• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Will Hillary be the democratic nominee

Will Hillary be the democratic nominee in 2008?

  • Yes. I am a conservative/republican

    Votes: 4 13.8%
  • Yes. I am a democrat/liberal

    Votes: 9 31.0%
  • No. I am a conservative/republican

    Votes: 3 10.3%
  • No. I am a democrat/liberal

    Votes: 13 44.8%

  • Total voters
    29

26 X World Champs

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Caine said:
I disagree.
Show me, without taking someone's words out of context and reading into something that wasn't a part of the original meaning, where any democrat has used the words "Cut and Run" as a part of thier Agenda in Iraq.
He won't be able to because it's never been said. It's just Republican propaganda meant for Republicans to keep the base in line.

It's the sheep mentality really cultivated originally by Reagan. Repeat the lie over and over and over and your base will believe you and not stray. It's one of Bush's evil tools. God forbid he would let the truth stand on it's own, but that would be Democratic now wouldn't it?
 

LeftyHenry

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
1,896
Reaction score
12
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
aps said:
I don't know this guy. I will check him out! Maybe he and Mark Warner can run together? Two democratic governors from red states--this could work.

Probably a good idea if we want to be sure to win however I don't think those are the type of democrats we want. I think Obama would be a good nominee.
 

26 X World Champs

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Navy Pride said:
You know you don't actually have to say the words to mean that.....When Dean says
Uhmm...yes you do actually have to say the words if people are going to "quote" the unspoken words as fact otherwise there are untruths being written and said which is exactly what my last post pointed out. Say the lie over and over again and the most gullible amongst the Republican party will buy into every word.

Or, using the stated principle of "you knew what he meant" wouldn't politics enter a new phase of patheticness?

Or shall we assume that when Bush said that neither Rove or Libby had anything to do with Plamegate that he really meant that I'm covering for my guys even if they're guilty...which would be an impeachable offense, right?

See how twisting the truth is really an old fashioned lie?
 

CoffeeSaint

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 24, 2005
Messages
1,088
Reaction score
23
Location
Wherever there is caffeine, I'll be there.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
26 X World Champs said:
Some might say it's DEMOCRACY...

A vote for the loser also shows the winner that his support is not universal, which tends to promote caution and a willingness to compromise, thus helping to forward the agenda you wanted when you voted for the loser. You should always vote for who you want, not for who you think will win; that way lies Fahrenheit 451's elections, where Winston Noble defeats Hubert Hoag, because Noble looks ike a president and Hoag picks his nose.

By the way:
Feingold, the only senator out of 100 to vote against the PA in 2001.....nuff said.......
I know you weren't asking me, but this alone would garner my vote. I like my politicians to protect the constitutional rights they swore to uphold, at least once in a while. Little quirk of mine.

Last point: Hillary Clinton will not run until people are willing to listen to her speak; if we are willing to listen to her in '08, she'll run. If not, she may try for a VP spot. She may be Machiavellian, but that means she's smart enough to pick her time to make her move -- and you will not find a single nominee for president who is not Machiavellian. We are so far past the point where an unwilling nominee would win, it isn't funny.
 

JustMyPOV

Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
143
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Judging by everything that I've been reading, it seems far more likely that Mark Warner of Virginia will be the candidate in '08. I like Hillary, and I think she's a great Senator, and would likely be a fine president. There are a number of reasons I believe that Mark Warner would be a better Democratic candidate in '08.

1. A standing governor of a state is statisticly more likely to be elected than a standing Senator.

2. Unlike Hillary, Mark Warner has not been thoroughly demonized by the GOP "PR machine". Ex: Even though her voting record has been solidly moderate during her time as a Senator, she's still regularly labelled as being an "ultra-left-wing-liberal" by popular media pudits whose audiences rarely seem to get their news from any other source.

3. Mark Warner is an immensely popular Democratic governor of a red state, is widely percieved to be a moderate, and would likely carry his home-state in a presidential race. Judging by the last couple of elections, one state, in either case would have made all the difference in the electoral college results.

4. Unlike our last 2 candidates, he's not creepy looking and actually seems able to speak without sounding like that school professor that used to put everyone to sleep when he gave a lecture. I won't say that Hillary isn't a decent orator, but sometimes I have trouble detecting sincerity in her words. She sounds like she's always reading index cards, even when she's not, in my opinion.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
CoffeeSaint said:
A vote for the loser also shows the winner that his support is not universal, which tends to promote caution and a willingness to compromise, thus helping to forward the agenda you wanted when you voted for the loser. You should always vote for who you want, not for who you think will win; that way lies Fahrenheit 451's elections, where Winston Noble defeats Hubert Hoag, because Noble looks ike a president and Hoag picks his nose.

By the way:
I know you weren't asking me, but this alone would garner my vote. I like my politicians to protect the constitutional rights they swore to uphold, at least once in a while. Little quirk of mine.

Last point: Hillary Clinton will not run until people are willing to listen to her speak; if we are willing to listen to her in '08, she'll run. If not, she may try for a VP spot. She may be Machiavellian, but that means she's smart enough to pick her time to make her move -- and you will not find a single nominee for president who is not Machiavellian. We are so far past the point where an unwilling nominee would win, it isn't funny.


I know you weren't asking me, but this alone would garner my vote. I like my politicians to protect the constitutional rights they swore to uphold, at least once in a while. Little quirk of mine.

That is OK........Even if they are wrong?


Last point: Hillary Clinton will not run until people are willing to listen to her speak;

Hillary will runand get the dem nomination in 2008 because the left wing base of the democratic party loves her............She will not win because she is a liberal and the majority of this country is moderates and conservatives and will never elect someone from the far left or right.............
 
Last edited:

26 X World Champs

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Navy Pride said:
I wonder what the date was on that...I heard him on Meet the Press say we should pull out as soon as possible..
This is not an accurate and true statement. Meet The Press has all of their transcripts on the MSNBC website so please prove your assertion.

I've heard Feingold speak many times recently and also I've heard him interviewed multiple times since Murtha had the guts to tell America what's really going on. Every time Feingold is asked he has the same answer:

Feingold on Iraq and America's National Security

We need a policy on Iraq that includes a public, flexible timetable for completing our military mission there, so that we can focus on our national security priority – defeating the global terrorist networks that threaten the U.S.

I have proposed December 31, 2006 as the target date for the completion of the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq.
Our brave service members and their families deserve answers about how long they can expect to be in Iraq. The American people deserve a clear plan for concluding our military mission. And the Iraqi people need to know without any doubt that we do not intend to stay in that country indefinitely.
Source: http://feingold.senate.gov/

The source is his senatorial website and is current. This exact strategy is what Feingold has been calling in every instance, including his Meet The Press interview.

Oh, BTW - Here's the actual transcript from Feingold's appearance on Meet The Press from 8-21-05. Notre the date, and note what he said:
MR. GREGORY: Explain why you've taken this step at this point. Why set this target date?

SEN. FEINGOLD: Well, it's been a long time coming. I didn't support the war in Iraq in the first place. But once the country decided to go into Iraq, I felt it was very important that we do the best we can to success and support our troops. The problem is is that we're not getting the leadership from the administration. The president is not telling us what is the time frame, what are the benchmarks and what is the possible completion date for this mission. And what's happening is the American public is really despairing of the situation.

I tried first to simple offer a resolution a couple of months ago to ask the president to give us a sense of his own of how long this will take and give the world a sense of when we might finish what some people call an American occupation. We didn't get any response from the president. His last speech was just a bunch of the same slogans we hear all the time. And, frankly, we got very little reaction from the members of the Senate. So I felt it was time to at least put on the table an idea, get the discussion going, break the taboo and say, "Look, let's see if we can remove the troops after we succeed with a series of steps by the end of December 2006. Let's see if we can have a target date that will work."
Source: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8926876/

I would really like to see your transcript from MTP where Sen. Feingold says what you claim? I'm sure everyone here looks forward to the truth, so please provide backup to your statement:
Navy Pride said:
I wonder what the date was on that...I heard him on Meet the Press say we should pull out as soon as possible..
If I am wrong I will graciously write a post in this thread admitting that I was mistaken. We all make mistakes afterall, right Navy?
 

Thorgasm

Bus Driver to Hell
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
69,518
Reaction score
15,437
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Navy Pride said:
I wonder what the date was on that...I heard him on Meet the Press say we should pull out as soon as possible............

This president will not ask the crooked french and Germans permission to protect our country like Feingold and the dems want to do.....He believes unlike Kerry that the war on terrorism is a war for our very existence and not to be fought as a police action or in a very sensitive manner as Kerry wants to do.......

Eveyone thinks, "we should pull out as soon as possible". The definition of possible may be debateable. The French and Germans wouldn't be protecting our country, they would be securing Iraq. Iraq is not America's 51st state. How can you infer that "liberals" are spineless and cowardly yet they aren't the ones scared about our very existence? C'mon, the terrorists haven't even destroyed a third world country let alone a superpower. I think the conservatives might need to grow some cahones.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Judging by everything that I've been reading, it seems far more likely that Mark Warner of Virginia will be the candidate in '08.

I like Warner and might even vote for him if he got the nomination.....Sadly that will not happen, he is to much of a moderate..........

As far as Hillary goes I can not think of one red state she would carry......
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,428
Reaction score
7,226
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Navy Pride said:
I like Warner and might even vote for him if he got the nomination.....Sadly that will not happen, he is to much of a moderate..........

As far as Hillary goes I can not think of one red state she would carry......

Well, seeing as how you are "Very Conservative", and constantly bash the Democratic Party, I don't think your in the position to even GUESS who will be the Democratic Nominee.

Tell me one way in which you are qualified to be so assertive in your opinions on a party your not a part of and hate with a passion?

Tell us the truth Navy Pride, You only want Hillary Clinton to win Nomination because you know she will not win the election. This is just wishful thinking.
 

ptsdkid

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
1,704
Reaction score
10
Location
New Hampshire
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Caine said:
Well, seeing as how you are "Very Conservative", and constantly bash the Democratic Party, I don't think your in the position to even GUESS who will be the Democratic Nominee.

Tell me one way in which you are qualified to be so assertive in your opinions on a party your not a part of and hate with a passion?

Tell us the truth Navy Pride, You only want Hillary Clinton to win Nomination because you know she will not win the election. This is just wishful thinking.


Stop playing games here McCain wannabe: You know damn well that Hillary gets the dem nomination and goes on to lose big time to the Repub (preferably Romney).

You do see where Gore and Kerry will be throwing their hat's in the ring as well. Gore and Kerry give the most credence to the term 'liblosers', other than Ted Kennedy, but he's already liblost back in 1980. HeHeHe!
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
independent_thinker2002 said:
Eveyone thinks, "we should pull out as soon as possible". The definition of possible may be debateable. The French and Germans wouldn't be protecting our country, they would be securing Iraq. Iraq is not America's 51st state. How can you infer that "liberals" are spineless and cowardly yet they aren't the ones scared about our very existence? C'mon, the terrorists haven't even destroyed a third world country let alone a superpower. I think the conservatives might need to grow some cahones.

Everyone wants to pull out, the difference is the democrats want to pull out now, the republicans want to pull out when the job is finished..That is a huge difference........
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Caine said:
Well, seeing as how you are "Very Conservative", and constantly bash the Democratic Party, I don't think your in the position to even GUESS who will be the Democratic Nominee.

Tell me one way in which you are qualified to be so assertive in your opinions on a party your not a part of and hate with a passion? I look at things from a Conservative or Liberal viewpoint........

Tell us the truth Navy Pride, You only want Hillary Clinton to win Nomination because you know she will not win the election. This is just wishful thinking.


I think I can guess who the dem nominee just as well as you can......I am part of no party and i hate no party...........I look at the issues from a Conservative VS Liberal viewpoint...

Yeah I would love to see a good conservative kick Hillary's butt........I have never denied that..........
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,428
Reaction score
7,226
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
ptsdkid said:
Stop playing games here McCain wannabe: You know damn well that Hillary gets the dem nomination and goes on to lose big time to the Repub (preferably Romney).

You do see where Gore and Kerry will be throwing their hat's in the ring as well. Gore and Kerry give the most credence to the term 'liblosers', other than Ted Kennedy, but he's already liblost back in 1980. HeHeHe!

Do you ever NOT talk out of your ass?
Do you know what your talking ABOUT?

Gore already said he doesn't plan on running for another political office, ever.
 

JustMyPOV

Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
143
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Navy Pride said:
I think I can guess who the dem nominee just as well as you can......I am part of no party and i hate no party...........I look at the issues from a Conservative VS Liberal viewpoint...

Yeah I would love to see a good conservative kick Hillary's butt........I have never denied that..........

Well, you'll get to see a good moderate politely and respectfully kick her butt, but it'll be in the primaries. Warner is the buzz of the party, Hillary is the buzz of the media. When it comes to primaries, it's usually the buzz of the party that comes to be, as I'm sure you well know. The collective media thought for sure that McCain had the GOP nod in 2000, remember? ;)

Edited to say: I could very well envision Hillary as his running mate, however.
 
Last edited:

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,428
Reaction score
7,226
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Navy Pride said:
Everyone wants to pull out, the difference is the democrats want to pull out now, the republicans want to pull out when the job is finished..That is a huge difference........

Prove it, or stop talking out of your ass.

I think I have already showed the Feingold supports finishing the mission and then getting out, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

So, prove that all Democrats want to "Cut and Run" as only the Republicans have used the term.
 

LeftyHenry

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
1,896
Reaction score
12
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
ptsdkid said:
Stop playing games here McCain wannabe: You know damn well that Hillary gets the dem nomination and goes on to lose big time to the Repub (preferably Romney).

You do see where Gore and Kerry will be throwing their hat's in the ring as well. Gore and Kerry give the most credence to the term 'liblosers', other than Ted Kennedy, but he's already liblost back in 1980. HeHeHe!

Dems could put Donald Duck as a nominee and win. The war is unpopular and repubs are the ones who are mainly behind it. All dems have to do is capitalize on.

BTW don't even mention the idea of winning in 06 especially if King Bush doesn't clear up his NSA scandal
 
Last edited:

ptsdkid

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
1,704
Reaction score
10
Location
New Hampshire
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Caine said:
Do you ever NOT talk out of your ass?
Do you know what your talking ABOUT?

Gore already said he doesn't plan on running for another political office, ever.


You obviously missed Gore out on the stump a couple daze ago. The prime time lunatic hasn't changed a bit. His hat is already in, sport.
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,428
Reaction score
7,226
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
ptsdkid said:
You obviously missed Gore out on the stump a couple daze ago. The prime time lunatic hasn't changed a bit. His hat is already in, sport.

Ummm... Asking you this is like asking a retard how to tie his shoe, but....

Do you have any proof of this???
 

ptsdkid

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
1,704
Reaction score
10
Location
New Hampshire
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Caine said:
Ummm... Asking you this is like asking a retard how to tie his shoe, but....

Do you have any proof of this???


There isn't any intrinsic proof that even Hillary is going to run. This is politics here, McCain. Sort of like believing Mohammed Ali was going to retire some half dozen times before he actually did.

Now go down like a nice lemming and vote on my question of changing the ACLU's name to the Liberal Taliban.
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,428
Reaction score
7,226
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
ptsdkid said:
There isn't any intrinsic proof that even Hillary is going to run. This is politics here, McCain. Sort of like believing Mohammed Ali was going to retire some half dozen times before he actually did.
Ummm... Okay, I'll show you my claim of Gore said he is NEVER RUNNING FOR OFFICE AGAIN. If you can prove that he recently (a couple of daze ago as you put it) said he was putting it in for 2008.

Heres mine.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/10/12/politics/p062342D66.DTL
http://www.politics1.com/p2008-dems.htm


Now go down like a nice lemming and vote on my question of changing the ACLU's name to the Liberal Taliban.
Only if you agree to rename the Republican Party the "American Taliban"
 

JustMyPOV

Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
143
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
ptsdkid said:
Stop playing games here McCain wannabe: You know damn well that Hillary gets the dem nomination and goes on to lose big time to the Repub (preferably Romney).

Heh. Yeah, give the nod to Romney. Please. I'm from MA and well... Yes, I think Romney would make a fantastic nominee for the GOP. Warning: When he loses, he may come to YOUR state to run for governor. He'll promise to do the same for your state as he did for ours. :toilet:

He says he won't run for re-election in MA so he can focus on the Presidential election in '08. The real reason he isn't running again is because he doesn't want to have his ass handed to him at the polls before he runs for president.

You do see where Gore and Kerry will be throwing their hat's in the ring as well. Gore and Kerry give the most credence to the term 'liblosers', other than Ted Kennedy, but he's already liblost back in 1980. HeHeHe!

They can throw their hats anywhere they want to, just as you can throw around childish names at people you disagree with. In any case, it's apparant to anyone that's been paying attention to the Democratic party that Warner's getting the nod. So I'd stop getting your hopes up that it's going to be one of Hannity's or Rush's pre-processed, liberal demons. I guess they'll have to start cherry-picking Warner's comments and working on a whole new slate of misinterpretations and misrepresentations in order to pull it out for Romney in '08, eh?
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Caine said:
Do you ever NOT talk out of your ass?
Do you know what your talking ABOUT?

Gore already said he doesn't plan on running for another political office, ever.

Yeah and no politician has ever changed his mind.....:roll:
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
JustMyPOV said:
Well, you'll get to see a good moderate politely and respectfully kick her butt, but it'll be in the primaries. Warner is the buzz of the party, Hillary is the buzz of the media. When it comes to primaries, it's usually the buzz of the party that comes to be, as I'm sure you well know. The collective media thought for sure that McCain had the GOP nod in 2000, remember? ;)

Edited to say: I could very well envision Hillary as his running mate, however.


As I said many times Warner has no chance to get the nomination because the democratic party base is far left and Warner is a Moderate just like Leiberman and Edwards were in 2004......

Do you remember who your nominee was? The biggest liberal in the Senate......
 
Top Bottom