Would You Vote for Bill Clinton Over Barack Obama?

by Chris D Posted 2012/09/06 19:00:00

Related Topics: 2012 Election, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Economy, Politics, DNC, Democratic National Convention

944 votes
Read all 794 opinions
Lightning Report View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Yes, it's all about Bill!	708 votes	75%
	No, I'd still vote for Obama.	236 votes	25%

Former president Bill Clinton stole the show Wednesday night at the Democratic National Convention, which is exactly why President Obama was hesitant to include him in the program. Clinton was also very critical of Obama in 2008 when he was in the run-off with Hillary, so there was some bad blood being put to bed last night. Americans seem to still be enamored with Bill Clinton. He is a very eloquent speaker, and has the ability to get people focused on the big picture items. If you had to vote for either Bill Clinton or Barack Obama for president, who would you pick?

WASHINGTONPOST.COM reports:
Fact-checking Bill Clinton on the economy

washingtonpost reports fact-checking clinton economy

+33

Add a comment above

The Patriot 2012/09/06 19:11:51

Yes, it's all about Bill!

+34
That's like asking - What would you rather have - Syphilis or Gonorrhea.
>> See Replies

More polls by Chris D

Somkey ... to Dogman 2012/09/21 07:12:56

All you're doing is repeating yourself.

reply
Dogman to Somkey ... 2012/09/21 09:19:27

Correct. You still haven't backed up anything you've said. So I'll keep asking. I don't let people off the hook when they talk out of their ass.

reply
Somkey ... to Dogman 2012/09/22 08:18:58

Well, then you better stay on your own back,

reply
Veda to Dogman 2012/09/06 21:54:54

+1
it is going to be difficult for Obama to top Clinton's speech.

reply
lee to Veda 2012/09/06 22:26:22

wait for it....

reply
biggerman to lee 2012/09/06 23:51:39

+3
It will be a repeat of last year's empty promises.

reply
Dogman to Veda 2012/09/06 23:21:13

I agree. But he doesn't have to. They are different men, with different backgrounds and experiences. Clearly the two best speakers of our time. Don't doubt Obama's oratory skills. Like Clinton, Obama will knock this speech out of the park.

reply
Veda 2012/09/06 21:41:59

Yes, it's all about Bill!

+1
Most definitely Bill. He had experience to back up his Presidency unlike Obama.

reply
Suz 2012/09/06 21:40:59

No, I'd still vote for Obama.

+1
I didn't vote for Bill when he was running but now that I've switched parties, I see the error of my ways. He was a far superior president to either Bushes or Reagan. I do think the president has done remarkably well given the mess he inherited and the intransigence he got from Republicans from 2010 onwards.

reply
MyPaper... to Suz 2012/09/06 22:38:37

It took you the switching of parties to see that???
Jeez. Even being as liberal as it gets, I recognize there were some decent conservative/republican presidents. Well, none within this past century.... but they're there. Technically I guess they'd be more liberal by our current standards if compared to the modern world...

reply
bill 2012/09/06 21:29:01

Yes, it's all about Bill!

+5
Anybody but Obama! My Boxer Fred would be better!!!!!!!!!!

reply
YeahISa... to bill 2012/09/07 00:11:44

I fought a dog that looked like that when I was drunk one night...

reply
bill to YeahISa... 2012/09/07 00:41:09

+1
He is a boxer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

reply
YeahISa... to bill 2012/09/07 00:51:30

It took me a while to realize it was a dog and trying to fight it wasn't a good idea.

reply
Gracie - Proud Conservative 2012/09/06 21:16:33

Yes, it's all about Bill!

+4
I wouldn't vote for either but I think Clinton somewhat likes America.

reply
phil 2012/09/06 21:10:27

Yes, it's all about Bill!

+2
I like Bill

reply
Justagirl 2012/09/06 20:56:49

Yes, it's all about Bill!

+5
Eh? At the least, Clinton appears to care about Americans, doesn't apologize for us...or snarl, snivel, whine, and blame others for his failure. AND politics was more entertaining back then.

reply
Andy Devine 2012/09/06 20:41:57

Yes, it's all about Bill!

+4
Bill was selling the Clinton brand. Hillary is looking at 2016 and Bill is looking for the U.N. Secretary General spot. We will never escape the Clinton machine.

reply
Steve from NV 2012/09/06 20:38:57

Yes, it's all about Bill!

+7
I voted for Clinton twice. Voted for McCain last time around and I will vote for Romney this time.

reply
Zeyev to Steve f... 2012/09/06 21:41:42

+4
The ten poorest cities and percentage of population below the poverty level:

1. Detroit , MI 32.5%
2. Buffalo , NY 29.9%
3. Cincinnati , OH 27.8%
4. Cleveland , OH 27.0%
5. Miami , FL 26.9%
6. St. Louis , MO 26.8%
7. Chicago, Ill. 26.4%
8. Milwaukee , WI 26.2%
9. Philadelphia , PA 25.1%
10. Newark , NJ 24.2%
U.S. Census Bureau, 2010

What are the common threads? Democrats and unions.

Detroit, MI (1st on the poverty rate list) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1961.
Buffalo, NY (2nd) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1954.
Cincinnati , OH (3rd) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1984.
Cleveland , OH (4th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1989.
Miami, FL (5th) has never had a Republican mayor until now and he was recalled
St. Louis , MO (6th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1949.
Chicago, Ill (7th) has never had a Republican mayor.
Milwaukee , WI (8th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1908.
Philadelphia , PA (9th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1952.
Newark , NJ (10th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1907.
* In the history of our federal government:
5 Representatives have been expelled. All 5 were Democrats.
14 Senators have been expelled. All 14 were Democrats.
21 Representatives censured. 16 De...

The ten poorest cities and percentage of population below the poverty level:

1. Detroit , MI 32.5%
2. Buffalo , NY 29.9%
3. Cincinnati , OH 27.8%
4. Cleveland , OH 27.0%
5. Miami , FL 26.9%
6. St. Louis , MO 26.8%
7. Chicago, Ill. 26.4%
8. Milwaukee , WI 26.2%
9. Philadelphia , PA 25.1%
10. Newark , NJ 24.2%
U.S. Census Bureau, 2010

What are the common threads? Democrats and unions.

Detroit, MI (1st on the poverty rate list) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1961.
Buffalo, NY (2nd) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1954.
Cincinnati , OH (3rd) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1984.
Cleveland , OH (4th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1989.
Miami, FL (5th) has never had a Republican mayor until now and he was recalled
St. Louis , MO (6th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1949.
Chicago, Ill (7th) has never had a Republican mayor.
Milwaukee , WI (8th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1908.
Philadelphia , PA (9th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1952.
Newark , NJ (10th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1907.
* In the history of our federal government:
5 Representatives have been expelled. All 5 were Democrats.
14 Senators have been expelled. All 14 were Democrats.
21 Representatives censured. 16 Democrats, 5 Republicans.
7 Senators have been censured. 4 were Democrats, 3 were Republican.
2 Presidents have been impeached. Both were Democrats.
The troubling facts: 80% Democrat offenders, 20% Republican

A ten year old child can look at the facts above and see the common threads!
(more)

reply
lee to Zeyev 2012/09/06 22:27:14 (edited)

now show us the list of STATES

all of them RED states.

go figure.

reply
biggerman to lee 2012/09/06 23:59:53

+2
What are you talking 'bout, Willis? Many of the states where those cities are found also voted for Democrats nationally and if they were "Red" States it only because the rural populations in those states were significantly Conservative and could overcome the ignorance of those urban dwellers.

reply
lee to biggerman 2012/09/07 21:48:50 (edited)

bigger picture man is not getting it.

RED states have more poverty and TAKE more fed welfare dollars than BLUE states.

if America were a business, the RED states would be FIRED

reply
biggerman to lee 2012/09/08 03:45:00

I don't know where you are getting your figures: I would suspect that most Welfare is collected from people who live in cities and regardless of where those cities are located, urban areas are heavily Democrat and have idiot Democrats as mayors. When you look at a map that indicates voting by counties rather than just voting by States, it is amazing that virtually the entire map favors Republicans and only in the cities do Democrats get most of the votes. We all know that welfare and government dependency among those living in the inner cities is a big reason fo rthat. But, I wouldn't call IL, WI, PA, OH, and MI Red States - If they vote Republican this year - bye bye Obama.

reply
lee to biggerman 2012/09/08 21:20:28

were talking about poverty and RED states have more of it.... that's why they need welfare from the feds...

they can't support themselves.

if Republicans treated states like they wnat to treat ppl, they would be homeless and starving.

reply
apachehellfire65 2012/09/06 20:38:54

Yes, it's all about Bill!

+7
if they were my only two choices then bill in a heart beat.

reply
TheBadOne 2012/09/06 20:35:44

No, I'd still vote for Obama.

+3
Bill's just as responsible for this fiscal mess as Bush is. Anyone who mentions Bush without mentioning Bill is under-informed, anyone who mentions Bill without mentioning Bush is misinformed, and anyone who thinks this all started under Obama needs their heads examined (and for anyone thinking I'm a dolt for not mentioning the Reagonator or Bush the first... well I guess there you go. Not like Carter or Ford were any better though.)

However, I'm still voting for GJ because despite the lip service that Obama provides to make people believe he's a civil libertarian, he's too beholden to corporate interests and Eric Holder (who shoulda been canned long ago) to prove that he's anything other than a cronyist who "supports" gay marriage starting in 2012...

reply
jerry 2012/09/06 20:35:04

Yes, it's all about Bill!

+5
I'd pick Bill, but that's like picking Hemorrhoids over Herpes.

reply
YeahISa... to jerry 2012/09/07 00:13:32

+1
I don't think those two are comparable. I'd rather hemorrhoids anyday.

reply
heirsoftheking 2012/09/06 20:33:34

Yes, it's all about Bill!

+6
Wouldn't vote for either one, but things were definitely better under Bill.

reply
Sunny to heirsof... 2012/09/07 16:41:42

The WORLD was an easier place under Clinton.

reply
fuzzy Ken "In G-d We Trust" 2012/09/06 20:21:35

Yes, it's all about Bill!

+8
Although I am a Conservative I would much rather have Slick Willy than Obama. I long for the days when the worst you could say about the President was that he got a BJ from an intern and used her nether regions as a humidor.
Clinton knew how to work with the GOP rather than alienate and shut them out with the line "We won."

reply
twhiting9275 2012/09/06 20:18:38

Yes, it's all about Bill!

+2
HANDS DOWN!
Bring back Billy J!

reply
Dale 2012/09/06 20:18:20

Yes, it's all about Bill!

+4
If that were the only choices on the ballot, then it would be Bill Clinton, but if that was the only two.

reply
George Romney 2012/09/06 20:16:31

Yes, it's all about Bill!

+3
Look at that fact check. Only two claims that weren't accurate in a nearly hour long speech and even then they had some basis in truth.

Boy, you don't get that from politicians these days/

reply
Mr. Smith 2012/09/06 20:12:15

Yes, it's all about Bill!

+8
Bill knew that if he wanted to have a successful presidency he had to move to the right and work with the GOP congress. He did it and now look at him, he gets to tout that he balanced the budget and created economic prosperity. Obama has done the exact opposite, he refuses to work with the GOP and now look at him, he's an utter failure! When Obama's presidency is over in Jan., instead of touting his successes for the rest of his life, he'll get to blame everyone else for HIS failures.

reply
twhitin... to Mr. Smith 2012/09/06 20:19:48

+3
Clinton - A TRUE example of a leader
Morality question aside, he did EXACTLY what it took to get the damn job done!

reply
Mr. Smith to twhitin... 2012/09/06 20:34:46

+4
I agree - which is why I think his speech hurt Obama more than helped. He just reminded the people of all the things Obama is not.

reply
Papillon 2012/09/06 20:11:20
Grammar Freak 2012/09/06 20:07:43