To Those who would Vote for Hillary CLinton...

24567

Comments

  • Get_Right
    Get_Right Posts: 14,167
    slightofjeff wrote:
    You realize this is a private message board. Nobody knows who you are, right?

    Thats not entirely true-some people here do know me, but thats not really the point.

    my reasons are personal and thats all there is too it.
  • Get_Right
    Get_Right Posts: 14,167
    ledvedderman wrote:
    I can respect that

    thanks

    now you can all say you do know someone who supports her
  • Get_Right
    Get_Right Posts: 14,167
    ledvedderman wrote:
    That's probably a little more accurate

    see. A little girl on girl action would be good for the country!

    j/k
  • tybird
    tybird Posts: 17,388
    slightofjeff wrote:
    Me neither. I think I've seen more Bush supporters, actually. And I'm dead serious.
    What's the difference between a Bush supporter and a Clinton supporter...other than the name of the party?? I can't tell the difference between Hillbilly and Bushie.....
    All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a thousand enemies, and whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you, digger, listener, runner, prince with the swift warning. Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be destroyed.
  • ledvedderman
    ledvedderman Posts: 7,762
    Get_Right wrote:
    see. A little girl on girl action would be good for the country!

    j/k

    It only does good if the two chicks are hot. Any day Scarlett Johannson and Jessica Biel want to play doctor in the White House, I hope President Obama would allow that.
    E8toX.gif

    http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
  • cornnifer
    cornnifer Posts: 2,130
    Get_Right wrote:
    nope

    I have personal reasons for supporting her.

    thats cool, you certainly are not obligated to explain to anyone why you support who you do. Understand people will be left to speculate, as i admittedly am right now, that your "personal reasons" are breasts and a vagina. Hopefully i'm wrong. You could be packing 12 inches for all i know.
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
  • cornnifer
    cornnifer Posts: 2,130
    ledvedderman wrote:
    My best guess is that people remember how good the times were under President Bill, and after 8 years of W they want to return to that.

    I really do not see her appeal at all.

    Which is funny because people seem to be forgetting that by the end of his second term, clinton had been impeached, we had sleaze, lies, scandals, perjury, and evidence tampering which all helped Bush get elected in the first place! Sounds like EXACTLY what i want to go back to.
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
  • Get_Right
    Get_Right Posts: 14,167
    cornnifer wrote:
    thats cool, you certainly are not obligated to explain to anyone why you support who you do. Understand people will be left to speculate, as i admittedly am right now, that your "personal reasons" are breasts and a vagina. Hopefully i'm wrong. You could be packing 12 inches for all i know.

    Would that be so bad if I supported her solely because she is female?
    Its not the reason, but I dont see a problem with that

    speculate away, but she is not my lover and Im only packing 9.
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,880
    Get_Right wrote:
    Would that be so bad if I supported her solely because she is female?
    Its not the reason, but I dont see a problem with that

    speculate away, but she is not my lover and Im only packing 9.


    Yes it would be just as bad as voting for someone that is male because you are male, or black because you are black, or white because you are white...and so on.

    A woman that votes for Hillary because she is a woman is making it ok for any man that will not vote for her simply because she is a woman.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    tybird wrote:
    What's the difference between a Bush supporter and a Clinton supporter...other than the name of the party?? I can't tell the difference between Hillbilly and Bushie.....

    One is a corporate candidate who would use his influence to oppress the poor and give tax cuts to the rich.

    The other is a corporate candidate who would use her influence to take everyone's guns and force everyone to have mandatory abortions.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • Get_Right
    Get_Right Posts: 14,167
    cincybearcat wrote:
    Yes it would be just as bad as voting for someone that is male because you are male, or black because you are black, or white because you are white...and so on.

    A woman that votes for Hillary because she is a woman is making it ok for any man that will not vote for her simply because she is a woman.


    I dont agree with your reverse logic.

    I see no problem in having a gender or an ethic alliance-I think that already happens-unless of course the particular candidate is totally incompetent-and I cant say that about any of the frontrunners.
  • cornnifer
    cornnifer Posts: 2,130
    Get_Right wrote:
    Would that be so bad if I supported her solely because she is female?
    Its not the reason, but I dont see a problem with that

    speculate away, but she is not my lover and Im only packing 9.

    Yes, it would be a bad thing. i'm not a woman, but i would argue that cunton is the LAST woman any intelligent woman would want to have elected! Without mincing words, she is a lying, underhanded, win at all costs dirty politician whose only desire is to get back into the white house. The woman has ZERO integrity. Is THIS the kind of woman women want representing them? My guess is hillary would destroy the chances of an honest woman of virtue and integrity ever having a chance at the white house again. At least for a long time. As a man, i have no problem with strong women. My wife is a strong woman. i love strong women. Hillary isn't that. There is a sometimes fine line between being a "strong" woman and just being a dirty, crooked, lying bitch. Hillary is on the wrong side of that line.
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    Get_Right wrote:
    I dont agree with your reverse logic.

    I see no problem in having a gender or an ethic alliance-I think that already happens-unless of course the particular candidate is totally incompetent-and I cant say that about any of the frontrunners.

    So it's cool if I come out and say I will only consider voting for white dudes, then? Because I kind of think that makes me a racist misogynist.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • Get_Right
    Get_Right Posts: 14,167
    cornnifer wrote:
    Yes, it would be a bad thing. i'm not a woman, but i would argue that cunton is the LAST woman any intelligent woman would want to have elected! Without mincing words, she is a lying, underhanded, win at all costs dirty politician whose only desire is to get back into the white house. The woman has ZERO integrity. Is THIS the kind of woman women want representing them? My guess is hillary would destroy the chances of an honest woman of virtue and integrity ever having a chance at the white house again. At least for a long time. As a man, i have no problem with strong women. My wife is a strong woman. i love strong women. Hillary isn't that. There is a sometimes fine line between being a "strong" woman and just being a dirty, crooked, lying bitch. Hillary is on the wrong side of that line.


    And thats different from every other politician how?

    People are a bit idealistic when it comes to politics-which is ok.

    With very very very few exceptions, they are all self interested and deceptive in their own way-its part of politics-thats why its a dirty business.
  • Get_Right
    Get_Right Posts: 14,167
    slightofjeff wrote:
    So it's cool if I come out and say I will only consider voting for white dudes, then?

    only
    no

    but to say I generally prefer a man in the oval office is-just be ready to back that up with more than a gender based reason for saying it.
  • cornnifer
    cornnifer Posts: 2,130
    Get_Right wrote:
    And thats different from every other politician how?

    People are a bit idealistic when it comes to politics-which is ok.

    With very very very few exceptions, they are all self interested and deceptive in their own way-its part of politics-thats why its a dirty business.

    Bullshit. Where as it is true that politicians want to be elected, (otherwise there is no point in running for office), and whereas it is also true that most politician will be less than honest in that attempt, the fucking clintons take this shit to a whole new level. You know it as well as i do. i generally don't like politicians. i'm 35 and have not participated in a presidential election since 18, and then, it was only because i had just acquired anew civil right and was excited to exercise it (kind of like getting hammered on your 21st birthday). Even i, however, have never happened across politicians that make me want to puke more than the clintons. Never. On the other hand, never have i happened upon a politician, in my lifetime, that i have been able to get behind, heart and soul, like i have with Barack Obama. i will be sincerely exercising my civil right to vote for the first time in my life. Whereas their platforms are somewhat similar, the two could not be further apart.
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
  • Get_Right
    Get_Right Posts: 14,167
    cornnifer wrote:
    Bullshit. Where as it is true that politicians want to be elected, (otherwise there is no point in running for office), and whereas it is also true that most politician will be less than honest in that attempt, the fucking clintons take this shit to a whole new level. You know it as well as i do. i generally don't like politicians. i'm 35 and have not participated in a presidential election since 18, and then, it was only because i had just acquired anew civil right and was excited to exercise it (kind of like getting hammered on your 21st birthday). Even i, however, have never happened across politicians that make me want to puke more than the clintons. Never. On the other hand, never have i happened upon a politician, in my lifetime, that i have been able to get behind, heart and soul, like i have with Barack Obama. i will be sincerely exercising my civil right to vote for the first time in my life. Whereas their platforms are somewhat similar, the two could not be further apart.

    I respect your views, but disagree. I like Obama-he is a good candidate, and I like what I hear. Im not sure he is the guy I want cleaning up our foreign policy mess. But its irrelevant anyway as far as Im concerned.
  • MasterFramer
    MasterFramer Posts: 2,268
    Get_Right wrote:
    I respect your views, but disagree. I like Obama-he is a good candidate, and I like what I hear. Im not sure he is the guy I want cleaning up our foreign policy mess. But its irrelevant anyway as far as Im concerned.

    So you are going to settle for a shady canidate that is part of the same money grab going on right now?
    10.31.93 / 10.1.94 / 6.24.95 / 11.4.95 / 10.19-20.96 / 7.16.98 / 7.21.98 / 10.31.00 /8.4.01 Nader Rally/ 10.21.01 / 12.8-9.02 / 6.01.03 / 9.1.05 / 7.15-16,18.06 / 7.20.06 / 7.22-23.06 / Lolla 07
  • anotherclone
    anotherclone Posts: 1,688
    Here's the thing I don't understand. I've noticed that people are quick to say why they don't like someone. Be it you don't like someones lack of experience or whatever. But when pressed to say why they DO like someone, suddenly that's a bit harder to say. Easy to complain about what you don't like, hard to say something positive about what you do like.

    I guess I mean, its easy to say Obama isn't who you feel can get us out of the foreign policy mess. But what makes you feel that Clinton is? I believe she actually only has a couple more years of working "experience" in office than Obama. Correct me if I'm wrong with that. How does that make her more experienced to solve foreign policy matters? Has she been in the trenches negotiating with the enemy herself?
  • Get_Right
    Get_Right Posts: 14,167
    MasterFramer wrote:
    So you are going to settle for a shady canidate that is part of the same money grab going on right now?

    See thats the point you all miss, I think they are all shady-thats a given for me in politics.

    And your man Obama looked pretty shady standing next to ole Teddy.

Categories