Contrast Ségolène and Hillary

[DeclinetoState]

http://blog.blogosfere.it/blogs/ilcentrosinistradeigiovani/images/esteri/Segolene%20Royal.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dd/Hillary_Clinton_first_lady_portraitHRC.jpg/459px-Hillary_Clinton_first_lady_portraitHRC.jpg

The one of Hillary is a painting, so some of her flaws are probably downplayed. Nonetheless, she is wearing a pantsuit--which she almost always does in real life--which Drudge (or one of his callers) was speculating that you'd never see Royal wearing.

[DeclinetoState]

French Counterpart Lacked Substance, Senator's Camp Says
By Anne E. Kornblut and Perry Bacon Jr.
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, May 8, 2007; A06

There was a time when advisers to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/c001041/) (D-N.Y.) looked abroad for proof that women can get elected to a top leadership role in the modern world: Margaret Thatcher (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/related-topics.html?tid=informline&subject=Margaret+Thatcher), the former British prime minister; Angela Merkel (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/related-topics.html?tid=informline&subject=Angela+Merkel), the German chancellor; and Michelle Bachelet, the president of Chile (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/related-topics.html?tid=informline&subject=Chile).

But as presidential candidate Ségolène Royal was defeated by a conservative man who had been France (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/related-topics.html?tid=informline&subject=France)'s chief law enforcement officer, the Clinton campaign was quick to dismiss comparisons between their candidate and her Socialist counterpart across the Atlantic. "Other than the fact that they are both women, they don't have much in common," said Howard Wolfson, Clinton's communications director.

Unlike Royal, who emphasized her charm and femininity rather than her strength on foreign policy, Clinton has proven her national security bona fides, her advisers said. They argued that unlike Royal, Clinton does best among her own gender. An Ipsos (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/related-topics.html?tid=informline&subject=Ipsos+Group) exit poll on Sunday found that Royal lost the women's vote by 4 percentage points, while 2008 polling in the United States (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/related-topics.html?tid=informline&subject=United+States) has shown a gender gap in which Clinton performs stronger among women, particularly those younger than 60.

Clinton advisers said that, if anything, Royal proved that a woman must run with a focus on her credentials. Clinton allies saw the race as evidence that the New York (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/related-topics.html?tid=informline&subject=New+York) senator is running the right kind of campaign, a substantive one -- even if it means she is sometimes accused of lacking charisma.
Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/07/AR2007050701677_pf.html)

Funny, but I don't see Hillary as having either charisma or substance.

[Attero Dominatus]

Funny, but I don't see Hillary as having either charisma or substance.

Nope. Both are nothing more than overglorified moonbats.

[DeclinetoState]

But one of them has great legs!

[M.C.]

A socialist pig with great legs is still a socialist pig no?

[hellinon]

But one of them has great legs!

Not really...

[DeclinetoState]

Originally Posted by DeclinetoState http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/showthread.php?p=549636#post549636)
But one of them has great legs!
Not really...
http://blog.blogosfere.it/blogs/ilcentrosinistradeigiovani/images/esteri/Segolene%20Royal.jpg

Not really?

Here's someone with charisma, substance, and great legs:

http://img5.ranchoweb.com/images/rondog/ann-coulter-geeorge-carlin.jpg

I'm talking about the one on the right. :D