some people just don't trust her. Get over it.

I hope that one day you can learn how to properly respond to someone without undermining your own argument. By attacking Bernie who was never brought up, it comes off as childish.

Very similar to when Hillary came out against Keystone XL. She was still attacked.

She could cure cancer and the haters would attack her for hurting the coffin industry.

Don't you remember when ABC hosted the Pennsylvania debate and they asked no substantive questions? Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos asked questions about flag pins and Rev. Wright. Hillary was trying to join in because this is politics and wanted to win. Happens all the time.

You do realize Obama appointed Hillary as his Sec. of State, right? He obviously didn't hold a grudge. The primaries in 2008 were roough, but they got over it. I was an Obama supporter in 2007/2008. Is that OK with you?

What exactly does my signature gif have to do with this OP? What an odd and out-of-place reply.

I also realize sometimes you keep your enemies close.

I suspect there is no love lost between Obama and the Clintons. Politics, et al.

and I don't always reply to all the people who reply to me.

Perhaps a PM might be the best bet for a matter as trivial as this? Either way, it's a strange question and I'm not sure what your point is.

Nothing more and nothing less.

Can't really know for sure, but the IWR vote was and remains a deal breaker for me. Totally inexcusable, with devastating consequences.

I wouldn't support Kerry in the 2004 primary for the same reason.

"Hatred" has nothing to do with it.

Too many here are about bringing good Democratic politicians down.

My guess is Bernie loses some support to Hillary. Tweetie said a poll just out shows Hillary beating Biden and Sanders in FL, OH and PA.
Biden leads Bernie in all of them

in the south, some folks are getting desperate about it around here.

They think Hillary will steal their chance at economic justice.

Of course the teahaddist republican party and their owners the koch bros are just going to roll over for President Bernie and give him all the pie in the sky stuff he is promising.

I mean look at all the things Bernie has accomplished in his years in Congress....

Except, I guess, when it's merely Hillary bashing. Perhaps the great minds of the Hillary Clinton Group could work out a rubric for distinguishing between those two categories.

There will, of course, be no need for a third category, of "legitimate concerns to raise as part of the vetting of candidates during the fight for the nomination." When it comes to Hillary, there are no recorded instances of any DU post that Hillary supporters consider as falling within that category.

through.

If you see it as a contest, then of course people are allowed to criticize. Clinton would be a bad President because she's too hawkish and too corporatist, Sanders would be a bad President because he's too opinionated and could never work with Congress, Sanders would also be a bad candidate because the Republicans would pound him with "socialist" ads, Clinton would be a bad candidate because too many swing voters consider her untrustworthy.

I've seen all of these criticisms here and I think all of them are legitimate arguments to raise. That isn't to say that I agree with them -- just that they're valid subjects for discussion. Such criticisms don't constitute Hillary-hating or Bernie-bashing.

So, tell me, what's your paradigm? When people argue that Clinton would be a bad candidate or a bad President, is that "Hillary-hating" in your book?

Bernie can't get enough support to make it a contest.
Attacking Hillary here is carrying water for the repubs because the real race is between Hillary and who ever remains in the clown car.

she changes depending on what votes she needs

and bernie supporters will see through the facade

So why poll him?

And she was singing its praises before she was against it.
Second - it seems to me that you label anyone who supports another candidate as a "Hillary hater". Like there can be only two states of being - Hillary hater or Hillary Supporter.

I don't hate Hillary. I don't like her as a candidate. Same for Biden.

And thinking that, at this point in time, that Hillary was going to peel supporters from other candidates by announcing she is now against a part of the TPP is just foolish. Did you really think she was going to gain supporters from other candidates? And did you think that is the only issue that others don't like?

then read your OP. I don't know which one of you is my favorite Hillary spokes person.

By early, I mean probably yesterday. But I agree, since when is wanting full knowledge of something before taking a position on it a bad thing? Sounds reasonable. Dare I say, presidential.

can't possibly be good for your average human being.

I don't trust her to say what her real stand is on this issue, she was okay with it now she's against it . Sorry, that doesn't mean I hate her, I just don't trust her.

She did not know what the actual deal was. Now, as some terms of the deal have come out, she has stated her position on those terms.

is HRC simply mentioning the TPP in her remarks. There are a few were she does mention positives of the trade deal which could be interpreted as pushing, but most of the 45 are not "pushing".

Mentioning does not equal pushing. The author of the linked to article is reaching and simply looking for a hyperbolic negative to smear Clinton with. Not that anyone would do that at DU.

And, she did push it - whether it was 15 or 45 - she did.

Oh - and to the other person: I'm not lying. I don't lie. That's Hillary's forte.

I bet if someone did the same to Sanders you wouldn't like it so much.

And then you worked in a second smear. Two for the price of one, how nice of you.

"I'm not lying. I don't lie. That's Hillary's forte."

There are a few were she does mention positives of the trade deal which could be interpreted as pushing, but most of the 45 are not "pushing".

There was no "it" until now to "push." She did did know what the terms were. As your link states, she didn't push any terms but rather "spoke favorably" of the goals espoused by the negotiators.

It's just campaign rhetoric and everyone from her biggest donors on down know it.

Clinton's Wall Street backers: We get it
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/hillary-clintons-wall-street-backers-we-get-it-117017

We don't hate her we just don't believe she's being honest.

I think being the first woman president is her main focus, and I don't trust her on the issues that matter most to me

Now what you meant to say was, 'People who don't want to vote for Hillary continue to not want to vote for Hillary.'

A lot more truthful.

isn't he? He has been leading the GOP field in the polls for weeks. But as another poster said, poll ratings do not necessarily translate into right or wrong.

Promoting how it would affect Africa, which represents 7 out of the 10 fastest growing economies. Also, so much touting of private sector solutions!!!

The TPP, in this speech offers manna from heaven for low income workers and families and PROTECTS!!!!! PROTECTS, I TELL YOU.... sovereign rights of each country!!!!

But, then.... she thought about it some more... especially after the way the public responded to Bernie Sanders stance on the TPP.

Imagine that, madfloridian. Thanks for the memories.

I don't love or hate her. Hell, I don't even know her.

I find most of her political stances, her grasping for power, her collaboration with Republicans, her corporate fundraising, her indifference to human life (see IWR vote), and similar items repugnant. But, hate her? Nope.

If she gives specific reasons (which will make it more difficult for her to pass a similar deal if she becomes president) then I'll be more comfortable with the possibility of her becoming president.

and that includes a non-Democrat in the first debate. She will certainly clarify her remarks once the TPP is posted, which per PBO yesterday will be "very soon," which I take to mean a matter of days if not hours. Doing what she's gotta do is fine with me. It's either that or get flattened by Senator Sound-and-fury.

the Benghazi committee.

Instead saying "Oh, it's great that Hillary's now in opposition to the TPP just as Bernie is," it's still attack, attack, attack. Changing your mind about a treaty that wasn't even finalized until the other day is now some sort of terrible thing. Funny though, that when Bernie said that if he were president he would continue the drone program if necessary, that was a change of mind.

I'm certainly not going to get all worked up about the TPP until I see the details myself. The World Wildlife Fund wouldn't be so enthusiastic about it if it was so bad. Five years and compromise from all countries involved. Oh wait, compromise is out of fashion these days I guess.

She doesn't say it exactly the way they want, they read between the lines and declare evil intent.

Most of them having been doing the same to Obama for 6 years now.

There is a reason it's not working for them.

then tries to pretend that his positions were hers.

Fucking pathetic. How can anyone support this pandering , insincere, flip flopping ego maniac?

by hating some more

eom

blah blah.... hate... haters... haters that hate... arrgghh.. hate.....

comments about the TPP. I just watched it and unless it's my imagination, much of it (especially about emails and Russia) was: Hillary, why couldn't you see into the future like a fortune teller and know exactly what would happen, what's wrong with you? And: Hillary, some people who support you are attacking Sanders and Biden, why couldn't you see into the future and stop this, or are you egging them on, what's wrong with you?

Not seeing the contradiction here. Her extremely late pandering is very straight forward and transparent.

That's really rude. I don't hate Hillary - I'm skeptical she's going to do what she says she'll do. Especially when what she says changes like the wind.

Continuous fury and rage. The jury pool would have been depleted.

I'd say DU on the whole has it pretty damn good.