7 posts tagged “hillary clinton”

Is it likely that the U.S. will have a female president in the near future? In your lifetime? Why?

Yes, but I for one would hope it is not Hillary Clinton.  That, of course, is a well-known fact, so I'll focus on the questions at hand.

Some have suggested that the American people are fine with the idea of a female president until one actually seeks a nomination. That might be true. It's also true, however, that Hillary is the first female candidate with a real shot at the nod. I think that what we're seeing is unprecedented, and because this is such a unique time in American history, anything is truly possible. Some people will always carry their prejudices close to hearts, whether it's with regard to Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, or Mitt Romney, and that is a shame. But I don't think any of those three candidates are likely to be stopped from gaining their respective nominations or the office because of bias alone. I may be looking through rose colored glasses, but I certainly hope not. Only time will tell, but I would like to think we as a country have progressed beyond the point of this issue.

And if not, well, I'm sure America will be ready by the time I launch my own campaign. (Only 18 years away from eligibility!)

Perhaps the most effective point this article makes is it's last, that the first votes of the upcoming election are 9 months away. Anything can happen from now until then, McCain pulling ahead included. He's still my favorite Republican (probably due to the lack of other candidates, at least in my mind), but I can no longer see myself voting for him come '08. I used to say that McCain vs. Hillary would be a no-brainer, and that I'd take him due solely to his integrity over her any day, but now that match up seems like one long headache I don't want to have. Here's to Obama - fresh and headache-free.

It seems real now, even though we knew he'd be running since January. And now that it's real, I'm starting to let myself feel...hopeful. No other candidates make me feel hopeful, certainly not Hillary. I can see Obama as president, and unlike many, I believe his relative inexperience is asset. He has yet to be corrupted by DC, and his baggage is minimal. He is the anti-Hillary, and if he plays his cards right, I don't think he'll have a problem beating her for the nomination.

Now please, God, don't let my hopes be crushed again...

I used to really love John McCain, and I still do. But his campaign in this upcoming election is going to disappoint me, I know it is, because it already has.

I know he has to pander to certain interests to win the nomination. I know he is a conservative. I know many, if not most, of his positions directly oppose mine, not the least of which his pro-war stance.  But man, I miss the McCain of the Straight Talk Express, the McCain who stood up to Falwell and Robertson, and the McCain who put his principles before politics. But that McCain was unelectable, I suppose, so now he's decided that politics rather than principle should take highest priority.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe he is being honest and principled, and I simply don't agree with him. But I doubt it.

He is, indisputably, a man of great character and honor. That alone could win my vote should it come down to him against Hillary. But I just don't have the same enthusiasm for him that I once did. I would hate to see him turn into just another politician come '08. But I fear that he will.

Please, Senator, prove me wrong.

I rarely agree with Cal Thomas on, well, anything, but it turns out that Hillary is quite a unifying force - just not in the way that she would like. If the Democrats nominate her, they deserve to lose. She is not worth her baggage, and I hope we don't find out the hard way.

It's not like we need her to beat the GOP - there is going to be a huge field of candidates this time around, much better than in 2004, and I don't understand what she has that Obama or Biden or Edwards or Richardson don't have. She's very, very average, and at this point in history, we do not need another average politician in the White House. Besides, didn't the midterms supposedly cure the Dems of their addiction to losing? At this point, I don't think so.

Am I missing something?

Officially jumping into the upcoming 2008 circus is 2004 veteran John Edwards, as of yesterday, though most people knew around Nov. 3rd, '04 that he'd be back.

My immediate reaction is, how can Edwards win out over a field of candidates like Clinton, Obama, and Biden, when he couldn't even beat out John Kerry? Especially considering he'll probably be facing Kerry again.

This, I believe, is his answer, taken from Yahoo news, regarding his new campaign site:

"This campaign is about changing America," the Web site read, listing five priorities that fit neatly with Edwards' message of economic equality. Among them: "Providing universal health care for all Americans," "Rebuilding America's middle class and eliminating poverty," and "Creating tax fairness by rewarding work, not just wealth."

He's smarter this time around. He knows what mood the country's in, and he knows that connecting to that mood is half the race. He will surely position himself as the anti-Hillary, but I suspect she's quite capable of crushing him like a bug.

I like Edwards, I do, and I'd love to have Elizabeth as first lady, but something is just missing. I'm not sure what it is. Maybe it's the 2004 issue - I simply do not want 2008 to be about 2004. It's the same reason why I can't support Kerry again, and God knows I still believe he'd make a great president. The truth remains, America needs a fresh start, and that's what Barak Obama represents to me.

That's also why choosing Hillary would be a grave mistake by the Dems. Almost anybody is preferable to her, baggage-wise.

One thing is for sure: the new crops of candidates from both sides of the aisle are shaping up to be quite interesting, and there's a good chance that 2008 will actually be about issues that matter. Based on what I've seen, I think Edwards will further enhance that possibility, and if he proves himself capable, he may have a good shot at the White House. Only time will tell.

Whenever political analysts discuss Barak Obama's presidential prospects,they always rave about his idealism,fresh appeal,and his honesty,but then they brush him aside as too young and inexperienced to face Hillary Clinton.

But I counter that his lack of DC experience is exactly what we as a country need in our leadership.How is it a bad thing that he has yet to be corrupted by beltway garbage?And as for his age,I truly believe it is also a plus.History books don't paint JFK as too young to have carried out his duties.Some people are wiser at 40 than most at 80.Prospective presidents should not be judged solely by their age.And I'm sorry,but I think most people would risk a young president over a cold calculating one,which brings us to Hillary.

I seriously doubt that she's the devil some believe her to be,but I don't think she's the hero still others believe her to be.What I believe she is is a smart,message-obsessed political veteran who carries her own self-interest closest to heart.That doesn't make her a devil,it makes her a typical politician.And now is not the time for a typical politician in the White House.

We as a country are far from what we should be.We arose from 9/11 on a wave of grief-ridden arrogance that brought us to where we are now-stuck in a war we can't get out of.Now we have to get ourselves together and face up to it,but we can't do it with another stuffed suit in the Oval Office.In 2008,we should choose hope and elect Barak Obama president.