DescentBB

Hillary says she no more wants this man's endorsement than she wants the plague. So she's been distancing herself from Koch's weekend praise as fast as possible. But what does that tell you about Hillary Clinton when one of the liberal-reviled Koch brothers says that she'd possibly be a better president than any of the current GOP nominees? Possibly she's more willing to suck up to US. plutocrats perhaps?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary- ... d=38638619

of course, that is what he meant. Sort of a 'devil we know' sort of remark. If I were Charles Koch, or any adult with a functional brain, I'd roll the dice with Hillary rather than put either Cruz or Trump in the White House.

Perhaps. But if Charles Koch thinks Hillary would be workable presidential choice, then that indicates he thinks she's just another establishment candidate who can be bought off by the moneyed powers that be in Washington. Most of the Dems who are voting for her aren't going to see any real change in the status quo of Washington politics either if she gets elected, despite that flowery campaign rhetoric that Hillary is putting out in order to compete with Sanders. We're going to get yet another crappy Clinton presidency.

tunnelcat wrote:Perhaps. But if Charles Koch thinks Hillary would be workable presidential choice, then that indicates he thinks she's just another establishment candidate who can be bought off by the moneyed powers that be in Washington. Most of the Dems who are voting for her aren't going to see any real change in the status quo of Washington politics either if she gets elected, despite that flowery campaign rhetoric that Hillary is putting out in order to compete with Sanders. We're going to get yet another crappy Clinton presidency.

yeah, pretty much, EXCEPT that with about 42 percent support in the Primaries, and most of the actual enthusiasm, Clinton and the Dems will have to mold the platform and shape the policy proposals and promises to keep them on board.

Hillary Clinton should be judged at International Criminal Court, and not to elect for the Presidency.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-weis ... 80642.html
http://www.globalresearch.ca/barack-hil ... me/5519979
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/04/13/ ... ok-moment/
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/04/13/ ... y-clinton/
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/ ... gn-policy/

Sigma, you just showed me why I dislike Hillary so much. Yet.....it appears that she's going to win the nomination anyway.

tunnelcat wrote:Yet.....it appears that she's going to win the nomination anyway.

I can not believe this. In country there are over 300 million people and she is the best candidate for the head of state?

sigma wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:Yet.....it appears that she's going to win the nomination anyway.

I can not believe this. In country there are over 300 million people and she is the best candidate for the head of state?

Pathetic, isn't it?

sigma wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:Yet.....it appears that she's going to win the nomination anyway.

I can not believe this. In country there are over 300 million people and she is the best candidate for the head of state?

glass houses again. Look at the pathetic little emperor wannabe who runs your nation. Turned tail and ran from the Middle East, oversaw your economy going into the shitter and your money being worthless on the world markets. Best you can do?

Well slick, Russians really don't elect their leaders, do they? So technically, they don't have a choice anyway. In fact, do WE have a choice anymore? We keep getting served up a bunch of political insiders and/or imbeciles to choose from. What good is choice?

callmeslick wrote:glass houses again. Look at the pathetic little emperor wannabe who runs your nation. Turned tail and ran from the Middle East, oversaw your economy going into the **** and your money being worthless on the world markets. Best you can do?

http://savepic.ru/9535330.gif

Foil wrote:Drop the international smack-talk and get back to the topic, folks.

OK