I decided I'll back Hillary to the hilt if she

[quinnox]

goes ahead and tries one last time. Fuck it. I said she would be too old, but I don't care about that any longer. The more I think about it, the more excited I get by the prospect of her as president. Yea, some of it is disappointment, seeing the state of the country, and thinking what might have been. But if she decides to go for it, then lets do this!

[Cooley Hurd]

1. If she went to the left of Obama...

...with UHC and closed Guantanamo... AND stopped the drone shit, she will have my undying support.

[DonViejo]

5. Sec'y Clinton will have to go to the left of...

the U.S. Congress in order to close Guantanamo, they're the people blocking the President from doing it.

Barack Obama abandons Guantánamo closure plan after Congress veto
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/20/barack-obama-guantanamo-congress-veto

Congress, rules keep Obama from closing Guantanamo Bay
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/01/09/135179/congress-rule-keep-obama-from.html#storylink=cpy

Democrats in Senate Block Money to Close Guantánamo
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/20/us/politics/20detain.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

[Whisp]

9. oh, you are just being silly now.

A Clinton could Easily get it done! Congress, Schmongress.

[Cooley Hurd]

27. So... a President no longer has the power of the executive order??

He let the same fucks from the MIC (that JFK ignored in 1962) dictate to him. Perhaps he's fearful of the same outcome (in 1963)? I love the POTUS, but it's time to stand up to the institutions that have fucked our country hard since the 1950's.

[DonViejo]

68. I'm certain this wasn't the only issue the Congress...

Last edited Sun Mar 31, 2013, 02:29 PM - Edit history (1)

has blocked a President's ability to issue Executive Orders on. In fact, the entire issue of gays in the military was an issue taken away from the President's authority when it passed DADT under President Clinton. 'Pukes and not yet evolved Dems were afraid Clinton (or one of his successors) would issue an executive order similar to the one Truman issued integrating the Armed Forces.

[brooklynite]

125. Define what you mean by "close Guantanamo"...

What Congress did was refuse to allow court trials to be held in the United States. In which case the choices are to hold them on Guantanamo (happening now), or hold them in some other country (presumably not an improvement), or let everyone go. Which approach are you supporting?

[Buzz Clik]

26. Short memories.

Obama's attempt to close Gitmo was one of his first actions. It requires Congressional approval.

[Cooley Hurd]

29. An executive order is no longer valid?

Every day that Gitmo is operational, there's dozens of potential blowbacks. This shit has to stop.

[Buzz Clik]

31. Will Hillary have more success fighting the Congressional resistance?

[randome]

37. Who would take the prisoners? No state wants them.

[DonViejo]

84. There's a brand new...

empty/not used prison in Illinois the President wanted to send Guantanamo's prisoners to:

White House set to transfer Guantánamo detainees to Illinois
Move swiftly criticised by Republicans who warn that housing terror suspects on mainland US soil will bring more attacks
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/15/guantanamo-detainee-obama-illinois-thomson

But our Congress, in it's infinite wisdom, blocked it:

Senate blocks transfer of Gitmo detainees
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30826649/

And, if Americans are truly opposed to having the prisoners in U.S. prisons, why aren't they screaming about this:

There Are Already 355 Terrorists in American Prisons
The preposterous arguments against allowing Gitmo detainees into the U.S.
By Fred Kaplan
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2009/05/there_are_already_355_terrorists_in_american_prisons.html

[alcibiades_mystery]

104. Congress retains the power of the purse, and they have explicitly forbid $1 US dollar from

being spent on transferring prisoners off the island to anywhere.

So, unless you're advocating simply shutting the place down and asking the current prisoners (including KSM) to "find their own way home," the executive order would mean little. You can't spend money Congress has explicitly forbid you from spending, at least if you want to avoid impeachment proceedings.

[RC]

56. Obama is the Commander in Chief.

Why couldn't he just order the transfer of the personal off the island?
If bu$h can start a war or two that last 10 years or more, without Congressional approval, closing gitmo should be a piece of cake.

[randome]

93. Transfer them where?

[alcibiades_mystery]

107. Congress has explicitly forbid the federal government from spending a dollar to transfer any Gitmo

prisoner.

I'd love to hear how you propose for this all to happen, apart from the "he can do anything! he's president!" nonsense. You know, an actual real world solution to the policy challenge?

Whenever you're ready.

[RC]

110. Obama only seems to have power when he wants it.

Otherwise...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022593627#post65

[alcibiades_mystery]

114. That's not an answer to how you transfer prisoners when there is an explicit prohibition on

paying a single dollar to transfer them.

You can play the whole "Oh, he's President" shit all day, but you are unable to answer that question. How do you do it. Any idea would work here. The challenge is simple: Congress has expressly forbid you from spending a single dollar to transfer any prisoner from Guantanamo. You want to transfer prisoners from Guantanamo. How do you do it?

I mean, seriously, let's brainstorm. Do you free them all, ending their status as prisoners under the law, then recapture them all immediately, then transfer them as new status detainees to whom the prohibition does not apply?

I mean, really. Come up with something concrete.

[RC]

115. You seem to think the prisoners are all guilty of something.

Guantanamo itself is evidence of our country's war crimes. Let's start there.
If the prisoners were actually guilty of something, then lets try them in open court or even turn them over to the World Court to be tried. Just what can a 3rd world citizen know of our military or state secrets, anyway?

There are ways to get around congress. Just ask the 1%.

[demwing]

65. So lets do away with this powerless position.

Since the president has so little influence, even during the period when his own party controls both houses, we really ought to have a conversation about eliminating the role. Seems like such a waste of money.

[Dragonfli]

78. It is good for tourism and nostalgia, Like royalty in England he has no power but

the commoners do so love to adore the royal family, The position is nice for parades and meaningless ceremonies full of pomp and rituals that the masses have grown accustomed to. Someday one of the princesses will get married and you won't want to miss that.

[demwing]

92. No more kings?

How quaint

[msongs]

82. going to the left of obama....there's an easy as pie task nt

[libodem]

2. I heard Chelsea is not going to have grandchildren

Hillary might as well, run. What else is there to do? If that is what she wants I'll be there.

[Nye Bevan]

46. Who can predict whether Chelsea's kids will want children? (nt)

[libodem]

72. It is just my personal

Perspective. I was championing her retirement from the dirty business of politics to a lovely life of brilliant grandchildren. I know it is weird but I want to protect her and Bill by making a a safe imaginary place for them, where they are untouchable, national treasures. I know it is sick and wrong. I just want them unmolested by the right.

So, I recently heard, Chelsea, by choice, doesn't expect to have kids. The world is so fucked up I don't blame her. (I was making other plans for her)

It was dumb. And it is my problem. Funny how I feel like they are 'my people' and I want them to be relaxed and happy, and away from the mud slingers and character assassins. I can't take it.

[Autumn]

3. I love Hillary. She's one hell of a woman. I would back her unless we can

get Elizabeth Warren to run.

[NYC_SKP]

4. I would support her if she runs and wins the primary, but I would prefer Warren or Grayson. nt

[ProSense]

6. Sure

So will a lot of the people who have been attacking Obama relentlessly.

Transparent.

[AtomicKitten]

61. !!!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

7. Nope. No more Clintons, no more 3rd Way centrists.

[HereSince1628]

10. I'm done with primary campaign work for moderates, triangulators, and pragmatists

[winter is coming]

118. ^^ This. n/t

[patrice]

132. +++1

[quinnox]

20. Hillary could surprise you

I think she is a lot more liberal than she lets on. That is my opinion.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

22. Liberal? You mean like her IWR vote and vocal support for Bush's Iraq adventure?

I think not.

[quinnox]

28. well, maybe she had to do that

for her political career. She is a woman, and she has to appear strong. I am not excusing it, just saying she might have had reasons. And it was not a pivotal vote she made either, in terms of the numbers. If she had opposed it, that would have made no difference in how it came out.

[Marr]

59. Of course you're excusing it.

Just like that absurd H1B line about there not being any Americans to fill those positions.

[dflprincess]

127. How many people died because she cast a vote for her political career?

Even if her vote wouldn't have changed the outcome at least she would have been record as opposing the war.

Reread your post, you are excusing her for for doing it.

[antigop]

30. Liberal? You mean like her touting the "advantages" of outsourcing and increasing h1-b visas?

Last edited Sun Mar 31, 2013, 09:50 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/ndtv-exclusive-hillary-clinton-on-fdi-mamata-outsourcing-and-hafiz-saeed-full-transcript-207593

Hillary Clinton: So you are talking about the outsourcing of US jobs to India. We know it's been going on for many years now and it's part of our economic relationship with India and I think there are advantages with it that have certainly benefitted many parts of our country and there are disadvantages that go to the need to improve the job fields of our own people and create a better economic environment so it's like anything like the pluses and minuses

The ""advantages" and "benefits" of outsourcing go to the executives and shareholders, NOT the working stiffs.

So, please explain what laid-off engineers and IT people are supposed to train for after their jobs are are outsourced?

Hillary Clinton reaffirms support for more H-1B visas:

[quinnox]

34. you obviously are no fan of Hillary

How long have you had that video laying around? You have a collection or something?

[antigop]

36. You obviously have no reply to Hillary's selling out American workers. nt

[quinnox]

38. I'll note at the end of the video she clearly says she thinks more Americans should be trained to

fill these jobs. Inconvenient truth for you, isn't it?

[antigop]

41. We have PLENTY of engineers and IT people that are trained now whose jobs have been

outsourced or replaced with h1-b visas.

http://www.epi.org/publication/bp356-foreign-students-best-brightest-immigration-policy/


Inconvenient truth, isn't it?

[quinnox]

73. well, I think you are a big time Hillary basher

I think I have nothing further to add.

[antigop]

121. Telling the truth is NOT bashing. I think you have nothing to add because you cannot defend

her sell-out of the American worker.

[zeemike]

100. Yes but they want more than minimum wage...

This is a race to the bottom in case you have not noticed...
And our leaders want us to win.

[Life Long Dem]

76. You don't get it.

Offshore outsourcing lobbyist are lining Hillary's pockets.

[bvar22]

108. This is a good one too. Hillary defining HER concept of the "Middle Class".

[quinnox]

109. yea, and guess what, Obama never followed through on that either

The social security cap remains the same! Obama, not following through, it is just a wee-bit of a pattern.

[Whisp]

42. she is so liberal she speaks about human rights and women and children's rights

and gets all kinds of applause because she is so with it, so heartfelt about the suffering of others. So feminist. So caring. o yeh.

She was witness to what her husband did to Iraq's humans, and women and children, for two full terms? Tens of thousands and thousands suffered and died because of the sanctions, and many of them children. Where was her humanity then and where it is now that she can ignore all this suffering to this day and will not count these people as 'humans'.

good gawd if people can't see this kind of shit for the shit it is, then no wonder we get Bushes and the likes of.

[quinnox]

47. you are a well known Hillary basher

always have been. So your view is so not surprising.

[Whisp]

55. it's not my personal view, it's history and a fact.

but you know that and you don't have anything else, so Basher comes up.

She may think she is through with the past, but the past is not through with her.

[quinnox]

58. I find your insinuations about Hillary very insulting

to her, and you are not her mind reader. You don't know what she was thinking.

[Whisp]

64. history and fact can be very insulting to ones

who want to pretend it can be changed or altered.

How is it I am 'insulting' (such a meek word when compared to Death and Suffering of bystanders by the tens of thousands) Hillary Clinton by the Fact that the sanctions on Iraq, during her husband's terms, were catastrophically hurtful to the country and it's people? Where was her human rights voice then? And if she just discovered it after that particular time, where is her human rights voice to look back and count these people in now?

I am insulting the very structure of power that allows these heinous deeds to fade away into the background. But to some it matters if a Democrat does it, then it's fine - under the rug you go! until the next time, that is.

[quinnox]

67. whatever

You want to know my opinion? I think you hold a grudge against Hillary. I don't know why, but you seem hell-bent on painting her in the worst possible light. I'm done with this conversation.

[Whisp]

71. my grudge is against people that support war and destruction.

and then pretend they don't/didn't.

not that complicated.

[chknltl]

95. +1

You made your case quite clear. Your reason to not support Mrs. Clinton require no further validation for me. I can only speak for myself but I would strongly prefer to not be in the position of supporting Mrs Clinton because she was the lesser of two evils. I suspect i am not alone among our fellow DUers who would reluctantly support her if that winds up being the case.

[Whisp]

102. I think it's important to let the Clinton presidential camp know

what we know now. That they can't make it all go away and that even though they would like some amnesia thrown in with their constant cravings for American Idol status, that there are hard and true facts that they can't dismiss.

Last time she thought it would be an inevitable cakewalk for her. But we know how that went. One of her biggest failings, and her team's (but I call it hers because she should have been in charge, she should not have the luxury of blaming others for her failings)

Another of her biggest failings was not realizing how archived records were so easily available through the internet. I think her being a luddite in that department also had a lot to do with her loss. Her Tuzla moment was the epic example of that. She just didn't think it was on record, that she could make up any kind of shit she wanted, because that's the way it always worked before.

These oversights don't come from a smart and savvy person, they come from neglecting facts. Who wants that as CiC?

[chknltl]

117. Clear and concise reasoning for not supporting a Clinton bid to be the nominee.

First off thank you for reminding me why I needed to be against Sen. Clinton in the '08 primaries. I recall googling Hillary Clinton Military Industrial Complex and was horrified by what I turned up. I also recall that horrible schism here in the DU between Clinton supporters and those who feared what impact a President Hillary Clinton would have on our country. Early on we were labeled by her supporters as' haters'. The word 'hate' is something I reserve for those who have caused sooooo much destruction on our planet in the name of greed or sociopathy. It would be accurate to say that I hate VP. Dick Cheney or Rush Limbaugh. Mrs Clinton has not earned my hate, she instead has earned my concern. I have come to expect being labeled a 'terrorist' from the crowd that claims that I am either with them or with the terrorists but it is hard to imagine that one would have to put up with that here. We lost a lot of good DUers back in the '08 primaries because things got out of hand between supporters and non-supporters. I hope things go better for all of us this time around.

[zeemike]

103. Yep

[green for victory]

135. +42 truth cuts like a knife nt

[NorthCarolina]

98. Ummm, Hillary was/is a DLC member,

as was her husband. They had a major hand in moving the Democratic Party well right of center where we find it today. She may be coming out as more socially liberal lately, but she is a fiscal conservative who will serve Wall St. as effectively as her predecessors. Count me out on that.

[winter is coming]

122. If true, she's hidden it well. And will likely go on hiding it well.

Last edited Sun Mar 31, 2013, 10:09 PM - Edit history (1)

And if she's not going to act on the well-concealed liberal leanings you believe she has, then they're irrelevant.

Supporting a candidate "to the hilt" because you believe their liberal beliefs "could surprise you" makes as much sense as dating a married man because you think he might leave his wife.

[99Forever]

23. Bingo.

Give us an actual Democrat or don't ask for my support or my vote.

[antigop]

32. +1000 No more DLC/Third Wayers/Corporate Dems. nt

[RedCappedBandit]

60. Yup

[Apophis]

87. Agreed.

[woo me with science]

97. Amen. No more corporatists and warmongers. nt

[dflprincess]

128. +1000

I was hoping maybe someone from the Democratic wing of the party might run.

[Helen Reddy]

8. Clinton/Warren 2016

A gal can dream.

[onehandle]

14. Sold! nt

[patrice]

133. Warren/Sebelius 2016

NO Hillary for me.

[Helen Reddy]

152. Understood. n/t

[KittyWampus]

11. Oh Goodie, a war hawk who is cozy with the Bushes & defense industry. woohoo.

[antigop]

33. Oh, goodie -- someone who sold out American workers! YIPPEE!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2593806

[TheKentuckian]

12. Due to the state of the country, her ideology is unacceptably dangerous being dedicated

digging the same holes that brought us to this state and I will actively oppose her nomination.

What "it" are you fucking? The future of self determination and access to opportunity for the people?

I say fuck the Turd Way and the corporate agenda, they are a deadly cancer.

Your vote for an overseer is a vote for the slaver. The two cannot be separated in real world application even if the bullshit rhetoric used to spin outcomes is different.

[quinnox]

17. I thought it was clear

I meant I had reservations before this, and her age was a big factor in my reservations. So "Fuck it" means I decided I will let that go. That I no longer care about it.

[madokie]

13. I'm in

Its damn well time we have a woman President and I can't think of anyone who is more prepared for that than Hillary. Plus I think she is on our side.

[quinnox]

24. yup, likewise

[antigop]

35. No, it's damn well time we have a president who sticks up for American workers.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022593627#post30

[Cleita]

66. Gavin Newsom *whistling* Gavin Newsom

http://www.gavinnewsom.com/

A Dennis Kucinich with charisma. Grew up poor like Dennis and as mayor of San Francisco implemented many liberal policies to aid the poor and homeless.

And he's sooooo handsome!

[juajen]

154. Yeah, he's beautiful; however, he does have a predilection for

women and booze. He is also fantastic. Just pointing out why Bill Clinton might have really liked him. Yea, Big Dog! Honestly, I just love a wicked democrat, especially one with a big heart. Much is forgiven when a man is charming, compassionate, astute, beautiful and loves well! Go Gavin! Tis very true, that we love our female dems for different reasons. Go Hillary!

It doesn't hurt that he is part Irish either. Nothing sexier nor more beautiful. Gotta love, including Obama.

[Cleita]

156. Half irish, eh? No wonder my heart was going pitter patter.

Nothing more handsome and charming than an Irish guy, even the ones who aren't handsome. My late husband was Irish.

[Laurian]

15. I'm on the Hillary bandwagon!

While I would love Grayson, I'm afraid there's no way he could win a national election. I also love Warren, but I think Hillary's resume and experience puts her way ahead. I actually think her age is an asset, not a liability.

[MineralMan]

16. I will back the Democratic candidate for President in 2016,

just like I've backed every Democratic candidate since I voted in my first Presidential election in 1968. Back then, you had to be 21, so I had to wait longer than I wanted to. Very frustrating. I did get to vote in a California gubernatorial election, though in 1966. I voted absentee, since I was in the USAF at that time, and far from home. Despite my vote for Governor Brown, Ronald Reagan won that election. Soon, he emptied the state's mental hospitals and created a new class of homeless people. Feh!

However, since 2016 is still a long time off, and since there is an election in 2014, I'll be focused almost entirely on the 2014 election until it is over. We shall see who emerges as the presidential candidate in 2016.

[treestar]

19. Your last sentence ^^^^^

So true. A good 2014 Congress can make progress.

Even the most leftist President electable, stuck with a republican Congress, means no progress.

[MineralMan]

21. 2014 is SO important.

And the time to start working on it is NOW!

[treestar]

25. Amen!

I get so tired of posters who think it all falls on the Presidency, wishing for a left wing dictator, and acting like the Presidency already provides for one. It's darn pathetic. They rail against Obama instead of Boner and the Rs and dream of getting their fix in 2016. Ignoring the midterms completely.

[treestar]

18. October 26, 1947 (age 65), date of birth

So that means 68 for most of 2016, turns 69 just before the election, inaugurated at 69. That's not too old. Though we would want a second term, and she'd be 73 at inauguration and be serving up to age 77.

Still, people who keep working and traveling and have the medical care she has - can still be pretty vital in their 70s.

[Kurovski]

40. And she's in great shape.

I think she took on that heavy work load as SoS to prove to us and herself she could do it.

[krawhitham]

53. blood clot in her head

[juajen]

155. Hasn't that been dissolved? What is the latest?

[TwilightGardener]

39. I won't. She's a foreign-policy failure. She's learned nothing from her IWR days.

Only if she's the nominee will I vote for her, but I sure won't support her.

[quinnox]

43. whatever

You guys are sore or something. Hillary did a great job. Even Obama said so!

[TwilightGardener]

52. SoS was a you scratch my back/I'll scratch yours deal. She was pretty much a figurehead

and Obama allowed her to bring a lot of her campaign staff into the State Dept. with her, in order to keep her network together. He didn't extend that option to John Kerry--the WH has veto over Kerry's staff.

[karynnj]

120. It was in Obama's interest to say so - otherwise he is saying HIS policy was a failure.

Only time will tell how good, bad or mediocre she was. I suspect that by design she did very little of the key diplomacy on the toughest issues. Obama appointed special envoys for them. This meant that her job was two things (mainly) - the first was managing the huge state department and from people who worked there she was well liked. The second was an endless number of trips that added to the US's political capital internationally. So, no big diplomatic triumphs, but many comments that she was a very competent manager of the State department.

I suspect that what she might use for her campaign is that she was THE global advocate for human and women's rights. I don't know if the US actually moved opinion in other countries or if this really caused permanent change. However, I suspect that if - say Afghanistan backtracks when we are out, she will argue that Obama and Kerry did not hold to her standards - ignoring that to do so meant occupying Afghanistan forever.

[juajen]

158. She was the most obvious person for the republicans to attack

and they were not successful. There's a reason for that.

[Comrade_McKenzie]

44. I said awhile back I wouldn't support her during the primaries...

I've since changed my mind.

She is my #1 pick as of right now.

I don't really care about the things most liberals dislike her for.

I vote in elections based on how it will affect me personally.

[quinnox]

45. thank you

I agree, she is a great pick.

[Marr]

48. I wouldn't vote for her even if she had the nomination.

I'm done voting for DLC/Third Way trojan horses, period.

[Nye Bevan]

50. Do you place President Obama in that category? (nt)

[Marr]

51. Yes. /nt

[krawhitham]

49. Lets not and say we did

[Liberal_in_LA]

54. glad obama is prez but would support clinton

[LittleBlue]

57. No thanks

No more Clintons, no more Bush clan, no dynasties in America. Britain can keep their monarchs.

[Cleita]

62. Agreed. I would like to see Gavin Newsom run.

http://www.gavinnewsom.com/

He has the charisma and he's a real liberal, not a Republican Lite democrat.

[LittleBlue]

69. Good idea

So sick of these fake liberals so fearful of leaving the "center". I could enthusiastically support Newsom. Or Elizabeth Warren, assuming she doesn't turn out to be a third-way type.

It will be disappointing if we have to choose the most palatable of a group of centrists.

[Cleita]

70. Like in the recent past? Yeah, that's gotta change this next election.

We need real change.

[juajen]

157. Damn it, she is a Rodham, not a Clinton. She should take back her

maiden name; but the voters would hate that. There is no reason why a person should not run for office, if qualified, in spite of her parents or grandparents, or aunts or uncles, or even her husband, who she is not related to. Ridiculous!

[Comrade Grumpy]

63. I decided I'll back Hillary to the hilt...

...if she wants to open an independent bookstore or something.

[Starry Messenger]

74. A lot of people in this thread are going to get banned from DU if they don't vote for the nominee.

Funny, considering how some of them behaved to people who were lukewarm on President Obama.

That said, while I would love Warren or Grayson, they don't have much of a chance. We need to keep the White House out of the hands of the right-wing and if Clinton looks like she is the one then of course we should support her.

[quinnox]

75. the Hillary bashers took over my thread

They just can't stay away. So, not only does Hillary get demonized by the right wing, she also gets demonized by a contingent of dedicated Hillary haters.

[Starry Messenger]

80. She polls incredibly well over the leading Republicans:

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-centers/polling-institute/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1861

I'm sure most people here will support Clinton over Chris Christie, etc. I just think it is ironic that people who went around labeling people as Obama-haters are now holding their breath and turning blue over the prospect of having to support Hilary. I was an Obama primary supporter, but thought that Hilary and Edwards supporters were treated very shabbily by people here after the election .

[Agschmid]

129. I thank you for trying to reason with them...

they just don't get it though do they?

[dflprincess]

130. Right now there is no nominee

and now is the time to make it clear we will not just roll over and accept another damn DLC/Third Way/"New" Democrat as the nominee.

[antigop]

131. + 1000. Thank you! nt

[Starry Messenger]

146. I'm not against that.

I didn't mean to give that impression.

But a candidate is going to have to be liked by Wall Street in order to run in our system. I hate it too, but the loads of cash needed to win pretty much makes that a dead cert.

[mainer]

77. I'm OK with moderates. But cowards? No.

She was a coward when she caved and voted to invade Iraq, purely for political expediency.

That was why I supported Obama over Hillary. At least he had the nerve to state the war was wrong.

And he had the courage to support gay marriage. That turned the tide.

[quinnox]

79. wow, what a pile on

the Hillary haters are loving this.

[mainer]

81. I once loved the idea of Hillary as President.

Hell, I have a nice framed photo of me and Hill, smiling together.

But her Iraq War vote really soured me on her. Those of us opposed to the war knew there was no chance of a mushroom cloud. We needed our elected Democrats to vote based on the evidence -- not the made-up BS jury-rigged together by Bush.

The fact these Dems caved was such a deep disappointment, it felt like a betrayal. It's hard to get past that, because it was the ONE TIME true courage was called for. And she (along with Kerry and Edwards) failed the test.

p.s. Quinnox, you and I agree on other issues, so don't take this personally.

[quinnox]

83. I'm not, thanks for the explanation

[Whisp]

85. fact is, some of us hate what she stands for, and who she buckles under for.

you have nothing to defend her atrocious record with but call us haters.

that's as weak as it gets.

[olddots]

90. they are not Hillary " HATERS "

they disagree with some of her decisions . if she gets nominated only a fool wouldn't vote for her considering what the republicans have come to .

[PolitFreak]

86. IF?????

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

88. Whoever it takes to bar the gates of hell and keep the Republicans down there

I don't care who the nominee will be as long as they are able to win and offer a reasonably progressive agenda. I'm more interested in the overall policy rather than the particular person.

[Dragonfli]

89. I can't back any more DLC corporate politicians, the people can't take much more triangulated

Republicanism, more free trade, more Entitlement reform, we never recovered from welfare reform or NAFTA, if we survive the current version, it's "reforms" and free trade agreements, the wealth disparity will make the poor and rich in a Dickens novel seem quite level in comparison, this before we even choose the next candidate. I just can't keep supporting the 1% at the expense of myself and the other common born, it would be passive suicide.

We desperately need a Democrat that will square the deal, and right the wrongs, not continue down this path of subservience to the Pete Petersons of the world. We likely will get no such thing, but to choose to support the continuation of the path we are on would be to volunteer oneself to the slaughter.

We can't vote for people we think are likable based on personality, the policies do matter, these pragmatists feather their own nests quite well, but leave us stuck in the mud below. We really need to put policy over personality.

It is quickly becoming a matter of survival for a larger and larger number of impoverished Americans.

I realize this is a politician you admire and I understand your support, it is your support to give,
but I am not of the economic socio level where I can back the policies that are killing people like me with poverty.

[MadHound]

91. I cannot support another DLC corporate candidate like Clinton ever again.

I won't support her, I won't vote for her. Clinton's have done too much damage as is.

[randome]

94. Sorry but you may as well give us your pick on 2020, as well.

Since we're taking potshots at the future.

[beyurslf]

96. TOTALLY

[quinnox]

99. exactly!

[cynatnite]

101. I supported her last time and I will again...

She was amazing as Sec. of State.

[graham4anything]

105. I ma 100% for Hillary to continue the great agenda of President Obama

the haters of Hillary were the haters of Obama were the haters of Bill were haters of Jimmy Carter and Teddy Kennedy and LBJ and Lincoln

they would be very happy like in 2000 to mess things up again.

They are a very tiny minority of the country, much like the NRA is a tiny minority of the total people.

Those haters would knowingly elect Jeb rather than move forward on issues that really,
are petty and only a few care about in the midst of 1000s of more important issues.
Therefore like a bratty child, they get a time out from adult consideration.

Hillary will kick Jeb's ass.
And it takes a Clinton to defeat a Bush, like happened in 1992.

And it's better that it was President Obama first, because it will be so much easier to rule from the left the next two terms and also Hillary can nominate President Obama to the US Supreme Court in around 2018 and President Obama can help then make official all the great things already done.

Dotting the I's and Crossing the T's, 10 steps ahead, rope-a-doping the haters time and again.

One keeps getting 10% so much better than 0% of 100%.

America always changed slowly and it took decades of fracture in 1952, 1968, 1972, 1980, 1984, 1988, 2000, 2004 to make things go backward.

We need a few decades of continuous Democratic presidents to take us where we need to be.

And, btw, the Democratic party was never anti-war.
They were anti-Iraq and towards the end, anti-Vietnam, but never anti-war.
It is a great sleight of hand for the haters to insinuate otherwise, when it was not true nor ever has been.

And social domestic equalities and other social issues are vastly more important anyhow.

[Whisp]

112. Hillary would be a throwback to Obama's successes.

She will not progress, but regress.

Let's put someone in who truly Can move the President's ideas forward. Let's leave the old days behind, the hucksters and the liars have no where to go now. We know who they are, they have a record that can not be erased from history because of the wonderful tools we have to research. We don't have to depend on the assholes at CNN or Fox or MSNBC to Tell us what the story is (like they told us the Iraq war story).

Time for people with a clean record to follow through, like the clean record Obama had (which drives the rw so nuts they have to Make Shit Up), not the has been enablers of corruption and destruction.

[graham4anything]

113. Michelle can continue to do that in 2024 and 2028. 2016 is too early for that.

[Whisp]

116. Although I really admire Michelle, I just don't think she is a political animal

She doesn't have the patience for all the bullshit that Obama has. And I have a feeling she just loathes that life and looks at this stint as a necessary sacrifice the Obama's family is willing to make, in order to make changes.

She will be doing huge and wonderful things in other ways for a long time. And so will their kids. Truly good people.

Have to go to Easter dinner at family's, so bye for now, graham. If that is what you are planning as well, have a good one.

[just1voice]

111. I thought you were going to say "if she regularly mentioned kittycats", LOL

That alone would get a huge chunk of supporters, LOL!

[stevenleser]

119. The haters who responded to you make me laugh.

If Hillary wants this, no one can stop her. They can whine and stomp their feet as much as they want, it will not help.

[antigop]

124. Ah, yes ...Add "1" to the "inevitability" meme counter. nt

[stevenleser]

134. You remind me of Freepers who think the same joke is just as funny the 1000th time they tell it.

At least try and phrase that whole counter BS slightly differently next time.

[antigop]

136. At least try and cut out the "inevitability" meme. nt

[stevenleser]

140. Nope, that's my belief. if that bothers you, you better find a way to deal. nt

[antigop]

141. You"ll just have to deal with my adding to the "inevitability" meme counter when I see it. nt

[stevenleser]

148. And you will have to deal with me pointing how freeperesque it is to tell the same joke 1000 times.

[antigop]

149. It's not a joke. nt

[antigop]

137. and I'll add to the counter every time someone tries to spread the "inevitability" meme. nt

[stevenleser]

139. See, that's a little better. nt

[antigop]

143. Why does it bother you so much when I call out the "inevitability" meme? Hmmmm????? nt

[stevenleser]

147. I already told you, the 1000th time, its not funny anymore. nt

[antigop]

150. It's not intended to be funny, but it really seems to bother you when I point it out. nt

[Poll_Blind]

142. She wanted the last one, too. Enough to try to scam it with superdelegates. We stopped her.

We'll stop her again.



PB

[Demo_Chris]

123. I will only support her if she completely rejects the policies of Obama and her Hubby

If not, then no. No more free trade, no more wars, no more mandates, no more pillaging from the poor, no more allowing corporations to own the world and police themselves, no more corporate insiders and revolving door, I am done with all of that garbage.

If the DNC wants to go there yet again they will have to do it without me.

[Warpy]

126. She is far too conservative for me so I won't support a primary campaign

but I can guarantee you I'll vote for whatever stiff the Democrats offer up in November, 2016.

[MoonRiver]

138. Way to go Quinnox!

I'm for Hillary all the way to the White House in 2016! And, seriously, what other candidate do we have who can hold her/his own against Jeb?

[antigop]

144. Add "1" to the "inevitability"meme counter. nt

[antigop]

145. pssst....don't tell anyone.... no one has announced for 2016. nt

[rdharma]

151. I could only support Hillary........

........ if the alternative was MUCH worse.

There are MANY BETTER possible candidates in the Democratic Party.

[delrem]

153. Hillary is pure DLC/third-way. nt

[AtomicKitten]

159. k