Offline
I see no one tried to answer why Rubio is faring not so well this year within the R-tribe vs last year. Any thoughts ?
Offline
tennyson wrote:
I see no one tried to answer why Rubio is faring not so well this year within the R-tribe vs last year. Any thoughts ?
I wonder that as well. I also wonder why anyone would think Hillary is good enough now, when she couldn't even get the nomination over an unknown Barack Obama in 2008? Certainly both parties must have better to offer? Hell, I'd argue that Clinton was a much more viable candidate in 2008 than she is now. Even besides her polarizing history, she's too old, in my opinion. A lot of people in 2008 wouldn't vote for John McCain simply because they thought he was too old (even before he named Palin as his running mate), and Clinton will be about the same age in 2016 as McCain was in 2008.
Last edited by The Man (4/14/2015 8:23 pm)
Offline
The Man wrote:
tennyson wrote:
I see no one tried to answer why Rubio is faring not so well this year within the R-tribe vs last year. Any thoughts ?
I wonder that as well. I also wonder why anyone would think Hillary is good enough now, when she couldn't even get the nomination over an unknown Barack Obama in 2008? Certainly both parties must have better to offer? Hell, I'd argue that Clinton was a much more viable candidate in 2008 than she is now. Even besides her polarizing history, she's too old, in my opinion. A lot of eople in 2008 wouldn't vote for John McCain simply because they thought he was too old (even before he named Palin as his running mate), and Clinton will be about the same age in 2016 as McCain was in 2008.
Obama was far and way the better orator and with his vision (that he could not deliver) many bought into that vision. Remember that the actual vote tally for the nomination was very close.
Could the D-party find a better qualified candidate or one that would bring in more votes (which is really the only thing that matters to the party) than Hillary ? That is a good question. Hopefully some will decide to throw their hats into the ring so we can a better notion. In terms of current qualifications, however, Clinton is certainly the one with the most background relating to the Presidential position.
Offline
tennyson wrote:
Obama was far and way the better orator...
Are you saying that Obama was better at oral than Hillary? I think Bill might agree. (big-grin)
Offline
The Man wrote:
tennyson wrote:
Obama was far and way the better orator...
Are you saying that Obama was better at oral than Hillary? I think Bill might agree. (big-grin)
There's the rub[io].
Couldn't resist.
Offline
Tarnation wrote:
The Man wrote:
tennyson wrote:
Obama was far and way the better orator...
Are you saying that Obama was better at oral than Hillary? I think Bill might agree. (big-grin)
There's the rub[io].
Couldn't resist.
Ok, you get points for effort on that one. You had to add the 'io' on the end though, and pronounce it differently. You can do better!
Offline
tennyson wrote:
I see no one tried to answer why Rubio is faring not so well this year within the R-tribe vs last year. Any thoughts ?
Didn't Rubio make some remark showing compasssion for current immigrants that drove "the base" batty?
Offline
Didn't Rubio make some remark showing compasssion for current immigrants that drove "the base" batty?
Not sure, but I thought that was Jeb Bush. Anyhow, it's hard to keep track of any of these people as their positions and comments seem to change every few weeks or months.
I think we all have to be reminded the goal is to get elected, not necessarily to actually govern. Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing.
Offline
Well, the other side of the coin is,,, you can't do anything if you don't win.
Offline
Well, the other side of the coin is,,, you can't do anything if you don't win. - Goose
True, so you do or say anything that you think will help you cross the goal line.