although I am a bit of a fan because I believe she has been very strong on civil rights issues through the years (LGBT, women, minority rights, etc. ). I am also a fan of Elizabeth Warren and think she may bring an even more populist viewpoint. So I think I would prefer Elizabeth but Hillary is also better than many opponents who come to mind.

and has left every country she's had her fingers in worse off that before. Her healthcare initiative went nowhere.

I see no evidence that she's competent. She'd be a disaster as President.

Last edited Fri May 30, 2014, 09:16 PM - Edit history (1)

do as president. She has been a rather successful lawyer, ok as first lady, short stint as senator, and apparently competent as Secretary of State. But I don't know how she'd be on her own. She has always been sort of in the shadows with Bill taking top billing. I think she really missed her shot in 2008 and that is too bad. At her current age if I were her I think I'd want to hang it up here, call it a career, and enjoy my retirement.

But I know the party wants her for name recognition and frankly Biden, Warren and even Sanders are the same cohort in terms of age.

What I'd really like to see is the party reach down and pull up O'Malley/Castro. O'Malley - successful governor of Maryland. Castro - successful mayor of San Antonio. Both excellent candidates and a younger face for the party. There are undoubtedly other up & comers but these are two I see as a very palatable ticket.

I wouldn't blame her for wanting to hang up her coat and retire. She's been active for half a century and campaigned on behalf of her husband or herself for 34 years prior to being appointed SoS.

I mean I was in the Draft Gore movement, we were all but certain it would happen. That speech at the Brooking's Institute was a gutpunch, and when Dean went down in flames I gave up caring about being super politically active behind a candidate (canvasing, GOTV, yeah, but other than that? Hell's no).

Her Libya actions might be "warmonger-esque" but the US spent a paltry $1 billion on that endeavor and no boots were on the ground (and notably, no American lives lost). Benghazi was, I think, CIA overreach and I think she is truthful that she wasn't responsible for the low level procedural efforts that would've protected them.

Hillary Rodham Clinton in fact did cast a vote to give President Bush the authorization to go to war in Afghanistan & Iraq. So Did a majority of Democratic Senators & Democrats in Congress, most of which have fought explicitly hard their entire lives fighting for the causes & the principles that we, the Democratic party, believe in and cherish. Its not my intention to make excuses for her vote, but it shouldn't be forgotten that the American people, The Congress, & The Senate were all blatantly lied to by the Bush Administration when Colin Powell went in front of the United Nations & declared that there was irrefutable evidence that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction & the capability to use such weapons in a 24 hour time period. After hearing this A Very Large Bipartisan number of citizens polled also supported intervention in Iraq, especially those for whom which then Senator Clinton represented & answered to, he New York constituents that had been more effected by 9/11 than other state. So if thats what you call a war monger than you obviously forget the pressure on her vote...

As for her failed healthcare initiative in 1993 and its failure, if you remember the facts correctly by the end of the millions of dollars spent in ads by the American Medical Association, the tobacco industry, and so many other industries and individuals who threw money at ads proclaiming it to be socialism, proclaiming the same bs we seen in President Obama's battle for healthcare reform, if you remember correctly he policy was chastised so much that even one of the most Liberal of Democrats of the time, Henry Waxman of California, even he said he couldn't support the plan because it was 'crafted behind a veil of secrecy' So as much as you would like to ignore the facts and play the blame Hillary & ONLY Hillary game, you should research and know that this was not merely Hillary's failure, but the Presidents failure, & even more so Congressional & Senate Democrats whom also caved in under the cloud of lies brought forth by the Republican party & their special interest groups.

Although the Clinton health care plan failed, it certainly set the groundwork for the health care law we have today, the Affordable Care Act. And she played a leading role in advocating the creation of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, which provides state support for children whose parents cannot provide them with health coverage. She promoted nationwide immunization against childhood illnesses. She also played a leading role in creation of the Adoption and Safe Families Act and the Foster Care Independence Act. She encouraged older women to seek a mammogram for early detection of breast cancer (which is covered by Medicare) and successfully sought to increase research funding for prostate cancer and childhood asthma at the NIH. She worked to investigate illnesses that were reportedly affecting Veterans of the Gulf War; now commonly known as Gulf War Syndrome. And she created an Office on Violence Against Women at the Department of Justice. She is also the first first lady to hold a post graduate degree, and she traveled to more countries than any other first lady had at that time.

Also, you trash her tenure as SOS by saying " every country she's had her fingers in worse off that before" Again, your opinion is so far from the facts As our secretary of state, Clinton visited 112 countries, helping to repair a badly damaged U.S. reputation. She advocated an expanded role in global economic issues for the State Department and cited the need for an increased U.S. diplomatic presence, especially in Iraq, where the Defense Department had conducted diplomatic missions. Clinton unveiled the Global Hunger and Food Security program, prevailed over Vice President Biden to send an additional 21,000 troops to Afghanistan, saved the signing of a Turkish-Armenian accord, and assisted the president with major decisions as to the U.S. position with regard to the revolution in Egypt and the decision to use military force in Libya. As well as other accomplishments,

While You say you see no evidence she competent to be President & that she would be a disaster, the facts that I have laid out above as well as the facts of her record in the United States Senate, My Opinion, based on facts not falsehoods and Republican talking points, as laid out above and in her record, provide me Evidence that Hillary Rodham Clinton is just as competent & just as qualified as ANYONE IN EITHER PARTY TO BE THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,..

AND WHILE I DON'T EXPECT YOU TO AGREE OR OTHERS FOR THAT MATTER, I THINK THAT HERE ON DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND, WE CAN DISAGREE WITHOUT BEING DISAGREEABLE, WE CAN MOST CERTAINLY ARGUE OUR SUPPORT FOR THE CANDIDATES TO WHOM WE THINK SHOULD BE THE 2016 DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE BY LIFTING THEM UP, AS OPPOSED TO TEARING OTHERS DOWN. BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY & AT THE END OF THE PRIMARY SEASON, WE ARE ALL STILL DEMOCRATS, AND WE SHOULD ALL SUPPORT THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT, OR YOUR ON THE WRONG SITE...

elected?

and that may be why the elite dems are putting their $$$ behind Hillary. She definitely is an experienced politician and she's tough.

nasty butts. Hillary is tough and very experienced, she basically tells them politely to F off and moves forward. It's not that I don't like Elizabeth Warren ... but that Hillary carries a lot of experience with her, etc. Sadly, it's also the money angle, who can gather up the most money. Isn't that a sad way to have a political system wherein money is the first thought.

but at least we know she's solid on civil rights issues. I'm not convinced anybody in this oligarchy is going to let a populist win at this point. The country is bought & paid for. So who will do the least damage to working class folks on a daily basis? I'd love that to be Elizabeth but if Hillary is the better fighter against the repugs we have to go with her. I'm ok with that.

win elections, especially in the hostile political environment in today's US. I really have no issues with Hillary, I've always liked her. I did vote for Obama, but not because I disliked Hilary. I would like to see her run again.

I think she's brilliant, and I believe she's very competent and savvy. I also believe that she WILL be the nominee.

I'm a big fan of Elizabeth Warren, myself, but feel she's too "new" to the political climate for her to be considered as a serious presidential candidate. I sure could see her serving in a cabinet position for Hillary.

along with Clinton, Biden, Sanders etc is that they are all up there in age. It was definitely a question when Reagan was campaigning and they are all in that neighborhood. That is why I'd prefer they think about looking at some younger candidates. But then again she is female, savvy and as you said very intelligent. We could do much worse.

That's why I think it's a good possibility that someone like Julian Castro (not sure that it WILL be him, but good possibility) will be strongly considered as a running mate.

Only one person I can think of... and that sucks that we have to literally reduce the winning candidate to being able to pull in that kind of money.

Whoever the democratic candidiate is he/she will have a bunch of young lions to pick from: Gillibrand, Castro, Booker, Wendy Davis, Cuomo. The real test will be who is picked.

If a conservadem like Booker is picked, it means Hillary is going for those reagan democrats again. This would be the worst idea, IMHO, because it wioll say, very loudly and clearly, that Hillary is trying to drag the base along without any respect.

If a Liberal is picked, like Warren or Saunders, it means Hillary is trying to win back the base again, with the promise of being left of Obama.

or O'Malley. They're not going to go with 2 women on the ticket. Castro at least puts Texas in play (even though it's still early demographically).

winning in this horrific political climate we now have in this country ... and I think Elizabeth Warren would be great in a cabinet position. I think of Hillary as more turn-key, ready to go.

And if she WILL be the nominee, it's because there's no stopping what the elites want...

Finally, the peasantry will get all that free trade we've apparently been clamoring for.

The question is, what would she be effective for?

His basic decency always shines through.

The Democratic Party leaders have some important decisions to make about which candidates will be fought for and funded in 2016.

They may talk a good game about standing for the 99 percent, but they had better realize that their decisions and their behavior will show the party's true intentions, and voters will respond accordingly.

If they want to win, they might want to reconsider backing another Third Wayer, corporatist, or warmonger.

We can continue the incredible success of the last three decades!



Warmest regards,

American Income Inequality

First of all I posted this same post above in response to someone bashing her into the ground in a Republican fashion so I am re-posting this because I would like more people to see it, and while reading this keep in mind in 2008 I supported President Obama over Hillary Clinton in the primaries...Also until the entire 2016 Democratic Field is unveiled, I don't endorse anyone...


Hillary Rodham Clinton in fact did cast a vote to give President Bush the authorization to go to war in Afghanistan & Iraq. So Did a majority of Democratic Senators & Democrats in Congress, most of which have fought explicitly hard their entire lives fighting for the causes & the principles that we, the Democratic party, believe in and cherish. Its not my intention to make excuses for her vote, but it shouldn't be forgotten that the American people, The Congress, & The Senate were all blatantly lied to by the Bush Administration when Colin Powell went in front of the United Nations & declared that there was irrefutable evidence that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction & the capability to use such weapons in a 24 hour time period. After hearing this A Very Large Bipartisan number of citizens polled also supported intervention in Iraq, especially those for whom which then Senator Clinton represented & answered to, he New York constituents that had been more effected by 9/11 than other state. So if thats what you call a war monger than you obviously forget the pressure on her vote...

As for her failed healthcare initiative in 1993 and its failure, if you remember the facts correctly by the end of the millions of dollars spent in ads by the American Medical Association, the tobacco industry, and so many other industries and individuals who threw money at ads proclaiming it to be socialism, proclaiming the same bs we seen in President Obama's battle for healthcare reform, if you remember correctly he policy was chastised so much that even one of the most Liberal of Democrats of the time, Henry Waxman of California, even he said he couldn't support the plan because it was 'crafted behind a veil of secrecy' So as much as you would like to ignore the facts and play the blame Hillary & ONLY Hillary game, you should research and know that this was not merely Hillary's failure, but the Presidents failure, & even more so Congressional & Senate Democrats whom also caved in under the cloud of lies brought forth by the Republican party & their special interest groups.

Although the Clinton health care plan failed, it certainly set the groundwork for the health care law we have today, the Affordable Care Act. And she played a leading role in advocating the creation of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, which provides state support for children whose parents cannot provide them with health coverage. She promoted nationwide immunization against childhood illnesses. She also played a leading role in creation of the Adoption and Safe Families Act and the Foster Care Independence Act. She encouraged older women to seek a mammogram for early detection of breast cancer (which is covered by Medicare) and successfully sought to increase research funding for prostate cancer and childhood asthma at the NIH. She worked to investigate illnesses that were reportedly affecting Veterans of the Gulf War; now commonly known as Gulf War Syndrome. And she created an Office on Violence Against Women at the Department of Justice. She is also the first first lady to hold a post graduate degree, and she traveled to more countries than any other first lady had at that time.

Also, you trash her tenure as SOS by saying " every country she's had her fingers in worse off that before" Again, your opinion is so far from the facts As our secretary of state, Clinton visited 112 countries, helping to repair a badly damaged U.S. reputation. She advocated an expanded role in global economic issues for the State Department and cited the need for an increased U.S. diplomatic presence, especially in Iraq, where the Defense Department had conducted diplomatic missions. Clinton unveiled the Global Hunger and Food Security program, prevailed over Vice President Biden to send an additional 21,000 troops to Afghanistan, saved the signing of a Turkish-Armenian accord, and assisted the president with major decisions as to the U.S. position with regard to the revolution in Egypt and the decision to use military force in Libya. As well as other accomplishments,

While You say you see no evidence she competent to be President & that she would be a disaster, the facts that I have laid out above as well as the facts of her record in the United States Senate, My Opinion, based on facts not falsehoods and Republican talking points, as laid out above and in her record, provide me Evidence that Hillary Rodham Clinton is just as competent & just as qualified as ANYONE IN EITHER PARTY TO BE THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,..

AND WHILE I DON'T EXPECT YOU TO AGREE OR OTHERS FOR THAT MATTER, I THINK THAT HERE ON DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND, WE CAN DISAGREE WITHOUT BEING DISAGREEABLE, WE CAN MOST CERTAINLY ARGUE OUR SUPPORT FOR THE CANDIDATES TO WHOM WE THINK SHOULD BE THE 2016 DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE BY LIFTING THEM UP, AS OPPOSED TO TEARING OTHERS DOWN. BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY & AT THE END OF THE PRIMARY SEASON, WE ARE ALL STILL DEMOCRATS, AND WE SHOULD ALL SUPPORT THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT, OR YOUR ON THE WRONG SITE..

Jackson Stephens was her Walmart investor friend, who also helped bring petrodollar banking to Washington:

BCCI IN THE UNITED STATES

''We came. We saw. He died.''

Hillary Clinton’s Honduran Disgrace

Don't know if you know all that. I do know that I'm done with the "Money trumps peace" crowd, whether the name is Clinton, Bush, or whatever.