk of the money.

reply to post by RedGolem


RedGolem A state issued photo id is also very easy to get. I just renewed my licence and I did it all on there web site. Did not half to go to try to find there building. Any way as I said at the start of the thread, I think Hillary will win because she controls the money, or the biggest chunk of the money.

Suppose you are a single parent family with 2-3 small children. You live off food stamps, rent assistance and whatever passes for AFDC. You own no car. In fact, you can't even drive. So how do you get to the license issue place to get a photo ID that cots money? That money would buy a gallon of milk. priorities.

Renewal via the internet can be done in FL, too. Of course, you don’t get a new picture. My sister decided to go to the office for a new picture the last time she renewed her license because the picture was getting TOO much out of date.

Actually, I think Barack has raised the most money. I heard it continues, and it was $20 m to $17 m between her and him. I suspect she has a list of READY donors should the emergency arise. Like in stud poker, you don’t show your hole cards.

I love her new hairdo. She dresses chic. She has aged well! I think she is at last in her element! She actually LOVES this campaigning! She is head and shoulders above the other Dems and the GOPs wanna-be’s. And, her “chunk” of money is big enough!

[edit on 10/2/2007 by donwhite]

Actually Hillery did raise more the Obama.

But the import of the news is this, as rendered by the Drudge Report:
QUEEN OF THE QUARTER: HILLARY CRUSHES OBAMA IN SURPRISE FUNDRAISING SURGE.
And the news isn’t stopping there. Mrs. Clinton’s win for the quarter ($22 million) is likely to overshadow the foreign policy speech that Mr. Obama ($19 million) gave around noon.
The revelation of Mrs. Clinton’s numbers was exquisitely timed: she released her numbers a day after he did, allowing his campaign to bask in expected glory - only to have the bubble burst today. And the Clinton camp had set lower expectations for its own fund-raising, adding to the surprise.
sorce

Like I said in the beginning she does have control of the money. And who ever controls the money will control the election. Unforchanet but that is basically how I see it.

reply to post by RedGolem


You are now 2 upmanship on me, Ms R/G! Congrats.

For any of those who are following this there will be a debate between Obama, and Clinton tonight. If you want to see how your candidate or your next president handles things in a debate you might want to be sure to watch it.

Hear is so more information on Hillery. I still do think this will be an interesting year ahead in U.S. politics.

Weather you support Hillery or not, here are some things you should know.

Bill says : Hillary never wanted to run for public office, but she did want to work at public service.




The facts are: When Clinton was considering not running for another term as Governor of Arkansas in 1990, Hillary said she would run if he didn’t. She and Bill even had me take two surveys to assess her chances of winning. The conclusion was that she couldn’t win because people would just see her as a seat warmer for when Bill came back licking his wounds after losing for president. So she didn’t run. Bill did and won. There is no question she had her eye on public office, as opposed to service, longggg ago.



Bill says: In law school Hillary worked on legal services for the poor.



The facts are: Hillary’s main extra-curricular activity in law school was helping the Black Panthers, on trial in Connecticut for torturing and killing a federal agent. She went to court every day as part of a law student monitoring committee trying to spot civil rights violations and develop grounds for appeal.



Bill says: Hillary spent a year after graduation working on a children’s rights project for poor kids.



The facts are: Hillary interned with Bob Truehaft, the head of the California Communist Party. She met Bob when he represented the Panthers and traveled all the way to San Francisco to take an internship with him.

sorce

In case any one is still following the path of Hillery here is some of the latest.

In New Hampshire, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton’s campaign released its toughest mailer to date. The piece took aim at Obama’s health care plan, excerpting critics who called him “wrong on policy” and his plan “incomplete.” (Read the mailer[PDF])

The Clinton campaign also sent out a press release that questioned the Illinois senator’s electability. The e-mail pointed to both a newly-released New York Times/CBS poll and a Politico report on a 1996 candidate questionnaire that stated Obama was against capital punishment ,and in favor of banning handguns.

Obama’s campaign said that he does not hold those views, and that the survey had been filled out by a staffer, not the senator himself.

Recent polls have found Obama and Clinton essentially tied for the lead in the Granite State’s Democratic primary.

cnn