MadBadger
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:48 PM
Original message |
Poll question: If You Dont Support Hillary for SOS...What is your biggest Reason Against the pick? |
|
Edited on Mon Nov-17-08 06:49 PM by hnmnf
This is an anonymous poll so you can all be truthful.
I just dont think that many people here are against her because of their "Hillary hate"
My reason has is choice 2. I just think there are better, more qualified people for the job.
|
Diane R
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:49 PM
Response to Original message |
1. A combination of options, plus others. |
MadBadger
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
4. If this were an exam, you would get the question wrong of course :-) |
|
Have to choose the BEST answer
|
Mojambo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:49 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Waste of her talents. n/t |
styersc
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:49 PM
Response to Original message |
3. If your name is not BH Obama, then who gives a rat's ass. |
mikelgb
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
16. A citizen of the United States of America? |
|
Edited on Mon Nov-17-08 06:55 PM by mikelgb
|
mwei924
(990 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:50 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Bill Clinton's unnecessary drama |
TwilightGardener
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:50 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Among other reasons, unqualified. She was never a big foreign policy expert. |
|
He's going for star power and political scheming, and not competence. Who's he going to pick for Health and Human Services, Sarah Palin?
|
FLAprogressive
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:51 PM
Response to Original message |
7. A combination of #2 and 5 |
|
Bill Richardson is twenty times more qualified.....
|
camera obscura
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
williesgirl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:51 PM
Response to Original message |
8. Other - Bill Clinton can't keep it in his pants for 8 yrs - more embarrassment. |
onehandle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:52 PM
Response to Original message |
9. DUers not about teh hate? |
|
It's the defining characteristic for many here.
I blame Karl Rove.
|
mwei924
(990 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
13. All the options in the poll are legitimate reasons for opposing someone for a position. |
KittyWampus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:52 PM
Response to Original message |
11. She is comparitively UNDER qualified. Her husband is incapable of keeping his mouth shut. |
sniffa
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:53 PM
Response to Original message |
|
just many of her supporters.
|
JVS
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
35. So you've adopted the MF doctrine? |
librechik
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:54 PM
Response to Original message |
|
when we turn back the clock to an earlier diplomatic era?
and it seems like a gift/legacy payback appointment rather than choosing the best person for the job.
|
IndianaGreen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:54 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I got no problem with Hillary as Secretary of State, but I think she will better in the Pentagon. That place needs to be purged of all the neocons and corrupt corporatists brought onboard by Rumsfeld and kept by Gates (Gordon England being a fine example!).
Hillary will kick ass in the Pentagon!
|
MadBadger
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
17. So then your choice would not be other, but you think she should be at some other cabinet position |
IndianaGreen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
20. No, I think she will be fine at Foggy Bottom, but she will be better at the Pentagon |
|
DOD needs a complete overhaul!
|
wisteria
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:58 PM
Response to Original message |
18. There are better choices and I don't like the idea of this Clinton entitlement. |
|
Clinton in this position sends nothing but a bad message.
|
democrattotheend
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 06:59 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I like her fine, but I think HHS is a better role for her, I think there are better people for SOS, and I think she'd be great if she stayed in the Senate. But I'm not too upset about it...if Obama believes his administration and the country will be best-served with her as Secretary of State I trust his judgment.
|
BuyingThyme
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 07:01 PM
Response to Original message |
21. Because she's a **********. |
RFKHumphreyObama
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 07:03 PM
Response to Original message |
22. Because she would be the greatest Attorney General since RFK |
|
And she should be allowed to occupy that role
|
harun
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 07:04 PM
Response to Original message |
23. Other: World view too far to the right, too pro-Israel. |
Kali
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 07:05 PM
Response to Original message |
24. Kissinger endorsed her? |
amandabeech
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 07:12 PM
Response to Original message |
|
2. I like her in the Senate and can see her doing very well there in a leadership role.
3. Others are better qualified for SOS.
4. The better cabinet spot for her would be HHS. She has been involved in HHS issues for a long time, and it is extremely important domestically but less visible, particularly abroad, so Bill wouldn't be as big a problem. Other posters have mentioned it and I think that they're right.
|
TwilightGardener
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #25 |
26. I guess HHS wouldn't feed the Clinton ego and sense of entitlement enough. |
Teaser
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 07:17 PM
Response to Original message |
27. Senate is better for long term impact |
THUNDER HANDS
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 07:18 PM
Response to Original message |
28. I don't want her for SOS for three reasons |
|
1. I fear she'll be more powerful and more influential than Joe Biden.
2. I really wanted to turn the page from the Clinton years and not have either a Bush or Clinton in the White House for once in my life.
3. I think she could be an all-time great senator on the level of Ted Kennedy, if she wants to be, which clearly she doesn't.
|
saltpoint
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 09:07 PM
Response to Original message |
29. I'll honor President - elect Obama's decision on his Cabinet and on |
|
other appointments.
That said, I would prefer Kerry or Richardson for the job.
|
BlooInBloo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 09:12 PM
Response to Original message |
30. I don't think war-advocates are a good fit for the Top Diplomat job. |
|
Edited on Mon Nov-17-08 09:12 PM by BlooInBloo
|
Carolina
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #30 |
|
She lost me with her calculating IWR vote in 2002. I was a big Clinton supporter in the 90s but now wish they'd just go away. Let some new people CHANGE the face of DC and our nation
We've been through this sort of recycling with Bush who populated Washington posts with people who cut their political teeth during the Nixon era and honed them with Poppy.
Enough already. We voted for CHANGE! Keep HRC in the Senate.
|
BlooInBloo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #33 |
36. Not just the 'yes' vote there, but the refusal to acknowledge that it was a mistake.... |
|
And then "obliterating" tens of millions of innocent men, women, and children.
That's not the kind of temperament I want in my SoS.
I do acknowledge, however, that it's an excellent POLITICAL move for Obama.
|
political_Dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 09:18 PM
Response to Original message |
31. A combiation of the answers, plus other reasons. |
|
Edited on Mon Nov-17-08 09:20 PM by political_Dem
Ultimately, I think we need new blood in terms of approaching the problems of today. America took a chance and picked someone who truly represented change. Now, change has to come to the cabinet posts as well.
It's getting tiring that the same people are asked to serve all that time.
The DLC'ers cannot have a lock on everything. We need to pick talent from different sources who will best serve the country. That's why a "cabinet of rivals" explanation cheapens the decision making process.
|
ecstatic
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 09:21 PM
Response to Original message |
32. I'm neutral but leaning towards no simply because |
|
I was a great admirer of hers for many many years, but her performance during the primaries makes me think she is a bad manager and has bad judgment when it comes to picking employees. I really want a great manager to be leading each department--and no drama!
|
Skip Intro
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 09:22 PM
Response to Original message |
34. blind, irrational hate. nt |
AZBlue
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 09:47 PM
Response to Original message |
37. Combination of choices #2 & #5 |
burrowowl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-17-08 09:56 PM
Response to Original message |
38. She should stay in the Senate |
|
and I would like to see as Senate Majority Leader!
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 03:19 AM
Response to Original message |