Vote
22 Total Votes
1

Rand Paul

13 votes
3 comments
2

Hillary Clinton

9 votes
2 comments
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Seido says2014-07-05T12:30:28.5710961-05:00
Neither. Elizabeth Warren please.
discomfiting says2014-07-05T12:52:48.8311521-05:00
^ exactly
TheReguritator says2014-07-05T12:54:37.2823478-05:00
Yuck, neither. They're both loons.
Rightwing15 says2014-07-05T13:22:51.3201958-05:00
I really want clinton so that the clinton name is embarrassed beyond repair, then we will actually realize we need to change instead and will act on it instead of saying we will. Its embarrassing how much our country has degraded, i think that we need a republican because yea the republican side doesn't please everyone but to have a country run at a functioning level then you need to have a someone who looks for the greater good rather than the individual good.
FuzzyCatPotato says2014-07-05T13:23:59.0246298-05:00
"I really want clinton so that the clinton name is embarrassed beyond repair, then we will actually realize we need to change instead and will act on it instead of saying we will. Its embarrassing how much our country has degraded, i think that we need a republican because yea the republican side doesn't please everyone but to have a country run at a functioning level then you need to have a someone who looks for the greater good rather than the individual good." Yes, because Clinton was SO terrible. If we're talking about political families and bad, why not look at the Bushes?
Seido says2014-07-05T13:52:33.8105171-05:00
@Fuzzy To be fair, the elder Bush was a pretty good president. He was intelligent, experienced, and more or less knew what he was doing. I might not agree with all of his conservative values, but he was certainly better than his son George. Geb also seems to be pretty intelligent. Overall, the Bush family only has one bad apple.
texans14 says2014-07-05T16:28:22.2056098-05:00
FuzzyCatPotato, Clinton was terrible, and so is Obama. Politically, Hillary is more like Obama than her husband.
Formerland1 says2014-07-06T03:29:18.4125204-05:00
Yet somehow the people we have decided shouldn't win win still win , voters are far to apathetic . They look at name gender and race and that biases thier entire vote most of them don't even watch the tiniest snip of news to learn a out who thier voting for . They could have killed 27 people and it would go over a quarter of the voters heads . Quarter one - group that logically discusses and find correct action after much research Second quarter - idiots that really don't care. Half- voters that only research enough to get a quick easy answer even if its wrong When the half and the second quarter both vote for the same person the first quarter looses . From that we can infer that the second quarter is completely useless scrap them , we need to convince 51% of the half of voters to vote with the first quarter to ensure the world doesn't get driven into the ground . Did that make any sense at all ?
natertig says2014-07-06T04:02:03.7513364-05:00
Elizabeth Warren is way way way too liberal. Big government is not the answer and the last 6 years should be good enough proof of that. I hate it when people say Clinton or Warren would be better than Obama, but fail to realize that they would have voted and signed every single piece of legislation Obama would have. Hilary and Warren support extending the Patriot Act just like Obama, They all support socialized medicine (which is obviously not working), and they all would try to stop the Keystone pipeline. Also, when people point to Bill Clinton and claim how good of a president he was, they fail to forget the Gingrich Revolution where Republicans took over the house and the senate and sent the spending bills to Bill to sign them. Pretty much all Clinton did was sign them and he did things that NO democrat would ever do today, such as limiting unemployment benefits and having expansive welfare reform.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.