Why would you vote for Hillary?

Page 8 of Originally Posted by jvdfc Well this one got off topic. Totally agree. Ref asked a GREAT question. For those who are CONSIDERING voting for Hillary, I ... 271 comments | 11563 Views | Go to page 1 →

  1. #106
    Run To State's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 03
    Location
    I've got a strong urge to fly. But I got nowhere to fly to."
    Posts
    30,413

    So, no one really has any really good things to say about Hillary or any good reasons to vote for her? Quite a few Dems on this board and you've got nothing? No surprise for me, but very telling.
    Advertisement

  2. #107
    The Professor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 04
    Location
    Sag Hollow
    Posts
    21,234

    Quote Originally Posted by Run To State View Post
    So, no one really has any really good things to say about Hillary or any good reasons to vote for her? Quite a few Dems on this board and you've got nothing? No surprise for me, but very telling.
    I think I posted earlier that it doesn't matter who the Democrats run, they're still going to win.
    They have such a huge advantage starting out with the electoral college that it's nearly impossible to defeat them in a presidential race in this day and time. Policy means nothing anymore. Vote for the Democrat candidate because they're not the Republican candidate.
    Someone might lose a few entitlement programs if a Republican won. That's the thinking I suppose. Buying votes with welfare seems to be the new trend.

  3. #108

    Join Date
    Feb 13
    Posts
    4,143

    Quote Originally Posted by The Professor View Post
    I think I posted earlier that it doesn't matter who the Democrats run, they're still going to win.
    They have such a huge advantage starting out with the electoral college that it's nearly impossible to defeat them in a presidential race in this day and time. Policy means nothing anymore. Vote for the Democrat candidate because they're not the Republican candidate.
    Someone might lose a few entitlement programs if a Republican won. That's the thinking I suppose. Buying votes with welfare seems to be the new trend.
    Buying votes with welfare is a myth. The reason the GOP is sucking pondwater in presidential elections is because of its abysmal record of attracting non-white voters. Romney three years ago did a stellar job of locking down the white vote, yet still got hammered in the electoral college.

  4. #109

    Join Date
    Dec 00
    Location
    Louisville, Ky USA
    Posts
    4,503

    Quote Originally Posted by Manitoudan View Post
    Wonder if Trinity alum votes straight ticket ? LOL . At least he /she is honest about it .
    I didn't used to. I do now because I think that the modern Republican party has gone off the rails crazy. My ideal candidate would bring republican management style and efficiency to democrat programs. That used to be what most Republican candidates offered. Now, they don't want to make the government run better, they want to kill the government.

  5. #110
    Run To State's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 03
    Location
    I've got a strong urge to fly. But I got nowhere to fly to."
    Posts
    30,413

    Okay, while I agree with how Dems have fooled non-whites into thinking they care about them, that's not what the thread is about. Come on.
    I'll take it one further. What good reason, other than she's not a Republican/Conservative, would you have to vote for her? What impresses you about her for a role as president? What has she done to gain your confidence that she is the best candidate to lead this country and make things better for all?

  6. #111

    Join Date
    May 01
    Location
    City of Beautiful Homes
    Posts
    25,563

    Quote Originally Posted by The Professor View Post
    I think I posted earlier that it doesn't matter who the Democrats run, they're still going to win.
    They have such a huge advantage starting out with the electoral college that it's nearly impossible to defeat them in a presidential race in this day and time. Policy means nothing anymore. Vote for the Democrat candidate because they're not the Republican candidate.
    Someone might lose a few entitlement programs if a Republican won. That's the thinking I suppose. Buying votes with welfare seems to be the new trend.
    Those voters need to look to Detroit for a glimpse of the future. Long time Democrat rule has really worked out for them hasn't it?

  7. #112

    Join Date
    Feb 13
    Posts
    4,143

    Quote Originally Posted by Run To State View Post
    Okay, while I agree with how Dems have fooled non-whites into thinking they care about them, that's not what the thread is about. Come on.
    I'll take it one further. What good reason, other than she's not a Republican/Conservative, would you have to vote for her? What impresses you about her for a role as president? What has she done to gain your confidence that she is the best candidate to lead this country and make things better for all?
    A presidential election is not about "What have you done?" It's about "What will you do?" As I pointed out earlier, Reagan had no record of national achievement in 1980, yet beat Carter decisively. Why? Because in that election the country was unhappy with Carter, as opposed to being enamored with Reagan.

    In other words, voting against a party or philosophy is certainly as valid, if not more valid, than voting for a person.

  8. #113
    mcpapa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 05
    Location
    Home of a proud papa
    Posts
    60,637

    [QUOTE=Twotoplace;5520306]A presidential election is not about "What have you done?" It's about "What will you do?" /QUOTE]

    Correct. Or sometimes, "what won't you do that your opponent will do"?

  9. #114

    Join Date
    May 01
    Location
    City of Beautiful Homes
    Posts
    25,563

    Quote Originally Posted by Twotoplace View Post
    A presidential election is not about "What have you done?" It's about "What will you do?" As I pointed out earlier, Reagan had no record of national achievement in 1980, yet beat Carter decisively. Why? Because in that election the country was unhappy with Carter, as opposed to being enamored with Reagan.

    In other words, voting against a party or philosophy is certainly as valid, if not more valid, than voting for a person.
    Carter too had no record of national achievement since he was dismal as a president and had been a governor before then. No Governor can claim to have a record of national achievement. Not Carter, not Reagan, not Clinton, etc. Hillary's problem is that she has no record of national achievement after spending 13-14 years as a senator and administration official. Past performance is all voters can go on to determine what someone might do in the future. No one can believe anything a politician says.

  10. #115
    jvdfc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 06
    Location
    By the Lake
    Posts
    8,914

    Quote Originally Posted by capt278 View Post
    Absolutely no vitriol from the Left.

  11. #116

    Join Date
    Feb 13
    Posts
    4,143

    Quote Originally Posted by 75center View Post
    Those voters need to look to Detroit for a glimpse of the future. Long time Democrat rule has really worked out for them hasn't it?
    If you want a glimpse of in-the-moment GOP ineptitude, take a look at what Brownback and the Republicans are doing in Kansas.

  12. #117

    Join Date
    May 01
    Location
    City of Beautiful Homes
    Posts
    25,563

    Quote Originally Posted by Twotoplace View Post
    If you want a glimpse of in-the-moment GOP ineptitude, take a look at what Brownback and the Republicans are doing in Kansas.
    Obviously you have no disagreement with my assessment of what long term democrat leadership will lead to since your response was the old "he did it too" classic. Thanks.

  13. #118
    capt278's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 08
    Posts
    4,318

    Quote Originally Posted by Twotoplace View Post
    A presidential election is not about "What have you done?" It's about "What will you do?" As I pointed out earlier, Reagan had no record of national achievement in 1980, yet beat Carter decisively. Why? Because in that election the country was unhappy with Carter, as opposed to being enamored with Reagan.

    In other words, voting against a party or philosophy is certainly as valid, if not more valid, than voting for a person.
    In other words, you can't answer the question he asked.

  14. #119
    capt278's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 08
    Posts
    4,318

    Quote Originally Posted by Twotoplace View Post
    If you want a glimpse of in-the-moment GOP ineptitude, take a look at what Brownback and the Republicans are doing in Kansas.
    Don't know of any city in Kansas being dead broke.

  15. #120

    Join Date
    Feb 13
    Posts
    4,143

    Quote Originally Posted by capt278 View Post
    Don't know of any city in Kansas being dead broke.
    This link will bring you up to speed on the problems in the Sunflower State, brought on by the Republicans' zeal to cut business taxes.


    Jobs plummet in Kansas at worst possible time for Gov. Sam Brownback amid budget crisis | The Kansas City Star The Kansas City Star

Top