|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency |
![]() |
Cali_Democrat
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:20 PM Original message |
Hillary Clinton for the Supreme Court? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tansy_Gold
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:21 PM Response to Original message |
1. LOL -- I've been saying it since 2000! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lisa58
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:21 PM Response to Original message |
2. Yes! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
beaglelover
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:22 PM Response to Original message |
3. That would be great! (nt) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Webster Green
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:22 PM Response to Original message |
4. Oh man, The wingnuts would really come unhinged. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cutlassmama
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:23 PM Response to Reply #4 |
6. More reason for her to go for it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
maxsolomon
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:23 PM Response to Original message |
5. i tihnk she is more useful where she is now. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mr715
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:23 PM Response to Original message |
7. I'd kill for it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Perky
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:24 PM Response to Original message |
8. It would be a very interesting pick |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karynnj
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 06:27 PM Response to Reply #8 |
39. Might not be the same thing |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AuntPatsy
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:24 PM Response to Original message |
9. Definately, she could do more good in such a position... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hughee99
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:24 PM Response to Original message |
10. No thank you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
monmouth
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:27 PM Response to Original message |
11. No, no and absolutely no. Thank you...n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bigdarryl
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:32 PM Response to Original message |
12. NO she's to old 62 going on the Court is not a good idea |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
krawhitham
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:42 PM Response to Reply #12 |
16. +1 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DJ13
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:34 PM Response to Original message |
13. If she were the most liberal among Obama's choices, sure |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GodlessBiker
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:38 PM Response to Original message |
14. A definite yes. Would she want the position? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lunatica
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:39 PM Response to Original message |
15. I'd be so happy I would run in circles waving my arms in pure joy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jefferson_dem
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 05:18 PM Response to Reply #15 |
21. I would be thrilled to no end. And my cat... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lunatica
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 06:27 PM Response to Reply #21 |
38. Yup! That's definitely the happy dance! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sunnybrook
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 09:21 AM Response to Reply #21 |
65. You need to get a cat! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dave29
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:42 PM Response to Original message |
17. duh. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LiberalFighter
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 04:57 PM Response to Original message |
18. I would support any nominee that could cause Scalia to have a heart attack. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cascadiance
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 07:30 PM Response to Reply #18 |
48. Or Bobby Knight so they would have a "hunting accident"... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tritsofme
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 05:14 PM Response to Original message |
19. Too old. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jefferson_dem
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 05:16 PM Response to Original message |
20. I've been lobbying for that since Sotomayor. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Little Star
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 05:27 PM Response to Original message |
22. We should only be so lucky!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BlooInBloo
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 05:29 PM Response to Original message |
23. Works for me. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
damntexdem
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 05:29 PM Response to Original message |
24. Sure. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 05:31 PM Response to Original message |
25. it wouldn't mind but I have a feeling it would trigger a huge amount |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Metric System
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 05:37 PM Response to Original message |
26. Not this again! Seriously, why does this keep coming up? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cali_Democrat
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 05:56 PM Response to Reply #26 |
31. Because Justice Stevens is retiring. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Lyric
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 05:50 PM Response to Original message |
27. I'm all for it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jenmito
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 05:54 PM Response to Original message |
28. NO. She's already SOS and seems pretty darn happy there. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
road2000
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 05:55 PM Response to Original message |
29. I'm a woman, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karynnj
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 06:29 PM Response to Reply #29 |
41. I would object on the grounds of nepotism for Michelle, who I think is fantastic |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
road2000
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 07:11 PM Response to Reply #41 |
44. Kidding, really. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karynnj
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 07:17 PM Response to Reply #44 |
46. I figured as much |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
burning rain
![]() |
Tue Apr-13-10 12:08 AM Response to Reply #41 |
97. Nepotism isn't so bad, as long as you keep it in the family. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sebastian Doyle
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 05:56 PM Response to Original message |
30. If she were in her 40's maybe. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LittleBlue
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 06:04 PM Response to Original message |
32. Too old. I want someone under 50. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AlinPA
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 06:11 PM Response to Original message |
33. Yes and it woud be explosive for the republicans. The media would go berserk. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tom Rinaldo
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 06:15 PM Response to Original message |
34. She has a powerful intellect and a powerful will |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
philly_bob
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 06:18 PM Response to Original message |
35. Or Bill... (nt) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karynnj
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 06:35 PM Response to Reply #35 |
42. Hell NO |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karynnj
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 06:19 PM Response to Original message |
36. No |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BootinUp
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 06:26 PM Response to Original message |
37. She is very capable in any number of roles |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
harkadog
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 06:29 PM Response to Original message |
40. She couldn't get pass the Senate. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ShadowLiberal
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 06:39 PM Response to Original message |
43. No way, she's too old, we need a young liberal |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
totodeinhere
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 07:28 PM Response to Reply #43 |
47. Agreed. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Lord Helmet
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 01:49 AM Response to Reply #43 |
57. +1 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
craigmatic
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 07:14 PM Response to Original message |
45. no she should run in 2016 no other dem has the stature to follow Obama but her. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Beacool
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 09:52 PM Response to Reply #45 |
51. Frankly, I think that by 2016 we'll end up with a Republican president. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karynnj
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 11:34 PM Response to Reply #51 |
53. 3 terms in a row is rare for any party, but it happens - and seems to happen with |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Beacool
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 09:32 AM Response to Reply #53 |
66. Well............. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mr715
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 10:08 AM Response to Reply #66 |
68. Though I agree |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Beacool
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:39 PM Response to Reply #68 |
79. Correct. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SwampG8r
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:30 AM Response to Reply #66 |
71. yup |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Beacool
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:41 PM Response to Reply #71 |
80. Hi, fellow Gator!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karynnj
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 02:12 PM Response to Reply #66 |
82. Why do I think he will be seen as transformational? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Lord Helmet
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 01:35 AM Response to Reply #51 |
54. fiction |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Beacool
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 08:55 AM Response to Reply #54 |
62. That's your opinion and you're entitled to it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mkultra
![]() |
Sun Apr-11-10 12:58 PM Response to Reply #62 |
88. well, not yet at least |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
StevieM
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 03:09 AM Response to Reply #51 |
59. Hey Bea! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Beacool
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 09:15 AM Response to Reply #59 |
63. Yes, she would have been a great president. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JTFrog
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 05:45 AM Response to Reply #51 |
61. The way she was treated? LOL! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mr715
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 10:12 AM Response to Reply #61 |
69. Wow |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mkultra
![]() |
Sun Apr-11-10 01:00 PM Response to Reply #61 |
89. spot on |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Beacool
![]() |
Sun Apr-11-10 03:58 PM Response to Reply #89 |
91. What sexist B.S.!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mkultra
![]() |
Mon Apr-12-10 12:04 PM Response to Reply #91 |
92. that is what happened |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Beacool
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 09:45 PM Response to Original message |
49. How about what Hillary wants? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
saltpoint
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 09:50 PM Response to Original message |
50. I doubt if she wants the job. And I'd rather see a younger nominee |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ChimpersMcSmirkers
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:34 AM Response to Reply #50 |
73. I'd like to see someone younger as well. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
saltpoint
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:38 AM Response to Reply #73 |
74. -- -- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
akbacchus_BC
![]() |
Mon Apr-12-10 11:31 PM Response to Reply #50 |
96. I totally agree with you my friend. SOS Clinton maybe a good pic for |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
proteus_lives
![]() |
Fri Apr-09-10 11:11 PM Response to Original message |
52. Nah. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
boppers
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 01:47 AM Response to Original message |
55. Failed the Bar, and too right-wing for me. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Beacool
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 09:19 AM Response to Reply #55 |
64. She was already considering moving to Arkansas to be with Bill. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JTFrog
![]() |
Sun Apr-11-10 07:08 AM Response to Reply #64 |
84. Strong in this one, the cognitive dissonance is. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Beacool
![]() |
Sun Apr-11-10 03:55 PM Response to Reply #84 |
90. Hate all you want, but the woman is extremely bright. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
quakerboy
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 01:47 AM Response to Original message |
56. If we hit a trifecta |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MrMickeysMom
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 02:42 AM Response to Original message |
58. Let me say this about that.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Grinchie
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 03:28 AM Response to Original message |
60. Walmart would love it! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Knight Hawk
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 09:39 AM Response to Original message |
67. Think Again |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SwampG8r
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:18 AM Response to Original message |
70. i just got here and i bet |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SwampG8r
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:34 AM Response to Reply #70 |
72. ok im impressed |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NorthCarolina
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:54 AM Response to Original message |
75. As DLC though, wouldn't she lean towards favoring Corporate interests? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BlueMTexpat
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:00 PM Response to Original message |
76. I think that she'd be great ... but not right now. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
blue_onyx
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:27 PM Response to Original message |
77. I would be fine with Hillary being the nominee |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
harun
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:39 PM Response to Original message |
78. Not Liberal enough, too Corporate. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Beacool
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:48 PM Response to Reply #78 |
81. Sounds just like Obama. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dr Morbius
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 02:42 PM Response to Original message |
83. While I wouldn't have a problem with Justice Hillary Clinton... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kahuna
![]() |
Sun Apr-11-10 07:25 AM Response to Original message |
85. She'd be great. .. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Fire1
![]() |
Sun Apr-11-10 09:12 AM Response to Original message |
86. No. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MadHound
![]() |
Sun Apr-11-10 09:24 AM Response to Original message |
87. No, no corporatist moderates for the Supreme Court, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AnnieBW
![]() |
Mon Apr-12-10 10:15 PM Response to Original message |
93. HECK NO! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Arugula Latte
![]() |
Mon Apr-12-10 10:41 PM Response to Original message |
94. Nope. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
akbacchus_BC
![]() |
Mon Apr-12-10 11:22 PM Response to Original message |
95. Personally, SOS Clinton is more effective in her current portfolio, SOS |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
craigmatic
![]() |
Tue Apr-13-10 02:37 AM Response to Original message |
98. She's probably not liberal enough but it's hard to tell how liberal she really is. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
davidpdx
![]() |
Tue Apr-13-10 04:33 AM Response to Original message |
99. This is a media hype story and there's no truth to it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheKentuckian
![]() |
Tue Apr-13-10 11:28 AM Response to Original message |
100. Too corporate, too neocon/neolib (same thing different fables), and a little long in the tooth |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Sat Sep 07th 2024, 06:51 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC