Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Think of this incredible fact: if Hillary is elected, we'll have 36 years of either Clinton or Bush

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
DuaneBidoux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:05 PM
Original message
Think of this incredible fact: if Hillary is elected, we'll have 36 years of either Clinton or Bush
As either VP, or President, a Bush or Clinton will have continuously served in one of the two offices for 36 straight years if Hillary is nominated and elected twice.

Bush SR. VP 80-88
Bush SR. President 88-92
Clinton, Bill. President 92-00
Bush Jr. President 00-08
Clinton, Hillary? President? 08-16

Total years: 36
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Capn Sunshine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. although this is a wingnut meme
I expect to see it 25/8 if Hillary is the candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuaneBidoux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
11. I don't inherently see it as serving just the needs of wingnuts.
Yes, they'll use it if they have the chance--but I absolutely guarantee we'd be using it if we were facing a run by Jeb.

For a really far out scenario just imagine Jeb elected in '16 and going for 8 years. By then I think the Bush twins, or even Chelsea, will be old enough to pick up and run with it!

I'm sorry, but even if Chelsea were the most wonderful Dem in the whole world by then even you must admit it might be a bit spooky.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bunkerbuster1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #11
30. Actually, by 2016 Chelsea will be old enough to run.
born February 27, 1980, she'll be 36.

We don't need no stinkin' rotten John Ellis Bush (please, please, don't call him by his folksy nomme de bullshit "Jeb")
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roguevalley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #30
36. I guess we are officially Rennaissance Italy with the Medicis and the
rest fighting over our serf bones. God, I am sick of this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #30
38. Great....Sign us up Chelsea....QUEEN CHELSEA...because we will be a
MONARCHY long before then and she will just inherit. It's okay...it's the way it's going. No Constitution...just shredded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fridays Child Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:09 PM
Response to Original message
2. Just curious: do you think the Clinton part of that formula is a bad thing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuaneBidoux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:31 PM
Original message
No, I like both Clintons. But it would be, you must admit, an amazing fact.
I doubt if anything in American history has ever happened like it.

And, although I like the Clintons I am a little uncomfortable with dynasties of any stripe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fridays Child Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:49 PM
Response to Original message
15. I agree that it would be amazing but I'm not worried about the so-called dynasty...
...aspect of the issue. I really think that's just another meme manufactured by the right wing to undermine the candidate who most intimidates them. And it's not only a cynical scare tactic but it's disingenuous as hell, too (what a surprise, eh?) when you consider that they somehow neglected to raise the issue when Poppy's boy was running for the White House.

By the way, I'm not a Hillary supporter but, like many here, I will vote for her if she gets the nomination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cosmocat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #15
29. Bingo ...
WHY the freak on earth is it NOW a problem, when you have the potential to have a COMPETENT president when it wasn't an issue with these freaks 7 years ago when a moron was in line ???

Like because this clown is a disaster we have to rule out someone who won't be a disaster ???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-20-07 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #15
47. Maybe you should be a little worried....
the "wing-nuts" who point out Iran-Contra connections don't seem to be too big of fans of the Bushes either. The major concern is the role of the CIA and what is happening in our foreign policy.

http://www.ncoic.com/clinton.htm

Gee, I wonder how this relates to what is going on in Iraq, Iran and our support of other big oil dynasties?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
27. and how exactly do you define a "dynasty"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kurth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
3. We need new blood
This country has ~300 MILLION people to choose from.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MGKrebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #3
17. Bring it on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:18 PM
Response to Original message
4. So...
Are you saying there was no difference between Bush and Clinton...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojambo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:24 PM
Response to Original message
5. The founders would be dismayed
Except maybe the Adamses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:25 PM
Response to Original message
6. and?------but at least it will end on a high note (with a Clinton).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:26 PM
Response to Original message
7. ok, a prediction of the replies you'll get
some rubbish about dynasties.
a call for new blood.
who's next? Jenna or Chelsea?
Not it Gore gets in!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alamom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #7
44. Oh...we got better this time. I think we're on Candid Camera with this one,
Edited on Tue Jun-19-07 08:08 PM by Alamom



with some replies.....decide for yourself. :rofl:


edsp

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
8. Hillary isn't a Clinton
She's a Rodham.

It'd be different if Chelsea was running. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuaneBidoux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. But as Faux "News" repeatedly pointed out--she wants no part of Rodham.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElizabethDC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #13
21. Not true, actually.
I'm aware that Fox has been reporting this (thanks to the Colbert Report) - but on campaign fundraising letters (I got one as recently as last week) and thank you notes, the return address says "Hillary Rodham Clinton" in really big letters, and the heading at the top of the page says "Hillary Rodham Clinton" and it's signed "Hillary Rodham Clinton" (actually it's just signed "Hillary" but typed underneath it says "Hillary Rodham Clinton").

So that rumor, courtesy of Fox News, simply isn't true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 11:31 PM
Response to Reply #8
22. Hillary is a Clinton by insemination (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemSoccerMom Donating Member (168 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #8
28. NICE! Good point. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:30 PM
Response to Original message
9. It doesn't bother me.
I don't have a candidate yet, but the bush/clinton/bush/clinton thing doesn't bother me. She's a different Clinton, but even if Bill could go for a 3rd term, it wouldn't bother me. FDR did ok.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arugula Latte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
10. Reason #317 to work against Hillary's nomination ...
x(

Ugh. The thought of that depresses the hell out of me ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #10
20. They have medication for that-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wwagsthedog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:34 PM
Response to Original message
12. I think I'm going to be sick. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mckeown1128 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:42 PM
Response to Original message
14. This bothers me...
I also have a problem with the Kennedy's. We shouldn't have dynasties. It bothers me for example when congressmen get elected because their father was a well liked governer or senater.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElizabethDC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:51 PM
Response to Original message
16. I'm shocked! No one has mentioned this on DU before.
Well, not today anyway. Did you just realize this? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuaneBidoux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #16
23. No. I don't spend every day glued to DU
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alamom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #16
42. Oh surely it was. You must have missed it. It's on at least 3 times a day, somewhere.
And it's making such a change in what people think. :sarcasm:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TeamJordan23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:55 PM
Response to Original message
18. Don't forget Jeb Bush in the future
haha.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
19. The white male dynasty must continue.
:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alamom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #19
43. Yes Sir. They've done such a fine job so far, Sir.
:) :patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
24. If she is as able a leader as her husband was...
If she is as able a leader as her husband was, I've got no problems with it.

(Caveat: I have made no decisions concerning the Democratic Primaries yet)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nedsdag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 12:58 PM
Response to Original message
25. Oh, I've mentioned that constantly.
It doesn't matter to the sheeple who support her.

It's too bad someone else can't run for public office instead of those two families.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. "its too bad someone else can't run for public office"
On the planet where I live, lots of people are running for public office. In fact, out of the dozen and a half people running for president, only one is from one of "those two families".

I'm not even an HRC supporter, but this is one of the stupidest arguments against her candidacy imaginable.

I'm curious about the people who find this to be a concern: are they married or have children? Do they think that they are completely interchageable with their spouses or kids -- that their relatives, blood or otherwise, are incapable of independent thinking or decision making but rather follow the "family" line of thinking on all things?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nedsdag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #26
31. If she was Hillary Rodham.
Who wasn't married to Bill Clinton and running as an independent, then yes, I would think about voting for her.

But do you actually believe Hillary would change course after the two of them have been politically meshed for over 35 years? This isn't Mary Matalin and James Carville we're talking about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueStater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #26
32. Please. Hillary would never be considered a serious candidate if not for her husband
Edited on Tue Jun-19-07 02:39 PM by BlueStater
She's just like the current White House idiot and his daddy in that respect. Hillary is obviously a trillion times more intelligent than that monkey and accomplished a lot of things on her own but her White House bid is being fueled by her relation to Bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. Don't interrupt...
Don't interrupt the current, trendy and edgy "dynasty" theme the RW is putting out, dammit! Critical thought just gets in the way...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truebrit71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
34. Thank God it won't happen then...I'm done with BOTH of those families...
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ananda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
35. daawwgg
I didn't realize.. sobering.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
juajen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
37. Gee, what an original post!
I've never heard it put that way before.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LBJDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
39. Don't be fooled
Dynasties don't mean anything. The president isn't really in charge - the top contributors are. They can do with or without a dynasty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
illinoisprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
40. People are such chickens they stay with them dysfunctional people time after time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highnooner Donating Member (373 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #40
41. This is the reason why I believe Hillary can't win
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BenDavid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 11:17 PM
Response to Original message
45. This is silly! Why? You
associate the Bush's record with Clintons (Bill). HRC is everything like Bill when it comes to politics and once she wins we will have 16 years of peace and prosperity and the 12 years of the bushes cannot even be compared to the Big Dawd's 8 years.....
In another poll on this forum the question was asked, Would you vote for a candidate like a Bill Clinton? The poll thus far had 66%. Well, excuse me but if anyone is gonna be like Bill it is HRC. The poll goes against the grain in this forum because you have so many HRC haters they would rather buy into the right wing spin and believe HRC cannot win.
Yes, why don't you all get so fired up and go against HRC with everything you have and if she does happen to lose the nomination then we will lose the 08 election.
Do you honestly believe that the right wing racists are afraid of Obama? Hell no! They would use every dirty trick in their arsenal. So I will stay with a fighter. A winner and someone like a Bill Clinton.....
I do thank you
Ben David
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1932 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 11:54 PM
Response to Original message
46. That is not a sign of a healthy democracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Oct 31st 2024, 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC