When did Hillary lose your support or did she ever have it at all?

[Mortos]

I have been looking at the posts on Hillary over the last day and it seems that there are not many people here who support her, in fact, the majority of posters seem to range from disinterest to outright disgust.

My wife, who is a proud progressive and has supported every democratic candidate in every election has flatly stated that she will not support Hillary in any way shape or form.

I fought for and defended Bill throughout his presidency and I still love to hear him speak and wouldn't mind him being president again but something about Hillary rubs me wrong. I have seen her appearances on Olbermann and watched some of her videos from her official website and she just strikes me as...phony and insincere or worse she is trying to be everything to everyone and is incapable of taking a stand or position without first vetting it through her handlers.

One last thing, the way she laughs after questions is very annoying.

Anyway, I was wondering what the feeling was here. Did you support her at one point, does anyone still?

[WestHoustonDem]

1. It's her voting record in the Senate

Iraq War, Bankruptcy Bill, etc.

[jrthin]

8. Same here. n/t

[LostinVA]

14. She did NOT vote for the bankruptcy bill

She was at her husband's side while he had dangerous follow-up surgery, and publicly said she would have voted AGAINST it.

[thoughtanarchist]

22. "The 2 income trap"

I forget the author --

I believe the book documents that she voted for the bankruptcy bill.

If she abstained, that offers (slight) redemption.

She also voted in favor of drilling in ANWR


Once you vote like you've been paid for, it's tough to regain my trust.

[BlueIris]

62. "Two Income Trap" is by Elizabeth Warren and Amelia Warren Tyagi.

Just FYI for anyone who wants to know. 'S a good (if depressing) book, endorsed by (among others) my beloved John Kerry.

[paulk]

145. she voted for the 2001 bill, along with 81 other Senators

She did not vote on the 2005 bill, the one that is most commonly referenced here on DU as "the bankruptcy bill", but she clearly came out against it in a floor speech the day before the vote.


She has voted NINE times against drilling in ANWR.

http://www.gop.com/Blog/BlogPost.aspx?BlogPostID=1970


you need to get your facts straight.

[HughBeaumont]

61. That would be S-256.

She DID vote for S-420 in 2001.

[Greyhound]

125. It was the follow-up to remove the scar tissue and was described at the time as

a "low risk" procedure. Now I don't believe that any heart surgery can be accurately described as low risk, but OTOH I'm not a cardiac surgeon, and that is how they described it.

She has, as you've described, made that statement, but she did vote in favor of its precursors, twice, so forgive me if I'm a little skeptical about her sincere opposition to it. It is indicative to me that of all the possible issues that were not delineated in The Constitution, that the founders saw fit to specifically include the right to a fresh start, which our corporate congress is trying to steal from us.

[Indiana_Dem]

me, too. Too much for corporate globalism--spells trouble to me.nt

[OhioChick]

58. Agreed

Hillary clears outsourcing air


Hillary Clinton made it apparent where she stood on outsourcing during her India visit, in an attempt perhaps to clear the Indian misgivings received during the Kerry campaign. "There is no way to legislate against reality. Outsourcing will continue," she told an audience of Indian big-wigs. She pointed out that there were 3 billion people who feel left behind and are trying to attack the modern world in the hope of turning the clock back on globalization. "It is not far-fetched to imagine ... if the Indian miracle would be the one of choice of those who feel left behind," said Hillary.

Hillary has been at the forefront in defending free trade and outsourcing. During the height of the anti-outsourcing backlash in the US last year, she faced considerable flak for defending Indian software giant Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) for opening a center in Buffalo, New York. "We are not against all outsourcing; we are not in favor of putting up fences," Hillary said firmly, despite inevitably invoking the ire of the anti-free trade brigade.

Hillary further clarified her position during her recent visit as well as solutions that could be beneficial to both countries. She urged Indian industries to invest more in the US to allay negative outpourings over outsourcing of American jobs to India. "I have to be frank. People in my country are losing their jobs and the US policymakers need to address this issue," she said. She ruled out that the anti-India feeling was a reflexive reaction, and explained that the feeling was more because of the imbalance in trade between the two countries, which in turn caused anguish among Americans about the nature of the economic relationship.

"In 2003, US merchandise exports to India was $5 billion, while India exports to the US was $13.8 billion. Though the US understood that the economic vibrancy of India was in its own interest, there are people who feel left behind and might stir up negative feelings against India because they do not understand the economic benefits of outsourcing," Clinton remarked.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/GC01Df03.html

[OnionPatch]

77. Ding ding ding ding!!

That was it for me. She wants to ship my job to India and I'm going to vote for her? :rofl:

[indepat]

93. The day she voted for IWR

[RiverStone]

141. Her YES on the IWR---

Her YES on the IWR when 23 other Senators (21 DEMS, 1 Indie, 1 rethug) voted NO....

Everybody knew what Shrub was up to; as I believe Hillary did as well. She IMHO, did not vote her conscience.

I'd prefer to see her in a Cabinet position in the new DEM administration in 08.

[WI_DEM]

2. I like Hillary and thought she was a great First Lady

and was happy when she was elected to the senate, though disappointed in her stand on Iraq. I just think it's time to move away from Bush-Clinton.

[Clark2008]

3. If I lived in New York, I'd support her as senator, but, because I live

in a purple state, I simply feel she can't win enough reddish/purple states to win. Even many solid Dems I know distrust or dislike her here. It's the atmosphere. It's a bit of misogyny. It's years of her being treated unfairly by the corporate media.

I don't NOT support her. I just don't think she can win.

Is that fair enough?

[MrSlayer]

4. Never had it.

Her actions since she's been in the Senate have made me even more opposed to her.

[TheModernTerrorist]

134. same here

I have other candidates in mind. If she got the nomination, I don't think I'd go as far as voting third-party yet, but I'd defenitely be holding my nose. However, I don't think she'd make it past the primaries. I WOULD vote for Clark (like I did last election), Gore (like I did in 2000), if either of them ran. But I'll just have to wait and see when the primaries come rolling up on us.

[ShortnFiery]

5. She's a great NY State Senator but she never has had my support as Presidential

Candidate.

Don't cha think that 12 years of Bushes was a little over the top? :crazy:

Even if it's a kinder Corporate Ruler, IMO, 8 years of Clintons is enough. :shrug:

Say no to dynasty, lest ole Jeb and George P. will be waiting in the wings. THE HORROR! :SCARED:

George H.W. Bush
Bill Clinton
George W Bush
Hillary Clinton
Jeb Bush

What a nightmare - for the entire nation!!!

[Ignacio Upton]

147. I second your post!

n/t.

[_dynamicdems]

150. Omigod! What a horrible scenario!

I'd really move to Canada before the Jeb coronation.

[oasis]

6. "her annoying laugh" yup. Not the kind of person you'd like to have a beer with.

I think we've been down this road before.

Now,how about her administrative skills? America needs a "fixit-it" person at the helm.

[Alamom]

54. ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU . N/T

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

7. I Support Her Just Fine.

She might not be my top choice, but I will support her 100% if she gets the nom, and if she won it would be my DREAM to see the Big Dog back in the white house!

[lancdem]

9. Your wife would vote for McCain

if HRC were the nominee? Yikes ...

BTW, I'm undecided. I think Hillary has done well since declaring, but I'm also a fan of Obama and Edwards. As for taking stands, she hasn't even put forward any proposals yet. I'm taking a wait and see approach.

Keep in mind, DU is not representative of the vast majority of Dems. In 2004, Howard Dean was way more popular here than among primary voters at large.

[ShortnFiery]

13. Yeah DU has ZERO correlation to the rest of the Democratic Party.

Perhaps it's best said that the liberal base enjoys wide membership at DU, but all sides get their time in the sun.

Remember, either Hil becomes a whole lot less pandering because you can NOT as easily intimidate people who are Democrats to put Party above Country.

I regret that Terry M., Hil's campaign organizer never learned that lesson but he's sure to get another opportunity to have his political butt given to him. And who will he blame? Us evil liberal leftist commie pinkos. :P :rofl:

[elocs]

28. As a Liberal, I think that the DU correlation with the rest of the Democratic

Party might not be 0, but it is certainly smaller than we would like to believe in our righteous self importance. We tend to want to dictate that the Democratic Party should do this or should do that when in reality most of us are probably on the left wing of the Party. If we run an out an out Liberal candidate for President, that person loses. We need a centrist candidate who is open to Liberal ideas and who will advance certain of them as quickly as they are able to. We like to crow about how the overwhelming majority of Americans reject the Iraq war, but we dismiss their views when a majority of Americans reject Liberal ideas. Not even all Democrats embrace Liberal ideas, otherwise we would all be Liberals. Advancing Liberalism is a marathon, not a sprint.

[ShortnFiery]

30. Oh please, I'm am a humble servant. Nothing self-righteous about me.

All any of us true liberals want is REGULATION of Capitalism and Corporate control of our government.

Any candidate who is in the pocket of large lobbying groups and other corporate interest is NOT going to glean my support even though they choose to put a D after their name.

That isn't a left wing cause but an AMERICAN cause.

But all those who are corrupted by big money have to do is call someone "a liberal" or "a leftist" for far too many good democrats to run to the right and into the camp of the Big Money Corporate Lobbyists.

No, it's courageous and humble to realize that a true American always votes for The Person and puts COUNTRY over PARTY.

Do what you wish, but know that if you vote for someone who supports warmongering, NAFTA, AIPAC interest or The Bankruptcy Bill, you are supporting the continuation of Corporations running our government. :shrug:

[elocs]

41. Maybe not you, but I have seen many self righteous Liberals here.

I believe in getting what I can done and not trying to ram my beliefs down people's throats. I am also not living the delusion that my own personal beliefs are the only ones that are really American and all others are just posers. Too many Liberals come across like they have all the answers and know what is right for everybody. I see it displayed here all the time. Everything comes down to an us against them scenario. That's not the way the real world works and that is not a pragmatic way to advance Liberal ideals.

[ShortnFiery]

46. I get your point ... but IMO they are not "liberal" if they are not TOLERANT

Yes, I fully concur. :-)

For example, I'm a former smoker but I don't harbor ill feelings toward those who are still addicted. I realize that it often helps people to cope, i.e., lessens anxiety. The same intolerance can be said of those who insist that breast feeding is "the only" way to have a healthy child and other "nanny state" type, IMO, ELITIST views.

To me (and I believe many others) being liberal is to be tolerant of others and to be able to deal with many incongruities in life. No, I make MANY stereo-typic and judgment call mistakes each day but I try to own up to these faults.

My definition of Liberal would include most average, working Americans. We don't want our bosses or the government snooping on us and we don't want to sacrifice our children to perpetual war. The final criterion, that of not wishing for a corporate stranglehold of our government is also, IMO, not a leftist value.

Just because the M$M tells us so, it's not necessarily the unvarnished TRUTH.

In conclusion, If your term of "centrist" means a true moderate who is willing to stand up for the people before the interest of corporations (or other big money government lobbyists), then I'm with you. I don't think we have a problem here. ;) :hi:

[Marrah_G]

113. There are my posts I won't comment on because of that.

I think I am a bit to the left of most Dems in my area (Boston) yet I find myself to the right of many topics here. I love reading DU and the news information is great, but there is also a side of DU that screams at any sort of differing opinions. You quickly learn which topics are not worth even attempting to debate. Even typing this I have a feeling I'm going to regret saying anything at all.

[Mortos]

16. No my wife wouldn't vote for McCain

I think if it comes down to it, all the disgruntled people here will vote for Hillary if she is the Democratic nominee. I hope we have a good primary with honest opinion and debate and leave out the personal attack dog politics from within our own party.

[ShortnFiery]

20. My husband who loves the thought of Hillary as President

Has seemingly threatened everything short of divorce if I don't vote for her if she gets the nomination. Not nice to pressure this liberal. I don't know exactly what I will do, but I will not vote for DYNASTY, even a Democratic one. :thumbsdown:

[OKNancy]

64. Since primaries are on a state by state basis

I'm pretty sure that Oklahoma will go to Edwards or Clark if he enters.
I seriously doubt that Sen Clinton will win the Oklahoma primary.

[Clark2008]

26. My husband - a classic New England liberal - told me if it

came down to Hagel v. Edwards, he'd vote for Hagel.

Some people just rub us the wrong way. It happens.

[Lusted4]

40. The world can go to hell just don't rub me the wrong way.

[burythehatchet]

37. and look how popular Dean is now. We're just a year ahead of the crowd

[WinkyDink]

86. Yes, because he's not an equivocating Centrist.

[davidwparker]

10. Yes, during the Clinton years, when times were good. Then, some

bad policies of her NAFTA-signing husband came home to roost.

I will never meet her. Would only see her on television. Her laugh and things like that don't bother me.

To me, it's more like Clinton-fatique. We live with the effects of NAFTA/WTO. We have liars in the media from few sources due to consolidation after that NAFTA-signing Clinton signed the Telecommunications bill. Poor personal decisions got * close enough for Daddy's men to steal the election for him and we know the history since then.

Too much. Too much, water under the bridge with the Clintons. I see "Big Dawg" now more as "the cult of personality."

[Nicole]

11. She never had it

Of course I will vote for her if she wins the nomination. I won't vote for her in the primaries though.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. Vote Date: October 11, 2002, 12:50 AM

A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.

Clinton (D-NY), Yea

[motocicleta]

68. b - i - n - g - o

you can't shake the devil's hand and say you're only kidding

[HoneyBee]

70. That vote eliminates a number of Senators; including Kerry.

I am not disagreeing with you in ANY way, in fact, I agree. I am just wondering if you withhold support on each of those "Y"'s.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

97. Yes.

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

75. Her support for IWR lost me as well

nm

[DURHAM D]

15. Blah, blah, blah. . . n/t

[LostinVA]

17. I would vote for her in a New York minute

[opihimoimoi]

18. Hillary is a great Democrat...she would be a better President than any Pub...dats for sure

I ain't voting for no McCain who humps Bushies leg...nor Rudy or Newt....

The GOP have destroyed themselves with Supoort for Bush...They blew it....

[WinkyDink]

87. Who wouldn't be?

[elfin]

19. I am just tired of her - her studied calculations

to position herself with the end goal in mind without the charm of her spouse who could get away with it, her history of polarizing the nation (though may not be her fault) which guarantees more of the same when we crave some semblance of unity, her false "reaching out" to sworn enemies when we KNOW she harbors bitterness etc.

She is enormously talented --- as a Senator. She could be a great national voice for progressives once she rediscovers the heart and values which propelled her into public service in the first place.

Now she is a technocrat -- she needs more passion and depth ala Ted Kennedy to earn my vote.

[cynatnite]

108. Bill Clinton did the same reaching out to enemies...

He says so in his book.

You've got to be calculating in politics. Seems to me that should be a requirement. I would expect anyone with a brain to be thinking ten steps ahead for every step they take forward.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

21. It's a quirk of mine.

You see, I have always had this thing about dynasties ruling the US, and it's just become worse over the last six years.

I don't think I will be getting over it soon, either.

[blm]

23. I supported her and Bill passionately throughout his term and after. I believed

back then that he must have had very good reasons for closing the books on the outstanding matters of Bush1's crimes of office. I especially believed that the reason he didn't pursue BCCI was because he was told that opening the books on BCCI would collapse the world economy - it was what I heard back then and I still believed it.

Then I read his book - very excited to learn about what went down.

He never even mentioned BCCI once in his book. The biggest terrorist bank in the world - the root of all international terror funding networks and armsdealing and drugrunning networks, enabled by oficial governments, international financiers and banking institutions, and Bill Clinton had NOTHING to say about it. 9-11 made that unacceptable.

Had BCCI books been opened there would have been no 9-11. Had IranContra books been opened, there would be no 9-11 - screw the Bush pardons, all Clinton had to do was declassify some material and open the rest of the books.

Add his coverup of the CIA drugrunning story in 1996 and the dogged takedown of the Pulitizer Prize winning reporter who reported it, and it all adds up to ONE thing - Clinton chose to protect Poppy Bush over the best interests of the citizens of this country.

I expect Hillary will do the same. What else could she do after her husband was coopted and made part of the coverup and is now actively working to rehabilitate Poppy Bush's reputation with the American people these last 5 years?

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0511-29.htm

[WiseButAngrySara]

24. Strange as it sounds, I know a lot of other women who share

this view whether they are Dems or Reps, Prog or Conserv...

Her stance as a 'What, do you expect me to bake cookies' to her defense of Clinton and 'I stand by my man no matter what.' Many believe that in the face of marital affairs, Hillary's standing by Bill was hypocritical, and I think damaging in some way. If she had experienced domestic violence would she have been so inclined to 'stand by her man?'

This was the first inkling I had of her phony political incongruities. I think she damaged a lot of women with her political ambitions. I haven't really believed her since.

[Crunchy Frog]

25. I've never thought she was viable as a presidential candidate.

Unfortunately, the way she is demonized on the right would ensure the biggest Republican turnout in this nation's history IMHO.

I liked her very much as First Lady, but I have been disappointed with her as a senator, particularly with her support for the Iraq invasion. I don't see any indication that she would push this country in a progressive direction, and instead, would likely provoke a massive RW backlash, even as she tried her best to appease them by more triangulation.

That's just the way I see things.

[lonestarnot]

27. She hasn't lost my support, but she did disappoint me.

She should not have supported the bushitler war in the first damned place.

[Imagevision]

29. Hillary lost it when Barack Obama came into play...

[Generator]

31. She and her husband have spent years NOT

standing up to Bush. It's that simple. She's spent her energy mincing words, drafting video game bills, and wooing defense contractors, and well-not doing anything much to stand up in a time of evil. That's hard to overlook. BE the opposition. She's so not outstanding. She's just standing. She's just expecting this ride basically because her name is CLINTON. You know like Bush got to be president because he was born to one. Well, she married one. What has she done to EARN being president? I am not being facetious. She got all her money, all her name recognition, all of it from marriage. HOW is that feminism? How?

She won her senate seat based on name recognition but YES, she worked for it. It's hers and she deserves that. But president? PLEASE? Why? Because her name is Clinton. There is no other reason. She's not done anything brilliant. She's not courageous. What does she have but the name? What great mark has she made in the senate? What am I to support? OH YES-what I am to support is the MONEY-that's number uno-and of course the NAME. Let's cut the bullshit. That's all it's about. Money and the name.

I'd love to support a Pelosi presidency. Did she marry a president? OR a Boxer presidency. Again-no husband that she married. They did it without marrying it. Hillary by running for president is the anti-feminist. Running on us feeling sorry Bill cheated on her and she soldiered through all of that shit-and yes she braved mountains of it-almost all of it unwarranted and vicious-so we OWE her a frigging presidency.

I'm sure that's what she's said to Bill. "You OWE me, buddy. For as far as I can go." Well even if she runs the Democractic party into the ground at the one moment we have a GREAT chance of having control of the white house and more in a time of dire need-we must give it to Hillary because Bill cheated on her and she's OWED. She's selfish, sneaky and well I just started the list. Ask again tomorrow. LOL!

[KoKo]

32. She's a "Stand In" for Bill and his "Second Chance Presidency"

and many of us feel Bill looks worse in hindsite than he did when WE DEFENDED HIM TO THE DEATH OVER MONICA!!!!]

We've moved on and most of Clinton's policies look worse in "hindsite" than they did when he was President.

So, why should we vote for CLINTON II! :shrug:

[ieoeja]

131. What KoKo01 said.

We were too busy defending Clinton from Rightwing lies to pay any attention to the fact that he presided like a Republican. Win we didn't have to spend every waking minute defending his ass from some new bullshit we could finally evaluate his performance and realize he sold us down the river.

Clinton: One small step Right for America; one giant leap Right for the Democratic Party.

[MH1]

33. When she joined the rovian smear against Kerry just before the 06 elections...

she lost my tepid "I'll support her if she wins the nomination so I won't bash her now" support.

She revealed what a conniving soulless opportunist she is on that day. Since then I have discovered that other people have other examples to cite. I guess I had been blind up until that day.

Practically, between that act and her coziness with Rupert Murdoch, I don't think I can trust how she would act as President if she were somehow elected. I don't think I could even trust her SC nominees, because I would expect them to be supporters of corporatism (mega-business if you prefer) at the expense of competitive markets, and that that would be a priority for her over liberal social values such as being pro-choice.

[BlueIris]

63. Ding ding ding.

That was when I just couldn't believe there was anything meaningful left to her.

[farmbo]

79. ...IS RIGHT!!!...and here's your NEW Frigidaire!!!

I could pretty much put up with all of Hillary's antics until the "botched joke" episode.

Kerry had stubbed his toe on the joke but it was innocent enough-- coming as it was from a decorated war veteran-- to be shrugged off as a simple campaign trail miscue.

And although the GOP blowhards tried to spin it as Kerry smearing the troops, even the MSM took it for what it was worth. The whole thing was blowing over.

Until Hillary weighed in...

She bought in to the smear spin and told Kerry (he of three purple hearts) that he owed the troops an apology. That in turn kept the smear in the news cycle for an additional week during a crucial time in the national campaign.

For what? Did she really think he smeared the troops? Not hardly.

So she could pander to the Fox News crowd and pitchfork her possible 2008 opponent at the same time.

[Blue_In_AK]

128. Absolutely, absolutely.

That was the lowest blow she could have delivered. She knew damn well what Kerry meant and she should have jumped to his defense instead of taking on those Rove-like qualities of "Oh, John Kerry owes the troops an apology." I lost any lingering respect I might have had for her at that point.

[tnlefty]

34. Didn't have it at all!

IWR and the fact that she may be changing her tune a little now, it doesn't seem sincere to me.

[flyarm]

35. I WILL NOT SUPPORT THESE FAMILY DYNASTY'S..I AM SICK OF IT

THIS IS NOT A MONARCHY...i want someone who is not related to any of the former presidents!


Al Gore baby..run..run and i will work my rear end off for you!!

Edwards has my support now..he is a man of integrity!

and i loveeeee Elizabeth!!

fly

[Porcupine]

56. Agreed. No family dynasties.

Why should two families have a lock on the presidency for over 20 years. Isn't that a little odd considering we claim to be a democracy?

[Raksha]

66. I can't say I'm categorically against family dynasties,

even though I feel the same as everyone else about the Bush/Clinton dynasties, because I know good and well I would have supported the KENNEDY dynasty. Unfortunately, the best ones have a nasty habit of getting killed, and Teddy couldn't run because of Chappaquiddick. But I'm sure John-John would eventually have run for president if he'd lived--and I would have voted for him too.

[Nedsdag]

94. Ditto.

If I want a Dynasty, I'll watch Joan Collins' TV show.

This isn't a banana republic with two ruling political families.

Enough is enough!

[sellitman]

71. That's silly. What if..

Robert F Kennedy Jr were to run?

Would you not support him because of his last name?

That being said.....I want Gore to run. I'd only vote for Hillary if she turned out to be the nominee.

[_dynamicdems]

151. The last Kennedy in the white house was over 40 years ago.

That's not quite the same as George Bush - Bill Clinton - George W. Bush - Hillary Clinton - Jeb Bush? ... Chelsea Clinton?

Enough! Let Hillary wait 40 years. :D

[WA98296]

122. Totally agree with you. Not good for democracy, not at all.

[cynatnite]

36. I like her and support her...

I think she would make a fine president. I think Obama, Edwards and the others would do well, too. It's easy to nitpick over how she laughs, talks or whatever.

I prefer to look deeper than that such as her voting record and other actions. So far, she looks good.

[motocicleta]

69. You don't care about the IWR and bankruptcy bill votes? n/t

[cynatnite]

109. The IWR vote is done and over...can't be undone...

she's even said so and regrets her vote. I'm done bitching about that vote. It's in the past and nothing will ever change that. Many of those who voted for it are working at ending the war and getting our troops home. That's what I care about.

Plus, I don't expect EVERY politician to vote the way *I* think they should vote on everything. It's a little unreasonable, IMO.

[motocicleta]

114. That's cool

I definitely don't expect any politician to vote just like me. I just have a hard time trusting any of those that voted for a handful of bills, those two in the forefront. It makes me question, if you voted for the IWR, are you really doing all you can to end the war, or is this just a cynical show? Will you do more to stop the next war? How can I trust you to get the next big decision right?

This goes for not just Hillary, but Edwards, Obama, Kerry, et al. That is one big time mistake. People have certainly been fired for less.

In general, I don't like or trust any politicians,and don't expect much more than to avoid the biggest screwups, much less do I ask them to vote with me 100%.

[Buck Rabbit]

38. I like her better than Bill, but she lost my support over the Middle East.

I think a lot of people have a fantasy image of Bill Clinton as some kind of liberal. Getting a blow job does not in itself qualify you as such.

Of those running she is one of my least favorite Dems, but I prefer her to her husband who in turn I prefer to any Republican.

She now ranks with me at the bottom of the heap of announced Dems with Edwards, who this week we learn has bought the neocon crap on Iran just like he bought it on Iraq. That boy is a slow .. no .. a non-learner.

[mitchum]

39. Never had it

[HCE SuiGeneris]

42. After attacking Kerry for his botched joke -- that was inexcusable.

[Raine]

43. She lost it when

I took a look back over the Clinton's records and realized they were not that progressive and actually pretty conservative. Also can't stand the DLC and Terry McCaulif (sp?).

[no_hypocrisy]

44. During her campaign the first time for senator, only one radio station gave

her airtime in the NY metropolitan region: WEVD, during at least one interview on Bill Mazer's program. No fawning, no third degree, but a decent interview.

Hillary got elected. In 2001, WEVD lost its format of independent (OK, mostly liberal) political talkshows with some paid programming when the Forward sold the station to WABC/Disney which converted it to the flagship station of ESPN. Hillary was strangely quiet despite requests for her to intervene or just say something in defense of the station that essentially launched her. The format change was a fait accompli, but I'll always remember how she kept her distance from the situation.

[Robbien]

45. She was against this bankruptcy bill and convinced Bill to veto it.

As a senator she favored the lobbyists backing the bankruptcy bill so she supported it.

And she lost my vote.

[AtomicKitten]

47. I have this tendency to swim against the tide.

Just like some of the more ardent JK supporters put me off him for good, the over-the-top trash talk about HRC here at DU is forcing me to defend her more and more, and that is really pissing me off. So knock if off.

[Warren DeMontague]

48. She lost me with the Iraq War.

I used to like her. I still think she's okay as Senator from NY; but she should not be the nominee in '08.

[Tatiana]

49. I'm apathetic. It's a trust thing, for me. Actually, I trust her husband more.

Yes, Bill sold us out on some issues, but I do believe on more issues than not, he could weigh issues carefully on merit and make good decisions.

People forget Clinton did not run as a liberal, nor did he ever really present himself as one. He was pushing welfare reform as Governor of Arkansas. He was a moderate from a Southern, conservative state that lived up to expectations in terms of domestic policy and exceeded them in terms of foreign policy. I don't think Hillary takes quite the same approach, nor does she have that intrinsic empathy for others that Bill does.

I agree with other suggestions that she would make a great Supreme Court Justice.

[B Calm]

50. She lost me when she voted to allow Chucklenuts permission to invade

Iraq! I even donated to her senate campaign.

[IdaBriggs]

51. Haven't and won't. I don't believe in dynasties.

I discussed this point in detail on June 25, 2005 here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1884652 and I stick by it.

Its not personal; its protectionist. I value my country, and do not want it to become a hereditary monarchy between specific families -- Bush or Clinton.

[GreenZoneLT]

52. Health-care reform hearings

Closed hearings, presentation of an all-or-nothing proposal that got absolutely creamed in Congress. Showed all the political deftness of Jimmy Carter's energy-reform bill. She might have improved since, but when's she ever been an executive, so that you'd have some evidence of it? I think she's a pretty good senator, but I haven't ever seen any evidence that she could even be an effective governor, let alone president.

I like Hillary, I just don't see her as the best Democratic presidential candidate.

[lumberjack_jeff]

135. The perfect populist issue, carefully stripped of anything which might improve the population

The bill was a split-the-baby mess which attempted to do the impossible: provide health care for everyone while preserving the outrageous profits which are the hallmark of our current system.

[bluetrain]

53. The only reason I voted for her in NYS was because the Green Candidate

was a clown. She's not progressive. She does not speak for me. I do not trust her. And I will not vote for her even if she's the Democratic candidate in 08. I will not vote for Obama. I do not trust anyone who, like Clinton and Obama, have been forced upon us by the Corporate Media as being our candidates. And I won't vote for Edwards because, as much as I like his wife, he just doesn't have it. I am not alone in my feelings and the left will lose if we don't support an actually progressive candidate. I held my breath with John Kerry. I'm not willing to do it again. The first election I was old enough to vote in was '00 and Nader was an easy choice in NYC. There's no hope for my generation in voting for DLC assholes. There's not much hope in voting outside of that block and I'll tell you that we're all really angry. Everybody I know votes (and my friends span from Malibu Movie Stars to Nurses and Strippers in Middle America to C-Squat Junkies). None of us like the options. And people are getting more anarchistic and nihilistic by the hour. If there isn't a candidate who appeals to the emotional desperation of people at this hour, then we're going to be faced with record non-turn-out. And the BFEE will walk away with everything. Truth be told, I don't really believe there's been a fair federal election since JFK.

[Alamom]

55. She has my vote any day of the week and I am sorry to report,

DU is not representative of the voting public.

However, I will vote for the Democratic Nominee-as I always have.

[bklyncowgirl]

57. She never had my support--despite the appeal of Bill Clinton as "First Husband"

I will vote for somebody other than Hillary Clinton in the Democratic Primary in my state. She doesn't even make it onto the "maybe" list.

It's the Iraq war, frankly or more particularly her unwavering support for it. To this day, she still refuses to say she made a mistake in voting for it.

The most important vote of her career, one which gave an arrogant and inexperienced president unlimited power to send young Americans and countless Iraqis to their deaths, a power that he has abused and mishandled and she is unwilling to say that this was a mistake!

If she wins the nomination I will vote for her though with plenty of reservations. I cannot see myself donating to her campeign or pounding the pavement for her.

[sendero]

59. There was a time..

... when I would have welcomed the nomination for 2 reasons.

1) I thought she could win

2) It would be a sharp stick in the eye to a bunch of Republicans.


But now, I don't think she can win, and I no longer trust her after watching her waste time on pandering bullshit while toeing the Republican line on Iraq. Yes, for those with short memories she didn't get remotely serious about opposing the war until the polls showed the public had lost all faith in it.

That's perfectly in character for her, and exactly what we do not need in a leader.

[Skidmore]

60. This has been the evolution of my thinking about her as well, and

the whole issue of dynasty is really a problem for me. I will not support her because of those reasons.

[w4rma]

65. She's boring and she's bought. She lost my support when I figured out that

she sat on the board of Wal-Mart which benefited the most out of any business in America from her husband's free trader(traitor?) policies.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

67. I saw a snippet of Hillary yesterday that summarized it all for me

I can't tell you what show or who the interviewer was because I was just walking through the room. But anyway, she was saying that the surge "didn't sell". And I thought, there you go - that's why I don't like her. Many of her positions seem to be about marketing and what the polling says. I get no sense of all of her LEADING even when the position can be difficult. For contrast, think of Feingold.

[Az]

72. Never really was a fan of hers

Not a hater. Just not a lover. I don't think my opinion of her has changed much. She seems to be consistantly pretty much what I think of her.

[natrat]

73. feels like a scam especially with mcaullife involved

[mmonk]

74. Three letters.

DLC. When that organization of democrats began smearing fellow dems and pushing war, it's adherents were out the door with me.

[Individualist]

116. Ditto!

[Tesha]

76. Hillary had $500 of our support in 2000.

Hillary had $500 of our support in 2000. But she lost our
support when she started voting for the war and against the
constitution.

So now, as I've mentioned elsewhere, I will go out of my
way to assure that Hillary does not get the Democratic
nomination in 2008.

Tesha

[xiamiam]

78. cant stand her...she is in the way of change for America but shes got the $$$...

a huge sprawling political money machine...and THAT is just about all she has got..every thread about Hillary is a waste of time...another diversion...she is just more of the same...I just dont understand why people dont see that...its disappointing, even here at DU...its still kool aid, just a different flavor...wish she would just throw her support behind Gore...

[WA98296]

121. The money is coming from pharmaceuticals. That does the people NO GOOD.

Another purchased office?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

80. When she voted for the IWR. I vowed not to vote for her again. I didn't this

November.

[Lord Byron]

81. It's the economy, stupids!

She's a free trader. Loves NAFTA. Will say anything to get elected including taking a fair trade stance. Plus, she likes war.

No2DLC ABH

[tenshi816]

82. I don't dislike HRC, but

I was never especially a supporter of hers either.

I dislike the fact that it seems to be a foregone conclusion to a lot of people that Hillary already has the Democratic nomination sewn up. I don't see that she's done anything to qualify her as the presumptive nominee for the Democrats a full year and a half before the 2008 convention. The entire Hillary juggernaut seems to be driven by both the Republicans and the media without taking much account of what the American people themselves want.

Like many others at DU, I'm also uneasy about the dynastic implications of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton.

Finally, there's just something off-putting to me about Hillary Clinton. I will vote for her if she's the Democratic candidate but it will be without enthusiasm. I get the feeling that she believes she's already got the nomination in the bag simply by announcing that she's running, and that all the rest of the race is just for show.

There are other Democratic candidates (and potential ones) who have much more appeal to me.

[GeorgeGist]

83. When she shut out the health-care community...

in her foray into policy making. Believe it or not, there are patient advocates working in the health-care who know how distorted the current system is and have better ideas on how to correct it than a lawyer.

[eridani]

95. That was it for me as well

She merely proposed funnelling humongous amounts of public money into insurance companies' bottom lines with an addendum "try to insure more people, pretty please with sugar on it and a cherry on top."

[OregonBlue]

84. When she voted FOR the IRW.

[WinkyDink]

85. I simply do not believe the majority of Americans will vote for a woman,

and I am utterly convinced, were I wrong about that premise, that Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton will not be the one to make history.

You and I may know there was nothing to WhiteWater or Vince Foster, and precious little to do about Monica, but there are still plenty of articles on these subjects waiting for new readers.
HRC, IOW, will be spending time on old topics.

And most to the point, I think she is not right for the moment, which I believe is calling---as evidenced by the 2006 election---for a candidate more to the Left than she is.

ETA: Progressives can be hard-headed realists, too, and it has nothing to do with being, say, intolerant or less than open-minded. The question is, rather, who ELSE in the electorate is AS open-minded?

[Cobalt Violet]

88. She never had my support .

I like them very,very liberal.

[Sick_of_Rethuggery]

89. IWR.

The flag burning amendment sponsorship in 2006 only confirmed her as a silly opportunist to boot...

[Skinner]

90. A lot of people won't appreciate hearing this, but here goes...

For whatever reason, I think Hillary Clinton gets treated more harshly here than most other Democrats. Is she perfect? Of course she isn't. But very few candidates are perfect. I know that the Iraq War vote is huge for many people, but it seems to me that Hillary has paid a greater price for that vote -- and for every other vote -- than all the other Democrats who voted the same way.

My gut feeling is that the hatred toward Hillary may be motivated by something akin to a feeling of betrayal. Progressives were thrilled to see a first lady who wasn't just a potted plant. Progressives supported her fight for universal health care. Progressives cheered her "bake cookies and have teas" fighting spirit. Progressives stood by her when she was vilified mercilessly as a loony lefty by hard-core right wingers.

Then she got to the U.S. Senate, and we learned that she wasn't a one-dimensional caricature of a hard-core left winger. Instead, she turned out to be a complex and nuanced and political person whose votes and rhetoric did not always conform to the progressive ideal. And some of us felt betrayed. We thought she was a super-lefty -- the Weekly Standard and the RNC said it was so -- but she turned out to just be a regular lefty.

Regular lefty is fine for most members of the U.S. Senate. But when you were led to believe that someone was a True Blue Lefty, it can feel very bad to find out otherwise.

But then again, there may be another reason why Hillary seems to be held to a higher standard than all of the other high-profile politicians in the Democratic Party. There is one thing different about her. But I'm not going to bother saying it because progressives are known for being an open-minded and tolerant group of people, so that couldn't possibly be the reason.

Or, the other possibility is that she actually is awful, and I am clueless for not seeing it. Which is certainly possible.

[eridani]

96. You can't be in favor of NAFTA and still be a lefty

Period.

[Lost4words]

101. Yup! A democrat for Nafta is a Repuke in spirit, Nuf said.

[Guaranteed]

111. I think she's held to a higher standard because her last name is Clinton

and she and her husband have held the leadership of our party, at least by conventional wisdom, for a good 15 years now. Certainly, my expectations of her are high.

The privilege of being a walk-on nominee for the Presidency also has its responsibilities.

[SaveElmer]

118. I think you are on to something there...

I think the CW that had grown up around her, pushed by the MSM in cahoots with the right wing, was that she was this raging lefty...and she isn't

Politically she ranges on the left side of the spectrum, and is certainly more liberal than alot of Democrats, but her willingness to make common cause with any number of progressive enemies on various issues(Brownback, Gingrich etc), has drawn the ire of this section of the party...

However, I think it will also get her elected President!

[rinsd]

124. Ya know I never thought of it in those terms.

Makes as much sense as anything else. I would think it feeds itself even more because now she gets so much attention people think that it takes away from their guy (which may be closer to their ideal candidate).

[Laurab]

136. I don't hold her to a higher standard - I just don't think she can win

I'm of the belief that any dem (note - Lieberman is no longer a dem, or I would have to change that), would be better than any republican.

I'm sure she'd be a fine President, but she is HATED by the right - they think of her as we think of *, although in her case, it's not justified. I have no problem with a woman running, I DO have a problem with a woman who would be the best "get-out-the-vote" for repukes running. It's something that I don't think can be overcome.

I don't have a dog in this race yet - there's a lot of time, and eventually I will, but I really, really hope Hillary does not win the primary because I want the Dems to win.

To be honest - I also don't see anything that she's done (and she's my senator) - that would make her stand out. She was married to Bill, and has name recognition, that's about it. The same could be said for several other candidates, but Hillary has been in the public eye for a LONG time, and as a senator, I think she's just been adequate.

I don't like to bash ANY dem candidate, but I do want the Dems to win the presidency in '08. Running someone republicans hate with a passion is not the way to do it.

That being said, if she does win the primary, she's my candidate. I just hope she doesn't.

[KoKo]

144. What you say is true...but adding that in "hindsight" Clinton's Presidency

was not as good for Democrats in Policy as it looked at the time. And, many of us spent so much effort defending Bill and Hillary against Ken Starr and the RW Attacks that we weren't really looking at the policy and that we kept losing seats in the House and Senate during the Clinton years.

I don't know what you mean about the the "one thing different about her, but I'm not going to bother sayinging it because progressives .....are known for being open minded, tolerant"..though. Is there something you know that we don't? Something Scandalous? PLEASE TELL.....it sounds interesting...if we need to be open minded and tolerant about it. :shrug:

[seabeyond]

91. i didnt want a second bush, i REALLY dont want a second clinton

i think this is so wrong for our country to have two families run our country with all thesecrets for more than two decades. i cannot stress how much i think this is a problem for our country in many different ways. that is the first issue

secondly,.... i dont trust hillary more than i dont trust all the other candidates.

[Sweet Freedom]

92. I just can't re-live all the Clinton bashing

As much as I would love to see a woman elected during my lifetime (and my eight-year-old has assured me she's up to the task if one hasn't been elected by the time she's eligible :) ), I just don't want to go back to the days of Clinton bashing. We will have to relive everything that we've already been through, and it is simply time to move on.

[Lost4words]

98. I think Richardson has a better chance. H has too much baggage!

I have really learned how BC raped the middle class in this country with that Nafta garbage.
I never want to see another Bush and I rather never see another Clinton in the WH.

I dont want a DLC candidate ever!

[rman]

99. priorities:

video games versus illegal war.

I did support her when she was helping to try and fix medicare-or-whatever-it-was-called-back-then. I think the failure wasn't entirely due to the Clintons.

[gauguin57]

100. When she started being a big fake, like so many politicians.

When she started trying to be all things to all people in order to get elected. That completely turns me off about ANY politician. Stand for what you stand for, for God's sake. Get real or get lost.

FLAG-BURNING? GIVE ME AN EFFIN' BREAK, LADY!

That's when.

Oh yeah, and IRAQ!

[blossomstar]

102. I am amazed that it's h appening to me too!

I literally always liked Hilary before, but when she was on Olberman, I had to mute her when she would laugh (SHRILL) because it was so annoying. It also did not sit well with me when she came out after Kerry's botched joke... she seemed to be "pouncing on him". I WANT to vote for her, and don't understand these feelings I'm getting! Thanks for your post, it's good to know it's not just me.

[Ilsa]

103. I have "Clinton Fatigue."

I don't feel like fighting those nasty old battles again over their reputations, whether their marriage is "for real" (like it's any of my business). And yes, I also think she blows with the wind.

I'd rather have someone with a new face, lots of experience, not necessarily in Congress, really bright, and ready to take on the Ins-Hannity-s of Fox Fiction.

[sniffa]

104. when she came to boston and got aLL buddy buddy with

the reverand eugene rivers. the man's an outspoken bigot (not to mention an asshoLe, as he's been in the news not too Long ago for handLing a rape at his center very poorLy) and some of the things he says shouLd have been repudiated by her.

i don't care for her trianguLation, but that wasn't the tipping point.

[confludemocrat]

105. I like her more than Obama, anyway, if that means anything n/t

[SmokingJacket]

106. The proposed flag-burning amendment.

A small thing, but her support of it tipped me over to the non-support column.

Of course, I will vote for her if she's the candidate.

[mod mom]

107. After reading "Best Democracy Money Can Buy", although I was a very weak supporter of her

beforehand.

Issues that upset me: Iraq War, NAFTA supporter (KILLS the middle class weakens our nation), and too corporate!

[DefenseLawyer]

110. She can't win.

That's enough reason for me. I want to win.

[Justpat]

112. Her voting record is appalling for a Dem

supposedly concerned about average americans.

She has made friends in NY with her standing up for
the firefighters and policemen involved in 911 rescue
and and the resulting health problems. But her position
on almost every other issue really pisses me off.

But she sides with big business on almost every issue.
Her stance on outsourcing really enrages me. She still
buys into the globalization inevitability bs put out
by all big business.

[etherealtruth]

115. Here's her record

http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=WNY99268

pretty respectable

[in_cog_ni_to]

117. I LOVED Hillary Clinton BEFORE she voted for the IWR. After that, she lost me.

Had she come out in 2004 and said she made a mistake because she was LIED to about the illegal invasion, I MAYBE would have forgiven her, but she STILL hasn't apologized for that horrid vote. What is she thinking???!!! There was an election on November 7 and the voters TOLD HER....we want to get OUT of Iraq. Her stance on this illegal invasion will lose her the nomination.

[WA98296]

119. I agree with almost everything you said/think. Except, I can no longer

overlook Mr. Clinton's mistake with Free Trade agreements, so I would not wish to have him back. Free Trade works against the middle class (most of America).
Really, if you take time to really evaluate them, the Clintons are both republicans, despite what they chose to call themselves.

Additionally, this country will not benefit from presidencies which are in essence becoming dynasties:
Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, ___________, ___________.

It is not in the best interest of democracy.
Not only that, the Clintons and the Bushes have become far too chummy.
It sickens me. Bush is a criminal in my opinion.
I think our democratic congress (especially Nancy Pelosi) best keep that in mind in dealing with Bush.
Less applause for him, and MORE accountability.

As far as Mrs. Clinton losing ALL hope of ever receiving my vote for anything, it came when she stood side by side with Bill Frist, on the Today Show, talking about her visions for Health Care reforms (which included having us all micro-chipped). I can not be surprised by this as she receives more money than anyone, or is second most, anyway, she receive way too many contributions from Pharmaceutical companies. That's because THEY have something to gain by having her, not US.

[populistdriven]

120. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act - The Clintons are both Corporate Stooges

Plus when Hillary screwed up the health care reform by insisting on it being a protection racket for corporate profits.

[rinsd]

123. She hasn't lost anything from me.

I'm more of an Edwards guy for this election but I will support Clitnon if she wins.

[SoCalDem]

126. I am fundamentally against "legacy" elections. (no matter the party)

As long as the "former" is living, I think it's wrong.

Let's say that she DID go on to win.

everyone would second-guess and say ""I see Bill's fingerprints on this or that" or when a decision was made, more attention would then be paid to getting "his" input.

It's just bad policy, and there's a reason why a TRUE monarchy usually involves the death of the reigning monarch. It's to AVOID the conflict of interest issues.

With *², WE know his Daddy's been meddling, or at the very least, *²'s trying some risky stuff to either impress his daddy or show him up.. Either way, WE lose.

[Blue_In_AK]

127. I never warmed to Hillary as much as I did Bill,

I'm not sure why, but I agree with you on the "everything to all people" thing. I feel like she takes whatever position is politically expedient for her on any given day, and that she is motivated more by self-interest rather than the common good. I suppose that's a criticism that could be leveled at most of the candidates, but something about her just seems self-serving and self-absorbed.

I'll admit I'm relying purely on my instinct here.

[DaveJ]

129. She's not much different than Mr Clinton

Everyone seems to love Bill but they're unsure about Hillary? Seems a little sexist to me since they are both so similar politically.

On that note, I think the U.S. urgently needs a woman president in order to boost female esteem in this country.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

130. video games.

Maybe that sounds silly, but there you have it.

[marlakay]

132. Agree with your wife

Something about her is just power hungry, like I said before I will vote for her over a republican if she makes it in the end but I won't fight for her or help in any way, shape or form. Only candidate I will even do out of state trips for is Gore.

[coalition_unwilling]

133. Hilary reminds me of the "Good German" exposed as a myth by

Daniel Goldhagen in "Hitler's Willing Executioners". The position that "I didn't know I was being lied to prior to the invasion\occupation" is a bald-faced lie, as 30 million of us knew pre-war that she was being lied to. She chose not to know she was being lied to or she knew but now is lieing about knowing she was being lied to.

She lost me with her vote to auth military force and she will never get my support back.

[porphyrian]

137. It's just not all about her. Yet, this administration is trying to frame it as if it is.

Alarms should be going off all over the place for everyone.

[Diane R]

138. The final shoe dropped when she bashed Kerry the day after he 'botched' the joke.

Hillary was on thin ice with me because I felt that she only does what is politically expedient. She puts her finger to the wind, and never steps out front unless she feels it is safe.

Her strong support of bush's Iraq policy turned me against her. But it was just 2 weeks before a critical national election when she joined with Republicans in bashing a hard working Democratic Senator....simply because it helped her position herself for the '08 election.

I'll never forgive her for that, and I really hope I won't have to hold my nose and vote for her.

[Poll_Blind]

139. She never had it at all. I find it extremely strange to consider the...

...possibility that out of 300 million Americans, the best presidential choice would be the wife of the previous Democratic president. I'm sure actual conservatives, not PNACers, but actual (yes, even likable aside from the difference of opinion) conservatives scratched their head, or a lot more, when the SON of the previous Republican president got the nod for a run at the White House.

  Neither side likes the concept of political dyansties much, except insofar as individuals with brand recognition really have done a yeoman's job in politics on their own.

  Neither Bush, Jr. nor Hillary Clinton had shown anything exceptional prior to their run except brand recognition which is a shameful thing for a Democracy to sink to when considering new leaders.

PB

[DarkTirade]

140. There are a few reasons...

mostly because she seems like the type who tries to please everyone. A) That is impossible, B) that will get nothing whatever done, and C) she tries to please people who she shouldn't be pandering to. Silly things like trying to go up against violent video games. There are more important things that need fighting, trying to ban something that shouldn't even be sold to minors in the first place (and most stores don't sell them to minors, I might add.) isn't the best use of a senator's time.

[CTyankee]

142. C'MON PEOPLE. IF SHE RUNS WE'LL VOTE FOR HER!!!

Hello, we're Democrats. We will vote for her. If you don't vote for her you are enabling a Republican to once again screw our country!!! AAAGGHH!!

This has to stop. What is best, her or some Repuke who is intent on taking us all down on the Rapture?

Pleez. Get a grip. We will vote for Hillary.

[SethInUpstateNY]

143. I voted for her in 2000,

but she lost me with her support for the Iraq War.

[Arugula Latte]

146. She bends in the wind, as the political winds blow ....

I don't trust her and I don't think she's genuine. She'd sell us all down the river if it were to her advantage.

I want someone who knows herself/himself, and is not afraid to stand up and say "this is who I am, this is what I believe."

[B Calm]

148. It's not patriotic to blindly follow a leader who lies us into war, it's treasonous!

[_dynamicdems]

149. Never had it. Never will.

We have a number of candidates who are better qualified than Hillary Clinton. I remember "Hillary Care" among other things she's said and done. She's two faced and backstabbing and immediately after declaring her candidacy, Hillary's campaign staffer began attacking other Democrats, including her husband's former VP, Al Gore who is not even a declared candidate.

She hasn't got a strong position on Iraq. Talk about wafflers!

She wants to make nice with Republicans and her husband has nearly crawled in bed with the Bushes in recent months. Notice there have been NO attacks from the WH on Hillary. There seems to be an uneasy truce there, for the time being. What was the price of that, I wonder? Keeping her mouth shut about Iraq? Or was it throwing other Democrats under the bus?

She hasn't done anything as a senator, so why should anyone think she'd do better holding the highest office in the land?

If Hillary gets the nomination, the conservatives will rip her to shreds. The Clinton dirty laundry and baggage will be brought out in what you can bet will be the dirtiest campaign ever. And the more she tries to fight fire with fire, the worse it will become because it will play into the public perception of her as a shrew.

Good grief, is this all the Democratic Party has to offer?

[Califooyah Operative]

152. DLC

I've always been skeptical of her but her triangulation, hawkishness, and assosciation with the DLC is too much for me to swallow.

I will vote for the democratic nominee in the end but my first choice is sure as hell not going to be Hillary.

[roguevalley]

153. vote for war, voting record in general and her waffling.