U.S. Politics - Jeb announced yet?

[BloodRider]

It's absolutely not true that Clinton lied on a question that was irrelevant to the line of investigation. Clinton's lies about Lewinsky took place within the context of a sexual harassment lawsuit against him by Paula Jones. Jones' lawyers had every right to ask him about other state or government employees with whom he had sexual relationships to explore their theory of the case, which was that Clinton had a pattern of sexually propositioning women who were subordinates to him in government employ. Evidence of Clinton's other sexual relationships could then be used for a variety of purposes in the Jones case. Jones' attorneys had every right to ask those questions, and Clinton had every obligation to answer honestly.

That is a gross rewrite of the Kenneth Starr investigation.

[BloodRider]

It's not a sex scandal.

But thank you for proving my point.

It was until Starr set about going for the perjury trap.

[Swordfish]

It was until Starr set about going for the perjury trap.

We will agree to disagree on that point. by the time Starr was involved, he'd already fucked an intern. Starr did not trap him into that, nor did Starr compel him to abdicate his responsibility to not perjure himself.

Again, I never cease to be amazed by the tenacity with which some on the left will downplay sexual harassment(or whatever you want to name it).

You expect that from the right, but....

[awesome possum]

But thank you for proving my point.

Classic.

"Let's start an argument about something that's not at all relevant to much of anything with a point only I have in mind, and will not share, so that at the end of the day I can chalk up yet another argument win for myself against those silly ole liberals."

But hey, cool tirade man. Can't wait for the next one in April about WMDs in Iraq!

[Jaxom 1974]

I have not moved the goalposts.

But you have:

The original question was how having him as a husband might affect her campaign. Not about whether it reflects on her qualifications to be president.

I'm not sure how you talk about that without talking specifically about what it is about him that might or might not affect her.

I was simply pointing out that a lot of people on the left seem to downplay his offenses. And the responses in this thread have more or less proven that out.

You moved the goalposts once you said others have made the point more eloquently than yourself indicating you don't want to elaborate your point. But whatever. Or better to suggest that you might have been trying to kick the can down the street. Eh.

Having him as a husband absolutely can reflect on her. That being said, my point about her qualifications was based on my interpretation of you were arguing your point.

[Jon Sprunk]

My two cents on Bill's effect on Hillary's campaign: he helps. a LOT.

For all his blunders, I think Bill Clinton is still more popular around the country than Pres. Obama. And Obama won pretty handily in 2012.

I'm not sure Hillary Clinton could win the presidency on her own (if she, for instance, divorced Bill.) But with Bill in her corner, she is the odds-on favorite.

[BloodRider]

Classic.

"Let's start an argument about something that's not at all relevant to much of anything with a point only I have in mind, and will not share, so that at the end of the day I can chalk up yet another argument win for myself against those silly ole liberals."

But hey, cool tirade man. Can't wait for the next one in April about WMDs in Iraq!

Ohhhh. If we are making requests, I'd like to hear BENGHAZI!!!!!!! again.

[lokisnow]

I agree with swordfish. Clinton should have been impeached and his supporters do profoundly disturbing mental gymnastics to provide him with excuses.

However, the narrative became that republicans engaged in a sexually grotesque witchhunt, therefore Clinton's impeachment worthy conduct will not negatively affect the campaign. Because he got away with his crimes, like bush and his war criminal cabinet got away with their crimes and it appears that bush's war crimes will not negatively affect Jeb bush's presidential campaign.

Bill Clinton's impeachment worthy conduct also has no bearing on Hilary Clinton's qualifications to serve as president.

Bill Clinton's current and recent affairs, including potential pederasty with billionaire buddies very well might affect Hilary Clinton's presidential campaign.

[The Once and Future King]

I agree with swordfish. Clinton should have been impeached and his supporters do profoundly disturbing mental gymnastics to provide him with excuses.

However, the narrative became that republicans engaged in a sexually grotesque witchhunt, therefore Clinton's impeachment worthy conduct will not negatively affect the campaign. Because he got away with his crimes, like bush and his war criminal cabinet got away with their crimes and it appears that bush's war crimes will not negatively affect Jeb bush's presidential campaign.

Bill Clinton's impeachment worthy conduct also has no bearing on Hilary Clinton's qualifications to serve as president.

Bill Clinton's current and recent affairs, including potential pederasty with billionaire buddies very well might affect Hilary Clinton's presidential campaign.

Bill Clinton for all his many many many many many many faults, is still loved by a large majority of americans. While he adds some negatives to hil's campaign he adds much more positives just by showing up

[lokisnow]

Bill Clinton for all his many many many many many many faults, is still loved by a large majority of americans. While he adds some negatives to hil's campaign he adds much more positives just by showing up

Agreed.

[NestorMakhnosLovechild]

That is a gross rewrite of the Kenneth Starr investigation.

That's impossible, since that post contained not a single reference to the Starr investigation.

Paula Jones' civil suit against Bill Clinton is a different thing than the Starr investigation. The former was one of the things that was reviewed and investigated by the latter, but they're not the same thing.

[Larry of the Lawn]

Bill Clinton for all his many many many many many many faults, is still loved by a large majority of americans. While he adds some negatives to hil's campaign he adds much more positives just by showing up

Anecdotal, but most of the people I encounter at work are career blue collar guys that like guns and are afraid of minorities and foreigners. They are all pretty hardcore conservative, listen to Rush Limbaugh all day, but... they all love Bill Clinton. Some of them even voted for him, and I've heard them talk about how the Clinton's 'get shit done'. Not sure how prevalent that sentiment is but it seems that at least for a very limited section of the poplulation, Bill Clinton is the rare someone that gets people to vote across the aisle.

[awesome possum]

Good ole GOP, sees how well the new tax policies are working out in Kansas and thinks, "hey, let's do that in more states."

A number of Republican-led states are considering tax changes that in many cases would have the effect of cutting taxes on the rich and raising them on the poor.

Favorite targets for the new taxes include gas, e-cigarettes, and goods and services in general. Gov. Paul R. LePage of Maine, who wants to start taxing movie tickets and haircuts, is also proposing a tax break for the lowest-income families to relieve some of the pressure.

At the same time, some of those governors — most notably Mr. LePage, Nikki R. Haley of South Carolina and John R. Kasich of Ohio — have proposed significant cuts to their state income tax. They say that tax policies that encourage business growth provide more jobs and economic benefits for everyone.

A new report suggests that these states could be creating financial problems down the road. The strategy of shifting from income taxes to consumption taxes has caused huge budget shortfalls in Kansas and, more recently, North Carolina, which announced a budget shortfall of nearly half a billion dollars.

And in other news: a Virginia Republican barely won a seat in the state last election, and that was just too close so they're just going to go ahead and gerrymander the district now to avoid any close calls next time.

Hospital prices always go up, except this past year, where they didn't go up but actually went down. Hmmm, what was different about 2014? Can anyone tell me? Was some kind of program fully implemented or something? I can't remember.

111 of the 201 member companies in the "Business Roundtable" have about $1 trillion stored overseas. Because businesses are doing so poorly in the US right now, why would they want to invest that money when it might not go into their pockets?

And to end on a happy note: A NJ judge has declared that therapists who claim homosexuality can be cured are guilty of consumer fraud.

[TerraPrime]

111 of the 201 member companies in the "Business Roundtable" have about $1 trillion stored overseas. Because businesses are doing so poorly in the US right now, why would they want to invest that money when it might not go into their pockets?

So, less like trickle down, more like trickle away.

[Commodore]

Anecdotal, but most of the people I encounter at work are career blue collar guys that like guns and are afraid of minorities and foreigners. They are all pretty hardcore conservative, listen to Rush Limbaugh all day, but... they all love Bill Clinton. Some of them even voted for him, and I've heard them talk about how the Clinton's 'get shit done'. Not sure how prevalent that sentiment is but it seems that at least for a very limited section of the poplulation, Bill Clinton is the rare someone that gets people to vote across the aisle.

he never won 50% of the vote, hardly a sign of broad-based appeal

[Commodore]

111 of the 201 member companies in the "Business Roundtable" have about $1 trillion stored overseas. Because businesses are doing so poorly in the US right now, why would they want to invest that money when it might not go into their pockets?

If they bring it back stateside, it gets double taxed. It would be fiduciary malpractice on shareholders to repatriate those earnings.

[DanteGabriel]

he never won 50% of the vote, hardly a sign of broad-based appeal

Obama won 52.9% and 51.1% of the vote. Did he have broad-based appeal?

[OnionAhaiReborn]

he never won 50% of the vote, hardly a sign of broad-based appeal

No, his towering approval rating through most of his second term continuing through to a very high favorable rating to this day is the sign of broad-based appeal.

[Seli]

If they bring it back stateside, it gets double taxed. It would be fiduciary malpractice on shareholders to repatriate those earnings.

And not using the money to make more is fine?

eta: come to think of it, if the companies were actually paying taxes the taxes paid by the individual shareholders could go down, so malpractice either way?

eta: a nagging idea at the back of my mind lead to some searching, and it seems the strict fiduciary duty of a company towards its shareholders an ideology rather than a rule of law. eg http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/09/09/how-the-cult-of-shareholder-value-wrecked-american-business/

[TrackerNeil]

Obama won 52.9% and 51.1% of the vote. Did he have broad-based appeal?

You clever boy! If Commodore says yes, he's just admitted something anathema. If he says no, that means GWB had even less appeal. Fiendish!