Are We Done With The Clinton and Obama Trainwreck Yet?

www.washingtonexaminer.com...
POLL: AMERICANS OVERWHELMINGLY PREFER "NEITHER" TO OBAMA OR HILLARY
Obama - 21%
Hillary - 25%
Neither - 45%

"Clinton can take no pleasure from winning, according to the poll analysis: “Liking her better only means she is simply the lesser of two evils. Broken down by party, the GOP picks Clinton over Obama, mostly because they dislike him more. And the Democrats are split along racial and gender lines."

This certainly explains why Americans are sooooooo unhappy right now, with zero "desirable choices" to vote for in 2016. (Jeb Bush may throw his hat in the GOP ring in 2016. But I think Americans are fed up with the Bush and Clinton "dynasties". And the GOP has told Romney to sit this one out.)

My parameters for a Presidential candidate are simple: ex-governor of a well-run state; intelligent, capable, ethical.

Who would YOU like to see run for 2016, who you could support with enthusiasm?

If you're asking me to pick from the current crop of elected officials, I'd say nobody. If they're in office right now, they're part of a broken, corrupt system.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun
I entirely agree with your sentiment.
If they're in politics or bureautics...they must go - else, the trainwreck will continue, no matter who is elected.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun


I agree, however there may be some hope. What about the Gov's of the states that have now allowed the recreational use of Weed? They at least, are more open minded than the rest of the bunch!? If one of them ran, I would probably vote for one of them.
They would most likely Not be WarMongers!! Just My thoughts here.....

I see there are some who still dont get it....

Clinton, obama, bush, romney, paul...IT DOESNT MATTER.

Theyre all sides of the same coin.

" Are We Done With The Clinton and Obama Trainwreck Yet? "

"WE" might be done.

But I doubt they are.

They have much work to be done.

C'mon Ron Paul!

This is YOUR time!

We know you hung up your hat but the timing has never been better...Just once more!

Peace

a reply to: jude11

I'd be tempted to vote for him, but he brings too much religion with Libertarianism for me to want to consider it seriously.

It's going to be Clinton v Bush.

Cause, that's how we roll.

a reply to: MKMonikerI like your parameters for Presidential Candidate. However, I would like to add another. He or she should have been a career military person. That way they would understand our military and how it is suppose to function. A retired General or a Admiral would be nice. IMO

Is Ross Perot still kicking?
There's a fella who had a plan and his own money to fund a campaign. No dependencies on the corruption mongers on Wall St. or elsewhere.

Ah what am I thinking! If he had a chance of winning they'd just suicide him or crash his plane into a mountain.

Thanks for all the comments. Sounds like everyone is "fed up" with the current crop of politicos in DC. I heard someone say one time that it takes a "certain personality type" to go into politics. I would guess that means a thick hide, ability to lie convincingly, and align yourself with scum who is rich and powerful. AND a certain delusional form of thinking, that you do and sacrifice "so much" that no one appreciates, so you are perfectly entitled to corruption and graft to line your own pocket with taxpayer money.

Used to be, men who had been successful in business, many times graduated to politics to share their knowledge and management skills. They knew this was a time to take a steep pay-cut and serve the Greater Good. Now anyone and everyone can run for political office. I guess this is "progress and equality of opportunity," but I see more egos and campaign mud-slinging than skills to handle the job. Like most people, I end up holding my nose and voting for the lesser of 2 evils.

I've argued long and hard for "term limits" in the federal Congress. But the persuasive counter-argument (found out the hard way in state congresses), is that just as a Rep/Senator learns the ropes and can be assigned to committees, they have to leave.

a reply to: MKMoniker

Why didn't you include the BUSHES?????

Ever see how chummy they all are when they rarely get together?

Same bird different wings!

originally posted by: MKMoniker
Thanks for all the comments. Sounds like everyone is "fed up" with the current crop of politicos in DC. I heard someone say one time that it takes a "certain personality type" to go into politics. I would guess that means a thick hide, ability to lie convincingly, and align yourself with scum who is rich and powerful. AND a certain delusional form of thinking, that you do and sacrifice "so much" that no one appreciates, so you are perfectly entitled to corruption and graft to line your own pocket with taxpayer money.

Used to be, men who had been successful in business, many times graduated to politics to share their knowledge and management skills. They knew this was a time to take a steep pay-cut and serve the Greater Good. Now anyone and everyone can run for political office. I guess this is "progress and equality of opportunity," but I see more egos and campaign mud-slinging than skills to handle the job. Like most people, I end up holding my nose and voting for the lesser of 2 evils.

I've argued long and hard for "term limits" in the federal Congress. But the persuasive counter-argument (found out the hard way in state congresses), is that just as a Rep/Senator learns the ropes and can be assigned to committees, they have to leave.

Obama "was" that fresh face, an outsider, and someone who was one of the people; a regular joe. He qickly changed once in office-didn't you notice how fast his hair turned grey? Al if not most politicians probably start with positive ambitions in mind.

a reply to: MKMonikerI have always thought term limits should be enforced. That was there is always some new blood coming in. There really does not need to be continuity in a office. I think 2 or 3 terms should be plenty. There would be no career politicians that way. Maybe corruption would be less if not eliminated.

a reply to: Ceeker63

I eagerly await the day that politicians actively shorten their own term limits & outlaw runaway campaign funding.

LoL, I couldn't even say that with a straight face.

Personally I'd support Romney in a heartbeat.

I think a few million voters should apologize to him for choosing Obama.
(While at it they could apologize to the rest of the USA.)

a reply to: MKMoniker

Warren. She's in no ones pocket. She fights for the middle class and American values. Sadly Republicans can't see that because she's progressive on social issues. She's one of only a handful of uncorrupted politicians and the only one of those with the popularity and name recognition to win.

a reply to: MKMoniker

Ethical politician is an oxymoron. I told some of my face book people that if it becomes a Bush/Clinton race in 2016 that people should immediately take to the streets and protest until both parties pull their candidates and put in new ones. Since they would never allow a 3rd party to run.

a reply to: MKMoniker

Sadly we the people STILL like to think we have anything to do with the election process, that went long ago and truthfully was probably never even an option to allow the mom and pop POTUS to even attempt a run.

This will be no different then it always has been, with the years and years of dirt that the Clintons have on EVERYONE in government, Hillary is a shoe in...if she does not kick off before then, she is not well if you read between the lines.