<p>Where is the Republican’s plan to pay for the continued occupation of Iraq “for as long as it takes to win?” </p>
<p>How are the Republicans paying for infrastructure improvements in Iraq that are abandoned as soon as they are built?</p>
<p>To put this into perspective, Clinton’s infrastructure improvements you cite total about $2 billion a year. We are currently spending $144 billion a year in Iraq.</p>
<p>You be the judge. Come on Republicans. Is Iraq going to funded by allowing the United States infrastructure to crumble. Go ahead, say it!</p>
<p>To answer your question. Hard core Republicans are never going to vote for a Democrat. Hard core Democrats are never going to vote for a Republican. National elections in the United States are determined by the 30% or so of the electorate that is soft-Republican, soft-Democrat, or Independents. These voters are up for grabs as fashions change. For example, these are voters who may have voted for Ron Reagan and Bill Clinton. </p>
<p>They are categorized as “Independents” in the polls, but that’s a litte misleading as most Independents lean one way or the other.</p>
<p>No candidate will provide that kind of specificity. It’s almost impossible to even get a handle on military spending right now because so much of the Iraq occupation has been funded “off-budget” in the form of emergency supplementals and because of the cost of re-equipping the military after we get out. All of those issues are highly dependent on when and how we redeploy. For example, the long-term health care costs of disable veterans can’t be determined with casualties running at such high rates and increasing over time.</p>
<p>“No candidate will provide that kind of specificity.”</p>
<p>…Yet she is able to provide such specificity on exactly how much she will spend on the crumbling infrastructure to rebuild America so another Minneapolis tragedy will never ever ever occur. And it is interesting that she said this without having a complete handle on the severity of the nation’s infrastructure problem. (Heck, it is possible that the BIG DIG alone could eat up her entire “emergency” budget.)</p>
<p>I love the analogy provided by another poster. If this is your first love I-dad, it is our job to point out the not so perfect side of this relationship. ;)</p>
<p>I confess I haven’t read the whole thread but did anyone else cringe when Hillary said “I’m your girl!” No matter what your politics, to me it was offensive that a WOMAN would say that.</p>
<p>"Actually, I think Hillary is running a bit to the right of Bill.</p>
<p>Here’s the deal with the Clinton campaign strategy. They campaign basically as technocrats. Identify issues of concern to a broad base of Americans, and offer incremental, largely achievable, policies to move towards those objectives."</p>
<p>Yup. Read more money and more profits for health insurance companies, and bigger campaign contributions.</p>
<p>Between 18-33% of every dollar Hillary (or the others) devotes to purchasing private health insurance goes for profit, much of it for the fatcats. Why not just hand them a certain percentage of the federal treasury, keep a percentage for yourself, and then develop a health care system that really WORKS, not just for the uninsured, but for everyone?</p>
<p>Actually, she could probably discuss with specificity those budgets. She serves on the Senate Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works and on it’s Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee.</p>
<p>She could also discuss Pentagon budgeting since the Senate Armed Services Committee oversees those appropriations. However, Pentagon budgeting would not make for very effective campaign speeches. It’s a massive and arcane topic.</p>
<p>Simple. There is not the political will for a single-payer government health care system in the United States.</p>
<p>BTW, Clinton was a sponsor (along with Republican Lindsey Graham) and others of a bill that became law increasing the number of citizens covered by government run health care – specifically, extending VA health coverage to all Reserve and Guard members who have been deployed on active duty.</p>
<p>“Simple. There is not the political will for a single-payer government health care system in the United States.”</p>
<p>I expect leadership, not someone who goes along with the crowd, and lines the pockets of her campaign supporters in the process. </p>
<p>“mini- im curious. who are you supporting?”</p>
<p>Not. In my state, it doesn’t matter - whoever the Dems nominate will win. In my precinct, it doesn’t matter - Kucinich already has it sown up. I could vote for Obama because of the symbolism. I could also vote for Hillary because of the symbolism, except I couldn’t without knowing whether she was a dupe (then I could vote for her) or in on the Big Lie of January/February 1998, the cover for her husband’s genocide, and which precipitated Democratic support for the hostile, aggressive occupation of Iraq. But if I knew she was a dupe, and she could apologize for it, I could well vote for her. (And could still even vote for her if Gingrich had a chance in Washington State - it’s more likely that Gravel could be elected President than that.) I like Edwards on most of the issues, and especially like the fact that he is a trial lawyer, and I also think he’s cute. I think Dodd and Biden are blowhards, and their “experienced leadership” is part of what landed us in Iraq (they WERE dupes). Kucinich expresses many of my values (and, more likely than not, I will vote for him in the caucuses); but we all know he doesn’t matter. </p>
<p>Of the Reps, the only one I have the remotest trust in is Huckabee. Although I disagree with him about most everything, I don’t think the country would go to hell-in-a-hand-basket if was elected. He’s toast, of course.</p>
<p>^ As long as it is not hair envy. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>(Truth be told, I wouldn’t pick Hillary as a mate for my S. Unfortunately I probably won’t be involved in the decision making. Now with my daughter, that’s another story…)</p>
<p>Wow. In the last several hours, at least 2 people have mentioned support for Edwards on this thread. Could the tide be turning?? I can hardly contain myself. He’s definitely still my first choice, but I’m a yellow dog Democrat, so will definitely vote that ticket, regardless. Even if I wasn’t, I’d still vote for the Democrat. :)</p>