"HK" wrote in message
...


Your guess is as good as mine on this, but I think a Hillary-Barack ticket
would be unstoppable.

Barack-Hillary would be better.

Oh, wait. She already *had* that job.

Eisboch

On Jan 30, 10:17*am, wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:49:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...

Your guess is as good as mine on this, but I think a Hillary-Barack ticket
would be unstoppable.

Barack-Hillary would be better.

Oh, wait. *She already **had* that job.

Eisboch

*I think Obama-Richardson would be a strong ticket. It adds someone
with substantial experience and expertise in foreign policy, and has
the added advantage of not including someone very divisive near the
top of the ticket.

I kind of like Richardson, the only thing I see wrong with him is he
was soooooo deep in Billarys pocket, I don't know if he could climb
out...

wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:49:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...

Your guess is as good as mine on this, but I think a Hillary-Barack ticket
would be unstoppable.
Barack-Hillary would be better.

Oh, wait. She already *had* that job.

Eisboch


I think Obama-Richardson would be a strong ticket. It adds someone
with substantial experience and expertise in foreign policy, and has
the added advantage of not including someone very divisive near the
top of the ticket.



Are we going to hear the "gravitas" chorus from all of the political
pundits just like we did in 2000 when Bush picked Chenney? You do
realize what you are saying is that Obama is an empty suit and can't
handle the job without adult supervision.

On Jan 30, 10:20*am, BAR wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:49:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...

Your guess is as good as mine on this, but I think a Hillary-Barack ticket
would be unstoppable.
Barack-Hillary would be better.

Oh, wait. *She already **had* that job.

Eisboch

*I think Obama-Richardson would be a strong ticket. It adds someone
with substantial experience and expertise in foreign policy, and has
the added advantage of not including someone very divisive near the
top of the ticket.

Are we going to hear the "gravitas" chorus from all of the political
pundits just like we did in 2000 when Bush picked Chenney? You do
realize what you are saying is that Obama is an empty suit and can't
handle the job without adult supervision.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That is one reason I could take Obama over Billary....

On Jan 30, 10:35*am, wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:20:02 -0500, BAR wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:49:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...

Your guess is as good as mine on this, but I think a Hillary-Barack ticket
would be unstoppable.
Barack-Hillary would be better.

Oh, wait. *She already **had* that job.

Eisboch

*I think Obama-Richardson would be a strong ticket. It adds someone
with substantial experience and expertise in foreign policy, and has
the added advantage of not including someone very divisive near the
top of the ticket.

Are we going to hear the "gravitas" chorus from all of the political
pundits just like we did in 2000 when Bush picked Chenney? You do
realize what you are saying is that Obama is an empty suit and can't
handle the job without adult supervision.

Not saying that at all. And when they picked a baby sitter for GWB,
it's too bad they settled on Jeffrey Dahmer.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dahmer was an amateur

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RA...CS/BODIES.html

wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:49:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

Your guess is as good as mine on this, but I think a Hillary-Barack ticket
would be unstoppable.
Barack-Hillary would be better.

Barack/Bill Richardson would be the tough one to beat. He could say he
was sending Richardson on the road to fill in the gaps in his foreign
policy experience.

Hillary vs McCain will leave all of the anti-war people with no
attractive candidate. That may depress turnout and really make this a
crap shoot. I think the solid voters at that point will be the people
who are against Hillary no matter who else is running (the NRA vote,
Pro-lifers and other dependable turnout)


Are you kidding? After nearly eight years of being BUSHwhacked, every
DEM in the country will vote for Hillary *or* Barack, along with a
majority of independents.

There's very little difference between Hillary or Barack on ending
Bush's war. Hillary has said she will have a formal plan for doing so
within 60 days of assuming office.

The GOP candidate will carry the GOP and a small number of Independents.

The best thing about a Hillary or Barack vs. McCain race might be a
higher tone than we have seen coming from the Republicans in the last
two national elections. McCain isn't going to tolerate that "swiftboat"
crap, and neither will Hillary or Obama on their side.

This is not to say it will be a sweet campaign; it'll just be cleaner
than the last two.

Oh. "Pro-lifers." Misnomer. They're not pro-life, they are anti-abortion.

"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:49:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

Your guess is as good as mine on this, but I think a Hillary-Barack
ticket would be unstoppable.
Barack-Hillary would be better.

Barack/Bill Richardson would be the tough one to beat. He could say he
was sending Richardson on the road to fill in the gaps in his foreign
policy experience.

Hillary vs McCain will leave all of the anti-war people with no
attractive candidate. That may depress turnout and really make this a
crap shoot. I think the solid voters at that point will be the people
who are against Hillary no matter who else is running (the NRA vote,
Pro-lifers and other dependable turnout)


Are you kidding? After nearly eight years of being BUSHwhacked, every DEM
in the country will vote for Hillary *or* Barack, along with a majority of
independents.

There's very little difference between Hillary or Barack on ending Bush's
war. Hillary has said she will have a formal plan for doing so within 60
days of assuming office.


Don't get too excited about anybody's plan, regardless of their political
party. Decisions will be made based on the miserable reality of the
situation, not on what politicians say on television.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/30/wa...iJ978I5aagtojQ

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message

There's very little difference between Hillary or Barack on ending Bush's
war. Hillary has said she will have a formal plan for doing so within 60
days of assuming office.


Don't get too excited about anybody's plan, regardless of their political
party. Decisions will be made based on the miserable reality of the
situation, not on what politicians say on television.



Exactly right. People, especially Hillary, promise a lot of things if it
gets a vote.
Big difference when you have to produce.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
There's very little difference between Hillary or Barack on ending Bush's
war. Hillary has said she will have a formal plan for doing so within 60
days of assuming office.

Don't get too excited about anybody's plan, regardless of their political
party. Decisions will be made based on the miserable reality of the
situation, not on what politicians say on television.



Exactly right. People, especially Hillary, promise a lot of things if it
gets a vote.
Big difference when you have to produce.

Eisboch




Have you listened to Mitt's promises? Hehehe. What an empty suit he is.

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
There's very little difference between Hillary or Barack on ending
Bush's war. Hillary has said she will have a formal plan for doing so
within 60 days of assuming office.

Don't get too excited about anybody's plan, regardless of their
political party. Decisions will be made based on the miserable reality
of the situation, not on what politicians say on television.



Exactly right. People, especially Hillary, promise a lot of things if it
gets a vote.
Big difference when you have to produce.

Eisboch


Have you listened to Mitt's promises? Hehehe. What an empty suit he is.

I suppose you wouldn't have any trouble filling that suit. Ya right.