Hillary or Generic GOP Candidate?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
PharmacistReb

PharmacistReb

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
229
Reaction score
69
Members do not see this ad.
What's the political makeup of the board? What's the thought process for a candidate who provides better healthcare, safer world, better job outlook? Or at least the lesser of the two evils.
 
Although I voted for W 3 times, I don't mind Hillary all that much. She would be my choice of the Democratic candidates. I don't have a real feel for the Republican field yet. Would like to hear what Ben Carson has to say. Although I've personally met Rick Perry a couple times he doesn't seem very presidential. I don't think a tea partier stands much of a chance. I don't want Palin any more than I want Bernie Sanders.
 
I will say that I also am really interest in what Dr. Carson has to say, I have heard him speak before and liked him then but wasn't thinking about him running a country.
 
I will never vote for a former president's spouse or family member. This is America; the presidency is to be earned, not handed to you because of who you're related to. If it's Hillary vs. Jeb in 2016, I'm just going to stay home.
 
PharmNerdMatt said:
I will say that I also am really interest in what Dr. Carson has to say, I have heard him speak before and liked him then but wasn't thinking about him running a country.
Click to expand...
2hf2j49.jpg

http://samuel-warde.com/2014/07/startling-hypocrisy-conservative-icon-dr-ben-carson/
 
Dalteparin said:
I will never vote for a former president's spouse or family member. This is America; the presidency is to be earned, not handed to you because of who you're related to. If it's Hillary vs. Jeb in 2016, I'm just going to stay home.
Click to expand...
I agree with the bolded part 😀 but for different reasons.

"Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat. Women often have to flee from the only homes they have ever known. Women are often the refugees from conflict and sometimes, more frequently in today’s warfare, victims. Women are often left with the responsibility, alone, of raising the children."
~ Hillary Clinton at Conference on domestic violence in San Salvador, El Salvador (17 Nov 1998).

True leader and role model for young girls 🙄

🙄

The more I hear from this person, the less I consider her Presidential material.
Let alone the gender war she raises and her ignorance of the issues facing the common people,
- Hillary has a long history of being willing to serve the interests of large corporations.
- As secretary of state, Hillary was one of the most hawkish members of Obama's cabinet. I will not see this country spend people's taxes on war/weapons again.
- No opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline.
- She voted for the Patriot Act & NSA surveillance.
- She disguises in any form, is willing to say anything, just to get people's votes. Her actions, however, speak otherwise. You should check up on her past votes/actions.

If it's Hillary vs. any GOP, I'll stay home 😀 or I will write Bernie's name on the ballot!
This country would be ****ed up either with H. Clinton or a lunatic Repub anyway (wait... aren't both of them Repub...?). Nuts on one side & crooks on the other. What choices!
 
as long as crazy ass Carly Fiorina doesn't get elected, I'm coo...I still remember her campaign was full of fail for CA Governor.

As a side note, I wish California could secede and keep all of the money it sends to the poorer states. I hate subsidizing other places.
 
Too much baggage with Hillary, and I'm against political dynasty families like the Bush, Clinton, Kennedy families etc.

I can't really say I've been fond of Democrat policies as of recent, but then again Republicans haven't put much forward that is any better. I'll reserve my decision until I know who is likely to get the GOP ticket and see how Hillary runs herself. As of now though I highly highly doubt Hillary is going to get my vote. I think the only Republican I'd definitely say no to at this point is Jeb Bush.
 
Last edited:
I dunno, I can't seem to find any candidates who are fair/just about the Israel-Palestinian issue. (What needs to happen is a either a two-state solution reverting back to the 1947 lines with the settlers being kicked out of the Palestinian areas/dissolution of the Palestinian militias and a formation of a formal Palestinian army, or a one-state solution where all Palestinians are granted Israeli citizenship with full rights.)

Pretty much every candidate is a Israel ass kisser.
 
Sparda29 said:
I dunno, I can't seem to find any candidates who are fair/just about the Israel-Palestinian issue. (What needs to happen is a either a two-state solution reverting back to the 1947 lines with the settlers being kicked out of the Palestinian areas/dissolution of the Palestinian militias and a formation of a formal Palestinian army, or a one-state solution where all Palestinians are granted Israeli citizenship with full rights.)

Pretty much every candidate is a Israel ass kisser.
Click to expand...

Here's my solution.

Put a nuclear warhead in both areas. Tell them that if there's any more trouble, I detonate that ****. You'll have peace or they'll all be dead. Problem solved on our end either way.

Next.
 
WVUPharm2007 said:
Here's my solution.

Put a nuclear warhead in both areas. Tell them that if there's any more trouble, I detonate that ****. You'll have peace or they'll all be dead. Problem solved on our end either way.

Next.
Click to expand...

The area is so small that just one warhead will pretty much devastate the whole region. Especially the way the winds will carry the fallout.
 
No one wants to for democrats, but if they don't vote for democrats, who will they vote for? republicans... Seriously!


We have two political parties... one with no ideas (democrats) and one with bad ideas (republicans). Most will sadly pick the one with no ideas...
 
3rd party, I will never vote for the "lesser of 2 evils" when there is a better 3rd party candidate to vote for (and there ALWAYS is a better 3rd party candidate.)
 
I will always vote for the strongest republican candidate. No sense in wasting a vote on a candidate with no chance of winning... if all of the libertarians would have voted for Romney he probably would have won.

I really wish that these elections would focus on more pressing issues such as economics, however it pretty much boils down to the Democrat running advertisements on the radio telling single mothers that he will raise their kids and Republicans shooting themselves in the foot by bringing up social issues in an extremely sensitive society.
 
Last edited:
Maruko said:
This country would be ****ed up either with H. Clinton or a lunatic Repub anyway (wait... aren't both of them Repub...?). Nuts on one side & crooks on the other. What choices!
Click to expand...

I'm surprised you have the intelligence to operate a computer if you think Hilary is politically conservative. Shes a Socialist... plain and simple.

At least we can agree that we both dislike Hilary, however the reasons that you have to dislike her are actually the only things that I do like about her, haha 🙂
 
SClENCE said:
I will always vote for the strongest republican candidate. No sense in wasting a vote on a candidate with no chance of winning... if all of the libertarians would have voted for Romney he probably would have won.
Click to expand...

You say that like you think Romney might have done something different than Obama?

Not a chance. As has been pointed out Obama=Bush=Clinton=Bush, etc. Yes, all these politicians SAY different things, but once in office there is no difference in what they do. And its funny to watch how they manipulate the public...like Republicans being "pro-life", do you ever see them bringing up a pro-life bill when they have the majority and could theoretically limit abortions? Nope, they only bring up "pro-life" bills when they are in the minority, when they know they will lose, but they can tell their constituents that they "tried" to do something. Same with any pet issue of the Democrats or Republicans--their pet issues will only be brought up to vote when they are a minority, never when they are a majority. Because both parties have the exact same goals, they just pretend there is a difference because it makes the American public happy to blindly root for their "team" of choice.

Which is why the status quo will continue. Too many people will vote for their "team" regardless of results. So YEA, go Cubs, go Republicans, go Democrats, go Phillies, whatever.

And yes, I voted for the libertarian candidate last election, but Romney would not have been my 3rd, or even my 4th choice (nor was Obama, I would have done a write-in candidate before I wasted my vote voting for either one of them, because it didn't matter which one won, they both would do the same thing in office. )
 
Besides, you can elect the most left-wing nutjob or right-wing nutjob to the office... unless you've got a filibuster-proof majority in the senate, nothing gets done. So it really doesn't matter.

So on that note, I'll either vote for Chris Christie or Marco Rubio because SNL would be a lot funnier with Chris Christie as president and Marco Rubio is really easy to say. Boom.
 
Sparda29 said:
I'd be considered Republican when it comes to economics and gun policy. Democrat when it comes to social policies.
Both of them suck when it comes to foreign policies and **** like the Patriot Act.
Click to expand...

You sound like a libertarian.
 
SClENCE said:
I'm surprised you have the intelligence to operate a computer if you think Hilary is politically conservative. Shes a Socialist... plain and simple.

At least we can agree that we both dislike Hilary, however the reasons that you have to dislike her are actually the only things that I do like about her, haha 🙂
Click to expand...

Hilary is clearly a corporatist. She takes money and allows various businesses to control her. See, Big Pharma, the Law lobby, Wall Street interests. I wouldn't call her a "socialist" any more than I would a moderate. Of course, that word is used in a silly way in the US. Unless you think that there should be no government, by definition you have socialist tendencies. The Republicans are "socialist" in many respects themselves. Defense spending? Big time socialists.

Again, the correct answer is writing me in. I'll fix this ****.
 
Voting in America is pointless. Woohoo we get to vote for the latest installment of the Bush Clinton monarchy. They all take their marching orders from the same people.
 
Redistribution of wealth falls under the ideals of socialism. Perhaps when I used the word socialist I could have phrased in a different way. I can, however, say the the affordable care act is something you would not have seen from Romney.

I personally like the ideas of Paul Ryan (Romney's running mate) when it comes to economics/spending.
 
SClENCE said:
Redistribution of wealth falls under the ideals of socialism. Perhaps when I used the word socialist I could have phrased in a different way. I can, however, say the the affordable care act is something you would not have seen from Romney.

I personally like the ideas of Paul Ryan (Romney's running mate) when it comes to economics/spending.
Click to expand...
Tell that to the people of Massachusetts. Romney himself said in a TV interview that the country should adopt his plan, but retracting his comments once he was trying to get the republican nomination. Republicans were praising Romney when he got his version of the ACA passed in MA.
 
I don't think Dems want to redistribute wealth as much as they want more money from the rich and more power over the financial lives of others. I can't think of instances where middle class or poor individual's have seen wage increases from increased taxation nor do I see much in regards to aiding in people making money. College tuition as we all know is still extremely high, interest rates higher than in the past and wages not really going up across the board. If anything we've seen the rich get richer. I don't see them pushing incentives for companies to pay their employees more or policies that enhance wealth.
 
W19 said:
Tell that to the people of Massachusetts. Romney himself said in a TV interview that the country should adopt his plan, but retracting his comments once he was trying to get the republican nomination. Republicans were praising Romney when he got his version of the ACA passed in MA.
Click to expand...

The ACA by Romney was a state-level solution for a state-level problem - and in no way does it endorse a federal health care mandate.

"In place of Obamacare, I will pursue policies that give each state the power to craft a health care reform plan that is best for its own citizens. The federal government’s role will be to help markets work by creating a level playing field for competition."
 
SClENCE said:
The ACA by Romney was a state-level solution for a state-level problem - and in no way does it endorse a federal health care mandate.
Click to expand...
Please explain how Massachusetts is so drastically different from the rest of America.
 
zelman said:
Please explain how Massachusetts is so drastically different from the rest of America.
Click to expand...

I never said it was different. The point is that Romney's plan makes health care a consumer market as opposed to a government program. The role of the federal government is to regulate the market, not to dictate the market or become the market. The state should be free to handle healthcare however it wants according to the constitution.

Please explain explain how Obamacare is so much cheaper than Romney's plan. See how it feels to have words put into your mouth in the form of an irrelevant request? This method of debate seems common among the low information liberal type.
 
Last edited:
SClENCE said:
I never said it was different. The point is that Romney's plan makes health care a consumer market as opposed to a government program. The role of the federal government is to regulate the market, not to dictate the market or become the market. The state should be free to handle healthcare however it wants according to the constitution.

Please explain explain how Obamacare is so much cheaper than Romney's plan. See how it feels to have words put into your mouth in the form of an irrelevant request? This method of communicating seems common among the liberal type.
Click to expand...
I never said they were different, but they are different.🙄 They are the same plan. Carbon copy of each other... A healthcare market place with subsidies for low income individuals and expansion of medicaid.

 
SClENCE said:
I never said it was different. The point is that Romney's plan makes health care a consumer market as opposed to a government program. The role of the federal government is to regulate the market, not to dictate the market or become the market.
Click to expand...
The Supreme Court disagrees with you.

Also, if the state and federal governments only did the things it was supposed to do, there would be no FDA, DEA or OSHA. Health insurance wasn't addressed in the division of powers between the state and federal government because it didn't exist. There is room for interpretation here.
 
The FDA, DEA, and OSHA are all regulatory bodies... I don't think that Obamacare is in place to solely regulate the insurance marketplace now is it?

Your ignorance is the single most expensive commodity that the US has to offer.
 
Last edited:
W19 said:
I never said they were different, but they are different.🙄 They are the same plan. Carbon copy of each other... A healthcare market place with subsidies for low income individuals and expansion of medicaid.

Click to expand...


Once again, allow me to educate you.

The Massachusetts law applies to the 6.5 million residents of the commonwealth. Obamacare covers more than 300 million people spread across 50 diverse states. Massachusetts began its reform with a rate of uninsured that was half that of the nation as a whole, and it was written to meet the unique needs of state residents. These differences led Governor Mitt Romney to oppose Obamacare. While Romney’s health reform is working in Massachusetts, he believes one model cannot meet the needs of all 50 states. In addition, Oamacare has a much broader scope in that it includes provisions to address healthcare provider shortages, increase wellness and nutrition programs, bolster community health centers, and adjust Medicaid and Medicare.

Obamacare infringes on civil liberties by forcing individuals to engage in commerce. It is constitutional for states to impose such mandates but not for the federal government to do so.
 
SClENCE said:
Once again, allow me to educate you.

The Massachusetts law applies to the 6.5 million residents of the commonwealth. Obamacare covers more than 300 million people spread across 50 diverse states. Massachusetts began its reform with a rate of uninsured that was half that of the nation as a whole, and it was written to meet the unique needs of state residents. These differences led Governor Mitt Romney to oppose Obamacare. While Romney’s health reform is working in Massachusetts, he believes one model cannot meet the needs of all 50 states. In addition, Oamacare has a much broader scope in that it includes provisions to address healthcare provider shortages, increase wellness and nutrition programs, bolster community health centers, and adjust Medicaid and Medicare.

Obamacare infringes on civil liberties by forcing individuals to engage in commerce. It is constitutional for states to impose such mandates but not for the federal government to do so.
Click to expand...
Tell that to the SCOTUS. They call it a tax. You think a law to give people healthcare in MA is not good for Mississippi...
 
It doesn't matter what they call it it's unconstitutional.
 
W19 said:
The patriot act is probably unconstitutional but it is still in the book...
Click to expand...

I won't claim to know a lot about the patriot act, though my impression is that it is unconstitutional. But how is this relevant?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Good Certificates or Education for inpatient Pharmacy
Replies
5
Views
2K
clarkbar
C
E
The Big Question: Pharmacy School or Career?
Replies
3
Views
2K
steveysmith54
S
R
Physician, Pharmacist or Grocery Store at fault?
Replies
6
Views
2K
Pronounce Doxazosin
P
P
Expanded Role of Team Members. Who are they hiring to do these things? Nurses or Pharmacist or Other? Everyone fighting to show VALUE to get paid.
Replies
0
Views
811
PrincessSnow
P
N
Airforce Reserves (or other service)
Replies
14
Views
3K
BC_89
BC_89
Top