Goodbye Hillary! Hello Michele!

a reply to: seagull In respect to your age I can understand where you come from. Maybe she shouldn't run I do not know. I think she would would win but I do not know if that would fix a thang. What would your solution be to fix this broken machine?

a reply to: MRuss


Democrats lost hundreds of seats from coast-to-coast during the Barack-Michelle era. The Obama's let the party and Democratic voters down horribly. If they want Michelle as their candidate, an I.Q. check is in order.

a reply to: carewemust

So true, and yet look at how hivemindless the two party cultism thing goes where Hillary the effing WAR CRIMINAL was hoisted up there, they went completely out of their minds crying and rioting when she lost, still wont let up in rabidly defending her even though every thing from personality to criminality that they all supposedly hate Trump for well THAT IS Hillary thru & thru.

We're just too dumb and easily preyed upon as a species is why we cant play games with these term limits.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

I don't have a problem with her slinging a book. Why shouldn't she? As long as its content isn't intentionally dishonest, she's entitled to share her perspective.

I've watched that woman for years. Politically we couldn't be further apart. But I also admire her dedication, and generally, her professionalism. Donna has always struck me as one of those issues democrats that didn't demonize opponents. I have mad respect for that and wish we would return to the days when there were more people like that on both sides.

Now, having said all of that, I was deeply disappointed to learn about the debate question issue. Moreover, I think because of the Clinton culture, Donna was bound to acquire a stink all her own.

Now it seems she is doing what anyone in her position would do. She's trying to salvage what's left of her reputation and find a path forward. You can't blame her for that. At least, I don't.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

For POTUS, you get the husband elected the first time and then the wife elected the second time

That's fine if it's what the people want. That's what is great about living in a democracy. The people elect who they want. Unless your trying to say you think our system is rigged and our president is not the person that the people wanted.

A michelle presidency would be fine with me.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

Then why not have no term limits to begin with, if that's what people want????

As I said... well read the post above yours.

Pull up some incumbent re-election statistics. We're just too lazy and dumb as a species we always end up re-electing the same people over and over and over and over and over again and that's why there's the concentration of corruption off the charts for consecutive generations running now........

Here you go, proof we cant trust ourselves with this terms stuff:

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

We may disagree on the particulars, but yeah, term limits should be something the electorate demands.

a reply to: loam

I've watched that woman for years. Politically we couldn't be further apart. But I also admire her dedication, and generally, her professionalism. Donna has always struck me as one of those issues democrats that didn't demonize opponents. I have mad respect for that and wish we would return to the days when there were more people like that on both sides.

Be honest man. Would you be saying any of this about her if she had never come out with this book?
I wont say your a lier if you can't point me to a past thread were you do say something nice about her, but it sure would help me.

I'm sorry that was a knee jerk thing for me to say I read the rest of your comment and realized I am assuming your a trumpster and I shouldn't do that. It's just that I have seen a bunch of trump supporters and hard line republicans suddenly loving a person that we all know that they hated before, just because she has bad things to say about dems and hillary.

Sure she can write any book she likes its the flip flopping the repubs are doing over her that bothers me. Hell, all the "us agianst them" bs that the dems and repubs do to each other bothers me.


Edit: I am also on the side of term limit changes.

a reply to: Allaroundyou

Hey, I ain't that old...

I have some somewhat radical ideas about that, frankly.

1) The office of President should be non-partisan. That would make him or her, at least in theory, if not fact, independent of party politics, and beholden to none save the voters. Unlikely, but it's an interesting notion, if I do say so myself.

2) Term limits by Constitutional amendment, not Congress. Congress wouldn't allow that into committee, much less out of committee.
2a) President- One four year term, followed by, if re-elected, two two year terms. Not sure how that'd work, but it'd sure make things interesting...
2b) Senate- One six year term. Can return to office but only after a two year hiatus. Lose all seniority in the process.
2c) House of Representatives- Two six year terms. Period. Full stop. As they're more local than Senators, they might actually accomplish something if given a bit more time.

I wouldn't touch the odds on any of these happening outside of bad fiction... But, you asked!

a reply to: loam

Those two graphs together tell the whole story. Approval ratings keep dipping yet the incumbent trend increased at the same time.

It also demonstrates the increasing effectiveness of the Two Party + MSM Propaganda System. It doesnt matter the two parties squabble, as long as they only address each other and the corporate run MSM only talks about them and them alone then no toher choice will ever have a chance.

So now factor that into the incumbent rate situation, third parties no wonder they dont exist fo shizzle in the Congress when the Two Party's manage to hold their own seats down even against each other so effectively.

And of course none of those cronies are going to go out of their own way to change it because its them the career (often criminal) politicians in charge of the term limits.

So its up to US to DEMAND it, somehow. Those two graphs the best I've found so far beyond rhetoric to do my part to argue the case; try to motivate people to even care....

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Then why not have no term limits to begin with, if that's what people want????

Ok why not? I am all for trying something new. If it is in fact what we all agree we want to try.
Isn't trying something new, something other than in your own words,

re-electing the same people over and over and over and over and over again

I think we both agree in principle on that. It just seems you want a specific change while I am up for really any kind of majority agreed upon change at this point. Yes, michelle would be an obama which is more of the same but she would also be a black women and that would be the biggest change to our presidency that the US has ever had.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

How can you act like you're about trying something new when you're advocating an un-ending Status Quo???

SERIOUSLY!

Move to England and go kneel in front of the Royal Palace every mrning on your way to work, perhaps.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
It just seems you want a specific change while I am up for really any kind of majority agreed upon change at this point.

Look at those two graphs and with a straight face emoticon tell me that the majority are anywhere near competent enough to do anything right, right now.

We're too easily manipulated. The entire MSM apparatus is a Status Quo propaganda monstrosity, and its so far gone that even criticizing (the multinational megaconglomerate corporation owned MSM's) blatant propaganda fake news smear campaigns gets you smeared even around here as being an enemy of free speech.

We're too dumbed down and polarized as a people right now, indoctrinated our whole lives. And even if we had a rapid turn around and system reboot give it another 10 or so years and the same BS would arise again given the same vested interests gettings a grip on things again. Because the biggest issue is we're too easily manipulated as a species, especially in the ever increasingly dizzying Modern World.

Look back two years, the MSM had it all laid out it was supposed to be Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush in the general election. And people were cool with it.... BECAUSE PEOPLE DONT EVEN KNOW WHAT THEY SHOULD WANT (they just follow the propaganda even when the MSM trust rating are through the floor and Congress approval ratings int eh abyss The People still keep going along with the overall yellowbrickroad the Two Party + MSM System keeps paved in front of US.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

I have no need to defend myself on this point. My posting history speaks for itself. I've never hidden the fact that I'm a conservative, but I've never been a slave to a political party. During the Bush years, I was one of the most prolific critics of him and his administration on these boards.

With respect to Donna, I have posted at least a few times how watching her get confronted about the debate question issue by Megan Kelly was one of the hardest things to watch. It was heartbreaking.

Donna's punditry over the years was almost always substantively wrong, but I never disliked her. She struck me as an honest broker. I tend to like that type. lol

Can't say anything positive about too many pundits today. But that's another subject.

To put your mind at ease, or perhaps confuse you further, I have been a 'government governs best when it governs least' conservative since the Reagan years. But I'm married to a tree hugging, granola eating liberal (at least she was until this last cycle), have all of the world's three major religions represented in my family, had an uncle who was the leader of the communist party in a major European city, and I could go on about another dozen Heinz 57 sauce aspects of my life. But it starts to get uncomfortably close to doxxing myself, which I will never do.

Bottom line, not everyone is a rabid partisan, including Trump supporters.

a reply to: seagull Hey I never called you old except that one time. And ya I can get behind your idea. It does seem like a way to get rid of corruption. Now if that ever happens time will tell.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Are you saying a black women being POTUS would NOT be something new?

a reply to: scraedtosleep

We already had Michelle Obama in the White House, with Barack. So having the two of them back in there would be the same old same old.

So quit playing coy and throwing the damn race card. wtf.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss WTH they are not playing the race card person. Way to be triggered though. Would it be that bad to have her as a president?

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

So your argument is that you and I and all other americans are just to dumb to vote.

If that's how you feel than why vote at all? Why even talk to us about this if you and I are all just brainwashed.

I bet what you really believe is that only you and those that agree with you are smart enough to vote. Am I right.

a reply to: loam

not everyone is a rabid partisan

Thank goodness.

Sorry again about my false assumptions.

Hippy girls are the best!

Politically I'm a centrist.