United We Stand - uwsboard.com

For a Hillary! Victory in the Old Dominion.

http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/lates ... l?mode=jqm

Meh at this point what difference does it make?

Major Kong wrote:Meh at this point what difference does it make?

You're probably right. She was already a lock.

ip_law-hokie wrote:

Major Kong wrote:Meh at this point what difference does it make?

You're probably right. She was already a lock.

she didn't win last time. Why will this be different?

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

Major Kong wrote:Meh at this point what difference does it make?

You're probably right. She was already a lock.

she didn't win last time. Why will this be different?

Yeah. People tend to forget that. And she was the favorite.

Yours is a very good point. She couldn't beat the guy who won last time. As an aside, I always wondered why Republicans didn't think of that when they chose Romney for 2012 (except Romney couldn't beat the guy who couldn't beat the guy who won). Is that some kind of screwed up loser vs loser once removed thingy?

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

Major Kong wrote:Meh at this point what difference does it make?

You're probably right. She was already a lock.

she didn't win last time. Why will this be different?

Once wrote:Yours is a very good point. She couldn't beat the guy who won last time. As an aside, I always wondered why Republicans didn't think of that when they chose Romney for 2012 (except Romney couldn't beat the guy who couldn't beat the guy who won). Is that some kind of screwed up loser vs loser once removed thingy?

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

Major Kong wrote:Meh at this point what difference does it make?

You're probably right. She was already a lock.

she didn't win last time. Why will this be different?

That's all there really was. Cain imploded as a womanizer, Newt as an egomaniac, Perry as uumm forgetful. That kind of narrowed it down. That said, Romney would have been a fantastic president. I hope he runs again, then nation needs someone with his intelligence and business sense. Raegan also lost his 76 primary to Ford, so anything is possible. That said, someone who already lost is no way a guarantee of a win.

I hope he runs again too.

awesome guy wrote:

Once wrote:Yours is a very good point. She couldn't beat the guy who won last time. As an aside, I always wondered why Republicans didn't think of that when they chose Romney for 2012 (except Romney couldn't beat the guy who couldn't beat the guy who won). Is that some kind of screwed up loser vs loser once removed thingy?

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

Major Kong wrote:Meh at this point what difference does it make?

You're probably right. She was already a lock.

she didn't win last time. Why will this be different?

That's all there really was. Cain imploded as a womanizer, Newt as an egomaniac, Perry as uumm forgetful. That kind of narrowed it down. That said, Romney would have been a fantastic president. I hope he runs again, then nation needs someone with his intelligence and business sense. Raegan also lost his 76 primary to Ford, so anything is possible. That said, someone who already lost is no way a guarantee of a win.

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

Major Kong wrote:Meh at this point what difference does it make?

You're probably right. She was already a lock.

she didn't win last time. Why will this be different?

Um. Candidate Obama in 08 was virtually unbeatable. That's what forced McCain to throw a hail Mary with Palin. You remember the packed out football stadiums and millions deep inauguration? Say what you will about him, but Obama's a great candidate, especially before he got stuck with the blame for Bush's failed economic policies and wars.

Major Kong wrote:Meh at this point what difference does it make?

chuckd4vt wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

Major Kong wrote:Meh at this point what difference does it make?

You're probably right. She was already a lock.

she didn't win last time. Why will this be different?

Um. Candidate Obama in 08 was virtually unbeatable. That's what forced McCain to throw a hail Mary with Palin. You remember the packed out football stadiums and millions deep inauguration? Say what you will about him, but Obama's a great candidate, especially before he had to actually govern.

FTFY:

133743Hokie wrote:

chuckd4vt wrote:

awesome guy wrote:

ip_law-hokie wrote:

Major Kong wrote:Meh at this point what difference does it make?

You're probably right. She was already a lock.

she didn't win last time. Why will this be different?

Um. Candidate Obama in 08 was virtually unbeatable. That's what forced McCain to throw a hail Mary with Palin. You remember the packed out football stadiums and millions deep inauguration? Say what you will about him, but Obama's a great candidate, especially before he had to actually govern.

FTFY:

Well it's not so easy to govern when your predecessor sticks you with the worst economy in 80 years and 2 unpopular/ unwinnable/ incredibly costly wars. Ad I've said before, JFK, Lincoln, Washington, Reagan, or Clinton rolled into one couldn't have fixed that mess in less than 4 or 5 years. I ain't saying Obama's perfect, we should been out ta Afghanistan by 2011, but he deserves some credit for our steady recovery and withfrawls.

chuckd4vt wrote: Well it's not so easy to govern when your predecessor sticks you with the worst economy in 80 years and 2 unpopular/ unwinnable/ incredibly costly wars. Ad I've said before, JFK, Lincoln, Washington, Reagan, or Clinton rolled into one couldn't have fixed that mess in less than 4 or 5 years. I ain't saying Obama's perfect, we should been out ta Afghanistan by 2011, but he deserves some credit for our steady recovery and withfrawls.

OK

chuckd4vt wrote:Well it's not so easy to govern when your predecessor sticks you with the worst economy in 80 years and 2 unpopular/ unwinnable/ incredibly costly wars. Ad I've said before, JFK, Lincoln, Washington, Reagan, or Clinton rolled into one couldn't have fixed that mess in less than 4 or 5 years. I ain't saying Obama's perfect, we should been out ta Afghanistan by 2011, but he deserves some credit for our steady recovery and withfrawls.

Oh spare me...Hellfar when did the incompetent community organizer try to govern since he was elected?

He was elected in 2008 and has been campaigning ever since...he's the 1st POTUS in my lifetime that even ½ way through his final term is still campaigning.

As far as any recovery what recovery we have experienced is despite our POTUS and all the clowns in DC...they haven't built schitt besides a massive debt.

chuckd4vt wrote: Well it's not so easy to govern when your predecessor sticks you with the worst economy in 80 years and 2 unpopular/ unwinnable/ incredibly costly wars. Ad I've said before, JFK, Lincoln, Washington, Reagan, or Clinton rolled into one couldn't have fixed that mess in less than 4 or 5 years. I ain't saying Obama's perfect, we should been out ta Afghanistan by 2011, but he deserves some credit for our steady recovery and withfrawls.

O_o

That's some serious kool-aide, even by UWS standards, hoss.
Seriously?

RiverguyVT wrote:

chuckd4vt wrote: Well it's not so easy to govern when your predecessor sticks you with the worst economy in 80 years and 2 unpopular/ unwinnable/ incredibly costly wars. Ad I've said before, JFK, Lincoln, Washington, Reagan, or Clinton rolled into one couldn't have fixed that mess in less than 4 or 5 years. I ain't saying Obama's perfect, we should been out ta Afghanistan by 2011, but he deserves some credit for our steady recovery and withfrawls.

O_o

That's some serious kool-aide, even by UWS standards, hoss.
Seriously?

I just don't see the doom and gloom the right wingers are seeing. Do you not agree Obama inherited one of the worst set of circumstances in Presidential history? I can think of only 4 or 5 who faced worse. And in reality, he's been OK. Not awesome, but decent.

chuckd4vt wrote:

RiverguyVT wrote:

chuckd4vt wrote: Well it's not so easy to govern when your predecessor sticks you with the worst economy in 80 years and 2 unpopular/ unwinnable/ incredibly costly wars. Ad I've said before, JFK, Lincoln, Washington, Reagan, or Clinton rolled into one couldn't have fixed that mess in less than 4 or 5 years. I ain't saying Obama's perfect, we should been out ta Afghanistan by 2011, but he deserves some credit for our steady recovery and withfrawls.

O_o

That's some serious kool-aide, even by UWS standards, hoss.
Seriously?

I just don't see the doom and gloom the right wingers are seeing. Do you not agree Obama inherited one of the worst set of circumstances in Presidential history? I can think of only 4 or 5 who faced worse. And in reality, he's been OK. Not awesome, but decent.

He inherited an economy on a downturn. His policies and processes exacerbated and lengthened the downturn as well as the recovery. We're going on 5 years and the economy hasn't yet completely turned around. That ain't Bushes fault.

Afghanistan was a war that all but a small minority of Americans supported. The end result was a stable country, which the Obama admins policies have since destabilized.

Iraq was a war that many Americans and a majority of our elected officials supported. The rationale for that support ended up mot being true. That said, Bush left Obama a country in somewhat peace. Again, the Obama admin has fubared it all.

You say Obama inherited one of the worst set of circumstances in presidential history. I say we elected a neophyte community organizer that was, and still is, in way over his head and has yet to surround himself with the talent he needs to properly lead the country.

chuckd4vt wrote:Do you not agree Obama inherited one of the worst set of circumstances in Presidential history?

He probably should have made them his priority rather than focusing on healthcare.

GCHokie78 wrote:

chuckd4vt wrote:Do you not agree Obama inherited one of the worst set of circumstances in Presidential history?

He probably should have made them his priority rather than focusing on healthcare.

Well, when it comes to things he had a ton of control over, he withdrew us from Iraq, which is not what his GOP opponent would have done, and he escalated things in Afghanistan. Those paid off, but I fat him for keeping us in Afghanistan longer than 2011. Foreign policy has been an overall success for him, despite the occasional gang style attacks on Americans abroad.
And we'll be totally out of Afghanistan before he's out of office!!!

And domestically, we've moved incredibly far to the left when it comes to social issues. Gay marriage, legalization of weed, and the likes. I attribute that primarily to the RWNJs and their Tea Party primarily. Though Obama's remaining relatively steadfast helped the moderates determine who the loons were. He has failed on implementing gun control policies.

And the economy has steadily improved. It took over a decade to recover from the Great Depression. IDK what people expected from the POTUS here. And I feel Obamacare is a step in the right direction toward a Universal HC system. 50 yrs from now, historians will struggle to explain the atrocity that was our old model.

Overall, he's done a decent job, hence his easy reelection last yr. I personally would have liked the earlier withdraw from Afghanistan and a recovery bill thatb

The silver lining to Clinton winning the Presidency is that it will make UWS that much more entertaining over 4-8 years.

VisorBoy wrote:The silver lining to Clinton winning the Presidency is that it will make UWS that much more entertaining over 4-8 years.

She won't win. She was a heavy favorite last time. A nobody came out of nowhere and beat her.

CWHOKIECPA wrote:

VisorBoy wrote:The silver lining to Clinton winning the Presidency is that it will make UWS that much more entertaining over 4-8 years.

She won't win. She was a heavy favorite last time. A nobody came out of nowhere and beat her.

In American politics, anything is possible. Who thought Obama would win before he became so popular?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... president/

VisorBoy wrote:

CWHOKIECPA wrote:

VisorBoy wrote:The silver lining to Clinton winning the Presidency is that it will make UWS that much more entertaining over 4-8 years.

She won't win. She was a heavy favorite last time. A nobody came out of nowhere and beat her.

In American politics, anything is possible. Who thought Obama would win before he became so popular?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... president/

I was solidly on record as saying no way we'd elect someone whose name sounded so much like the 9/11 terrorist's (Osama), much less like a deposed dictator's (Hussein), too.

I compared it to 1950s america seeking out a guy name adolph mussolini. It still throws me.

RiverguyVT wrote:

VisorBoy wrote:

CWHOKIECPA wrote:

VisorBoy wrote:The silver lining to Clinton winning the Presidency is that it will make UWS that much more entertaining over 4-8 years.

She won't win. She was a heavy favorite last time. A nobody came out of nowhere and beat her.

In American politics, anything is possible. Who thought Obama would win before he became so popular?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... president/

I was solidly on record as saying no way we'd elect someone whose name sounded so much like the 9/11 terrorist's (Osama), much less like a deposed dictator's (Hussein), too.

I compared it to 1950s america seeking out a guy name adolph mussolini. It still throws me.

Maybe we're not so xenophobic after all.