Anti-Hillary poll (reasons for opposition)

What is the primary reason you oppose Hillary's candidacy? (for those who support her I am including an option for you as well)

In full disclosure, I do not support her and will vote here but I did think she was impressive in the CNN/Youtube debate.

just above "Other".

I also don't like it when a candidate running for local office is able to avoid debating members of their own party because the local channel puts in a block against candidates who haven't raised enough money...

Especially when the person who owns the channel donates money to that candidate, and not to the others. If you're going to host a debate on your channel, and set a donations bar, don't donate to one of the potential candidate. Better yet, don't use donations as your measure of a good candidate.

Murdoch wants to set up Hillary as easy pickings for the Republicans. And, if she would happen to win, she owes him. A win-win situation.

I don't mind voting for a more moderate democrat, as they usually stand a better chance at winning in the general election. The problem with Hillary however is that she has so much other baggage that it doesn't matter that she's a moderate, she's still the most unelectable democrat who could win the nomination.

Call me extremely pesstimistic, but I'm just feeling like our top 3 democrats aren't good enough to win the general election. Hillary has too much baggage to win, but I do think that she'd probably make the best president out of her, Obama, and Edwards. Obama has shown far too often for my liking that he's too inexperienced, and Edwards is moving so far out to the left that I fear he's almost unelectable.

One of a hand full of democrats in this nation that was a household name in late 2002 - early 2003 that by speaking out against the Iraq invasion and some of the American people would have listened. (that's by the way a compliment Hillary supporters) People would have listened because she would have better insight on the situation in Iraq then 99% of the population since her husband is the former president, there is no doubt his insight influences her as much as the other way around.

First she could have rallied the democrats to vote no on the invasion, if this didn't work she should have ran in 2004 for president. As the whole invasion fell apart, her momentum would have grown in the race from people who had come to the realization invading Iraq was wrong. I'll put it this way, a large number of conservatives that couldn't stand Hillary before would have gained a new found respect for her insight. No doubt 2004 would have a tight race but I feel she would have defeat Bush.

I feel by voting for the Iraq war she gained nothing, maybe she thought conservatives might have seen her in a positive light in hopes of running for president in the future, but ask the average republican their opinion of Hillary Clinton in 2007 its the same as it was in 1997. Ask the average democrat their opinion of her, what would have been her base is a whole lot smaller.

All of the other issues are problems, but that one's the sticking point.

I want the Democrats to have the White House. Period.

She's pro-offshoring/anti-American worker, pro-war, anti-single-payer healthcare, & a rightwinger.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/02/02/america/NA-GEN-US-Clinton-Iran.php

She's made other stern threats against Iran in speeches. If Bush & Cheney don't get around to bombing Iran first, I'm afraid Hillary will if she gets elected.

Same reason I won't vote for Edwards in the primary.

I also see Clinton as something of an opportunist (what politician isn't?) and have questions about her experience but my main opposition comes from the fact that she authorized the worst president in the history of this country to go to war whenever and wherever he wanted.

While I like many of Edward's positions on the issues I cannot support him in the primaries for that reason also.

Real choice is all of the above.

To some degree or another? Their campaigns carefully craft what they say and do, in order to get elected. :shrug:

;)

Not in Clinton's case, however.

Haven't spent much time in the White House the past 4 decades. You tailor your message to the audience if you want to get elected. Every winner does it in every race for every office in the land. The difference is that if you are running to Represent San Francisco, you can embrace your inner commie ... but if you are running for President of the US, you've got to suppress and even disavow any views that the majority of Americans may find "scary".

You vote for the person and his/her track record ... not the nonsense that flies out of his/her mouth during the campaign.

to be more of a political opportunist than other politicians.

She's borrowed some of the same progressive rhetoric as the other candidates, and I like that. It's an improvement over hearing how moderate she is, or how we have to get beyond partisanship, or any of the other missing-the-point pablum that Unity08 and the beltway fools traffic in. This isn't the 1990s any more, and for all of her implicit desire to go back there, she hasn't borrowed the old language.

On the other hand, I'm worried that is all she is offering. Once she gets in office, is she going to offer "solutions" that really shore up the status quo and minor changes that don't really strike at the heart of our problems, or does she have the stomach to actually fight for real fixes, if it involves stepping on corporate toes? I don't know, and that uncertainty makes me distrust her.

Now is not the time for cosmetic "changes" and incrementalism. Now is the time for strong action to restore the Republic. I trust John Edwards to take that action. I do not trust Obama (for tactical reasons) and Hillary to do so.

I don't know if she's really as conservative as she acts, but the act is clearly not going away. It's too bad; I really wanted to back her, especially after all the shit thrown her way. But her willingness to accommodate thrown shit is astonishing.

-Hillary Clinton voted for the illegal invasion in Iraq and has stood by it ever since. She has not apologized for it, or even acknowledged she was wrong about it!

-Hillary Clinton voted for the Patriot Act, which infringes on the privacy of millions of American people. It gives (almost) unlimited power to intelligence services at the cost of ordinary citizens. It is not needed.

-Hillary Clinton voted for the Military Commissions Act, which mean she voted to give George Bush the authorization to determine whether you or I are enemy combatants, have us rounded up and put in prison (or worse!) without any way we can prove that we are innocent. In other words: Hillary Clinton voted against Habeas Corpus.

-Hillary Clinton will not rule out the possibility of going to war with Iran.

-Hillary Clinton is bought by lobbyists and big corporations. They own her. She works for them, not for the American people. She will serve the very same special interest groups George Bush is serving.

Not even Republican candidate Ron Paul has such a bad record! (I do NOT support Ron Paul in any way.)

And she was anything BUT 'impressive' in the CNN/YouTube debate. She didn't answer one question to the point. All she gave us were sound bites and rehearsed one-liners.

:dem:

She is a continuation of the bad politics of the past 20 years.

She tried to take out Howard Dean

DLC

murdoch

I am sick to death of the clintons.

free trade

Is it because Bush makes Bill look like the best president in history? Bill sure was the best president of the past 20 years. (But that says more about Reagan and the Bushies.)

I do like Bill's work for the Clinton Foundation and Clinton Global Initiative (is that the right name?).

"A lot of kids don't know what work is. They think work is a four-letter word."

"Kids, for whatever reason, think they're entitled to go right to the top with $50,000 or $75,000 jobs when they have not done anything to earn their way up."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2628709&mesg_id=2628709

unless he is running against Hillary. Anyone else and she said she would just stay home.

I don't believe a word she says.

Also I'm tired of the two family dynasties. I don't want 24-28 years of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton...

What next? 8 years of Jeb and then maybe Chelsea will be ready to take over?

I think she's calculating and opportunistic and might lack conviction on certain things, and may play to public opinion too much, but....

I really don't see why those are bad things.

In fact, the more I think about it, I think they're excellent qualities in a president.

Which is why I don't hate her, or even dislike her. In fact, the more I think about her the more I like her.

If Obama wasn't in the race she'd be my No. 1 choice.

I personally think she has no values at all. It's all about getting elected. She would run as a Republican or Socialist if she thought she had a better chance of getting back into the White House.