Disgusted is more the word I'd use. Utterly repulsed. But TPTB will likely get what they want despite what I or we as a country want. Hillary should probably be in jail as far as I am concerned.
I called it months ago, sure I predicted bush Clinton finals with clinton winning but even if the one participant is changed it won't change the outcome.
no shit. more people are going to vote for her than any other democrats and the republicans don't have a single viable candidate. It isn't a conspiracy, she might suck but she is still going to get the most votes.
I agree with all that, but nowadays that doesn't necessarily mean her being the winner (and I'm not talking about her winning the popular vote but winning the electoral vote, though that is also a possibility).
The math indicates she has a good chance (not as good as Sanders against any Republican) however, only one time since the Truman administration has the presidency not alternated 8 years from one party to the other (the exception was Carter then Reagan/Bush and that was almost certainly the result of the original October Surprise). Th Clinton's have connections, but those aren't as important as the old guard, cross-party connections IMO.
The fact that they seem to have something along the lines of power-sharing and/or cooperation in dividing people against the other party, I doubt this election will be any cleaner than Bush vs. Gore or Kerry, or Obama vs. Clinton (they just picked horrible opponents for Obama, so no need to cheat) or Kennedy vs. Nixon for that matter. So much easier nowadays since they can control the voting machines and American's have accepted the ridiculous notion that exit polls just stopped working around 2004.
You can't really call it nepotism as previous presidents don't have any legal (or I believe functional) influence over elections. It's more a move towards dynastic politics. This would be only the third time we have immediate family members holding the presidency. The 2 precedent cases show remarkably little similarity in policies between father and son (except in the latter case attacking Iraq), though this case would probably be closer policy-wise. But even though Bill was a neoliberal (i.e. not an economic liberal) economic policy has shifted so far right since then that Hillary would probably be much more conservative on economic issues. Also, given the degree to which the last two presidents have ground us into this middle east quagmire (with help from the 2 before them), Hillary would almost certainly embrace a more militaristic foreign policy as would any candidate but Sanders.
If Bernie wins it, which I don't think he will unfortunately, it will be interesting to see how many people will bring up his Jewish religion when starting an argument against him. The Israel/USA conspiracy theories will be at full blast.
28 comments
5 [deleted] 2015-11-27
She is on The Economists cover also for the world in 2016. Sad but I think it will be her too.
1 DEVILNEUF 2015-11-27
Is there anyway to bet on it from now? I guarantee she will be the next president.
1 workitloud 2015-11-27
Vegas odds. Google it.
1 DEVILNEUF 2015-11-27
I'm from Europe. Can I still bet?
1 drphillysblunt 2015-11-27
Yeah, as long as any sports book you use has odds for it. most do already
0 workitloud 2015-11-27
Hillary's running 4-5 and 8-11, I was completely shocked. McCain is close behind at 300-1, and Sarah Palin and George Clooney are tied at 500-1. :) http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2016/winner
0 workitloud 2015-11-27
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2016/winner
5 sheasie 2015-11-27
SANDRES '16
-18 Titus__Flavius 2015-11-27
Bernie Sanders is wrong about everything...
http://bernieiswrong.com/
3 SleazySnake 2015-11-27
Even if she does not get a single vote cast for her
2 curtman99 2015-11-27
This is so witty. And true.
2 Manaspider 2015-11-27
Disgusted is more the word I'd use. Utterly repulsed. But TPTB will likely get what they want despite what I or we as a country want. Hillary should probably be in jail as far as I am concerned.
2 Stormy_knight 2015-11-27
Seriously? I haven't seen much from her lately. She's terrible... And she's going to run this country into the ground
2 make_mind_free2go 2015-11-27
yeah, different shit, same smell.
2 gombo223 2015-11-27
I called it months ago, sure I predicted bush Clinton finals with clinton winning but even if the one participant is changed it won't change the outcome.
This has been decided years ago probably.
1 Dismalhead 2015-11-27
Not who I want by a long shot, but probably true.
1 sleaze_bag_alert 2015-11-27
no shit. more people are going to vote for her than any other democrats and the republicans don't have a single viable candidate. It isn't a conspiracy, she might suck but she is still going to get the most votes.
1 DiarrheaMonkey- 2015-11-27
I agree with all that, but nowadays that doesn't necessarily mean her being the winner (and I'm not talking about her winning the popular vote but winning the electoral vote, though that is also a possibility).
1 DiarrheaMonkey- 2015-11-27
The math indicates she has a good chance (not as good as Sanders against any Republican) however, only one time since the Truman administration has the presidency not alternated 8 years from one party to the other (the exception was Carter then Reagan/Bush and that was almost certainly the result of the original October Surprise). Th Clinton's have connections, but those aren't as important as the old guard, cross-party connections IMO.
The fact that they seem to have something along the lines of power-sharing and/or cooperation in dividing people against the other party, I doubt this election will be any cleaner than Bush vs. Gore or Kerry, or Obama vs. Clinton (they just picked horrible opponents for Obama, so no need to cheat) or Kennedy vs. Nixon for that matter. So much easier nowadays since they can control the voting machines and American's have accepted the ridiculous notion that exit polls just stopped working around 2004.
You can't really call it nepotism as previous presidents don't have any legal (or I believe functional) influence over elections. It's more a move towards dynastic politics. This would be only the third time we have immediate family members holding the presidency. The 2 precedent cases show remarkably little similarity in policies between father and son (except in the latter case attacking Iraq), though this case would probably be closer policy-wise. But even though Bill was a neoliberal (i.e. not an economic liberal) economic policy has shifted so far right since then that Hillary would probably be much more conservative on economic issues. Also, given the degree to which the last two presidents have ground us into this middle east quagmire (with help from the 2 before them), Hillary would almost certainly embrace a more militaristic foreign policy as would any candidate but Sanders.
1 Dysnomi 2015-11-27
Yup.
0 DEVILNEUF 2015-11-27
If Bernie wins it, which I don't think he will unfortunately, it will be interesting to see how many people will bring up his Jewish religion when starting an argument against him. The Israel/USA conspiracy theories will be at full blast.
5 sheasie 2015-11-27
That's what they said about Obama :)
Next we knew... SHillary was literally crying on TV :(....
Not to mention that Shillary his literally a murderer. (I don't think the same can be said about Sanders.)
3 higger44 2015-11-27
If Hillary wins we are FUCKED.
5 Titus__Flavius 2015-11-27
You are already fucked, you are a slave, wake up.
2 DEVILNEUF 2015-11-27
Definitely fucked already. Hate to beat a dead horse but Carlin wraps it up absolutely perfectly: https://youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0eZYEtI
1 higger44 2015-11-27
There's still hope pal
-2 otistoole 2015-11-27
I hope sanders wins and goes full bolshevik, rounding up all you useful idiots to be disposed of first.
2 DEVILNEUF 2015-11-27
Hahaha I'd rather that than being faux happy, eating poisoned produce and the 1% fucking us over more and more each day.
0 workitloud 2015-11-27
Hillary's running 4-5 and 8-11, I was completely shocked. McCain is close behind at 300-1, and Sarah Palin and George Clooney are tied at 500-1. :) http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2016/winner