Skip to comments.
N.Y. Poll: Hillary May Not Carry State in 2008
NewsMax ^
| 18 May 2006
Posted on 05/17/2006 6:51:20 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-71 last
To: Jameison
Personally I think the clintons and Ross Perot were on the same side. Don't you think the hildabeast is grooming a 'new Perot' for '08?Divide and conquer, don't ya know.
61
posted on
05/18/2006 6:16:50 AM PDT
by
Ditter
To: Ditter
"Don't you think the hildabeast is grooming a 'new Perot' for '08?Divide and conquer, don't ya know."
I am quite sure she is thinking about it.
It's exactly the kind of thing Hitelry will do. After all it worked splendidly for her husband, when he got in through the stupidity of Ross Perot.
Only thing is..its not gonna work this time round.
Perot was played up by the MSM with little challenge from conservative grassroots.
Today we have conservative Talk Radio, Conservative blogs, etc etc.
Any Hitlery "Perot" is going to get taken apart, and Republicans are sure not going to split their votes because of some runt from a third party with big ears, a peanut brain, and a vendetta against the Bush family.
62
posted on
05/18/2006 7:03:57 AM PDT
by
Jameison
To: sgtbono2002
It always hurts me to se Hillary called a former First Lady. She has no idea what entails being a lady.And there ain't no way she was his First....
63
posted on
05/18/2006 7:11:52 AM PDT
by
Onelifetogive
(Freerepublic - The website where "Freepers" is not in the spell checker dictionary...)
To: Onelifetogive
Somehow I feel that works two ways. I doubt he was her first either. I suspect her first was a member of the Black Panther party she worked so diligently for.
To: hardworking
Whatever she and her party may envision...They envision extensive, nation-wide voter fraud and liberal go-after-Republicans-for-no-cause judges to win elections.
To: sgtbono2002
It always hurts me to see Hillary called a former First Lady. She has no idea what entails being a lady.
She probably doesn't like it either.
66
posted on
05/18/2006 9:17:29 AM PDT
by
cjmae
(Sanity was not equally distributed)
To: Aussie Dasher
I guess New Yorkers don't believe the senate is very important then
67
posted on
05/18/2006 9:18:28 AM PDT
by
cjmae
(Sanity was not equally distributed)
To: madison10
68
posted on
05/18/2006 10:36:58 AM PDT
by
hardworking
(Me? I just work to earn a living, pay taxes, educate my kids...so what could I possiblty know?)
To: Jameison
Ross Perot wasn't stupid and he didn't want to be president, he just wanted to defeat GHW Bush. The stupid ones are the volunteers who took him at his word.
69
posted on
05/18/2006 12:36:20 PM PDT
by
Ditter
To: Ditter
"Ross Perot wasn't stupid and he didn't want to be president, he just wanted to defeat GHW Bush."
Bingo!
Ross Perot stupid is giving us the nightmare on BJ Klinton Street or 8 years, the most disgraceful presidency in American history.
It's like the Germans voting or Schroeder 4 years ago, because they hated President Bush, and Schroeder made Bush the center piece of his campaign.
The result? The highest unemployment in Germany since before WW II. You don't cute your nose to spite your face. Today Germans finally had enough of the economic disaster that Schroeder was, and voted the rabid sucker out of power
70
posted on
05/18/2006 12:50:18 PM PDT
by
Jameison
To: Jameison
The danger isn't only a Perot.
A Perot-surrogate issue would function in the same way.Even someone as charmless and inept as hillary clinton can win if the Right FRACTURES over its pet issues.
We must not, in this Age of Terror, allow another Perot or Perot-surrogate issue
elect a defective and dangerous clinton by a plurality.
(Nor must we allow either to defeat us in '06, for that would set the stage for our defeat in '08.)
With Rudy on the ticket opposing clinton, the focus goes from red to blue
and the critical question becomes, "Which blue states will he carry?"
New York alone will make a clinton win impossible, IMO.
What's black and white and read all over and is more self-destructive than pre-9/11 thinking?
Pre-clinton thinking, that's what....
Putting doctrinal purity ahead of making sure a defective and dangerous clinton never again controls this country is pre-clinton thinking.
We no longer have the luxury of time or circumstance to massage our sensibilities, to indulge our indignations.
We will not survive another clinton. (We may yet not survive the first one.)
STOPPING HILLARY
[JOHN PODHORETZ'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT MESSAGE (and it's not his 'HILLARY IS A BITCH' THEORY OF ELECTABILITY)]
THE ABSURDITY OF THE 'HILLARY IS A BITCH' THEORY OF ELECTABILITY
AND OTHER PODHORETZ NONSENSE
NOTE: Podhoretz is absolutely right about one thing--
even hillary clinton can win if the Right FRACTURES over its pet issues.
We must not, in this Age of Terror, allow another Perot or Perot-surrogate issue
elect a defective and dangerous clinton by a plurality. (Nor must we allow either to defeat us in '06.)
-
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2006
71
posted on
05/18/2006 9:13:21 PM PDT
by
Mia T
(Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-71 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson