English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-02-08 04:05:38 · 34 answers · asked by basport_2000 5 in Politics & Government Politics

34 answers

NO. Remove the name Clinton just as the DNC is going to do because they really can't afford to lose.

2007-02-08 04:16:39 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

I detest Obama. He is the biggest liar and hypocrite in America with his moderate speeches and ultra liberal voting record. He can't win anywhere in the South whereas a Clinton, Edwards ticket could put the Democrats back in the White House. I wonder though if a Clinton/Bayh or Clinton/Richardson would be more effective by bringing middle of the road voters back because it looks as though the Republicans will run either moderate Giuliani or moderate McCain.

2007-02-08 05:07:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

An Obama / Edwards ticket

2007-02-08 08:57:19 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Well, I prefer Edwards on the ticket....but not Clinton and Obama

I actually want the Democrats to win and having a woman or a black guy on the ticket is a sure fire way to throw in the towel

Im not racist...just realistic....the country is not ready for a woman in office or a minority

Lets stick to the safe white guy and get a win....its going to be hard enough going up against Giuliani

2007-02-08 04:10:44 · answer #4 · answered by Huh? 3 · 2 2

A ticket without Clinton... I have no problem with a female president. But I have a huge problem with Hilary Clinton. Find someone else. If the democrats put her on the ticket, they lose my vote.

2007-02-08 04:09:18 · answer #5 · answered by Uncle Tim 6 · 4 2

None of the above - I don't want Hillary AT ALL! She's a socialist that tries to claim she's a moderate. She will also say anything to get someone to vote for her.

Obama is too inexperienced. There shouldn't be a huge learning curve when someone is president. Edward is too liberal too.

Have you read all the New Yorkers on Yahoo that say she's a "do nothing Senator." If they don't like her, and they are familiar with her, why should we?

2007-02-08 04:10:25 · answer #6 · answered by Dizney 5 · 3 2

Obama Edwards is the most electable. i do not imagine Edwards can get the nomination yet when he were Veep it makes a especially good mix for the final election. Hilary's were given some significant negatives interior the final if she receives the nom...

2016-11-26 02:46:53 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Edwards Pres. Obama VP

2007-02-08 04:13:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

Neither. What I'd really like to see is Feingold/Obama. Russ Feingold is one of the few politicians with a clear vision and enough backbone to follow through. Unlike the rest of the spineless pack, a group of cliche-regurgitating clowns, Senator Feingold not only talks the talk; he walks the walk. It's about time Americans woke up and elected a president with integrity and balls.

2007-02-08 04:16:42 · answer #9 · answered by Hemingway 4 · 0 2

please do not disturb the liberal socialists today.
they are all in a meeting of the "Neville Chamberlain Society"
for presentation of the "Jane Fonda Award for Acts of Treason
or Anti-American Rhetoric".
the nominated indiviuals this year include:
John Mirtha
Jane Fonda
Barbara Steisand
Harry Reid
Hillary Clinton
Ted kennedy
Chuck Shumer
Jimmy Carter
Carl Levin
and a few others.

2007-02-08 05:34:38 · answer #10 · answered by Chef Bob 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers