Can anyone explain why Hillary is slipping in the Polls?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MarkMN @ May 3 2007, 12:34 PM) [snapback]434794[/snapback]</div>

Dude are you serious? I wonder if you went out and got a H---er from another woman and your wife found out... Would she stay with you? Or take 50% .

Most couples dont stay together after one or the other has been caught cheating. The whole trust issue comes to mind.

Of course theres the women that get the S--t beat out of them by thier husbands or boyfriends and they still stay with their partner.. Hmmm, is that a strong woman?

However those that are into swinging, dominatrics or spankng with other people obviously have an open relationship.....

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ May 3 2007, 09:41 PM) [snapback]435176[/snapback]</div>

says who? when your the Pres & 1st lady their business is everyones business public or personal..
Dont you read the papers?

 

Hillary is a very strong willed woman, which is why she didn't let her EMOTIONS rule her life when Bill's indiscretions came to light. She had, and still has, her eyes set on making as big a difference in the world as she can. While i personally don't like her and don't think she would make a good president, it's very, very wrong and ignorant to imply that she's weak because of her family values.

I know many strong women who simply don't believe in divorce. As someone in a movie once said, "It's just sex".

 

I wonder if they will demand a recount after the next election? You know, you want to be fair.. :lol: :lol:

Seems to be whats wrong with america today, "Its just sex" & who cares about family values its just a peice of paper...

 

Hillary's best chance to become president would be to go into hiding. Every time I see her or hear her my head fills with negative thoughts. Maybe she could let Bill make her speeches and appearances. I think the Republicans would love to run against her, has there ever been a candidate with such huge negatives? Can she win?

When I watched this I wonder if bill really wants her to win?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9U0ZNteqdw

Am i way out in left field or is this in really bad taste? " I am former President Bill clinton and I am endorsing my wife for President" :lol: Is it desperation?

 

She's slipping because of the tireless and important work of Doberman et al here on Prius Chat. We now all know that she is a terrorist. That was news to me. And now I know that she's a wussy and a strong willed woman. Who knew?

Seriously though. She was the frontrunner before anyone had even thrown their hat in the ring. As others throw their hat in the ring, the percentage of the pie would have to by default go down. Seem simple to me. It also seems pretty evident that her fan base is NOT all that big and her numbers will continue to go down as people learn about and find other candidates they like. I have yet to find a candiate I like in the race from any party. I'm waiting for a pragmatic third party, but I don't have my hopes up. Pragmatism doesn't do well in big money politics.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(larkinmj @ May 18 2007, 11:48 AM) [snapback]444885[/snapback]</div>

FOOL

I'm not BLAMING him for the cole - i'M BLAMING HIM FOR NOT STRIKING BACK

As far as I know - we are still at war from 9/11

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ May 18 2007, 11:59 AM) [snapback]444897[/snapback]</div>

Let us Begin our tour here.

Who cares about Political Influence - We weren't attacked.

Who cares about balancing a budget right now - if New York is bombed - we won't have a budget - we will have a depression. If we have biological and terrorist attacks across the country - there will be no taxes - there will be no budjet - only chaos, death, disaster and destitue across the nation.

We were hit shortly after he was in office - sorry to tell you - but Clinton had more time to deal with AQ than Bush did...

In FACT - Clinton is partly the CAUSE of it - how?

When Clinton took office - he passed a bill (slips my mind) that prevented CIA members from acting in Covert operations which were illegal in this country..... So If a terrorist was planning a bombing - the CIA member would have to say, "no - sorry - no can do" instead of participating in the bombing.... This lead to lack of intelligence from the field - wihch lead to a string of bombings of our embassies, ships, hotels, clubs, etc etc etc.

Don't get me wrong - i'm not blaming Clinton - ultimately the militant and fanatical Islamic sects are responsible... I could be a real jerk and just say it's the entire Islamic religion... but i'm not as narrow minded as you might expect.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ May 18 2007, 11:59 AM) [snapback]444897[/snapback]</div>

Yes - Ship it to Mexico - Walk it across the border. They can also strike Israel - which is our greatest ally in that region - and frankly - they might be the only people with the balls to actually bomb Iran before it's too late.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ May 18 2007, 11:59 AM) [snapback]444897[/snapback]</div>

If we aren't playing at yankee stadium - we are playing at shea...

If we aren't fighting the Terrorists there - we are fighting them HERE.


Hate to break it to you - but BECAUSE of the war in Iraq - they are presenting a unified front against the country - against our troops - they DO NOT WANT IRAQ TO BE A FREE DEMOCRACY.

So - With all of their resources - manpower - money - diverted THERE - it won't be aimed HERE.

If we leave - game over for Iraq - which means game over for us.


The President and our public officials can't say it out loud - but I'd rather see Iraqies die than Americans.

I'd rather THEIR women and children be blown up - than OUR women and children...

Call me selfish - call me an insensative nice person - but DEEP DOWN INSIDE - you'd agree - you'd rather some
dirt poor islamic family living in a mudhole die, than you, your family in your 300,000 house driving your pretty prius to and from work everyday die.

FACT -







BigMahma

 

They don't need to ship it to Mexico and to the US. They can do far more damage by setting it off in the Straits of Hormuz and effectively cutting off 40% of the worlds oil.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Darwood @ May 18 2007, 02:14 PM) [snapback]445039[/snapback]</div>

Good point - but would that not also hurt their own revenue?

Lets not forget they are financing their dictatorships, palaces and terrorist machine with oil money.


I cannot wait until we are oil independant - and they are trying to eat it - millions of arabs will die.. It will be a glorious day for Allah - when all his sons return to him.



BigMahma - Who loves Prius because it kills TowelHeads.

 

You have a seriously twisted view of reality, my friend... If the terrorists are all so busy over there, then how have there been so many terrorist attacks Since we went there? In fact, the rate of terror attacks outside of Iraq has pretty much remained steady.

Lets work backwards here...

May 2007 - Fort Dix
April 2007 - Virginia Tech
April 2007 - man from Ohio found in connection to Al-queda and planned terrorist attacks
Jan/Feb 2007 - UK letter bombs
Jan 2007 - rocket bomb on the US embassy in Athens
Jan 2007 - three bombs in the Philippines


Those are just the most recent 6 that you would probably care about (there have actually been 48 terror attacks this year)... But no, you're right... fighting in Iraq there is totally keeping them from attacking elsewhere in the world. BTW, if you list out world wide terrorist attacks, there were something like 10-20 per year in the 90's when Clinton was in office...

In Clinton's last year in office, there were 11 reported terrorist attacks in the world. In Bush's first year as president, there were 26. His second year, 43. His third year, 30. Seems to be a HUGE difference here.

BTW, shortly after he took office, Bush was warned by French intelligence that Al-Queda was planning some sort of airline attack... As far as i know, thats the first indication we had that 9/11 would happen. But you're right, it was all Clinton's fault!

 

Iran will be shipping their oil to China via pipeline, not Hormuz.

The point I have not gotten around to making, is it would be FAR cheaper to replace middle eastern oil with alternative energy and PRii for all than it will or has been to use our military to keep secure the oil exporting regions we get our oil from. Using the military for this in no way saves us the cost of switching to alternatives, since we'll have to do that ANYWAYS when peak oil hits home. Why not skip the step and just be done with the whole region by removing our need for those resources? If we have zero presence in the ME, the risk of terrorist attacks gone down SIGNIFICANTLY.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hycamguy07 @ May 18 2007, 11:21 AM) [snapback]444914[/snapback]</div>

Yep; I agree. I am a prude (if one wants to be negative) when it comes to this sort of thing.
--Marriage is generally considered to be a monogamous arrangement and that's usually a good idea.
--Sex **IS** important and the idea of its being meaningless is **HIGHLY** overrated.
--Trust is delicate and easily torn, difficult to mend, and the seams usually show afterwards.

I'm scared of the term 'family values,' though, since it seems to have been corrupted somewhat. Maybe it's better that an orgy-crazed San Franciscan like me doesn't use it, anyway!! [smile]

While the Clintons may have an open marriage and shouldn't be punished for it, it's easy to come to some less than flattering conclusions based upon what we knew about their relationship. And, really, Clinton's dalliances seemed pretty debasing. Have you no control over yourself, man??!??

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Darwood @ May 18 2007, 01:33 PM) [snapback]445060[/snapback]</div>

This WAAAAYYYY too smart and rational and non-confrontational to EVER happen.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ May 3 2007, 07:08 AM) [snapback]434619[/snapback]</div>

Could it be because a new candidate is raising from below and I'm supporting him?