Quote:
Originally Posted by Prolongus
If Hillary had beaten Obama in the primaries in 2007 and gone on to become president, it would have been 22 straight years of either a Bush or a Clinton in the White House.
Actually, it would have been 24 years (Bush Sr. won in 1988). And if she won re-election in 2012 (likely against Romney), it would eventually be 28 fucking years. And there are some people (BigTex, are you listening?) that wouldn't have a problem with that. There would be 30 year old people who would have no remembrance of a President who was NOT a Bush or a Clinton. Dynasties would seem normal. It is sick.
And she would have won, too, 'cause Dubya fucked it up so badly, Hugo Chavez would have beaten McCain.
|
I don't care what your party is, if you love your country you would NEVER re-elect out of the same family.
Even if you knew to a mathematical certainty that Hillary was the best choice for President, you still should never do it.
Even if Hillary was the best, she would be only a tiny bit better than whomever was second best. It is not like it is a choice between Albert Einstein in first place and Kim Kardashian in second place.
Whatever tiny marginal improvement Hillary would have over the second best choice is NOT enough to justify the harm done by nepotism to our politics and civil society.
Any time you are face with a choice that presents very little upside and a potentially large downside, you do NOT take that choice - in politics or in life.