MR

Hillary Clinton announced today "I'm in" . Do you guys think we're ready for a female president. Does it even matter if the leader of the world most powerful nation is a male or female? How would this affect the rest of the world?

In my opinion, if Hilary does as good of the job as Bill Clinton, then I would vote for her. But I know not all of you will agree with me. The main reason I liked Clintons policy was because he cared more about his own country than spending his countries money in other countries. As a president of USA , USA should come FIRST(Unless youre mad cause someone messed with your dad 10 years ago).
I hope whoever that wins the 08 election knows that they got their work cut out to get us out of the mess Bush has created!

If I was a Yank, I'd vote for a chick to be President!
Chicks rule , boys drool!




Kidding fellas, slow Saturday here, sorry.

I'd vote for a female President as long as they are the best person for the job, in my opinion. That being said, I'd never vote for Hillary in a million years.

conversationpc wrote:I'd vote for a female President as long as they are the best person for the job, in my opinion. That being said, I'd never vote for Hillary in a million years.

What a shock. Keep that mind closed. God forbid, she is a Democrat and obviously the smartest and brightest person in the field. I admire your loyalty to the GOP. They surely appreciate it.

Indiana won't even get a visit from her. She will conced the 12 votes Indiana has to offer; won't need 'em.

I think it's absurd that that question even has to be asked in this country. There have been female leaders of powerful nations throughout history.

But for some reason, in this, the supposedly most progressive, democratic country in the world, it does have to be asked.

I think Hilary is ready to be president, but I don't know if she'll get the chance. She'll get my vote.

I think the REAL question that we should be asking ourselves is: Do we want TWO families running the worlds greatest superpower for such an extended period of time??????

George Bush Sr. - 4 years

Bill Clinton - 8 years

George W. Bush - 8 years

Hillary Clinton- ????


Next......... Can you say Jeb????????????????????????????????

Hillary is not electable. She's a ****.

But I do think the country would vote for a woman - just not her. Doesn't matter what politcal party. Men would vote for a woman - but not her.

She will have trouble with Obama in the primaries.

Just my take.

yogi wrote:I think the REAL question that we should be asking ourselves is: Do we want TWO families running the worlds greatest superpower for such an extended period of time??????

George Bush Sr. - 4 years

Bill Clinton - 8 years

George W. Bush - 8 years

Hillary Clinton- ????


Next......... Can you say Jeb????????????????????????????????

By the time Hillary does her 8 years and Jeb his, itd be time for lil Chelsea Clinton to run too

AR,,, Hilary may be a **** according to you, but George W. Bush is also a **** even though he doesnt have a ****. Wait, what the fuck ,,, for a minute there I thought we were in BT with all the *****ing ****'s

Behshad wrote:

yogi wrote:I think the REAL question that we should be asking ourselves is: Do we want TWO families running the worlds greatest superpower for such an extended period of time??????

George Bush Sr. - 4 years

Bill Clinton - 8 years

George W. Bush - 8 years

Hillary Clinton- ????


Next......... Can you say Jeb????????????????????????????????

By the time Hillary does her 8 years and Jeb his, itd be time for lil Chelsea Clinton to run too

AR,,, Hilary may be a **** according to you, but George W. Bush is also a **** even though he doesnt have a ****. Wait, what the fuck ,,, for a minute there I thought we were in BT with all the *****ing ****'s

If you think I am a fan of GW Bush you are way off.

AR wrote:

Behshad wrote:

yogi wrote:I think the REAL question that we should be asking ourselves is: Do we want TWO families running the worlds greatest superpower for such an extended period of time??????

George Bush Sr. - 4 years

Bill Clinton - 8 years

George W. Bush - 8 years

Hillary Clinton- ????


Next......... Can you say Jeb????????????????????????????????

By the time Hillary does her 8 years and Jeb his, itd be time for lil Chelsea Clinton to run too

AR,,, Hilary may be a **** according to you, but George W. Bush is also a **** even though he doesnt have a ****. Wait, what the fuck ,,, for a minute there I thought we were in BT with all the *****ing ****'s

If you think I am a fan of GW Bush you are way off.

No man,,, Just saying that even a **** can become a president so ****'s ARE electible!

bush's speach writer...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=YawWwuuL7uk& ... ed&search=

Behshad wrote:

AR wrote:

Behshad wrote:

yogi wrote:I think the REAL question that we should be asking ourselves is: Do we want TWO families running the worlds greatest superpower for such an extended period of time??????

George Bush Sr. - 4 years

Bill Clinton - 8 years

George W. Bush - 8 years

Hillary Clinton- ????


Next......... Can you say Jeb????????????????????????????????

By the time Hillary does her 8 years and Jeb his, itd be time for lil Chelsea Clinton to run too

AR,,, Hilary may be a **** according to you, but George W. Bush is also a **** even though he doesnt have a ****. Wait, what the fuck ,,, for a minute there I thought we were in BT with all the *****ing ****'s

If you think I am a fan of GW Bush you are way off.

No man,,, Just saying that even a **** can become a president so ****'s ARE electible!

Ok, Gotcha. You're right about that.

My politcal beliefs (ok, I am bored)

Grew up a Maryland Democrat.

Got older - became a Republican.

Realized the two party system was a farce, and that both parties are virtually the same = now an Independent.

Rush (the band) were right - Big Money rules the world.

Politicians are all ass kissers to get money to get elected, then they are all beholden to special interests. The best minds in our country want nothing to do with elected office. The smarmy types are the ones who run.

Having to put our beliefs as a nation into only 2 political parties is insane.

I really don't care if someone is male or female. I have more republican tendencies, so I would probably vote for the republican candidate. However, I don't like Hillary Clinton. She's too liberal for me, and I just don't trust her. Not that you can trust any politician, but I don't trust her more than I don't trust the others. I am in Illinois, so it really doesn't matter who I vote for. Illinois is traditionally a blue state.

Fuck Hillary... She is an evil bitch ... Yes, our great country could be ready for a female President, it just won't be her. She is too polarizing, just imagine the shit they will dig up about her.

No more Clinton's and no more Bush's.

AR wrote:
Politicians are all ass kissers to get money to get elected, then they are all beholden to special interests. The best minds in our country want nothing to do with elected office. The smarmy types are the ones who run.

Having to put our beliefs as a nation into only 2 political parties is insane.

Amen! Give the man a cigar, or a beer.

RockinDeano wrote:

conversationpc wrote:I'd vote for a female President as long as they are the best person for the job, in my opinion. That being said, I'd never vote for Hillary in a million years.

What a shock. Keep that mind closed. God forbid, she is a Democrat and obviously the smartest and brightest person in the field. I admire your loyalty to the GOP. They surely appreciate it.

Indiana won't even get a visit from her. She will conced the 12 votes Indiana has to offer; won't need 'em.

Indiana will be all the better for her not setting foot in our state.

As for closed minds, give me a break. I'm no huge fan of the Republican party but they're certainly more in line with what I believe than you libs are.

I will be $50 richer when Hillary loses.

dcvader wrote:Fuck Hillary... She is an evil bitch ... Yes, our great country could be ready for a female President, it just won't be her. She is too polarizing, just imagine the shit they will dig up about her.

No more Clinton's and no more Bush's.

I agree.

NealIsGod wrote:I will be $50 richer when Hillary loses.

Just about everyone gets richer when Democrats lose.

conversationpc wrote:

NealIsGod wrote:I will be $50 richer when Hillary loses.

Just about everyone gets richer when Democrats lose.

Hmmmmm...Let's see here. During Bill Clinton's presidency (democrat), we had the most ROBUST economy, EVER! During Bush's presidency (republican) we have a tanking real estate market, rising interest rates, and the highest energy costs, EVER. Yeah...good theory on your part!


John from Boston

p.s. For the record, I'm a registered independent!

Back on topic... I don't know whether or not this country is "ready" for a female president, or if it ever will be. That said, I wouldn't vote for Hillary Clinton, if she were the only candidate on the ballot, and it has nothing to do with her gender!


John from Boston

Enigma869 wrote:Back on topic... I don't know whether or not this country is "ready" for a female president, or if it ever will be.

John from Boston

Please elaborate on this. I'm sure there are a lot of women eager to hear what you have to say about it.

Enigma869 wrote:

conversationpc wrote:

NealIsGod wrote:I will be $50 richer when Hillary loses.

Just about everyone gets richer when Democrats lose.

Hmmmmm...Let's see here. During Bill Clinton's presidency (democrat), we had the most ROBUST economy, EVER! During Bush's presidency (republican) we have a tanking real estate market, rising interest rates, and the highest energy costs, EVER. Yeah...good theory on your part!


John from Boston

p.s. For the record, I'm a registered independent!

The economy now is just as strong if not stronger. Let's not leave out the unemployment rate now and over the last couple of years is lower than the average of that during the Clinton administration. Home ownership, including that by minorities, is at an all-time high. Gas prices have come way down. Interest rates now are still lower than they were at the end of the Clinton administration. Energy costs were going up long before Bush was ever President, so that argument's a red herring.

As far as the real estate market going downhill, it was certainly bound to do so. The prices in this country for real estate have been majorly inflated. I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner. In my opinion, it may end up being in the same situation as the dot com decline which started during the end of Clinton's presidency into the beginning of the Bush administration.

Now just because I started this topic doesnt mean that I am against a female leader. I simply wanted everyone's opinion on this. I personally dont think the gender of the president will decide how great he/she will be for this country. I also think that if we managed to get by with Mr Bush running this country, it cant possibly get worse than this, whether we do have a male or female president.
As I said before, the most important thing is if the president is looking out for the people's interest or his own.
So to answer my own question, I think yes, USA is ready for a female president, simply because I think our nation is ready for a devoted president that will get us back on our feet and back on track regardless of gender/race.

conversationpc wrote:

Enigma869 wrote:

conversationpc wrote:

NealIsGod wrote:I will be $50 richer when Hillary loses.

Just about everyone gets richer when Democrats lose.

Hmmmmm...Let's see here. During Bill Clinton's presidency (democrat), we had the most ROBUST economy, EVER! During Bush's presidency (republican) we have a tanking real estate market, rising interest rates, and the highest energy costs, EVER. Yeah...good theory on your part!


John from Boston

p.s. For the record, I'm a registered independent!

The economy now is just as strong if not stronger. Let's not leave out the unemployment rate now and over the last couple of years is lower than the average of that during the Clinton administration. Home ownership, including that by minorities, is at an all-time high. Gas prices have come way down. Interest rates now are still lower than they were at the end of the Clinton administration. Energy costs were going up long before Bush was ever President, so that argument's a red herring.

As far as the real estate market going downhill, it was certainly bound to do so. The prices in this country for real estate have been majorly inflated. I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner. In my opinion, it may end up being in the same situation as the dot com decline which started during the end of Clinton's presidency into the beginning of the Bush administration.

So basically youre saying, anything good that happend was because of Bush and anything bad was caused by Clinton,,,, Now thats a bit biased my friend, dont you think!?

The unemployment was at record low during Clinton.
The gas prices have gone down? where are you? Unless you think theyre down because they were raised by a $1/gallon first then lowered $.50?? I remember back in 98 I could get gas for $.96 a gallon. And no I am not expecting to see those prices ever again, cause I am realistic and no matter who wouldve been the president we would still have had higher prices on gas just like anything else,, but the major jump we seen in the gas prices the past 5 years are partially results of Mr Bush being a part of the Oil industry as well.
Interest rates have gone down, but mainly as a resuly of the Buyers Market... When there's 3 times as many real estate as buyers, the market automatically adjusts to it , which means lower house prices and in its turn lower rates.

I dont think it has anything to do whether we have a democrat or republican president. We have had both great and louzy presidents from both parties. I personally dont vote for a president based on his party, I vote based on his passion for his country, but thats just me,,,,

conversationpc wrote:
Just about everyone gets richer when Democrats lose.

Well, yeah except the thousands who lost their jobs so the Big Corporations could get tax cuts to move the jobs to Asia and Mexico. Oh and there are those thousands that lost their lifesavings due to the lack of adequate health coverage. Oh yeah, and there are also the ones that are struggling in entry level jobs because all that were available were in those small businesses that are so popular with this administration. Maybe by the time they get their college loans paid off though some big corporation will come swallow the business and then things will get better for them, until they close the place and move the jobs to China that is. I almost forgot about the ones that couldn't even afford a college education because their folks lost their jobs so they have to work for minimum wage to help their family out.

I don't know what world you live in but I'm glad everybody their is getting richer.

Behshad wrote:So basically youre saying, anything good that happend was because of Bush and anything bad was caused by Clinton,,,, Now thats a bit biased my friend, dont you think!?

No, I'm not saying that at all. Clinton deserves credit for the economy during his Presidency just like bush deserves the credit for it now.

conversationpc wrote:The economy now is just as strong if not stronger. Let's not leave out the unemployment rate now and over the last couple of years is lower than the average of that during the Clinton administration. Home ownership, including that by minorities, is at an all-time high. Gas prices have come way down. Interest rates now are still lower than they were at the end of the Clinton administration. Energy costs were going up long before Bush was ever President, so that argument's a red herring.

As far as the real estate market going downhill, it was certainly bound to do so. The prices in this country for real estate have been majorly inflated. I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner. In my opinion, it may end up being in the same situation as the dot com decline which started during the end of Clinton's presidency into the beginning of the Bush administration.

We'll agree to disagree that the economy is stronger, because I don't believe it is, and nobody will convince me, otherwise. Most people had more money in their retirement accounts when Clinton ended his run, than they do now, and that's even after 7 years of this moron, in the white house! As far as energy costs going up when Clinton was in the White House...Perhaps that's true, but gas was NOWHERE near $2.00 a gallon, let alone approaching almost $4.00 per gallon, during W's administration! As for home ownership going up...I can assure you that has NOTHING to do with Bush, AT ALL! I own a mortgage company and can tell you from first-hand experience that the only reason home ownership has gone up is because banks have became VERY relaxed with their underwriting guidelines over the past 5 years. Something you neglected to mention, in your glowing review of W. is that foreclosures are at a 30 year high!


John from Boston

Yes but the U.S. is not ready for Hillary Clinton as the first female president. I would vote for her husband in a heartbeat but she is NO Bill Clinton. No thanks. Right now, I am liking Obama or Edwards....