A lot of things bother me about Clinton but one thing that stands out

[cali]

is the sense of entitlement she radiates. It appears to me that she believes she's owed the nomination, and she does not come off as respecting either Obama or Edwards.

I don't take well to that or several other things.

If the Clintons return it's back to the past at a time when we need to move away from the past. She may or may not have vision but I sure haven't seen it. The same old people will return: Terry McAuliff and the DLC movers and shakers that shape so much about HOW the Clintons approach governing, and the how is deeply entwined with the substance. I listened to Gary Hart yesterday expound on all this on "On Point". He noted that we, as a country, desperately need to move out of the same cycle populated by the same people.

The thought of the Clinton years coming back with all the attendant soap operas and grudge matches and vengefulness, just depresses me. We've had a full 20 years of bushes and Clintons. Twenty fucking years of the presidency split between two families. On that point alone I'd be reluctant to support her, but there's so much more.

I don't trust in her veracity about matters small and large. I suspect she does have a lot of liberal instincts, but I also think she'd be willing to jettison them for political advantage as she's done in the past.

Clinton polarizes through her triangulating. I believe that if we nominate her, she'll probably be elected- as long as she doesn't run against McCain, so it's not her electability that bothers me. It's what kind of a President she'd make.

[Diane R]

1. You spoke my mind.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

2. Everybody that meets her likes her so it's part of a "leadership" strategy and it works

One person's sense of entitlement is anothers sense of leadership.

[cali]

5. I didn't say that she's not personally likable.

She may very well be, and she's certainly smart and hard working. I'd prefer her to any repuke. I just don't get a sense of her bottom line about critical issues.

[Cha]

I met her at a NY fundraiser in 2001 and

took her picture..and after October 2002 I put that picture and put it in a drawer..not sure I still have it.

Who wouldn't try to be as charming in person, when you're meeting people, as you can be..at a fundraiser? It's hillary's actions as my senator that makes cali's OP resonate fully and then some.

[Muttocracy]

15. can you elaborate on her as senator?

I'm in NY too and not sure how I feel about her (other than being livid the national party appointed her to the job).

[Cha]

23. she turned her back

on us when we called and wrote to her to vote NO on the IWR..and the subsequent votes to help the bush agenda.

The war is my issue..I think a Dem will win in Nov and I want that Dem to be someone who was against the war from the beginning.

[Muttocracy]

24. yeah, not representing NY on that one - except defense contractors n/t

[Cha]

25. Exactly..it's monsterous..and

anyone who says..get over it in so many words isn't able to relate to all the damage done to real lives with the bombing of Iraq and our Soldiers who would still be alive and whole.

Kerry and Edwards have aplogized and I think made real progress on that but not hillary.

[Muttocracy]

27. as far as I know Biden apologized too - I can respect them a bit

for not realizing what a monster Bush & co. would be, and assuming he would follow diplomatic channels, inspectors etc. - at least they admit it now, and didn't vote for that damn Iran resolution!

[Cha]

28. Exactly...Biden's a good guy..

and I'm sorry for his supporters that he dropped out..I know how that feels from the 2004 race.

[Bread and Circus]

3. If Clinton rules for 8 years we will have had 36 years of either

a bush or a clinton as President or VP.

That will be half of an average lifetime. That will be half of my lifetime. We might as well have a king and queen. At least there's some aesthetic beauty in a royal family.

Anyone my age stands a fair chance that at least half of their lives will be dominated by 2 families and their narrow view of what the Country should be be...

That's two families...

Did we try to get rid of monarchies and family dynasties when we started this great country?

I contend the coalescence of power around these two families is a symptom of the concentration of wealth, access and power in the country. The haves have more and the power gets more and more concentrated in the few.

[Cha]

11. I contend that too..and the m$$m

just laps it up cause it's all good for them. Do you think we beat this at this time in history?

[Bread and Circus]

29. what can I do? I gave money to Obama. I voted for uncommitted...

I'd gladly vote for Edwards and be shocked if I ever got a chance to vote for Kucinich in the GE.

I try to reason with people here on DU and I feel shouted down by what feel more like conditioned robots that reasonable human beings. I'm forced to place 25+ people on ignore just so I can visit this forum and not want to poke my eyes out with searing hot forks.

I feel defeated.

[truedelphi]

13. She got into the Senate because of her connection to Bill Clinton

And the money that she raised as a person running for the Senate got rolled over into her campaign for President.

None of this is criminal activity - but all of it indicates that the machine-politics-as-usual are able to put a Corporatist into Power, which in this day and age is what the DLC is all about.

What this means for the middle income person is that we are totally totally screwn. While we can't keep up with our bills, despite many of us watching as both spouses work, as some people work two and three jobs, that taxes will probably not be re-tooled for inflation, etc.

Then on top of this, we will be "mandated" to buy ourselves some health insurance. With what money that we don't even have, I don't know. This will occur under a health insurance policy that will continue to give away at least 20% of the monies to the high fallutin' insurance execs that saw to it that Clinton's campaign coffers are overflowing.

A lot of us are learning the hard way that having a D after a candidate's name does not mean a thing in terms of real democracy.

[Auntie Bush]

19. I'll take the Clintons any day over the Romneys or Bushes.

Count your blessings!

[Bread and Circus]

30. ?!? that's a non sequiter post, it doesn't even begin to address the issue

[Yael]

4. This is exactly what Edwards' "its personal, not political" is designed to point out

Well spoken.

[Muttocracy]

"it's personal" meant something completely different coming from her = it's all about me

[Muttocracy]

6. presidential advisors

Can anyone point me in the direction of good commentary on the advisors HC, BO, or JE are likely to have in office. Given that (IMHO) we've ditched the most experienced candidates already, I am very concerned about who will be advising these folks, particularly on foreign policy. It could enhance or reduce them as candidates.

To me the Bill 2-fer was questionable enough (I kinda like presidential term limits). Given Bill's comments of late, either Hillary can't control him or likes his comments, and I'm not happy about either of those. First Spouse is a pretty undefined role, right? Are there guidelines about what SO-in-chief can / cannot do the way there are for other government positions?

Thanks for your thoughts

[Yael]

10. Regardless of who wins the Nom, I would be HIGHLY surprised if Joe Biden

isn't tapped for Secretary of State before the swearing in ceremony's catering plans are even determined.

[Muttocracy]

14. I'm torn

Part of me wants that desperately.

And part of me wants Joe keeping an eye on any of these three (party or none I believe in checks and balances). And really wants him in the Senate when the GOP regains the Senate (I fear it will in the next 8 years - no reason, just that things go in cycles).

Knowing plans for Biden for VP or SoState (if he wants it) would make me root for one of the three, though I can see good reasons for him and them not to talk publicly about it. "Candidate X meets secretly with Biden" would be a headline I'd love to see ;)

[Yael]

21. Every debate, it was an echo chamber.

No matter the question on foreign policy, they all lined up "I agree with Joe".

He will play a part. I have no doubt.

[Muttocracy]

22. still echoing

His policy ideas and catchphrases have shown up with all 3 candidates. (Pet peeve of Biden supports. Hillary's ads in Iowa bugged me the most.)

Using his ideas is a good thing but, sheesh, consider the number of people who call him the plaigiarist... :eyes:

You're right, no more Professor Biden foreign policy seminars at the debates :)

[Tess99]

7. She does have a sense of entitlement.

Last night, when she would not say that Obama and Edwards are at least prepared to be President was tacky low blow. She can't even be gracious because she feels they are both so beneath her. I'm an Obama supporter who just a few days ago thought it would be tacky for Edwards to stay in after Feb. 5th, because I thought it would mean he was all about himself and just can't let go of his presidential ambitions. But now I see that that is not true, because people who are blood thirsy for power are never gracious in my opinion, yet Edwards is always gracious. I believe that both Obama and Edwards would never have brushed off the fact that Hilly is prepared to be president. They all are. But she couldn't even acknowledge that.

To me, that was the nastiest moment of all the debates. Far worse than Obama saying she's "likeable enough", like that's a diss. And far worse than Edwards kidding her about her unattractive jacket. He was slaughtered for that.

Why people don't see what Hillary did last night as nasty is beyond me.

[Muttocracy]

8. I agree - especially on the terror/ready day 1 stuff

I'm relistening to the debates via YouTube (I missed the middle part last night) and I have to say that bothers me the most.

[Yael]

12. That was my reaction as well. I thought it was EXTREMELY

tacky to dodge that question with "I'll let the voters decide". She wasn't asked OUR opinion, her majesty was asked HER opinion.

[zabet]

9. I do not think

any of the candidates come off as if they
think they are 'entitled' to the position.
I do not really have a horse in this race since
Biden dropped out, so I cannot be accused of
favoring one candidate over the other.
What I see from Clinton is not a sense of
entitlement, I see it as confidence, self-assured
and comfortable in her own skin so to speak.
As far as worrying about the 'soap opera' effect,
that is going to happen no matter what Dem is
nominated. From the vitrol spewed here on DU,
I can assure you, once a nominee is picked, DU
will look like candy asses in their smears compared
to what the GOP attack and smear campaign will spew.

[jasmine621]

16. You are entitled to your opinions. There really isn't anything that HC

can do to change the minds of those who see through hate-colored glasses. And really, could she be any worse than Bush or Reagan?

[Muttocracy]

18. "could she be any worse than Bush or Reagan?"

Is that your idea of a reason to support her?

[cali]

20. I don't hate her and I've said dozens of times here that if she's the nom

I'll vote for her. Furthermore, I've been defending her vigorously for months here- to the point where I was often called a "hillbot".

You are projecting.

[Imagevision]

17. If Hillary gets in, she'll throw you a bone or two then throw the rest of you under the bus...

[JackORoses]

26. In the debate, She wouldn't even admit that they were both qualified

She said, "Let the Voters Decide"

much like "Let the Courts Decide"

the rallying cry of the Weasel Brigade