2006-10-09 18:30:01 · 15 answers · asked by livinhapi 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Sure, why not
2006-10-09 18:33:08 · answer #1 · answered by lucy02 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
It can happen. The law is written in a way that the courts would have to decide if the former President can be vice and the courts are very liberal, so it would be approved.
President Bill Clinton reduced our military spending in half, while dropping more bombs than every President since WW2 combined. President Clinton sold us out to the Chinese (Nuke technology, rocket technology, submarine technology, etc.), and disgraced the office of President with his scandals. The last thing America needs is him back in the white house.
Realistically you can only vote for her, if you are looking to get him back in the white house, because she is an awful person, a horrible public speaker, and just all around unpleasant. Like him or hate him, President Clinton is one of the most dynamic and articulate public speakers in the world.
(And as far the those who would complain about the economy under Bush: The DOW is at a record high, and the unemployment rate is lower than it was during the Clinton administration. If Clinton had replenished the missiles\bombs he used, Bush would not have the same deficit he has had. Also as a reminder the country had entered a recession just prior to Bush taking office).
2006-10-09 18:44:08 · answer #2 · answered by Dano 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Why? The unemployment rating is lower now (4.5%) than at anytime during Clinton (5.8%). The stock market is going through the roof. The tax decreases are giving Americans more money to spend (which they are). Gas prices are fairly low (which is right in line with where they should be in accordance to historical records).
The only reason that people think this country sucks economically-speaking is because the Establishment Left-Wing Media keeps pounding it in everyone's face.
Vote Democrat and the tax rollbacks go right back to where they were with Clinton. Economy tanks again.
2006-10-09 20:08:00 · answer #3 · answered by hawk79 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hillary was pushing for lower wages for nurses, just for starts and she wasn't even a government official. For some reason, she scares the hell out of me! Bill gave away our missile technology to China under the "No Dual Use Treaty", in which "China" promises to only use this technology to improve their ability to put satellites in space and promises "never" to use it to improve their "long range nuclear missile technology". Get it...Long range, as in USA. No, we don't need these people in office with the way the world's headed right now. We need a third party that will fight for the people of this country and not for corporations and governments of other countries. Actually, we need Jesus to return soon, cause this is one messed up planet.
2006-10-09 18:43:56 · answer #4 · answered by White Knight 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
president clinton was one of the greatest presidents every. america had its greatest economic prosperity under clinton. the stock market was booming, he obtained three straight surpluses, lowered interest rates, inflation was very low, lowered the national debt, real median average income increased, greatly decreased the poverty rate, the dollar currency was increased, he created millions and millions of private sector jobs and organized peace in the middle east. he was a great leader and hillary would implement the exact same policy that worked under bill.
2006-10-09 18:36:06 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
a individual does not run for vice-president. he or she is chosen by making use of the presidential candidate. invoice Clinton isn't eligible for a third presidential election, in spite of the fact that it there it does not be unconstitutional for him to function vice-president. in spite of the fact that, it would be very not likely, no remember who must be the presidential candidate.
2016-10-19 03:10:03 · answer #6 · answered by dorseyiii 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For her to be electable, she would need a 3rd party candidate to siphon votes aways from the republicans. Ross Perot is washed up, who will she get? It must be a southerner
2006-10-09 18:50:30 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, not really. To me that would be like having Hitler for President and Kim Jong Ill for veep. Please, we've had enough of Bill and Hill would be a BIG mistake!
2006-10-09 18:33:20 · answer #8 · answered by Cinner 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
That would be a vast improvement over Bush/Cheney.
2006-10-09 18:34:52 · answer #9 · answered by brian2412 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
yes I Would
2006-10-09 18:34:51 · answer #10 · answered by corning150 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
NO,NO,NO!!!!! Did we not learn from 8 years of Bill?????? Has the American populace become masochists????????
2006-10-09 18:35:14 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋