The scary thing is it might just happen. Im serious. H. R. Clinton is probably going to be the Democrate's Candidate in 2008. I know, I know, I know. Everybody has already been saying it. But it frightens me. Why you may ask? Well that is what the blog is for.
She...Im having trouble...might win. And let me head this off. I am not opposed to the idea because she is a woman. It is mainly because of who she is. She is a wolf in sheeps clothing. She is willing to be whoever the American public wants her to be to get elected, but will disregard all of that if elected. She is already starting to try to change her image by talking tough on illegal immigration. She is aligning herself with faith based organizations. All of this while doing nothing about the borders and favoring abortion. I bring abortion up only to show her true side regardless of what she is trying to portray. I have no intention of discussing the issue, mainly because I think it has diluted politics for decades ever since Roe V. Wade (interestingly enough Wade was an alias to protect the identity of the women in the case who eventually changed her position on abortion. A fact picked up in a wonderful book Freakanomics recommended to me by my buddy at the blog Unlimited Hell).
You are probably thinking, "all polititians do that, change their image to pander to a particular voting bucket." To some extent you are right, but lying or manuvering around your core values is not. So why might she win? Two reasons. One she is a woman. Again, not a problem. But being a "minority" wins big points in elections, especially if you are trying to walk on ground no one has been before. The second is Bill "The First Gentlemen" Clinton. Carisma-a-go-go. That is a political one two punch.
A friend, who posts on this site and shall remain nameless but rhymes with Ess, and I were discussing this very topic. And what I am about to say, which is not really earth shattering, would be a great bout. Condlezza Rice VS Hillary Clinton. Condi would have her. Not only is she a woman, but black as well. Maybe the black population will stop believing the Dems who they wrongfully attact themselves to. That may be the next post, How the Democratic Party keeps the black population believing they are victims and must rely on the governement. Condi is strong, she is a foreign affairs expert, she is extremely intellectual, and has a cheerfull presence.
Please take no offense. Understand the issues are very important, and their physical attributes are not all that I see. But I am looking at it from a voter block standpoint, rather simplistic but extremely important. I have to agree with some that this country may be ready for a woman president. Heck, Hollywood (not in any way liberal and probably wouldn't support Hillary...sarcasm is cool) is already preparing the nation for that very thing with that new show Commander and Chief. (Sidebar, Donald Sutherland plays an evil Republican. Hmmm. Media bias. Not Hollywood.)
The true problem lies in the fact that the Republicans have no solid opposition to Hillary. McCain. Hell of a guy, but too middle of the road. Rudolph Giuliani, the man who kicked the mob out of New York and toughed out 911. Maybe, but still if you are talking true conservative, too middle of the road. There are others, but none that truely stand out. We will have to just sit and wait I guess.
It's late. There may be spelling and grammer mistakes. Im tired. Chime in.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Well, I can and I can't. Politics is politics is politics. The race to election day is in fact a huge dog and pony show (maybe horse and elephant?), and getting elected really is (sadly) more about whether people like you - your looks, how you talk, etc. - than you stand on the issues. For me, and for those who keep up on the issues, it is the exact opposite. So the majority of america is prior, not the latter. Apply that to our current president and you get some interesting results. Bush won over Gore and maybe that was the dog and pony show. But even with several people dissatified with Bush, he wins a second term. I think you can contribute that to is straight forward approach. Public Speaking is not his strong point, but at least he says what he means and sticks to his guns. That is one thing that sets him apart from a Hilary Clinton, I feel.
Politics is a game. It is THE game. Yes, you predicted correctly, I will point out, and as the two of you have already elaborated, that every candidate will pander to what s/he thinks the public wants in order to get elected because an unelected president can’t do any good in the political arena. It’s how senators have gotten and maintained their seats for centuries. You pick your battles; you sign what needs to be signed in order to get your pending bill to pass. You swing towards the middle of the road (the 2004 elections notwithstanding) in order to appeal to more people and get elected so you can make the changes you see for the country. And for your information, it IS possible to align with some issues on a religious docket and still be ProLife.
It is ProLife, btw. It is not “favoring abortion.” Nobody wants to kill fetuses for fun… it is a right for a woman to choose what is best for her own body and self, and that is a very difficult decision to make. Not that I’d expect a man to fully understand… how many pregnant daddies do you see drop out of school to take care of their kid? In comparison, how many babies grow up without daddies because he ran at the first sight of a kid? And of course “Wade” is an alias. As controversial as this issue is now, the trial of Roe v Wade could have been a threat to this woman’s safety and certainly to her privacy.
Please note, if you don’t want to bring up abortion, don’t drop it into your blog like a cherry bomb and then smother it with whipped cream and hope it turns out looking benign…
“Lying or maneuvering?” “Deceitful?” Will someone PLEASE give me a FACT here? Instead of a generic, dilapidated, political adjective. I could call Big Bird a liar, but it wouldn’t hold up in a debate.
And don’t think for one second that Hillary’s (questionably) feminine status won’t lose her just as many votes as it will gain her, mostly because of opinions like yours on both sides of the color line (blue and red).
Political Elections are won on charisma. That is fact. You have said it and proven it…so why do you use it as a scoff when talking about the Clintons? Yes, they have a politically-instigated relationship. So? Clinton gets his ** on the side and Hillary was a great first lady, making things move on the political docket. I eagerly await (and I know it’s coming) arguments to the contrary.
“Maybe the black population will stop believing the Dems who they wrongfully attact (SIC) themselves to.”
Why “wrongfully”? And obviously “Condi” doesn’t feel she needs handouts, unless you count her JOB as one. (Don’t tempt me into a discussion on Bush’s appointment methods.)
Yes, Hollywood is liberal and often activist. What is the relevance, your honor?
“but still if you are talking true conservative, too middle of the road”
We do not need another bible-thumping, chum-appointing, ranch-pretend-farming, marriage-banning “true conservative” in office. Ever. Dubya has the quota filled for the next century. And he does not say what HE means, he says what his increasingly more nervous administration means. And “sticking to your guns” (an appropriate idiom) is only the result of pride, not strength.
Finally, Yes, there are errors: Spelling, yes. Grammar, yes. Lack of supporting facts and political actions, yes. Please rewrite this entire thesis and resubmit it to me by the end of the semester.
;)
In terms of the black population alligning themselves with Dems, that is another post for another time. The thought just popped into my head and my hands started typing it. I will get to it more in depth at another time.
The terms ProLife and ProChoice are strickly buzz words. Labels to hide true actuality. Myself personally, I do refuse to talk about it strickly because to much weight is given to it. I did drop a quick bomb to provide the controdiction of her position.
I don't scoff the Clintons with the mention of charisma. I have said it before, it's one of Bill's strong points. What makes Bush different is the fact that he has charisma, not as much as Clinton, but he has something to back it up with. He is just being him. Clinton and Hillary use it strickly as a front.
I really have to disagree with you, suprise suprise. Sticking to you guns takes strength and determination. It can be at times a protection of pride, but can also be a sign of leadership (something that no liberal would admit Bush has).
In terms of being not conservative enough, I think Bush falls short in a few areas but not as much as so of these other characters. He spends like a Dem. Not good.
FYI he does work his ranch. He is not a pretend cowboy, and whats wrong with thumping the bible? I don't think he thumps it but why not use that as some kind of measure or basis to figure out what is right and wrong as an individual?
I'm through with ya.
How about because we're a country based on freedom to choose one's own religion and not politics based on christianity??
(I just plain disagree with the rest of your post, so I won't restate my arguments)
And LS, I will fully grant you that we are more mental astute or at least aware by discussing pertinent topics in an age where people don't even read the paper before not showing up to the voting polls on election day...
Post a Comment