The Number ONE Reason to Vote for HILLARY If She's the Nominee...

[liberalpragmatist]

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. The number one reason is to piss off republicans.

That's about the only thing I trust Hillary Clinton to do.

[Warpy]

2. I trust her to protect civil liberties, to a point

but that's it. It's still more than any Republic would do.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

7. I don't.

[lvx35]

11. I worry she won't.

She's just too much of a pragmatist, and it appears there is too much power in the survelliance culture for her to stand against it without losing power.

[lvx35]

9. Exactly. That's why I would like Hillary/Obama at some level.

Just the sheer annoying-conservatives factor of Hillary with a black man.

[TechBear_Seattle]

3. As opposed to voting for someone else who is the Democratic nominee?

How about explaining why we should vote for Clinton in the primary? That would be far more useful information. Or are you content to set up strawmen to knock down?

[BOSSHOG]

5. I am somewhat happy

that my state's primary is irrelevant. I can save my energy for the general election.

[TechBear_Seattle]

6. My state primary is irrelevant too. I refuse to be as delighted as you appear to be.

It pisses me off to no end that the Washington Democratic Party is effectively boycotting the presidential primary in 2008 and yet forcing the state to spend some 9 million dollars on a pointless election.

[BOSSHOG]

8. I'm not delighted

there is nothing I can do about its date now

[ShortnFiery]

4. I wouldn't count on it. I have NO idea who HRC truly is ...

Perhaps, we'll all get new shoes? :shrug:

[Zensea]

10. Rah rah rah -- politics as a sports event

Go Team!!!!!
whatever.
not this stuff again please

[liberalpragmatist]

16. So you don't care about Roe v. Wade?

The ability of Congress to regulate "interstate commerce"?

Much of it has already been eroded in the past couple of years. But many decisions rest 5-4 with Kennedy voting with the left. If Stevens goes, the Court gets a decidedly right-wing majority, not just the center-right majority it currently has.

Nothing about rah-rah, "go team." Simple, brutal facts - if the Republicans get the WH again in '08, the court will be completely reshaped for the next two or three decades. I care about that, and that goes well beyond simple partisan considerations.

[mmonk]

12. I'm not sure where she stands on abuse of power.

I know she is for abortion rights which is a plus. Anyway, yes, her nominees would not be bad like the republicans. It's everything else that bothers me concerning her. However, people telling me to vote even for people I don't like at this point because of the republicans doesn't have the same feel as it did before I found out how lacking in effect our first majority in congress in the bush years would be. I really have to feel comfortable with the candidate to cast a vote now. I don't feel any comfort level with her yet.

[dkofos]

13. I doubt it, but I could be wrong. She has only proven to me that she

will say anything to get elected.
And I will not vote for her in the primary.

[melody]

14. I'll vote for the Democratic ticket regardless of the nominee

Anyone who doesn't, is passively voting for the Republicans. They may as well
cast their votes for the GOP.

[truebrit71]

15. Um...that's already gone to the dark side...

.

[EFerrari]

17. I can't do it. Please don't nominate her. n/t

[Bigmack]

18. Your pic took a while to load...

.. on this POS. I thought it was gonna open to a pic Fred and the Missus. I still chuckle when I think of her in the "Negligee Nite at the Playboy Mansion" dress.

As far as I'm concerned, H looks like freakin' FDR compared to the Old Fart and his Arm Candy. Imagine what the neocons and others can do with a dumbshit like him if he actually gets into office?

[DFW]

19. The OP says it all.

All reasons NOT to vote for the Democratic nominee pale against it,
unless you are for the laws of the land being subject to the whim
of Scalia, thomas, Alito and Roberts.

Please look at their recent (last 2 years) rulings if you need further
convincing, and I mean that for real, and I consider it a legitimate
complaint if our nominee is not to the liking (in the extreme, even)
of a voter. But the SC is too important.

The next president WILL be nominating a Supreme Court Justice.

If it's Republican, it will be another Sam Alito or a Clarence Thomas.
If it's Democrat, it will be another Steve Breyer.

If another Clarence Thomas instead of another Steve Breyer is NOT
reason enough to vote Democratic, then I hope you hold Canadian citizenship.

I was already called on this in another thread. I must be DLC, why do I
support "our party, right or wrong?" etc. If it were only that simple.
Again, I'm not DLC (100% Deaniac), and absolutely do advocate blind
acceptance of everything put forth by the Democratic Party.

But along with the OP, THIS TIME it is vital that the next nominee to the SC
be nominated by a Democrat. If we get another Clarence ("I never met a death
sentence I didn't like") Thomas on the Supreme Court, and he gets put there
because too many Democrats or progressives were too angry with our choice of
nominee not being "their" choice, then I might as well hang it up and ask my
wife for political asylum.

There are a few of our potential nominees I'm not entirely comfortable with,
but the thought of a Republican selecting the SC Justice is enough, THIS TIME
at least, for me to overlook anyone unless they are clones of Zell Miller. If
it's Zell Miller, then Ralph Nader will finally have a leg to stand on with his
"there is no difference" line.

Otherwise, gimme a D!