Bill has a habbit of ( Ill be nice ) " wandering off " do you think she'll be able to keep the leash tight just long enough ( and assuming she wins the nonmination ) for her to get to the general election
2007-12-01 11:22:39 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
I'm with ya Philip
2007-12-01 13:35:01 · update #1
without bill because everytime i see her i remember that he got a blowj0b from an intern called monica lewinksy and it makes me feel like not voting for her... ewwwwwwwwwwwww
2007-12-01 11:26:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think she is better with Bill, for professional reasons. I mean, he's the only reason why people know her in the first place. No matter how crappy the husband might be, connections are still connections. And hey, the guy knows what it's like to be president. In all fairness, he wasn't that bad of a president. He can actually give her some pointers.
So what if he wanders off a bit? As long as he has the sense to stay married to her and not divorce her, everything will be all right...well, as all right as you can actually be when there's politics involved, really.
2007-12-01 19:32:44 · answer #2 · answered by fliptastic 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It depends. Unfortunately the former president still is a huge draw with mainstream democrats & has a lot of pull within the national party. So for her going after the nomination & appealing to straight democrats who want a return of what they think of as good times, she probably needs Bill.
However for the general election to somehow appeal to those conservatives who are disenfranchised enough to consider her, have Bill too visible could be considered her albatross because of all of the 'interesting' things that happened during his time in office & prior. & then there is the thought that having him too visible in any part of the campaign leads to the idea of who would really be running the gov't if she won - him? her? or a co-presidency?
2007-12-01 20:09:02 · answer #3 · answered by anna s 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I want Edwards up there, not the Clintons. I like that whipper snapper.
Her "universal health care" is neither universal nor health care. it would cost the working poor a fortune. I could care less about Bill being there. Despite being a cad, he was not such a bad guy, and was a good president. She does better with because fo the authoritative effect, but her message is unclear and convoluted.
2007-12-02 05:43:33 · answer #4 · answered by Etain 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bill still has a potential,can influence the American voters,Hilary surely going to do better with the help of Bill/////////////////
2007-12-01 20:26:54 · answer #5 · answered by GargVK 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Would America be better off without BOTH?
2007-12-01 20:31:03 · answer #6 · answered by Philip H 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
She's not going to change Bill, but without him, I don't think she has what it takes to be president.
2007-12-01 19:26:18 · answer #7 · answered by beez 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Heh, I would be happy to see her voted in just to get Bill back in the white house again.
2007-12-01 19:31:24 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Her only HOPE is WITH BILL! The people want BILL BACK!
I don't!
2007-12-01 20:46:31 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
without bill no one would have a clue who the hell she was and she would be polling less than kuccinich.
2007-12-01 23:25:16 · answer #10 · answered by Avatar_defender_of_the_light 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋