true. every 'no sale' usually starts with hearing their sales pitch

I don't disapprove of Hillary politically. I disagree with her on many issues but that isn't a reason to disapprove of someone.

The reasons I can't support her candidacy are mostly unfair to her. Simply put I think it is a bad idea to return a former president to the White House in any capacity, but particularly one where there is so little oversight and official responsibility. Now, I don't think the presidential spouse should just sit on their hands for four or eight years but I also think they should not be key figures in the administration. You think Cheney works magic behind the veil that exists around the mostly unofficial role of the vice president, there's absolutely nothing that can be done to the presidential spouse.

Now, it is certainly possible that Bill won't feel any need to be all that involved or that Hillary will create a firewall that keeps him out but I am uncomfortable with the situation enough that I'd rather avoid it.

Plus, I would like to see a break in power. I wasn't so much bothered by the "dynasty" aspect of Bush because I viewed it as an anomaly. Going 180 years between father/son presidents implies it isn't much to worry about. It isn't fair to Hillary but doing it again right away bothers me. If she's elected we're looking at the possibility of a 26 year span where the presidency stays within just two families. And then Jeb will want a turn.

Finally, I don't have much hope of the bi-partisan atmosphere of our government improving much. If Obama is elected I'm sure Republicans will find reason to revile him just as much as they did Clinton and if Fred Thompson is elected the vitriol will eventually match that targeted at Bush. So the hope for improvement is small but I think it is zero if Hillary Clinton is elected. Again, not fair to her.

That said, I don't think she is wasting her time. I'd say she is still the most likely Democrat to get the party nomination. However, among the major Democratic hopefuls I think she is the one most likely to shore up the Republican base enough to prevent a Democrat from winning the election.

I agree that part of evaluating has to be at least initially taking at face value what they have to say about themself. I haven't visited the official sites yet, but that is mostly because I'm still in a very passive state when it comes to gathering information about the candidates.

And apparently tonight I am in the mood to write books. (I'm hyper about some very good events for me at work today but don't have a good outlet for the hyperness; I predict a very long daytrip tomorrow.)

Not only do I not think Clinton is wasting her time ... I predict she will be our next president.


She's not my first choice. But we could do worse.




Obviously.

:D

http://www.loungeoftomorrow.com/LoT/...dson#post40932

I educated myself.

Interesting guy. He was governor of New Mexico, an energy mogul, was Secretary of Energy, signed medical Mary J legislation, has rather decent foreign relations experience. While he voted in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, he added sexual orientation and gender identity to New Mexico's list of civil rights categories, and opposes the "don't ask, don't tell" policy....

what's he sound like?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tjOuL5qwNIc

Richardson has a lot going for him too.......


He's a Governor---the last 4 Presidential Elections were won by Governors....and 7 of the last 8.

He's from the right latitude..........Every Presidential Election since 1960 has been won by someone from the Sun Belt.

He's not a Senator............Kerry, Gore, Dole, Mondale, Jackson.....etc.

His name is Bill...............2 of the last 4 elections were won by someone named Bill:cheers: