DU is proof

[fadedrose]

My neighbors are Republicans and hate HRC.

My acquaintances are mostly Democrats and they don't like HRC.

The number of people here at DU who can't stand her is proof that she is just too polarizing. In real life, I know of no one who cares for her.

There is no other candidate that draws the ire that HRC does. And it's not because she's, in her words, "ahead." We're just very suspicious of her motives and intentions and the people she's been hanging with.

She's wrong for the time - too much baggage. Enough of the Bush family and enough of the Clintons. Let's move on already.

[babylonsister]

1. Duck and cover, fadedrose, but welcome! Clinton has many

fans on the DU, but not everyone is a fan here.

[CitizenLeft]

2. I'm not arguing any point whatsoever...

...LOL. I try to stay out of these primary wars. However... I DO know people who like her, and are rooting for her. Some are Democrats... but most are solid independents who can't wait to vote for her. The one thing they all have in common is that they do NOT visit political message boards, watch political punditfests, nor listen to talk radio, left or right, or even watch Real Time/Maher. They are average fairly-informed citizens who are not political junkies. And they like her.

DU is not representative of the Democratic party, nor of the electorate. We are activists, and are much further to the left than the "average" person. Anyone asking where her support is has to look outside this medium. Her support is there.

[fadedrose]

3. Truthfully, what do they like about her?

[CitizenLeft]

5. that's a good question

First of all, they are all women - I'm counting now, in my head, the people I'm talking about. I count eight without thinking too hard about it or even trying to list them. They like her because (1) she rode out Monicagate (2) she's tough and (3) they want to see a woman succeed. Two of them were Republicans before Bush. One of them, an ex-Republican, is aggressively boisterously pacifist, and does not see the "warmongering" that she is accused of. She didn't like the Iran vote, but doesn't see her as an obstacle to peace (I don't either - I believe she's doing just what they say - angling for moderates and disaffected Republicans... and it's working, in my opinion).

To be honest, I don't ask them, I just let them talk because I feel neutral about her. For those who give a reason, see above. For those who don't? Bottom line, they just like her.

[fadedrose]

6. In a round-about way, I think you just said that ....

short people, especially men, are supporting Kucinich. :)

Works for me.

[CitizenLeft]

7. LOL!

:hi:

[Mojorabbit]

10. The few people I have met who like her

think she is for single payer universal health care. This worrys me as if she wins there is going to be some really pissed off people over this.

[bvar22]

81. I've run in to THAT false belief too.

Others believe that she will bring The Troops home.
Many are unaware that she will continue combat missions in Iraq.

[loudsue]

48. So how well-informed could they possibly be?

"The one thing they all have in common is that they do NOT visit political message boards, watch political punditfests, nor listen to talk radio, left or right, or even watch Real Time/Maher. They are average fairly-informed citizens who are not political junkies."

Do they only read her books? The demographic you describe IS Hillary's base. They don't know shit about how much damage she'll do. Hell, they don't even know what's going on.

:kick:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

89. Since You Are Implying Hillary Supporters Are Dumb

B.S.- Social Science

M.A- Political Science

Did thirty six hours of post graduate work at the Florida State University. Taught Introduction To Political Science Or American Government (POS 101) at the community college level...I have two friends, one's an appellate attorney, the other is a trial attorney who has won several eight figure verdicts... They are supporting Hillary...

It's always charming (sic) when we imply or infer those who disagree with us are idiots...

[fadedrose]

91. Sounds like they're rich

8 figure settlements, eh?

That's what we've been trying to tell you - Hillary is not the poor or average person's candidate. She's with the rich and connected now. I guess your buds don't want a tax increase and know who will be buttering their bread.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

99. Ha Ha Ha

They support Hillary because they believe she's the most qualified...

If they were worried about tax burdens they would be Rethuglicans... But that would go against being lawyers...

[PurityOfEssence]

112. George W. Bush has an M.F.A. from Harvard

Educational or financial attainment is not the same as intelligence; often, these are zealously sought and hidden behind by the mediocre or worse as sheer compensation.

It IS tiresome, however, to dismiss all of one's opponents as dolts; there are many reasons why people support various positions or candidates. What's WORSE--and more prevalent--is the tiresome human inability to see any mixture of traits whatsoever, and the need to attribute all failings to opponents and all admirable characteristics to allies.

People crave simplicity, yet little exists; no wonder so many are at such odds with the world: they have an assumption that simply doesn't fit reality...

[Timefortruth]

90. You are right,

some people like her, no doubt about it.

She is also polarizing, but division is the modern recipe for success.

[creeksneakers2]

107. Hillary isn't polarizing

Hillary and Bill are centrists and consensus style politicians. The people on the left don't like her because she "triangulates",compromises too much. The Clintons run negative attacks as tactics but they aren't part of their overall strategy.

The right wing started off in early '92 telling terrible lies about Hillary. They said she had a plan for children to sue their parents. They said she was a witch who called Eleanor Roosevelt back in a seance. They said she had a hardcore socialist agenda and she'd have people dying in hospital emergency rooms waiting for treatment. They hated her without restraint.

The right wing over time convinced more and more of the public of their characterization of Hillary. Clinton bashing was a popular media sport in the 90s. Whenever Hillary was mentioned, it was always with innuendo about her being guilty of something. They said she took FBI files of her opponents when that was nothing but trash.

If Hillary does something leftists like she's accused of trying to shore up her base. If Hillary does something moderates like she's accused of trying to live down her reputation as a socialist maniac. If Hillary does something the right wing likes she's flip flopping.

Almost half of America is convinced by these repeated characterizations. Few defend Hillary, because they know they'll be attacked without mercy by the right wing.

I'd say the right wing and the people who are stirring up the Hillary hatred are the ones who are polarizing.

[PurityOfEssence]

115. That makes so little sense one could almost call it "anti-sense"

You state right there many of the dynamics by which she accrues enemies, yet claim that she doesn't do anything of the sort. What do you think "polarizing" is?

By sucking up to the conservatives for years upon years, the Clintons have not really accomplished their task: the right still hates them. Worse, many of the left see them for what they are: calculated, extreme maneuverers.

She's an ultra-moderate, yet even many in the middle don't like her. How'd she do that? I guess even fence-sitters don't like people who set up housekeeping atop fences, especially when they consistently deny it to people on either side of the palings.

Yes, she's got a great base of support among women, among some moderate leftists fixated on rubbing the reactionaries' noses in their antics of the 90s by forcing another Clinton on them, among suckers who actually think she's anything but a somewhat right-of center centrist moderate corporatist, and that's about it. The left doesn't like her, the right HATES her. People who dislike evasiveness can't stand her. There are probably more misogynists out there than we'd all like to believe, although I think the country is perfectly ready to elect a women to the presidency.

Your post makes no sense whatsoever. She's incredibly polarizing. Her actions and inactions have rankled many people from many different political footings, and the carousel is creaking under the sheer weight of the baggage.

It's not the big "them" that did this to her, at least not completely. Yes, she has been demonized, but it's stuck. Her actions and her oscillation between a flinty-harsh and glowingly warm persona have driven many to the point of exasperation.

[Maat]

108. I believe that you hit the nail on the head, CitizenLeft!

And welcome to DU!

And, having a Master's Degree and a J.D. (law degree, Juris Doctor), and being no slouch in the been-in-school-forever department, I happen to believe that DUers are better educated than most!

[pinto]

4. Spirited debate, interesting primary, and some good choices on our side.

Good to see they are not a lock step series of wax dummies, as we've seen in the (R) debates.

[CyberPieHole]

8. Yeah. DU reflects the U.S. electorate...

The polls are all wrong. Anecdotal evidence is proof positive.:crazy:

[CoffeeCat]

67. Every time someone brings up the point...

...that they barely know anyone who supports Clinton--people scream
that this is invalid because it's "anecdotal."

Obviously, one persons' experience does not equal the views of an
entire nation.

However, hundreds of DUers say this same thing. Most of us do not
know anyone who supports Hillary. I am involved in our local Dem
group. No one likes her. I've seen Dems roll their eyes and talk
about her in disparaging ways. There's no other candidate that
sparks so much disgust from within the party.

Furthermore, check out other messageboards and blogs. They are filled
with many people wondering where the real-life Hillary supporters are.

Many, many Democrats are speaking out against her--with great passion.
I've never seen anything like this inside our own party. Usually
people tout their own candidate, but this year there are many Dems
who speak out against Hillary and communicate a very strong dislike
of her--and her warmongering, corporatist votes and behavior.

[fadedrose]

68. "Speaking out against"

It wasn't easy for me to say anything bad about Hillary at first.

After all, she's a woman, I like(d) Bill, she's a Democrat (sort of), and it made me beel a bit traitorous.

I can't figure out why so many people are supporting her publically, like Clark, Vilsack (who dropped out and I thought would be good) and some others. What is she promising or threatening?

Your post takes in my opinions pretty much.

[bvar22]

82. former Chairman of the DLC Tom Vilsack

will continue to support the current Darling of the DLC, much like Hillary can count on support from former DLC Chairman Joe Lieberman.



Clark believes in expanding the military to WIN the "War on Terror".
So does Hillary.

[asdjrocky]

111. They are both hawks.

[loudsue]

92. Thank you, Two Sparkles! Bingo!

The only candidate I've ever seen come close to the dislike people have for Hillary was when Joe Lieberman was announced as Gore's running mate. Nobody liked him. When he ran for president last year, same thing. People just shook their heads.

Why do people keep pushing her? I KNOW her campaign has people on the big message boards trying to push her, and there MAY even be some sincere supporters from the general population. I've just never met one, and none of the people I've asked have ever met a Hillary supporter.

It's just too upsetting to think what all this means.

[Godhumor]

132. The only way sampling is valid is if it is random

DU, your local group, or other, by fashion, non-random samples will not lead to valid conclusions about the population.

[LSK]

70. maybe because she has superior name recognition

So when a poller calls Joe Nobody who doesnt follow any of this and rambles off names, Joe Nobody actually heard of Hillary Clinton versus the others?

[Truth2Tell]

93. Ding Ding Ding!

Wasn't she Bill Clinton's wife??!!!

I just loved that jovial rascal!

[sampsonblk]

9. Welcome to DU, fadedrose

We have been through this subject quite a few times here. Clinton is polarizing because the GOP hates her. Not because of anything she's done. I've met people who absolutely hate John Kerry. Jimmy Carter. FDR. Walter Mondale. Harry Truman. The list goes on.

This is GOP politics. We can't allow them to pick our nominee. And you can best believe that whoever gets the nomination is going to be the next great villain of the right wing. Its how they operate.

[fadedrose]

11. I am very unconfortable

with the number of right wingers who seem to support HRC.

I am confused as to whether they want her to take the nomination because they KNOW they could beat her in the election, or even worse, the KNOW she will play ball with them if she wins the election.

Drug companies, corporations, lots of lobbists from what I hear - supporting her - a person has to be a fool just to let this stuff pass without even thinking about it.

[AntiFascist]

12. I don't think the far left "hates" Hillary in the same way as the GOP....

I would support her in a second if she would abandon the DLC's foreign policy strategy and outline a radically new approach to dealing with the Middle East and the rest of the world. But instead she feels its just a simple matter of establishing a broader coalition and using sticks and carrots. No wonder she would prefer to talk about universal health care.

[Usrename]

13. She would pardon all of Bush's crimes.

There wouldn't be any more justice if she won than if the Republicans were in the White House. What's the difference?

Is she more tolerant of gays or something? Not. I sure don't see the appeal. She doesn't even know most of think we're in a crisis. What with people being detained for five years without charges, extraordinary renditions as policy, along with an unapologetic torture regimen.

I just see silence on all of these kinds of issues as complicity. It's difficult to see it any other way.

Chris Floyd says it better than anyone else I have seen so far:

>

"At his Harper's blog, Scott Horton demonstrates how the architects of George W. Bush's filthy torture regimen are now holding positions that allow them to protect themselves and their masters from the legal consequences of their actions."

>

"... The Democratic nominee looks certain to be Hillary Clinton -- whose husband buried a whole boatload of previous Bush crimes after he took office in 1993, as Robert Parry reports in his book, Secrecy and Privilege. If Clinton I had allowed justice to pursue the various Bush I scandals to the end, we would have been spared the hideous, murderous farce of Bush II's reign. The name of Bush would have been so rightly tainted that L'il Pretzel would never have gotten anywhere near close enough to steal the 2000 election. Is there anyone who believes that Clinton II would pursue Bush II's manifold crimes any more diligently than her husband?"

>

"No mainstream Democrat will ever allow full-fledged criminal investigations and prosecutions of Bush II officials for torture and the war crime of military aggression. You know and I know that's not going to happen. We will get, at most, some soaring rhetoric about "healing national wounds" and "coming together again" and "moving on." (With the outside possibility of a few small fry being offered up as sacrifices, to let the Dem president preen as the "restorer of the rule of law" -- and also purge the Republicans, and Bush, of the worst taint: "Hey, it was a few bad apples, and now they're gone. We've got a clean slate!")"

>

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php...

DU discussion:http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

At least some of the dillusions are now starting to be shattered. We are in a real mess.

[sampsonblk]

16. I am with you on that. Very unfortunate

The thought of that makes me mad. But I think that's where we are headed. I think Hillary Clinton will be a breath of fresh air, and a lot of things that have been neglected will be front and center again. But I agree that the likelihood of Bush's crimes being investigated is nil of Hillary Clinton wins. Very unfortunate.

[tavalon]

20. You aren't under the impression that we get to pick our nominee, are you?

One of the reasons I'm pretty much staying out of the primary wars is because short of a surprise (in the form of Gore), the "nominee" has already been anointed. It's done, finished. That pisses me off too much to get involved in this gameplaying.

On edit: I'm not particularly upset about the who of it, but rather than transparency of it. I am not stupid and I don't like that they so obviously think I am. They clearly think they don't have to try very hard to convince me and others that this is a race and that infuriates me.

[FatDave]

36. You may yet be surprised

I would not be at all surprised if Iowa breaks all expectations, and sets up a different candidate going into NH. Then again, I would not be surprised if that didn't happen. But I don't think it's anywhere near the done deal the media wants it to be.

[wiley]

14. You can move on. I don't hate HRC, nor do my neighbors.

[cali]

15. when, oh when, are people going to grasp the simple

concept that personal anecdotes about not knowing anyone who supports a candidate, don't cut the proverbial mustard? It's boggles the mind that anyone could think this means anything that can be extrapolated onto the larger voting public. Anecdotal evidence: I know no one supporting Clinton. Virtually everyone I know supports Kucinich, but we all realize that that means nothing as far as the the race goes in the real world. Furthermore, using DU as proof of how rank and file dems feel, is foolish to the nth degree. We aren't representative of the party rank and file.

[wyldwolf]

22. can I k&R your reply?

[Rockholm]

31. I have no idea who my neighbors are supporting.

As for my friends and co-workers, we talk politics a bunch. We discuss our hatred of most republicans. We do not however, bash DEMOCRATS. We discuss that there are pros and cons for each and every candidate. No mud slinging and no ganging up for or against any of them. We are still making up our minds.

Here in Massachusetts, we are next to NH so we get to see many commercials for the candidates on both sides. We get to chuckle and groan when we see fake as shit Mittens on the screen. Rudy is a pig. McCain is an ass.

I agree with you Cali. Red herrings do us no good.

[Marrah_G]

33. I'm in Mass also

My experience sounds much like yours. The Dem bashing I see here (from all sides) still manages to shock me.

About Mittens.....how the hell can anyone in NH actually like that guy. They have the same news stations we do. They know what a piece of shit he is....Bleh.

[Rockholm]

38. The national media is propping him up.

If that POS is elected, I am going to throw up. Then move out.

[Sparkly]

34. Another favorite: "Well, *I* have never been polled."

:rofl:

[Cameron27]

37. Thank you

[silverojo]

17. K&R

And in total agreement.

[oasis]

18. Whenever I need to prove anything, I immediately consult the experts at DU.

:eyes:

[DCKit]

26. Someone agree with your position...

Or do you automatically switch over the the opposite side?

Bwahahahahaha!!

[bob4460]

19. IF HRC wins we WILL have the repug for pres n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

24. She Would Kick The Rethuglican's Ass The Way She Kicked Obama's And Edwards' Ass

DSB

[cali]

25. why do people labor under the delusion that they have a crystal

ball? All you're doing is demonstrating base ignorance. Sure she can win. Any of the dems running can win. The republican party is in meltdown. Fewer and few of the voting public identify with the party. See the exhaustive and recent Pew report/poll, to gain a modicum of understanding about this. The pukes aren't raising enough money by individual candidates, or on a national and state level, to steal the election. Our candidate needs the states Kerry won and Ohio (which Kerry actually won). The scene in Ohio today is radically different from 2004. It's no longer in the grasp of the pukes. No Blackwell as Secretary of State to screw dem voters with shortages of voting machines in key dem precincts. The fundies are split and the repuke party itself is in danger of doing the same. I could go on but why bother? Absolutists rarely have the ability to look at actual facts and base their prognostications on them.

[tomg]

130. Cali, I entirely agree that Clinton can win.

In fact, should she be the nominee, she will win, as will any of the Dem nominees ( although Dems do have a tendency to form circular firing squads whereby they manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, but that is a very different issue. Question: what is the one thing uniting all democrats. Answer: that they all disagree with each other).

Still, I think that there are reasons that the Republicans need her to be the Democratic nominee for their own survival. The dems next year could run the table - too many Republicans in Senate are vulnerable or bailing out, and in the House the Dems could really take over big time. The Republicans need anything to stop the complete wipeout. It could make the Goldwater campaign look like a victory. Hillary gets their fundamentalist base going, and they will work hard against her. In fact, their irrational hatred of all things Clinton is about the only thing keeping that group even moderately in line with the Republican Party. At the same time, like many in our base I'll vote for her, as will everyone I know. But we won't go door to door.

The impact, then, could make itself felt in local, statewide and Congressional races. If the Republicans go with someone like a Huckabee/ Romney team, even though they could never win, a few close Representative races go the other way to the Republicans, an R. senator is saved, a governorship we should have gotten is down.

This isn't an argument against her being the nominee ( it could be seen as an argument against the base becoming complacent or purist). It is, though, a concern I have, and depending on the Republican nominee, it is something we need to consider. Of course if Guiliani is the Republican nominee, none of the above is a concern, and the Republicans are so screwed.

[avrdream]

29. Come back and talk to us when you have a star, mate.

Until then, you don't speak for DU.

(Apologizing ahead of time for those legitimate DU'ers who can't afford to donate. Doesn't matter - we know you care about Dems.)

[loudsue]

94. That's TOTAL bullshit!! You're putting down someone who doesn't have a STAR???

Like their opinion doesn't count? Democrats don't do that shit. I've had a star since 2002. And I second what the previous poster said: If we get Hillary, we WILL HAVE ELECTED ANOTHER REPUBLICAN.

[avrdream]

113. Now YOU I'll listen to.

I'm just fed up with people coming to DU and stirring shit up when they can't even be bothered to donate even $5.00.

My latest standard. You have yours and I have mine. We will disagree on both the star and Hillary and that's that. I can't change you and you can't change me.

[cali]

133. What foolishness

she's not a republican. it's just childish to insist she is.

[Tactical Progressive]

21. That's a fantastic endorsement for Hillary as President

Your "neighbors are Republicans and hate HRC."

I can't think of a single thing, not one single thing - policy statements, past records, job experience, personal histories, whatever -that I think is a better qualifier of who should be President, than that statement.

Because there is simply no better representation of what is 'good' than what Republicans don't like.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

102. bull. they just hate her because she's clinton's wife...

it has nothing to do with her actual policies.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

23. DU Is To Rank And File Democrats What The Hell's Angels Are To Motorcyle Enthusiasts

DSB

[DangerDave921]

42. ROFL

Best description EVER of this site. Perfect. :)


Look, I know folks in CT who are life-long dems who voted for Lieberman last time around. So the letter "D" does not mean progressive, green, or anything other than democrat.

[watercolors]

44. You got that right, good analogy!

nt

[Lilith Velkor]

50. Yyyup.

[LoZoccolo]

51. lol

:thumbsup:

[goodgd_yall]

60. Good one!

[goodgd_yall]

61. You're going to win a DUZY for that one. n/t

[cobalt1999]

75. LOL. I love the analogy.

[wyldwolf]

27. DU is proof - the sequel

My neighbors are Democrats and love HRC.

My acquaintances are mostly Democrats and they like HRC.

The number of people here at DU who can't stand her is proof that she will be the nominee. The loudest voices on DU have a track record of opposing the one who eventually is the nominee. In real life, I know plenty who care for her.

There is no other candidate that draws the attention that HRC does. And it's because most people I know want to vote for her. We're just very impressed with her motives and intentions and the people she's been hanging with.

She's right for the time. Enough of the amateur wannabe leaders. Let's move on to HRC.

[fadedrose]

62. Ya, but

A lot of us can't figure out what her motives and intentions are. She never answers a direct question with a plain answer. What positions on what issues does she have that you really like and would defend?

Too many one-liners thought up by people like Carville...

[Bongo Prophet]

74. Can you please NOT insult the other "wannabe leaders"? It will HELP Hillary.

Please, Wyldwolf. I understand her qualities that people like, and like myself. I have pros and cons on ALL the candidates. But the insults thrown will make it harder to pull in those on the edges. Personal insults, especially of the kind and to the degree with which we see here, leave deep scars.

If Hillary is the nom, I will be trying to persuade those on the margins to consider the bigger picture, to compare their choices, and make the decision to back the FAR BETTER one. In other words, we will be ALLIES. OUR job will be easier if there is less unnecessary scarring.

this is NOT to say I don't think you should DEFEND your candidate, and push back when necessary. To the contrary! Some of the anti-Hillary stuff is so stupid it hurts, and some is policy disagreement, legit or not. Often it seems you insult ALL of DUers in similar fashion to those who dismiss ALL Dems for the sins of a subset of the larger group. Maybe you don't care, maybe you do and this is just the "heat of the battle" talk. Either way, I trust you are sincere in your position of HRC as the best candidate, and want to see her in the WH, rather than a Guiliani or whatever.

The attacks on HRC can have a backlash effect, and I would suggest you leverage that with a more classy and judo like approach. More minds will be changed at this point onward with that strategy than the "you guys are all LOSERS" style that will make you look like sore winners in the end.

This is just an honest request and suggestion, and I hope you see some wisdom in it - at least enough to consider.
We HAVE to beat the GOP and need EVERY vote we can get to REPUDIATE the neocon/GOP/bush philosophy of Norquist-style (non)government. That is the most important thing of all.
I am SURE we agree on that.

Peace and respect
b prophet

[loudsue]

95. And the rank & file on DU have been ABSOLUTELY CORRECT

about 99.9% of the things we've felt strongly about:

1) The war in Iraq

2) The crooked goings on of the Justice Dept.

3) The electronic voting machines

4) Joe LIEberman

5) Valerie Plame

You name it, and we're usually WAY ahead of the curve.

And we're calling this one, too. A Hillary presidency will be bush lite.

[Perry Logan]

28. On the contrary. I think people are sick of anti-Clinton shit.

The louder the Hillary-haters bleat, the better she does.

[xiamiam]

41. not true...do you see biden haters?edwards haters? kucinich haters?

a big fat no...but there are an awful lot of hillary haters as you say..wonder why?

[Silent3]

138. Because she's the one clear obstacle in the way of any non-Clinton candidate?

If you want Obama or Edwards or Kucinich or Biden or Dodd or Richardson or Gravel to win, you probably "hate" Hillary because you view her as the chief rival in the way of your candidate reaching the top.

This has much less to do with Clinton's policies or voting record or anything else other than a tacit admission that she's the one your guy would have to beat for your guy to win.

[NoPasaran]

30. Oh jeez

Nobody Likes Hillary Post # 32,482

Enough of this tired crap.

Let's move on already.

[Arugula Latte]

40. It's not exactly an insignificant detail.

If a huge, significant chunk of the electorate on BOTH sides despises our supposed candidate -- and not only despises, gets actively worked up about her in a negative sense -- that ain't a minor problem that can just be brushed away.

[Sparkly]

32. "suspicious"

I find it so interesting the word "suspicious" comes up around the Clintons so often. There indeed WAS, and no doubt IS, a "vast rightwing conspiracy" that began chasing "suspicions" about them more than 15 years ago, along with constantly drilling at the "Everybody hates Hillary" thing.

Loads of investigations later, it's clear none of these sinister "suspicions" panned out, but the odor of the Arkansas Project et al persists. And so does the "can't stand her, polarizing, baggage" stuff.

Now obviously, some people don't like her -- you can say that about any candidate. But to the extent that it seems people parrot the exact same lines we've heard from the rightwing for all these years, it doesn't seem based on much beyond what Stephen Colbert calls "the gut." Which is to say it's based on nothing except a comfort level with the script.

[DangerDave921]

43. Monica

That whole thing with Monica was real, and not created by any RW conspiracy. So I have to give them that one.

[oasis]

54. The "Monica thing" was a private matter that was sniffed out by right winger, Lucianne Goldberg and

her agent Linda Tripp.

[DangerDave921]

66. I know

But you said none of the suspicions panned out. That one kinda did.

All the whitewater, travel gate, file gate, billing records, etc. -- Ancient History and totally sham attacks.

[oasis]

69. The right wingers "conspired" to make public the Clinton/Monica relationship. That's my point.

BTW, I said nothing about "suspiciaons panning out". You must be refering to another poster.

[creeksneakers2]

109. Monica was the one thing they ever had anything right about

But even on Monica the right told lies. Remember the talking points memo? Supposedly Clinton had his lawyers set up a script for Monica Lewinsky to use. They brought up a bunch of BS like that.

[Freddie Stubbs]

35. If no one likes her, then she will lose the primaries by a very large margin

But you know that isn't going to happen.

[ihavenobias]

46. The Problem With That Is

The media frames it as 'the candidate who raises the most money is the best candidate' when it's completely untrue.

If we had publicly funded elections, then yes, maybe.

Also, people assume their getting Bill Clinton back and or they have fond memories of things being better in the 90's (of course, and also of course compared to how awful it's been post 2000). At the very least her name recognition is enormous.

But yes, she does have the highest *unfavorability* rating of any candidate. She's also raised the most special interest money, by far, of any candidate.

Can you trust her to reform health care for the benefit of most Americans when she's taken more money from the health care industry than any other candidate, democrat *or* republican?

How about her funding from the defense industry and what I'm sure is her totally unrelated position on Iran...

[fadedrose]

47. Also

You forgot to mention that she appears to be in no hurry to get us out of Iraq, no small matter.

Then again, there's that voice of hers.....gees, without piling on all the real, good, legitimate reasons why many of us don't want her as a candidate, it should be enough in itself to discourage anyone with ears from voting for her.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

86. I Like Her Voice

It makes me hawt (sic)

Can we be more shallow?

[fadedrose]

87. I could be

if I tried harder. will do my best.

[cali]

134. I don't like her voice

so the fuck what? could you possibly be any smaller? Keep it up and you'll disappear altogether.

[fadedrose]

137. Woke up this morning

"so the fuck what? could you possibly be any smaller? Keep it up and you'll disappear altogether."


Woke up this morning....

and found I'd been THREATENED by Tony Soprano or Paulie Walnuts. Oooo.
Either cali is so desparate he had to resort to the junk above or he's been kidnapped (or disappeared :)) The cali I know and love is a bit arrogant, but he's very smooth, articulate, seems educated, sophisticated, debonair, suave, refined and has an unlimited vocabulary. He called me obtuse and I don't even know what it means (what a waste). He could not have written the crude raunchy post above, and even journaled it. Na, couldn't happen. Bring'em back, Tony.

Hope the mob leaves us both alone. DU has enough problems.

[loudsue]

97. You're forgetting who owns & programs the voting machines. nt

[Rowdyboy]

39. My neighbors are Republicans and hate gays....some of my Democratic acquaintances

don't like gays. Many people at DU think we're too polarizing.

Yet we hang in there and we will overcome all the incredible bullshit the ignorant throw at us. I expect she'll do the same because she's tough too.

[Hydra]

45. I like Hillary as a person

But I dislike her political stances.

In my advocacy against the war, I've found some commonalities among the Dems I've talked to who support her:

1. They like that she's a woman, and a strong one at that(I like that point)
2. They don't know the specifics about her stances- they think she's anti-war and for the equivalent of single payer universal health care
3. They refuse to believe the evidence otherwise...even her own press releases

In short, they believe in her, and believe she will be our savior. Considering the fact that she's already been chosen without our input, I highly doubt that she feels that she serves us...she's currently indebted to whoever puts her in the WH.

I suppose we'll find out, soon enough.

[John Q. Citizen]

63. Hillary's supporters are much like bush supporters were. It's all image and no substance.

[oasis]

73. Thanks for providing a ton of "substance" with your statement.

:eyes:

[John Q. Citizen]

76. I've asked Hillary supporters repeatedly what issues and solutions their candidate has that

attracts them to support her, and rarely get an answer. When I do, it's stuff like,

I'd like to see a woman president,

Bill was great,

She's ahead in the polls,

etc. I don't see them going into the details of forcing American to buy insurance from private corporations and of US tax payers funding those corporations,

I don't see them saying that "I'm for US Military solutions to foreign policy objectives"

I don't see them saying, "It's great that her financial backers are corporate connected"

I don't see them saying, "NAFTA has made America stronger."

It's like when I ask Repos on my local discussion board why they voted for bush. They say, well he's better than Kerry or Gore. They never defend bush' policies. Or they point out that Hill said we have to disarm Hussain.

And that's what I mean by lack of substance.

[oasis]

78. Are you suggesting that Hill prefers "military solutions" over negotiation?

As for NAFTA, if you listened to the last debate, you heard her opinion.

Her website holds more information on her ideas and opinions.Check it out if you're seriously interested in finding out where she stands.

[John Q. Citizen]

83. I've been checking out her website since Feb 2007. I've seen her votes

on military appropriations and her weird vote on declaring QUD to be a "Terrorist " organization.

Never mind that the defination of a terrorist is someone who targets civilians for a political goal. I heard Hill last night saying that QUD is targeting our soldiers in Iraq, (where's the evidence, please) but that sure wouldn't make them terrorists, now would it? Or does she consider our military to be civilians?

So yeah, since bush has a war on terror, and she has now labeled the QUD as "terrorist" that would follow that we should war on terroist, wouldn't it?

I didn't hear what she plans to do about NAFTA last night. Did she say she wants to withdraw? Nope.

You can attribute all the peace-loving, anti-globalization and affordable universal health care motives to Hillary that you want.

Just as bush supporters attributed sincere Christian, anti-country building, balanced budget motivations to bush. It's the same old song and dance.

[bvar22]

84. This is Hillary's "position" on NAFTA.

After she is elected, she will form a commission to study if NAFTA can be improved.

Last night at the "debate", Hillary refused to say that NAFTA was a mistake. She only admitted that it "didn't turn out like we expected".

Since you imply that you know Hillary's position, I'll ask you directly, What IS Hillary's position on NAFTA?

A direct answer to a direct question would be appreciated.

[Martin Eden]

49. I think Hillary has a bad rap ...

... that is mostly the product of rightwing assaults repeated over and over again while Bill was president and ever since she launched her own political career.

It is constantly drilled into everyone's perception that Hillary is polarizing and unacceptable to more than half the public -- and this has come to pass by dint of the constant drilling.

What has HRC actually done that warrants such derision and outright hatred -- especially compared with other mainstream Democratic politicians?

I am not a Hillary supporter. I disagree with her policy on Iraq and I think she is dodges giving stratghtforward answers on some important issues.

However, I think her bad rap has been largely manufactured by rightwingers since she first came to national attention, and it always irks me when Democrats reinforce the rightwing frame that has been constructed over those years.

I won't vote for HRC in the Democratic primary, but I also WILL NOT help tear down her prospects to win the general election if she's nominated. That tearing-down is ongoing right now. Please, let's not help a Republican defeat anyone who might be our nominee.

[ihavenobias]

53. She makes her own bad rap

"...Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York has amassed the most of any candidate, even as she calls for changes to the health care system that could pose serious financial challenges to private insurers, drug companies and other sectors.

Mrs. Clinton received $2.7 million through the end of September, far more than Mitt Romney, the Republican who raised the most from the health care industry, with $1.6 million. The industry’s shift in contributions toward Democratic candidates mirrors wider trends among donors, but the donations from this sector are particularly notable because of the party’s focus on overhauling the health care system..."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/29/us/politics/29health.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin


"...is it a coincidence we haven't heard anything convincing from Hillary Clinton, who took in $87,130 in telecom contributions in the 2006 cycle -- more than anyone else currently in the Senate? That makes Jay Rockefeller's contributions look like abject chicken feed..."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-hamsher/hillary-clinton-a-bundle_b_70052.html?load=1&page=2

[avrdream]

79. No star.

Still not speaking for DU.

[ihavenobias]

85. What?

are you talking about? I honestly have no idea!

[loudsue]

101. Still speaking for THIS DUer!

[Viva_La_Revolution]

103. I hear-by loan this newbie my star

so you can just drop the strawman argument that their opinion doesn't count.

Are you going to attack me for not having a star now?

[ihavenobias]

105. I can't believe the Star nonsense

Another Clinton supporter tried to slam me in another thread for no star (saying my opinion was worthless basically), obviously not noticing I JUST started coming to this site, and honestly, I had NO IDEA what the start was about!

I thought it had to do with a certain number of recommendations or something!

She actually said something like "you're not worth the fucking time"...incredible.

But whatever, no need to take any of this stuff personally.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

110. good attitude

you'll do ok here. :)

Welcome to DU!

[avrdream]

114. I don't think your opinion is worthless.

You are paying the price for all those who came before you just to stir things up against the Hillary Clinton nomination. Some of us supporters have become quite sensitive about it. This is my issue, not yours.

And, to top it off, you got a star donated to you by some kind DUer - and you get to keep it for a whole year! That's fairly cool of the person who donated it.

Stick around, it won't be the first time people get angry around here.

[fadedrose]

117. Unbelievable

You people are sensitive yet lack understanding of HRC critics. We're not here to stir the pot, we honestly don't like her. Not for any of the stupid reasons YOU say we have, we just don't connect with her.

I fault her and her supporters for not even comprehending the damage they do to this party with their "our way or the highway" attitude. Sound familiar, yep. The rightwing congress treated us Dems that way for years and now the HRC supporters are following the same path with the progressives. Do you people get a memo every day on talk points on how to insult us?

[cali]

135. lol

you just said her voice was enough reason not to vote for her. and I don't support clinton at all. i do, however, often end up defending her from bullshit attacks. there are just as many, if not more, hillary attackers who are my way or the highway as there are hillary supporters who have a take no prisoners mentality. if you can't see that, you're willfully obtuse.

[bvar22]

125. That's about par for Hill's Shills.

Its the Country Club mentality, and you just aren't their kind of people.
If you don't have a star, you probably aren't in the top 6%.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

126. Doesn't That Contradict The Meme That HRC Supporters Are Uninformed Idiots

DSB

[bvar22]

127. Not in the least.

The top 6%, the CEOs of the HealthInsurance Industry, the Armaments Industry, Telecoms, BigMedia, Wall St are all smart people. They realize that the next president will probably be a Democrat. They also know how to get their Bread Buttered in DC. Hillary will do the least to disrupt the Pay to Play system. She is the most conservative candidate, and will do the least to restore REAL people powered democracy.



OTOH, if you are NOT in one of the above groups, and are supporting Hillary for the Democratic nomination.....well, that is like the chicken supporting Col. Sanders.

[Martin Eden]

131. Hillary's bad rap is not based on campaign contributions

from the health care and telecommunication industries.

Those might be legitimate reasons why she is less desirable than some of the other Dem candidates, but the general public loathing of HRC is not based on that kind of information and reasoning. It's a more conditioned response to the unending characterization of her as s ome kind of wicked witch that would be a disaster for the country.

I don't think there is anything in her record that merits the frame that's been built around her, and I'll take HRC over any of the Republican candidates even though she doesn't crack my top 5 among the Dem field.

[KnaveRupe]

100. Her bad rap on DU does NOT come from RW talking points.

Right wingers are not out there saying "HRC is too CONSERVATIVE on issues", "she isn't PROGRESSIVE enough", "she is beholden to corporations" etc. Ask any RW-er who is the most liberal candidate in the field and they will say "HITLERY!1!!", which is indicative that they are idiots.

Those are the issues I am concerned about, and which many of the "anti-Hillary" posts I see here are worried about as well.

Opposition to HRC amongst us lefties is based on our perception of her as a triangulating, pro-corporate DLC-type. That being said, she is still infinitely better than anyone on the Republican side of the aisle and I will campaign hard for her if she wins the nomination. But so far, I have seen no reason to support her in the primaries. She is barely acknowledging the EXISTENCE of "the base", so why should anyone be surprised that "the base" is less-than-enthusiastic about supporting her in the primaries?!

As a side note - if Hillary does win the nomination, and goes on to win the general election, I REALLY, REALLY hope that she magically regresses into that brilliant, idealistic, ultra-liberal Hillary Clinton that went to Wellesley and who met the equally idealistic Bill Clinton at Yale Law.

But I'm not betting the farm on it.

[asdjrocky]

52. Thank you.

I really don't want to live out the rest of my life with bush, clinton, bush clinton.... bush (Remember Jeb.)

Edwards / Obama 08.... and all that shit goes away for 16 years. Come on people

[fadedrose]

55. Alleluiah and Amen

[asdjrocky]

58. Thank you!

Isn't there like 300 mil people in this country? I mean, is there really only two families that should be in charge? I thought the American Revolution was about us not wanting a Monarchy.

Just sayin...

[bullwinkle428]

56. I'm not a Hillary partisan by any means, but have to admit

I was very surprised over this past weekend - I drove from my place in eastern Iowa north to the Twin Cities, and saw several Hillary signs located on farms and other properties in very rural (read SOLID RED) parts of Iowa.

It seems pretty clear to me that she has appeal in places where many wouldn't give her a snowball's chance, so I'm certainly not about to throw her under the bus regarding her chances against any of the Repukes...

Welcome to DU - you're already learning about how these primary battles turn into flamefests so quickly! :rofl:

[JDPriestly]

57. You are so correct. Thank you for this post.

[goodgd_yall]

59. I know an HRC supporter

My next door neighbor liked Edwards at first, but he has switched his support to Hillary. I've been asking my friends and acquaintances who they're for and most all haven't decided yet.

[BringBigDogBack]

64. Word.

[Basileus Basileon]

65. DU is representative of nothing but DU. Were it otherwise,

DK would be running away with the nomination.

Your friends are self-selected and not representative of the general populace.

[Enrique]

71. you nicely hit most of the anti-Hillary talking points

1.too polarizing
2.can't win
3.too much baggage
4.Bush-Clinton dynasty

But you missed "she's shrill."

[fadedrose]

72. Shrill -

You haven't read any of my posts.

I have shamefully said that she needs a voice transplant and that she cackles.

[ihavenobias]

77. I'm not sure

that polarizing is necessarily a talking point but I see what you mean.

A better set of points to discuss would be

1. Takes far more special interest money than any other candidate, including republicans (see health care for perfect example)
2. Is the most hawkish of the candidates (see her not admitting Iraq vote was a mistake and then voting for Kyl-Lieberman)
3. Has, by far, the least populist, pro-middle class message of all candidates. See stance on trade as one example.

Now, you can *debate* the above points but if you simply dismiss them as "talking points"...

[ihelpu2see]

80. would have to agree, here in CT and I have mentioned it on DU

that none of the independants ( the highest # of reg. voters) are leaninig for HRC none of the moderate Republicans and only a few dems. lean HRC.... So the national polls are only name recognition. Plus, a CNN poll showed that only 30% have watched the debates so far.... So what are the people using as there reference, Name, and Name alone.... That is what is sad ...

[bvar22]

88. Hillary nomination = most risk for the least democratic gain.

Hillary IS the most polarizing Democratic candidate. Whether she deserves it is NOT important.
Acknowleging the FACT that she IS polarizing (Left AND Right) is important.

Hillary is also the most conservative of the Democratic candidates with the deepest ties to Corporate Money, Corporate lobbyists, Armaments Industry, Health Insurance Industry, Professional Health Management Industry, Pharmaceutical Industry, and AIPAC.

Why assume the most risk (polarizing), for the least gain (conservative)? :shrug:

K&R

[ihavenobias]

98. Because

People hate investing time, money and energy into someone only to be proven wrong. It's humiliating and frustrating, so they'll stick with her and ignore all of those damning facts.

[laureloak]

96. Exactly, Why is HRC being shoved down our throats?

I don't want her and I only know of 2 who name her as their first choice.

[beaconess]

104. DU is proof?

DU is interesting and engaging, but it's hardly proof of anything - except of how the people on DU see things.

[roxnev]

106. It is not HRC fault

you live in a bad neighbor hood

[robinlynne]

116. Agreed. And there are great Dem candidates: all of the others.

[McCamy Taylor]

118. DU Is Proof that the Freepers are playing Divide and Conquer

and having a lot of fun at our expense.

All you have to do to get a cheer around here is post

1. I hate Hillary who is just the same as Bush (shades of Al Gore is the same as Bush)

2. Obama is a good guy but he can't win (though no one ever says why)

3. Edwards is the real Democrat (and he can win because he is a White Southern male)

4. No, Kucinich is the real Democrat

Over and over again like a broken record

The only good thing I can say is that most of you all are not nationally know politicians or celebrities so no one will accuse you of waffling if you take back your divisive words later. Once we have nominated our candidate, I hope that you do not act like a bunch of idiot 1968 Democrats and implode the party but instead act like savvy 2008 Democrats and unite to win.

Hint: how about more substantive posts and fewer gut impressions?

[fadedrose]

122. This is not as much fun as you think..

Maybe you're too smart to understand us "idiots," but can you explain WHY we feel the way we do. There have been so so many substantive posts about why HRC is not popular with many of us, try reading them. Reasons range from political contributions to the war and impending war.

The HRC supporters have a smug and arrogant attitude that is driving even a bigger wedge than there originally was between at least me and HRC herself. You make light of the concerns we have about what she may do in office. With all the damage W has done, we need a HEALER, not division and derision. We need a diplomat, someone who loves peace, cares about the working class (your cue to call me a "commie"), the environment, NAFTA, health care, and someone to maybe put social security in that damned lockbox, someone who understands America's people.

All I hear from HRC supporters is that she's ahead in all the polls so screw us.

[sce56]

119. I'll 55th that Emotion

[DianaForRussFeingold]

120. Honestly,I Don't See Much Difference Between Her And LieBerman...

:-( I'm sorry, Clinton supporters-- This is too important! Check her voting record... She says she is opposed to war with Iran and then turns around and supports everything that leads to it... :scared:

[Unca Jim]

121. Of course I don't have a star so my opinion means nothing...

but she's looking better to me after each debate. I like how she stands up for herself and explains issues in ways that make actual sense. I understand she lies sometimes (as all candidates do) and I don't agree with her on every issue, but I think she can take this country in a better direction. Frankly, I think any of the Democratic candidate will be OK.

By the way, I don't donate to DU because I think my political donations should go to organizations which actually do stuff to make this country better, not to buy bandwidth for people who just sit around and bitch. I like DU ('cause I like to sit around and bitch), but I think my money can be spent better elsewhere.

[DianaForRussFeingold]

123. I would love if she would stand up, against war ...

Kyle/Lieberman bill sets the stage for the US to take military action-- http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=60d_1190757741 How do you feel about the Kyle/LieBerman bill?

[leftrightwingnut]

124. What disturbs me most about HRC is the Murdoch connection.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12762092/

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/09/politics/main1600694.shtml

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/10/nyregion/10hillary.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin

When I first heard about this, I *knew* Hillary would be our next president. Done deal.

Since then, every news story about Clinton has that air of inevitability about it. Even if they discuss her shortcomings, its always about how these are problems that must be overcome.

Get used to it, faderose. By the time the election rolls around, we will all be brain-washed into loving Hillary.

And if it is a squeaker as it was in 2000, expect election shenanigans -- but this time in Clinton's favor.

[fadedrose]

128. Not very encouraging - Good links, bad news

I looked up all your links, thanks for posting. I know these things are happening but hate to do the research when asked for evidence.

Gee if only I were a centrist. Had the bad luck at this time in history to have been born a Democrat. Real ones will soon be extinct at this rate and I'm betting that HC supporters will gloat over their demise.

[THUNDER HANDS]

129. my fiancee likes her

and she's about as non-political as you can get.

My ex-girlfriend liked her too.

I think it she gets the nomination you'd see a HUGE amount of single women voting for her.

[Lil Missy]

136. How can you say no one cares for her when she is the overwhelming frontrunner?