General Discussion

Orsino

(37,428 posts)

122. Perhaps they should be.

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 03:05 PM

Sep 2013

Installing dynasties for their own sake blocks qualified candidates not born to power. That's the opposite of democracy, and is in itself demonstrably bad.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

144 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I see "future President" written on Chelsea's face and in her demeanor. [View all] kelliekat44 Sep 2013 OP

Anyone over George P. Bush. onehandle Sep 2013 #1

While I genuinely like Chelsea... TDale313 Sep 2013 #2

Exactly... Decaffeinated Sep 2013 #15

+1 mr clean Sep 2013 #36

o. Dark n Stormy Knight Oct 2013 #144

+ another Scuba Sep 2013 #62

I am feeling that too -- no Bush or Clinton monarchies anneboleyn Sep 2013 #137

Agreed Jawja Sep 2013 #142

Nope. The Velveteen Ocelot Sep 2013 #3

Looking at her resume - I'd say NO. Tx4obama Sep 2013 #4

+1 JustAnotherGen Sep 2013 #76

I think she has a lot of her mother's mannerisms. femmocrat Sep 2013 #5

If we need another Clinton she is the one I would want n/t doc03 Sep 2013 #6

Hedge fund comes to mind. nt AtomicKitten Sep 2013 #7

The US Presidency is not a god damn birth entitlement! longship Sep 2013 #8

Never said it was. nt kelliekat44 Sep 2013 #9

Then why promote Chelsea Clinton as a Presidential hopeful? longship Sep 2013 #14

I have a theory about that, but you have hit on some of it. R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2013 #17

Very well said. woo me with science Sep 2013 #21

"already flapping", indeed. For quite a while now, actually. Wilms Sep 2013 #23

"there is no fucking birthright for office under our Constitution" Dragonfli Sep 2013 #55

Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2013 #91

"I love lamp!" Guy Whitey Corngood Sep 2013 #120

+++ RedCappedBandit Sep 2013 #64

Fucking A. n/t X_Digger Sep 2013 #28

Nor are genetics a disqualifying factor for the office of Presidency... LanternWaste Sep 2013 #81

Just lack of political experience. That will do. nt longship Sep 2013 #100

And boy does it ever help to have parents who truedelphi Sep 2013 #126

Except if you're born poor. Then it is a complete barrier. nt Romulox Sep 2013 #109

Perhaps they should be. Orsino Sep 2013 #122

I saw the same thing written on the face of Cheryl Begay last week. Zorra Sep 2013 #10

First Dine' president? Sounds good! Lizzie Poppet Sep 2013 #20

yes'm, good catch. Zorra Sep 2013 #25

Pass. nt City Lights Sep 2013 #11

Please, no more dynasties. The Velveteen Ocelot Sep 2013 #12

+1 nt Live and Learn Sep 2013 #43

Nope. But I wouldn't mind to get Bill and Hillary back in quinnox Sep 2013 #13

Ew! cui bono Sep 2013 #113

Not really. R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2013 #16

Does any part of you think that the automatic dynasty effect is just....wrong? nt Bonobo Sep 2013 #18

No more wrong than the knee-jerk reaction that a family tree should automatically disqualify a poten LanternWaste Sep 2013 #82

Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2013 #92

ONE OF US. ONE OF US. GOOBLE GOBBLE. GOOBLE GOBBLE. WE ACCEPT HER. WE ACCEPT HER. Gravitycollapse Sep 2013 #19

I saw a movie that did that line fadedrose Sep 2013 #42

As it happens, "Freaks"... JHB Sep 2013 #63

It had to be released after 1945... fadedrose Sep 2013 #94

Either you saw something that was recycling this one, or else... JHB Sep 2013 #96

she is in her 30s and hasn't done much to show she wants or should be in elected office JI7 Sep 2013 #22

No thank you , I have had my fill of Clintons and the like bowens43 Sep 2013 #24

Well, since we don't have a Royal Family, Nye Bevan Sep 2013 #26

I wouldn't write her off. Scootaloo Sep 2013 #27

If she has any electoral office ambitions SheilaT Sep 2013 #29

True, she maybe happy running the CGI long after her parents are gone davidpdx Sep 2013 #49

Yeah, President of the Clinton Foundation. n/t PoliticAverse Sep 2013 #30

Can we stop with the dynasties? davidn3600 Sep 2013 #31

I think it depends on if her mother runs and wins. hrmjustin Sep 2013 #32

no Marrah_G Sep 2013 #33

Oh my God. Really?! kiawah Sep 2013 #34

Welcome to DU! cui bono Sep 2013 #115

+1 n/t Orsino Sep 2013 #119

I am against Republican Dynasties Steerpike Sep 2013 #35

We need someone LEFT of Center for a change. RC Sep 2013 #37

Forgot the sarcasm tag I hope fletchthedubs Sep 2013 #89

I hope so too. "Charming?" truebluegreen Sep 2013 #116

People complaining about dynasties??? How about judging each person JaneyVee Sep 2013 #38

These people are very difficult to judge Steerpike Sep 2013 #40

Okay, then, let's discuss her political experience and expressed interest in running for office. winter is coming Sep 2013 #56

I think that's an accusation it's fairer to level at advocates of a Chelsea Clinton presidency. Donald Ian Rankin Sep 2013 #59

Precisely. Excellent post. nt Union Scribe Sep 2013 #80

I agree. Let's just people on their merits. RedCappedBandit Sep 2013 #66

Agreed. treestar Sep 2013 #79

To which *other* 33 year old with no political experience are we comparing her? Romulox Sep 2013 #110

Nope (nt) Ino Sep 2013 #39

NO MORE DYNASTIES. GreenStormCloud Sep 2013 #41

This. Why? PowerToThePeople Sep 2013 #46

Chelsea is married to an Ex-Goldman Sachs Investment Banker. That qualifies her... n/t PoliticAverse Sep 2013 #52

I agree. Chelsea Manning stood up for the constitution. xfundy Sep 2013 #44

Thanks. (nt) enough Sep 2013 #71

Nope. n/t winter is coming Sep 2013 #45

I will not vote for another Clinton. Llewlladdwr Sep 2013 #47

Chelsea Manning for President! avaistheone1 Sep 2013 #48

It makes more sense than OP. n/t Smarmie Doofus Sep 2013 #57

That thought occured to me too. dipsydoodle Sep 2013 #60

I think she's intelligent but the President needs to be a civil servant. joshcryer Sep 2013 #50

Hopefully not in my lifetime... wundermaus Sep 2013 #51

No--she'd be doing something in government by now if that were the case. MADem Sep 2013 #53

This is pathetic LittleBlue Sep 2013 #54

Shouldn't she distinguish herself in some lesser capacity first? Smarmie Doofus Sep 2013 #58

Is this politics, or team sports where you mindlessly support whatever brand? Lee-Lee Sep 2013 #61

I think it's a problem that people think people are qualified to run the country RedCappedBandit Sep 2013 #65

Yup. That's "prefer to have a beer with" thinking... JHB Sep 2013 #70

I think this sort of pining for New Camelot has been one of the most... JHB Sep 2013 #67

Super GeorgeGist Sep 2013 #68

Nepotism is so unimaginative. nt bemildred Sep 2013 #69

Oh, come on. Iggo Sep 2013 #72

I don't think so. HappyMe Sep 2013 #73

What is wrong with you??? cali Sep 2013 #74

I hope not bigwillq Sep 2013 #75

I'd rather someone who comes up through that ranks treestar Sep 2013 #77

Good Lord. LWolf Sep 2013 #78

Chelsea Clinton? Uh, no. She's very smart and I like her but I see 'not running for office' Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #83

Not me. Let her run for some office and we'll see MineralMan Sep 2013 #84

I see the same thing in my great granddaughter tularetom Sep 2013 #85

No. She seems a little too... Phentex Sep 2013 #86

She needs to wait her turn Capt. Obvious Sep 2013 #87

I see "future president" written on Jimmy Carter's grandson's face and actions Generic Other Sep 2013 #88

I don't disagree with you. I never said I support "dynasties" either. I merely expressed my op. kelliekat44 Sep 2013 #93

Don't you think she should have some Sissyk Sep 2013 #140

Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2013 #90

When I ask folks why they think Hillary is most qualified to be President fadedrose Sep 2013 #95

If I recall correctly, if Bill hadn't been the nominee and another Democrat... JHB Sep 2013 #134

Another + for Hillary, but fadedrose Sep 2013 #135

Based on what qualifications? bighart Sep 2013 #97

Gawds help us. bunnies Sep 2013 #98

trolling for "Clinton bashers"? bobduca Sep 2013 #99

I have no idea what Chelsea Clinton's position is on any issue. I only care about candidates on the Douglas Carpenter Sep 2013 #101

Written on her face? HangOnKids Sep 2013 #102

Hey, I'm not responsible for what I do after we've had a few and the other person cui bono Sep 2013 #114

Her demeanor is going to be pissed! n/t HangOnKids Sep 2013 #118

In which case Jeb Jr. is probably passed out somewhere with "Future President", a giant cock and a Guy Whitey Corngood Sep 2013 #127

Please stop! HangOnKids Sep 2013 #128

Does it look like this? Generic Other Sep 2013 #143

post like this make me ashamed of this forum and fearful of the future Douglas Carpenter Sep 2013 #103

No, and here's why (Part One) Divernan Sep 2013 #104

Here's why, Part II Divernan Sep 2013 #105

Here's why, Part III Divernan Sep 2013 #106

Thank you. woo me with science Sep 2013 #107

You're very welcome. Divernan Sep 2013 #112

Looks like Chelsea would make a fine representative of the 1%, bvar22 Sep 2013 #133

Awesome research! Sissyk Sep 2013 #141

Wow ... "'Wives eyes light up when they see the closets" Myrina Sep 2013 #123

Tells you the typical One Percent couples with that kind of money to spend. Divernan Sep 2013 #129

Not just there ... Myrina Sep 2013 #130

$$$$$$$$$$ nt Romulox Sep 2013 #108

kelliekat44anything. nt Romulox Sep 2013 #111

I'm sure you are doing that just to get a rise out of the people with Clinton fatigue. :D Pretzel_Warrior Sep 2013 #117

Bearing a strong resemblance to one's biological parents isn't a job qualification. n/t Orsino Sep 2013 #121

Get back to me when her face appears on a tortilla or underpass. Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2013 #124

Nope. Myrina Sep 2013 #125

No. Not interested in any more Clintons. PeteSelman Sep 2013 #131

We are not a Monarchy.... Agnosticsherbet Sep 2013 #132

Jesus fuck. Can we stop trying to create a fucking dynasty? nt Codeine Sep 2013 #136

Nope Boom Sound 416 Sep 2013 #138

No cordelia Sep 2013 #139