Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Elizabeth vs. Hillary
Elizabeth Edwards may not conduct herself the way the wives of most presidential candidates would conduct themselves, however, she does make some valid points. She stated that there is a “hatred” for Hillary Clinton among the Republicans and this “hatred” would force many Republicans to vote against Clinton in the elections. This may be true. With the war in Iraq, the President’s approval ratings, the slumping housing market and the issue on immigration, many may not want to vote for a Republican candidate. One of the only things that would motivate people to come to the polls to cast a Republican vote is to cast a vote, any vote, against Hillary Clinton. The vote may not be for the love of a Republican candidate, but for the “hatred” of Hillary Clinton. I think many people feel that the Clinton administration was a joke in many respects and they don’t want to see them back in the White House.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I think people on all sides will vote against Hillary, instead of "for" someone else. The approval ratings mean nothing for parties, Or neither will win this election (both houses held by the dems, their approval rating at 23%, less than the president's...). The republican front runners (Giuliani,McCain, and Romney+-) seem to be closer to the middle,so even though they still are republicans they are playing more towards the middle majority.
I agree that many people remember the Clinton administration as a joke. Just today I heard someone comment they would vote for Hillary on the basis that anyone who could put up with Bill could run a country. I hope that between now and November 2008 some of the Republican canidates can entice voters to come to the polls and leave their "hatred" behind.
>She stated that there is a “hatred” for Hillary Clinton among the Republicans and this “hatred” would force many Republicans to vote against Clinton in the elections.
But Republicans who hate Hillary Clinton would also not vote for any Democrat, so this really doesn't mean anything as far as the election is concerned. Don't forget that there are more registered Democrats than Republicans, plus many Independent/No Party voters, most of whom have no hatred for Hillary.
>I think many people feel that the Clinton administration was a joke in many respects and they don’t want to see them back in the White House.
Most evidence refutes this. While it is true that the majority of Americans didn't like Clinton on a personal level, his job approval ratings were in the 60% positive range at the end of his second term and public opinion on the job Clinton did has actually increased since he left office.
>I think people on all sides will vote against Hillary, instead of "for" someone else.
All opinion polls say otherwise. Democrats tend to like her quite a bit and Independents tend to prefer her to the Republicans.
>The approval ratings mean nothing for parties,
There is actually no validity to this statement. Scientifically-conducted polls are highly accurate, usually within 2-3% of actual election results. It is, of course, early, but compare the polls from the week before any election and they will be highly accurate.
>Or neither will win this election
Again, not true. The numbers in the presidential race are low because it is early and because there are 17 candidates. When it is November 2008 and there are 2 candidates, there will clearly be one winner.
>(both houses held by the dems, their approval rating at 23%, less than the president's...).
This actually doesn't mean much. The approval rating of Congress is pretty much always lower than the president's, regardless of the party of the president or the party of Congress. It has very little to do with issues or agendas, it has more to do with psychology and the fact that one person is easier to identify with than 535.
>The republican front runners (Giuliani,McCain, and Romney+-) seem to be closer to the middle,so even though they still are republicans they are playing more towards the middle majority.
Not according to any examination of the issues. Giuliani, while he is relatively moderate on social issues, is conservative on economic issues and extremely conservative on foreign policy issues. McCain and Romney are even further to the right. This is why none of them is even close to getting a majority amongst Republicans. There are many moderates in the Republican Party and they don't like any of the candidates, which is one of the big reasons why "None of the above" is currently winning in Republican polls.
I think it'll be a shock to everyone if Hillary doesn't win. Deep down people know that she's going to get it.
The real joke is this current Administration. Anyone who had to work for a living now and then remember how easy it was to get a job under Clinton. Oh, and remember that thing called a balanced budget? The Republicans constantly attack the Democrats for spending, when in fact, it is they who run the deficit sky high. Under Reagan, the deficit went up exponentially, GW aint fairing any better. Clinton actually had a surplus in the budget.
The real joke is that the "New Age" Republicans aren't interested in Democracy or whats good for our country, they are interested in only a few things, power, greed, and the destruction of our democracy, after all, do you need any more proof than the biggest joke of them all, the 2000 Presidential election. Instead of believing in what Fox News or other conservative television news stations say, just look at what our international friends are saying in the News about us..They think we are the joke with our "banana republic". Try researching your facts about our country, economics and politics instead of what everyone seems to be doing these days, treating politics like its a sporting event, them vs us, red vs blue, try seeing politics as something that effects millions of people, who are getting poorer by the minute, by the millions because of people who are currently "running" our country.
YES, finally someone comes out and says it why are we un-patriotic when speak the truth. Standing by doing nothing is far worse than to not agree with situations.
Personally I do not think people are un-patriotic if they have a problem with the administration. In that case most of the people in the U.S. would be called un-patriotic. But I think instead of going around with a bad attitude all the time, some people realize that, yeh I don't agree with what is going on, but what am I to do? The people of the U.S. elected Bush and now it's our problem we have to deal with him.
That is a problem of its own harris_zac . . .
>The people of the U.S. elected Bush and now it's our problem we have to deal with him.
Many people believe that the election was fixed and that we didn't elect him either times.
I really don't see how someone could fix an election and win, not once, but twice. That theory seems to be kind of far fetched. If it did have any kind of truth to it, as much controversy as there is over the war and all of the opposition that Bush has,why hasn't it came up on the news or any politician said anything about it. If there are so many people that believe it was rigged, why hasn't something been done about it? You can't be a president for almost eight years under false terms,I don't think our government is that corrupt. Maybe we should put this theory in the stack with the U.F.O. sightings.
To say it is impossible is absurd. Do you know how many impossible things has happened in the past century. Television, computers, etc... Those things would've have been harder to prove than fixing a vote.
Post a Comment