Clinton Vs Bush again?
 

Yes this time Jeb Bush
Vs Hilary Clinton




I would prefer new people
not those who were around in the real corrupt times

http://news.sky.com/story/1392929/je...hite-house-bid

All cut from the same cloth anyway

Yep. So we will have had Bush, Clinton, Bush, (Obama), Clinton/Bush, spanning 30 years. Democracy is an absolute joke, it's practically hereditary rule at this point.

In my opinion, Obama was an anomaly that wasn't supposed to happen. Hilldawg Clinton was supposed to win over Obama and then go on to take the presidency and then probably Lil' Bush this time around - so the running order "should" have been:

'89 Bush, '93 Clinton, '01 Bush, '09 Clinton, '14 Bush.

In the land of the free, and the home of the Bushes and Clintons.

Yes, the land of the American Dream, where any billionaire oil baron's son can become president.

Well for me, if that is the choice I certainly would hope and want Hilary Clinton to become President over Jeb Bush any day.

I hope another Democrat takes her place
she is not up to this job.,

I imagine his surname will hinder him as much as it will help him, don't see why his election should be seen as a foregone conclusion when it's anything but, not even likely that he will be the Republican nomination

I have to disagree,I think she would make a really good President as she did Secretary of State too.

shes a scary person, didnt she imply the reason she wouldnt withdraw from the democratic leadership race in 2008 was that obama may get shot? as for her role as foreign secretary, how on earth cna that be branded a success? benghazi etc

:hehe:

obama was a complete one off, an unknown from nowhere who rode the internet tidal wave of support to usurp the horrible hilary clinton
the fatc hes been massively critiized by the powers that be and the most racist and radical and the likes of fox news 24 hrs a day, tells you hes done a lot of good
economically unemployment is down from 10.5% to record low 5.8% , way ahead of europe...growth has been steady for 4 years at 3% way ahead of europe
his foreign policy decisions have been vastly better than bush, hes done more to tax and tariff the chinese imports, hes taken the US car manufacturing back to number 1....he DID succeed in getting the many millions he targeted for obamacare....hes started up stem cell research again, hes fined the banks trillions unlike the useless british politicians, americans economy, safety and repuation is light years better than it was 6 years ago

She is Corrupt.

mega mega mega corrupt

Also is breaking the rules as she has been president before. Bill was a fairly blatant puppet, with hilldawg pulling the strings. She just gets to do it herself this time.

What a load of crap.

First of all, the last 2 elections didn't have a clinton or a bush involved AT ALL, so that blows your little theory out of the water,.

Second, Hillary and Bill aren't from the same family, they aren't genetically related AT ALL.

Third , It's like saying you won't go to a bakery if they have too many generations working there. Guess what, families have careers and they teach their children and pass their skills down. just like a Baker, or a Carpenter or any other profession does. It's not shocking that family members of politicians also get involved in politics. Just like children of actors might become an actor, or children of a Pawn shop owner might get into the Pawn shop business. You are making it sound sinister when it's not at all. It's totally natural.

Genetic relations has nothing to do with this. Based on your logic adopted children aren't members of a family because they're not genetically related. Family isn't just genetics and every culture has its own definitions for it, and in American culture spouses = family, especially women since patriarchy reigns supreme and she is viewed as a Clinton while Bill isn't viewed as a Rodham.

And also the presidency of the US is a bit different from a family bakery. I was going to expand on that, but there's no need. If you are seriously equating the two then you'd probably be best off just staying out of political discussions altogether.

Hillary was interested in politics BEFORE she met Bill, and she married Bill long before he was successful in politics. , so do you think she should be disqualified just because she married a man who was also interested in politics? Why is it strange that a woman would marry a man with similar interests and a similar world view?

If you don't think it's odd that in a country of 300+ million people, where supposedly anyone who dreams big enough has a shot at becoming president, we have instead had father / son combos, potential husband / wife combos, other little Bushes in the running... Then I have to wonder how influenced by patriotism and the US propaganda machine you are Alex. To anyone looking from the outside it looks obviously dodgy.

It's not surprising when you see how much it costs to get elected in the US.

I found this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaig..._United_States

The size of the country is always going to make it expensive, and also the fact they spend a lot on political TV advertising.

That's the way it's going here, it's nothing about policies and everything about who can afford to hire saachi.

Hilary > tbh.

It isn't that odd in the USA to have families engaged heavily in politics and wanting to carry on likely the good work they see it as from their previous successful family members.
Another notable family that could have had things turned out diffeerently been dominating USA politics for a very long time was the Kennedy's.
With John,who sadly was assassinated
as was Robert,(who I think reading up about him would have been an amazing President, Edward being the other Kennedy Brother in potitics.

I think Hilary is a strong person and someone who who would be a really good President.
If she was the Democrat candicate and I lived in the USA and had a vote, she would win my vote, no problem wahtsoever.

Bill Clinton didn't come from a rich family, neither did Jimmy Carter or Barack Obama.

Was Bush privileged? yes. but he is the exception not the rule.

Tbf though, the Whitehouse has turned into a pseudo monarchy in the way it is ran, that's hard to deny.

it's actually very easy to deny.

A monarchy means power is passed through bloodlines. other than the Bushes i can't think of any other presidential power being transferred via bloodlines through the white house... so what are you talking about?