Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Bush vs Clinton 2016? (Original Post) HomerRamone May 2014 OP
exactly.. n/t 2banon May 2014 #1
Neither stands a chance at the nomination struggle4progress May 2014 #2
I agreee with you, struggle4progress. Excellent analysis. JDPriestly May 2014 #3

struggle4progress

(118,295 posts)
2. Neither stands a chance at the nomination
Tue May 6, 2014, 12:37 AM
May 2014

Americans won't want a third Bush, given the record of the first two

And when Clinton stepped down as SoS, she said she had spent nearly forty years in public life and was through with doing that. If she ran successfully, she'd be the oldest President ever on her inauguration day, older by a few weeks than even Reagan was when he was first inaugurated -- and we can expect a loud chorus of She's too old!, plus the rightwing's usual recycling of slanders, of which they have a plentiful supply from the mudslinging during her years as FLotUS

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
3. I agreee with you, struggle4progress. Excellent analysis.
Tue May 6, 2014, 02:39 AM
May 2014

Plus Hillary would bring in all the old Clinton cronies who helped GWB bring the country's economy down.

Elizabeth Warren doesn't say anything nasty about Hillary Clinton, but she sure criticizes and persuasively the Clinton, GWB and Obama financial favorites. Her book A Fighting Chance is a call for justice. The more people read that book, the less the chances of either a Bush or a Clinton winning the presidency. We bought extra copies to give to friends and families. It's that good. She says in her book what Occupy may have wanted to say but just didn't have the inside knowledge or years of studying economics to say. Besides she is a lot more succinct, to the point and organized that the Occupiers. I'm not criticizing the Occupy movement. I'm just differentiating it.

Also, Elizabeth Warren's book is a delight to read. The stories about her life are moving. She came from a relatively poor family and made it to teach at Harvard law school and then serve in the Senate. Her story is an inspiration for every woman in the country.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Bush vs Clinton 2016?