Hillary for President?

Question

Who do you think the next president will be?

I would like to thank "kate" and "sterz" for pointing out the fact that I posted my question in the wrong section. (It's true, and while the rest of us realize an obvious mistake when we see one, well...) I would also like to point out the fact that people like these are usually the ones who get picked last~why? Because they have zero capacity authority yet insist on being boring and bossy.

Answer 1

Hillary will make a good president. I met her and I think she is wonderful. When you address her, she focuses in on you and she treats you as if you are the only person in the universe and she will not veer away from you until you are done saying what it is that you have to say to her. She is very charismatic and exhibits a high intelligence. She knows what she is talking about. She rarely refers to notes when she is speaking. She was great when she made her report on the health care issue back in the day when her husband was president. I hope she is successful in her quest for the Presidency.

Answer 2

Most people have a few skeletons in their closet ... Hillary has a couple grave yards. There is no way she'll survive the democratic primaries in 2008 to even get a chance for the nomination of the DNC. If they do that, they will lose to whoever the RNC puts up (probably Giuliani or McCain).

Obama is still basking in the limelight of a democrat-friendly media that wants him to be the new shining star of the democratic party. We still don't know much about him other than the media likes him and he is a good speaker. I have a feeling that the more we get to know him, the more he will show his liberal tendencies (people in Illinois know what I mean) and pull himself left of where most American voters are in their political beliefs.

The few things I know for sure in this deal are:
1) This presidential race is starting far too early. The candidates can't begin to officially (legally) campaign until next year, but they are already using their positions on issues like the Global War on Terror (GWOT) to campaign in the media. You'll notice there hasn't been a whole lot of presidential paper filing on the Republican side ... because they know that it's too early and candidates are going to talk themselves into a political corner if they start now. The more time politicians have to talk, the worse they look. Look at AlGore and John Kerry. If they would have just shut their mouths instead of jabbering at every possible opportunity, they may have won an election. The more they talk, the more they say things that contradict other things they have said. AlGore was one of the best self-contradicting politicians I've ever seen.

2) This overturning of party control in Congress has falsely emboldened the Democrats to think they have the unbridled support of the American voting public. That upset was more about a bloated, do-nothing Republican majority than it was about any new ideas they brought to the table. How many real plans have we heard to address the situation in Iraq? None. Just ideas and statements about how bad it is, but no defined plan for another option. Plus, and this is important, politicians need to remember right now that the war was highly supported by the American public (86% approval in 2003) when it started. People are upset about how the war has gone and how it seems to be headed, but they don't like being told they are stupid. To come out at this point in the game and say that we should never have gone in (when they had the chance to vote against it and didn't because it was popular at the time) is to insult the intelligence of the voting public, and that could come back to bite them in the rear later. Right now, the folks who have announced their candidacies (mostly Democrats) seem to be playing to the court of public opinion in their political grandstanding and public statements. They are hedging their political futures on the fact that the war is unpopular right now. We have mostly forgotten (or some may have never known) that in the midst of Lincoln's presidency (and Civil War), he was highly unpopular and blamed for the ongoing debacle that the Civil War had become. Men were dieing in the thousands on a daily basis. Battles saw the wholesale annihilation of massive numbers on both sides. The economy was tubing, and the nation looked like it was at the footsteps of an early demise. However, he stayed the course against all popular opinion and advice, and acted in what he thought was the best course of action for the nation, and he's remembered as one of our greatest presidents ... even though most thought he was a failure at the time.

I don't compare Bush to Lincoln in terms of leadership abilities, communcations abilities, economic policy, decision making, or anything else (other than political affiliation). I'm just presenting the idea that maybe we are too pationate about this right now to see 20 years down the road. There may be some part of what's going on right now that we can't see, but will understand at some later time that will put it all in context for us. I just hope that we're not selling ourselves (and our president) short because we want what gives us the most instant gratification instead of doing what is right in the long run. Regardless of what got us into Iraq, it is imperitive that we finish the job there now, there is much more at stake than an American election, for us, the Iraqis, our allies, and the entire Middle East. I think that the politicians who are bartering for political favor and electionability right now are pandering to the anti-war movement and leftist tendencies of some loud voices, possibly at the expense of our future. I hope that someone with more vision than what I'm seeing from Obama, Clinton, Bidon, and the others comes forward to really lead the nation, not just tell us what we want to hear.

The difference between good leaders and great leaders is the ability to look 2, 5, or 10 years down the road to see where you want to take your organization (or in this case ... nation) and keep that vision in mind as you make the day-to-day decisions required. This long range idea will make sure that the decisions you make every day are made within the context of progress towards a goal, not just a short-term solution to a problem that will leave another problem for your successor. Right now, I don't see anyone like that coming forward from either party, and I'm concerned about who we're going to be stuck with to choose from next year.

Answer 3

This is the area for "Books & Authors" - I'd suggest checking with the group over in "Government & Politics."

Answer 4

Not Hillary "Boxer Face" Clinton, unless she comes out of the closet and admits she's a dyke! Then all the freaks will vote and she will probably win. HA!! NOT!!!

Answer 5

I hope it's Hillary Clinton

Answer 6

i think it would be interesting for her to run
and a really good leap forward for women..
as president i dont kno.. lol
but after seeing some canidates..
i'm leaning towards her
i really dont like that Obama guy..
hes annoying..

just an opinion... tho

Answer 7

Well, it won't be HELL-ary!!!! She may cause somewhat of a stir but she'll never win. I can't say that I've heard a name that gives me cause to be excited. A little early in the game yet?

Answer 8

Not Hillary. Too many people hate her.

Answer 9

Is there a book question somewhere in there?

Answer 10

OBAMA NEEDS TO WIN