(04-08-2015 12:38 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(04-08-2015 11:19 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-08-2015 10:52 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(04-08-2015 10:24 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-08-2015 10:06 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Field a viable candidate?

I did some work for the Phil Gramm campaign way back when. He, at the time, SHOCKED the entire field by stating that to run a successful campaign the candidate would need to raise an eye-popping 30 million dollars.

They now do that in a weekend...

Please, scream Benghazi and Cell phone all you want. Once you guys destroy Bush and Walker by forcing them too far to the right, they'll be toast.

All of HRC's negatives are on the table.

Yep - and she's sleezy and slimy and devoid of any meaningful accomplishments enough that she shouldn't be able to win a dog catchers election. Ah yes - she has that defining "D" next to her name, so - no problem. She already has 45% of the electorate in the bag.

Well when you offer 5% of the electorate Gay bashing, that gives HRC 5% in the bag.

When you offer 14% of the electorate racial profiling and voter suppression, that gives HRC another 14% in the bag.

When you offer 12% of the electorate 'deport momma' and voter suppression, that gives HRC another 12% in the bag. Even if the person doing it can speak Spanish. Especially if that candidate is a Batista Cuban.

So even before you get into the issue of women voters and liberal versus conservative, you pretty much have a 25% head start for a Democrat in a general election. So how does a GOP candidate get better than 2/3rds of the Anglo vote?

This is just so much bullsh!t it's laughable. However, that is how the narrative is spun and the vast majority of low information Democratic voters lap it up. So I guess perception = reality - even if it's not really true.

But then, the whole premise of the Democratic game is lie, and see how much will stick.

Both of your descriptions are laughable narratives, don't act like you're above this sort of response when your original criticism of Hillary is just meaningless hyperbole combined with a cheap shot at all Democrats.

Hillary is an empty dress... or eh... empty pants suit. She has proven nothing and has no accomplishments other than the fact that she married a capable man that was a relatively popular president. Yet, her poll numbers are always good. I just don't see the appeal. She isn't even a champion for liberal causes.