General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWho Said It: Hillary Clinton or John McCain? Take this quiz
link:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/08/hillary-clinton-john-mccain-quotes-foreign-policy-quiz
.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)I can't tell them apart apparently........
LOL.....
rock
(13,218 posts)I also got 5/10.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)I got 6 out of ten.
valerief
(53,235 posts)JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)John McCain would never say "raison d'etre." He ain't no Frenchie lover.
earthside
(6,960 posts)... of Rand Paul.
If by some miracle Rand Paul got the nomination of the Repuglican Party, and Hillary Clinton is coronated as nominee of the Democratic Party, it looks like Hillary would be running to the right of Paul.
Yup.
That's what American needs ... a presidential contest between a Wall Street libertarian and a Wall Street neocon.
dsc
(52,163 posts)she is to the right of him on gay rights, no wait that is bullshit. She is to the right of him on abortion, no wait that is bullshit. She is to the right of him on voting rights, no wait that is bullshit. She is to the right of him on climate change, no wait that is bullshit. She is to the right of him on social programs like food stamps, no wait that is bullshit. I could go on but I think I made my point.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)I think that should tell you something.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)dsc
(52,163 posts)for the record, I have no idea who I am voting for in 2016, I am too busy with 2014. I can see scenarios in which I would vote for Hillary and scenarios in which I wouldn't. Not being psychic, I have no idea which scenario will play out.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)You just pointed out where Hillary is more to the left than Rand. I could do the same showing where Rand is more to the left than Hillary on certain issues. And, some of those are pretty big.. like her being more hawkish on war.
dsc
(52,163 posts)I absolutely guarantee that my list will be both longer and more substantive.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)They are both center right politicians.
Hillary is pro Wall Street, pro Lobbyist, and pro War. Rand Paul is worse on some social issues. So what? They're both terrible, and I think that's the point.
dsc
(52,163 posts)otherwise I doubt you would think the voting rights act, gay rights, and abortion among other things amount to so what.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)And, I'm against everything that Democrats once considered important; like worker's rights, peace over war, gay rights, abortion rights, civil rights, etc. That's why I support Bernie Sanders over any other candidate.
dsc
(52,163 posts)but the fact is if you don't see a difference between Hillary and Ron Paul then you really don't hold those issues in very high regard and again, I suspect you have that position due to not really needing those rights all that badly yourself.
Rand paul is much better on foreign policy than the warmongerer hillary clinton.
dsc
(52,163 posts)the one would would eliminate foreign aid from Israel or the one who has apparently claimed never to say that. Paul has a disturbing habit of saying whatever it takes to get people to vote for him.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)I see quite a big difference between Hillary and Paul. I also think both would be very poor choices as President.
So, you're wrong, and I already told you that I hold all of those issues in very high regard. That's why I support Bernie Sanders, whom I'm guessing you would also criticize.
dsc
(52,163 posts)though I have some doubts he is capable of translating his success in Vermont nationwide. I frankly think Sherrod Brown would be far more able to translate his electoral success nationwide and is as liberal as Sanders.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)We need only look back on the policies of the big dog's administration for our clues to beware of the democrat wearing the cloak of the republican ruling class.
Repeating my current mantra: Let's do it to it in the 2014 elections.
After that, I'll entertain the next round of strategy and tactics to send every greedy politician home. They hate the talk of term limits. It would be a 50 state battle to limit their influence to say 3 terms max?
progressoid
(49,991 posts)Damn.
beerandjesus
(1,301 posts)...but one of those I only got right because I couldn't imagine McCain using the term "raison d'etre".
valerief
(53,235 posts)Dustlawyer
(10,495 posts)tridim
(45,358 posts)The fact that a quiz like this is even possible is reason enough that she should never be our nominee.
Progress, not regress.
marble falls
(57,112 posts)MoonchildCA
(1,301 posts)...because I couldn't picture John McCain using the term "raison dêtre".
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)Thank you Mr. Carpenter for disabusing me of preconceived "notions". I've been waiting for a woman President since the days of Geraldine Ferraro. I'm still waiting for a real Democrat to emerge in 2016.
Bernie Sanders, I respect and support.
frylock
(34,825 posts)knr
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)that's some scary shite
rocktivity
(44,576 posts)rocktivity
AnAzulTexas
(108 posts)I would never vote for Hillary, but this is just another reminder that we, as a country, are broken.
SpankMe
(2,957 posts)I didn't know that McCain was to the left of Hillary on these issues.
We don't have to agree on everything, though. If she's the nominee in 2016, she gets my vote anyway - regardless of who the Republican candidate is. She'd be the firewall that keeps the entire, hardcore congressional Republican agenda in check, even if she's not a liberal purist.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)really acceptable?
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)betterdemsonly
(1,967 posts)stuff so older dems that don't get on the internet, and who take landline polls are getting exposed to her garbage.