General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsClinton Holds Solid Leads Over All GOP Challengers
Hillary Clintons potential place in history and her husbands tenure in the White House boost her presidential prospects, while Jeb Bushs political legacy and Mitt Romneys 2012 run for the office are negatives, a new ABC News/Washington Post poll finds.
Clinton leads both in hypothetical head-to-head matchups at this early stage as well as Rand Paul, Chris Christie and Mike Huckabee alike. The national survey finds 53 to 56 percent support for Clinton among registered voters against each of these potential Republican candidates, while they get 39 to 41 percent. One reason is that Clinton is stronger in her political base, given the far more fragmented nature of the current GOP field.
As with Barack Obama, the recovery helps Clinton. About three-quarters of registered voters who rate the economy positively support her, and she leads overwhelmingly among those who say theyve gained ground financially under Obamas presidency. But she also leads, by 16 to 20 points, among those whose finances have just held steady.
Clinton has a strong advantage among those who see income inequality as a major problem, and she runs essentially evenly vs. these potential Republican nominees among those who think its a problem, but not a major one. She trails only among those who dont think the income gap is a problem just 16 percent of registered voters.
Women favor Clinton by 20- to 24-point margins, men by non-significant 2- to 7-point margins. Shes also strong among racial and ethnic minorities, adults under 40 and lower-income voters.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2015/01/historys-a-positive-for-clinton-not-so-for-bush-or-romney/
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)Just saying...
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)would they blabber on about if they could not pretend it is always election season and make it a game?
It should not be a two year campaign....I do not accept that.
wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)I know it's cute to say "it isn't 2016," but it's also irrelevant. Even unannounced candidates are busy doing research, competing for staff, etc. etc. You may not like it. You may not accept it. But it is a fact and political reality.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Amswer: one that does not require you to raise 1 billion dollars because there are no election fiance laws.
To just accept an endless election cycle is to accept the results of the Citizens Undermined decision, to me.
wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)And, frankly, I don't give a rat's ass what other countries do during the election seasons.
If you're trying to argue against the FACT that election season begins after the midterms, your arguing against decades of factual data. Good luck. And I can't WAIT to let my daughter press the button for Hillary.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)season.
McCamy Taylor
(19,240 posts)Had it made to order.
samsingh
(17,600 posts)FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)I remember midway through Bush I term and everyone thought he was unbeatable against the field of Democrat contenders.
Berlin wall had come down.
The Soviet Union was collapsing.
The whole "Peace Dividend" was being discussed.
Then Clinton came along and won.
wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Adrahil
(13,340 posts)But I'd rather start here than in the other position!
benz380
(534 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)benz380
(534 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)SFnomad
(3,473 posts)Just what we need, people to sit on their hands.
You'd rather a RepubliCON win than Hillary, eh?
PosterChild
(1,307 posts)Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)Dawgs
(14,755 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)benz380
(534 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)benz380
(534 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)... you have evidence. Nah! Not usually the mark of a 'progressive' argument.
benz380
(534 posts)wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)especially people who make a living riding the Neo Liberal Train to oligarchy town.
Reading this thread, they could give a rats ass what other people think and how they might be economically hurt, you know, just like Republicans.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Dawgs
(14,755 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Have a great weekend.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)Because Democrats will always do the right thing, especially the Turd Way.
wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)It doesn't fit your narrative.
wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)nolabels
(13,133 posts)It doesn't matter if it's Hillary or any other politician that is being used to purchase your vote, if your integrity can be obtained in this matter, eventually what you have will be worthless and or you will have nothing. It's analogous to playing a game of Monopoly where you are dealt all of money and another person was dealt all the property pieces. The point being at the time when you have went around the board enough, you will eventually be defrocked
The only question i would like to ask is if you still be around about three or four years from now,
so we can tell you and the rest of the cheerleaders 'we told you so'?
William769
(55,147 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)POTUS:
"Let's face it Fox, you'll miss me when I'm gone. It'll be harder to convince the American people that Hillary was born in Kenya."
And after hearing all the fear and hate about Bill and her, the blue dress, and on and on and on...
I'm deliberately going tone deaf on their complaints. That is what they have accomplished with the hyperbole, as she was nowhere my first choice. Not in 2008, and not anytime recently.
Remarkably, only a few that like Obama have that attitude. She supported him in the end, and not in a mealy mouthed way, and he may very well support and campaign for her.
That will seal the deal for me, and for those of us who care about civil rights issues for ALL. And her support for women is going to blow a lot of people out of the water, plain and simple.
We are 51% of the population and are tired of being looked down upon and our issues tossed to the side like minorities and LGBTs in favor of those celebs that are celebrated who belittle us for their 'rights.'
PosterChild
(1,307 posts)Gamecock Lefty
(700 posts)For those refusing to vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination, keep this in mind . . . Supreme Court Nominees! We cannot let a conservative tilt the court any more to the right. Cannot, must not!
Go get em, Hillary!
SunSeeker
(51,662 posts)PosterChild
(1,307 posts)BrainDrain
(244 posts)everyone said HRC was going to be the 1st Woman Prez of the good ole US of A. She was.....what was the word? oh yeah..inevitable. Then along came this kid...ummmm..lemme think..Barak Obama...and we all know what happened then....don't we?
HRC is NOT inevitable..ever. Holding double digit leads now is nothing....she would have a double digit lead over Bugs Bunny, (well maybe not) but you get my point.
Sorry..she is a lost cause....others here had already said anything I would have so I won't add to the pain.
ProudProg2u
(133 posts)Next round I'll be writing in Elizabeth Warrens name on the ballot. A waste you say...? Not in my view.
SunSeeker
(51,662 posts)Which of course is not a waste in the GOP's view. But it is a huge betrayal of the progressive cause.
Phlem
(6,323 posts)Thanks for that, laughter is always good medicine.
SunSeeker
(51,662 posts)My point is that if you refuse to vote, or vote for anyone other than the Dem candidate on the ballot, it is the same as voting for a Republican. And you know it. Of course, you want to change the subject.
The fact is, if you let a Republican gain the presidency by either refusing to vote or writing in some protest vote, it IS a betrayal of progressive values. A Republican will appoint more Sam Alito's, who will outlaw abortion, and continue to eviscerate the Bill of Rights. You can post all the silly emoticons you want, it won't change that fact.
Phlem
(6,323 posts)your opinion.
The fear mongering over is supreme court seats is bullshit. What's it going to matter anyway once the TPP is passed, by a Democrat.
Yes the TPP, a very progressive piece of legislation in your opinion.
I see the third way supporters are out in full force huh, Hillary or nothing?
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)See if you can differentiate the saber-rattling quotes of President-elect Hillary Clinton from those of John "Bomb Bomb" McCain. It may not be as easy as you think!
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/08/hillary-clinton-john-mccain-quotes-foreign-policy-quiz
Phlem
(6,323 posts)And guess what, if she loses it's going to be all our fault for not supporting her. I'm sure it has nothing to do with her 1% policies and support.
It'll be the folks on DU, all of us who are aware of the third way and the damage they have caused for not supporting Hillary.
and the wheel goes round and round, round and round.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)Jobs and livable wages. I'm sure there's a hell of a lot more but your going to have to look it up.
The opposite of the TPP.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)then we have bigger issues. The TPP? You know secret closed door negotiations, could be why the content hasn't been released? It's so damn good we don't need to know and we must fast track it!
Try this:
https://www.citizen.org/tpp
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Good or bad can not be judged.
Phlem
(6,323 posts)Just like the way you think Hillary is the only answer.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)why can't we see it? You have a happy posting BS day too.
PosterChild
(1,307 posts)...because to do so would poison the negotiations by preventing the participants from being frank with one another and forcing them into theatrical posturing.
The point of a negotiation is to craft a deal that has something for everyone. By putting it out as a whole people are given the opportunity to decide based on the pluses balanced against the minuses, as opposed to a piecemeal evaluation that only considers the detrements of one provision without an understanding of other counter balancing provisions.
If you are simply against any and all potential deals and think we should build a moat around America and become a hermit kingdom, well fine. Say so. If you think that America should be , has to be, an active participant in the world and engaged with it in order to enjoy peace and prosperity, then support confidential negotiations so that we can establish relationships that are, overall , to our advantage.
PosterChild
(1,307 posts)...are only obtainable in the context of vigoris participation in a world market. Trade deals like the TTP are the only progressive alternative.
That is, if by progresive you mean actually making progress.
Phlem
(6,323 posts)it's how they are written the affect us. Your also talking to someone who lost his career cause of NAFTA.
PosterChild
(1,307 posts)SunSeeker
(51,662 posts)You have yet to dispute that.
Instead, you keep trying to put words in my mouth so you can change the subject.
My concern over who sits on the Supreme Court is not "bullshit." That person determines whether women, half our population, will be subject to being forced to give birth against their will. Choosing if and when to be a mother is the most fundamental liberty to me as a woman. That is more important to me than whatever the TPP ends up being. I can do nothing if I cannot control my own body. Your dismissal of that is a dismissal of women.
You think you have a better candidate than Hillary? Get them on the Dem primary ballot.
Phlem
(6,323 posts)your particular issues don't compare to the misery of the rest of the nation. But yeah, go ahead and put words in my mouth. I'll check in with my wife and daughter tonight and see if I dismiss women.
They can try and will continue to try but I'm pretty confident Roe vs Wade will not be overturned unless the powers that be want a nation full of women and men taking up arms.
Here's a secret, I don't want anyone telling my daughter what she can and can't do with her body, period.
Also it takes votes on both sides to confirm a Supreme Court Judge. Remember during Bush junior reign how the Democrats bent over backwards for Republicans, including Supreme Court positions.
Your going to want to tell the Senators and Representatives you employ with your tax dollars to do the right thing and actually support their constituents cause I promise I cannot single handedly overturn RvW on my own, sorry.
This is why I push the third way away. We need people we can count on, not Republican lite.
SunSeeker
(51,662 posts)Exhibit 1: George W. Bush.
It is not just my liberty. It is all womens liberty that is at stake. Your refusal to acknowledge that speaks volumes.
Phlem
(6,323 posts)volumes upon volumes. Whatever SunSeeker, I should have know information does not go in, it only comes out no matter. Just because we don't elect a woman president equals the upending of Roe v Wade. it's not like any President hasn't protected it till now. For your information I would take Warren or Sanders over corporate Hillary any day. But I'm pretty sure that's also going to fall on deaf ears.
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)The fact is when people are asked, they claim to be moderates but when confronted with specific issues they are liberals.
Hillary continues to be framed by the media and the republicans as a liberal which she is not. Let's subject Hillary to a real primary and get her to be specific on the issues. If she want to lead the Democratic Party it's time to demand that she drops her allegiance to Wall Street, military contractors and global corporations and support the poor and middle class.
SunSeeker
(51,662 posts)Gosh, all those pollsters should save a lot of time and just talk to you.
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)Did you believe that one as well? Who really cares about a poll two years before an election when we have don't even know who the candidates will be? Other than people who want to see Hillary become such an institution she can get away with as little challenge from the left as possible.... Personally I want to see her debate Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders at least three times...
SunSeeker
(51,662 posts)He is a masterful campaigner, and as people saw and heard him, they liked what they saw. Then when he did well in Iowa, it was the beginning of the end for Hillary. As much as I love Bernie and Elizabeth, I don't think either of them have the carisma to pull off what Obama did. There is no new Obama-like candidate I am aware of waiting in the wings this time around.
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)These early Hillary polls reflect a public that doesn't know "any of the candidates" because no one has formally declared yet. They're also reacting to her popularity and name recognition, not the issues.
I think you're wrong about Warren. She not only has charisma but she's developing a track record of fighting Wall Street corruption and standing up for public interest. Something Hillary can't come close to.
SunSeeker
(51,662 posts)I get it, you think Warren and/or Sanders are the Obama of 2015. I disagree. We'll know soon enough.
BrainDrain
(244 posts)Except for his home state, and oh yeah his speech at the Democratic convention, no one "knew" or predicted Obama in 2007..yet he happened anyway.
To say at this point that there "is no Obama in the wings this time" is to close your eyes to history, and the unpredictability of the political process. Remember, everyone, and I literally mean, everyone "knew" HRC was going to be the Democratic nominee in 2008.
Just because the certain Dem's are determined to control the meme about her, does not mean it will happen. She is NOT a progressive, anyone with eyes knows this. So lets all sit back and enjoy the show. I suspect that for HRC it is going to wind up being a replay of the "Titanic" for her once again.
SunSeeker
(51,662 posts)The 83% of Dems who either want Clinton or someone more conservative are also without eyes? Only the 11% of Dems who want someone more liberal than Clinton have eyes?
http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/25/politics/clinton-liberals-trust/
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)And Hillary Clinton isn't one of them....And if we end up with a Hillary vs Romney or Bush election it'll not only be the most boring and meaningless election in my lifetime, it'll probably be the last chance for the party to lift itself out of the muck of triangulation and actually stand for something again. Stand up and "fight" for it's traditional values and people will line up to support them. You won't get that with Hillary Clinton..
People that identify with the Dem party are a dwindling 32% down from 35%... Less than a third of Americans now identify themselves as Democrats. Even less for the Republicans.. What is that saying? A growing number of people don't relate to either party anymore. With an off the map insane GOP this is a time when you'd expect the Democratic party to shine! Do you really think another Wall Street owned third way Democrat is going to turn that trend around?
MyNameGoesHere
(7,638 posts)Can I get a ride?
peacebird
(14,195 posts)It didn't work out so well for her then either.
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)easychoice
(1,043 posts)either set of middle initials apply.Her fan club refuses to investigate her.
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)... but I absolutely will not vote for her.
I wasn't born yesterday. I realize politics isn't about ponies; it's about compromise.
In the past, I've actively supported and voted for candidates with whom I had significant differences. But we all have our limits, and I've reached mine.
No more warmongering, corporatist, neo-liberal Wall Street suckups for me.
Enough is enough.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)BTW, I heard a little bit of Hartmann and Pap this morning talking about the (Dershowitz) Douche-o-witz scandal.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)peacebird
(14,195 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)smart and capable. Facts of Hillary's stand on the issues are on record, she has fought for Civil Rights since her college days and fought for working Americans. These are issues which are important to uplift American workers and this is good for the economy.
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)"... the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life."
Now, how about a nice game of solitaire?
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)raindaddy
(1,370 posts)The corporate owned media can't get enough of Hillary, they'll continue to clip the wings of the party of the people until everyone forgets what the party once stood for!
The best thing that could happen to this party is a series of debates, including Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders outlining each candidates vision for the future of the party in detail.. Because third way, Hillary's vision of a Corporatocracy won't hold up to the traditional Democratic party ideas of Warren and Sanders.
Phlem
(6,323 posts)Thirdway supporters are out in full force 2 years prior to anything happening.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)There are no candidates yet but it's pretty clear Clinton supporters don't want a primary:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6122080
* Sorry Steven, once posted it's in the public domain.[ /div]
mylye2222
(2,992 posts)A part her superstar status?
Phlem
(6,323 posts)almost 900 views and only 13 recs. But go ahead and keep trying to shove Hillary down our throats, we'll just puke it back up.
wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)You equate posts with popularity contests.
It's such a joke the DU admins made it their pic of the moment.
Phlem
(6,323 posts)She's thirdway, you know, the people who helped us lose the midterms. I'm sure you have the data on how there's 0% chance she'll fuck it up again.
But go ahead, live your fantasy, it's still a free country.
wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)so keep posting.
wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)Sorry, you can repeat it forever and put a shine on it but it still looks like shit. Putting her up against a bunch of monkeys does make her look slightly palatable in a puke-ish kind of way. Sorry don't you have more Hillary re branding to do?
wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)Repeating an idea, ideology, bullshit that's all dressed up with no where to go? That's classic Republican tactic or did you not know that?
wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)Sounds like the typical progressive mentality.
Phlem
(6,323 posts)But I thought Hillary was progressive?
"Sounds like the typical progressive mentality." I knew you were anti progressive. Thanks for the confirmation.
And we are done.
wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)she is nearly as Left as EW.....so please continue with your proof...
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Nobody is shoving anything.
Phlem
(6,323 posts)No amount of fantasy talk will convince me otherwise.
Phlem
(6,323 posts)Still doesn't make it so.
wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)darts at it.
wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)And enjoy your fast approaching vacation.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Mind.
JI7
(89,262 posts)and Obama would have lost the primary by a huge amount.
Rex
(65,616 posts)A bacon sandwich would have a large lead over the GOP candidates.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)democrats are way in the lead already!
I can't wait to vote for our next democratic President whoever he or she may be!
Chemisse
(30,816 posts)It suggests that there is very little wiggle room in the middle - that both sides are entrenched and not likely to change their minds. It also suggests that the nation is heavily favoring the Democrats for 2016.
broadcaster75201
(387 posts)I'll vote. You'll vote. But amidst all the horror Dems don't vote.
I'll believe she, or any Dem, wins hen I see it.
wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Then it must have been his vast Republican base that put him in the White House 2 times!
brooklynite
(94,713 posts)...they may not vote in off-year elections. I seem to recall a lot of them voting in 2008 and 2012.
vi5
(13,305 posts)...good for her. With such high levels of support she won't need my time, money, or vote. Glad to hear it. Best of luck to Mrs. Clinton.
Metric System
(6,048 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)I do not agree with Hillary on every issue but damn, if she gets the nomination I will back her one million percent!
Or any other democrat because....insane theocratic teabaggers!
Its going to be real interesting to see what happens around here after the democratic nominee is chosen.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Algernon Moncrieff
(5,790 posts)It represents the activist wing of the party. The activist wings of both parties are further from the center than most of their fellow members.
The problem I see here at DU is that many can't see that Hillary supporters and Warren/Sanders supporters have broad agreement on a wide array of issues; instead, they delight in labeling Hillary supporters as third-way corporate shills. I saw many of these same attacks against Hillary supporters by Obama supporters in 2008. To be sure, I largely approve of Barack Obama's President, but many of those same supporters from 2008 can do nothing but express how disappointed they are in his President, and how we need a "true progressive." What America needs is an effective leader -- one who knows foreign policy; has served in the legislative branch; one who understands the way the White House (and a governor's mansion) works; and yes -- one who doesn't completely frighten business interests. Hillary Clinton fits that description. The fact that her husband is an extremely popular ex-President is a bonus.
elzenmahn
(904 posts)...I want somebody in there who FRIGHTENS THE HELL out of business interests!!!!!
That's precisely why I say that the only reason why I'll vote for HRC (assuming she's the nominee) is to keep the Repubs out. It will be with a gas mask on my face and with great trepidation.
But a vote is a vote, right, Hillary? (And the rest of the Turd Wayers)?
Beacool
(30,250 posts)All the pissing and moaning because a potential Democratic candidate beats out every Republican candidate.
Crazy..........
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)You know, someone who gets it?
brooklynite
(94,713 posts)Sherrod Brown doesn't want to run either (I actually asked)
Alan Grayson? Name a House member who's ever been a competitive Presidential candidate. (or is that not the point?)
Algernon Moncrieff
(5,790 posts)....but I suspect the poster also knew that.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)Sure, they would rather a Republican win the general election. But the 1% will favor Hillary in the Democratic primary.
Wall Street does not consider Hillary a threat at all.
Autumn
(45,120 posts)AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Conversely, out of the public eye, her favorability soars.
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/msnbc-hillary-more-shes-public-spotlight-less-public-seems-her
That should make another run for POTUS fun.
Autumn
(45,120 posts)tritsofme
(17,398 posts)Even someone like George W. Bush has increased his popularity markedly since leaving office and no longer being involved in the daily partisan scrum.
There is no doubt Hillary's numbers will come back down to earth as she reengages politically, but she remains the best shot of Democrats to win a third term in the White House.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Not a revelation but it makes running a protracted political campaign a huge problem. Her unfavorables are high right out of the gate.
She was the "best shot" in 2008 too. According to her camp, nobody else could win. It's wasn't a particularly convincing argument then. It's laughable now.
Elizabeth Warren has the big mo. She's lightning in a bottle. She's the best candidate hands down.
wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)People who despise Clinton comfort themselves with two contradictory crutches -
1. Her high ratings are just NAME RECOGNITION
2. The MORE she's out there, the LESS people like her.
Bill and Hillary Clinton remain two of the most investigated and written about people in history. As Bartcop once said, "We've never looked at (anyone) so close in all of history. Elvis, JFK, the Beatles and Jesus Christ combined never had so many scurrilous, untrue,
shit-for-brains lies told about them."
For as the ABC poll said, Hillary's history is a PLUS for her, not a negative.
eridani
(51,907 posts)Not to blow off reproductive rights, but there are lots of other issues.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)What's not to like?
Inevitable as ever.
stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)Algernon Moncrieff
(5,790 posts)Bill Clinton was easily the best President in my lifetime (caveat: too soon to tell with Obama -- I think you have to give it 5 years or so to really see with clarity). I like the fact that Bill would likely have a signifigant role in a Hillary Clinton administration, and I like that she brings experience as both Senator and SecState to the position. I also see her as our best shot at not waking up with President Christie in late January of 2017.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)wyldwolf
(43,869 posts)Liberal_in_LA
(44,397 posts)To see a woman prez
Tommy2Tone
(1,307 posts)It is afterall an "elitist" underground democratic site.
McCamy Taylor
(19,240 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)sus453
(164 posts)I remember a little known thing called "vote your conscience". When I walk into the voting booth, and there is no one in the two major parties who represents my values, should I hold my nose and vote for the lesser of two evils, or should I cast my ballot for a third party who has little chance of winning?
Hillary Clinton is better than the Republicans on social issues, but on almost everything else, she does not represent my values or represent what I see as a way forward for our country. As a senator she enthusiastically voted for the Iraq War and tried to out hawk the Republicans. She only changed her mind when it became politically expedient. She continued this war-mongering as Secretary of State - she supports Israel right or wrong in its subjugation of the Palestinians, she sided with the neo-cons on Iran until that was politically expedient too. Her ties and sympathies with Wall Street, Goldman Sachs, etc, are well-documented, though I'm sure she may veer slightly left to try to forestall a Warren or Sanders candidacies.
She wears the air of inevitability like a badge, both for the nomination and the presidency. But should I or other progressives vote for someone in the primaries who doesn't represent our wishes for the country, or should we vote for someone who will actually fight for what we believe in?
Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks out of both sides of her mouth, and her message depends on which way the wind blows. I won't vote for a Republican, but neither will I vote for someone who betrays my beliefs. An I have a feeling I'm not alone in this.