Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
32 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Would Hillary do better without Bill as husband? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Scott Russell
United States
Clarkston
Michigan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
My wife and I were discussing Super Tuesday at lunch. She came up with an interesting statement. SHe thinks she could vote for Hillary if she weren't married to Bill.

Would anybody else's opinion of Hillary change if she divorced Bill? I think that it might be a good move. He could still campaign/fundraise for her, but it would show that she's independent of him.

Or from a slghtly different angle, how much of her disapproval rating is due to being married to Bill?

Personally, Hillary and I are far enough apart on some issues that I don't care to whom she's married, but the fact that my wife would consider her as a candidate without Bill baggage prompted this post.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bela's dead and Vampira won't talk
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Frankly, I can't imagine her in the race without having had Bill as her husband.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
"that's a smith and wesson, and you've had your six"
Avatar
Lets just say I'd vote for Bill for a third term without batting an eye, but I'll be voting for Obama.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bela's dead and Vampira won't talk
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
GAWD wrote:
Really makes you wonder how far women have come huh?

We wouldn't even know about her, give her the time of day, or take her seriously if Bill weren't her husband.

Is a woman president, elected on her husband's coattails, really progress at all?


To be fair, I don't think this is as much an issue of a gender bias as it is the sorry state of how we choose our leaders.

Dubya is there on daddy's coattails, too.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
"that's a smith and wesson, and you've had your six"
Avatar
Koldfoot wrote:
To be fair, I doubt Bill would have been elected for a first term if his overly ambitious wife wasn't directing the show from behind the scenes.

I further understand that she was instrumental in keeping the Clinton team focused and was a chief strategist in the effort to keep him from being convicted after the impeachment.

Bill may be her calling card, but her ambition made him such.


Don't kid yourself. Besides the occasional need for a power tripping BJ, Bill is smarter than you, me, and Hillary combined. He knows what's going on and how to game the system. If it's wasn't for the failure to contain what JFK was able to, today you would think Bill was a god damn genius that he really is.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Beyak
United States
Santa Rosa
California
flag msg tools
badge
Combat Commander gets your blood flowing.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I thought that if she had dumped that pig right after the Monika scandal she had a very good shot at becoming president. I guess she just didn't have the balls.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Colleen
United States
Menomonee Falls
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
nextinline wrote:
I think Hillary really loves Bill. He's one of her 'causes', in a way. She's steady and loyal to her early ideals of people-at-large and that skanky husband of hers.

And I think they both adore that daughter of theirs. They've done a good job of raising her - apparently - because she's never (to my knowledge) been in the news for something bad.


I agree. She loves him. They just have an open marriage.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
GAWD wrote:
Lots of political scientists think that the reason Bill Clinton was elected in 1992 is as simple as two words:

Ross Perot


I didn't know it was even up for debate. Didn't Perot get 19% of the vote? And wasn't a majority of that from people (like me) who did not want Bush Sr. in the White House again?

The Chapels of the word can preach Clinton's wonderous and Godlike qualities to the Earth's End... but he still only won because Perot sucked off Republican votes. What is most interesting about that era is why so many people voted for Perot and how craftily Clinton built a powerbase as a result of his good fortune.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
colleens wrote:
nextinline wrote:
I think Hillary really loves Bill. He's one of her 'causes', in a way. She's steady and loyal to her early ideals of people-at-large and that skanky husband of hers.

And I think they both adore that daughter of theirs. They've done a good job of raising her - apparently - because she's never (to my knowledge) been in the news for something bad.


I agree. She loves him. They just have an open marriage.


I'm certain you're being sarcastic... aren't you? But still, it makes one wonder what their relationship really is. I'm no fan of the "open marraige" concept, preferring my own doctrine of serial monogamy. It has always creeped me out though, how Bill so brazenly diddled his way through being a governer and a President and Hillary still hung in there... dour expression and all.

She reminds me of that honey badger in "The Gods Must Be Crazy II".
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Colleen
United States
Menomonee Falls
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DWTripp wrote:
I'm certain you're being sarcastic... aren't you? But still, it makes one wonder what their relationship really is. I'm no fan of the "open marraige" concept, preferring my own doctrine of serial monogamy. It has always creeped me out though, how Bill so brazenly diddled his way through being a governer and a President and Hillary still hung in there... dour expression and all.

She reminds me of that honey badger in "The Gods Must Be Crazy II".


Well, I'm only being a little sarcastic here. My attitude is this: if a guy I was with had women giving him blow jobs (and it's extra gross if she's his employee) then I'm gonna leave him and probably take some sort of misguided, cruel burning bed type revenge on my way out the door.

Now, when I ask myself why might I not leave a man who did this? I think well, if he were the most powerful man in the world, smart, sexy, and rich, then I'd probably love him no matter what. I'd hate him, but I might love him. So, I think she loves him. Otherwise it just doesn't make sense.

Or maybe she's just crazy.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
nextinline wrote:
DWTripp wrote:


She reminds me of that honey badger in "The Gods Must Be Crazy II".




How cute!


Ya think so? Depends on the definition of cute. Heh. Here's some data:

Pound for pound the honey badger is one of Africa`s fiercest carnivores. Birds, bees, scorpions and snakes make up its usual prey but, attacks on antelopes and buffalo are not off limits for this fearless animal. Honey badgers may look innocent, about the size of an average dog, but these fearless foragers prey on more than 60 different species in the Kalahari, including some of the region’s most..



Awww.... what an adorable smile she has.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Melissa
United States
Tallahassee
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
colleens wrote:
I agree. She loves him. They just have an open marriage.


Honestly this is still my preferred hypothesis. A DADT type arrangement seems to best fit what happened if I assume that both of them are intelligent and self-respecting.

The other argument, that she finds power more important then her partner honoring their relationship agreements is not very flattering.

To address the question, no I don't think it would help her to divorce, it might have helped during the scandel but only because it would have shown that there was something she values more then political power.

But in essence all of my misgivings about H. Clinton are about her, not her husband. Ambition is necessary to be a candidate for high office, but hers is so naked and overriding that it makes me uncomfortable. Too much coalescing of executive power has happened as it is. Ambition is a greveious fault, at least when you are looking for someone to help restore a balance of power.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Hoskins
United States
OKC
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
GAWD wrote:
Lots of political scientists think that the reason Bill Clinton was elected in 1992 is as simple as two words:

Ross Perot


"Read my lips: No new taxes." certainly didn't hurt WJC in '92.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
matthewjhoskins wrote:
GAWD wrote:
Lots of political scientists think that the reason Bill Clinton was elected in 1992 is as simple as two words:

Ross Perot


"Read my lips: No new taxes." certainly didn't hurt WJC in '92.


Ther was that. And there was his failure to follow Stormin' Norman's advice and finish Saddam off in Desert Storm. Those two points rankled the average conservative voter, gave Perot enough of an edge to be viable and Carville made mucho hay in the sunshine.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Melissa
United States
Tallahassee
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
I read his law review articles. This forward to a volume on the duty of public service by attorneys is something I printed out because it was so beautifully put. I am also familiar with Tribe's work, which gives me a fair amount of insight on where he stands on the proper balance of power.

We don't agree on Hillary. I admire many ambitious people, including women. I also loathe a fair number of them.

To me the key difference is the nature of the ambition. People who are ambitious because they want change, even if the change they want is not one I want, are generally people I respect. People who are ambitious for self I generally find offensive. It isn't always a clear line, nor is ti at all objective.

I find H. Clinton personally ambitious and that is both annoying to me and potentially dangerous in an executive following the current "unitary" one.

I also do not think calling attention to what you see as ethical shortcomings on the part of a candidate's spouse is a good strategy for a Clinton supporter.

I also happen to think that mandates are probably a better system, but it isn't a key issue for me, nor am I convinced that a system that only has had a two year trial in MA and less then a year in CA is really ready to be considered for nation-wide implementation.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Colleen
United States
Menomonee Falls
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
After thinking it over, if I were married to Bill Clinton and such evil lurked in the relationship, I probably wouldn't divorce him. I might cheat on his lying ass every night and smile and make him breakfast in the morning while using his wealth and power to build my own insataible career in politics where one day I'd rule the world.

Somehow I feel like I've seen this before.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Melissa
United States
Tallahassee
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
nextinline wrote:


If you don't want to fact-find then I can't make you.


I don't think either of us has failed to study the issues. I think we simply have different priorities when evaluating canidates. I first look to the canidate's philosopical stands on things like sepreation of power and limits of govermental authority including first admendment freedoms. Then I consider the canidate's personal crediabilty which includes both decisions that person has made and, if known, how they treat others*. Only after I have decided that this is a person who has a reasonable vison of how the system should work and treats others well do I care about what they propose to do.

You seem to care a lot more about policy and what people who are connected to, but not the canidate, do.

Which makes you rather like the people who find Hillary hard to swallow because of Bill, but on the other side.

*such as waitstaff, empolyees that are under them and random strangers. I live in the state captol, so this is often a deciding factor for me in local and state contests. People who are consistantly rude to people who are serving them are not, in my opinion, sutiable leaders in a democarcy.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorge Montero
United States
St Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
I'll take Manhattan in a garbage bag. With Latin written on it that says "It's hard to give a shit these days"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
nextinline wrote:
mchall wrote:
I read his law review articles. This forward to a volume on the duty of public service by attorneys is something I printed out because it was so beautifully put. I am also familiar with Tribe's work, which gives me a fair amount of insight on where he stands on the proper balance of power.

We don't agree on Hillary. I admire many ambitious people, including women. I also loathe a fair number of them.

To me the key difference is the nature of the ambition. People who are ambitious because they want change, even if the change they want is not one I want, are generally people I respect. People who are ambitious for self I generally find offensive. It isn't always a clear line, nor is ti at all objective.

I find H. Clinton personally ambitious and that is both annoying to me and potentially dangerous in an executive following the current "unitary" one.

I also do not think calling attention to what you see as ethical shortcomings on the part of a candidate's spouse is a good strategy for a Clinton supporter.

I also happen to think that mandates are probably a better system, but it isn't a key issue for me, nor am I convinced that a system that only has had a two year trial in MA and less then a year in CA is really ready to be considered for nation-wide implementation.




If you don't want to fact-find then I can't make you.


I grok that Clinton-bashing is a multi-million dollar business but I find it hard to believe that a reasonable person can be convinced by it to such a degree that any and every honorable thing Hillary has done means nothing. I also really find it hard to believe that, as smart as you are, you're excusing yourself from looking at Michelle Obama by using this argument. Do you expect the same public outcry?



I for one rarely agree with a Republican on anything. Even the weather. But I do find some things that Hillary has proposed and voted for to go against my own set of priorities. Things like trying to censor and regulate video games, or voting to allow a crazy president to go invade stuff.

The fact that Bill is there with her doesn't bode well for me either. He's the man who signed the DMCA, one of the most evil laws this side of the PATRIOT act. His congress extended copyrights. The Telcom reform Act. I had no problem with the ML scandal: If he can get his interns to give him blowjobs voluntarily, good for him.

Better him than Bush though.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Melissa
United States
Tallahassee
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
nextinline wrote:
It would probably help me make the decision, too, and rudeness means a lot to me. ...
I'm not discounting your sources. I just wonder if they could step back and look at things from another angle they might be a bit more sympathetic. Or not.
People have said time and time again that Hillary is, above all, Focused. Perceived 'rudeness' can be a by-product of being a focused person.


Sorry I didn't make it clear, I don't know anyone with first-hand experience with any of the presidential candidates, so this isn't a factor for me in that race. It is just often a factor in local and state races since I often know people who have worked with or waited on candidates. On this one, I like knowing my source
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.