LOL. To stay with it. One has actually painted houses the ****ty brown color and the customers shrug and say, yeah well, at least she was on budget and the paint protects the house from the rain. The puke green paint contractor is actually promising brilliant five-color masterpiece but has actually only waved a brush in the air at rallies. :grin:
Would the driveway be cheaper to clean than replacing the windows? I think so. So I'd go with that. I think my pressure washer could do the trick. So the takeaway is: vote Bernie. Or Hillary. I'm not sure who was s*** brown and who was puke green.
...and some of us like the current color of the house even if we agree it needs some upgrades but don't want to turn it into a casino, a megachurch or a commune. We're hoping for a competent caretaker for the next 4-8 yrs.
http://www.slate.com/articles/doubl..._a_subversive_act.html?wpsrc=sh_all_dt_tw_bot Unless you really take a look at those pressures, the narrative around Hillary Clinton’s*“likability” is doomed to be inaccurate. Trying to parse Hillary Clinton without also parsing Hillary hate is like trying to drink water without touching the glass. Here is one of those pressures: Hillary Clinton absolutely cannot express negative emotion in public. If she speaks loudly or gets angry or cries, she risks being seen as b****y, crazy, dangerous. (When she raised her voice during the 2013 Benghazi Senate committee hearings, the cover of the*New York Post*blared “NO WONDER BILL’S AFRAID.”) But if Hillary avoids emotions—if she speaks strictly in calm, logical, detached terms—then she is cold, robotic, calculating. You’d think the solution might be to put on a happy face, to admit to emotions only when they are positive. But it turns out that people hate it when she smiles or laughs in public. Hillary Clinton’s laugh gets played in attack ads; it has routinely been called “a cackle” (like a witch, right? Because she’s old, and female, like a witch); frozen stills of Hillary laughing are routinely used to make her look “crazy” in conservative media. She can’t be sad or angry, she*can’t be happy or amused, and she can’t refrain from expressing any of those emotions. There is no way out of this one. There is no right way for her to act.
That's just life when you are a completely and totally unlikable person. Hillary isn't the first unlikable person that has had trouble trying to fool people into thinking that they are likable.
Most people say the same thing about Donald Trump...... The reason that Hillary is so unlikable has to do with her inauthenticity, she's just a fake person. I'm sure she can be nice one on one, but this isn't about that. I hear Donald Trump can be a nice guy one on one, he's still one of the least likable candidates to ever run for a major party nomination. When you see a fraud desperately trying to appear as if they are a real person, it's off putting.
http://www.investors.com/politics/andrew-malcolm/hillary-clinton-subway-gaffe-photo-op/ "Clinton’s had Secret Service chauffeurs for 23 years now. She hasn’t driven a car this century. She prohibits traveling press from photographing her boarding chartered private jets." How can she pretend to understand what regular folks are going through? She's been so out of touch for such a long time. Her friends are the elite, mega rich, hollywood types, not normal folks. And yes, she even screwed up a staged subway ride which is discussed in the article.
This sounds pretty whiny. Her political opponents will make baseless reproaches by taking things out of context and interpreting them in a sinister way? I suppose the implication here is she's treated differently, perhaps because she's a woman. But, all presidential candidates (worth airtime) endure this.
I support Hillary. I'd vote for Bernie in the general election, but between the two I like Hillary more. Also, right now Bernie supporters are worse than Ron Paul supporters were in 08. My Facebook feed (and Reddit) has been taken over by articles stating Hillary is a closeted Republican and everyone except Bernie is a corporate sellout.
I've noticed this as well. This is true for almost any female who has climbed the corporate ladder. Culturally we accept a hard-ass male, but not a hard-ass female.
I'm pretty sure her appeal is more about what she isn't than what she is. Surprised by some Dems who are saying they wouldn't vote for her. I'm a Republican and I'd still vote for her over Trump or Cruz.
As we all know Hillary is pretty well qualified to become President. She's not my ideal candidate, considering all the baggage she carries, but she's more than a viable candidate. Only downside I can see as a sensible person, is how hawkish she could be. That worries me a littl bit. But besides that, she's pretty qualified, and should be a pretty good president. Plus, who doesn't want to see Bill as the First Man? Is that what you even call it? Who knows, but I'm looking forward to it.
You say that, but honestly she isn't. Her incompetence/corruption (pick one or both) as Secretary of State shows that she isn't qualified to work in any capacity that would require her to handle classified information. I get that people may like her politics, but she's absolutely not fit for high office......but she could be the best candidate if the alternative is Donald Trump. That is, assuming she gets to run and isn't held accountable for her incompetence/corruption as Secretary of State like pretty much anyone else would be.
Clinton might be at her best when she is attacked. It seems like everytime she has to deal with a hostile Congressional committee or a pushy opponent in a debate her favorability ratings go up. If Sanders does go negative in the next debate that might actually help her.
There shouldn't be any question that she is treated differently because of her gender. I can't think of any recent presidential candidate who has been as criticized and / or assessed for her looks than she has.
Incompetent because of an embassy attack and corrupt because of an email server. Wow, you are hilarious. There's tons of things you could legitimately criticize about Hillary as Secretary of State, but you choose to focus on the matters that least reflect her qualifications.
I wouldn't expect someone like you to be capable of following along in conversation, but it's good that at least you try. The fact that she violated the law when it comes to properly handling classified information shows that she was either incompetent if it was an accident, or corrupt if she did it all on purpose to avoid FOIA requests. It was either incompetence or corruption when she broke the law instructing someone to remove classification headings on a classified document, then further broke the law by asking them to send that document which was now stripped of classification markings to her via unsecured means. Those are both highly illegal and anyone who knows anything about working with classified information would know that doing so would make you unfit to ever be in a situation where you had to deal with classified information in the future. Again, incompetence or corruption, doesn't really matter though. We KNOW that she's not fit to hold high office even if we'll ignore it due to those she's running against. There is no question that she's unfit for office and she couldn't get a job handling classified information in any way other than appointment or winning elected office. She'd be deemed unfit for even the most basic jobs requiring security clearance.
Serious question. She couldn't satisfy her husband, how she gonna satisfy Congress or The People? Does it not concern anyone that the person that knows her the most betrayed her. He doesn't even like her. She doesn't appeal to HIM!!! That seems important.
