General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsONE PHOTO shows why Hillary Clinton will win in 2016.
Inside the situation room on the night that Bin Laden was killed.
No other candidate can match Hillary's gravitas.
joshcryer
(62,277 posts)You'll note that Obama, Biden, and Clinton are the most senior in the room without that insecure position.
Cosmocat
(14,575 posts)I don't care what anyone says, he is tougher and sharper than even a lot of democrats are.
To me, in that picture, he is leaning forward, a pose of being totally focused, while his expression is more neutral, not scared of the situation or overwhelmed by it.
He did the best by Hill that he could after he got elected.
SOS gives her the clear foreign policy cred (in reality, now what the press does is another story) the dipshit R won't have.
joshcryer
(62,277 posts)As well as a few others.
Obama knew what he was doing and was determined. He has the most determined look of anyone in that room. Clinton is kind of concerned for the guys in the SEAL team, but she's not questioning Obama's decision, as are so many men in the room with their arms crossed.
demwing
(16,916 posts)Wow...your chakras must be aligned!
joshcryer
(62,277 posts)Perhaps you lack basic rudimentary experience with other peoples' body language.
demwing
(16,916 posts)That they're closed for arguments, or that they're nervous. It could also mean that the AC was on and these three guys were cold.
Don't pretend you can decipher complex body language signals from a single photo, it's just silly.
joshcryer
(62,277 posts)You can call my reading of the body language of the majority of the people in the room subjective, that's fine. But to act as if it doesn't mean anything is absolutely silly. That room is filled with emotion. I see leaders leading and followers following. That's my interpretation. If you have a problem with that, sorry.
demwing
(16,916 posts)I'm saying that we have no clue what it means, despite your magic 8 ball prediction.
joshcryer
(62,277 posts)That's the question. I'm at least admitting to seeing something that I think is real. There's emotion there. And I think it's leadership followed by followers.
There are lots of articles about staff and advisers having doubts in Obama's decision at that moment.
demwing
(16,916 posts)that's it. There's no legitimate way to read Hillary's leadership or electability from this image.
You wrote: "I'm at least admitting to seeing something that I think is real"
No offense, but why is that of any value here?
CANDO
(2,068 posts)When I cross my arms it's just more comfortable at the moment. Body language my ass!
Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)Cha
(297,804 posts)Clown car!
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)that will be the spin.
cali
(114,904 posts)that photo doesn't demonstrate that she'll win- or lose. Personally, I fear she'll lose in the general, but I wouldn't point to a photo as being the reason. It's one of the reasons I don't support her. I think she's a lousy campaigner.
PBass
(1,537 posts)which you did not address.
Which other candidate has Hillary's gravitas? Don't say Biden. He's a perceived as a little too comical.
cali
(114,904 posts)I think he'd potentially give her a run. Lots and lots of variables.
PBass
(1,537 posts)changing the conversation. Unfair to you.
Walker does not have Hillary's gravitas, not Rubio.
I don't think people want a novice in the White House in 2016. I really don't. The popularity of the Tea Party is tanking right now, the public had a good look at what "outsiders" and "non-politicians" (sic) do when they're in office. A bunch of those noobs are going to lose after one term, in 2016.
blue neen
(12,334 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)blue neen
(12,334 posts)I agree that it may not be the most important thing, but Rubio looks way out of his league in this speech.
7962
(11,841 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)Some Democrats are starting to sound like Bush's PR team. And catching Bin a Laden, or killing him, doesn't make up for all unanswered question politicians like Hillary refuse to ask. If you think we can ride a static picture from the past to victory then you haven't learned much. The situation is dynamic and people don't want an Imperial Presidency which means no more Bushes or Clintons. We should not cede the campaign advantage of running against nepotism by selecting our own. It's nauseating to see how foolish people are.
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)Or this one
Or maybe even this one
PBass
(1,537 posts)Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)We have one still photo. From that it is inferred that Clinton has "gravitas". From that it is inferred that she will win in 2016...
What? First of all, what is gravitas, exactly? Second, whatever it is, it is a complex attribute that would not be measurable from a single still photo. Third, there have been presidents without "gravitas"; dunno, GWB comes to mind . Do you think he had gravitas? And there have been candidates with gravitas who did not win (Gore?)...
Boomer
(4,170 posts)If that photo is her best shot, I'm bracing myself for a Republican presidency.
Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)Or a picture of when they introduce fast track TPP legislation this week.
Not "gravitas". Hutzpah.
Triana
(22,666 posts)...they'd STILL be crowing about it - louder now that we're looking at 2016.
What do I hear from Dems? ..... (chirp.........chirp)
UTUSN
(70,762 posts)AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Is the entire way-too-long election season gonna be full of these ridiculous things?