<p>I am just watching the debate here and Clinton sounds like Bush with a skirt…</p>
<p>They all sound like bush…even Obama. They’re all just saying the same thing…trying to prove they’re as ‘tough’ as bush. Hillary even moreso because she wants to prove she’s MAN enough for the job.</p>
<p>They’re all saying what they think they’re SUPPOSED to say…except Kucinich & Ron Paul. They seem to be the only freethinkers.</p>
<p>Don’t any of the Democrats know that President Bush can’t run for re-election?</p>
<p>Both Clintons are and always have been more about winning than ideology. She’ll do whatever it takes. At least she won’t sell out her principles.</p>
<p>EDITED: In all fairness, this is exactly how I felt about GWB in 2000. Not much has happened to change my mind since then.</p>
<p>Are you kidding? She was the only candidate on stage constantly attacking the Republican party. All the others were too preoccupied either fortifying their own stances or attempting to weaken her. Instead of a united front against the Republican party, it was more of a united front against her, which quite honestly, is very unfortunate.</p>
<p>So did W sell out? Or did he stay with his conversation with G_d.</p>
<p>
Don’t Republicans see their candidates [except for Ron Paul] trying to out do each other competing for the Bushevik vote, waving red meat for those who like his policies, while adroitly trying to keep the two syllables of his name from passing their lips so it can’t be used as a sound bite?</p>
<p>No matter. Whoever the GOP nominee is will be welded to Bush at shoulder, elbow, hip, and knee by the time the Democratic ads are done.</p>
<p>That’s the callousness of Clinton. She ATTACKS the Republican Party, but has more in common with them than another person on the Democratic Stage/</p>
<p>She voted f or the Iraq War. She voted to enable the Iran War. She’s a question mark on Social Security and said she would do healthcare in her SECOND Term.</p>
<p>Lord save us from a bunch of right wing Democrats.</p>
<p>Kucinich was pretty cool last night. Direct, and honest. Wished he looked a bit more presidential though…and the UFO business doesn’t help the cause.
Hillary is all about winning - a political animal all the way. Yes, she’s bright, tough and articulate but I just don’t trust her.
Edwards seems too slick.
Obama might have some potential.
This won’t be easy…</p>
<p>“EDITED: In all fairness, this is exactly how I felt about GWB in 2000. Not much has happened to change my mind since then.”</p>
<p>WashDad, I’m not sure how you can say that about Bush. It seems exactly the opposite to me. That he gets something in his head and nothing can dislodge it. If he were about winning only, he wouldn’t have risked the last election by going to and staying in Iraq and he wouldn’t have risked the wrath of his base with his stand on immigration.</p>
<p>“If he were about winning only, he wouldn’t have risked the last election by going to and staying in Iraq”</p>
<p>Yes, that’s why when I see claims from the likes of Ted Kennedy that Bush started the war for “political” reasons I don’t know whether to laugh at his stupidity or cry because someone so dense is the “dean” of the Democrats in the Senate.</p>
<p>“Yes, that’s why when I see claims from the likes of Ted Kennedy that Bush started the war for “political” reasons I don’t know whether to laugh at his stupidity or cry because someone so dense is the “dean” of the Democrats in the Senate.”</p>
<p>What political reasons? If the democrats had had a decent candidate in 2004, Bush would have lost. Kennedy is not stupid, he’s projecting because HE actually would do anything for political gain.</p>
<p>
Yes, rather than running as Bill on the Nostalgia Ticket or Empress on the Dynasty Ticket.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly…!</p>
<p>Republicans, however, shouldn’t dare talk about the “Empress on a Dynasty Ticket”. Do you really think Bush II would have won without the name? Spare me</p>
<p>Right. The very idea is preposterous.</p>
<p>Incidentally, you know it was supposed to be Jeb instead of gw, right? Poppy bush actually CRIED in public when talking about how Jeb didn’t make it to the presidency. Implied was that the ‘dumb’ brother had to do the job instead. Ah well, just a puppet anyway…</p>
<p>What in heaven’s name is wrong with politicians in a democracy trying to learn from their past mistakes and to position themselves as centrists appealing to the greatest possible number of people, including some who may not be registered in their party? I am so tired of hearing about inconsistency. Our whole system is designed to produce inconsistency . . . except if we’re being charitable we call it “growth” or “leadership” or “compromise”.</p>
<p>That doesn’t mean one can’t be a little cynical if a candidate has a primary-eve change of heart on something that’s a fundamental, up-or-down moral issue. That means you, Mitt. But I would distrust any sitting legislator who is too “perfect” on anything like Iraq, or taxes, or the environment. Those are all tough, complicated issues. If someone is too consistent, then he or she isn’t actually doing anything.</p>
<p>Are there any HIllary supporters who support her because they want Bill back in the White House?</p>
<p>If there is so much disdain for Hillary, why is she so far ahead in the Democratic polls? She must be so popular because she voted for the war in Iraq after examining the intelligence information showing Saddam had WMD.</p>