How can Hillary survive?

That's for you Johnny.

 

Neither could take Michael Moorer. ;D

 

I'm no pedophile and no Republican.... but I don't think Clinton is remotely electable.

 

The day after the news broke, perhaps?

 

There is only one Democratic player who can get the votes to win a national election.

And it's the same guy who got the most votes back in 2000, and has been right about two hugely significant issues since then.

 

And I say this as a fan, he's become hugely a lot of things, it appears.

 

Give Yawn and Hondo credit, they've consistently ducked the question of the millenia.

If your party can't answer that fundamental question, it has no chance at stealing the WH again.


I know those crickets will chirp all night so here's the sad truth:

During a White House meeting last week, a group of governors asked President Bush and Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, about their backup plan for Iraq. What would the administration do if its new strategy didn't work?

The conclusion they took away, the governors later said, was that there is no Plan B. "I'm a Marine," Pace told them, "and Marines don't talk about failure. They talk about victory."

Pace had a simple way of summarizing the administration's position, Gov. Phil Bredesen (D-Tenn.) recalled. "Plan B was to make Plan A work."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/04/AR2007030401321.html

Stay the course and SURGE are not exit strategies. Why would anyone follow a leader who has no idea where he's going. Reveals more about those who following than the dilusional one they support.

 

I believe Hillary will NOT be the Democratic nominee because of history. She is the frontrunner, and Democrats haven't nominated an early frontrunner in an open election since Adlai Stevenson.

Republicans on the other hand have been the opposite. The early anointed one is usually a shoo-in to get the nomination. But Giuliani has now caught McCain. So it's a horse race.

My holy grail of a brokered convention could be realized.

 

Yawn's brother was an only child.

 

Fenian - he wasn't found not guilty and the case was not thrown out. In essence Ritter did a plea bargain:

In Massachusetts this is known as continued without a finding. I know a number of people charged with DUI who because it was their first offense lost their license for 90 days and had their cases continued without a finding where it would be expunged from their record if they remained clean for 2-years (or something like that). That doesn't mean they were any less guilty of driving drunk. I hope you noticed that Ritter never says "I didn't do it." This guy is scum and he basically only got a suspended sentence for trying to lure underage girls into watching him beat-off or worse.

Scum. And I'm surprised you are defending him.

 

Not for nothing, but ACOD and "continued without a finding" are not remotely the same. The former closes the action in question. Period. The end. The latter leaves the case open for a specified period of time. And, since that "source" seems to have been a renegade ADA and the leak was suspiciously well-timed, I'm not about to dismiss Ritter's opinion on WMD's in Iraq because, whatever his legal status, he was right and the chickenhawk caucus was lying.