Why do people distrust Hillary Clinton?

[betsuni]

I just saw a TV news reporter ask two New Hampshire restaurant owners why they thought Hillary wasn't doing well there. One hesitated before slicing a sandwich in half, searching for words. The other finally said, "She's ... not trusted."

Another thing to put in my large sized "I Don't Get It" file. I don't distrust her. What am I missing? You'd think the over two decades of propaganda aimed at mesmerizing me into believing that Hillary is a terrible person would make a dent, but no. I've always thought she was someone you'd go to first if you needed a good lawyer or be on a committee with.

Why do so many people distrust her? Or DO they? All I know is that we're supposed to think so. Surely the media are owned by The Establishment and clearly they relish every fake scandal, gleefully reporting things like Trump farting out that she "is, in a certain way, evil" -- so why should I consider Hillary a puppet of The Establishment?

The lust to see Hillary Clinton as a forked-tongue devil is vulgar. She's human. Or is that The Plan? Humans make mistakes and we can empathize. Like with Bill Clinton! But everybody knows you can't trust Satan.

I have a feeling I'm going to need a bigger "I Don't Get It" file.

[Lunabell]

1. I don't distrust Hillary.

She just seems to flip flop on very big issues. It was only 2013 that she came around to gay marriage. Bernie has been on the bandwagon since the '70's. Sure some say she evolves on the issues, but I say she does whatever is politically expedient.

HRC will have my vote if she wins, but for me until then it is BERNIE! BERNIE! BERNIE!!!!!!

[Cha]

2. "Bernie Sanders Claims He’s a Longtime Champion of Marriage Equality. It’s Just Not True."

But Sanders is not quite the gay rights visionary his defenders would like us to believe. Sanders did oppose DOMA—but purely on states’ rights grounds. And as recently as 2006, Sanders opposed marriage equality for his adopted home state of Vermont. The senator may have evolved earlier than his primary opponents. But the fact remains that, in the critical early days of the modern marriage equality movement, Sanders was neutral at best and hostile at worst.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/10/05/bernie_sanders_on_marriage_equality_he_s_no_longtime_champion.html

Human Rights Campaign Endorses Hillary Clinton for President



http://www.hrc.org/blog/human-rights-campaign-endorses-hillary-clinton-for-president

South Carolina Equality LGBT Organization Endorses Hillary Clinton For President!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/2/7/1481354/-South-Carolina-Equality-LGBT-Organization-Endorses-Hillary-Clinton-For-President





Hillary is going to make an excellent POTUS for all of us.

[betsuni]

3. Thank you so much for facts, Cha!

[Cha]

5. You're welcome.. I think a key point here is that sanders was claiming it and it just isn't

so. Hillary hasn't said she was for it before it came to be and obviously the HRC trusts her on their very important issues. As well as the South Carolina Equality LGBT Organization!

I think those who "don't trust her" have just been listening to too much of the rw propaganda against her propagated by the US M$M.

After all she has been voted the most admired woman in the world for the last 20 years.

betsuni~

[mgmaggiemg]

23. agree ;)

[betsuni]

4. Well, I expect politicians to do politically expedient things, it's part of the job.

Even religious or human rights leaders sometimes have to do that. It doesn't bother me the way it does some others I guess.

[Tommy2Tone]

6. Why are you in the Hillary group?

I come here for Hillary news and not to here Bernie bullshit. I am amazed you are allowed to post this here?

[yallerdawg]

7. The corporate M$M is the big winner!

Over $100 million was spent in advertising in New Hampshire! The M$M wanted a contest - not a coronation - and they have made it so - in both parties! If election campaigns now cost billions, guess who is getting the money? Each and every debate has exceeded all previous primary cycle debate ratings!

Fox News has been bashing Hillary since its inception. Hillary Hate is a 'cottage industry' for three decades.

And I bet most people 44 and under have never heard a good thing about Hillary Clinton in their entire lives!

When was the last time we heard a good thing about Hillary Clinton on a nationally broadcast network?

[uponit7771]

8. Because there have ADMITTEDLY been millions of TAX PAYER dollars spent on the "Dont Trust Hillary"

... meme

[RunInCircles]

9. Clinton Foundation? Anyone!

Too many arm sales to Clinton foundation donors.
Part of a pattern of being for sale.
Sorry I know this is the Hillary group but you asked.

[Cha]

10. Quit spreading misinformation.. no one asked for that.

[fleabiscuit]

16. The name says it all. eom

[Nonhlanhla]

11. Various reasons

I think the primary reason is the decades of right wing smearing of Hillary. A lot of the older Democrats don't fall for that, because they know the history, but younger Democrats as well as people who have never really been into Dem politics until now, take it as fact. When the Benghazi thing started, I knew right away that this was all pre-emptive strike against Hillary.

Secondly, gender. There is an ancient distrust of women who seek power. This goes back centuries and is part of the Western world's cultural legacy. It is slowly fading, but there is still a lot of knee-jerk reaction to women who seek power. A lot of this is underlying and unexamined. I'll give a race analogy: there are tests that see how people associate different races with animals, and those tests often reveal shocking results with regards to how black people are viewed (I remember a very interesting session on this by Philip Atiba Goff, who does important research on issues of police brutality and unexamined prejudice). People are very naive when they think that things like racism and sexism are just on the surface, and as long as you don't feel racist or sexist you are not. It's just not that simple.

Finally, Hillary herself. She has not flip-flopped nearly as much as Bernie's people suggest, but she has at times changed her position. Some of that is inevitable, and a lot of it was positive, e.g., that time when she opposed a bankruptcy bill after learning how it would harm women and children. But at other times it was less positive. Add to that her Iraq vote, which disappointed many liberals, myself included. Now, I do think these positions are misrepresented severely by the Bernie campaign (which is one of the most underhandedly negative campaigns I've seen in quite a while, since it appears as if Bernie's hands are clean, while the whisper campaign against Hillary's integrity is waged under the surface). But she did, unfortunately, give them some ammunition to work with. I think her Iraq decision is particularly misrepresented, since even a brief analysis shows that she was in fact not ra-ra about the war. But the fact that she did not see through the Bush administration is still a disappointment.

To be a Hillary supporter therefore requires not buying into the right wing manufactured image of her, to not have underlying knee-jerk reactions to an older woman seeking power, and to have a more nuanced perspective on her positions than is often possible during a heated campaign. Not all of Hillary's detractors necessarily oppose her for all these reasons, but I think we can see quite a lot of it in some responses to her. The problem is that she cannot really address #2 in my list, because then she is accused of "playing the gender card." And #1 and #3 seem to reinforce each other.

So we've got our work cut out for ourselves.

[casperthegm]

12. I'm not here to bash, just answer your question regarding distrust

I can only answer for myself but here are a number of reasons I don't care for her/distrust her;

Her position on Keystone (or lack of one). She waited until the same week that Obama made his decision before announcing where she stood. That's not standing up for the environment. That's politics.

Wall Street money. Whether it's impression or reality, it's there and it can't help but make me wonder. Generally speaking, it's hard to imagine the banks and Wall Street throwing all of that money at her and saying "here you go, we don't expect anything in return." And if you haven't checked out the youtube video of Elizabeth Warren vs Hillary Clinton I recommend you do so.

Her opposition to Glass Stegall. Though I do recall her telling the banks to "cut it out." Thanks Hillary.

Her Iraq vote. You may be sick of hearing about it but it's a big deal. It was poor judgement and lack of foresight. Sanders saw that it would destabilize the region. And it did. Now we not have the legacy of the Iraq war, we have the current ISIS situation.

Speaking of that, there is the no-fly zone proposal. Another poor foreign policy decision. What happens when Russian jets cross that line? You have to be prepared for that and I don't see it.

The email and server investigation by the FBI. Sorry, it's real. It very well could end up being nothing in the end, but what if it's not? What if it drags on until the general election and then she gets indicted? Then you end up with a republican in the White House.

Gay marriage. You can see how she has flip flopped over the years, as confirmed via politifact. Another change based on the political winds.

All of this and more have led me to distrust her judgement and her authenticity.

[treestar]

14. Disagreement I see

but no reason for "distrust." Unless you distrust those who disagree with you on principle. Some people think that others are immoral if they don't agree.

I may not agree with her but think she did what she thought best, which is not a reason to "distrust" her unless I think others must always agree with me and to do otherwise is dishonest.

[romana]

15. Warren

The Warren video you cite doesn't tell the whole story on that. This blogger provides more detail and context to that vote: https://medium.com/@zacharyleven/the-case-for-hillary-3564233d524f#.eninm3owq

[BlueCaliDem]

18. See? You can write all that about Hillary in the Hillary Clinton Group, and NO ONE has

alerted on you and hidden your post. Do the same with regard to Bernie Sanders, and your post is alerted AND hidden because, you know, in a democracy censorship is acceptable - well, in a Sanders democracy, that is.

I can give you a list that would counter each and every one of your points, but you've already bought into the GOP-favoring U.S. media narrative and taken on a very non-liberal position not to dig a little deeper when things are being reported by said GOP-favoring U.S. media. Liberals do nuance, and that would require digging deeper than what you're fed by the U.S. media. That's why I'm supporting Hillary Clinton, not Sanders. IF the vetting should start with him (and I don't see it happening) people would be shocked at what a weak candidate Sanders really is.

[uponit7771]

20. Sounds like you disagree with her positions but not where's she's been a Bush level liar on some

... things.

[treestar]

13. They don't

or she would not be admired/popular. This is simply not true, but the right wing and some of the left want it to be true and try to make it so by repetition. Plenty of Americans are uninformed enough to think that what they hear over and over again must be so.

[BlueCaliDem]

17. If Bernie got the same in-depth bashing through tens of millions of dollars as Hillary Clinton gets

and still gets today, people would not only distrust him, they'd dislike him immensely.

The GOP, Rove, and pro-GOP media (all American media except for a few blogs) have gone to the greatest lengths to demonize Hillary Clinton because she's tough,woman - and that's a no-no in a male-chauvinistic society where men are still seen as the preferred gender.

Democrats and Liberals should NOT allow themselves to believe the focus-group tested RW-smears launched at Hillary Clinton without making a comparable case against her opponents in order to level the playing field. Currently, the playing field is lopsided. Thanks to PoC - the true base of the Democratic Party that saved President Obama in his re-election bid - equilibrium will be restored.

When she said in that last debate that Rove is spending millions of dollars of negative advertising against her in New Hampshire, not a single journalist did anything with that. Not a single person in the media asked if they were doing the same against Sanders, not even Sanders. Clearly, we know who the big-wigs in media want to run their candidate - most likely Jeb Bush - against, and it ain't Hillary.

[treestar]

25. So true, and it's become "cool" to say all politicians can't be trusted

and we have to wonder why this poll is even conducted - it is like the purpose is to suggest there is some reason not to trust her. And have any such polls been even taken on the others? Where's the poll on whether Bernie, etc. are trustworthy?

[BlueCaliDem]

32. Well, I'm no sheep and I refuse to bleat with the others.

No other presidential candidate has been subjected to that stupid poll, except Hillary Clinton. Why? Why put out a poll day after day that they've conducted exclusively on the only woman running for president? If we need proof that the media is in cahoots with the GOP there you have it: not a single Republican was subjected to a poll like that. And Bernie's been completely ignored. Now that he's won New Hampshire handily, I'd like to see what kind of vetting he gets since he's currently ahead of Hillary Clinton in delegates. Dollars to donuts, they will continue to ignore him.

[handmade34]

19. the Republicans

have been very cunning in their memes against Hillary and working on the psyche of the voting public... too many people "mistrust" Hillary because it has been repeated so many times, not because they have facts to back it up

[pandr32]

21. They don't trust her, yet give everyone else a pass...

Go figure!

[mgmaggiemg]

22. yep....

I have a big one as well...

[wysi]

24. The more than 25 years of right wing lies...

... aimed directly at taking down the Clintons. Lots of them get repeated here these days.

[NiteOwl1]

26. Let me count the ways....

There are several reasons...

NAFTA & GATT - Undermining US Workers.

Glass-Steagal repeal (which allowed Wall Street to takeover the whole financial sector and destroyed the safety of our banking system... and ultimately lead to the financial collapse). Yes... Bill could have prevented it.

Pure oppotunism. Hillary is pure chameleon... which we'll see more of in the weeks ahead.

The Clintons are globalists and deeply involved in policies that are undermining the middle class.... regardless of what they say.
CFR / Trilateral / Bilderberg members.

Undermining national sovereignty.

Is that enough for a start.

And, somehow, we're supposed to believe that she really supports the middle class..

[betsuni]

27. No. Please pack your knives and go.

[NiteOwl1]

28. The truth is...

The truth. Hurt or not. That is the history... and those are the facts. I wish it were otherwise.

[UtahLib]

30. I see you have your run of the mill RW and CT talking

points memorized. Run back to the litter box now and crow about invading the Hillary group like the big shot you think you are.

[NiteOwl1]

33. Right.... wrong

You're way off the mark. RW.... if you knew me you would know better. But I don't delude myself or wear rose colored glasses and I don't seek answers in soundbites or what the MSM tells, and does not tell us.


Gatt... Nafta... Glass-Steagall are absolute truths... and all products of the Clinton years (did I mention that I voted for him twice). They have done tremendous damage to the working class and eroded our national sovereignty. In the case of G-S, it's repeal nearly took down our economy and financial system and, due to the stranglehold of Wall Street over the government, it has not been replaced, leaving us subject to an even greater threat in future. As to the trade agreements, the TPP was to be the next step, but there is massive blowback that is getting in the way now. Research for yourself, seek truth and you will find it.

And the Clintons are clearly globalists... and members of the organizations noted. Again... irrefutable.

[BlueCaliDem]

31. Uh oh...

[Cha]

35. Most of the Unions are supporting Hillary. HRC and PP are supporting Hillary. Later today

the CBC is endorsing Hillary.

AG Holder has endorsed Hillary.. 170 African American Women Leaders are going to South Carolina to knock on doors and make phone calls for Hillary.

Most all of the Dem Reps and Senators are supporting Hillary. They've had years of experience with both of them and they choose Hillary Clinton.

Don't even think about saying "#establishment".. BS called HRC and PP establishment.. and as Daniel Kushner wrote..

"Again and again, when the Sanders campaign learns of these moves, the emphasis is on their being parts of the establishment. And they are parts of an establishment. But if this establishment is the enemy, then on whose side is he?"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-kushner/the-fetishization-of-not-knowing-bernie-sanders_b_9195124.html

[Lil Missy]

29. 20 +++ years of smears by the right-wing machine

Now they don't have to work at it - left wing purists do it for them.