well, barack has what, 6 years of experience in politics?
doesn’t he consider his pre-senate experience as “experience”?
i think the bottom line is that you enjoy detracting from hillary’s ability to stand on her own by saying she is a “former first lady”. it’s a cheap shot, one that is not too unlike our local jackass radio talkshow host (bill cunningham) who kept calling Obama, “barack hussain obama” just to drive home the point that he is muslim.
yes, hillary clinton is a former first lady. similarly, yes, obama’s name is muslim. but the context and tone is delivered in such a way to as to detract from the person being referred to. and this is what you’re trying to do in reference to hillary. so, don’t act innocent by saying “what, she is a first lady right?” that is not the point, and you know it.
i think the bottom line is that you enjoy detracting from hillary’s ability to stand on her own by saying she is a “former first lady”.
I don’t think I ever said Hillary can’t stand on her own. My objection is that she says she should be the one that answers the phone at 3:00 am because she has 35 years of experience. I’m just not sure that those years in a law firm count towards being better equipped to handle foreign policy decisions.
** it’s a cheap shot, one that is not too unlike our local jackass radio talkshow host (bill cunningham) who kept calling Obama, “barack hussain obama” just to drive home the point that he is muslim.**
Actually, it’s nothing like that at all. My shot has nothing to do with Hillary being a woman and Cunningham’s has everything to do with striking fear because someone has a name that he shares with a terrorist.
yes, hillary clinton is a former first lady. similarly, yes, obama’s name is muslim. but the context and tone is delivered in such a way to as to detract from the person being referred to. and this is what you’re trying to do in reference to hillary.
Not quite sure how you compare being a Muslim with a first lady but I’m not really comparing her to anyone. I’m saying her claim of 35 years experience is overstated for political effect.
I think you want her to continue since you are Republican and know if she continues with this line of argument, McCain is going to destroy her.
What makes you think that McCain is going to destroy her? Because that is what Republicans would want you to believe? I think McCain will have an easier time against Barack.
Hard because there is no white male candidate? What do you have against Obama’s race and Hillary’s gender? Why should these matter to you?
No problem with their race. Like a lot of folks, I think it will speek volumes about how far our country has come, when a woman or a so called minority get elected to POTUS. The only condition is that the black or female president must be the most qualified. My problems with Obama and Hillary are not with their race and gender, but their qualification for the job.
Of the original bunch of Democrats running for office, neither one of them had the most experience or were the best qualified. Biden is probably the smartest of the bunch, but we all know that smarts, experience and qualifications are not what people look for in a POTUS. It seems to me that folks like Dodd and Biden were glossed over for the sake of nominating the first black man and a Clinton.
Of the two candidates, I would rather have one who is not a serial liar, already hated by 45% of the electorate and did not follow along with Bush on the Iraq War. That eliminates Hillary from my list of candidates.
I don’t know a single Republican who will vote for Hillary. I know several Democrats who won’t vote for Hillary. I know more than a few Republicans who either will vote for Obama or at least give him a good hard look. Hillary will bring Republicans out of the woodwork to vote against her. Hillary will keep Democrats at home who might otherwise be excited to vote for Obama. Obama at least has a chance of either getting Republican votes or keeping Republicans at home who don’t care for McCain. If Hillary is the Democratic nominee, she needs Obama to bring out the vote. If Obama is the nominee, he would be a fool to put Hillary and her negatives on the ticket.
My problems with Obama and Hillary are not with their race and gender, but their qualification for the job.
Of the original bunch of Democrats running for office, neither one of them had the most experience or were the best qualified.
Since when is being qualified part of the criteria for being President?? Srsly, if that was important we wouldn’t have had a former actor and our current idiot holding the office. This is all a popularity contest and we all hope that whoever gets elected doesn’t fuck up the country any more than it already is. With each election I get more and more cynical but I know who I want elected because I think she will do the most smart things and the least stupid things. I have no illusions that either candidate will fix all of our problems.
Since when is being qualified part of the criteria for being President??
It’s not, but Hillary put it in issue with the 3:00 AM ad. She can’t win THAT comparison with McCain. To take him on, she’ll have to be the voice of change that Obama is right now. But is it really “change?” If Hillary wins, it will start the 21st straight year that either a Bush or a Clinton has been in the White House. Although their agendas are different, I think a lot of America would like to see “new blood.”
This is all a popularity contest and we all hope that whoever gets elected doesn’t fuck up the country any more than it already is
Which is exactly why Hillary will have a harder time. She’s exceptionally unpopular with Conservatives. While I think she has all the tools needed to be a good president, her polarizing nature will bring droves of people out to vote against her. I can’t say the same about Obama. He doesn’t have the “Bill Clinton” stink on him that fires up the Conservatives.
“She’s exceptionally unpopular with Conservatives.”
Can’t help but suspect that at least part of that is her being a woman. Conservatives do also tend to be socially conservative, and that includes gender issues.
Can’t help but suspect that at least part of that is her being a woman. Conservatives do also tend to be socially conservative, and that includes gender issues.
Probably, but I’ll bet that the biggest issue by far is her last name.
Can’t help but suspect that at least part of that is her being a woman.
Probably true, but does it matter? If enough people turn out to vote against her who cares what the reasons are? Then again, you may have a good number of Conservatives vote against Obama because of his race, too. I still think “woman + Clinton” is more undesirable for the right than “African American with Middle Eastern middle name.”
It’s not, but Hillary put it in issue with the 3:00 AM ad. She can’t win THAT comparison with McCain. To take him on, she’ll have to be the voice of change that Obama is right now. But is it really “change?” If Hillary wins, it will start the 21st straight year that either a Bush or a Clinton has been in the White House. Although their agendas are different, I think a lot of America would like to see “new blood.”
So which is it? Does she have no experience because being married to Bill Clinton doesn’t count, or is she just more of the same because she’s a Clinton. Kind of a catch 22.
Can’t help but suspect that at least part of that is her being a woman.
Wrong. Elizabeth Dole ran a respectable race for the Republican nominee years ago. Conservatives absolutely love Condi Rice and think the world of Margaret Thatcher. Conservatives put the first woman on the Supreme Court. Conservatives were pushing for Colin Powell to run for president before Liberals had a viable minority candidate. It is a shame he did not run. Until this year, both conservatives and liberals, Democrats and Republicans, all had white men leading the charge. It is good to see it change. I think you will soon see similar changes in future Republican tickets as well.
So which is it? Does she have no experience because being married to Bill Clinton doesn’t count, or is she just more of the same because she’s a Clinton. Kind of a catch 22.
Not really. She could easily be portrayed as a “more of the same with less experience.” It’s not necessarily one or the other.
So which is it? Does she have no experience because being married to Bill Clinton doesn’t count, or is she just more of the same because she’s a Clinton. Kind of a catch 22.
Not really. I don’t buy the whole “no experience” thing. Personally, my opinion is that none of the three viable candidates has the necessary experience for a 3:00 AM call because none of them ever had to deal with it. Also, I kind of agree with Jon Stewart that something is happening in the world ALL the time, so what’s the big deal with the 3:00 AM call?
But, to address your question directly, I can see the Right saying that Bill will be a heavy hand in any foreign policy dealings, so it’s really “more of the same.”
I think this whole issue about Obama and Hillary not being “qualified” is a complete smoke screen by the right.
What qualifications does a person need to be POTUS? Technically the only qualification a person needs is to be a natural born US citizen, older than 35, and have resided in the US for at least 14 years. If our founding fathers had wanted to include more qualifications, they would have done so.
Besides the basic qualifications, the only viable experience to be POTUS, is to have been POTUS. Being a governor of a State does not prepare you for the inner workings of Washington any more than having been a US Senator or Congressman.
Finally, for all those that think Obama or Hillary don’t have experience, have you done any research into their political activities (bills, committees, etc etc), because if you had, you would know that they have a lot of experience in a lot of areas.
*** I think this whole issue about Obama and Hillary not being “qualified” is a complete smoke screen by the right.***
Except that Hilliary is the one claiming that Obama lacks qualification because he’s inexperienced, which begs the question… If experience is the key to qualification, how does either out-qualify McCain?