Boston Herald poll has Sanders leading Hillary in NH...

[UgaTom]

Here's the link.

Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders has rocketed past longtime front-runner Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, a stunning turn in a race once considered a lock for the former secretary of state, a new Franklin Pierce University/Boston Herald poll shows.

Sanders leads Clinton 44-37 percent among likely Democratic primary voters, the first time the heavily favored Clinton has trailed in the 2016 primary campaign, according to the poll of 442 Granite-Staters.

Of course, that's Sanders country, but not long ago he was way behind. He's kind of like the Dem's Trump - the candidate you say you're supporting if you just want to rage against the machine. It's difficult to see Sanders beating Hillary in more moderate states, but the optics aren't good for Hillary. If Biden jumps in, he and Sanders split the anyone-but-Hillary vote and hand her the nomination. If Warren jumps in, that's when the fireworks would start. More and more, it looks like 2016 could be the GOP's race to lose (which they are quite capable of doing).

 

[StoneColdKillerDawg]

Here's the link.

Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders has rocketed past longtime front-runner Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, a stunning turn in a race once considered a lock for the former secretary of state, a new Franklin Pierce University/Boston Herald poll shows.

Sanders leads Clinton 44-37 percent among likely Democratic primary voters, the first time the heavily favored Clinton has trailed in the 2016 primary campaign, according to the poll of 442 Granite-Staters.

Of course, that's Sanders country, but not long ago he was way behind. He's kind of like the Dem's Trump - the candidate you say you're supporting if you just want to rage against the machine. It's difficult to see Sanders beating Hillary in more moderate states, but the optics aren't good for Hillary. If Biden jumps in, he and Sanders split the anyone-but-Hillary vote and hand her the nomination. If Warren jumps in, that's when the fireworks would start. More and more, it looks like 2016 could be the GOP's race to lose (which they are quite capable of doing).

Colonel or Deion IYO?

 

[whitepug6]

Here's the link.

Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders has rocketed past longtime front-runner Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, a stunning turn in a race once considered a lock for the former secretary of state, a new Franklin Pierce University/Boston Herald poll shows.

Sanders leads Clinton 44-37 percent among likely Democratic primary voters, the first time the heavily favored Clinton has trailed in the 2016 primary campaign, according to the poll of 442 Granite-Staters.

Of course, that's Sanders country, but not long ago he was way behind. He's kind of like the Dem's Trump - the candidate you say you're supporting if you just want to rage against the machine. It's difficult to see Sanders beating Hillary in more moderate states, but the optics aren't good for Hillary. If Biden jumps in, he and Sanders split the anyone-but-Hillary vote and hand her the nomination. If Warren jumps in, that's when the fireworks would start. More and more, it looks like 2016 could be the GOP's race to lose (which they are quite capable of doing).

The Republican presidential candidates, collectively and individually, are nuttier than squirrel turds. The Democrats could run a ham sammich for president and it would win a 1964-style landslide.

But seriously, think about this:

Suppose Hillary Clinton wins all the primaries but has to shut down her campaign before the Democratic Convention because she has been indicted by the Justice Department and faces a 40-year prison sentence?

That would make President Obama a very powerful person indeed in selecting the next President of the United States.

 

[UgaTom]

The Republican presidential candidates, collectively and individually, are nuttier than squirrel turds. The Democrats could run a ham sammich for president and it would win a 1964-style landslide.

But seriously, think about this:

Suppose Hillary Clinton wins all the primaries but has to shut down her campaign before the Democratic Convention because she has been indicted by the Justice Department and faces a 40-year prison sentence?

That would make President Obama a very powerful person indeed in selecting the next President of the United States.

I'm sure you wish that were true. Hillary already trails top Republicans in battleground states. She pretty much has nowhere to go but down and she's the best the Dems have to offer.

 

[jenkinscreekdawg]

The Republican presidential candidates, collectively and individually, are nuttier than squirrel turds. The Democrats could run a ham sammich for president and it would win a 1964-style landslide.

But seriously, think about this:

Suppose Hillary Clinton wins all the primaries but has to shut down her campaign before the Democratic Convention because she has been indicted by the Justice Department and faces a 40-year prison sentence?

That would make President Obama a very powerful person indeed in selecting the next President of the United States.

i don't know how you can get any nuttier than risking the countrys' security by using a personal server !

 

[UgaTom]

i don't know how you can get any nuttier than risking the countrys' security by using a personal server !

That's okay with libs. GO TEAM!!!!1! and stuff.

 

[whitepug6]

I'm sure you wish that were true. Hillary already trails top Republicans in battleground states. She pretty much has nowhere to go but down and she's the best the Dems have to offer.

The worst the Democrats have to offer is light-years better than the Republican rogues' gallery.

 

[whitepug6]

i don't know how you can get any nuttier than risking the countrys' security by using a personal server !

Oh yes you can...think about Donald Trump with nuclear launch codes.

 

[jcddawg]

The Republican presidential candidates, collectively and individually, are nuttier than squirrel turds. The Democrats could run a ham sammich for president and it would win a 1964-style landslide.

But seriously, think about this:

Suppose Hillary Clinton wins all the primaries but has to shut down her campaign before the Democratic Convention because she has been indicted by the Justice Department and faces a 40-year prison sentence?

That would make President Obama a very powerful person indeed in selecting the next President of the United States.

Every one of the Republican candidates is nutty? No, sir, it's you that is nutty. Not every Republican candidate is nutty. You don't like their positions, okay, but nutty? Not even close.

 

[UgaTom]

The worst the Democrats have to offer is light-years better than the Republican rogues' gallery.

Keep telling yourself that; it's not true, nor would it help Hillary's numbers if it were. Right about now, Dems are probably hoping that the FBI indicts her.

 

[d-dawg]

I like the pub candidates. My choices right now are 1. Walker 2. Carson 3. Cruz. Those are subject to change as we get closer. The dems are going to possibly go with Sanders or Hilllary ( aka the Clinton crime syndicate)....really ? If the pubs can't smoke those two then our country is in a whole bunch of trouble. I gotta believe that we are not that far gone. Oh and I forgot they have Pocahontas and Crazy Uncle Joe Biden and maybe even Owl Gore waiting in the wings. Anyway, that is quite a list of candidates to chose from for the Dems LOL

 

[whitepug6]

Every one of the Republican candidates is nutty? No, sir, it's you that is nutty. Not every Republican candidate is nutty. You don't like their positions, okay, but nutty? Not even close.

Oh yes they are all nutty. I quote Jeb Bush, from the debate: "You get rid of Obamacare and replace it with something that doesn't suppress wages and kill jobs."

The unemployment rate in March 2010 when the President signed the ACA, according to the Labor Department, was 9.9%. In June 2015, the unemployment rate was 5.3%. The economy has added about 12 million new jobs since March 2010.

So yeah, even the so-called "moderate" Republicans are nuts.

 

[whitepug6]

I like the pub candidates. My choices right now are 1. Walker 2. Carson 3. Cruz. Those are subject to change as we get closer. The dems are going to possibly go with Sanders or Hilllary ( aka the Clinton crime syndicate)....really ? If the pubs can't smoke those two then our country is in a whole bunch of trouble. I gotta believe that we are not that far gone. Oh and I forgot they have Pocahontas and Crazy Uncle Joe Biden and maybe even Owl Gore waiting in the wings. Anyway, that is quite a list of candidates to chose from for the Dems LOL

Yeah, you Republicans got surprised in 2008 and 2012 because you listened to the lunatic-fringe fever swamp echo chamber that told you McCain and Romney were going to beat Obama. Keep believing what you want to believe. The right-wingers lost the so-called Culture Wars to progressives and in 2016, the American electorate is not going to be interested in immigration, abortion, gay marriage, and repealing the ACA.

 

[Boost Assendahm]

Yeah, you Republicans got surprised in 2008 and 2012 because you listened to the lunatic-fringe fever swamp echo chamber that told you McCain and Romney were going to beat Obama. Keep believing what you want to believe. The right-wingers lost the so-called Culture Wars to progressives and in 2016, the American electorate is not going to be interested in immigration, abortion, gay marriage, and repealing the ACA.

You may be right about the voting public's shallow take on things and our laughably low threshold for any information that is not delivered in entertaining, preferably humorous fashion. That proves what? That we are more dull minded and fear confrontation more than ever in our short history of voting for the prettiest and/or the slickest on the board? WE (all of us) definitely have that down pat. But NONE of that embarrassing precedent makes anyone making a run for the highest office in the land "nutty." Maybe some are more "qualified" than the next, but I'm sure that "qualified," whatever that is supposed to mean, means NOTHING to most of the voting public. The reality this time around the voting block is that much of the voting public (whether they sport liberal or conservative blather on their bumpers or refrigerator doors) has certainly reached the level of water boarding saturation with politics as usual, DC style. Sick of it, and might very well vote Bernie or Donald or into the Head Talking Head's hot seat. We the peeps surely are NUTS and getting nuttier by the day. Not sure we have the right to blame any of that on the politicians or the media or show business or big business or big government. And maybe, just maybe, there's enough of us to finally "vote the bums out." And maybe, we will have made things reasonably clearer to the movers and shakers at ALL levels of government that "we're mad as hell, and we're not gonna take it anymore!"

 

[whitepug6]

You may be right about the voting public's shallow take on things and our laughably low threshold for any information that is not delivered in entertaining, preferably humorous fashion. That proves what? That we are more dull minded and fear confrontation more than ever in our short history of voting for the prettiest and/or the slickest on the board? WE (all of us) definitely have that down pat. But NONE of that embarrassing precedent makes anyone making a run for the highest office in the land "nutty." Maybe some are more "qualified" than the next, but I'm sure that "qualified," whatever that is supposed to mean, means NOTHING to most of the voting public. The reality this time around the voting block is that much of the voting public (whether they sport liberal or conservative blather on their bumpers or refrigerator doors) has certainly reached the level of water boarding saturation with politics as usual, DC style. Sick of it, and might very well vote Bernie or Donald or into the Head Talking Head's hot seat. We the peeps surely are NUTS and getting nuttier by the day. Not sure we have the right to blame any of that on the politicians or the media or show business or big business or big government. And maybe, just maybe, there's enough of us to finally "vote the bums out." And maybe, we will have made things reasonably clearer to the movers and shakers at ALL levels of government that "we're mad as hell, and we're not gonna take it anymore!"

I respectfully disagree. Just in recent memory, and off the top of my head:

Al Smith (and the Democratic Party) was nuts to run a Catholic presidential candidate in 1928. If you know something about the history of the 1920s, you'll know why I said that.

Alfred Landon (and the Republican Party) was nuts to run against FDR in 1936 with the policies he proposed to the American people, and the electorate let him know that.

Strom Thurmond (and the white southern Democratic Party) was nuts to run as a third party candidate against President Truman in 1948. The results of the 1948 election proved southern Democrats were irrelevant to the rest of the party and paved the way for Congress to pass civil rights legislation over southern obstructionism.

Adlai Stevenson (and the Democratic Party) was nuts to run a second time against President Eisenhower in 1956. Ike was enormously popular and Stevenson had already lost in a landslide to Eisenhower in 1952.

Barry Goldwater (and the Republican Party) was nuts to run against LBJ in 1964. After the nation's emotional response to the Kennedy assassination just a year earlier, it is doubtful that any Republican (Rockefeller, Nixon, Lodge, Dirksen, etc.) could have successfully challenged LBJ. But Goldwater was tone-deaf to what Americans in 1964 wanted, and he found out the hard truths on election day.

George Wallace was nuts to run as a third party candidate in 1968. Like Goldwater in 1964, Wallace was politically tone-deaf to the concerns of Americans. Whatever you may think about Richard M. Nixon as a person, you have to concede that he was sometimes a brilliant politician. In 1968, he artfully played the moderate candidate balanced against the hard-right (Wallace) and the left (Humphrey).

George McGovern (and the Democratic Party) was nuts to run against Nixon in 1972. McGovern was tone-deaf to the American electorate, and the results bore that out.

Jimmy Carter was nuts to run for re-election in 1980. What was he thinking? The Iran Hostage Crisis, the disastrous rescue attempt, the bad economy, gas shortages, the Cuban refugees. All under his watch.

 

[Rolodawg2011]

The Republican presidential candidates, collectively and individually, are nuttier than squirrel turds. The Democrats could run a ham sammich for president and it would win a 1964-style landslide.

But seriously, think about this:

Suppose Hillary Clinton wins all the primaries but has to shut down her campaign before the Democratic Convention because she has been indicted by the Justice Department and faces a 40-year prison sentence?

That would make President Obama a very powerful person indeed in selecting the next President of the United States.

But Hillary and Sanders are sane? LMAO, Pal you are on fcked up individual.

 

[Boost Assendahm]

Oh yes they are all nutty. I quote Jeb Bush, from the debate: "You get rid of Obamacare and replace it with something that doesn't suppress wages and kill jobs."

The unemployment rate in March 2010 when the President signed the ACA, according to the Labor Department, was 9.9%. In June 2015, the unemployment rate was 5.3%. The economy has added about 12 million new jobs since March 2010.

So yeah, even the so-called "moderate" Republicans are nuts.

WE are addicted to nuts, who say nutty things and do nutty things. A considerable percentage of us get our political information from comedians and ONLY from comedians, but that same crowd calls Beck and Limbaugh "mean." "He's mean!" "She's mean!" Ever hear that in the playground? Have some of us never gotten past our primal fears at recess? Now there's a thought to ponder about our true motivations in how we elect and whom.

 

[Rolodawg2011]

Oh yes they are all nutty. I quote Jeb Bush, from the debate: "You get rid of Obamacare and replace it with something that doesn't suppress wages and kill jobs."

The unemployment rate in March 2010 when the President signed the ACA, according to the Labor Department, was 9.9%. In June 2015, the unemployment rate was 5.3%. The economy has added about 12 million new jobs since March 2010.

So yeah, even the so-called "moderate" Republicans are nuts.

So I take it you don't teach economics? Lord have mercy. Talk about low information. But then being a liberal doesn't require thought, just blind obedience ...because Gov is good, and gov never lies , its only there to help you.

 

[whitepug6]

So I take it you don't teach economics? Lord have mercy. Talk about low information. But then being a liberal doesn't require thought, just blind obedience ...because Gov is good, and gov never lies , its only there to help you.

LOL wrong again. I teach US history and an elective course in military history. Historians routinely point out incidences in which governments or societies have philosophies or pursue policies that were disastrous for themselves or others.

 

[whitepug6]

Keep telling yourself that; it's not true, nor would it help Hillary's numbers if it were. Right about now, Dems are probably hoping that the FBI indicts her.

Just an uneducated guess, but I believe Hillary Clinton will be indicted. Less powerful and less famous government employees have been indicted, tried, and convicted for similar offenses.

The figure to watch in this is President Obama. Do you think he wants a President Hillary Clinton to succeed him? Do you think a President Hillary Clinton is likely to further his "legacy"?

I believe there is a political figure very close to President Obama who would like very much to be president but has not announced his candidacy. This political figure does not have much support within the Democratic Party so long as Clinton is the presumptive frontrunner. So think about this scenario:

Clinton wins all or most of the primaries and is assured of the Democratic nomination. Just before the Democratic Convention, the Attorney General indicts Hillary Clinton

 

[BonJax]

BO hates the Clintons. So who are you thinking?

 

[whitepug6]

BO hates the Clintons. So who are you thinking?

Vice President Biden.

 

[dieharddawg62]

Vice President Biden.

Please let the dems nominate that creepster...

 

[StoneColdKillerDawg]

Oh yes you can...think about Donald Trump with nuclear launch codes.

That's less risky than Hitlery with any level of authority. She's already proven to be a unless, lying c#%t. The only word you need to know to prove why she shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the controls is "Bengazi".

 

[whitepug6]

Please let the dems nominate that creepster...

Biden is a creepster? Talk about rocks and glass houses! Lindsay Graham isn't creepy? Ted Cruz? Mike Huckabee? Trump? Rick Perry? Bobby Jindal?