He'd be almost 74. Any chance?
Joe Biden 2016?
|by Anonymous||reply 108||11/11/2012|
She will win .
|by Anonymous||reply 1||11/10/2012|
Don't think so. I personally love the guy, but I think he knows the VP will be his pinnacle.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||11/10/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 3||11/10/2012|
Nope, enough with the old white men.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||11/10/2012|
Joe for Secretary of Eldergay Affairs.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||11/10/2012|
Nope. He'd old. America is too shallow to elect somebody 76 years old.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||11/10/2012|
And, besides, I don't think it's a good idea to vote for somebody that age...health reasons. You know?
I love Joe Biden though and he'd be a great president. But, no...too old.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||11/10/2012|
He's said he doesn't want the Presidency.
He'll gladly step aside and support the candidacy of Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton (just like he did in the 2008 primaries).
|by Anonymous||reply 8||11/10/2012|
I really hope not. I like him but I don't think he'd win the general election. I'm hoping for Hillary with a younger non-white guy in his 40's or 50's as her running mate.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||11/10/2012|
Joe, you've been great, but it's Hillary's turn. It was Hillary's turn in 2008 and 2012. Hillary in 2016.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||11/10/2012|
Hillary is 65 now. I wonder if she'll be up for it at 69. It's a lot of stress.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||11/10/2012|
[quote]America is too shallow to elect somebody 76 years old.
Too smart, hon.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||11/10/2012|
It'd be nice if Hillary ran, but she said she won't. We'll see how long that lasts.
Honestly, I don't know who the Dems are going to put up in 2016, but they'd better start grooming someone good now or we could lose everything we have gained and will gain in the next four years.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||11/10/2012|
Andrew Cuomo in 2016!
|by Anonymous||reply 14||11/10/2012|
Hillary wants to be wooed. She wants the dems to come to her. Trust me, she'll run and she'll win.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||11/10/2012|
R14 Tablescapes at the White House! Lower the drinking age to 12!
|by Anonymous||reply 16||11/10/2012|
[quote]Hillary wants to be wooed. She wants the dems to come to her.
That little minx.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||11/10/2012|
Biden said he didn't think he'd be voting for the last time for himself in 2012. Does that mean he'll run for mayor of a town in Delaware, for condo association president or run for the Senate again? I doubt he'll run for the presidency. Perhaps he's willing to be Hillary's VP? Supposedly he's quite good at being a VP, public gaffe-prone persona aside.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||11/10/2012|
Hard to tell, but Biden may well get his chance during this term. Remember there are Republican Psychos out there who try you know what with Obama, since their guy didn't make it. Mark my words. And if they succeed then Biden will have to serve out the rest of the term. Not good news for me, since an Irish witch has apparently inferred that He will be President. Something to do with his hand apparently! Wondering why, well since I'm Irish, I'm also unfortunately from Biden's ancestral home village. And to think that our ancestors may have actually met and partied together over some beer and poteen centuries ago!
And I've even worse news for any secret service agents, if there is any chance that he does end up having to visit the area on an official trip, then I'm sorry to inform you, there isn't any pub or drinking establishment around to go to and pose for photographs. We're the only parish in the area without a drinking den! You'd have to head for the nearest town unfortunately. And the streets are very narrow, sorry to say.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||11/10/2012|
Democrats generally don't nominate old people.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||11/10/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 21||11/10/2012|
Chris Christie will run as a Democrat in 2016.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||11/10/2012|
No, no, no, won't be Joe no more.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||11/10/2012|
Women live around 8 years longer than men, so a female 69 is much "younger" than a male 69.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||11/10/2012|
It's Beau Biden for me.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||11/10/2012|
So, Hillary fans. How do reconcile the fact that she supported and voted to invade Iraq?
|by Anonymous||reply 26||11/10/2012|
Cuomo vs. Christie
|by Anonymous||reply 27||11/10/2012|
So we'll have a B&T campaign! Yaay!
|by Anonymous||reply 28||11/10/2012|
No, won't happen. People who might run:
|by Anonymous||reply 29||11/10/2012|
Christie has to loose weight or he won't be able to run for anything!
|by Anonymous||reply 30||11/10/2012|
It's going to take a high charismatic Dem nominee to stop Christie, Rubio or Bush. Republicans are going to vote in droves in 2016 if they get a candidate that they like and feel passionate about. If Dems nominate a ho-hum candidate like Cuomo or O'Malley, we'll lose.
Hillary is the only one out there who has the charisma and gravitas to win. She can also raise a ton of money.
Brian Schweiter and Kirsten Gillibrand could possibly win, but they'll need the economy to be firing on all cylinders to sweep into office.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||11/10/2012|
R26. Most of the US Senate voted for the war in 2003. The wave of patriotism sweeping the country was crazy. Colin Powell even went before the UN and said Iraq had WMDs. Hillary is a born leader, so don't blame the war on her.
Obama didn't vote for the war because he wasn't in the US Senate at the time. So, it was very easy for him to sit on the sidelines from his very safe seat in the Illinois Sate Senate and make one minor speech saying he was against the war. Obama wasn't exactly a profile in courage when he was in the Illinois Senate. He voted "present" so much of the time. He often would not commit to voting "yes" or "no."
Based on Obama's previous political record, had he been in the US Senate in 2003, then it's likely he would have gone along with the Iraq war just like most of his Dem and Repug colleagues...or wimped out and abstained from voting as he often did in Illinois.
Listen, I'm glad he won reelection, but his opposition to the war was quite irrelevant from Illinois at the time.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||11/10/2012|
R29, Perhaps you should start threads identifying these politicians and their accomplishments. I'm sure the majority of voters are unfamiliar unless they live in their home state.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||11/10/2012|
Sorry, I love Hillary Clinton, but the notion that it's her 'turn' makes me puke. A turn implies entitlement, no matter the outcome. She is not entitled to a run at the Presidency. If she wants to make a bid for it, more power to her. Let her win it like she did in... erm... well, you know.
I'm not prepared to risk an election for anybody's turn. If somebody posted it was Jeb's turn next the place would fall silent following your apoplexy.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||11/10/2012|
"Obama wasn't exactly a profile in courage when he was in the Illinois Senate. He voted "present" so much of the time."
R32 - He voted present about 3% of the time in the IL senate. Voting present in the IL state senate was a common practice.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||11/10/2012|
Mark Udall is a very handsome man, and he comes from an important swing state, but he's invisible, and hasn't made a name for himself in the Senate.
I hope Martin Heinrich makes a name for himself in the next 4 years because he could be a possible VP nominee.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||11/10/2012|
I don't worry about candidates having made a name for themselves.
Bill Clinton was exactly a household name at the beginning. In fact, he was considered a bit of a joke because of the state he governed. And then he started to talk and it all changed. Ideas matter, anybody can have them. Part of running for president is a bit like making it big in Hollywood... the candidate has something the others don't and then it's just a matter of right time, right place.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||11/10/2012|
Evan Bayh is pond scum. He is a nasty petty priggish piece of shit. He isn't running for anything. Talk about an angry white man, he was so fucking arrogant and nasty to Barack when he was shortlisted for VP, he tore his ass.
Webb is a wonderful VP type. But I also wonder what's lurking in his background. He might be someone who is going to be part of the President's cabinet in the second term. OK. I'd put him on the list as a longshot for VP candidate.
Mark Warner, Andrew Cuomo, and lets look at the women in the Senate. Also, check out Sebelius. She is a very sharp lady. She is a future nominee.
O'Malley may be an aspirant, but he's not getting a nomination. Maybe Deval Patrick? As a VP? And what about the Hispanic community? You know the GOP will nominate someone from the Latino community. Look at the center of the election map. Look at the Southwest. Udall is a good idea, but we need to think outside the box.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||11/10/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 39||11/10/2012|
Is the lipless Evan Bayh even still a Democrat?
|by Anonymous||reply 40||11/10/2012|
Following up on R37
Clinton gave a speech at the 1988 convention that became notorious because it was so much longer than it should have been. He became a joke on the late night shows. Then one of the shows, I think it was Arsenio Hall, had him on, and Bill just charmed the pants off of everyone.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||11/10/2012|
R35. Regardless of frequency, voting 'present' 129 times in the IL State Senate is quite a lot.
But that's not the issue. Hillary wasn't the only one who cast a 'yes' vote for the war, while Obama wisely voted 'no.' He wasn't there. He was safely in Illinois--not in the US Senate where the hard vote took place.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||11/10/2012|
If Hills doesn't run, these are the only viable nominees:
These are the possible VP nominees:
Schweitzer, Gillibrand, Udall--if they don't get the presidential nomination
|by Anonymous||reply 43||11/10/2012|
I would love to see her on the 2016 ticket.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||11/10/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 45||11/10/2012|
R42 - "Regardless of frequency, voting 'present' 129 times in the IL State Senate is quite a lot"
Out of 3000 total votes, it's not a lot. As I said, that is common practice there.
There were 23 senators (mostly Ds) who voted against the resolution.
Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii) * Jeff Bingaman (D-New Mexico) * Barbara Boxer (D-California) * Robert Byrd (D-West Virginia) * Lincoln Chaffee (R-Rhode Island) * Kent Conrad (D-North Dakota) * Jon Corzine (D-New Jersey) * Mark Dayton (D-Minnesota) * Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) * Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin) * Bob Graham (D-Florida) * Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) * Jim Jeffords (I-Vermont) * Ted Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) * Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) * Carl Levin (D-Michigan) * Barbara Mikulski (D-Maryland) * Patty Murray (D-Washington) * Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island) * Paul Sarbanes (D-Maryland) * Debbie Stabenow (D-Michigan) * Paul Wellstone (D-Minnesota) * Ron Wyden (D-Oregon)
|by Anonymous||reply 46||11/10/2012|
R43, Please elaborate on why these unknowns (outside of their home state) make good potential candidates. I started a thread on Castro, and the only responses I got talked about his good looks.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||11/10/2012|
Why is this a topic-HILLARY WILL run--full stop.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||11/10/2012|
It's not PC I know, but I'm going to say what I assume a lot of folks are thinking: two black nominees in a row won't go over well if Patrick is nominated.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||11/10/2012|
LOLOL! In which universe would you imagine Andrew Cuomo as someone else's VP?
|by Anonymous||reply 50||11/10/2012|
I like Brian Schweitzer and he's done amazing things in Montana. Including going after dark money groups. He's a bad ass with a bit of a libertarian bent (you have to be to be a Montana Democrat). Quick on his feet (he just decimated that jackass Darrell Issa on Bill Maher last month.) Liberal as they come but so folksy and funny that he'd get a lot of Republicans on his side. Also he likes guns and looks good in a bolo tie.
|by Anonymous||reply 51||11/10/2012|
I doubt he wants it. I've heard this theory that he and Hillary will switch jobs. That I can see.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||11/10/2012|
Obama has often been mocked for his appeal among young voters, but if it weren't for the strong turnout by young voters, he wouldn't have won this year or in 2008. Obama's GOTV efforts have been successful in turning a whole new generation into Democrats, and getting them to actually show up at the polls.
Whoever is nominated in 2016 has to be someone who can continue that momentum. We need young voters to turn out in order to cancel out the crazy old Republicans. That's what worries me about both Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton. Hillary's outreach to young voters was pretty dismal in 2008. She ran a more old-fashioned campaign focused on older voters and wealthy donors. I'm worried that if we nominate someone old, we might reverse a lot of the progress that Obama has set in motion.
|by Anonymous||reply 53||11/10/2012|
R47, Castro's keynote speech at this year's DNC proved what an impressive and up-and-coming star he is in the Democratic party.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||11/10/2012|
R53, I totally agree with you, but Hillary would be a highly charismatic and historic nominee because she would potentially be the first woman POTUS in history. She'd be the hero of every young woman in America. College-aged women would vote for her in droves.
The Clintons are still more popular than Obama.
|by Anonymous||reply 55||11/10/2012|
R54, I agree. What has he accomplished for his home state that would convince me to vote for him over another possible candidate?
|by Anonymous||reply 56||11/10/2012|
Anyone think Warren will be ready for a VP spot? Imagine, 8 years of Hillary followed by 8 years of Warren after 8 years of Obama. OMG! I get goose bumps at the thought.
|by Anonymous||reply 57||11/10/2012|
R57 - Yes, or the top spot.
|by Anonymous||reply 58||11/10/2012|
I'm sure that Bill cut a deal so that Obama's campaign machine would go to Hillary in 2016 and they will pair hair with someone young. And let it go R32, everyone else has.
|by Anonymous||reply 59||11/10/2012|
Senator-elect Elizabth Warren (D-MA) is 63.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||11/10/2012|
It would be a sure loss for the Dems if someone as old as Biden is the nominee.
Hillary's pushing it at 69 in 2016, but she is so popular that might not matter.
Educated guess: Hills sticks to her guns and says no, and the Dems find someone younger. Is there a younger Dem female who looks good? Or is it Castro?
|by Anonymous||reply 61||11/10/2012|
R60 - I keep forgetting that Warren is past 60. She looks and seems so much younger.
|by Anonymous||reply 62||11/10/2012|
I like Biden but he would just be too old for the job by then. Ask any Russians who lived through the end of the Soviet period--that's all they got were dotty old men and look what happened to them!!
|by Anonymous||reply 63||11/10/2012|
Hilary will be pushing it at 69; Biden has no chance at 74. Besides, he's been pretty much invisible the last 4 years.
|by Anonymous||reply 64||11/10/2012|
Sarah Palin has my vote.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||11/10/2012|
I had to smile at that one r65, you jokester you.
|by Anonymous||reply 66||11/10/2012|
Biden may have been invisible to you, R64, but he's been a very busy VP, doing what they do best these past four years: retail politics. Joe Biden has been the point person working with the governors to implement aspects of the Stimulus package that was passed in '09, and he has travelled all over the country.
He has personal relationships with Big Labor, Governors, mayors, and most of the U.S. Senate. President Obama would be crippled without his help. Joe advises on politics, on navigating thru Congress, and on foreign affairs. The President has grown to trust him and likes him immensely.
Joe is a wise, experienced, intelligent politician. President Obama has shown a tremendous astuteness by putting the right people in place in his administration by having Joe & Hillary where they are. He also has good people in Holder, Sebelius, Napolitano, and Pannetta.
His Interior Secretary, his Labor Secretary, his Education Secretary, even Geithner all do outstanding work. Of course they are guided by an amazingly intelligent, shrewd political mind in Obama. He is one of the Greats.
|by Anonymous||reply 67||11/10/2012|
I'm sorry, but we don't need that gaffe machine running on the top of the ticket. He's not ready for primetime and he never will be.
|by Anonymous||reply 68||11/10/2012|
The Dems need to take this 2012 win and go with someone vital and vibrant. I love Hillary and want it to be her (she'll be 69), but even she is getting up there, but she's probably just on the border of being acceptable due to her popularity and experiene.
Joe Biden however is too old. He'll be 73. He's a great guy, very experienced, but his time in the spotlight will have passed by 2016. I'd like to think in terms of two terms for the next Dem president--not just four years. Could Joe handle two terms? He would be 77 years old at the start of his second term. And by then, the Repugs would be running someone much younger.
|by Anonymous||reply 69||11/10/2012|
I feel like Hillary means it when she says she isn't running. I'm afraid that ship has sailed.
|by Anonymous||reply 70||11/10/2012|
Biden already shows signs of senility. In four years his mind will be completely gone.
|by Anonymous||reply 71||11/10/2012|
Well, R71, that's no reason one can't be president.
|by Anonymous||reply 72||11/11/2012|
A socially dumb, politically naive dreamworld-thing, from Aspie-Girl: My dream dream dream (strike at me from all sides for my ignorance, for I deserve it) ticket for the someday dream-time: Elizabeth Warren for Prez, Kucinich for VP.
Compassionate people for leaders...a lump in my throat, a gun pointed at my own stupid head for dreaming such a stupid thing...
|by Anonymous||reply 73||11/11/2012|
I got my 2012 Commemorative Edition of TIME in the mail yesterday. They have an article called, "2016: Let's Get the Party Started," in which they highlight the following potential candidates (with full-page portraits of each):
Rahm Emanuel (seriously?)
|by Anonymous||reply 74||11/11/2012|
The "(seriously?)" belongs after Bobby Jindal's name too. And Condi has said she will NEVER run for any office, ever.
Nobody wants another Bush. Period.
Biden will be too old.
It's really not much of a list if you ask me.
|by Anonymous||reply 75||11/11/2012|
Senator Ashley Judd for DMV veep in 2016!
|by Anonymous||reply 76||11/11/2012|
Andrew Cuomo is a logical choice.
Christie is more likely after his handling of Sandy,and his bromance with Obama.
Condi - No.
Elizabeth Warren is in the position Obama was in 2004. Plus, she had a tougher opponent.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||11/11/2012|
Dark horses out of left field
Antonio Vaillagrosso or however u spell it
Will be looking to be the token latin on the ticket, but he has BAGGAGE.
Gavin Newsome - Has lefty cred (Gay marriage) has bizniz cred and makes the gays horny
Jennifer Granholm - She hit it out of the park at the convention
And in a perfect world we would make Howard Dean our President
|by Anonymous||reply 78||11/11/2012|
Sorry, but the public will never take Bobby Jindal seriously for president. Yes, they might all be for superficial reasons. But it doesn't matter. Jindal will not be taken seriously.
He may want to run for president, but it ain't happening.
|by Anonymous||reply 79||11/11/2012|
R78 Better not bet on Jennifer, Rafalca-- she was born in Canada.
|by Anonymous||reply 80||11/11/2012|
He'll be brought down by an Anthony Weiner type of texting scandal.
|by Anonymous||reply 81||11/11/2012|
Julián Castro's speech was not well-received. They tried to repeat what happened with Obama, but it definitely fell flat.
|by Anonymous||reply 82||11/11/2012|
"but Hillary would be a highly charismatic and historic nominee because she would potentially be the first woman POTUS in history."
Equally true in 2008 & she couldn't close the deal.
PUMAs never die, they just hibernate.
|by Anonymous||reply 83||11/11/2012|
Hillary would trounce Biden.
|by Anonymous||reply 84||11/11/2012|
If Hillary gets a nice tan, dyes her hair dark brown and starts calling herself Hillaria she'll sweep the latino vote
|by Anonymous||reply 85||11/11/2012|
Actually in 2008 the Latino vote was heavily Hillary.
|by Anonymous||reply 86||11/11/2012|
Julian Castro doesn't have Obama's charisma. You could see the wheels turning in his ehad--Click, Click, Click.
|by Anonymous||reply 87||11/11/2012|
Er..."head" -- sorry. The Calla Lillies distracted me.
|by Anonymous||reply 88||11/11/2012|
Too bad Russ Feingold never made a run. I think he would've made a great POTUS.
I agree, Julian Castro needs a bit more seasoning before he's ready for a run at the top job.
And Bobby Jindal doesn't come up short because of superficial reasons. He comes up short because he's a fucking idiot.
|by Anonymous||reply 89||11/11/2012|
I'm telling you, Brian Schweitzer. Read his bio and tell me one thing about him that isn't a great way to get Independents, "independents" (those republicans who are too pussy to call themselves Republican after the brand got poisoned) and actual Republicans to vote for him. And he's SUPER liberal.
|by Anonymous||reply 90||11/11/2012|
Gavin Newsom reminds me of Patrick Bateman from "American Psycho". Bobby Jindal seems to be an American psycho.
|by Anonymous||reply 91||11/11/2012|
R90, a quick search shows that he is anti-control which does not excite me. So how is he SUPER liberal?
|by Anonymous||reply 92||11/11/2012|
On Chris Matthews's Sunday show, he asked his guests who had more momentum going into 2016, Hillary or Jeb Bush? Chris, Bob Woodward, Kathleen Parker, David Ignatius and Helene Cooper all agreed that it's Hillary's race to lose. And they all agreed that she's probably going to run. Republican Kathleen Parker said that Hillary would get a lot of votes from Republican women.
Let's not forget that Bill Clinton got a higher percentage of the Latino vote than Obama did this year. Put one of the Castro brothers on the ticket and you have a juggernaut ticket.
Bill Clinton was called the "first black President." The black community loves the Clintons. They'll put Barack and Michelle on the campaign trail mobilizing the black vote behind Hillary.
It goes without saying that Hillary would get historic support from women voters.
Do I need to go on?
|by Anonymous||reply 93||11/11/2012|
Hillary/Jeb would be an interesting replay of 1992. And it would perpetuate the perception that Republicans can't win without a Bush or a Nixon on the ticket (since 1928!) and Democrats can't win without a Clinton or an Obama (since 1976).
|by Anonymous||reply 94||11/11/2012|
[quote]Mark my words.
We do, O prophetess!!!
|by Anonymous||reply 95||11/11/2012|
Assuming Hillary is the nominee, the VP pick should not be someone too young, like one of the Castro brothers. The VP is always a heartbeat away, notwithstanding the cliche. While a secondary factor, I think Paul Ryan had a negative impact on the Romney campaign because of his youth AND inexperience. He lacked gravitas.
I like Martin O'Malley.
|by Anonymous||reply 96||11/11/2012|
Actually, I think Castro is sort of where Obama was in 2004. I want him as VP and then President 8 years later.
Imagine that: Democrats have the first black President, followed by the first woman President, followed by the first hispanic President. And 24 straight years of holding The White House.
|by Anonymous||reply 97||11/11/2012|
Cubans will never vote for anyone named Castro.
|by Anonymous||reply 98||11/11/2012|
I'm fine with that. Castro's dead. Let's normalize relationships with Cuba now.
|by Anonymous||reply 99||11/11/2012|
Julian Castro and his brothers' entire reason for being featured at the convention was Texas. By 2016 Texas will go blue. The appeal of the Castro brothers is in the West and Southwest. Look for the 2016 electoral map to go blue in Texas, Colorado, Nevada, and Arizona. That's the goal. The Castro brothers will not be factors for a national ticket in 2016.
I am not convinced Hillary is running in 2016. I would love it, but I also think she may feel her role and her impact is beyond the Presidency. She is already a world leader just by virtue of her intellect and personality.
You know, the entire campaigning process can be a hurtful, humiliating experience that drags people down. The idea of Hillary standing on some stage proving herself in a debate with some asshole, may be as repugnant to her as it is to me. After all, WTF does she have to prove.
So no, I'm not convinced she will run for President. But I am certain she will do great things, and have a huge impact on then entire world forever. She is going to be the 21st Century's Eleanor Roosevelt. Only moreso. That's my belief.
|by Anonymous||reply 100||11/11/2012|
I don't care what race they are. I didn't vote for Obama based on race.
|by Anonymous||reply 101||11/11/2012|
Marco Rubio is singularly unimpressive. He is Cuban, but a blank slate, and a dull speaker. He's lucky to be in the Senate. Condi Rice? Are you kidding? She'll be a Bush-era footnote in two years let alone four.
|by Anonymous||reply 102||11/11/2012|
R92, we lost that one. It's in the constitution, it's actually just the shitty way that it is. Guns are out there and their superfans will never give up the 45% of their personality that comes from their creepy hobby. I'm sorry. I hate it too, but I'm comforted by studies which show that a well armed community is safer (apart from the kids that they didn't responsibly show the guns to) I'd like a to see a Feingold/Schweitzer ticket, either position would be fine.
|by Anonymous||reply 103||11/11/2012|
Hillary is going to spend the next couple of years getting in shape, losing weight, getting her face refreshed, hiring a stylist to improve her wardrobe and defining her positions. By 2014 she will reemerge and everyone will go, 'damn, she looks good.'
She will get the nomination and her VP will be someone like Mark Warner or someone from a red state that is on the verge of turning purple.
|by Anonymous||reply 104||11/11/2012|
Bitchtress Nikki Haley would be a strong contender for 2016 were it not for Christie, Bush and Rubio standing in her way. She'll definitely be one of the top 3 candidates for VP, though.
|by Anonymous||reply 105||11/11/2012|
Nikki Haley has a lot of problems. Her abortion law that forces a lady to look at a sonogram of her fetus and then wait 24 hours before she can have an abortion, chief among them.
Then, there's reeducating her stupid base that Sikhs aren't Muslims which they can't seem to get. Looking at you dead dipshit in Wisconsin. Then you know, she's a Sikh.
Also, apparently those extramarital affairs she was accused of are true. She sounds compulsive so I doubt she quit fucking around. Especially with no consequences the first times.
These things won't go away.
|by Anonymous||reply 106||11/11/2012|
[quote]Hillary is going to spend the next couple of years getting in shape, losing weight, getting her face refreshed, hiring a stylist to improve her wardrobe and defining her positions. By 2014 she will reemerge and everyone will go, 'damn, she looks good.' She will get the nomination and her VP will be someone like Mark Warner or someone from a red state that is on the verge of turning purple.
Either that or she gets her own talk show.
|by Anonymous||reply 107||11/11/2012|
[quote]Then, there's reeducating her stupid base that Sikhs aren't Muslims which they can't seem to get. Looking at you dead dipshit in Wisconsin. Then you know, she's a Sikh.
Well, South Carolina is one of the "basest" states, so how was she able to convince them?
|by Anonymous||reply 108||11/11/2012|