Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   Look at it this way, Joe. The Senate Democrats may not want you over Hillary but the internet does. So sit back, relax in your Bird, pop open a Coors and watch some cat videos. You don't need the presidency, you have Fark   (politico.com) divider line 79
    More: Sad  
•       •       •

1354 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Jun 2014 at 1:28 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



79 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-20 12:04:11 AM  
Give me a chance to vote for Uncle Joe, and I'll do it. I will then immediately begin growing my salutary mullet.
 
2014-06-20 12:07:02 AM  
I hope Joe does run.  Even if everyone lines up behind Clinton, they have some key differences that need to be debated.  She's too hawkish for my tastes and even though she's moved more to the left the last few years, I'm still concerned about the Third Way BS we dealt with the first time around.  Regardless, the GOP debates are going to be a complete circus, so I think it would be good for the country to see two adults debating on the Democrat side.
 
2014-06-20 01:36:01 AM  
My only real quibble with Biden is his history as a very staunch drug warrior. The legalization movement has been making quite a lot of progress in recent years but all that can be wiped away by an overzealous executive branch
 
2014-06-20 01:43:23 AM  
Thanks for the Drug War, Joe.

Now, Fark off!
 
2014-06-20 01:44:12 AM  
I like Joe in small doses. As a full time President would be an entirely different matter. Not sure I want Hillary either but ... we shall see. Either choice is preferable to whatever the GOP has sitting around...
 
2014-06-20 01:49:07 AM  

Piizzadude: I like Joe in small doses. As a full time President would be an entirely different matter. Not sure I want Hillary either but ... we shall see. Either choice is preferable to whatever the GOP has sitting around...


So, you're willing to support a political dynasty instead of voting for bootstrappy self-made Real Americans like Rand Paul or Jeb Bush?

Typical libtard.
 
2014-06-20 01:50:15 AM  
If a Republican helped start, finance and support a war that cost the US a Trillion farking dollars and 100,000s of lives, they would be outraged.

When Joe Biden does it, it's cool cause... Trans Am.

Joe Biden is not qualify to be POTUS because of the Drug War. Period.
 
2014-06-20 01:51:12 AM  
I don't want a hawk, I don't want a neo-con, and the Clintons may not ask for the manufactured scandals, but the way they handle them is usually to blow them up further.  Joe's been almost solely responsible for getting most of the administration's landmark legislation passed and for moving their social policy forward.  I'd rather him than her.
 
2014-06-20 01:54:08 AM  
I believe Obama, as much as I like him, pissed away far too many opportunities by caving/"compromising" with republicans and it took him far too long to get tough with them.  This was my greatest fear going into 2008, which is why I supported Hillary at the time.  Hillary would not have put up with 1/10 the shiat Obama did.  That's about my only opinion regarding 2016 right now (aside from the whole republican clown car spectacle we're sure to see again).  It's still a long way off.  There's a good chance the democratic nominee will be someone we're not even discussing yet, too.
 
2014-06-20 01:57:20 AM  

Ow! That was my feelings!: If a Republican helped start, finance and support a war that cost the US a Trillion farking dollars and 100,000s of lives, they Democrats would be outraged.

When Joe Biden does it, it's cool cause... Trans Am.

Joe Biden is not qualify to be POTUS because of the Drug War. Period.


Well, I farked that up. Guessing the point was made though.
 
2014-06-20 01:58:20 AM  

msqualia: I don't want a hawk, I don't want a neo-con, and the Clintons may not ask for the manufactured scandals, but the way they handle them is usually to blow them up further.


How did the Clintons blow them up further?  It was the house republicans, as I recall, who had a special prosecutor investigating them for almost the entire Clinton presidency while they dragged him through the mud for 8 straight years.   When there was nothing to the Vince Foster "murder" or the innocuous Whitewater land deal, which was obvious to anyone with half a brain at the time, they finally struck gold with Monica.  BFD.  Why blame the Clintons for this?
 
2014-06-20 01:59:57 AM  
I think it'd be fun to have Joe as VP for another 4 years.

How cool would it be to have the first female president, a husband former president AND a third term VP Biden?  Appoint Obama as Hillary's secretary of state and I think the combination of events would cause at least a couple of Republican Congress critters to die of apoplexy.
 
2014-06-20 02:02:54 AM  

sassyfrancis: I think it'd be fun to have Joe as VP for another 4 years.

How cool would it be to have the first female president, a husband former president AND a third term VP Biden?  Appoint Obama as Hillary's secretary of state and I think the combination of events would cause at least a couple of Republican Congress critters to die of apoplexy.


Just to drive the republicans further off the cliff, have her appoint Obama to the supreme court too.
 
2014-06-20 02:04:33 AM  
Well you know what? FARK the Senate Democrats for not knowing a good thing when they see it!
 
2014-06-20 02:08:45 AM  
I dunno, can't really say I'm that happy with either old white person ruling America, but that's just me.
 
2014-06-20 02:12:03 AM  

whidbey: I dunno, can't really say I'm that happy with either old white person ruling America, but that's just me.


Ha! The most progressively white statement ever.
 
2014-06-20 02:36:59 AM  
Can't we make Biden VP for Life?  He's too much fun to lose, but he's never going to win over the public for the big chair (unless the wrong Republican emerges from the clown car).
 
2014-06-20 02:37:52 AM  

mcnguyen: sassyfrancis: I think it'd be fun to have Joe as VP for another 4 years.

How cool would it be to have the first female president, a husband former president AND a third term VP Biden?  Appoint Obama as Hillary's secretary of state and I think the combination of events would cause at least a couple of Republican Congress critters to die of apoplexy.

Just to drive the republicans further off the cliff, have her appoint Obama to the supreme court too.

Michelle

Obama.
 
2014-06-20 02:39:29 AM  

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: mcnguyen: sassyfrancis: I think it'd be fun to have Joe as VP for another 4 years.

How cool would it be to have the first female president, a husband former president AND a third term VP Biden?  Appoint Obama as Hillary's secretary of state and I think the combination of events would cause at least a couple of Republican Congress critters to die of apoplexy.

Just to drive the republicans further off the cliff, have her appoint Obama to the supreme court too.

Michelle Obama.



/farking Fark formatting.
 
2014-06-20 03:11:03 AM  
I really don't want Clinton. I don't want any more political dynasties, and quite frankly I still have a bad taste in my mouth about how she ran her campaign against Obama in 2008. Five me Elizabeth Warren or something. Or a real liberal to vote for, just for a change of pace. Like Anthony Weiner before he imploded in on himself.

That said, I'll vote for Clinton over whomever the Republicans find hatching from their fetid pit.

/would vote for a true, fire-in-the-belly liberal if they were were a viable candidate
//the closest we ever came was Ralph Nader
///not going to waste my vote and let the party of evil win, so I guess I'll vote for the party of slightly less evil
 
ecl
2014-06-20 03:20:43 AM  

Shadowknight: I really don't want Clinton. I don't want any more political dynasties, and quite frankly I still have a bad taste in my mouth about how she ran her campaign against Obama in 2008. Five me Elizabeth Warren or something. Or a real liberal to vote for, just for a change of pace. Like Anthony Weiner before he imploded in on himself.

That said, I'll vote for Clinton over whomever the Republicans find hatching from their fetid pit.

/would vote for a true, fire-in-the-belly liberal if they were were a viable candidate
//the closest we ever came was Ralph Nader
///not going to waste my vote and let the party of evil win, so I guess I'll vote for the party of slightly less evil


I hear Mccain and Palin are available.
 
2014-06-20 03:21:30 AM  

mcnguyen: I believe Obama, as much as I like him, pissed away far too many opportunities by caving/"compromising" with republicans and it took him far too long to get tough with them.  This was my greatest fear going into 2008, which is why I supported Hillary at the time.  Hillary would not have put up with 1/10 the shiat Obama did.  That's about my only opinion regarding 2016 right now (aside from the whole republican clown car spectacle we're sure to see again).  It's still a long way off.  There's a good chance the democratic nominee will be someone we're not even discussing yet, too.


I think we elected them in the wrong order. As you say, Clinton would have achieved more by getting tough than Obama did through compromise, plus we might then be looking at a more battle-hardened Obama running in 2016.
 
2014-06-20 03:41:41 AM  

The Numbers: mcnguyen: I believe Obama, as much as I like him, pissed away far too many opportunities by caving/"compromising" with republicans and it took him far too long to get tough with them.  This was my greatest fear going into 2008, which is why I supported Hillary at the time.  Hillary would not have put up with 1/10 the shiat Obama did.  That's about my only opinion regarding 2016 right now (aside from the whole republican clown car spectacle we're sure to see again).  It's still a long way off.  There's a good chance the democratic nominee will be someone we're not even discussing yet, too.

I think we elected them in the wrong order. As you say, Clinton would have achieved more by getting tough than Obama did through compromise, plus we might then be looking at a more battle-hardened Obama running in 2016.


As much as I was disappointed by Obama giving way too much to the Republicans, I think he was the right man at the right time. Coming off of Bush, we needed the proverbial "coolest guy in the room" to repair our reputation overseas. He was unflappable in the worst of situations.

Not to mention, him being him was enough to really show America the radical Right's true colors. Here's a guy who is trying his damnedest to make things happen and make sure everyone gets a say, and they just slap away every olive branch with thinly veiled racism, homophobia, Christian Dominion bend and at the obvious behest of a wannabe and very near plutocracy class.

Because of him, you have an entire generation of people who may not solidly vote Democrat, but will never, EVER vote Republican.
 
2014-06-20 03:43:11 AM  
I voted for Biden last time.  If he ran against Hillary, I'd vote for him again, baring some third primary candidate.

I'm still OK with him staying VP for life though.
 
2014-06-20 03:44:15 AM  

ecl: Shadowknight: I really don't want Clinton. I don't want any more political dynasties, and quite frankly I still have a bad taste in my mouth about how she ran her campaign against Obama in 2008. Five me Elizabeth Warren or something. Or a real liberal to vote for, just for a change of pace. Like Anthony Weiner before he imploded in on himself.

That said, I'll vote for Clinton over whomever the Republicans find hatching from their fetid pit.

/would vote for a true, fire-in-the-belly liberal if they were were a viable candidate
//the closest we ever came was Ralph Nader
///not going to waste my vote and let the party of evil win, so I guess I'll vote for the party of slightly less evil

I hear Mccain and Palin are available.


Please. It'll male the election for whomever is running against them a complete gimme. We might even be able to get a left-off-center person on the ticket and win.

Not holding my breath, but still.
 
2014-06-20 03:45:37 AM  
Male=make

Stupid phone...
 
2014-06-20 04:18:36 AM  

Shadowknight: The Numbers: mcnguyen: I believe Obama, as much as I like him, pissed away far too many opportunities by caving/"compromising" with republicans and it took him far too long to get tough with them.  This was my greatest fear going into 2008, which is why I supported Hillary at the time.  Hillary would not have put up with 1/10 the shiat Obama did.  That's about my only opinion regarding 2016 right now (aside from the whole republican clown car spectacle we're sure to see again).  It's still a long way off.  There's a good chance the democratic nominee will be someone we're not even discussing yet, too.

I think we elected them in the wrong order. As you say, Clinton would have achieved more by getting tough than Obama did through compromise, plus we might then be looking at a more battle-hardened Obama running in 2016.

As much as I was disappointed by Obama giving way too much to the Republicans, I think he was the right man at the right time. Coming off of Bush, we needed the proverbial "coolest guy in the room" to repair our reputation overseas. He was unflappable in the worst of situations.

Not to mention, him being him was enough to really show America the radical Right's true colors. Here's a guy who is trying his damnedest to make things happen and make sure everyone gets a say, and they just slap away every olive branch with thinly veiled racism, homophobia, Christian Dominion bend and at the obvious behest of a wannabe and very near plutocracy class.

Because of him, you have an entire generation of people who may not solidly vote Democrat, but will never, EVER vote Republican.


I think simply being 'not Bush' was more significant in repairing our overseas reputation and with Hillary, there'd be the implicit nod towards undoing the damage of the Bush years by putting Bill back center-stage.

As to your second point, again I don't think that's an Obama-specific consequence - the radical right would going to explode in a fireball of hate and fury at any Democrat elected to the WH. That's not to say his skin color isn't relevant, but had it been Hillary there'd still have been attacks, albeit this time likely focused on gender. They'd have travelled to the same destination either way, just using a different vehicle to get there.
 
2014-06-20 04:57:57 AM  
I love Joe and wouldn't mind seeing him run at all, but it's funny that the only things they point out as being against Hillary is her husband's presidency, whom she is not (and it was an economic boom besides), and the Benghazi issue.  If I'm not mistaken, the only thing they really hung on her was her department saying the attack was spurred by that anti-Islam video.  Yet didn't the leader of the attacks they just nabbed actually say that it was in fact a retaliation for that video?  Doesn't that ultimately mean that what they have on her is... nothing?
 
2014-06-20 05:26:36 AM  
The Senate aren't the only ones. Why can't the Democwats field a candidate with bwains.
 
2014-06-20 06:33:29 AM  

Ow! That was my feelings!: Joe Biden is not qualify to be POTUS because of the Drug War. Period.


Punctuation is not your problem.

/but yes
//point taken
///and dismissed
////political positions are not qualifications
//slashies are
 
2014-06-20 06:36:58 AM  

mcnguyen: I believe Obama, as much as I like him, pissed away far too many opportunities by caving/"compromising" with republicans and it took him far too long to get tough with them.  This was my greatest fear going into 2008, which is why I supported Hillary at the time.  Hillary would not have put up with 1/10 the shiat Obama did.  That's about my only opinion regarding 2016 right now (aside from the whole republican clown car spectacle we're sure to see again).  It's still a long way off.  There's a good chance the democratic nominee will be someone we're not even discussing yet, too.


This analysis is partly complicated by the fact that a lot of it, to President Obama, didn't amount to much of a sacrifice. Judging by the positions and policies he referenced in his actual 2008 campaign, he was not the great liberal lion that the left and right each thought he was. He's a moderate; in his shoes, I might have made the same compromises if it was a choice between giving Republicans a symbolic victory and fighting hard for a policy I didn't really like anyway.
 
2014-06-20 06:44:31 AM  
Senate Democrats and the party establishment in general favored Hillary so overwhelmingly in 2008 that the random black newbie from Illinois had basically no support for his candidacy at all, and if you were analyzing it from that perspective he'd have been dead farking last all the way up to the last week or so before the primaries.

... how'd that one work out again?

The Numbers: with Hillary, there'd be the implicit nod towards undoing the damage of the Bush years by putting Bill back center-stage.


Um... while the Bush Jr. administration was more innately disastrous, pretty much the best thing you could say about Clinton's handling of the issue of terrorism was that he only made things worse a couple of times in the course of vainly flailing about like a moron, and usually there wasn't any real impact one way or another.

So... not really sure what the fark you're talking about here.  Obama is a hypercompetent foreign policy ninja compared to Bill Clinton, I'm not really sure why you think trying to return to the '90s would be an improvement.  The '90s was the era of Bosnia and repeatedly managing to somehow 'negotiate' things  worse in Israel, not exactly a diplomatic high point there.
 
2014-06-20 06:44:57 AM  

mcnguyen: I believe Obama, as much as I like him, pissed away far too many opportunities by caving/"compromising" with republicans and it took him far too long to get tough with them.  This was my greatest fear going into 2008, which is why I supported Hillary at the time.  Hillary would not have put up with 1/10 the shiat Obama did.  That's about my only opinion regarding 2016 right now (aside from the whole republican clown car spectacle we're sure to see again).  It's still a long way off.  There's a good chance the democratic nominee will be someone we're not even discussing yet, too.


Obama's biggest mistake was assuming that the right wouldn't act like self destructive temper tantruming children.
 
2014-06-20 07:09:49 AM  

msqualia: I don't want a hawk, I don't want a neo-con, and the Clintons may not ask for the manufactured scandals, but the way they handle them is usually to blow them up further.  Joe's been almost solely responsible for getting most of the administration's landmark legislation passed and for moving their social policy forward.  I'd rather him than her.


Good point.

mcnguyen: I believe Obama, as much as I like him, pissed away far too many opportunities by caving/"compromising" with republicans and it took him far too long to get tough with them.  This was my greatest fear going into 2008, which is why I supported Hillary at the time.  Hillary would not have put up with 1/10 the shiat Obama did.  That's about my only opinion regarding 2016 right now (aside from the whole republican clown car spectacle we're sure to see again).  It's still a long way off.  There's a good chance the democratic nominee will be someone we're not even discussing yet, too.


Also a good point.
 
2014-06-20 07:10:56 AM  
Look man, Pappa Joe knows that you can be the man behind the man, but you never want to be The Man, you dig?
 
2014-06-20 07:13:26 AM  
Before anyone else makes any more references to a Clinton "dynasty", could you take the time to haul out the ol' dictionary, and look up the word "dynasty" and check out what it actually means?
 
2014-06-20 07:15:59 AM  

mcnguyen: sassyfrancis: I think it'd be fun to have Joe as VP for another 4 years.

How cool would it be to have the first female president, a husband former president AND a third term VP Biden?  Appoint Obama as Hillary's secretary of state and I think the combination of events would cause at least a couple of Republican Congress critters to die of apoplexy.

Just to drive the republicans further off the cliff, have her appoint Obama to the supreme court too.


 Cute you would think that Obama would be interested in the court.

Obama is done working after 2016. He wants to be Bill Clinton and suck up that sweet foundation money and speaking fees
.Doing what he does best,giving a speech and soaking up the applause of a captive audience.
( dropping the mic and heading off for a round of golf.)

Biden is a light weight and two-time loser presidential candidate,and the powers are not going to waste their money. on this plagiarist .

 He is nothing more than a rodeo clown sent out to distract the public with his antics.
encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com
 
2014-06-20 07:36:03 AM  

jso2897: Before anyone else makes any more references to a Clinton "dynasty", could you take the time to haul out the ol' dictionary, and look up the word "dynasty" and check out what it actually means?


noun

a succession of people from the same family who play a prominent role in business, politics, or another field.
"the Ford dynasty"
synonyms:    bloodline, line, ancestral line, lineage, house, family, ancestry, descent, succession, genealogy, family tree; More

Your point?
 
2014-06-20 07:37:37 AM  

Ow! That was my feelings!: If a Republican helped start, finance and support a war that cost the US a Trillion farking dollars and 100,000s of lives, they would be outraged.

When Joe Biden does it, it's cool cause... Trans Am.

Joe Biden is not qualify to be POTUS because of the Drug War. Period.


This. Also people forget he was a a major voice in forming (and defending) the PATRIOT Act
 
2014-06-20 07:54:56 AM  
If you disqualify someone for the drug war, don't you disqualify.. everyone?
 
2014-06-20 07:57:35 AM  

Emposter: I voted for Biden last time.  If he ran against Hillary, I'd vote for him again, baring some third primary candidate.

I'm still OK with him staying VP for life though.


This.

Please, Hillary, give us 16 years of VP Joe Biden.
 
2014-06-20 07:58:55 AM  

Yaw String: jso2897: Before anyone else makes any more references to a Clinton "dynasty", could you take the time to haul out the ol' dictionary, and look up the word "dynasty" and check out what it actually means?

noun

a succession of people from the same family who play a prominent role in business, politics, or another field.
"the Ford dynasty"
synonyms:    bloodline, line, ancestral line, lineage, house, family, ancestry, descent, succession, genealogy, family tree; More

Your point?


Okay, general point to objections to the word "dynasty", is there a better word to use when members of a ruling family (or in this case, obscenely rich and mega powerful enough to approximate "ruling class" in a country that does not have a monarchy) are allowed positions of power without allowing more than the slightest bit of room for an outsider to enter?

"Nepotism", maybe?  That implies the power was granted without consent of the people...which one could make the case that we really don't have much of a choice, but if we're being pedantic here...
 
2014-06-20 08:01:31 AM  

Dr.Mxyzptlk.: mcnguyen: sassyfrancis: I think it'd be fun to have Joe as VP for another 4 years.

How cool would it be to have the first female president, a husband former president AND a third term VP Biden?  Appoint Obama as Hillary's secretary of state and I think the combination of events would cause at least a couple of Republican Congress critters to die of apoplexy.

Just to drive the republicans further off the cliff, have her appoint Obama to the supreme court too.

 Cute you would think that Obama would be interested in the court.

Obama is done working after 2016. He wants to be Bill Clinton and suck up that sweet foundation money and speaking fees
.Doing what he does best,giving a speech and soaking up the applause of a captive audience.
( dropping the mic and heading off for a round of golf.)

Biden is a light weight and two-time loser presidential candidate,and the powers are not going to waste their money. on this plagiarist .

 He is nothing more than a rodeo clown sent out to distract the public with his antics.
[encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com image 289x175]


Given that the entire field of candidates for the Republican Party fits that description equally well, who would you rather see?

IMO, it's the age old question of need vs. want.  I  want a liberal/libertarian president who advocates for greater privacy rights, gay rights, and equality while also pushing liberal economic agendas, like supporting unions, green energy, and generating infrastructure projects.  I need someone who isn't any of the current Republicans considering or being considered for the presidency.
 
2014-06-20 08:07:43 AM  
edge1.politicususa.netdna-cdn.com
 
2014-06-20 08:15:33 AM  

Dr.Mxyzptlk.: mcnguyen: sassyfrancis: I think it'd be fun to have Joe as VP for another 4 years.

How cool would it be to have the first female president, a husband former president AND a third term VP Biden?  Appoint Obama as Hillary's secretary of state and I think the combination of events would cause at least a couple of Republican Congress critters to die of apoplexy.

Just to drive the republicans further off the cliff, have her appoint Obama to the supreme court too.

 Cute you would think that Obama would be interested in the court.

Obama is done working after 2016. He wants to be Bill Clinton and suck up that sweet foundation money and speaking fees
.Doing what he does best,giving a speech and soaking up the applause of a captive audience.
( dropping the mic and heading off for a round of golf.)

Biden is a light weight and two-time loser presidential candidate,and the powers are not going to waste their money. on this plagiarist .

 He is nothing more than a rodeo clown sent out to distract the public with his antics.
[encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com image 289x175]


If I say your name backwards do you disappear?
 
2014-06-20 08:45:28 AM  

Tomahawk513: IMO, it's the age old question of need vs. want. I want a liberal/libertarian president who advocates for greater privacy rights, gay rights, and equality while also pushing liberal economic agendas, like supporting unions, green energy, and generating infrastructure projects. I need someone who isn't any of the current Republicans considering or being considered for the presidency.


That.  That entirely.

And that's why I'd probably vote against Clinton in the primary, but for her in the general.
 
2014-06-20 08:47:05 AM  
People who support Hillary seem to think it's her "time" or her "turn". She's an awful politician and has an Al Gore-like tendency to exaggerate.

Anyone remember her claim of dodging sniper bullets? Her recent claim of leaving the White House dead broke?

Nobody wants a pathological liar as President.
 
2014-06-20 08:51:19 AM  
I would've thought us farkers would be smart enough to realize the democrats aren't going to announce the person who will eventually become the front runner until mid 2015.  Biden is old.  He would be 74 when he took the big chair if he got elected in 2016.  For comparison, McCain would have been 71 had he been elected and his age and health were serious topics during the campaign.

Clinton's best utility to the democrats is as a beacon for all the hate, anger, and confused flailing the GOP will focus on whoever they believe to be upfront.  She's too perfect a target to make it through a general election, so she probably won't get the nod even if she runs.  Which, for consistency's sake I'm maintaining she isn't going to do.
 
2014-06-20 08:55:38 AM  

Summercat: Dr.Mxyzptlk.: mcnguyen: sassyfrancis: I think it'd be fun to have Joe as VP for another 4 years.

How cool would it be to have the first female president, a husband former president AND a third term VP Biden?  Appoint Obama as Hillary's secretary of state and I think the combination of events would cause at least a couple of Republican Congress critters to die of apoplexy.

Just to drive the republicans further off the cliff, have her appoint Obama to the supreme court too.

 Cute you would think that Obama would be interested in the court.

Obama is done working after 2016. He wants to be Bill Clinton and suck up that sweet foundation money and speaking fees
.Doing what he does best,giving a speech and soaking up the applause of a captive audience.
( dropping the mic and heading off for a round of golf.)

Biden is a light weight and two-time loser presidential candidate,and the powers are not going to waste their money. on this plagiarist .

 He is nothing more than a rodeo clown sent out to distract the public with his antics.
[encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com image 289x175]

If I say your name backwards do you disappear?


No! I have to say it backwards.

img.fark.net
 
2014-06-20 09:03:16 AM  

Mentat: I hope Joe does run.  Even if everyone lines up behind Clinton, they have some key differences that need to be debated.  She's too hawkish for my tastes and even though she's moved more to the left the last few years, I'm still concerned about the Third Way BS we dealt with the first time around.  Regardless, the GOP debates are going to be a complete circus, so I think it would be good for the country to see two adults debating on the Democrat side.


And I am afraid she would move further right once she got the presidency. Obama did. He campaigned on single payer but offered up Hillarycare once he was in office. And the guys he appointed to deal with Wall Street were basically Clinton cronies. At this point, because the Republican Party is basically insane, I would vote for just about any Dem candidate over a Republican one for president (Supreme Court appointees alone decide my vote). But I would like someone more liberal if cor no reason than to correct the country's lurch toward Right wing wackjobbery.
 
Displayed 50 of 79 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report