Hillary makes it official

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,493
3,159
136
On the + side:
First woman president.
First former "first lady" president.
The "first gentleman" will also be a past president.
Will they call Bill the "first gentleman"?
If we are to have our first woman president, Hillary is quite worthy.
Momentum. Plenty of momentum ahead.

On the - side:
Ted Cruz.
Rand Paul.
Chris Christie.
Scott Walker.
Marco Rubio.
(This alone should be enough negatives, but wait, theres even more)
Why? Are the republicans freaking out so?
Will republicans play the religion card? i.e. God intended only man to lead, not woman.
Will republicans go too far? Picking on a woman?
Who will have the worst hair day? Hillary or Rand Paul?
Will women turn against the republican party? Especially after the woman attacks?
Does one single republican have the balls to take her on? Other than whining like a child?
Damned if they do, damned if they don't. The women always win the male vs female war.
Will kicking around old skeletons in the closet really gain republicans any brownie points?
Add all the republican candidates together, can they come close equaling one Hillary?
Ralph Nader deciding to run.
That Hillary stare. A bit of a crazed eyes look. Hillary has to stop doing that.
Hillary's smiling while talking tendency. Either talk, or smile, but never both together.

There is one hope for republicans, but they'd never do it.
Talk Barbara Bush into running.
Barbara Bush could just possibly beat Hillary.
 

IGBT

Lifer
Jul 16, 2001
17,956
137
106
so..it's time to get back to the Rose Law Firm and the pencil whipped billing records and who / why did Vince Foster get offed.. gawd this is going to be glorious.
 

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
24,195
856
126
On the + side:
First woman president.
First former "first lady" president.
The "first gentleman" will also be a past president.
Will they call Bill the "first gentleman"?
If we are to have our first woman president, Hillary is quite worthy.
Momentum. Plenty of momentum ahead.

Those are all absolutely HORRIBLE reasons to vote for anyone.

"I voted for Hillary because she'll be the first woman President!"
"I voted for Hillary because of the novelty that a former first lady will now be President!"
"I voted for Hillary because I wanted to see the former President become First Gentlemen!"
"I voted for Hillary because all of those novelty things make her worthy!"

What does any of that have to do with her ability to best lead our country? She needs to compete on her own merits and not the novelty of being the first woman, former First Lady, married to a former President, etc. Otherwise, this is a novelty election like The Governator or Jessie Ventura.

I'd be the first me President. Vote for me!
 
Last edited:

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,818
49,514
136
Do you want a president that accepts the science on climate change? Do you want a president that accepts macroeconomics 101? Do you oppose massive tax cuts for the rich?

If you do, looks like you're voting for Hillary, because I see no plausible Republican nominee that does any of those three things.
 

FerrelGeek

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2009
4,670
271
126
Yes, we need to further devolve the office of president to make it more of a reality show so that the young and stupid can relate. This is a vote for president of the US, not American Idol.

Too old. The Democrats need someone who is young, experience is not needed, but someone who can provide excitement for the young people and the minorities, most of them stay home during the election. To get out the vote, so to speak.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Libya.

http://theweek.com/articles/444243/how-hillary-clintons-smart-power-turned-libya-into-dumpster-fire

How Hillary Clinton's 'smart power' turned Libya into a dumpster fire
Michael Brendan Dougherty

Nearly three years ago, then–Secretary of State Hillary Clinton waved a peace sign to cameras in Tripoli as she celebrated the U.S.-aided overthrow of the kleptocratic government of Moammar Gadhafi. Clinton claimed victory for her philosophy of "smart power," the self-regarding name for bombing people on behalf of rebel groups in a war that would be cheap and easily forgotten.

That wasn't long ago.

Today, Libya has two nominal governments that pretend to preside over an anarchic, stateless region that is being pillaged and harassed by terror gangs. One parliament, dominated by non-Islamists, meets in Tobruk, an eastern city 1,000 miles away from Tripoli. An Islamist-dominated parliament, previously elected, does meet in Tripoli, but is hardly in control there; Operation Dawn, an Islamist rebel group, seized control of Tripoli's airport this week, setting the place ablaze. And Operation Dawn isn't even the biggest "winner" on the ground; that honor would probably go to Ansar al-Shariah, another Islamic extremist group. Meanwhile, the country is also reportedly being bombarded by Egyptian and Emirati airstrikes, according to The New York Times, as the conflict goes regional.

Depending on how you count them up, Libya has had five or six "governments" since 2011, all of them unable to impose any semblance of order on a country that probably never should have existed in the first place. The moments of relative calm in Libya over the past three years have only come about when nominal officials were busying themselves trying to tap the nation's oil money, and when the sectarian and tribal factions were roughly in balance.

Libya has no pleasant history. King Idris, who led Cyrenaican nationalists in World War II, cried when the great powers of the world added rule of Tripolitania to his list of duties. In 1969, "Colonel" Moammar Gadhafi took power in a coup, and the institutions of the officially socialist state were largely reduced to a program of keeping the Gadhafi family rich. Many sources on the internet will claim that Libya had solid democratic institutions, like government-run education. Despite a literacy rate that climbed to the highest in the region, experts say the education system stagnated in later years of his rule, and that Libyan university graduates make up a majority of the unemployed. Moreover, money generated by the energy economy flowed mostly to the incompetent and connected. And there was hardly any domestic economy, just rentiers, crooks, and poor-dependents, with loyalties dispersed through a tribal system.

The U.S.-abetted chaos in Libya had the immediate effect of encouraging a cleansing campaign against foreign workers in Libya. And, as Daniel Larison has repeatedly pointed out, it has nearly destroyed one of its neighboring states, Mali, which has experienced a spillover of militants since the NATO intervention. In Mali, as an avoidable civil conflict rages, U.N. peacekeepers are still being killed, and children are being held in prison with adults.

The decision to launch airstrikes on Libya was made in about 96 hours, by self-described "humanitarians" who took up the emerging international norm of "responsibility to protect" as their reason for war. To the applause of Bernard-Henri Levy and other munitions-grade faux intellectuals, they argued that Western governments had a duty to use military resources to help civilians who were being abused by their governments. Not in North Korea where the masses starve, or Zimbabwe where hyperinflation was rampant and the unemployment rate was nearly in triple digits, but wherever there seems to be a winnable civil conflict, with plausible-looking good guys who can be taught to say "democracy" and "human rights."

In the most obvious form of moral hazard, this pernicious "R2P" norm lowers the price of civil war in the developing world, encouraging rebels to make provocative attacks, then lobby for Western air support when the local bad guy punishes them for it. Uncle Sam or NATO deploys resources in a civil war these rebel groups could never win with their own blood and treasure. They often fail to win even when they do get help. The expectation of Western air power has exacerbated and intensified conflicts in Serbia, the Sudan, Libya, and Syria. As an international norm, R2P adds nothing but a noble-sounding gloss on getting more people killed than usual.

"Smart power" never existed. The phrase was nothing more than a two-news-cycles slogan of self-flattery for sophomoric Washingtonians trying to explain how much more human-rights-protecting and rational their bombs were than George W. Bush's. A decent society would send these Responsibility to Protect advocates to march the streets of Tripoli with "smart power" written on their backs like a "Kick me" sign.

But Americans don't care about how many gas fires we set so long as other people are inhaling the fumes. They will likely elect Madam Smart Power our next president. Every tin-pot nation that exists on the edge between order and chaos should live in fear of the legates she sends waving peace signs at cameras.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Kind of.

We give out wife beaters with our logo on them.
+1

Those are all absolutely HORRIBLE reasons to vote for anyone.

"I voted for Hillary because she'll be the first woman President!"
"I voted for Hillary because of the novelty that a former first lady will now be President!"
"I voted for Hillary because I wanted to see the former President become First Gentlemen!"
"I voted for Hillary because all of those novelty things make her worthy!"

What does any of that have to do with her ability to best lead our country? She needs to compete on her own merits and not the novelty of being the first woman, former First Lady, married to a former President, etc. Otherwise, this is a novelty election like The Governator or Jessie Ventura.

I'd be the first me President. Vote for me!
I'd vote for you before I'd vote for Hillary.

While I agree with the article, I'm not sure it will have much traction since the Pubbies did the same thing with Iraq at much greater cost and for 1/3 of that nation, not much better results.

I can see the slogans now: Vote for me, because Hillary sucks just as much.
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
46,276
9,359
146
Remember, we are only allowed shades of the status quo.

Sadly true. In a perfect world, I'd vote for and then attend the inauguration of President Elect Elizabeth Warren.

In the real world, I'll hold my nose and vote for Hilary, because the sole realistic alternative is Bush or some other Republican with 4 or 8 years to send Supreme Court nominations to Republican majorities in the House and Senate.

The Citizens United ruling is doing major damage to the shards of what's left of our supposedly egalitarian democracy. Antonin Scalia is a brilliant but entirely reprehensible man.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
+1


I'd vote for you before I'd vote for Hillary.


While I agree with the article, I'm not sure it will have much traction since the Pubbies did the same thing with Iraq at much greater cost and for 1/3 of that nation, not much better results.

I can see the slogans now: Vote for me, because Hillary sucks just as much.
If the Republicans nominate a hawk...I'm voting Libertarian. I don't give a shit if that means my vote doesn't effectively count.
 

rudeguy

Lifer
Dec 27, 2001
47,371
14
61
If the Republicans nominate a hawk...I'm voting Libertarian. I don't give a shit if that means my vote doesn't effectively count.

I still think its way, way, way too early to be decided or even guessing who to vote for.

I'm even giving Hillary a fair chance at my vote.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
If the Republicans nominate a hawk...I'm voting Libertarian. I don't give a shit if that means my vote doesn't effectively count.
Why not just vote Libertarian anyway? The chance of the Pubbies nominating someone who is actually worth voting for (as opposed to voting against the Hildabeast) is vanishingly small.

If the Pubbies did manage to give Gary Johnson or Condaleeza Rice a good shot, then I'm on board. Otherwise, screw 'em both and let G-d sort 'em out.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,818
49,514
136
If the Republicans nominate a hawk...I'm voting Libertarian. I don't give a shit if that means my vote doesn't effectively count.

Republicans will nominate a hawk, guaranteed. The closest one they have to a non-hawk is Rand Paul, and he wants a massive increase in military spending and is busily de-doving himself as we speak.

The lines for this election are already drawn. What I'm excited to see is where all the Republicans who, when Obama was president, talked about how much better Hillary would have been do a 180 and call her the worst thing ever.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Republicans will nominate a hawk, guaranteed. The closest one they have to a non-hawk is Rand Paul, and he wants a massive increase in military spending and is busily de-doving himself as we speak.

The lines for this election are already drawn. What I'm excited to see is where all the Republicans who, when Obama was president, talked about how much better Hillary would have been do a 180 and call her the worst thing ever.
Yep...kind of like what liberals did with McCain.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |