Palin vs. Hillary?

[fbibob]

Ok, it is now very possible that McCain and Palin could win the Presidency/Vice Presidency.

It is also very possible that McCain will be a one-term President.

Which makes it very possible that Palin will run against Hillary in 2012.

So what are people's thoughts about this match-up?

[Mnguy2007]

Ok, it is now very possible that McCain and Palin could win the Presidency/Vice Presidency.

It is also very possible that McCain will be a one-term President.

Which makes it very possible that Palin will run against Hillary in 2012.

So what are people's thoughts about this match-up?

Of course time will show more about Palin, but even now I would vote Palin over Clinton.

[Voobrazheniye]

Ok, it is now very possible that McCain and Palin could win the Presidency/Vice Presidency.

It is also very possible that McCain will be a one-term President.

Which makes it very possible that Palin will run against Hillary in 2012.

So what are people's thoughts about this match-up?

Hmmm.... how about Sarah with Condi as her VP?

So would the Dems put up Hillary and Oprah?

[fbibob]

I don't think Oprah could take the loss in income. Maybe Nancy Pelosi?

That would send me running for the dramamine!

[Lucker]

Based on the way "new" stars erupt into the Political arena and their average life time , I don't expect Palin to be around for long .
Sarkozy has become a laughing stock in short time and Gordon Brown lasted four months . Big Bang entrants .
The long distance runners are so often the slow starters -- Reagan , even Clinton . Putin , Thatcher

[beezneesman]

Based on the way "new" stars erupt into the Political arena and their average life time , I don't expect Palin to be around for long .
Sarkozy has become a laughing stock in short time and Gordon Brown lasted four months . Big Bang entrants .
The long distance runners are so often the slow starters -- Reagan , even Clinton . Putin , Thatcher

Yes I agree. Both sides in this unedifiying contest seem to be hamstrung by having one lightweight on the ticket. But it doesn't really matter who wins (either for Americans or anyone else) because the presidency is an irrelevance, as are the political parties. Presidents are simply whores in thrall to big business - the whole circus is simply contrived every 4 years to give the sheeple the idea that they actually matter.

[huney]

Yes I agree. Both sides in this unedifiying contest seem to be hamstrung by having one lightweight on the ticket. But it doesn't really matter who wins (either for Americans or anyone else) because the presidency is an irrelevance, as are the political parties. Presidents are simply whores in thrall to big business - the whole circus is simply contrived every 4 years to give the sheeple the idea that they actually matter.

Perhaps more significant, certainly more entrenched than the influence of Big Business, is the Federal Bureaucracy. I believe that element to be the largest factor to be overcome in any effort to implement real change in our government.

Largely, bureaucrats outlive any change in administration. Whether Barack Obama or John McCain wins the election in November, the media will be heard to proclaim that the 'winner' will face either challenge or support (depending on the results of the Senate and House elections) within the Congress and later will assign any failure or success on the part of his administration to effect change to their relationship with the Congress.

What they will not mention, and to my mind the more critical factor, is the fact that the new administration must first overcome the institutional inertia of the massive federal bureaucracy - the various departments ostensibly charged with executing the orders of the President, his cabinet officers and the Congress.

Yet another reason for reducing the size of our Federal Government.