jump to last post 1-41 of 41 discussions (118 posts)

Would you rather have Hillary Clinton or Mitt Romney as president?

  1. 0
    Phoebe Pikeposted 4 years ago

    Which one, if those were the only two choices, would you pick?

    1. 0
      Brenda Durhamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Romney of course.

      1. Mighty Mom profile image90
        Mighty Momposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Hi Brenda,
        Haven't seen you recently (unless you've been over on religion forums -- I haven't).
        Good to see you.
        Looks like you're the solo Romney supporter thusfar!

        1. 0
          Brenda Durhamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Well, the pickin's are kinda slim. haha.  Only two choices given, so I chose (hypothetically anyway).
          The religion forums?  Yeah. I half expected to see you there.

          1. Mighty Mom profile image90
            Mighty Momposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            It is a curious year, for sure!

            Do you have a candidate that you actually do support and if so, who and why (if you don't mind my asking, and with apologies to the OP for hijacking, but this discussion is kind of quiet right now and maybe we can stir the pot a bit by talking about the wider candidate pool).
            Is there anyone you feel is better than Romney?

            1. 0
              Brenda Durhamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Not anymore.  Both those Candidates dropped out.
              But Santorum is just as good as Romney, maybe better.

              My question is why doesn't your Democrat Party actually put a Democrat candidate up against Obama?   Don't they want their Party to survive?  Or are they content with it being dissolved into the "Progressive" Party?

              1. Mighty Mom profile image90
                Mighty Momposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I think there's a possibility the Dems will put Hillary up. I read hints here and there all over the place. But I'm skeptical.

                Why don't all the reasonable people (and there are lots on both sides of the aisle) meet in the middle and declare ourselves the Sane Centrist Party.
                We would kick booty!
                smile

                1. 0
                  Brenda Durhamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  I'm sorry, guess I didn't make clear........I should've said why don't the Democrats put up a "true Democrat" against Obama.  Which, Hillary is not, in my view.  She robotically urged all her followers to vote for Obama (a Progressive/Socialist/Far-Left Activist) after he won the nomination;  she knew he wasn't just a Democrat and knew he wasn't a statesman. Perhaps she herself is more like a Progressive, and is simply waiting to inherit the liberal ground that Obama broke.  That's what I mean.  Why she would abdicate to him is beyond me, unless she's wanting the Oval Office for her own liberal agenda (not Democrat agenda).  You see, there should've never been such a distance between Democrat and Republican agendas.  Citizens should be able to be presented with two viable Candidates, not from one viable and one far-out-there one.
                  "Sane Centrist Party"?   lol.  Well, that's kinda the same thinking as mine, if it weren't for the fact that we already had that option with both Parties, and would still have it IF people don't allow Obama's time in Office to break the original mold of viable politics.
                  As it stands now, and even moreso if Hillary runs, there's no way on God's green earth that I'd ever vote for a Democrat over a Republican even if the Republican was the weaker Candidate.  Party platform matters.  As soon as the Democrats reform their Platform back to something even close to viability, then there might be hope for America to consider trusting the Democrat Party.

                  1. Mighty Mom profile image90
                    Mighty Momposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    So you would vote for Gingrich as a Republican, even tho his personal record on family values is repulsive?

    2. dungeonraider profile image84
      dungeonraiderposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Mitt Romney MIGHT be the next Ronald Reagan.  But then, he isn't exactly new to politics, is he?  So what we see now, after many years, is going to be it, I suppose.  He might be what America needs in terms of cutting corporate-style fat from government agencies, but overall, he'd be hard on those less fortunate, a possible recipe for disaster.

      But, Hillary?  She is the type of statesman that America was founded on.  The concept of her ending up as a bad President seems absurd, doesn't it?

    3. Ramsa1 profile image70
      Ramsa1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      A tough question. I don't like either one.

    4. JayeWisdom profile image92
      JayeWisdomposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I wanted Hillary to be the Democratic nominee last time around and would have voted for her for POTUS in 2008. But then (and this will probably give Brenda a migraine) I'm what has been called a "yellow dog Democrat"--meaning I'd vote for a yellow dog before I'd vote for any Republican, only a pejorative adjective usually precedes "Republican" in that statement.  This is why I don't usually take part in political forums....

      1. livelonger profile image87
        livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Me too.

        In years past, for me, at least, there was always an opportunity to think through a tradeoff. I liked something about both candidates, but one's position on something was a dealbreaker, or the balance of one person's strengths and positions outweighed the other by some margin, etc.

        Not anymore. On all possible fronts, I disagree with the Republican candidate on everything, from social, economic, foreign policy, or even educational and science, issues, and rather easily choose the Democrat as the lesser of two evils. This dog just keeps on getting yellower. smile

    5. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image92
      TIMETRAVELER2posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Hillary.  She is experienced, level headed and brilliant and is a wonderful statesman.  However, she does not want to run, and I believe her.  Too bad because I think she is what this country needs right now.

      1. lovemychris profile image79
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I don't think she could.
        In the alternet spheres, it is going around that she and another man were the ones who master-minded Fast and Furious.
        And apparently Issa knows.

        who knows?, but it's out there.

    6. nifty@50 profile image79
      nifty@50posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Mitt Romney! He is the one I would choose out of the current GOP field any way. The other two front runners would lose in a general election vs Obama. Romney has been characterized as a " well oiled weather vane" & with the current grid lock in Washington, is isn't that what we need? Bill Clinton for all his faults, got a lot of good legislation past, being characterized as a "flip flopping well oiled weather vane" most of his second term.
      Between the "99%er's" & the "tea party die hards" both parties seem incapable of any compromise for the good of the country. Perfect example the"Cut Cap & Balance" fell 3 votes short in the house due to pressure of the tea party, the Democrats would not raise the dept ceiling with out a tax increase on the wealthy. The result, wallstreet tumbled over 500 pts & our credit was down graded for the first time ever. A failure of leadership on both sides, but ultimately the buck stops with the President!

    7. 0
      Sooner28posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Hillary.

    8. ib radmasters profile image60
      ib radmastersposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      The better question would be Hillary versus Barrack

      1. Eric Newland profile image60
        Eric Newlandposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Now there's a no-brainer. Given that a Dem win was pretty much inevitable after Bush, why, God, why did Obama have to win the nom over her in '08?

        1. Mighty Mom profile image90
          Mighty Momposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          It took me till about mid 2010 to stop asking that question.
          Wouldn't Congress have had the same mandate to make Hillary a one-term president? Same issues. Same players.
          Hard to say what she would have done that he was unable to...

          1. habee profile image90
            habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I'm still asking that question, MM! I think one difference would be that Hil would have been better at joining both sides. I don't think the nation would be so divided under Hil. She also had more experience, and we would have gotten Bill for free! lol. Oh, well...spilt milk and all that.

  2. Pcunix profile image90
    Pcunixposted 4 years ago

    Hillary. Without question.

    1. 0
      Phoebe Pikeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Could you expand on that? Is it because you like her way of thinking and speaking more?

      1. Pcunix profile image90
        Pcunixposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        She's a bright woman and she's not a Republican.  Romney is a flip-flopper and a Republican.

        1. mom101 profile image60
          mom101posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          What is your def of bright?

          Someone who doesn't know how to get a cup of coffee out of a drink machine? If that is it,  man shes bright.

          Don't go getting upset, I am a dem and voted for Bill both times. Proud of it too.

          All jokes aside. Politics, I'd say she would be the best player. She is good at that.

          1. Mighty Mom profile image90
            Mighty Momposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Sounds like I missed a good Hil v. coffee machine story! lol

            Got a link to the video on that?

            Not being defensive, but smart does not necessarily equate to common sense.
            Absent-minded professors and all that...

            1. mom101 profile image60
              mom101posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              MM, it was on one of  the campaign stops she made during her sprint 4 years ago.

              I laughed till I cried.  Yeah, you are right. Absent minded it was, right along with funny.

              1. Mighty Mom profile image90
                Mighty Momposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I love those campaign blooper videos.
                One thing I have to say about Obama is he is simply not funny.
                Not intentionally and not unintentionally, either.
                Gotta have a good laugh every so often.
                It's important!

                1. mom101 profile image60
                  mom101posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  I remember too that George Sr, while on his campaign tour, stopped at a grocery store and was simply amazed at how  the little scanner tool they use to scan the prices worked. He had never seen anything like it.

                  I am beginning to ask myself is it funny or are they just so out of touch with the common folks way of life.

  3. LawrenceS profile image75
    LawrenceSposted 4 years ago

    Hilary, because I think she has a better understanding of how Congress works. I also think she has a better understanding of how to lead a country and the pressures associated with it.

  4. AEvans profile image70
    AEvansposted 4 years ago

    Hillary, Because I believe she could accomplish tasks that Mitt Romney could not.

  5. 0
    Sophia Angeliqueposted 4 years ago

    Hillary. She's a Democrat. She has a brain. She smiled nicely when Obama spoke. Romney has no concept of the reality of anyone normal.

    1. couturepopcafe profile image61
      couturepopcafeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I'd choose Hillary, too, but not because she can relate to 'normal'. None of them can.

      1. 0
        Sophia Angeliqueposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I guess 'normal' is relative...

  6. 0
    oldandwiseposted 4 years ago

    I would have to say Hillary, hands down over Romney.

  7. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 4 years ago

    Hillary.
    She's been inside Congress.
    She's been inside the White House.
    She's been SOS -- unparalleled foreign policy experience.
    She's got domestic policy experience as well.
    Her husband is brilliant (and no longer a liability).
    She's got bigger cojones than ANY male in Washington*
    And she should have been POTUS in 2008

    *Wellesley women rule!

    1. stclairjack profile image79
      stclairjackposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      yea!

  8. brimancandy profile image83
    brimancandyposted 4 years ago

    Clinton. She is a very smart woman.
    A former president is her husband.
    She knows foreign policy.

    And Rommney is a rich douchebag.

    1. Pearldiver profile image87
      Pearldiverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      AND...

      She is well respected offshore and doesn't choke under pressure!

      Plus.... She Learned a lot from Monica don't forget! big_smile

  9. nanetteparker profile image81
    nanetteparkerposted 4 years ago

    i'll choose hillary.. brimancandy is absolutely right.. hillary clinton is one of those few smart women the world have this time...

  10. Paul Wingert profile image79
    Paul Wingertposted 4 years ago

    Hillary would be my choice. Only wish Bill could run again.

  11. couturepopcafe profile image61
    couturepopcafeposted 4 years ago

    Hillary over Obama and Romney.

  12. Disturbia profile image61
    Disturbiaposted 4 years ago

    I don't really trust Romney.  Something about the way he stammers when he's fumbling for an answer during the debates just doesn't sit well with me.  However, as to an earlier comment about him being a "rich douchebag" well he wasn't born rich, he earned his money, and I don't think the Clintons are exactly living on Skid Row.  How many millions did Chelsea's wedding cost? Also, the Clintons don't exactly have a spotless reputation. Can you say Whitewater? But, I suppose if I had to choose between the two, I'd go with Hillary.

  13. Evan G Rogers profile image82
    Evan G Rogersposted 4 years ago

    You are acting as though there would be a difference amongst them.

    1. Disturbia profile image61
      Disturbiaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      LOL, maybe I'd just like to see a woman president  lol, and I live in the northeast, I remember when Romney was Gov of Mass, another reason not to vote for him.

      1. Evan G Rogers profile image82
        Evan G Rogersposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Will you next tell me that you're not a sexist?

    2. 0
      Phoebe Pikeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Actually, there are some major differences between them if you follow their political history... they vote differently, have different reputations for their actions, etc.

      1. Evan G Rogers profile image82
        Evan G Rogersposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Yeah, they vote to steal money from everyone, but then they give it to DIFFERENT people.

        Such an option!

  14. kateperez profile image74
    kateperezposted 4 years ago

    hillary, and I am a republican

  15. WD Curry 111 profile image60
    WD Curry 111posted 4 years ago

    This is a choice between Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney? Hillary has earned it. She kept Slick Willie in office. She knows how to run with the wolves.

    1. 0
      Brenda Durhamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      hehe yeah she does.  My opinion is that she's become one of the wolves. All evidence points to it.

  16. barryrutherford profile image30
    barryrutherfordposted 4 years ago

    Hillary should be the next President

  17. watergeek profile image93
    watergeekposted 4 years ago

    If it was just those two to choose from, I would look at their voting records on two main issues: 1) the war, 2) the environment, esp. the Keystone XL pipeline and fracking.

    Offhand Clinton has looked warmongerish to me, which I do not like, but I'm aware that she's unhappy with the stance she has had to take at times and her husband is unhappier still. I don't know the details, though. Was she unhappy because she couldn't be more forceful? Or because she was prevented from working out solutions peaceably? With the pipeline, so far, she seems to be responding well to public outrage against it. I would have to look further to see if it's genuine.

    Romney I don't know about on either issue, hence the need for further research.

    1. Paul Wingert profile image79
      Paul Wingertposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Romney has trouble answering a simple "yes" or "no" answer. He has to spin and talk alot and say nothing and still doesn't answer it.

  18. Billrrrr profile image90
    Billrrrrposted 4 years ago

    Hillary had a chance to climb Everest and failed.  Meanwhile Mitt catches all the flak.

    Mitt was a pretty good governor in Massachusetts.  You should see what a mess his successor has made of the Bay State. 

    Mitt has plans and will take action.  You may not agree with him some of the time, but he won't be spending most of his term on vacation like the incumbent, and he will aggresively attack the nation's problems.

    1. lovemychris profile image79
      lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      When mitt was gvr. Mass was ranked 47th in job creation. We are now ranked 5th.

      Dem gvr and congress. Dems all around. Not too shabby.

  19. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 4 years ago

    That would be a hard choice for me to make - I like them both. I think, however, that Hill would be a stronger leader.

  20. 0
    oldandwiseposted 4 years ago

    I'd have a hard time voting for Romney, and No it's not out of jealousy. I don't feel he can relate to the average American.We've all seen or read from his tax returns he makes around 22 million a year. So I found myself wondering just what does that equal in a per day salary. So after the math, working on 20 million a year, I came up with an astonishing $54,794.52 a day. I don't begrudge anyone being successful in business, but I have to wonder can anyone making that kind of money really relate to the average American.

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image69
      Ralph Deedsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Me too! And beyond that Romney and the other GOP candidates' are proposing tax reforms that would primarily benefit the 1% not the 99%. Moreover, I wonder why he has accounts in the Grand Cayman islands and in Switzerland. He owes us an explanation for that. Sounds fishy to me.

      1. rebekahELLE profile image90
        rebekahELLEposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Did you hear his response during the debate tonight? HA, he has so much money he doesn't know where it is. I can't stand listening to him speak, let alone trust him.

    2. habee profile image90
      habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I'd have a hard time voting for Obama. He didn't grow up in the US, and he had a foreign father and a foreign step-father. I just don't think he "gets" Americana and all that it implies. No - I'm not a birther. I believe he was born in Hawaii. But there's no denying that he didn't exactly grow up in an all-American home. That's not saying he's a bad person. I simply think that many Americans view Obama as "different." I believe he has lofty ideals, but he sometimes seems to lack the ability to see them through. Even many Dems I've talked to say the same thing.

      Some people think Romney was handed everything he has, on a silver platter. When George Romney died, Mitt inherited some money - which he gave away. Mitt made his own fortune by being smart and by working long days, nights, and weekends. Did he have advantages growing up that most of us don't? Yes, but he built his own wealth. And I was glad to see him, for the first time, NOT run away from that fact in tonight's debate.

  21. bruzzbuzz profile image60
    bruzzbuzzposted 4 years ago

    I grew up a Republican and have voted Republican all my life. I would never vote for Obama because of his extreme left leaning policies. If Clinton were to run, I would probably vote for her before I would vote for what I consider to be a very uninspired Republican group of candidates. Of course, this is just my own belief and I would never try to encourage someone else to do what I do. That is why I am not going to get into the particulars of why I feel this way.

  22. 0
    oldandwiseposted 4 years ago

    So President Obama, because his father was foreign and his step-father foreign, suggests he didn't grow up in an all-American home? So an American soldier, marrying a woman from say Europe, comes home and has children, makes those children less American? Because they move around to different bases around the world. Sorry, I don't get it. As for Romney, I agree he made his own money. I have questions as to how, even though legal. I have a problem thinking he can relate to any average American citizen, given the fact he makes over $54,000.00 a day and doesn't even have to get out of bed to get it. Makes more in one day then most make in a year. Said he does speaking engagements and only made $364,000.00 last year. "Only $364,000.00", that alone shows he's out of touch. I'd like to ask him if he knows how much a gallon of milk or a loaf of bread costs. I seriously doubt he knows.

    1. habee profile image90
      habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      That's a false dichotomy. The children you describe grow up in the US and/or on American bases around other Americans. Obama grew up in Jakarta, while Romney grew up in Bloomfield Hills. Sorry, but I somehow think of Michigan as being more "mainstream America" than Indonesia. And as far as wealth is concerned, Obama isn't exactly a pauper. How often do you jet off to Hawaii for a $4 million vacation? How many dresses does your wife have that cost over $2,000? I relate more to Romney, while some Americans relate more to Obama. That's the great thing about America - we can all have our own opinions and vote accordingly.

      Sure, I wish an "average Joe" could run for POTUS, but the way our political system is set up, it takes piles of $$$ to run. Re: Mike Huckabee.

  23. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    Well, here's something:

    "But, Mitt Romney was born in America, right? He was born on March 12, 1947 in Detroit, Michigan. That is not in dispute. But, what is in dispute is his father's citizenship at the time Willard was born with the exact same situation with Obama/Soetoro.

    While I don't entirely trust Wikipedia, they at least get part of it right regarding Mitt Romney's father: "Romney was born to American parents in the Mormon Colonies in Mexico; events during the Mexican Revolution forced his family to move back to the United States when he was a child."

    Mr. George W. Romney, was elected Governor of Michigan. Because there was talk George W. might run for the presidency, his citizenship eligibility came into question and because it extends to the child at the time of birth, there is now question regarding Willard (Mitt) Romney:

    Mitt Romney's, father George W. Romney, Not A Natural Born Citizen of the United States of America, and was NOT, eligible for the Office of President, by Pinckney G. McElwee of D.C. Bar.)

    Congressional Record (House) June 14, 1967

    "I find no proper legal or historical basis on which to conclude that a person born outside of the United States could ever be eligible to occupy the Office of the President of the United States. In other words, In my opinion, Mr. George Romney of Michigan Is Ineligible to become President of the United States because he was born In Mexico and is, therefore, not a natural-born citizen as required by the United States Constitution."

    Thus, we have the same situation as with Obama/Soetoro: A father born in a foreign country who never became a U.S. citizen."

    Now we shall see if this becomes an issue as is it with Obama! And, will Trump lead it? Taitz? Anyone?......Oh what a tangled web.

    1. habee profile image90
      habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I've never disputed Obama's right to be POTUS, LMC. Anyway, from what I can find, Mitt's grandparents were U.S. citizens, so that would have made George a U.S. citizen, no matter where he was born. I think all this was hashed out in 1968.

      As to the DNC talking point about Romney's being responsible for MA's job ranking, read the full story on Politifact:

      http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter … ssachuset/

      When Mitt took office, unemployment in MA was one of the worst in the nation. By the time he left office, unemployment was at around 4%. Also, personal income increased in the state, as did the state's credit rating. Please compare these three statistics with our current U.S. economy.

      1. lovemychris profile image79
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Kind of like what happened to Obama in 09, huh?
        And, my feelings for Romney are personal, I don't need to read about him. I lived under him, and just do not like the man.
        He really did cut funding for poor people, while raising it for police and business.
        He really does support Jeff Perry--pervert of teenaged girls.
        He really was incognito from the state when he ran for senator.
        He really has as an advisor Kofer Black, who was president of Blackwater...wasn't Wright made a big issue for Obama? Black is mine.
        He really did strap his dog on the hood of a car for 12 hours.
        When asked about his family serving in the Iraq war, which he championed, he really did say "My sons are serving the country by helping to get me elected"
        And his tax plan really would cut his taxes in half, while raising them for the least among us.

        I see him as a perfect example of a 1%er. And they don't NEED any more representation!! They have had it all! Personal Opinion.

        1. habee profile image90
          habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          So...you don't think Obama is a wealthy 1%er? I find it amusing that Obama supporters are making a big deal about big business supporting Romney, when the EXACT same businesses backed Obama in 2008.

          And as far as the Obama birther thing goes, I never joined that bandwagon.

          1. lovemychris profile image79
            lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            But it's not about Obama not being born here, it's that they claim he has a foreign father...just like Romney does. They have to make an issue out of it if they are sincere....*cough* *gag*

            And the difference between Romney and Obama is that Obama wants to make the tax system fair, Romney doesn't. It's not about having wealth, it's about getting all the breaks!The loop-holes and right-offs and taxing huge wealth less than labor.
            The rich have had most of the breaks for 30+years.

            And they take it from the middle class to do it!
            Obama wants to give it back to the middle, as well as give businesses breaks to keep jobs here. Hire veterans, get people out of poverty.
            Spend Money on America, NOT overseas companies!

            Romney wants to increase his bracket's tax cuts, and give poor people more to pay.

            He outsourced businesses,outsourced his money, did not care about America, only the bottom line. IMO.

            And yes, Goldman Sachs funded Obama big time, and you see they got their way with his administration....but that has ended. Geithner is gone. Summers is gone. Emmanuel is gone. It takes TIME.

            And now GSachs is full-steam Romney. But HE never wavers in defense of big money. He thinks nothing of the lower classes! IMO IMO

            1. watergeek profile image93
              watergeekposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Interestingly enough, Goldman Sachs now has a program to help jumpstart 10,000 small businesses across the U.S. I just attended a breakfast seminar in Los Angeles last Friday. Apparently they've remembered that the only time our economy has been really healthy is when we've had a strong small business sector. Currently we have just over 7%, Lichtenstein being the only developed country with a smaller one at 6%.

              1. 0
                Phoebe Pikeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Those statistics might be because large corporations have been buying out "Ma and Pop" stores for many years now... it's kind of strange to imagine places without them. In my small town, no one would ever sell their stores.

      2. Pcunix profile image90
        Pcunixposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        He had absolutely NOTHING to do with the change in unemployment figures.

        I've lived here 64 years.  He's a charlatan.

        1. habee profile image90
          habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          If that's true, then he can't be blamed for the lack of employment, either. You guys can't have it both ways. That's like the libs who said Obama had nothing to do with jobs when unemployment was over 9%, but now that it's getting better, all of a sudden, the POTUS DID have something to do with the number of jobs. lol

          1. Pcunix profile image90
            Pcunixposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I didn't say that he did. I agree with the article : he had nothing to do with it either way.

          2. Mighty Mom profile image90
            Mighty Momposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Good point. Been saying the same thing about Congress for a few years now.
            Either government DOES have something to do with creating jobs ... or it doesn't.
            It seems like the prevailing party spins the employment or unemployment situation to whichever way they want it.
            LOL

  24. adjkp25 profile image91
    adjkp25posted 4 years ago

    I would go with Clinton.  This country is ready for a woman President, especially one who won't take any garbage from anyone.

  25. Lady_E profile image81
    Lady_Eposted 4 years ago

    Hillary. I love that lady. She is intelligent, rock solid, experienced and like Margaret Thatcher "not for turning."

  26. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 4 years ago

    Dang that Hillary! If she'd run for POTUS, just look how many arguments could be prevented on the HP forums! She obviously doesn't care about the peace on Hubpages. lol

    1. Uninvited Writer profile image84
      Uninvited Writerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      She ... And her husband would be attacked constantly, nothing would change

    2. Mighty Mom profile image90
      Mighty Momposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      LOL. You caught that, too? For as polarized a group as we forum posters are, we seem amazingly unified around Hillary. I wonder if that could be simply because she is NOT running? lol

      BTW, Hillary may not care about the peace on the Hub Pages forums. But does she care about really poor people? Or rich people?
      *slaps self for unnecessary silliness*

      1. watergeek profile image93
        watergeekposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Good question. She comes from a poor family, as does Bill. Her father seemed militaristic by the description I read in a book about her, whereas Bill didn't really have one. One would think they'd care about poor people, but then again, they could be shunning their backgrounds in favor of ambition.

    3. dungeonraider profile image84
      dungeonraiderposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I think the President has come to rely on her for her treasured advice, and that they've become close over the past few years.  I wonder if anybody behind the scenes tried to see if she would take on the incumbent, though tongue

  27. pstraubie48 profile image89
    pstraubie48posted 4 years ago

    Hilary because she seems to be pretty clear on what she thinks and believes. And, she is one tough cookie....I think Mr. Romney vacillates too much on his position on issues and will say whatever it takes to get elected.
    This being said, sadly, once the person is IN power, they really do not hold MOST of the power.

  28. dzephaniah profile image59
    dzephaniahposted 4 years ago

    Mitt Romney. Democrats shouldn't be allowed to rule for at list 3 more terms. Their policies will bankrupt this country.

    1. 0
      Phoebe Pikeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Mitt Romney is the kind of candidate that alters his views to fit whatever state he is in... he was also a democrat to begin with.

  29. Insanity Inc profile image59
    Insanity Incposted 4 years ago

    If Hillary and Mitt are my only two choices, then I choose suicide!!!

    1. Greek One profile image80
      Greek Oneposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      pay attention... Bush isn't one of the choices

  30. prettydarkhorse profile image65
    prettydarkhorseposted 4 years ago

    Hillary is all around - with experiences on domestic and international relations. She is smart as well!

    1. Mighty Mom profile image90
      Mighty Momposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Did anyone catch the PBS show on Bill Clinton last night?
      I tuned in only for a short while. But the part I saw was about Hillary being the powerhouse behind Bill. It was talking about how they met at Yale Law School and what he saw in her and what she saw in him.

      Make no mistake. She wouldn't just step down as SOS into a gracious early retirement. She's only 65.
      Nope, Hillary (and Bill) are plotting SOMETHING.
      Something BIG.

      1. prettydarkhorse profile image65
        prettydarkhorseposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I wasn't able to watch it. I am excited for that something big!!~

  31. Billrrrr profile image90
    Billrrrrposted 4 years ago

    Let the record show that:

    Romney was an 'action' Governor in Massachusetts.  He got things done.

    Romney took a bankrupt olympics and fixed it.  His performance was stellar.

    Romney has been a no nonsense businessman.  He made hard choices, shut some businesses down, propped up others, and never stood down when it came time to make a decision. 

    Romney has a proven track record of accomplishment and acheivement. 

    Romney doesn't talk a problem to death, he fixes it.

    1. habee profile image90
      habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      The more I learn about Romney, the more I like him. He has my vote and my support.

  32. 0
    idratherbeposted 4 years ago

    I'd vote for Hillary in a heartbeat over the wall street supporter Romney is. I can't in good conscience vote for a guy who was for the Vietnam war and used religeous and educational deferrments to avoid the draft. Yes, many deferments (4 or 5 I believe) until he ran out and his draft number (300) in the end, kept him from serving while the rest of us risked our lives. That in it self shows me he was for big business but not for protecting this great country.

    1. habee profile image90
      habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Did Obama serve in the military?

      1. lovemychris profile image79
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        No, but he stayed in America. Mitt wants to paint Obama as this "European guy".....but it was Mitt who spent 3 yrs in Paris, not Obama.

      2. 0
        idratherbeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        No President Obama didn't but to my knowledge he didnt use 4 or 5 deferments and the draft wasn't in place. Typical Carl Rowe reply to an argument one has no answer to. Flipit!

        1. lovemychris profile image79
          lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          "It is time to take off the kid gloves with the wingnuts."

        2. habee profile image90
          habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Karl Rove.

          1. lovemychris profile image79
            lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Yes, we need a Democratic answer to him. Morals, honesty and integrity need not apply.

            1. habee profile image90
              habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Dems have one - Wasserman-Schultz.

              1. lovemychris profile image79
                lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                What? You are kidding I hope. Or you don't know Rove at all.

          2. 0
            idratherbeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Id have to watch faux news to know that I guess. Again, no answer, but the flip.

        3. habee profile image90
          habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I answered this on another thread. Thought you saw it - you responded.

  33. Debby Bruck profile image87
    Debby Bruckposted 4 years ago

    H-I-L-L-A-R-Y
    Another vote for Hillary!

  34. Wizard Of Whimsy profile image61
    Wizard Of Whimsyposted 4 years ago

    Had to share this Tweet . . .

    https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/548998_10150670033726275_177486166274_9775178_2135423817_n.jpg

  35. Greek One profile image80
    Greek Oneposted 4 years ago

    I would rather have Hillary..

    She has the bigger testicles

    1. habee profile image90
      habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I love what the Ragin' Cajun said about that: "If Hillary would give Obama one of her b@lls, they'd each have two."

  36. dmop profile image87
    dmopposted 4 years ago

    Hillary with out a doubt.

  37. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    Here's Karl:

    "Even in the era of unbridled campaign contributions, Irving Moskowitz's $1 million donation in February to American Crossroads, the Karl Rove-linked super PAC, is eye-catching.

    A retired physician who made a fortune purchasing hospitals and running bingo and casino operations in the economically depressed California town of Hawaiian Gardens, Moskowitz is well-known to those who follow the Israel-Palestine conflict. His contributions to far-right Jewish settler groups, questionable archaeological projects and widespread land purchases in East Jerusalem and the West Bank have routinely inflamed the region over the past four decades and, according to many familiar with the conflict, made him a key obstacle to peace in the Middle East.

    Now, at age 83, Moskowitz has turned his money on the American political realm in a more prominent fashion than ever before, funding "birther" groups that question the legitimacy of President Barack Obama's U.S. citizenship and others that stoke fears about the president's alleged ties to "radical Islam."

  38. lovemychris profile image79
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    another Mitt supporter:

    "There are a lot of things that haven't been hammered at because Rick and Mitt have been going at each other," Friess said during an interview on Fox Business News. "Now that they have trained their barrels on President Obama, I hope his teleprompters are bulletproof."

    **************************

    anyone else seeing a pattern here??

  39. Liza Graham profile image60
    Liza Grahamposted 4 years ago

    Hillary Clinton

  40. Wizard Of Whimsy profile image61
    Wizard Of Whimsyposted 4 years ago

    Stephen Colbert Debunks the GOP’s War on Women . . .

    http://gawker.com/5900931/stephen-colbe … r-on-women

  41. SomewayOuttaHere profile image61
    SomewayOuttaHereposted 4 years ago

    from the outside looking in....neither

 
working