Hillary Has Zero Chance of Being Elected

[William33 110]

All other threads aside, the chance of Hillary being elected is as probable as our withdraw from Iraq, within a reasonable timeframe.

Comments?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

William,

Are you saying Hillary has 0 chance of being elected President or are you saying she won't be elected President?

They are two very different statements.

The first statement is a statement of probabilities, one which would be impossible to measure and/or confirm unless one looked to polls. And your lack of trust of polls, presumably due to your lack of understanding of psephology, is something you've made quite clear.

As for the latter, that just amounts to betting on who will win - not on who has or does not have a chance of winning.

So which one are you claiming?

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

i would not bet against her.

she's got a machine. one smart cookie. if fred is the repub nominee, she will kick his azz big time.

but if it is giuiliani, then it is a tight race.

Daniel

:energetic:

[Dan J 277]

If the election would be held today, she would win. But who knows what will happen in the next year.

[William33 110]

William,

Are you saying Hillary has 0 chance of being elected President or are you saying she won't be elected President?

They are two very different statements.

The first statement is a statement of probabilities, one which would be impossible to measure and/or confirm unless one looked to polls. And your lack of trust of polls, presumably due to your lack of understanding of psephology, is something you've made quite clear.

As for the latter, that just amounts to betting on who will win - not on who has or does not have a chance of winning.

So which one are you claiming?

I fully understand election trends and with that, I validate my statement.

Moreover, I also understand that the American people are not ready for a Woman president. Do I share that opinion? No. I would vote for Dr. Condoleezza Rice today.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

William,

Are you saying Hillary has 0 chance of being elected President or are you saying she won't be elected President?

They are two very different statements.

The first statement is a statement of probabilities, one which would be impossible to measure and/or confirm unless one looked to polls. And your lack of trust of polls, presumably due to your lack of understanding of psephology, is something you've made quite clear.

As for the latter, that just amounts to betting on who will win - not on who has or does not have a chance of winning.

So which one are you claiming?

I fully understand election trends and with that, I validate my statement.

Moreover, I also understand that the American people are not ready for a Woman president. Do I share that opinion? No. I would vote for Dr. Condoleezza Rice today.

You do understand, however, that the mere existence of a trend in favor of male candidates does not create a 0 probability of a female being elected? It may be low, even tend to zero, but zero? No.

[Jasman0717 9]

[Ban Hammer 14,297]

William,

Are you saying Hillary has 0 chance of being elected President or are you saying she won't be elected President?

They are two very different statements.

The first statement is a statement of probabilities, one which would be impossible to measure and/or confirm unless one looked to polls. And your lack of trust of polls, presumably due to your lack of understanding of psephology, is something you've made quite clear.

As for the latter, that just amounts to betting on who will win - not on who has or does not have a chance of winning.

So which one are you claiming?

I fully understand election trends and with that, I validate my statement.

Moreover, I also understand that the American people are not ready for a Woman president. Do I share that opinion? No. I would vote for Dr. Condoleezza Rice today.

connie is hawt!

[William33 110]

William,

Are you saying Hillary has 0 chance of being elected President or are you saying she won't be elected President?

They are two very different statements.

The first statement is a statement of probabilities, one which would be impossible to measure and/or confirm unless one looked to polls. And your lack of trust of polls, presumably due to your lack of understanding of psephology, is something you've made quite clear.

As for the latter, that just amounts to betting on who will win - not on who has or does not have a chance of winning.

So which one are you claiming?

I fully understand election trends and with that, I validate my statement.

Moreover, I also understand that the American people are not ready for a Woman president. Do I share that opinion? No. I would vote for Dr. Condoleezza Rice today.

You do understand, however, that the mere existence of a trend in favor of male candidates does not create a 0 probability of a female being elected? It may be low, even tend to zero, but zero? No.

Ok, nearly zero chance then. How's that?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Moreover, I also understand that the American people are not ready for a Woman president. Do I share that opinion? No. I would vote for Dr. Condoleezza Rice today.

There is someone who doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell - one of the chief architects of the Iraq war stands next to zero chance of getting a plurality of the public vote. They might as well put Donald J. Rumsfeld up for election...

As to Hillary - well I don't like her, but I think she's got rather more support than people want to admit.

Britain had Maggie Thatcher after all (first woman PM). If it happened in the UK it can happen elsewhere...

[Stabu 0]

I think she has a pretty good chance, at least that chance is a lot higher than withdrawing from the Iraq which is, sadly, extremely unlikely. Hillary won't do it, she'll just dance around it just like the whole Democratic party has done (and just like the Republicans do regarding abortion and gay marriage). Dancing around sertain issues benefits them more than doing anything about them ever. Politics and politicians suck.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think she has a pretty good chance, at least that chance is a lot higher than withdrawing from the Iraq which is, sadly, extremely unlikely. Hillary won't do it, she'll just dance around it just like the whole Democratic party has done (and just like the Republicans do regarding abortion and gay marriage). Dancing around sertain issues benefits them more than doing anything about them ever. Politics and politicians suck.

That sounds about right.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

I really think it will happen (and I wouldn't have thought so 2 years ago) simply because the Republicans are a mess. I think Guiliani or Romney could beat her. I don't think Romney will be the nominee and I don't think Guiliani will invigorate the Republican base - I would not be surprised if there is a protest candidate if he is the nominee.

Just because a lot of people hate George Bush doesn't mean he couldn't get re-elected. Same hold true for Hillary.

[almaty 19]

William,

Are you saying Hillary has 0 chance of being elected President or are you saying she won't be elected President?

They are two very different statements.

The first statement is a statement of probabilities, one which would be impossible to measure and/or confirm unless one looked to polls. And your lack of trust of polls, presumably due to your lack of understanding of psephology, is something you've made quite clear.

As for the latter, that just amounts to betting on who will win - not on who has or does not have a chance of winning.

So which one are you claiming?

I fully understand election trends and with that, I validate my statement.

Moreover, I also understand that the American people are not ready for a Woman president. Do I share that opinion? No. I would vote for Dr. Condoleezza Rice today.

connie is hawt!

she is gay

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

William,

Are you saying Hillary has 0 chance of being elected President or are you saying she won't be elected President?

They are two very different statements.

The first statement is a statement of probabilities, one which would be impossible to measure and/or confirm unless one looked to polls. And your lack of trust of polls, presumably due to your lack of understanding of psephology, is something you've made quite clear.

As for the latter, that just amounts to betting on who will win - not on who has or does not have a chance of winning.

So which one are you claiming?

I fully understand election trends and with that, I validate my statement.

Moreover, I also understand that the American people are not ready for a Woman president. Do I share that opinion? No. I would vote for Dr. Condoleezza Rice today.

connie is hawt!

she is gay

big time. reportedly has a very wide stance.

Daniel

:energetic:

Edited September 14, 2007 by AnaAndDaniel