Would Hillary have been better than Barry O?

Bob_Luken

I saw this quote from Hillary Clinton's new book concerning her earlier involvement in Bergdahl's situation.

"I acknowledged, as I had many times before, that opening the door to negotiations with the Taliban would be hard to swallow for many Americans after so many years of war,........"

So then, I instinctively told myself. Maybe, she would have been the better democrat. Seems like my current President doesn't understand why anybody would oppose his actions (any of his actions) unless they must be attacking him for political advantage. At least Hillary Clinton has a reasonable expectation as to why "many Americans" would be in opposition to this swap.

Asked whether he was surprised at the Bergdahl backlash, President Obama said "I'm never surprised by controversies that are whipped up in Washington,.......".

Really? Nobody in Washington told me realize that this was a very bad trade when I first heard of it, I just knew it was bad. I'm constantly surprised by this President's same childish reaction to any opposition. But, sadly, by now I shouldn't be.

So, the question is, Would Hillary have been a better president than Barry had she won in 2008?

Rain

I doubt anyone for a long time will be a good President. There is just too much distance from the American people to the President.

Bob_Luken

Oh, yeah, I kind of agree but, I didn't mean to ask whether she would have been a good president. But, just for the sake of speculation, would she have been better, or worse, than President Obama.

Bob_Luken

Bob Luken:

Double post double post.

jlmarta

They're both losers in my book. My dad had a saying for it. He'd say "I'll trade both of them off for a yellow dog and then shoot the damned dog".

Bob_Luken

jlmarta:

They're both losers in my book. My dad had a saying for it. He'd say "I'll trade both of them off for a yellow dog and then shoot the damned dog".

LOL But, that's not an actual answer to the question (and I'll ask it again until I get busy and have to go do real-world things). I'll put it another way. If you had to go back to 2008 in a time machine and your only two options were to leave history as it is, or put Hillary in the White House instead of Obama, which would you choose?

SleevePlz

I don't think it would be much different. The political parties seem to make all the decisions now (considering every vote is down party lines). So I imagine every Democratic President will be pretty similar, as will every Republican. I wonder where the next war will be when the GOP retake the Oval Office in a couple years....

wwhwang

Honestly, I think she would have been better than Barry O...not by much, however. This is still the same woman that said "What does it matter?" When pressed about the deaths in Benghazi, was a person of interest in a corruption investigation called Whitewater, has unconfirmed ties to the mafia (this one, I'm not too sure about), and spent millions on pet projects like independent studies as to whether video games make you a mass murderer.

In short, I think she would be slightly better, but just as corrupt. I'm all for having a female president, but not someone like that. I'd rather have a toaster as president than Barry or Hillary.

Bob_Luken

SleevePlz:

I don't think it would be much different. The political parties seem to make all the decisions now (considering every vote is down party lines). So I imagine every Democratic President will be pretty similar, as will every Republican. I wonder where the next war will be when the GOP retake the Oval Office in a couple years....

"When the GOP retake the Oval Office in a couple years...."? Did you just say Hillary can't win? Or was it just so you can make that crack about the warmongers?

The3Stogies

Instead of racism every one that disagreed with her would be part of a "vast right-wing conspiracy", or anti-feminist.

Bob_Luken

wwhwang:

Honestly, I think she would have been better than Barry O...not by much, however. This is still the same woman that said "What does it matter?" When pressed about the deaths in Benghazi, was a person of interest in a corruption investigation called Whitewater, has unconfirmed ties to the mafia (this one, I'm not too sure about), and spent millions on pet projects like independent studies as to whether video games make you a mass murderer.

In short, I think she would be slightly better, but just as corrupt. I'm all for having a female president, but not someone like that. I'd rather have a toaster as president than Barry or Hillary.

I'm in agreement with most of that. She would have been bad, but not as bad as President Obama has been. It's as if he truly is a foreigner. Seemingly, his values (evidenced by actions) are very different and foreign to those of most Americans.

webmost

Prolly sell more pardons than Bill.

SleevePlz

Bob Luken:

SleevePlz:

I don't think it would be much different. The political parties seem to make all the decisions now (considering every vote is down party lines). So I imagine every Democratic President will be pretty similar, as will every Republican. I wonder where the next war will be when the GOP retake the Oval Office in a couple years....

"When the GOP retake the Oval Office in a couple years...."? Did you just say Hillary can't win? Or was it just so you can make that crack about the warmongers?

Well, I believe things are cyclical. I also believe the GOP are warmongers, as evidenced by their warmongering. I find it amazing that the same people that freak out over the five deaths linked to the deserter aren't freaked out over the thousands of deaths in Iraq when that war was unwarranted (unless you believe invading a sovereign nation over WMDs/Saddam is a bad person/they bombed WTC/it definitely isn't about oil/insert random reason #5 here). Ever wonder how many American soldiers would be alive today if Gore was President back then? I do and it makes me really sad.

Beaker38

I don't like bashing presidents because everyone needs someone to blame (except W Bush he was just bad all around). well sometimes its not the president failing us its the government as a whole. the only thing i see congress doing votes on is there pay check. I don't know why some people vote these people in to there positions when all they care about is $$$. i know Obama came from a middle class family and i feel he represents us to the best of his ability. being president is probably the hardest job in the whole world and to say if Hillary would be better is like saying what would have happened if Lincoln was not assassinated or the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand of the Austro-Hungarian empire didn't happen and WW1 didn't happen. I don't like having political debates because people never budge on anything they believe. My family was very into politics with one of my relatives running for mayor in Albany, NY. There is little Obama can get accomplished due to congress shooting down all of his bills but at least he is doing something. Obama is probably the most down to earth president we have had in a while, who also didn't come form money. I am a Independent, the only time i can see voting for the GOP party is if they have someone that is not way far right or if Andrew Cuomo or as people in NY call him King Cuomo was running (I hate that guy).

jd50ae

Elmer Fudd would have made a better president.

The3Stogies

Bob Luken:

LOL But, that's not an actual answer to the question (and I'll ask it again until I get busy and have to go do real-world things). I'll put it another way. If you had to go back to 2008 in a time machine and your only two options were to leave history as it is, or put Hillary in the White House instead of Obama, which would you choose?

I choose Obama, or as is.
In a way maybe it is good that Hillary or McCain didn't get elected. Congress, the public and the press would not have been as forgiving as they have been to Obama. Being so popular and given a free pass enabled him to do just about what he wanted. His express transforming of America and foriegn policies have opened alot of eyes, finally. He is becoming a rouge president. Hillary would have had a slower approach to this I think, being held more accountable. While having almost the same agenda, healthcare, income inequality, etc, I think she would have turned up the temp more slowly. So we "boiled frogs" would not realize until it is too late how much government is taking over our lives, spying and lying to us. That's domestic, now foriegn policy well, they both stink at it, it's a draw. The reset with Russia says something I think. The Bengahzi mess says the rest. Would have been entertaining to have Bill back in the House though. I can see him doing the Easter Egg hunt, oh that's right they don't call it that anymore.

webmost

SleevePlz:

I also believe the GOP are warmongers, as evidenced by their warmongering.

Where does this come from? Every war in the 20th century, it was a Democrat dragged us into it. Each time with a lie. First war in the 21st century, it was a Republican. Ergo, we are to believe that Republicans are warmongers, while Democrats are pacifists?

Power corrupts. Period.

The3Stogies

webmost:

SleevePlz:

I also believe the GOP are warmongers, as evidenced by their warmongering.

Where does this come from? Every war in the 20th century, it was a Democrat dragged us into it. Each time with a lie. First war in the 21st century, it was a Republican. Ergo, we are to believe that Republicans are warmongers, while Democrats are pacifists?

Maybe not dragged us into it but set the stage

jd50ae

The3Stogies:

webmost:

SleevePlz:

I also believe the GOP are warmongers, as evidenced by their warmongering.

Where does this come from? Every war in the 20th century, it was a Democrat dragged us into it. Each time with a lie. First war in the 21st century, it was a Republican. Ergo, we are to believe that Republicans are warmongers, while Democrats are pacifists?

Maybe not dragged us into it but set the stage

Lets re-write history some more. But in order to do that, you would have to read history, in order to re-write it. Or, with some age and experience you would have had to live through some of it. Which brings up a serious problem, with all the xxxxxxx indoctrination centers turning out drones who don't know who the vice president is (I wish I didn't) and that there was a War Between the States (a real long time ago) it may be a lost cause.

Bob_Luken

SleevePlz:

Bob Luken:

SleevePlz:

I don't think it would be much different. The political parties seem to make all the decisions now (considering every vote is down party lines). So I imagine every Democratic President will be pretty similar, as will every Republican. I wonder where the next war will be when the GOP retake the Oval Office in a couple years....

"When the GOP retake the Oval Office in a couple years...."? Did you just say Hillary can't win? Or was it just so you can make that crack about the warmongers?

Well, I believe things are cyclical. I also believe the GOP are warmongers, as evidenced by their warmongering. I find it amazing that the same people that freak out over the five deaths linked to the deserter aren't freaked out over the thousands of deaths in Iraq when that war was unwarranted (unless you believe invading a sovereign nation over WMDs/Saddam is a bad person/they bombed WTC/it definitely isn't about oil/insert random reason #5 here). Ever wonder how many American soldiers would be alive today if Gore was President back then? I do and it makes me really sad.

Really? I didn't realize I was in with such a bad crowd. Now I'm sad too

Reminds of that saying - Conservatives think Liberals are wrong, and Liberals think conservatives are evil.

SleevePlz

jd50ae:

The3Stogies:

webmost:

SleevePlz:

I also believe the GOP are warmongers, as evidenced by their warmongering.

Where does this come from? Every war in the 20th century, it was a Democrat dragged us into it. Each time with a lie. First war in the 21st century, it was a Republican. Ergo, we are to believe that Republicans are warmongers, while Democrats are pacifists?

Maybe not dragged us into it but set the stage

Lets re-write history some more. But in order to do that, you would have to read history, in order to re-write it. Or, with some age and experience you would have had to live through some of it. Which brings up a serious problem, with all the xxxxxxx indoctrination centers turning out drones who don't know who the vice president is (I wish I didn't) and that there was a War Between the States (a real long time ago) it may be a lost cause.

My bad. I thought we were talking current politics, not Civil War era politics. If the Republicans have not become warmongers, then why did we invade Iraq? Feel free not to answer this question but rather attack me for being illiterate once again. That's cool too.

phobicsquirrel

SleevePlz:

Bob Luken:

SleevePlz:

I don't think it would be much different. The political parties seem to make all the decisions now (considering every vote is down party lines). So I imagine every Democratic President will be pretty similar, as will every Republican. I wonder where the next war will be when the GOP retake the Oval Office in a couple years....

"When the GOP retake the Oval Office in a couple years...."? Did you just say Hillary can't win? Or was it just so you can make that crack about the warmongers?

Well, I believe things are cyclical. I also believe the GOP are warmongers, as evidenced by their warmongering. I find it amazing that the same people that freak out over the five deaths linked to the deserter aren't freaked out over the thousands of deaths in Iraq when that war was unwarranted (unless you believe invading a sovereign nation over WMDs/Saddam is a bad person/they bombed WTC/it definitely isn't about oil/insert random reason #5 here). Ever wonder how many American soldiers would be alive today if Gore was President back then? I do and it makes me really sad.

I know right. I think she would have been worse, though there would have been a more civil discourse in the country. In truth though a lot of things Obama wanted to do when he came in office were popular however the president is only as good as conress is and the pressure from the people. Also the govt isn't really checked by the voters, they do their corporate masters will. Elections are mostly to appease us. Sure their are some political office holders that do good things but not enough of them. I'm thinking a tipping point will come though not sure which way it will tip.

jgibv

They are all bought and paid for way before their name is printed on the ballot....doesn't make a difference whose name is on there....

The_Kid

Bob Luken:

Oh, yeah, I kind of agree but, I didn't mean to ask whether she would have been a good president. But, just for the sake of speculation, would she have been better, or worse, than President Obama.

Better or worse for who?????? People with your mindset??? Curious, since this question is based on her statement regarding the Bergdahl trade, Why are you opposed to it? (the trade)

Bob_Luken

The Kid:

Bob Luken:

Oh, yeah, I kind of agree but, I didn't mean to ask whether she would have been a good president. But, just for the sake of speculation, would she have been better, or worse, than President Obama.

Better or worse for who?????? People with your mindset??? Curious, since this question is based on her statement regarding the Bergdahl trade, Why are you opposed to it? (the trade)

"Better or worse for who?????? People with your mindset???"

What mindset? I don't know your mindset. Why would you presume to know mine?

People with my mindset huh? LOL I'm still chuckling over that one. It's almost as if you said "you people". THAT would have been very funny.

The3Stogies

Obama said he would bring the country together, hmmm. Obama said he would make the world like us more, hmmm. Would Hillary have done better? Each event and how you handle it leads to the next, so who really knows where we would be now if she were president? Better or worse or the same.
I feel Obama has divided the country, us versus them mentality instead of working together. Also think we are really starting to look weak and ineffectual around the world. Maybe that is a good thing, time will tell, but I think it is a vulnerability to our freedom and others. We must protect our freedom at all costs. We have the greatest military force in the world, and the ability to fight around the world. Take the fight to them, keep them on their heels. Let the military fight the war not the politicians.

Wow, I'm starting to rant, back on task sorry

Bill did move to the center and stepped across the aisle to get things done, maybe Hillary would have done the same, who knows.

jlmarta

Well, back when Slick Willie was elected, a friend asked what I thought about the outcome of the election. I told him I didn't like our new president worth a damn and I didn't much care for her husband, either.

So, in answer to your question, let's put it into the words of the great Billary, "What difference does it make"? I don't see how one can compare a certifiable narcissist to a callous female supremacist with any kind of logic. But, hey, us peons don't know much about things like that, do we??

jd50ae

SleevePlz:

jd50ae:

The3Stogies:

webmost:

SleevePlz:

I also believe the GOP are warmongers, as evidenced by their warmongering.

Where does this come from? Every war in the 20th century, it was a Democrat dragged us into it. Each time with a lie. First war in the 21st century, it was a Republican. Ergo, we are to believe that Republicans are warmongers, while Democrats are pacifists?

Maybe not dragged us into it but set the stage

Lets re-write history some more. But in order to do that, you would have to read history, in order to re-write it. Or, with some age and experience you would have had to live through some of it. Which brings up a serious problem, with all the xxxxxxx indoctrination centers turning out drones who don't know who the vice president is (I wish I didn't) and that there was a War Between the States (a real long time ago) it may be a lost cause.

My bad. I thought we were talking current politics, not Civil War era politics. If the Republicans have not become warmongers, then why did we invade Iraq? Feel free not to answer this question but rather attack me for being illiterate once again. That's cool too.

You did not understand even a little bit what I was saying. And my personal opinion is it would be a complete waste of time trying to explain it. Your mindset is a closed mind.

jd50ae

jlmarta:

Well, back when Slick Willie was elected, a friend asked what I thought about the outcome of the election. I told him I didn't like our new president worth a damn and I didn't much care for her husband, either.

So, in answer to your question, let's put it into the words of the great Billary, "What difference does it make"? I don't see how one can compare a certifiable narcissist to a callous female supremacist with any kind of logic. But, hey, us peons don't know much about things like that, do we??

Well said. And if people don't remember "what difference does it make" when elections come up, I wonder if it will be because the xxxxxxx media will hide it just like they did Benghazi, in the first place. Who knows, there is enough time for so many more scandals before the elections that none of us will remember, or care about, anything.

jd50ae

The3Stogies:

Obama said he would bring the country together, hmmm. Obama said he would make the world like us more, hmmm. Would Hillary have done better? Each event and how you handle it leads to the next, so who really knows where we would be now if she were president? Better or worse or the same.
I feel Obama has divided the country, us versus them mentality instead of working together. Also think we are really starting to look weak and ineffectual around the world. Maybe that is a good thing, time will tell, but I think it is a vulnerability to our freedom and others. We must protect our freedom at all costs. We have the greatest military force in the world, and the ability to fight around the world. Take the fight to them, keep them on their heels. Let the military fight the war not the politicians.

Wow, I'm starting to rant, back on task sorry

Bill did move to the center and stepped across the aisle to get things done, maybe Hillary would have done the same, who knows.

Though I agree with you I wonder what would happen if we stopped sending our troops, money and technology to the stone age barbarians and countries that stab us in the back every chance they get. I would much rather we take care of our own problems first. Then we should concentrate on the sick and hungry elsewhere and leave the rest to killing each other off.

jd50ae

The Kid:

Bob Luken:

Oh, yeah, I kind of agree but, I didn't mean to ask whether she would have been a good president. But, just for the sake of speculation, would she have been better, or worse, than President Obama.

Better or worse for who?????? People with your mindset??? Curious, since this question is based on her statement regarding the Bergdahl trade, Why are you opposed to it? (the trade)

Anyone who would question others serious problems with this "trade" is not paying attention. Someone said that the "5" (10) are too old and the "war" has passed them by....that is quite possible the most ridiculous reasoning any one has come up with to date. Even the hank of the Congress harry reid doesn't get it by saying "I am glad to be rid of them". Well golly gee whiz...does anyone believe for one second that these "5" (10) haven't already met with their minions and have already made plans for further murder and mayhem? harry reid is just plain stupid, but there are a lot of naive people that add to the stupidity.