Obame
Clinton
Bernie
The Democrat’s best and brightest.
This the substance of a Democrat debate?
Democrats are pathetically shallow.
I thought Bernie’s answer was interesting. He didn’t mention being Jewish (I don’t think he’s religious, so I don’t think he’d see himself as a Jewish president). But he clearly though that having him in the White House would be just as historic as having a woman.
I think Bernie was hinting that putting a real Socialist in the White House would be a historic change for the USA.
He clearly sees himself as radically different from the US tradition of capitalism and bourgeois success stories.
He's white, he's old and he's Jewish.
He's lucky he's not on Obamacare or the Death Panel would have sent him to The Farm.
he’s certainly been thwarting Hillary
Because, you know, being historical is always a good thing. Right???
Sirhan Sirhan made history. John Wilkes Booth made history. And let us not forget the ever-historical Mark David Chapman or John Wayne Gacy or any of a myriad of others who have cemented their place in history. And I intentionally avoided using the “big” names of people who have changed world history in other-than-better ways.
Heck, if having a “historical” candidate is so important, let the dems nominate a quadriplegic Asian lesbian dwarf with a harelip. That would just about max out the “Historical” meter.
Dennis Prager had a great critique on the “flow of history” argument with liberals.
When they say it is the flow of history nationally, they are saying shut up conservatives, the water only flows one way, our way, you’re losing, give up.
When they say there is a flow of history internationally, like democracy spreading, they use it as an excuse to give up. We don’t have to seriously fight ISIS or support Russia against Islamo-facists, history says we’ll win in the long run, so we won’t bother to fight.
