by Joe T.
Member since:
September 13, 2006

Hillary Clinton and John McCain

January 09, 2008 12:02 AM EST
views: 159 | comments: 39

    Hillary Clinton 39%                              John McCain 37%

    Barack Obama 37%                              Mitt Romney 32%

    John Edwards 17%                             Mike Huckabee 11%

 

These are the results with 87% of the New Hampshire precincts reporting.

    How to look at the results. Hillary Clinton made a terrific comeback. I'm of the belief that it's not over until it is over.  John McCain made a meaningful comeback as well. He didn't have the bump that Hillary Clinton had due to the fact that she didn't lose by all that much in Iowa. I believe that Hillary Clinton can beat John McCain in the general election. Again, it is not over until it is over. But, let's look at these two for minute.

    McCain wants to continue with the current operations in Iraq. Clinton wants to take a look at the situation first and then make a move on Iraq. In reality, their positions aren't that much different. Hillary Clinton has a profit driven health care plan. McCain thinks that everything is going just fine with health care. That could be his downfall. He hasn't talked to too many people about the issue, I'm afraid. McCain talks about restoring our nation's budget to one of fiscal responsibility. Hillary Clinton says the same thing. When you really look at these two, the difference is that one is a man and the other is a woman. That might be the factor that tips the scales in Hillary Clinton's favor. As I said, it's not over until it is over. 

 

 

link to this page
Bookmark this post:
Facebook
Twitter
Delicious
Buzz
More

Comments: 39

Rex T. Jan 9, 2008, 12:18am EST
"McCain wants to continue with the current operations in Iraq. Clinton wants to take a look at the situation first and then make a move on Iraq. In reality, their positions aren't that much different."

They are both sitting Senators with access to pretty much the same information. What this statement tells me is; McCain has assessed the situation and knows what he wants to do. Clinton knows what she wants to do but won't come right out and say it. To take a look and then make a move, in this situation isn't leadership or honesty, it's an attempt to garner some on the job training while acting like you know what your doing.
Joe T. Jan 9, 2008, 12:22am EST
They both know what they are doing. The question is: who should be the next president of the United States of America?
P.W. Dowdy Jan 9, 2008, 3:47pm EST
Hot topic, Joe.

This is going to be one of the most interesting election in a long, long time.

Let's talk in August. We'll know more then. I'm waivering seriously between ONE candidate. Still open though.

Good to see you again, Joe.
Don(time to open them FEMA camps) S. Jan 9, 2008, 7:24pm EST
Someone is crying voter fraud on the Dems , now ain't that just like the pot calling the kettle black???
Carol LeHane Jan 10, 2008, 2:15am EST
No president should determine their currently course of action based solely on what they have said they would do in the past. He/she should look at the situation as it exists once he/she is in a position to acturally make the decision.
Peter Joseph Swanson Jan 10, 2008, 12:33pm EST
It's not over until it's over and it's going to be a VERY exciting race on both sides.
paul w. Jan 11, 2008, 2:10pm EST
Joe, there are a slew of differences on other issues. But, I appreciate your points on those major issues. As you said, a long way to go.....
vickey w Jan 11, 2008, 9:53pm EST
This is a good article Joe. I havent yet decided as to who I will vote for, but I think Hilly is going to get in. But I do know that I dont trust her and wouldnt vote for her. I think 8 of her hubby and 8 of GWB is enough. I want change .
Joe T. Jan 11, 2008, 11:43pm EST
Just what do you mean when you say that you want change? Didn't President George Bush bring us enough change. We are now in a serious and difficult war - that was quite a change. We no longer have habeas corpus - again - what a change. In the end, change is inevitable, but the more things change the more they stay the same. Hopefully, whomever is elected can fix the problems created by GWB. I think that Hillary Clinton is the right person for the job. The Republicans have nothing this election cycle. Really, Huckabee and Romney - talk about poor choices.
Connie C. Jan 12, 2008, 12:06am EST
Joe,
I have been following the campaign with great interest. I am looking for change. I want someone who cares about the citizens in the US and not just the big companies. I still have not decided for sure who I will vote for but I dont think it will be Hillary because she changes her stand on things as much as she changes her clothes.
Joe T. Jan 12, 2008, 12:10am EST
Connie,

I think that the big companies will always have more influence than they should. I don't see any president changing that. What I want to see is meaningful health care reform, an end to the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the strengthening of the middle class. I just don't see that Obama can deliver. McCain won't give us much in that regard, either because he doesn't believe that they are problems. I think that Hillary Clinton gets it. That's why she has my vote. I respect your opinions and ideas, Connie.
Jeff H. Jan 13, 2008, 7:33pm EST
I am all for health care reform but politicians have to address the fact that government controls are one of the biggest problems regarding costs.
Joe T. Jan 13, 2008, 7:34pm EST
How so, Jeff?
Jeff H. Jan 13, 2008, 7:48pm EST
Well put it this way. I am a single male. Laws mandate that insurance I receive covers cervical cancer and pregnancy. They aren't allowed to give me coverage based on me, my gender, or age. I am forced to collectively pay for everybody else. Remember, even though I have to pay for pregnancy, I am not covered unless I am married. These are just a few examples including paying for birth defects, (yes a single white male pays for birth defects even though he isn't covered if he gets a girl pregnant) autism, etc.

For instance. The government could make you pay for motorcycle insurance if they passed a law. Now you may not have a motorcycle licence and might not ever want one. But the government could make you pay for it. Your insurance would go up.

That is what happened to health care in a much larger way.
Joe T. Jan 13, 2008, 9:14pm EST
Blame the insurance companies. It is not the government that makes it that way, Jeff.
Jeff H. Jan 13, 2008, 9:30pm EST
Joe it is law. Insurance companies don't make law. Government does. yes insurance companies love the fact that more Americans pay more than they should for services the can't possible receive benefits for but government made the laws. Government can change the laws as well.
Joe T. Jan 13, 2008, 9:31pm EST
Jeff,

The insurance lobby works hard to get these laws on the books. They are powerful and Congress rolls over for them every time. You really have to blame the companies that come up with these schemes.
Jeff H. Jan 13, 2008, 9:34pm EST
Joe blame the insurance companies or the politicians you trust? Dig deep see how far the scam goes......
Joe T. Jan 13, 2008, 9:38pm EST
I understand why one would think that it is our Representatives and Senators. In fact, they are beholden to these corporations and lobbyists because they owe their campaigns to them. Money doesn't come easily and it doesn't come without strings attached. I can't stand the lobbyists.
Jeff H. Jan 13, 2008, 9:58pm EST
Joe I agree with you in terms of politicians beholden to lobbyists. We need change. Not the kind of change we got over the past 35 years either. Real change.
Joe T. Jan 13, 2008, 10:03pm EST
For one thing, we have to stop the giving corporations so much play. They will do just fine without tailoring the laws to help them instead of the regular people. Congress should be serving the voters - which doesn't always fall in line with the needs of corporations. Sadly, today, it is business that runs the government.
Jeff H. Jan 13, 2008, 10:09pm EST
Well do you want change or business as usual like we had for the past 35 years?
Joe T. Jan 13, 2008, 10:18pm EST
I want to return to pre-Reagan days. Since Reagan, the economy has been teetering on the brink of recession. The good years of the 1990s were really rather short lived. Bush's policies have been horrible. Let's face it, for six years, the Republican Congress rubber stamped Bush's initiatives. They fell down on the job. It's easy to blame the Democrats now, but the damage is difficult to reverse. The thing is: we don't have good choices for our representatives and senators. I like my Senators in Illinois but can't stand my representative. He votes every progressive measure down. The conservatives failed us as a nation. We have to swing the pendulum to the left (it will still be more in the center than anything else).
Jeff H. Jan 13, 2008, 10:41pm EST
The success of the 90's was because of Reagan Joe. Bill Gates, a social progressive, said that he could not have created his empire that drastically improved the lives of billions had it not been for Reagan's free market policies. Joe do you really thing that the average American is worse off now than when Carter was in office?
Jeff H. Jan 13, 2008, 10:42pm EST
I won't argue that modern day "conservatives" were a fraud and a joke.
Jeff H. Jan 13, 2008, 10:44pm EST
the Tom Delay years anyways.....
Joe T. Jan 13, 2008, 10:53pm EST
Yes, I do. Raises today are between two and four percent. In the 1970s, people received raises of five and six percent. Corporations pay less in taxes than post Reagan days. They used to have to take their turn, just like everyone else. Today, they are catered to like Gods.

Remember, that Reagan turned back his tax cuts because they were not working. George Herbert Walker Bush had to raise taxes because the tax cuts were not working. Reagan created recession. If you buy into the myth of the great Ronald Reagan, they you will buy into anything.
Anita D. Jan 13, 2008, 11:12pm EST
time will tell
Kathy D. Jan 16, 2008, 1:38pm EST
Great discussion - it's also refreshing to see a thread where people talk to each other as respectable adults.

I'm still undecided about who I want to win the Democratic nomination. They all have something positive to offer.
If it comes down to McCain vs Clinton I will vote third party. I can't see myself supporting either of them.

I've never seen Bush as the candidate of change. I don't see McCain or Clinton as leaders of change either. We need new faces. It is sad that no one ever mentions the Keating 5 or S&L bailouts anymore. Can we trust either a Clinton or a McCain to change? Haven't both had enough chances?
Jeanie C. Jan 23, 2008, 9:57pm EST
I think that's gonna be the race as I'm seeing things today in the news. I think Mitt shot himself in the foot in Florida, Thompson ran away, Rudy is the next to fall, but I don't think John can do it, I think he's too old and there's a lot of what he says that sounds very much like Bush.

Will be interesting. I can't wait for Feb. 5th. Our primary in Jersey got moved up so we aren't the last in the nation to vote any more in June. We'll know then I guess.
Mary M. Jan 27, 2008, 12:11pm EST
I would vote for neither Hillary or McCain. However, I do think Hillary stands an excellent chance of winning the race in the end. I am rooting for Rudy but don't think he really stands a good chance of making it through all the primaries well. In that case I would have to look harder at Ron Paul and Obama. I think what seems most bothersome to me about McCain is that I have at least some idea of what all the other candidates stand for, but not really what he would do to change things if elected. That and the fact that he had no idea where he was giving his speech yesterday. Some folks said I shouldn't let a slip of the tongue bother me, that he was tired, etc. If he's too tired to make it through the campaign, or remember a basic thing like where he's standing, I don't want him running my country!
Michelle K. Jan 27, 2008, 3:35pm EST
If it comes between McCain and Clinton, I'd be very pleased with that ballot. The majority of people in my county also supported either McCain or Clinton. Some of the other canidates have made some moving speeches and a good pitch for this topic or that topic, or performed well in a debate or two, but I definately believe McCain and Hillary Clinton are the best canidates for jumping in with their eyes wide open on day one and knowing what direction to head us into.
Hillary's plan with the war and McCains platforms have been widely discussed during the debates and post-debate interviews, and each canidate has a website. If you want to know what their plans are, it's out there.
necee t. Jan 30, 2008, 8:00pm EST
i just hope we get someone good...
Peter C. Frank Jan 31, 2008, 4:14am EST
If McCain can break away from the right-wing grip on the GOP and go back to his more moderate and independent roots, I think he'll end up being a good president, provided he can beat Hillary at the polls in November.

Gatherites For McCain!
Joe T. Jan 31, 2008, 5:42pm EST
Thank you, everyone for a terrific discussion.
Richard Owl Mirror Aug 23, 2008, 7:30pm EDT
Is THIS the real reason Sen Hillary Clinton wasn't vetted for VP ?
*Listen very carefully to the first 15 seconds of this video
I believe these few words are precisely why Sen Obama didn't vet Hillary Clinton for VP and why she didn't win the nomination in the first place.

www.youtube.com/watch

Words are my weapon of choice and, Truth is my Shield
APE 131313 Nov 25, 2008, 8:37pm EST
10 FREE Happy Thanksgiving Thank YOU comments to Joe cause he is always so pleasant and leaves such good comments!

Join the Conversation
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Already a member? Sign in
top
 
Gather | Friends | Groups | Share
About Gather | Engagement Marketing | Make New Friends | Gather Points | Advertise on Gather | Gather Press | Privacy | Terms of Service | Community Guidelines
Books | Celebs | Entertainment | Family | Food | Health | Moms | Money | News | Politics | Spirituality | Sports | Travel | Writing
Version 16961, "Pacino"; Copyright © 2009 Gather Inc. All rights reserved.