ladiesbballcoach Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Good point. The question is how many of the new voters will come out simply in opposition to Hillary or Obama. I think 2004 showed that you don't need new voters but motivated voters. I fully believe that Same-Sex Marriage Amendments in key, key states (Ohio) motivated and brought out voters which in turn voted for GW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frances Bavier Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 I think 2004 showed that you don't need new voters but motivated voters. I fully believe that Same-Sex Marriage Amendments in key, key states (Ohio) motivated and brought out voters which in turn voted for GW. I couldn't agree more with your assessment. Of course, sating that desire to discriminate against 10% of our own population gave us an administration that has treated us with total disdain and has us neck deep in Iraq. So there's the trade off for 3,000 dead soldiers and a couple trillion dollars of our tax money - the good news is that at least the gays aren't getting married. Frances Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frances Bavier Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 She won't get the votes that vote anti-abortion since her husband thought partial birth abortions were okay and vetoed the bill the Republican Congress put through and President Bush later signed into law and the Supreme Court is now considering. I think it's a given, that anyone that uses the abortion issue as a litmus test isn't going to vote for Hillary Clinton. Just as they would not vote for McCain, or Giuliani. Frances PS - I really like your new avatar, LBBC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladiesbballcoach Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 I couldn't agree more with your assessment. Of course, sating that desire to discriminate against 10% of our own population gave us an administration that has treated us with total disdain and has us neck deep in Iraq. So there's the trade off for 3,000 dead soldiers and a couple trillion dollars of our tax money - the good news is that at least the gays aren't getting married. Frances Disagree but that is a topic for another thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladiesbballcoach Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 I think it's a given, that anyone that uses the abortion issue as a litmus test isn't going to vote for Hillary Clinton. Just as they would not vote for McCain, or Giuliani. Frances PS - I really like your new avatar, LBBC. Unless that is the only choices and then they have to go to other characteristics to choose. PS Got it from the Christmas thread and thanks. It is the FIRST one that I have uploaded and went to this size. All the others have been smaller and some mods have tried to help me fix that problem but were unable to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diamond Dandy Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 She won't get the votes that vote anti-abortion since her husband thought partial birth abortions were okay and vetoed the bill the Republican Congress put through and President Bush later signed into law and the Supreme Court is now considering. No democrat would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augger Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 I would vote for Fletcher before I would vote for Hillary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shooter Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 I would vote for Fletcher before I would vote for Hillary. Ouch!!! That's gotta hurt!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sting Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 If she wins, we'll be just like Canada. Populated by Mexicans... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts