serryjw
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 06:11 PM
Original message |
2008 What are the chances for a Clinton vs Rice race? |
|
I still can't believe that blacks would vote for Rice but Dick Morris thinks it's possible http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/sisters-doing-it-for-themselves/2005/12/08/1133829721163.htmlIF you are Black please identify yourself. I think it may have more meaning,. THANKS!
|
Name removed
(0 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 06:18 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
|
BrklynLiberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 06:18 PM
Response to Original message |
2. IMHO: This country is still not ready for a woman in charge. They will |
|
Edited on Sun Jan-01-06 06:25 PM by BrklynLiberal
say it is some other reason..but it will be the gender that would keep either one of them out of the White House. I wish it were not so, but I guess I am still a cynic when it comes to that. When you actually have WOMEN in this country talking about taking the vote away from women, and denying them other rights that should be guaranteed to every citizen....how can anyone really think that a woman would be elected President in this backward country?
:sarcasm: Would she actually get the same salary as a man? Would she have to promise not to have any children? Could she possibly do a good job if she has any children to worry about? What about her emotional state at "That time of the Month" ..or God forbid, if she is menopausal? Can she be trusted to handle all those facts and figures all by herself? Will she be able to handle the leaders of other countries? There are just so many important issues to consider!!!! :puke: :puke: :puke:
|
serryjw
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
6. Would she have to promise not to have any children? |
|
I want to see one of them try :rofl:..BTW I agree with you, this country is not ready. It will be speculated until we get our nominee in 2008
|
phillysuse
(683 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
15. Condi is post menopausal |
|
She won't be having any children. She had a hysterectomy and is in her 50's.
|
Bucky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-02-06 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
25. So is Cheney. Oh wait, that was a catty comment. I take it back. Sorry. |
|
I don't know what comes over me sometimes.
|
GrumpyGreg
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
7. And she would probably throw like a girl too---we certainly |
|
can't have that. (sarcasm intended)
|
tinfoilinfor2005
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 06:21 PM
Response to Original message |
brainshrub
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 06:23 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Edited on Sun Jan-01-06 06:54 PM by brainshrub
The age of the Clinton Democrat (a.k.a. Republican) is over. Clinton has a good chance of being one of the greatest Senators in history, but I don't know if the party apparatus could get behind her for a presidential run.
As for Rice, she is a brilliant, and evil, woman who was able to get around the inherent racism in the Republican party by leveraging her association with the BFEE. The rank-and-file republican activists will never get behind her either.
I think both women will make a shot for it in 2008. Clinton because it's expected, and Rice because there are too many skeletons in the White House closet to allow non-NeoCon to be the predecessor.
|
petgoat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
10. Dr. Rice lied to the faces of the 9/11 widows (under oath) |
|
when she said the 8-6 PDB did not warn of new attacks.
|
Yupster
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-02-06 03:52 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
19. OI don't see anything in Condi's |
|
history that shows she would want to make a run for president.
I don't think she'll run.
I do think Hillary will run and I think she is the favorite to get the nomination and at least a 50-50 shot to win the White House.
|
AntiCoup2K4
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 06:29 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Either way an unqualified war mongering Republican wins..... |
|
...and the rest of us lose.
|
LibDemAlways
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 06:36 PM
Response to Original message |
8. The repukes would never nominate a |
|
black person, period. They'd lose their racist base.
The Dems won't nominate Hillary, either. After eight years of the Bush Crime Family we need a candidate who can unify the party and win with a comfortable enough margin that they can't steal it.
|
petgoat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
11. Lose their racist base? I disagree. |
|
Voting for Condi would validate their prejudices.
"See, I'm not a racist. If they were all like her--educated, rich, celibate, and Republican, this country wouldn't have any nigra problem at all."
|
LibDemAlways
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-02-06 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #11 |
18. Yes, some would vote for Condi on |
|
the theory that she's one of the few "good" ones, but many more would stay home. It's all a moot point, since I think she knows she'd never win and would be knocked out in the early primaries anyway.
|
Bucky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-02-06 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
|
You're close to right. Republicans don't say "nigra" any more. Not the ones who count anyway. They'd say something smoother, like "opportunity problems." The current generation of Republican leaders have all embraced racial equality. They're just concerned with keeping the middle class down.
|
Barak And Roll
(87 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
14. She also claims to be |
|
"moderatly pro-choice to libertarian" on the issue of abortion. Half of the party would jump ship before voting for a black woman who doesn't believe in an activly anti-abortion government.
BLACK WOMAN PRO-CHOICE Do they need anymore reasons to never vote for her?
|
Crunchy Frog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 06:47 PM
Response to Original message |
9. I think a Hillary nomination is very possible (though likely disastrous) |
|
but I think a Rice nomination is absolutely out of the question. The Repug party would never go for her, and she is smart enough to know it. She's a team player, and I think sees a strong role for herself in continuing to be a powerful insider in a Repug administration. I think people who talk about her as a likely nominee are either out of their minds, or pushing it for propoganda purposes (a subtle way of trying to promote Hillary?).
|
Coastie for Truth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 07:00 PM
Response to Original message |
12. In polling and focus groups in CA(Condi was Stanford's Provost) |
|
she lost to DiFi and Barbara Boxer. People in her home town don't like her (and that's conservative - by Metro SF standards - Menlo Park CA).
|
depakid
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 07:09 PM
Response to Original message |
13. About the same as being struck by lightening n/t |
Herstal
(61 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 07:44 PM
Response to Original message |
16. I think it would be great! |
|
Having the Major Parties both run females for the highest office in the land would rock! Even better, you could be sure that a bunch of the "Republican Establishment" types would be so pissed to have a woman (Rice) running that they would start a 3rd party with a candidate who would siphon of votes from the Republicans.
|
onehandle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 08:09 PM
Response to Original message |
17. None. The inheritors of the Klan will not nominate Rice. nt |
fujiyama
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-02-06 03:57 AM
Response to Original message |
20. I find it very unlikely... |
|
I don't see either being that well liked by their respective parties...The GOP gives a lot of lip service to equal rights but I don't see them giving the top slot to a female of color.
Granted, the only thing the right ultimately cares about is someone that does their bidding. Remember the color of money is green...and she ultimately will do their bidding of the neo cons. She is one of the architects for this administration's failed policy on Iraq and everything else.
The situation with Hillary is difficult to say. I think (and hope) she will fall out of favor with primary voters when they see that actual viable alternatives are available.
|
Neil Lisst
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-02-06 03:59 AM
Response to Original message |
21. Condi Rice has zero chance of getting the Pub nomination. |
|
Hillary has some shot at the Dem nod, but Condi? Right. Not a snowball's chance in hell of winning the nomination. She has NO constitency in the Republican party.
|
Bucky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-02-06 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #21 |
26. I think quite a few hacks are trying to groom her for VP. |
|
Yes, it's ridiculous. But then, so was Dubya in 1998.
|
Tarc
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-03-06 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #26 |
|
No, Bush was at least a governor, a post which has produced quite a few presidents over the years. Add that to the riding of daddy's coattails, and he was an unfortunately viable candidate. Condi on the other hand is an unelected policy wonk, with absolutely no credentials whatsoever that she has the capacity to manage a Starbucks, much less the United States.
And there's also the harsh but true reality; she is black. As much as they hate to admit it, the GOP base still conists of quite a few good ol' boys who are simply unable/unwilling to change their ways.
|
Silverhair
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-02-06 07:07 AM
Response to Original message |
22. Chances: Extremely Slim, but don't underestimate Rice. |
|
For some reason, people here like to think of any Republican as having an intelligence level below freezing. The fact is that many of them are highly intelligent but start their reasoning from a different set of postulates. Rice would be a very tough candidate. However, I don't think she has caught presidental fever.
|
SONUVABUSH
(188 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-02-06 04:07 PM
Response to Original message |
JohnLocke
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-02-06 06:25 PM
Response to Original message |
24. 10^-10 - not happening (nt) |
0007
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-02-06 07:50 PM
Response to Original message |
windbreeze
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-03-06 03:05 AM
Response to Original message |
29. What I worry about more is |
|
Our convention is first...they convince us they are going to run Rice...we lock into Hillary...then... Their convention comes....they nominate JEB instead...I have nightmares about this happening... I don't want to see this AT ALL!! wb...
|
patcox2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-03-06 09:44 AM
Response to Original message |
|
No way on earth.
Hillary will not get the democratic nomination because she is not a democrat, she is a pro-war, pro-business DLC windsock.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 09:00 AM
Response to Original message |