Anyone else NOT want Hillary for Prez?

[carrowsboy]

Personally I like her, BUT....

1988 - Bush

1992-2000 - Clinton

2000-2008 - Bush

2008 - 2012/2016 - Clinton

Anyone else see a problem with this? Is this democracy?

[Township75]

1. I think there are enough Repubs and Dems that could agree to

No Bushs in 2008 in return for No Clintons in 2008.

It would be a great gesture of bipartisianship.

And I wouldn't have to worry about either becoming president.

[FrenchieCat]

2. Oh yeah...that's creepy!

Are we America or did we really lose the Revolutionary war against the Monarchy? That is the question a Hillary Clinton run poses....apart from others problems that I see.

[sepia_steel]

3. *raising my hand*

Not me, thanks :)

[SoFlaJet]

4. yes me

I do not want her or believe that she can win-the right is feigning fear over her,don't buy in folks there is nobody they'd RATHER see as our nominee

[lancdem]

9. Oh, there are plenty of people they'd rather see

They couldn't beat her husband, remember. I've seen posts from progressives on other blogs who say conservatives privately tell them they do fear a Hillary candidacy. That doesn't mean she'll run, however.

[lancdem]

5. I don't think the fact her husband was president

should disqualify her in and of itself. If she does a good job, who cares what her last name is? That's not an endorsement of her candidacy, just a defense of her right to be judged on her own merits. Plus, if she won, it would be fair and square, not the way Chimpy won in 2000 and maybe even 2004.

[mntleo2]

39. Right ON! Who Gives A Crap For A Name?

I could care less. Still I am VERY disappointed with Hillary's stances, which are almost always Rethug lite. They just do not have a clue as to how to tap into us little people, and frankly I do not think they want to have a clue, they could care less. They seem to think only the 'elites' should be the ones who decides who governs us. Democracy like it was in ancinet Greece, where only titled people could vote...

My 2 cents GRRRRRR!

Cat In Seattle

[AJH032]

74. exactly

As long as she's elected by the public, there's nothing wrong with the fact that she is married to an ex-president (who happens to be one of the best in recent times). Besides, it's not like the Clinton family has anyone else besides Bill and Hillary to continue any kind of political dynasty (sorry, I don't think Chelsea makes the cut; she doesn't even like public speaking) unlike the Bush family which has Jeb, and his sons to continue theirs. It's the BUSH family we should be worrying about, not the Clinton family.

[Carolab]

6. Correction:

2000: Gore

2004: Kerry

[napi21]

7. I don't dislike her, but so far I haven't seen or heard ANY

candidate that I want to support!

I will say this. Everything the subject comes up about a female US Pres. I used to answer, I'd have no problem with it, but there really haven't any women I've seen who could do the job! I really do this Hillary could do the job!

Can she get elected is another question. I don't know.

[movonne]

8. I am... but sometimes I think Bill is about the only one

who could handle the mess we are in...and then I think if we got Hillary maybe we would have Bill's intake..

[halobeam]

10. IMO.. even after this Bush disaster, America isn't ready for a woman

president. Many would vote against her because of that, especially being in war, and don't think I'm a sexist for saying it. I personally would vote for her if she was the Dem running. I happen to like most of what she stands for. Sadly, this country has some growing to do, it's still a sexist and racist place.

Edit to add: She is definetely not my first choice. Not even my second or third, either.

[mwooldri]

82. We need a Progressive "Thatcher".

Someone who isn't afraid to 'handbag' the opposition.

I'm afraid that Hillary is no handbagger, and nothing like Thatcher. She may be right wing, and some of her policies repugnant, but you got to recognise that she had 'balls', and helped get Britain left by the mess of the socialist Labour movement of the late 1970's. For that time, she was right for Britain, a bit extreme maybe, but Britain needed pulling up by the jockstrap and that she did.

However, this person unlike Thatcher and (cough), shouldn't need to fight a war in order to ensure re-election (Thatcher got the Falkland Islands/Malvinas back after Argentina invaded... (cough cough cough) Iraq (cough cough)).

Nothing wrong with having a woman - just need to find the right one. Hillary - I don't know if she really has the balls for the job. My jury's out on this one.

Mark.

[Muddy Waters Guitar]

89. Barbara Boxer would be great

Boxer is Thatcher w/o the lunatic-level idiocy of many of Thatcher's policies esp. in her later years (the poll tax, cutting the financial lifeline to British scientists and engineers, her boneheaded opposition to German reunification after the Berlin Wall came down).

Boxer in comparison is tough yet effective at the same time, with leadership qualities but also the ability to learn and react on her feet.

[renie408]

11. I don't want her for a candidate. I wouldn't mind her for a President.

I don't think she can get elected, so she scares me as a candidate.

If she could skip the whole campaign/general election thing and go straight to being President, she might do a fine job.

[Muddy Waters Guitar]

90. Not so sure about that-- IWR, corporatist philosophy

Her continuing support for the Iraq War debacle and desires to expand it to Iran/Syria, her support for further increasing and facilitating outsourcing-- for this and other reasons there are many Dems who would not vote for her if she were the nominee.

[sandnsea]

93. That's so funny Renie..

I think she'd make a helluva candidate, lightening rod yes, but still a helluva candidate. I have very little use for her as a President. lol.

[win_in_06]

12. A worse, nightmarish alternative...

1988 - G. H. W. Bush

1992-2000 - Clinton

2000-2008 - G.W. Bush

2008 - 2012/2016 - J. Bush


I'd rather have another Clinton

[bergamot]

33. After that

Jenna Bush will be old enough to be President.

[AJH032]

75. and then George P. Bush,

Jeb's son, and so on and so on.

[BobRossi]

13. No thanks...

We don't need another caricature to enforce the wrong image of the party.

[SoFlaJet]

18. Right now

Mark Warner is the most attractive candidate out there for me

[FrenchieCat]

40. You know, I'm curious about something.....

about those who rave about Mark Warner.

I have a couple of questions for you...considering:

what does Warner say or think about the Iraq "war"?
Does he think we were justified in going in?
Should we now leave?
What are we fighting for?
What about Cindy Sheehan? What does he think of her?
Would he be for or against the 50 billion they will be voting on real soon.
What about deficit Reduction? What does he say about that? Wat will be his approach?
Is he for a single health care system or no?
What his position on rebuilding after Katrina? Does he agree with not paying prevailing wages?
What would he do about Iran and Syria?
Why was he at the bildenberg meeting earlier this year?

If you can answer these questions, great! I'll look into Warner if your answers are good ones.

If you can't answer these questions....then my question to you is what makes him so attractive? Should we even think of supporting someone's who postures on the most important issues facing us today are unknown? Why would we want to do that?

Should the fact be solely that because Warner is a one term popular governor from a red southern state that should make him enough of a compelling figure to vote for. Really?

What are his known stances, that you know of?
What has he uttered that would let us know that he's a fighter, won't take shit, won't be a GOP appeaser, etc., etc., etc.


Thanks! :hi:

[SoFlaJet]

44. I don't know if I'm raving or not

I just kinda like what I've heard him say,the way he looks and what he's done(from what I know of it right now)"now" being the key phrase

[AntiCoup2K4]

71. Good point! Warner's like the John Roberts of presidential candidates...

We know NOTHING about him, except that DLC'ers love him. And that ain't good enough.

[Selatius]

14. I DISAGREE with her economic policies

This is primarily the reason why I would want somebody else to be president.

[Kolesar]

23. She has name recognition, but I don't think most dems "want" her

...as the nominee. I wish she sounded more like Iowa Senator Tom Harkin when making a speech. Instead, she sounds like the dean of a university.

[jackster]

15. not me either

like her okay, but votes with the repubs WAY too much - too "centrist"

[jackthesprat]

35. Agree.

As a "progressive", I don't see centrist politics winning elections.

[carrowsboy]

16. Not about her being a woman...

or even Bill's wife or her voting record!

It, to me, is the fact that for nearly 20 years (maybe longer if Jeb runs/wins) that America will be headed from someone of these same 2 families.

You can't tell me that is not some scary kind of shit.

[davidinalameda]

17. count me in

I don't want Hill in the White House

Let her stay in the Senate

[Totally Committed]

20. Ditto for me!

Exactly.

:hi: dwickham!

TC

[jackthesprat]

19. Actually surprised she is taken seriously.

The idea that the extreme conservatism of our nation right now will support a female president seems deluded, at best.

[wryter2000]

30. Welcome to DU

:hi:

[jackthesprat]

32. Thanks!

[tridim]

21. Technically she's a "Rodham" not a "Clinton"

Regardless, she's the RNC's top pick for the Dem nomination and my 2nd to last choice right above Zell Miller and Joementum.

[Nordmadr]

22. I do not want her as President.

Still three years out, my support would be first and foremost behind Gore should he choose to run. I have my own reasons that make me feel confident in him as a choice, that have nothing to do with his television charisma or lack thereof.

Clarke is my early next best.

The election system must be fixed. If there is a national swing in popular votes for more left leaning candidates that is not reflected in the results, you could very well see a major uprising in the populace. Sounds like 17th (and 18th) century colonial America all over again.

Olaf

[Muddy Waters Guitar]

91. Yes-- Gore, Clark, Boxer my top choices currently

with maybe a clever populist like Brian Schweitzer in Montana as the running mate pick. Gore especially impresses me more every day, and he's *smart*-- a dude who might actually save this country from the disaster to which Bush has been pushing us. Gore has long been thinking about ways to boost up our investment in and use of renewable energy, something we need to be starting up, like, yesterday.

[jobycom]

24. Neocons and conservatives don't want her. nt.

[jackthesprat]

25. Yes they do.

Know she is unelectable.

[jobycom]

26. No they don't

They know she'll win, and reverse what they've tried to do.

[jackthesprat]

28. how do we go from reactionary government

to setting precedent for a female president. Help me understand that

[jobycom]

57. People get sick of the reactionary government, and vote her in

Same way we went from good government to this insanity we now suffer.

[jackthesprat]

60. she voted for the Bush Iraq War.

Don't see her as vastly different on that; why would the rest of America?

[jobycom]

62. No, sorry, she didn't

She voted for the Iraq War Resolution, which authorized Bush to use force if Iraq didn't comply with various conditions, after requiring Bush to seek UN approval first. Bush was going to war, he had already declared he could invade any time he wanted. The IWR put limits on how he could do it. Unfortunately, those limits didn't work.

She shouldn't have voted for it. But it wasn't a vote to go to war. We were going, even if it failed. Probably sooner.

[jackthesprat]

63. That is what I meant; that was the only vote.

Unlike many who signed bill to opppose war-unless Security Council approved-sponsored by Sen. Levin, of MI. Sorry, Hillary a pro-Bush on this one.

[jobycom]

64. I don't understand what you meant.

Bad punctuation, or I'm having a bad brain day. Probably the latter.

Hillary votes pro-Hillary.

[jackthesprat]

68. there was an alternate bill

Sen Levin sponsored a bill amending the original bill that would authorize war only if the security council of the UN voted for the war. Hillary could have signed on with that bill, but she did not--giving full approval to Bush for the war.
Kerry tried to use the same logic; I even defended him...but he did not sign on with Levin.

[desi826]

79. This is exactly why Dems always lose

Jobycom wrote:

"She voted for the Iraq War Resolution, which authorized Bush to use force if Iraq didn't comply with various conditions, after requiring Bush to seek UN approval first. Bush was going to war, he had already declared he could invade any time he wanted. The IWR put limits on how he could do it. Unfortunately, those limits didn't work. She shouldn't have voted for it. But it wasn't a vote to go to war. We were going, even if it failed. Probably sooner."

This is something that Dems just don't get and Repubs understand with great clarity.
It doesn't matter what something *actually* is; the only thing that matters is what the public "percieves" it to be.
This is why every Repub memo you see always says "we must *appear* to be....we must *appear* to act.....etc."

My point being that it doesn't matter what the IWR actually WAS, all that matters is what the public *percieved* it as being......permission to go to war. Sorry, but that is how most people viewed the bill and the MSM did nothing to change their minds.

Dems need to start thinking in this way if they mean to win the PR battle.

They should have known that the vote would have been percieved as a vote for war and NOT voted for it. Hilary, in this case was worse because she actually negotiated that thing with Lieberman and Bush. What kind of judgement does that show for a possible future presidential contender?

Again, it doesn't matter what a thing *actually* is, only what the American public *thinks* it is. This killed Kerry as well. It was an insurmountable wall, in his way. It's going to be even bigger for her, if she decides to run.
Des

[wryter2000]

27. It's not going to happen

At this point, even their "base" is abandoning them. HC could "mobilize their base" better than anyone else alive. As smart and as capable as she is, she wouldn't make a good candidate. All MHO, I've certainly been wrong before.

[dbonds]

29. /raisehand

[caledesi]

31. Like Hillary...but don't want her as a nominee.

This is getting shoved down our throats and I don't like it.

Winners:

Edwards
Dean
Clarke
Gore

[thereismore]

34. I don't want Hillary. Give me Clark or Gore. nt

[indie_voter]

61. Me too. n/t

[Jon8503]

36. Some time ago I would have said yes but ever since she supported

Bush in his war, I have a different take. I feel she was in a secure state for re-election and believe she could have voted anyway she chose. However, I think she was looking ahead at a presidential race thinking that voting for the war was the best way to go instead of what was the right way to go.

As such, will not support her any more.

[bee]

37. me. dont want her. really, really dont want her. n/t

[TumorSupressor]

38. I wish people would get off her bandwagon

She is NOT electable. Besides, its seems too much like royalty.

[MindPilot]

41. hand raised -- no Hillary

Hillary as a candidate would be the political equivalent of throwing a grenade at the GOP so they could pull the pin and throw it back. There is no way she could go up against the CorpMedia smear campaign; they would destroy her like they did with Dean only making it last the entire campaign. Hillary running would make sure the Bush reign continues unabated.

From our side, Hillary does not represent the democratic base. She thought invading Iraq was a good idea, shes sides with the big bidness corporatist way too often, and dabbles in nanny-statism too much for my tastes.

Get me Wes Clarke!!! A man who is not afraid to use the word "liberal".

[jackthesprat]

43. she seems rather conservative.

I just wonder whether democrats really, really want her or it's another failed attempt at pragmatic compromise.

[second edition]

42. Yes, a real bad feeling about this!

[nadinbrzezinski]

45. yep, way too many problems

[joeprogressive]

46. I respond with caution ,

since I was censored earlier for trying to classify Hillary supporters.

Hillary is the worst person we could nominate from an electability standpoint. If 2008 rolls around and we lose because we nominated Hillary, I will probably have a stroke before I can reach my keyboard to let everyone have it that supported her here.

People that support Hillary are no different than those that support the Green party. Maybe good in principle but defies all logical thinking.

[jackthesprat]

48. My mantra:

Gore lost...Kerry lost...Hillary....

[Dawgs]

47. No, I would love to see a Hillary/Clark ticket!!!

She's better than most of the potential canidates.

[jackthesprat]

49. Better at what exactly?

And which candidates?

[One_of_8]

50. There are several possibles that I would much prefer

Wesley Clark for one. I want a candidate that I could wholeheartedly support, and Hillary Clinton just isn't it, I'm sorry to say.

Hillary is a hot button, sure to energize the right and their base. What we want is a candidate who can appeal broadly across the spectrum, which is what Bill Clinton did (and still does). Hillary is not that individual, IMO.

[Bravo411]

51. I'd rather see Gore or Obama on the ticket. n/t

[Ioo]

52. I don't, I do not want her at all.

[carrowsboy]

53. Again...

Look beyond the "she can't be elected" "too early for a woman" "too centrist" molds and onto the big picture...

What is it about these 2 families?

Who is really pulling the strings?

And whoever it is, if they want her to be elected, then she will be.

[jackthesprat]

54. same thing really.

Corporate control of nation. I am surprised Wes Clark is so popular here, considering he never held an elective office and declared his party affilation weeks before the primary.

[chefgirl]

55. ME!!

Although she's undoubtedly more qualified than the the little idiot, her politics really dont impress me all that much.

Add to that, if she WERE to be the nominee, she would be the club the Repugs would use to finally beat the Democrats into nonexistence. Too much history with her and BigDog, and if you think back, it was Hillary the Repugs REALLY hated, not Bill.

Also, even if she were lucky enough to win the Presidency, do we really want another 4-8 years of the same shit we went through in the nineties??

I have a feeling that a Hillary win is almost as big a Republican wet dream as another Republican president would be, maybe even bigger.

Sorry, Hillary, you dont get my vote.

-chef-

[wiley]

56. I'd rather see Bush and his crew impeached

and take over the House and Senate in 06, or at least try. Hilary would lose worse than Edwards, although I hope the dems don't go to either of those places.

She's definitely qualified, however.

[yourout]

58. Thats a big 10-4.

Nothing would motiviate the pukes like Hillary.

[bunny planet]

59. I don't but if she is the candidate I'll vote for her. What's my

alternative, a Republican, no thanks.

[sandrakae]

65. She is not my first choice. I am liking a Kerry/Biden ticket.

If she wins the nomination, I will support her. She is not my first choice. I am afraid of all the baggage she brings. Kerry had no baggage, so the most they could come with was say he wasn't good enough to be President because he came back from Vietnam alive or he didn't bleed enough. A Kerry Clinton ticket wouldn't be bad either.

[rniel]

66. Maybe people ought to focus on 2006 elections instead

I think it would be great to get back a democratically controlled congress. Maybe some of the shit we have now wouldn't fly anymore.

But who knows maybe democrats and republicans are all fascists anyway.

[Zynx]

67. I don't trust her to be principled at all.

All I need to do is look how long she supported Bush on the Iraq War to know she is not to be trusted.

[jackthesprat]

69. Yes, my point as well.

[jackthesprat]

70. Yes, my point as well.

[OneTwentyoNine]

72. We don't need to try out the "Grand experiment" in 08....

I won't vote for her.....

[CANDO]

73. I don't like her and will not vote for her.

She makes a great Senator from the State of New York. I am holding out for whomever comes close to being an FDR, New Deal type. DLC'ers can go to hell as far as I'm concerned!

[Spiffarino]

76. Sorry. Too conservative.

They call it "triangulation" but I prefer to call it "strangulation" because it drains the life out of the Democratic party. She plays for the middle all the time, and her political views are less about what she believes than they are calculating what will get her the most votes.

I'd prefer to see a real progressive Democratic candidate for president, like Feingold, Durbin, or any number of others ahead of Hillary. Don't get me wrong - if she's the candidate in the end I'll definitely vote and vote for her, but she wouldn't even be my third choice in the Primaries.

[Crunchy Frog]

77. I'm loathe to get involved in these candidate pissing matches

this early in the game. But...no I don't really want Hillary for Prez. I don't really believe she would have much likelihood of getting elected either.

[Cappadonna]

78. Hillary isn't the problem, we just don't have many options

What are our options on the left? Dean seems too satisified building the new Democratic Party. Gore is probably tired of the bullshit. Kerry was an even bigger snooze fest than Gore. And right now, Edwards is going to have family matters (i.e. his wife recovering from cancer) to worry about a 2008 campaign. And most of the other gaggle of freaks and geeks seeking the crown just don't cut it.


The problem is that Hillary is probably the weakest AND the strongest candidate we have right now. That's a damn shame.

[bread_and_roses]

80. I don't want her

And I worked for months locally on her campaign for Senator. I have been very disappointed with her as Senator.

Besides, I don't like dynasties and think we need fresh faces, fresh voices, fresh ideas, and FRESH responses to the endless assault on our Civil Liberties, on World Peace, on the Environment, on Labor, Children, Americans of Color and the Poor.

I don't see Hillary providing any of that.

[SeaNap05]

81. Edwards 2008

[DemDogs]

86. With you there

And Edwards 08 can be President Edwards 09, which I don't think can happen with HRC. I mean, if people HERE don't want to vote for her . . .

[ladylibertee]

95. Make that two

[hippiechick]

83. I agree w/ ya but for other reasons.

... something about Hillary reminds me too much of Lady McBeth.

I've been called a troll for suggesting that she will bring every fundie nutjob out on voting day; and that she's just plain old too ambitious for my liking, but I'm sorry ... that's how I feel.

She may turn out to be a liberal Godsend if indeed she IS elected, but I just don't see it. Power's the thing for the Clinton's ... not 'living up to liberal/progressive principles'.

JMHO ~

[leesa]

84. I don't. She doesn't give a rat's ass about people dying in an illegal

war. Don't need that kind of person running our country. A corporate whore through and through.

[AzDar]

85. me. n/t

[corbett]

87. She'd Be An Ideal Veep

Her time on the Armed Services Committee, combined with her 8 years as first lady, makes her the ideal choice to be VP with Kerry as president. I've even had 100% pro-* friends tell me that they are resigned to Hillary's move to the Executive in 2008!

[Dinger]

88. I Like Hillary , But I'm Sick Of Her Being Shoved Down My Fucking Throat!

I think the repugs are smearing her with their support. They know it'll rub us wrong.

[windbreeze]

92. not me n/t

[Starbucks Anarchist]

94. I don't like dynasties.

And I don't like Dems who pander to the right wing.