2016: Rand Paul vs Hilary Clinton

[Divair]

It'll be a sad day for American politics when the prime candidates for the presidency are a snivelling, objectivist dauphin and lying fraudster wife of a rapist, apathetic towards genocides that get in the way of her publicity.

So business as usual?

[Gauntleted Fist]

It'll be a sad day for American politics when the prime candidates for the presidency are a snivelling, objectivist dauphin and lying fraudster wife of a rapist, apathetic towards genocides that get in the way of her publicity.

Seems like every presidential election?

[Diopolis]

Obama is gonna suspend the constitution there wont be a next election WAKE UP SHEEPLE

FEMA DEATH CAMPS! OBAMACARE DEATH PANELS! DEATH EVERYTHING!

Don't forget NWO.

[Pope Joan]

Rand Paul's idea do not withstand serious examination but his supporters do not really truly care about ideas anyway, when you get right down to it.

And whatever her numbers might indicate now, just remember how Hilary was the most hated American 15 years ago. The talk machine will crank up that hate again, and quickly.

[Afalia]

If I was an American I would like Hillary Clinton. However as a Briton, would Rand Paul be better for British interests? Probably not.

[The Godly Nations]

Clinton, because Rand Paul's an Austrian, and anything, even Clinton's bourgeois liberalism, is better than Austrianism.

[Gauntleted Fist]

Rand Paul's idea do not withstand serious examination but his supporters do not really truly care about ideas anyway, when you get right down to it.

And whatever her numbers might indicate now, just remember how Hilary was the most hated American 15 years ago. The talk machine will crank up that hate again, and quickly.

What?

[The Steel Magnolia]

Rand Paul's idea do not withstand serious examination but his supporters do not really truly care about ideas anyway, when you get right down to it.

And whatever her numbers might indicate now, just remember how Hilary was the most hated American 15 years ago. The talk machine will crank up that hate again, and quickly.

What?

You don't remember when the Clintons murdered dozens to cover up their illegal activities?

Hell, I was still hearing about it years later, and I wasn't even alive for some of Clinton's presidency.

[Farnhamia]

Rand Paul's idea do not withstand serious examination but his supporters do not really truly care about ideas anyway, when you get right down to it.

And whatever her numbers might indicate now, just remember how Hilary was the most hated American 15 years ago. The talk machine will crank up that hate again, and quickly.

What?

There was a lot of hate directed at Hillary back in the 90s. She was accused of engineering the murder of Vince Foster, an aide, of breaking the law with the way she made a lot of money in the Whitewater real estate ... thing. That will all come back. On the positive side, people who bring up those things can be slapped around with her exemplary record as Secretary of State.

[Gauntleted Fist]

What?

There was a lot of hate directed at Hillary back in the 90s. She was accused of engineering the murder of Vince Foster, an aide, of breaking the law with the way she made a lot of money in the Whitewater real estate ... thing. That will all come back. On the positive side, people who bring up those things can be slapped around with her exemplary record as Secretary of State.

But she wasn't the most hated American of the time, surely? I know she wasn't very popular because she didn't want to bake cookies or something, but even with all that it doesn't seem like it would be a real motivator for actual, visceral hatred.

[The Godly Nations]

What?

There was a lot of hate directed at Hillary back in the 90s. She was accused of engineering the murder of Vince Foster, an aide, of breaking the law with the way she made a lot of money in the Whitewater real estate ... thing. That will all come back. On the positive side, people who bring up those things can be slapped around with her exemplary record as Secretary of State.

Her record as Secretary of State was exemplary?

[Khadgar]

There was a lot of hate directed at Hillary back in the 90s. She was accused of engineering the murder of Vince Foster, an aide, of breaking the law with the way she made a lot of money in the Whitewater real estate ... thing. That will all come back. On the positive side, people who bring up those things can be slapped around with her exemplary record as Secretary of State.

Her record as Secretary of State was exemplary?

The Bengahzi truther movement disagrees.

[Mike the Progressive]

FEMA DEATH CAMPS! OBAMACARE DEATH PANELS! DEATH EVERYTHING!

Don't forget NWO.

Whoah, nobody ever said FEMA had death camps, they have work camps. Work camps. Where you labor. Silly liberals, you can't even insult conspiracy theorists correctly.

[Morganutopia]

It is one of the most en portent one to me.

1. video games
2.jobs
3.health care
4. not banning guns
5.geting off gas
6.gay rites

Are you twelve?

I am 15 media censorship is bad.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Are you twelve?

I am 15 media censorship is bad.

Fifteen.

But you know what, let me entertain you. Is every form of censorship bad?

[Grand Britannia]

I am 15 media censorship is bad.

Fifteen.

But you know what, let me entertain you. Is every form of censorship bad?

Yes.

[Pope Joan]

Rand Paul's idea do not withstand serious examination but his supporters do not really truly care about ideas anyway, when you get right down to it.

And whatever her numbers might indicate now, just remember how Hillary was the most hated American 15 years ago. The talk machine will crank up that hate again, and quickly.

What?

At the time she was leading the charge for affordable healthcare, the right wing hate machine had effectively targeted her. She was regarded as the single most disliked American by a majority (!!) of citizens. The healthcare plan was a disaster, and almost killed her career hopes. Notice how Nancy Pelosi is lambasted? Diane Feinstein? That's how it was for Hillary. Mark my words, she is being lulled into a false sense of security. One sign that she is a serious candidate and those old embers will be stirred into blazing hear once again.

"Bill put her in charge of reforming the nation’s health-care system. Her approval ratings went down in flames, and health-reform efforts followed suit....
And here’s where her most hateful critics, those who charge her with being a conniving, nepotistic, carpetbagging chameleon, kind of have a point: Hillary has had to become adept at pretending she’s something she’s not. When she’s herself — a woman with formidable intelligence, years of experience, and powerful connections — America can’t stand her."

http://nymag.com/thecut/2012/12/hillary ... ch-22.html

[The Steel Magnolia]

Fifteen.

But you know what, let me entertain you. Is every form of censorship bad?

Yes.

A ban on child pornography is censorship of media.

[Distruzio]

Neither. I don't vote.

[Grand Britannia]

Yes.

A ban on child pornography is censorship of media.

Maybe because it's a crime in itself.

[New Chalcedon]

If this would end up being the two final candidates for the presidency, who would you vote for? For me, this would be really interesting for me and a very difficult choice. I would favor Clinton when in comes to taxes, environment, immigration, abortion and gay marriage, but favor Rand when it comes to drones, guns, drugs, death penalty and social security. Both seem also seem to be good when it comes to right to privacy, but if either one changes their view on it, that would hand my vote to the other one. All in all. Who would you guys vote for and why?

Here are some links where you can review each of their positions:

Hilary Clinton: http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/hillary_clinton.htm
Rand Paul: http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Rand_Paul.htm

First, it's only 2013. If you must speculate about US elections, can it at least be the midterms, rather than the next Presidential election?

Second, neither candidate has even announced that they're in it, and there's no certainty that either (let alone both) will. Hillary Clinton, much as I admire her, is 65 years old, and has spent the last 21 of them in the public domain. If she decides that she's had enough, it's her right to - and she was reportedly exhausted after 4 years as (a very active) Sec'y of State. She's resting up, and I hope she decides that she's rested enough, but she may not. Rand Paul, meanwhile, is a very junior Senator from Kentucky, who hasn't shown any ambitions beyond his current position.

Third, you're presuming that either candidate would win their Party's primary selection process. While a Clinton entry to the Democratic nomination contest would clear the field of any other heavyweights (Biden, Cuomo, O'Malley, etc.), people assumed she was a lock for the nomination in 2008. And I don't see no President Hillary Clinton around. On the Republican side, it's not even as if Paul would start as the favourite - there are quite a few other potential nominees who have shown at least some interest, and have at least as solid a powerbase - Rubio, Christie, Santorum, Jeb Bush (although I think that "Bush fatigue" would do to him what "Clinton fatigue" did to Hillary in 2008). Each of these has their own powerbase within the party - Rubio would be the Southern Tea Party's preferred candidate, Christie the establishment candidate for the Northeast, Santorum the evangelical favourite, Bush the Southern party establishment, etc. etc.

Fourth, please don't kill that puppy, CTOAN.

[Mike the Progressive]

A ban on child pornography is censorship of media.

Maybe because it's a crime in itself.

According to whom? I recall people saying homosexuality was a crime, an unnatural perverse thing. I'm sure people said the same thing of interracial marriages. Does a pedophile have a choice in his illness?

I think censorship, as much as people hate to admit, is necessary at times. From child pornography to state secrets to not yelling "fire" in a theater...

The problem is we find the absolute interpretation of a right intellectually easy (and lazy). Absolutes are attractive after all. They require little thought, plus everybody likes a clear cut answer. Life has never been so simple (except it's not).

[Myrensis]

It appears as though NSers like to buzz about 2016 even though it is 3 years from now.

In any case, we'll have to see. I want to wait until debates, choosing of running mates, etc. to decide who will get my vote. Most likely Hilary.

It's 3 years until we vote. Judging by recent trends we have maybe a year before the campaigning starts.

[Grand Britannia]

Maybe because it's a crime in itself.

According to whom? I recall people saying homosexuality was a crime, an unnatural perverse thing. I'm sure people said the same thing of interracial marriages. Does a pedophile have a choice in his illness?

I think censorship, as much as people hate to admit, is necessary at times. From child pornography to state secrets to not yelling "fire" in a theater...

The problem is we find the absolute interpretation of a right intellectually easy (and lazy). Absolutes are attractive after all. They require little thought, plus everybody likes a clear cut answer. Life has never been so simple (except it's not).

According to the government.

A state secret is understandable, and so is banning something that is illegal by law.

[The Steel Magnolia]

So you agree some forms of censorship are okay then.