She ain't running.

7 people bought her crap book and the long knives are already out. She's unintelligible on the stump, 70 + years old, frumpy, campaigns in a tablecloth, a 1%'er after accomplishing next to nothing on her own and got that ample asss beat 8 years ago by some schmuck nobody had ever heard from, and nobody wants to ever hear from again.

At this point I'd recommend the MSLSD and Auntie Pinko crowd start to rally behind your hero Sharpton. He's got a better shot.

(01-30-2015 02:50 PM)mlb Wrote:  I will say, the Washington Times does attempt to do "investigative journalism", the issue is that they are slanted in how they write their story. A company I worked for in the past was essentially crushed due to supposed "indiscressions" by the gov't, when in reality it never happened as the "expose" claimed it did (I know, I was directly involved with the company when the so called issues happened). Even though the company had impeccable CPAR scores for the work they had completed, the higher ups in that gov't office were scared to do work with them and let the program die due to the garbage reporting done by the Times.

That makes me wonder if they are any better than a glorified rag paper.

I agree, and I don't believe everything I read, even if it leans right as I do.
Nonetheless it is pretty clear that folks went over her head because they
had zero confidence in her.

(01-29-2015 06:03 PM)No Bull Wrote:  

(01-29-2015 05:37 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Hillary Clinton's march to war?

WTF???

And when did Congress declare war on Libya again? I must have missed that day of my life.

Hillary Clinton's march to war?

WTF???

And when did Congress declare war on Libya again? I must have missed that day of my life.

Better question is why this was leaked. Someone is undermining HRC's prospective run. Is it the Obama administration...they have no love for HRC...

Maybe they really think Elizabeth Warren will run?

I am not totally convinced that Hillary is going to run for President.

Nor am I. Im not even sure she can win the Democrat nomination. She is a horrible on the campaign trail. If she runs and again shuns her husbands help? The same outcome is likely.

(01-31-2015 01:06 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(01-29-2015 06:03 PM)No Bull Wrote:  

(01-29-2015 05:37 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Hillary Clinton's march to war?

WTF???

And when did Congress declare war on Libya again? I must have missed that day of my life.

Hillary Clinton's march to war?

WTF???

And when did Congress declare war on Libya again? I must have missed that day of my life.

Better question is why this was leaked. Someone is undermining HRC's prospective run. Is it the Obama administration...they have no love for HRC...

Maybe they really think Elizabeth Warren will run?

I am not totally convinced that Hillary is going to run for President.

Agreed. This is Obama coming after Hillary.

Why?

(01-30-2015 01:40 PM)South Carolina Duke Wrote:  

(01-29-2015 05:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I don't read rags like the Washington Times...sorry.

Only Salon. How Ironic

How wrong.

(01-31-2015 02:51 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  She ain't running.

7 people bought her crap book and the long knives are already out. She's unintelligible on the stump, 70 + years old, frumpy, campaigns in a tablecloth, a 1%'er after accomplishing next to nothing on her own and got that ample asss beat 8 years ago by some schmuck nobody had ever heard from, and nobody wants to ever hear from again.

At this point I'd recommend the MSLSD and Auntie Pinko crowd start to rally behind your hero Sharpton. He's got a better shot.

This is a great post.

I think she will run, get the Dem nomination, but lost to a republican. She is a horrible old school candidate... she does not inspire and has a bad track record. She is the Dem's Mitt.

Interesting that you mention her age, and I know he's not running...but did you know that Mitt is older? Would his age have been an issue to you too?

RWT is Fitbud. I am certain!