Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The saddest part for me as someone who wants to see a Democrat in the White House after the next election is that our choices are between a woman who is dishonest and has declining credibility among both Democrats and independents, a senator who comes across as an aging hippie and a VP who is gaffe prone. BTW, I like Sanders and Biden.

Can we not nominate someone who would actually stand a decent chance of winning against a Republican field that is clown show? How about someone like Mark Warner?

Hillary will win against any Republican in the field now. Period. That is why the Republicans are so afraid of her.

Hillary will lose against a Republican nominee unless they end up with someone who is off the wall - and that includes Trump. You don't realize the extent of antipathy that moderates and independents have against Hillary. i know at least half a dozen fervent Democrats who have said they will not vote for her under any circumstances and will just sit out the election.

She is vulnerable on so many fronts especially when it comes to her credibility and trustworthiness. All we need is for the Justice department to start an investigation based on the recommendations of the two inspector generals and she will likely be toast irrespective of the final outcome.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nominating HRC will make the odds of a Republican winning the presidency an almost foregone conclusion. I say this not with glee but in sadness because the country would be better off with a Democrat as president.

She is damaged beyond redemption.

Lol. She beats any republican clown in the field with her eyes closed.

Ludicrous!

Her unfavorables are sky high and the polls in three swing states that came out today show several Repubican candidates beating her.

Trump running as an independent won't help.

How so? Trump won't capture any Hillary votes. He'd only draw from the conservative base.

Anonymous wrote:The saddest part for me as someone who wants to see a Democrat in the White House after the next election is that our choices are between a woman who is dishonest and has declining credibility among both Democrats and independents, a senator who comes across as an aging hippie and a VP who is gaffe prone. BTW, I like Sanders and Biden.

Can we not nominate someone who would actually stand a decent chance of winning against a Republican field that is clown show? How about someone like Mark Warner?

Hillary will win against any Republican in the field now. Period. That is why the Republicans are so afraid of her.

Anonymous wrote:The saddest part for me as someone who wants to see a Democrat in the White House after the next election is that our choices are between a woman who is dishonest and has declining credibility among both Democrats and independents, a senator who comes across as an aging hippie and a VP who is gaffe prone. BTW, I like Sanders and Biden.

Can we not nominate someone who would actually stand a decent chance of winning against a Republican field that is clown show? How about someone like Mark Warner?

Mark Warner is a closeted gay man. No way would be ever run.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bernie Sanders combed his hair for MTP today.

The Wilder his hair, the more powerful he gets

Hair combed or not, he still comes across as loony tunes.

Loony tunes? He set Chuck Todd straight this morning. Strong and solid. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/26/1405830/-Bernie-Sanders-did-not-allow-Chuck-Todd-to-spin-his-false-narratives

Anonymous wrote:Is it because the names in the first post are worried they wouldn't be able to fund raise (besides warren) or is it because they are worried that the clinton machine will hold a grudge against them when they decide to run in the future (2020/2024etc)

None of the names mentioned excite me in the least bit, and none could carry a general election, mostly because they are too far to the left. I'm a moderate democrat

The saddest part for me as someone who wants to see a Democrat in the White House after the next election is that our choices are between a woman who is dishonest and has declining credibility among both Democrats and independents, a senator who comes across as an aging hippie and a VP who is gaffe prone. BTW, I like Sanders and Biden.

Can we not nominate someone who would actually stand a decent chance of winning against a Republican field that is clown show? How about someone like Mark Warner?

Is it because the names in the first post are worried they wouldn't be able to fund raise (besides warren) or is it because they are worried that the clinton machine will hold a grudge against them when they decide to run in the future (2020/2024etc)

Anonymous wrote:Bernie Sanders combed his hair for MTP today.

The Wilder his hair, the more powerful he gets

Hair combed or not, he still comes across as loony tunes.

Anonymous wrote:Nominating HRC will make the odds of a Republican winning the presidency an almost foregone conclusion. I say this not with glee but in sadness because the country would be better off with a Democrat as president.

She is damaged beyond redemption.

In some ways I wish she had gotten the nomination in 2008. She likely would have won- McCain sealed that by picking Palin as his VP- and it would have given Obama more time to build his experience.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nominating HRC will make the odds of a Republican winning the presidency an almost foregone conclusion. I say this not with glee but in sadness because the country would be better off with a Democrat as president.

She is damaged beyond redemption.

Lol. She beats any republican clown in the field with her eyes closed.

Ludicrous!

Her unfavorables are sky high and the polls in three swing states that came out today show several Repubican candidates beating her.

Trump running as an independent won't help.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BTW, there are many of us who want HRC and would vote for her regardless of whomever else was running.

And there are quite a few Democrats and independents who would not vote for her ..... who voted for Obama and Bill Clinton.

I find it hard to believe there are Bill Clinton voters who won't support Hillary.

Because they have similar baggage and similar political positions. Plus, they are a team,,she played a big role in his presidency and he can be expected to play a big role in hers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nominating HRC will make the odds of a Republican winning the presidency an almost foregone conclusion. I say this not with glee but in sadness because the country would be better off with a Democrat as president.

She is damaged beyond redemption.

Lol. She beats any republican clown in the field with her eyes closed.

Ludicrous!

Her unfavorables are sky high and the polls in three swing states that came out today show several Repubican candidates beating her.

Anonymous wrote:All of you posters on the HRC bandwagon: I suspect OP is like me and other Dems on this thread. We certainly appreciate the need to vote for the Democratic nominee in the general election and will do so even if we have to hold our noses in the voting booth. Our concern is that many other voters to whom politics is not an obsession or who don't consider themselves dyed in the wool Democrats will vote for the Republican or not vote at all. Duh.

+1

You nailed it! The Democratic base will vote for HRC or anyone the party nominates just as surely as the Republican base will vote for Trump or anyone else the party nominates. But the base does not decide an election - it is the independents and moderates who decide elections.

Anonymous wrote:Nominating HRC will make the odds of a Republican winning the presidency an almost foregone conclusion. I say this not with glee but in sadness because the country would be better off with a Democrat as president.

She is damaged beyond redemption.

Lol. She beats any republican clown in the field with her eyes closed.