You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
5

[–] 6334848? 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

My theory is simple: Trump's opposition is god-awful and proven to be corrupt, and a lot of people would prefer to gamble on a wildcard rather then to hedge on a guaranteed shit sandwich. The Donald can basically lean back and watch as Hillary scares voters away crooked action by crooked actoon.

Trump would have a harder time to sell on the moderates and the middle if the DNC had picked Sanders.

It is laughable how hard the article tries to make the point that America wants no woman president. Female heads of state have been a thing now for decades in the west (Thatcher, Merkel), and I think if a competent contender appeared a vagoo would be no hindrance at all. For example, I reckon Condoleeza Rice would have had a serious shot at getting nominated if she had run despite being both black and female.

0
1

[–] Crensch 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

For example, I reckon Condoleeza Rice would have had a serious shot at getting nominated if she had run despite being both black and female.

Nightmare fuel.

0
1

[–] 6335435? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I don't agree with Condi's political stance either, but she is smart, educated and relatively scandal-free, so she is ahead of Hillary in at least one major aspect. Plus better ranked in the oppression olympics.