education for girls across the globe (one of many reasons)

So child-friendly!

If anyone can get trickle down to work it's Hillary. And the fact that she's embedded in the military industrial complex makes me feel safe.
Besides it'll be fun to find out what social issue she'll choose to try and distance herself from the Republican candidate. Women? Good choice the Republicans hate women. Once the election is over there'll be plenty of time for lots of reaching across the aisle.

As well as a vigorous primary.

Got anything other than sloganeering? Sell the candidate.

or rhetoric. It's merely cheerleading.

She has been a advocate for Civil Rights since her college days.
She has been an advocate on Women's and children's rights
She has sponsored bills to increase minimum wages
She wants to do something about wage disparity
She thinks executive salaries are out of line
She wants to repair infrastructure which provide jobs
She thinks education is very important

There are many more

http://ontheissues.org/hillary_clinton.htm

On trade? No. On foreign policy? A hawk. On economic policy? About as entangled with corporations as any candidate could conceivably be.

Strong? I question that based on her last campaign.

Brilliant? That only goes so far without a strong foundation of beliefs, and except for social issues, she doesn't have that.

and a half out from the election? Bernie Sanders gets marginalized at EVERY mention of his name. I wonder where we would be if that was not the case? He is for Publicly Funded Elections, infrastructure spending, climate change legislation, women's rights, livable wage.... He is against NSA spying, campaign contributions, MIC, Wall Street....
We have made his marginalization a self-fulfilling proffecy! Hillary sold out long ago!

And she believes in stuff.

She believes in hedge fund trading, Chelsea is deep into that, and she believes in reaching around the aisle and she believes in that warm purple space (her words).

She believes in outsourcing and trickle over economics and she believes in Hillary.

Voted for cap-and-trade system to control carbon emissions. Strongly supports protecting voting rights and opposes efforts to curtail them. Co-sponsor of the senate DREAM Act.

Any more questions?

By the way, it doesn't follow that not having the same perspective and beliefs as you do means someone doesn't have a "strong foundation of belief". That's foolish and arrogant. It only means they have a different foundation than you.

will be thrilled with Hillary.

I've got real problems, don't need "entertainment".

into another fan club.

Gingrich and kissinger state they would be fine with Hillary as president. And Jeb complimenting her work. The gop would have no problem with her.

That oughta tell ya something

you should know that!

by compromising with liberal Democrats, say hello to Pres. Bush. And we get to say (again) "told you so".

What you think we forgot about mid-terms already?

The Tea Party may desperately want to shed the name, even as the media agrees to ban mention, but they can not shed the stupid and the hate.

Remember when the Tea Party was all the rage......what happened to the once proud branding?

supporting the too sane for the crazies President under attack - NOW.

Leave the demonization of Democrats to the usual suspects.

Attacking Clinton 18 months before the elections is doing the devils' work now.

Focus...on the present.

... leaning voters that she's not what they need or want.

By the way, I'm not demonizing her; she's done that to herself by supporting war initiatives and praising war criminals.

The present being...SHE HASN'T EVEN DECLARED YET!

And personally, I don't want a candidate shoved down my throat - I'd like to at least have a choice.

Remember this, too: The 2008 Primaries were Hillary's to lose. AND SHE LOST.

Yup, I'm alerting everyone that she isn't going away anytime soon, and may become the Democratic candidate.

omits all details of HRC's putrid background. Anyone could fit the "qualities" you describe.

tends to embolden some. others just don't know better.

some are able to remember who posts where, some look to see, and some don't care. this op seemed to come out of nowhere, while at the same time another post regarding a dream ticket was scripted. that one seemed like click bait - will have to see where that one went after dinner.

also it appears you aren't willing to accept him under your umbrella in the protected group, no threads started there by him. i guess that leaves the second option of not knowing better still open?

Which group sre you talking about?

Or something like that. Fascist? Eh, nobody knows the difference between those two anymore...

NYC Liberals post at DU - comment #44 - on WilliamPitts blog "I do not want Hillary Clinton to Dem Nominee" - awesome research and great talking points..not so much gainst Dem primary challengers - but talking points against all the RW nutties concerning her record...

not, fine too.

And I'd buy a used car from her, too.

Hope you are looking for a classic..

I like used cars, and I cannot lie!

do not want her as president are not Democrats, but like to say stupid things about Hillary Clinton and prefer being contrary. Where would we be today if the Holy Mother had delivered a girl rather than a male?

I've heard a lot of self-described 'centrists' compare liberals to Teabaggers, and in once sense, they're correct. Liberals are a big segment of the party that cannot simply be ignored if you want to win a national election. If the party establishment/big money donors use their weight to cram through a Hillary Clinton nomination the way the Republican establishment did for Mitt Romney, we are going to lose.

We need someone the broader party can get behind-- not someone custom fit to the interests of the tiny, wealthy segment of the party.

The MittWitt was a Twit.

Hillary is a lot of things (like a Third-Wayer) and NOT a lot of things (like PROGRESSIVE) - but one thing she isn't is a twit.

…..policy or initiative or project other than Project Hillary that she's actually accomplished? She made lots of mistakes on (botched) the health care attempt in the 90's and I can't name one legacy item she is remembered for as Senator or Secretary of State.

I see her as courageous, ambitious, arrogant, tone-deaf, and an economic neo-con, though strong. Where is the Brilliance? And as for Making History—well, so did Thatcher, but the middle and working class of England have still not recovered.

Don't get me wrong, I will hold my nose and vote for her if she's the candidate, but I think she represents most of what is wrong with our country: war hawk, pro banking industry, pro-TPP, and pro welfare reform. I'm not sure she is super pro-labor.

But I would vote for her she was the only choice. Personally, I think it would suck! I'd much rather Elizabeth Warren be our first female president. I see Hillary as being a Margaret Thatcher type, and that doesn't sound so good.

Other than your thoughts about Sen. Warren.

War hawk, pro-Wall Street, pro-TPP, pro-fracking?

Show were there is any evidence that the issues you cite makes one NOT a Democrat.

I have always been of the belief that just calling oneself a Democrat wasn't enough, but actually acting a certain way mattered. Looking out for the little guys, having the environment at heart, protecting our jobs here at home, going to war only when it is the last possible option after receiving all the facts.

But hey, I guess I could be wrong. Maybe the new definition is center-right, or republican-lite as I like to call it. Well if she gets the nod, and I pray like hell she doesn't, I'll vote for her. But I do think her administration, if she can win, will make Obama's look like FDR, and we all know that hasn't been the case.

My personal feelings in no way dictate the state - both past and present - of the Democratic party. It really is that simple.

Your replies are void of anything except vague comments.

Why do you want Hillary? Give me something. Change my mind.

What makes her so appealing? Besides name recognition. Something.

... what I'm personally ok or not ok with. THAT doesn't matter. The Democratic party, established way before our time, doesn't require someone on a message forum to set litmus tests for membership.

I guess I knew it had and I am trying to take it back with other like minded people. If only one person at a time.

You still can't tell me why you want Hillary to be our candidate, if I am correct in assuming you do.

So I don't know, but I do believe, from what I know, he was a much better president than he is given credit for.

He had a pretty messed up situation to deal with after the Watergate issues.

And truth be told, I voted for Ford in our school election. I live in Michigan and was/am a Michigan fan so I went with the Wolverine. I do now realize the way I was blinded by the maize and blue. Thank god I was only 9.

In your initial 'DINO' post, you mentioned welfare reform as one of your issues with Hillary Clinton. Here is part of what Jimmy Carter ran on in 1976:

I was not aware of any of that.

I do believe that the southern Dems were different for a long time. Strom Thurmond comes to mind, would never consider him a progressive, and he switched when the party began to change.

I do know that Carter is ultra religious and that may play into what I know have been made aware of his conservative leanings. He has since started Habitat for Humanity, which is not a gov't entity.

I guess I would have voted for one of the progressives running against him in the primary, but would have voted for him in the general.

I am still very stunned by those facts, and I do see a lot of Bill Clinton in those platforms. And I voted for him twice in the general, but was not all that informed back then, but knew I wanted the Dem candidate to win.

Ok, really got to go.

Peace

I am just trying to understand how you see things

And I hope that the primary, if we do get one, will allow EW or Bernie to show some populist ideas to the populace. So if Hillary does get the nod and wins, she may move a little more left, and more importantly in 2020 we can elect some truly progressives Dems to state houses and get the districts redrawn in a fairer, not necessarily aligned too Dem friendly, but fair manner.

Either way I am voting Dem, as I am sure you will also.

Good chatting, I need to get my daughter to bed.

Cheers

she voted for the illegal invasion. That's all I need to know.

In the general, yes.

And having watched him since? The only thing, the one and only thing that keeps me from regretting that vote completely, is that Bush was the other guy.

And I'm sorry, I really need something beyond "not a Republican" to make me give a shit. Else I might as well just write in Dov Hikind and slap myself on the back for a job well done.

Ya got me there! I'm not making the same mistake twice!

I find it funny there are posters claiming HRC has done nothing, but deny the facts when someone posts her positions from a site like On the Issues.

Here is the link for anyone who would like to review her record.

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/hillary_clinton.htm

"Hillary Clinton on Budget & Economy


Government action to tackle recession, not tax cuts. (Feb 2008)
The economy is not working for middle class families. (Jan 2008)
We need immediate relief for home heating & housing crisis. (Jan 2008)
Voted to limit credit card interest to 30%. (Jan 2008)
FactCheck: Consistently against making bankruptcy stricter. (Jan 2008)
2005 bankruptcy bill was by big credit cards & lenders. (Jan 2008)
No evidence as to how Obama would pay for new programs. (Jan 2008)
Foreclosure moratorium mitigates agony; doesn’t prolong it. (Jan 2008)
90-day moratorium on foreclosures; freeze interest rates. (Jan 2008)
Call for a moratorium on housing foreclosures for 90 days. (Jan 2008)
Freeze mortgage interest rates for five years. (Jan 2008)
Look back to 1990s to see how I’d be fiscally responsible. (Dec 2007)
Help people facing foreclosure; don’t just bail-out banks. (Aug 2007)
Balanced budget replaced with rising costs & falling wages. (Jun 2007)
Last six years were challenging; let’s try a new direction. (Oct 2006)
Co-sponsored bills totaling $502B in spending thru 2005. (Oct 2006)
Use tax dollars to upgrade infrastructure, not for stadium. (Oct 2000)
Pay down debt & cut taxes within balanced budget. (Sep 2000)
Stimulate upstate economy by more local decision-making. (Sep 2000)
Supports Niagara casino, but prefers job creation strategy. (Sep 2000)
Protect next generation by paying off national debt. (Aug 2000)
We have outlived the usefulness of Bretton Woods. (Jun 1999)
The economy creates consumers but cannot create citizens. (Jun 1999)
Invest in people instead of “smokestack chasing”. (Feb 1997)
Voted YES on $60B stimulus package for jobs, infrastructure, & energy. (Sep 2008)
Voted NO on paying down federal debt by rating programs' effectiveness. (Mar 2007)
Voted NO on $40B in reduced federal overall spending. (Dec 2005)
Require full disclosure about subprime mortgages. (Dec 2007)
Reform mortgage rules to prevent foreclosure & bankruptcy. (Feb 2008)"

These positions do not appear to be from a Wall Street toady. That accusation is just another right wing slander against the strongest potential Democratic Party candidate for POTUS the party has had in decades.

TPP and XL Keystone pipeline, more wars, and GMOs, Hillary is your gal.


Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price–we think the price is worth it.

Whoever saves one life, saves the world.

I think she has this one and can only lose it, if she does something to cause the loss. Otherwise I think it is hers for the taking.

That is the only way to kick the Reeps out.

Hmm

I hope she runs although it would be a sacrifice on her end.

I will note that I believe that more than one of her vicious detractors here are right wingers posing as liberals.

Like my dear old mom and all of her retired coworker friends. Like my niece who worked on her campaign in 2008.

I'll vote blue myself as well.

If that means to approve the Keystone pipeline
If that means to go tow ar in Syria or Iran
If that means to listen to her donors that want to cut social security (do not dare call it an entitlement)
If that means to defend her rich donors from a tax icnrease they have deserved for 30 years

Then no, I am not ready for Hillary. It is because she IS so ready for the thigns I listed that I am not ready for her.