Hillary the inevitable.

[Savannahmann]

We are told that Hillary is inevitable. The supporters tell us we have no other choice. No one else is running, although Hillary hasn't announced yet either, and even if they did, they can't win against insert Republican candidate here. I've mentioned lately that it's a shame that we have to settle for Hillary, and that got me to thinking. When they tell us how inevitable Hillary is, or how unbeatable she is, there is no long list of accomplishments. There isn't a vision for America that will inspire. The most that the supporters tell us is that she's better than any Republican.

That's like saying a broken leg is better than a heart attack. Sure it is, but nobody wants a broken leg either. We aren't hearing how inspiring Hillary is. We aren't hearing how this is the culmination of a life of political activism. When we look at her record, it's at best mediocre if we're honest. Being one of the Democratic Senators who voted for George W. Bush's war in Iraq is not exactly a plus point to many here.

So I thought I'd toss a poll out. I'll give you the results now. More people would prefer Hillary as President over a sharp stick in the eye. This isn't saying that she's a great candidate who is able to unify people to vote for her. It's just given two pretty lousy choices, she is slightly less objectionable than the alternative. However, that is not a way to get the voters to turn out and vote for you.

Let's be honest. It's a bit of a hassle to go and vote. In my case I have to get the car, drive five miles to the "community center" and then find a parking place somewhere in a grassy field. Then I have to make my way it, present ID to the first desk. Fill out a card that says what is on my ID. Then I go to the second table where they compare the card I filled out with the voter registration rolls. If the card I filled out matches my voter registration information I'm good to go. Then they give me a smart card and I can now wait for a machine to open up. Once a machine is available, then I can go and use the touch screen computer to cast my ballots for whomever I choose. Quite the effort if you can imagine.

So what is going to motivate people to go through this. Is it a chance to vote against Republicans? For most people, no. They don't show up to vote against a party, or a candidate. They prefer to have someone to vote for. If Hillary is the candidate, I don't think we're going to get a whole lot of people waiting in the three lines to cast a ballot against the Republicans. Early voting is even worse.

So we have to inspire people. We have to give them something to vote for. So here is your chance today my friend. Would you prefer Hillary as the Democratic Nominee? Or would you prefer a sharp stick in the eye. Ok, we have the results. Sharp stick in the eye is a distant second. I guess Hillary is inevitable when you put the question that way.

26 votes, 4 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	I cast my ballot for Hillary. While uninspiring, it is slightly preferable to a sharp stick in the eye.
	4 (15%)
	Give me the sharp stick in the eye please. It would be less painful than Hillary.
	22 (85%)
	4 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[DemocratSinceBirth]

1. LOL

This board is a parody of itself.

[guillaumeb]

56. a pair of parody?

would you prefer more Republicans on the SCOTUS?

Vote for Jebba the Bush, or
Sarah Palin or
Mike Huckabee or
Ted Cruz or
Joni Ernst or

are those reasons enough to vote for the best available Democrat?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

63. I wouldn't vote for any of em

I wouldn't vote for any of em if you put a stick of dynamite up my butt and told me you would pull the trigger if i didn't.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

2. Neither, thanks.

Both are likely to be damaging.

[VanillaRhapsody]

3. Its not a question of inevitability

she has the support of the PARTY. You Left Leaning Independents just want to grouse about what and who OUR party supports...

WE support her AND she polls ahead of ALL Republicans. When you have someone that can say THAT let us know mkay?

[Logical]

7. Like in 2008??? nt

[VanillaRhapsody]

8. Do you have someone who polls ahead of ALL Republicans

get back to us when you do....mkay!


(by the way....she is WAY ahead of her polling in 2008)

[Logical]

9. She lost a 30 point lead in 2008 and just paid off her 2008 debt last year....

Sounds like a popular person!

[VanillaRhapsody]

10. and 30 points would STILL not be enough...she is ahead by 50 of them!

So yeah...since becoming Secretary of State...she is even MORE popular (not to mention experienced) now!


keep trying that losing position YOU have

[Logical]

45. She did terrible at fund raising also! nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

12. Saying a twelve point lead is a thirty point lead doesn't seem Logical, ergo:

At this stage of the contest in late 2006, Clinton’s lead over Barack Obama was a paltry 31-19, according to Gallup.


http://thehill.com/opinion/markos-moulitsas/214410-markos-moulitsas-no-warren-in-2016

[cascadiance]

35. Looking at the polls in 2008, it WAS accurate to say she lost that lead...

I don't think this chart is lying...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

36. The losses seem to be in the teens and not thirty and as the other poster pointed out ...

The losses seem to be in the teens and not thirty and as the other poster pointed out that lead is now in the 50s.

[VanillaRhapsody]

37. doesn't matter...STILL not enough....

keep trying though...

If you find one of those fancy charts that shows another candidate that can beat ALL Repukes....let us know!

[Logical]

47. You are going to have a bad 12 months! nt

[VanillaRhapsody]

48. No it appears that would be you....you seem to have some problem with math....

the numbers favor my position not yours....

[Logical]

73. LOL, once again, like in 2008! Numbers favored it then too! nt

[VanillaRhapsody]

75. and mr "logical" you have been told over and over...she has almost doubled that lead

since then and she has even more experience to boot!

I am starting to not believe your moniker!

[Logical]

46. nice try, where the fuck did I say any timeframe, here you go......

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/16/schneider.poll/index.html

On the Democratic side, Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York continues to gain support and build on her lead. She led Sen. Barack Obama by 23 points last month -- 46 percent to 23 percent. She now leads the Illinois senator by 30 points -- 51 percent to 21 percent.

You hillary fans crack me up!

[VanillaRhapsody]

49. still not a 50 point drop!

keep trying....perhaps you will learn to subtract soon...

50 point lead minus that 30 point drop you are expecting....still equals a 20 point lead.

or to make it easier...drop the zeros...5 - 3 = 2



Did you find a candidate yet that beats ALL Republicans (even without the double digits she is able to do)?

[Logical]

71. I have total faith clinton can lose a 50 point lead. Wow, you are brainwashed. nt

[VanillaRhapsody]

72. Yeah and monkeys will soon fly out of my butt!

So.....Mr "logical" do you have that candidate (with or without a 50 point lead) that can beat ALL of the Republican pack? Do you have any numbers to back that claim?

[Logical]

84. Way early! Way early. But at least I will vote for her if she is the nominee. God forbid! nt

[VanillaRhapsody]

87. Well then you better gird your loins...

[Logical]

86. Here you go, get ready.....

[VanillaRhapsody]

88. Not my monkeys....not my butt!

[davidpdx]

103. I really do hope monkeys fly out your butt

Maybe it would improve your attitude.

[VanillaRhapsody]

109. My attitude is just fine....Perhaps you just don't like REAL Democrats standing up for the Party!

[davidpdx]

125. I have a book I think you need to read, send me your address and I'll buy you a copy

[Renew Deal]

38. No, not like 2008

2008 she had at least one very viable opponent (Obama). This time there aren't any really viable opponents. Biden and Sanders would lose to her head to head. O'Malley is running for VP if he chooses to run. Webb hasn't been able to get it together yet. There is no viable opposition at this time. Biden knows he will lose and will likely avoid the embarrasement.

Also, Hillary's negatives were pretty high in 2008. They are much better now. Her support of the Democratic Nominee in 2008 and her hard work as Secretary of State has won people over. So this election is not at all like 2008.

The biggest risk to Hillary at this moment is Democrat fatigue.

[NM_Birder]

34. guess she just needs to say she is running and you can be relevant.

[Thinkingabout]

62. I guess it is difficult for reality to sink in for some, yes, she has the support of the major

Portion of the party, if that makes her inevitable then so be it.

[VanillaRhapsody]

64. Some cannot handle the truth!

[Thinkingabout]

65. Maybe in the next two years it will be very plain. The GOP has taken an

Alaskan cruise to brainstorm on how to beat Hillary, the road is oblivious to the Rove and Gang.

[VanillaRhapsody]

68. The fact that they even considered Jeb Bush shows just how desperate they are!

[Thinkingabout]

80. If I was looking for someone to run in the GOP and someone who beat Hillary

I would be concerned. I wonder if we will get a repeat entertainment from the 2016 GOP run as we got in 2008.

[VanillaRhapsody]

81. I have already bought my shares in popcorn stock....

I expect the clown car to start loading up shortly...I think it pulls into Rand Paul's neighborhood first!

[Thinkingabout]

89. Hey, free Keystone kops, huh. lol

[LWolf]

101. I'm a Democrat.

I've noticed that the early crew of HRC pushers have been attacking those who oppose her from the left as if we AREN'T the "PARTY." Many of us are. Believe it or not, the PARTY is not all neo-liberal.

When you refer to "OUR party," you are referring to a party that includes the left. You don't speak for the "PARTY," but for one faction within the party.

[davidpdx]

104. Oh now careful there....

I've noticed that the early crew of HRC pushers have been attacking those who oppose her from the left as if we AREN'T the "PARTY."

they can be a sensitive bunch.

[LWolf]

117. As you can see.

Apparently, if I don't support HRC, I'm not a "REAL" Democrat.

[VanillaRhapsody]

123. Okay....who do YOU have in opposition to HRC that polls in double digits against all Republicans?

I keep asking....and none seem to have a response.....

things that make you go.....hmmmmmm

[LWolf]

128. I have a long list of great Democrats;

I'd be happy to support any of them. I don't have a clue how they "poll," and I don't find pre-season polls to be all that important, quite frankly.

Do you want me to list every Democrat I'd prefer over HRC, or shall I wait for the actual primary season to begin, and tell you which of her opponents I'd prefer?

I choose candidates based on their record on issues.

[VanillaRhapsody]

129. and answer the question....do you know any of them can beat ALL Republicans by double digits?

meanwhile poll after poll prove that she does!

Oh and you want to talk about her record....OH BOY have YOU come to the right place....

Strongly Favors topic 1:
Abortion is a woman's unrestricted right
(+5 points on Social scale)

Lift ban on stem cell research to cure devastating diseases: Favors topic 1
Respect Roe v. Wade, but make adoptions easier too: Favors topic 1
Alternatives to pro-choice like forced pregnancy in Romania: Strongly Favors topic 1
Must safeguard constitutional rights, including choice: Favors topic 1
Remain vigilant on a woman’s right to chose: Favors topic 1
Keep abortion safe, legal and rare: Favors topic 1
Being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion: Favors topic 1
Supports parental notice & family planning: Opposes topic 1
No abortion for sex selection in China: Opposes topic 1
Voted liberal line on partial birth & harm to fetus: Favors topic 1
Endorsed Recommended by EMILY's List of pro-choice women: Favors topic 1
Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record: Strongly Favors topic 1
Expand embryonic stem cell research: Favors topic 1
Sponsored bill providing contraceptives for low-income women: Favors topic 1
Sponsored bill for emergency contraception for rape victims: Favors topic 1
Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance: Strongly Favors topic 1
Provide emergency contraception at military facilities: Favors topic 1
Ensure access to and funding for contraception: Favors topic 1
Focus on preventing pregnancy, plus emergency contraception: Favors topic 1
NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP: Favors topic 1
NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime: Favors topic 1
YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives: Favors topic 1
NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions: Favors topic 1
YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines: Favors topic 1

Strongly Favors topic 2:
Legally require hiring women & minorities
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Some world leaders are still misogynistic: Favors topic 2
Some world leaders are still misogynistic: Favors topic 2
We’ve come a long way on race, but we have a long way to go: Strongly Favors topic 2
Apologize for slavery, but concentrate on civil rights now: Favors topic 2
Human rights are women’s rights: Neutral on topic 2
Women’s rights are human rights: Favors topic 2
OpEd: "18 million cracks" meant "lingering sexism": Strongly Favors topic 2
Equal pay is not yet equal: Strongly Favors topic 2
1988: Instituted gender diversity Report Card within ABA: Strongly Opposes topic 2
Argued with Bill Clinton about diluting affirmative action: Strongly Favors topic 2
Shift from group preferences to economic empowerment of all: Neutral on topic 2
Sponsored bill maintaining role of women in armed forces: Favors topic 2
Rated 96% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance: Strongly Favors topic 2
Recognize Juneteenth as historical end of slavery: Strongly Favors topic 2
Re-introduce the Equal Rights Amendment: Strongly Favors topic 2
Reinforce anti-discrimination and equal-pay requirements: Favors topic 2
Ban discriminatory compensation; allow 2 years to sue: Favors topic 2
Sponsored bill enforcing against gender pay discrimination: Strongly Favors topic 2

Strongly Favors topic 3:
Comfortable with same-sex marriage
(+5 points on Social scale)

Increase America’s commitment against Global AIDS: Favors topic 3
I re-evaluated & changed my mind on gay marriage: Favors topic 3
DOMA discrimination holds us back from a more perfect union: Strongly Favors topic 3
I support gay marriage personally and as law: Strongly Favors topic 3
Let states decide gay marriage; they’re ahead of feds: Favors topic 3
2004:defended traditional marriage; 2006:voted for same-sex: Strongly Favors topic 3
Federal Marriage Amendment would be terrible step backwards: Favors topic 3
Gays deserve domestic partnership benefits: Strongly Favors topic 3
Military service based on conduct, not sexual orientation: Favors topic 3
More funding and stricter sentencing for hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3
Rated 89% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance: Strongly Favors topic 3
Provide benefits to domestic partners of Federal employees: Strongly Favors topic 3
YES on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3
NO on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage: Strongly Favors topic 3

No opinion on topic 4:
Keep God in the public sphere
(0 points on Social scale)

Partner with faith based community in empowerment zones: Strongly Favors topic 4
Tap into churches to avoid more Louima & Diallo cases: Favors topic 4
Community involvement helps, but only in short term: Favors topic 4
Link payments to good parenting behavior: Opposes topic 4
Allow student prayer, but no religious instruction: Opposes topic 4
Character education: teach empathy & self-discipline: Favors topic 4
Change what kids see in the media: Favors topic 4
Co-sponsored bill to criminalize flag-burning: Favors topic 4
Rated 0% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-Family-Value voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 4
Rated 100% by the AU, indicating support of church-state separation: Strongly Opposes topic 4
NO on recommending Constitutional ban on flag desecration: Opposes topic 4

Strongly Favors topic 5:
Expand ObamaCare
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Outcry if AIDS were leading disease of young whites: Favors topic 5
Lower costs and improve quality and cover everybody: Strongly Favors topic 5
Supply more medical needs of families, & insure all children: Strongly Favors topic 5
Medicare should be strengthened today: Favors topic 5
Smaller steps to progress on health care: Favors topic 5
Guaranteed benefits & focus on prevention: Neutral on topic 5
2006: If I can't do universal coverage, why run?: Strongly Favors topic 5
Universal health care will not work if it is voluntary: Strongly Favors topic 5
Universal health care coverage by the end of my second term: Strongly Favors topic 5
We need a uniquely American solution to health care: Favors topic 5
Health care initiatives are her first priority in Senate: Strongly Favors topic 5
Establish "report cards" on HMO quality of care: Favors topic 5
Invest funds to alleviate the nursing shortage: Favors topic 5
Let states make bulk Rx purchases, and other innovations: Opposes topic 5
Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record: Strongly Favors topic 5
Preserve access to Medicaid & SCHIP during economic downturn: Strongly Favors topic 5
NO on means-testing to determine Medicare Part D premium: Favors topic 5
NO on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit: Favors topic 5
NO on $40 billion per year for limited Medicare prescription drug benefit: Opposes topic 5
YES on increasing Medicaid rebate for producing generics: Favors topic 5
YES on negotiating bulk purchases for Medicare prescription drug: Strongly Favors topic 5
YES on expanding enrollment period for Medicare Part D: Favors topic 5
NO on limiting medical liability lawsuits to $250,000: Opposes topic 5
YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D: Favors topic 5
YES on overriding veto on expansion of Medicare: Favors topic 5

Strongly Opposes topic 6:
Privatize Social Security
(-5 points on Economic scale)

1997: Hillary warned against privatizing Social Security: Strongly Opposes topic 6
Soc.Sec. one of greatest inventions in American democracy: Strongly Opposes topic 6
Social Security protects families, not just retirees: Strongly Opposes topic 6
All should join the debate now to preserve future solvency: Opposes topic 6
Create Retirement Savings Accounts: Favors topic 6
Rated 100% by the ARA, indicating a pro-senior voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 6
NO on establishing reserve funds & pre-funding for Social Security: Opposes topic 6

Strongly Opposes topic 7:
Vouchers for school choice
(-5 points on Economic scale)

OpEd: Common Core recycled from Clintons in 1980s and 1990s: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Fully fund special education & 21st century classrooms: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Supports public school choice; but not private nor parochial: Opposes topic 7
Vouchers drain money from public schools: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Fight with Gore for public schools; no voucher “gimmicks”: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Charter schools provide choice within public system: Opposes topic 7
Vouchers siphon off much-needed resources: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Parents can choose, but support public schools: Opposes topic 7
Supports public school choice and charter schools: Favors topic 7
Solemn vow never to abandon our public schools: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Offer every parent Charter Schools and public school choice: Opposes topic 7
Rated 82% by the NEA, indicating pro-public education votes: Strongly Opposes topic 7
YES on funding smaller classes instead of private tutors: Opposes topic 7
YES on funding student testing instead of private tutors: Opposes topic 7
YES on $5B for grants to local educational agencies: Opposes topic 7

Strongly Opposes topic 8:
No 'rights' to clean air and water
(+5 points on Social scale)

$5B for green-collar jobs in economic stimulus package: Opposes topic 8
Voted against and consistently opposed to Yucca Mountain: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Scored 100% on Humane Society Scorecard on animal protection: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Remove PCBs from Hudson River by dredging 200 miles: Opposes topic 8
Rated 89% by the LCV, indicating pro-environment votes: Strongly Opposes topic 8
EPA must do better on mercury clean-up: Opposes topic 8
Grants for beach water pollution under Clean Water Act: Opposes topic 8
Strengthen prohibitions against animal fighting: Strongly Opposes topic 8

Opposes topic 9:
Stricter punishment reduces crime
(+2 points on Social scale)

Longtime advocate of death penalty, with restrictions: Strongly Favors topic 9
Address the unacceptable increase in incarceration: Opposes topic 9
Mandatory sentences have been too widely used: Strongly Opposes topic 9
Give kids after-school activities to prevent gangs: Opposes topic 9
Spend more time with kids to prevent violence: Opposes topic 9
Supports citizen patrols & 3-Strikes-You’re-Out: Favors topic 9
Supports “Three Strikes” and more prison: Strongly Favors topic 9
End hate crimes and other intolerance: Favors topic 9
Require DNA testing for all federal executions: Opposes topic 9
Increase funding for "COPS ON THE BEAT" program: Opposes topic 9
Reduce recidivism by giving offenders a Second Chance: Strongly Opposes topic 9
YES on reinstating $1.15 billion funding for the COPS Program: Opposes topic 9

Strongly Opposes topic 10:
Absolute right to gun ownership
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Rein in idea that anybody can have a gun anywhere, anytime: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Against illegal guns, crack down on illegal gun dealers: Opposes topic 10
Get assault weapons & guns off the street: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Background check system could prevent Virginia Tech massacre: Opposes topic 10
Congress’ failure at Littleton response inspired Senate run: Opposes topic 10
Limit access to weapons; look for early warning signs: Opposes topic 10
License and register all handgun sales: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Gun control protects our children: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Don’t water down sensible gun control legislation: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Lock up guns; store ammo separately: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Get weapons off the streets; zero tolerance for weapons: Opposes topic 10
Prevent unauthorized firearm use with "smart gun" technology: Opposes topic 10
NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence: Strongly Opposes topic 10
NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers: Strongly Opposes topic 10

Strongly Favors topic 11:
Higher taxes on the wealthy
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Rescind tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 a year: Strongly Favors topic 11
Pay down debt & cut taxes within balanced budget: Favors topic 11
GOP tax plan would hurt New York’s students: Favors topic 11
Rated 21% by NTU, indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes: Strongly Favors topic 11
Rated 80% by the CTJ, indicating support of progressive taxation: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on raising the Death Tax exemption to $5M from $1M: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on allowing AMT reduction without budget offset: Favors topic 11
YES on reducing marriage penalty instead of cutting top tax rates: Favors topic 11
YES on spending $448B of tax cut on education & debt reduction: Favors topic 11
NO on $350 billion in tax breaks over 11 years: Strongly Favors topic 11
YES on extending the tax cuts on capital gains and dividends: Strongly Opposes topic 11
YES on $47B for military by repealing capital gains tax cut: Favors topic 11
YES on retaining reduced taxes on capital gains & dividends: Strongly Opposes topic 11
NO on permanently repealing the `death tax`: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on supporting permanence of estate tax cuts: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on raising estate tax exemption to $5 million: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax: Strongly Favors topic 11

Favors topic 12:
Pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens
(+2 points on Social scale)

Introduce a path to earn citizenship in the first 100 days: Strongly Favors topic 12
Consider halting certain raids on illegal immigrant families: Favors topic 12
Deporting all illegal immigrants is unrealistic: Strongly Favors topic 12
Illegal immigrants with driver’s licenses puts them at risk: Opposes topic 12
Oppose granting driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants: Opposes topic 12
More border patrolling on both Mexican AND Canadian borders: Opposes topic 12
Anti-immigrant bill would have criminalized Jesus Christ: Strongly Favors topic 12
Sanctuary cities ok; local police can’t enforce immigration: Favors topic 12
Comprehensive reform to get 12 million out of shadows: Strongly Favors topic 12
Sponsored bill covering child resident aliens under Medicaid: Favors topic 12
Sponsored bill funding social services for noncitizens: Favors topic 12
Rated 8% by USBC, indicating an open-border stance: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on continuing federal funds for declared "sanctuary cities": Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on establishing a Guest Worker program: Favors topic 12
YES on building a fence along the Mexican border: Strongly Opposes topic 12
YES on eliminating the "Y" nonimmigrant guestworker program: Neutral topic 12
NO on declaring English as the official language of the US government: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on comprehensive immigration reform: Strongly Favors topic 12

Favors topic 13:
Support & expand free trade
(+2 points on Economic scale)

Chief advocate for Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): Strongly Favors topic 13
TPP agreement creates more growth and better growth: Favors topic 13
Smart, pro-American trade: NAFTA has hurt workers: Strongly Opposes topic 13
No fast-track authority for this president: Opposes topic 13
Defended outsourcing of US jobs to India: Favors topic 13
1980s: Loved Wal-Mart's "Buy America" program: Opposes topic 13
Globalization should not substitute for humanization: Opposes topic 13
Supports MFN for China, despite concerns over human rights: Strongly Favors topic 13
Build a rule-based global trading system: Favors topic 13
Rated 17% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on removing common goods from national security export rules: Favors topic 13
YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam: Favors topic 13
NO on extending free trade to Andean nations: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on establishing free trade between US & Singapore: Favors topic 13
YES on establishing free trade between the US and Chile: Favors topic 13
NO on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on free trade agreement with Oman: Strongly Favors topic 13

Opposes topic 14:
Maintain US sovereignty from UN
(-3 points on Economic scale)

US support & no-fly zone, but UN troops on ground in Darfur: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Support UN reform because US benefits: Opposes topic 14
Engage in world affairs, including human rights: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Keep Cuban embargo; pay UN bills: Opposes topic 14
2002 Iraq speech criticized both Saddam and U.N.: Opposes topic 14
2002: Attacking Iraq "not a good option" but authorized it: Favors topic 14
Urged President to veto UN condemnation of Israel: Favors topic 14
Voted against Levin Amendment: it gave UN veto over US: Favors topic 14
Dems believe in fighting terror with cooperation: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Restore habeas corpus for detainees in the War on Terror: Opposes topic 14
YES on preserving habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees: Strongly Opposes topic 14
YES on requiring CIA reports on detainees & interrogation methods: Strongly Opposes topic 14
NO on removing need for FISA warrant for wiretapping abroad: Strongly Opposes topic 14

No opinion on topic 15:
Expand the military
(0 points on Social scale)

There is no safe haven for the terrorists: Favors topic 15
Our troops are stretched; so increase size of military: Favors topic 15
Rated 100% by SANE, indicating a pro-peace voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 15
Extend reserve retirement pay parity back to 9/11: Favors topic 15
Improve mental health care benefits for returning veterans: Favors topic 15
YES on requiring on-budget funding for Iraq, not emergency funding: Opposes topic 15
YES on limiting soldiers' deployment to 12 months: Opposes topic 15

Strongly Favors topic 16:
More enforcement of the right to vote
(+5 points on Social scale)

Presidents should reveal donations to their foundations: Strongly Favors topic 16
Voter suppression revives old demons of discrimination: Favors topic 16
Stand for public financing and getting money out of politics: Strongly Favors topic 16
Move to public election financing, not banning lobbyists: Strongly Favors topic 16
Verified paper ballot for every electronic voting machines: Favors topic 16
Called for ban on all soft money in 2000 campaign: Favors topic 16
Prohibit 'voter caging' which intimidates minority voting: Favors topic 16
YES on banning campaign donations from unions & corporations: Favors topic 16
YES on banning "soft money" contributions and restricting issue ads: Favors topic 16
NO on establishing the Senate Office of Public Integrity: Opposes topic 16
NO on allowing some lobbyist gifts to Congress: Strongly Favors topic 16

Favors topic 17:
Stay out of Iran
(+2 points on Social scale)

OpEd: More aggressive than most Dems on foreign policy: Opposes topic 17
Smartest strategic choice is peace: Favors topic 17
Extend peace treaties to Palestinians, Syrians & Lebanese: Favors topic 17
Foreign aid spending is only 1%; lead by remaining engaged: Strongly Favors topic 17
Up to the Iraqis to decide the future they will have: Favors topic 17
Demand Bush to explain to Congress on his plan on Iraq: Favors topic 17
Deauthorize Iraq war, and don’t grant new war authority: Strongly Favors topic 17
Phased redeployment out of Iraq, beginning immediately: Strongly Favors topic 17
Withdraw troops within 60 days after taking office: Strongly Favors topic 17
Voted for Iraq war based on available info; now would not: Favors topic 17
Progressive Internationalism: globalize with US pre-eminence: Favors topic 17
No troop surge: no military escalation in Iraq: Strongly Favors topic 17
Require Congress' approval before military action in Iran: Favors topic 17
YES on authorizing use of military force against Iraq: Strongly Opposes topic 17
NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007: Strongly Opposes topic 17
YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq by March 2008: Strongly Favors topic 17

Strongly Favors topic 18:
Prioritize green energy
(-5 points on Economic scale)

$100B per year by 2020 for climate change mitigation: Strongly Favors topic 18
$100B per year by 2020 for climate change mitigation: Strongly Favors topic 18
Remove energy dependence on countries who would harm us: Strongly Favors topic 18
Stands for clean air and funding the EPA: Favors topic 18
Reduce air pollution to improve children’s health: Favors topic 18
Ratify Kyoto; more mass transit: Strongly Favors topic 18
Supports tradable emissions permits for greenhouse gases: Favors topic 18
Keep efficient air conditioner rule to conserve energy: Strongly Favors topic 18
Establish greenhouse gas tradeable allowances: Strongly Favors topic 18
Rated 100% by the CAF, indicating support for energy independence: Favors topic 18
Designate sensitive ANWR area as protected wilderness: Favors topic 18
Set goal of 25% renewable energy by 2025: Strongly Favors topic 18
Let states define stricter-than-federal emission standards: Strongly Favors topic 18
Gas tax holiday for the summer: Opposes topic 18
NO on terminating CAFE standards within 15 months: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on targeting 100,000 hydrogen-powered vehicles by 2010: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on removing consideration of drilling ANWR from budget bill: Favors topic 18
YES on reducing oil usage by 40% by 2025 (instead of 5%): Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on disallowing an oil leasing program in Alaska's ANWR: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on banning drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Favors topic 18
YES on factoring global warming into federal project planning: Favors topic 18
YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies: Strongly Favors topic 18

Opposes topic 19:
Never legalize marijuana
(+2 points on Social scale)

Medical marijuana now; wait-and-see on recreational pot: Opposes topic 19
Medical marijuana maybe ok; states decide recreational use: Opposes topic 19
Divert non-violent drug offenders away from prison: Strongly Opposes topic 19
Address drug problem with treatment and special drug courts: Strongly Opposes topic 19
End harsher sentencing for crack vs. powder cocaine: Opposes topic 19
Require chemical resellers to certify against meth use: Favors topic 19

Strongly Favors topic 20:
Stimulus better than market-led recovery
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Wealthy should go back to paying pre-Bush tax rates: Favors topic 20
Want to restore the tax rates we had in the ‘90s: Favors topic 20
Help people facing foreclosure; don’t just bail-out banks: Strongly Favors topic 20
Minimum wage increases haven’t kept up with Congress’ wages: Strongly Favors topic 20
Co-sponsored bills totaling $502B in spending thru 2005: Strongly Favors topic 20
End Bush tax cuts;take things away from rich for common good: Favors topic 20
Social issues matter; wrong time for tax cuts: Strongly Favors topic 20
Use tax dollars to upgrade infrastructure, not for stadium: Strongly Favors topic 20
America can afford to raise the minimum wage: Strongly Favors topic 20
Just Say No to GOP tax plan: Strongly Favors topic 20
YES on increasing tax rate for people earning over $1 million: Strongly Favors topic 20

[LWolf]

142. I don't know that anyone can beat anyone by any margin

until the election is held. That's when people actually vote. I do know plenty of Democrats that can earn my vote with their record on issues.

As I already pointed out to you, I don't choose candidates based on polls, but on record. Throwing out a long page of poll numbers doesn't change that, it simply provides evidence that you either don't listen well, don't comprehend well, or both.

[VanillaRhapsody]

143. poll after poll

"polling doesn't mean anything"

right?....right???


but whatever gets you through the night....


SCIENCE!

[LWolf]

144. Don't quote what I didn't say.

You want to talk about polls. I choose candidates based on records, not polls. I'm sorry you can't understand this. I'll try to make it simpler.

I'm not talking about polls because they aren't my focus, nor my tool. I care about issues. That's ALL I care about. If you want to have a conversation about polls, talk to somebody who gives a shit.

HRC does not meet my criteria for a candidate based on issues of economic justice.

[VanillaRhapsody]

146. right....

I have the record too....are you sure you want to go down that road as well?


Meanwhile YOU would rather see a DEMOCRAT with THESE stats and records and polling (the facts and record speaks for themselves on the fact that she IS a good Democrat ) taken down...and instead place your money on a longshot against Republicans!

[VanillaRhapsody]

150. wow....

three whole paragraphs about my "thing"?

flattered....truly...

[LWolf]

151. .

[Katashi_itto]

164. Maybe it takes a lot to describe someone

who could be the living reincarnation of Chauncey Gardner.

We ought to found a religion to dedicated to your perfection.

Something that embraces nothingness like Zen.

But less.

I can do it in less words.

But then I practice Haiku.

My money is on
Nuclear catastrophe,
or maybe zombies

[VanillaRhapsody]

122. apparently it is the "other side" that are sensitive...

[davidpdx]

126. Really there are "sides"

Tell me more about these "sides"?

I really hope you are talking about food.

[VanillaRhapsody]

127. You tell me....you brought it up!

Oh now careful there....

I've noticed that the early crew of HRC pushers have been attacking those who oppose her from the left as if we AREN'T the "PARTY."


they can be a sensitive bunch.

***note*** "they" denotes other....so yes YOU brought it up...

[davidpdx]

130. 103, 104, 125, and 126

Please tell me which post I claimed there were "sides"?

Yeah, that's what I thought.

[Katashi_itto]

148. I plan on waffles on election day if Hillary is the only choice.

[RussBLib]

156. results

On Sat Feb 21, 2015, 11:34 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

I plan on waffles on election day if Hillary is the only choice.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6256939

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Ok, so this guy does nothing but show up on threads BRAGGING about not voting, and encouraging others to join him. If this isn't a blatant, in your face mockery of the TOS of this site, then I don't know what is. What the hell has happened to this place?

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Feb 21, 2015, 11:40 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: this whole Hillary-not Hillary issue is overly tiresome, and this alert is an abuse of the alert system.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Hating on Hillary has become a DU tradition. So have attempts to discourage people from voting. Just reality.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: While I think this person is rubbing noses in it, the TOS doesn't require complete support of Democrats all the time. It isn't general election season so this is ok right now; according to the TOS. I believe that if this was said during general election season this would be hideable. Maybe even alerted to admin. based on this I vote to leave. Here


Winning elections is important — therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Katashi_itto]

157. Thanks! Looks like I struck a nerve

[Quackers]

165. I wonder who could've alerted on you.

lol

[Agschmid]

167. It was me.

I find that shit really annoying.

[VanillaRhapsody]

111. Pushers? WTF!!! She is far in the lead among ALL REAL Democrats no one is holding a gun to our heads

I think you Left Leaning Independents are just in denial.

Believe it or not...we don't need your assessment of who or what we are. Better to take a look in the mirror it seems someone who thinks HRC is being "pushed" on us is the one that needs introspection!

By the way...I AM in the Left....I am just a Realist not an Idealogue

[Major Nikon]

120. Results...

On Fri Feb 20, 2015, 07:28 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Pushers? WTF!!! She is far in the lead among ALL REAL Democrats no one is holding a gun to our heads
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6254651

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

I am a "REAL" Democrat. I am not an Independent. It's not appropriate to suggest that I'm not a "REAL" Democrat, period.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Feb 20, 2015, 07:38 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Buck up, sweet pea. This is one of the thinnest alerts I've seen in ages.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Nothing here that breaks the rules.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It is going to be a long primary season
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I'm real also I saw what happened in 07 with hrc
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: We're all passionate Democrats here. Our passion can be stormy. Politics should come with protective gear to help us from melting. I don't see a need to censor this post.

[VanillaRhapsody]

121. Not to mention this poster first suggested SOME Democrats were "HRC Pushers" and also

"neo-Liberals".....but they have skin this thin?

[malokvale77]

132. OK...

but the PARTY is about to lose a bit of it's base. You know the base that didn't vote for Reagan.

[VanillaRhapsody]

135. You know what....there are also alot of women including young women who hadn't bothered to vote

before....they will vote in that case.

So your threat falls kinda flat!

Thats the same argument the Teaparty is using on their side of the aisle by the way!

[malokvale77]

140. My threat?

I didn't threaten anything.

By the way, I have a 19 year old granddaughter. Her and her friends are not very thrilled with Hillary. They will take their rights as women. They are far more worried about having their future stole by Wallstreet and War.

Comparing me to the Teaparty is lame and only proves your weakness.

[VanillaRhapsody]

141. Yeah actually....you did!

"You know the base that didn't vote for Reagan."

I didn't compare you to the Teaparty...but I did compare the threat...they are a vocal minority too...

Ideologues are Ideologues....don't you agree?

[Agschmid]

145. Yup.

I can answer that for you.

[malokvale77]

172. I do not agree with anything you have ever stated on DU

My impression of you is that you are out to destroy the Democratic Party.

I'm disappointed so many on DU have bought into the same 'Third Way' crap.

[malokvale77]

174. "You know the base that didn't vote for Reagan."

That is what you call a threat?

That is reality VR. You are too funny.

I see you and your kind as the real threat to the Democratic Party.

[VanillaRhapsody]

175. No Ideologues do not deal with "reality"

Realists DO!

I and "my kind"....are called...The MAJORITY! HRC polls 50 points ahead of all the other Democrats...and I am a Democrat that votes for the winner of the Primary. And we "supporters" know that she also polls double digits higher than all the Republicans......Now when you have a candidate that has better odds than THAT....let me "and my kind"....know!

[whatthehey]

4. A promising career with Unskewed Polls awaits you.

[MohRokTah]

5. Cool Push Poll, Bro. eom

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. "Hillary sucks, wash, rinse and repeat."

There should be a contest for how many ways her detractors can say it.

[Katashi_itto]

158. Really, who says that?

Shes Wall St friendly, MIC friendly, what could be wrong with that?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

159. Brevity is a virtue.

Never convey in a paragraph that which can better be conveyed in a sentence.

[Katashi_itto]

160. How about...

Corporate Shill?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

161. Even better...

When you are slinging pejoratives, go big or go home!

[Katashi_itto]

162. Thought you wanted brevity?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

163. "Even better" seems like a compliment, no?/NT

[brooklynite]

11. Um, who told you that?

Nobody told me that, and I'm in with her big supporters.

Likewise, nobody told me we shouldn't have an open Primary. Nobody told me that Warren and Sanders shouldn't run if they want to.

What they DID tell me was that Clinton is a solid mainstream Democrat who would be the best candidate we can put up against the likely Republicans.

Now perhaps someone told you something different; the funny thing is, whenever I ask who told them, they never seem to be able to give me a name.

[sabrina 1]

17. What does 'solid mainstream Democrat' mean these days? Wall St friendly, MIC friendly? Maybe that

has appeal for her 'big donors', in fact we know it does, but for the working class, what does she have to offer? I am still waiting to see her opinions on some pretty big issues that are of great concern to the voting public. She's been rather silent for someone who is 'inevitable'.

And if Bernie did decide to run as a Dem would the Party support him? We KNOW they don't generally back progressive Dems if they have a Third Way condidate to back?

[brooklynite]

18. In my book? Pro choice, pro gay rights, pro progressive taxation, pro Social Security, pro ACA...

...People like to throw around "1%er" and "MIC friendly" as if that answers the question. Name specific votes or stated policies that are out of the mainstream of the Democratic Party.

[sabrina 1]

21. Every Democrat, and surprising as it may be, many Republicans, and certainly Independents, left

leaning Libertarians, support all those issues also. Some USE that support to cover for their OTHER policies. 'Look at me, I support WOMEN' but don't look at my 'Welfare Reform' or my deregulation policies or trade agreements that sent your jobs overseas''.

No one who supports women, supports WAR or proxy WARS. Women are the most harmed by all these wars.

And no one who supports the corruption on Wall St, or Third Way 'austerity' programs, or 'putting SS up for 'reform' via the Third Way policies, supports Women.

Words are just words, but ACTIONS are what we judge politicians by now.

[brooklynite]

23. So, am I to understand that you support an isolationist foreign policy and absolute passivism?

You're welcome to take that position, but you would be completely out of sync with the average Democrat.

As for Wall street, you've once again throw out buzz words. What Clinton policy can you point to in support of "austerity" or "Third Way policies"?

[sabrina 1]

25. Am I to assume you support Rove/Cheney/Bush's policies of turning this country into an Empire?

You can dispense with the buzz words, 'isolationist' eg. I support war as a last resort only when this country is threatened.

What do you support? That we invade countries all over the globe, as former Empires did, and which this democracy was formed AGAINST, for their Resources? Killing and torturing and pillaging in order to control the world's resources, supporting some of the world's worst dictators, see Karamov eg in order to do so? Then suffering the inevitable backlash that all Empires suffer before their final collapse?

Why did we go to Iraq?

As for Wall ST corruption, the kind that collapsed the world's economies, the mortgage fraud, the AIG fraud, the fraud that was reported by the FBI back in 2005 and for which they requested 'more manpower' as it was so widespread they could not handle it before it would cause an economic collapse, which it did, and were TAKEN OFF the job instead?

THAT kind of corruption. And the bailouts for the gamblers, while their victims lost their homes and jobs etc? That kind of fraud?

I wish the rest of us could get billions of dollars to cover our incompetence and fraud, though most of us would not even consider harming other people that way.

Did you not study what caused the global collapse?

And not one of them was held accountable.

Where DOES Hillary stand on SS? I have no idea. I know where Bernie stands and Warren and Sherrod Brown eg, but have no clue whether or not Hillary has changed her position since 2008.

[brooklynite]

28. No, I believe in the Obama policy of supporting democracy through limited military engagement

I trust, by the way, you didn't vote for him in 2012? He hadn't unilaterally withdrawn from Iraq and he had engaged us in Libya, so by your standards he was a war-monger, right?

[sabrina 1]

42. Democracy? Show me some of those 'democracies' we have helped to 'create' or support?

Did you know that those rising up in the Arab Spring eg, against one of our dictator friends Mubarak (surely you are not claiming the US was supporting DEMOCRACY in Egypt?) stated that they did not WANT 'democracy' as seen in Iraq.

Please, our military interventionism has gotten Democracy a bad name around the globe.

Have you seen Libya lately? A country that once had among the highest living standards in Africa, now looks like Mad Max, thanks to our 'support for democracy'. All their social programs are gone, murder, gang rapes, government collapse, allowing the worst and most brutal thugs to over run the country?

That kind of 'support for democracy'? Seriously, perhaps you don't follow the news of the countries we have invaded to support 'democracy' AFTER we are finished, but many of us do.

I knew people in Europe, BEFORE our 'support for democracy' in Iraq, Libya eg who used to go shopping in those countries. When of them returned to Iraq a few years ago, he was horrified at what had happened to the country.

You go ahead and support our support of some of the world's most cruel dictators in order to support 'democracy' if that is what you believe we are doing.

I prefer reality and I oppose vehemently what have done to those unfortunate people.

The British Empire made similar claims, they were civilizing all those 'savages' in their view. Our military is for DEFENSE. Not to run around the world controlling the resources of other nations. I'd like to know when the Constitution was changed to include our 'foreign adventures'.

[A Little Weird]

153. +1

[DonCoquixote]

40. funny Martin O malley

is all of these things.

[brooklynite]

41. Indeed he is...

...and he's welcome into the game. However, he has three weaknesses:

1. Little name recognition

2. Limited fundraising ability to improve his name recognition

3. Stuck with the fact that the Republicans took the MD Governorship by campaigning against his tenure.

nb - I have inside information that O'Malley's plan is to run a "friendly" Primary against Clinton, probably for VP placement.

[VanillaRhapsody]

50. You don't think you are THAT do you?

Solid Mainstream Democratic lead....50 point advantage....I'd say that is pretty solid amongst them!

[sabrina 1]

58. Excuse me? 'You don't think you are THAT do you'? Care to explain that more clearly?

[VanillaRhapsody]

61. You don't think YOUR views are that of the "Solid Mainstream Democrats"

do you?

Is that plain enough for ya?



The solid mainstream SUPPORTS Hillary Clinton with a 50 point lead over the rest of the pack..

The solid mainstream Democrat doesn't support a non-Democratic Independent!

By the way......are you the "solid mainstream Democrat" pledging to vote for whomever wins the Solid Mainstream Democratic Primary? As a matter of fact....who do you think that Independent will pledge to vote for after the aforementioned Primary?

[sabrina 1]

95. Solid Mainstream Democrats are FIGHTERS for the working class, the elderly, disabled, children,

iow, the most vulnerable members of society. They will not take loyalty oaths to those who do not represent the Working Class.

Do YOU support the Democratic Party moving to the Right in support of Wall St rather than the Working Class, the poor, the disabled, the elderly?

Btw, where does Hillary stand on SS? She hasn't said. And how about Welfare Reform that has so damaged, women in particular?

What about a National HC system? And how about the TPP that is going to be devastating in terms of the working class, and yes, we DO know that now for a fact?

How about the Neocon wars she has supported, with devastating results, has she changed her mind on that?

What about prosecuting corruption on Wall St? Has she ever said anything about that?

I don't take loyalty oaths. That's for Right Wingers who blindly follow their 'leaders'. Democrats don't blindly follow.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised to be seeing this 'your are not a Democrat' garbage on a day when Giuliani uses the same tactic on President Obama. Right wingers do that, don't they, they ACCUSE people of not being 'patriotic' or 'loyal' enough when they disagree with them. But they never can offer their own opinions for discussion, because their opinions are so bad they know they cannot discuss them.

Shame you feel the need to emulate such a failed tactic. How about you tell us WHY Hillary is worthy of our support?

[winter is coming]

60. Markos Moulitsas?

http://thehill.com/opinion/markos-moulitsas/233032-markos-moulitsas-dont-draft-warren

Stupid people may have talked about 2007 Clinton being “inevitable” but the data suggested anything but. This year, with Clinton’s closest challengers in the low teens, it couldn’t be more inevitable.

[brooklynite]

82. I see...one blogger

Well, one person here said Sanders could beat Clinton, so I guess he's inevitable?

[winter is coming]

85. Yes, one anonyous commentator here is exactly the same thing

as an opinion piece by the founder of Kos that was published in The Hill.

[brooklynite]

90. Still an opionion piece by ONE person...

hardly a concerted effort to deny people an open Primary.

[FSogol]

13. Unrec.

[MineralMan]

14. Can't vote. Push poll.

Want a different candidate? Get someone to run in the primaries. Can't do that? Vote for Hillary in November, 2016. Democrats vote for Democrats in general elections. If they don't, they're not really Democrats.

[hfojvt]

15. actually, no we don't

a) it's a Presidential election, so lots of people will vote in that
b) like the old joke about the two campers, where one says "you will never outrun that bear" and the other says "I don't have to outrun the bear, I just have to outrun you." Hillary, or any Democratic candidate, just needs to be more inspiring than her opponent
c) her gender alone is inspiring, especially to people who share that gender. How many female voters, and potential voters want to see that glass ceiling broken? I am guessing a fair number of them, even if they may not admit it to pollsters. In 2008, a number of black people came in to headquarters for Obama bumperstickers and told me they were Republicans. They probably would not admit that they were voting for Obama "just because he is black". I suspect many Republican women or independents who usually vote Republican will be "inspired" to switch.

On the other hand, I talked to two people while doing GOTV on election day 2008. One old black guy on a riding lawnmower told me "I haven't decided who to vote for yet" and I almost burst out laughing. I was thinking "you are joking right? Let me get you a mirror." One other old black guy with an incredible huge yard said he and his mother would not be voting because the supreme court proved in 2000 that there was no point. I talked with him for a few minutes and really hoped that my co-worker would join me, but she never came down the long driveway. I figured that an attractive black woman would be more persuasive than me.

I also talked to a white welfare mom with three kids who declined to vote. She said none of them were doing anything for the poor.

Unfortunately, we lost that election too. Our democratic incumbent in Congress got defeated. But we'd have needed another 30,000 votes to change that outcome.

[sabrina 1]

19. 'her gender alone' is NOT inspiring. Her positions on policies are what WOMEN are interested. If she

supports eg, her husband's policies on welfare, I can promise you that women will not support such policies. Women, single moms and their children were the most harmed by 'welfare reform', a third way policy. A group of dems that always aim their 'austerity' garbage at the poor, the elderly and the working class.

Please do not insult the intelligence of women in general by assuming they will automatically vote for anyone, based on their gender alone.

There have been some horrific women 'leaders' throughout history. Thatcher comes to mind, among others.

We are not stupid enough to be lured to vote for someone simply because they are a woman.

And what if Republicans decide women are that stupid also and run a woman on their ticket?

Women, like everyone else, want people who represent THEIR interests, their families, not Wall St and the War Machine, that is harmful to their interests.

[hfojvt]

24. they already tried that in 2008

with Sarah Palin.

And it may only be a deciding factor for 2 or 3% of voters. But taking 2% from your opponent and adding it to your side can easily tip some close states or make victories more solid in swing states.

I am not saying it is a deciding factor for ALL women, but I think it will be for some.

[VanillaRhapsody]

51. then YOU might want to read up on HER policies not HIS...

since you are soooooooo interested in her positions on women's issues....don't you think? A real feminist wouldn't use her husbands views as evidence of hers now would they?

[BainsBane]

93. Imagine anyone judging Biden or Sanders based on their wives' views

They wouldn't, but Bill Clinton is routinely sited as an argument against Hillary. That argument shows the ingrained sexism in the argument against her. That those most hostile to feminism are dedicated to her defeat is hardly surprising.

[tularetom]

105. If Biden's or Sander's wives had been president

you can bet your ass they would be judged on their wives views.

Actually, Hillary suffers by comparison with Bill Clinton. She embodies all the bad things that have come to be associated with his term in office like repeal of Glass Steagel, welfare "reform", media consolidation, but lacks the charm, charisma, and good-ol-boy self deprecating humor that kept the country on his side while he was still in office. She doesn't appear to be the quick thinker that Bill is either.

All things considered, she's a pretty lousy candidate, yet she appears to be the best we can hope for. That says less about her than it does about the overall state of politics in the country.

[BainsBane]

106. She embodies them in your minds

Last edited Fri Feb 20, 2015, 05:01 PM - Edit history (1)

in your minds. That's all about you people, not her actual positions on issues. You place on her all the ills of capitalism and the American political system. You pretend a single individual is responsible for (or can save you from) the capitalist system. In doing so, you people show a startling lack of awareness of the country you live in. This is a meme that has taken hold in part because some are all too comfortable in demonizing a woman. Clinton is not Eve, and she is not tempting you with the apple.

[tularetom]

108. Instead of attacking me for expressing my views

Why don't you defend the flawed assumption in your post that led to my response?

The only reason nobody attacked Biden or Sanders on their wives views is that their wives have never been POTUS. You may not like it but Bill Clinton is a big fat target for comment and his record is right out there in public for everybody to see. And a lot of people (of both parties) don't like it. It sure as hell isn't progressive. And to claim that Hillary is independent of Clinton's past is ludicrous.

That said, Bill Clinton is personally sort of a likable guy. Hillary just doesn't come across as likable at all and it has jack shit to do with her gender. She's not "tough", nor "compassionate", she's kind of a repressed cold fish without much of a sense of humor and she has an unfortunate tendency to embellish her personal experiences.

I've been voting since 1964 and I've voted for the Democratic candidate in every presidential election except one. I've voted for some awful candidates and Hillary may not be the worst of all. I'll vote for her if she is the nominee if only to preserve my right to bitch about the policies she champions after her election.

[VanillaRhapsody]

114. "if only to preserve my right to bitch..."

You just used THAT word and you want US to believe you are NOT sexist?

PUHLEAZE!

[tularetom]

116. It is a verb (genderless) ya know and I really don't care what you believe

But I will say this: A clumsy, tone deaf, poorly managed campaign like the one Hillary Clinton ran in 2008 will just make it that much more difficult for one of the many qualified women in the US who might entertain future presidential ambitions.

[VanillaRhapsody]

118. sure it is....You keep telling yourself that....you're a real feminist male alright

Last edited Fri Feb 20, 2015, 10:00 PM - Edit history (1)

whatever gets you through the night I guess...


talk about "tone deaf"

[VanillaRhapsody]

119. And if she becomes President Tom....what does that do for them????

like you said...."tone deaf"

[tularetom]

136. We'll just have to wait and see, won't we

It will depend to a great extent on what she does after she becomes President, IF she becomes President.

WTF do you want from me anyway? I already said I'll vote for her if she is the candidate, the alternatives are too scary to contemplate. It won't be the first time I held my nose to vote for a Democrat and probably it won't be the last.

So I guess if she gets elected it will be due in part to the votes she got from sexists like me.

[VanillaRhapsody]

137. Yeah you will

Let us know when you have a candidate that polls with double digit leads over all Republicans...mkay???

[VanillaRhapsody]

113. Judging her and saying they are essentially joined at the hip on policy when SHE has her

own career in politics and record that says otherwise IS sexist...

[SheilaT]

16. I thoiught she was inevitable in 2008.

Explain to me why she looks to be running in 2016. She can't run for a third term, she?

And no, I'm not attaching the sarcasm thing.

[Paladin]

20. You stick-in-the-eye people need to look at Jeb Bush's group of advisers.

If you loved Dubya's group of stumblebums, you'll be ecstatic over the people Jeb is gathering together: Wolfowitz, Baker, and lots of other Bush Family Enforcers, incompetents who you never dreamed would ever get a second chance. The choice this time around isn't between Not Overly Inspiring and A Little Less Inspiring; it's between Not Overly Inspiring (D) and Utterly Predictable Train Wreck (R). I suggest you get the Hillary snark out of your systems and join the rest of us on the ramparts, where you belong.

[Savannahmann]

97. Again, that is the broken leg is better than a heart attack argument.

Yes, a broken leg is not as serious as a heart attack. A broken leg is rarely life threatening unless it severs an artery. But that does not make the broken leg a good thing.

What got me to thinking about this was the observation that we have had some real giants in the Democratic Party who ran for President, and who won the Presidency. We want someone exceptional to hold that office. A person who has a vision of the nation that inspires the people.

FDR, Truman, JFK. In a twenty year period, those three were all Democratic Presidents. FDR was the first to win more than two terms. When he died in office, he was on his fourth term as President, and still much beloved by the people. He inspired a nation and led it out of the Depression. He rallied a nation and led it to the doorstep of victory during the Second World War. He created Social Programs that were the envy of the world.

Then Harry Truman took over. Unprepared, and utterly underestimated for the job of President. Harry quickly grew into the job, and did an amazing job. He was strong enough to maintain the dignity of the Presidency against the collected Generals during Korea. He was wise enough to know that keeping the Soviets out of Japan was a goal worth working for. I consider Truman to be one of the greats.

JFK. Led the country through the Missile Crisis. Inspired it through the goal of reaching the moon. It was an impossible goal. Listen to his speeches again. We will reach the moon using technology that does not yet exist. Using techniques that does not yet exist. We had to invent the things, test them, and then develop the techniques that would allow the tech to be utilized. What an astounding vision.

Then there is Hillary. No vision other than vague assurances that things will somehow work out with her in charge. No long list of accomplishments. The only elected office she's held was the Senate. There her record was mediocre at best. Her time as Secretary of State? Not really a long string of successes. Again mediocre at best.

So we're left with the battle cry to send the undecided into a coma. She's better than the Republicans. That is a rallying cry that would send the undecided into apathy. We need those undecided to break for our side. We need to give them something to vote for. Instead of giving them something that doesn't smell like a turd nearly as strongly as the Republican choice. Because then, the Republicans have a good chance at winning. Too good. Don't look at Polling now. Polling eight years ago had Hillary walking away with the Nomination. Nobody thought that Barack Obama a Freshman Senator from Illinois had a chance in hell.

She's better than the Republicans is as asinine as the poll I posted above. Even here imagine my surprise when people preferred a sharp stick in the eye.

[Paladin]

100. If we get a Repub president and we end up living in American Sniper Nation, remind me to thank you.

[VanillaRhapsody]

133. Exactly!

they have yet to produce this candidate with the stats that say they can take on ANY Republican comer and beat them by double digits. I keep asking....none seem to answer!

Its like having Micheal Jordan on the team.....but benching him "on principle"!

[Savannahmann]

166. Actually, it's more like a pudgy short guy that everyone says is better than Jordan.

Hillary is not the strong candidate of legend. Look at her voting record. Bankruptcy reform which if you don't recall was where we individual peons could no longer write off debt but the corporations still could. I wonder why it hasn't lowered credit card rates as advertised?

TPP, NAFTA, Free Trade. All of those are supported by Hillary, despite overwhelming evidence that it is shattering the ability of the middle class to remain middle class.

Shall I continue? When we get down to it, the only things that Hillary supports that are supported by a vast majority of Democrats is Woman's Choice, and Gay Marriage. So on the issues, she's mostly Right with a foot solidly on the line left. I say a foot solidly on the line because it would be interesting to find a Democrat who didn't support those things. I don't think any are still in office even in the South. So when everyone is in favor of it, then that strength is a ho hum everyone is like that situation.

So on social issues she's firmly in the pack, and on economic issues she's firmly out of touch. This is not Michael Jordan. That's a Costanza from Seinfeld pretending to be Jordan.

[VanillaRhapsody]

168. Stats doesn't even register with you did they?

do you have another guy on the team that scores by double digits consistently on every player on the other team?

Keep trying....let us know when you have a candidate with better stats!

[Savannahmann]

169. Yes stats register. But we don't have stats.

We have polling. That is like an estimate before the game to continue with your Michael Jordan example. The game isn't being played yet. We're not even in the season yet. So standing there and announcing that Michael Jordan will score fifty points in the championship game is not a statistic, it's an estimate. It's a prediction.

Polling now is far too early to be meaningful. The only polling that is meaningful right now is public opinion on issues. That should be a guide for prospective candidates on how to shape their message, and what issues to focus on. Before we get to the competition we have a long road. And the issues right now are Hillary's weak spot. Because as the game approaches, people will start tuning in.

We'll win the 40% of people who traditionally vote Democratic. The Republicans will win the 40% that traditionally vote for them. That leaves 20% that we have to try and convince. Actually a hair over ten percent, but you get the point. So how do we convince those people to vote for us? Do we announce that the election is already over? Hillary won guys, give it up. We have polling to prove it.

We had polling that showed more than 90% of the people approved of background checks for all weapons sales. The Congress failed to pass the legislation. That same polling was used to predict a huge Democratic win in Congress. That huge Democratic win never materialized. That was after the pundits and poll watchers swore that the Republican Party was dead because of that action.

Citizens United would unite the people to vote the Republican out of office. The Republicans picked up seats in the House and the Senate. Statistics were used to prove that the Republicans were doomed. Polling was used to show that the Democrats could just enjoy the stroll to victory. Now of course, we've forgotten about all of that haven't we?

Hillary is on the unpopular side of too many issues to win. Senator Wyden, of Oregon, knows that if he sides with the TPP his career in the Senate is over. http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Political-Action-Legislation/Poll-Shows-Voters-Will-Hold-Lawmakers-Accountable-for-Fast-Track-Support

Senator Wyden is a popular Senator with his constituents, yet this one issue places him in dire jeopardy of losing his seat. So let's talk issues.

Do you think the Labor Unions are going to push hard to get Hillary elected if she supports the TPP and Fast track which she has said she supports? The Labor Unions will not go Republican, but they won't go for Hillary either. How do Democrats win without the Unions? So how does your statistic look now? Unions make up 35% of public sector workers, and just under 7% of private sector workers. So how does Hillary win if she loses a percentage of that vote, even as little as a quarter of them because she supports TPP?

Remember, these are the statistics that you want to discuss, that you want to claim I don't understand.

Hillary won't win the South. So the states in play will be Ohio, Indiana, Colorado, and Pennsylvania. Three of those four are Union states. How does she win them if the Union doesn't come out to support her? How can the Union come out and support her if she supports wiping the manufacturing base off the map with the TPP?

I know Statistics. I was warning people this time last year that the Senate was in real danger. I was told then that I had no idea what I was talking about, but I was reading the polls, and not just the ones that said what I liked. I was reading polls on issues, and despite the predictions of huge success here I remained constant in my worries about losing the Senate. Sadly, I was right. We lost the Senate, and we lost it badly. Already people forgot that, and already they're convinced we actually won somehow and will keep winning.

Hillary can't win. She can't unify the various demographics that are the core of the Democratic Party. The Volunteers won't show up, the Unions won't put the time in, and won't push her because to them it will be as if they are electing a Republican. Or do you think the AFLCIO is going to show up in great numbers to put in the hours to elect Hillary on Gay Marriage and Choice? Perhaps the UAW will really pump the dollars into her campaign so that they can see more factories moved to Mexico.

I know what I'm talking about. I know the statistics. I know the numbers. You're predicting the outcome of the final game of the basketball season and we're not even in team practices yet. The numbers right now are meaningless, because they don't take anything into account especially issues which drove the midterm election against us. Issues we utterly ignored kicked our asses while we answered every question with war on women. In far too many states we didn't even win the Women's demographic. For example Texas. Wendy Davis didn't even win with the Women voters. Allison Lundgren Grimes didn't either. Those were our big hopes remember the Statistics that were tossed about how they were going to win big?

IF we run Hillary. We lose big. Because too many of our supporters will not support her. Or do you think that the Union Leadership will tell their members to commit suicide to get Hillary elected? People vote for self interest. They pick candidates based upon self interest. That means issues. That means our candidate can't be Hillary.

Now, in November of next year, you and many others are probably going to be blaming me for screwing up her chances. I've made a prediction too. I'm predicting that Hillary is death for our party. I'm predicting that Hillary will lose and the Republicans would win all three branches of Government with at least four probably eight years of appointing SC justices. With their majority in the Senate they can name Justices that make Robert Bork look like an enlightened liberal.

But go ahead. Keep pointing to the polls. When they start to turn against Hillary, do what we did going into November. Swear that the Polls are wrong. Talk about how the polling only calls people's house phones and that leaves out the millennials who don't have house phones and live on their cells. Talk about how the polling is always skewed to the Republicans. Because this time, the polling was skewed towards us, we lost by much bigger margins than the polling predicted.

So tell me how any of that doesn't matter. How Hillary can win without the Unions. Or tell me a fairy tale about how the Unions will support her when she supports the TPP and Free Trade that eviscerates their membership. Remember, this is just one issue that has peeled off thousands of votes, unless you think that the Unions are so awesome that they would donate time, money, and energy and vote against their own interests.

[VanillaRhapsody]

170. Yes we do...its called Polling...

and poll after poll puts HRC 50 points ahead of the pack and double digit leads over all Republicans...deny this if you care to...but it doesn't change the fact.

Maybe I should just deny Barack Obama's approval ratings too and just BELIEVE he has 100% approval as well!

This is fun.......I know...I will just BELIEVE I have a 24 in' waistline and Kim Kardashians booty!

[BainsBane]

22. Those who give the greatest impression of inevitiability are her detractors

90 percent of the posts about her are by people who oppose her. That has been the case for years now. It is that side more than any other than has created the notion of Clinton as THE candidate. There are people who have discussed nothing else, who have decided to turn unrelated threads into discussions about their opposition to Clinton because it is all they care about--not issues, not policy, just a tedious obsession with a single member of the political elite.

As for what motivates people, ask yourself and those who have decided defeating her is the most important goal (more than any policy or social cause) why you invest so much of your mental energy arguing against someone who has not even yet declared their candidacy. The notion that Clinton supporters here are pushing you to do anything is patently absurd. The obsession is overwhelmingly by those who despise Clinton. And don't try to tell me it's about policy because they discus none, unless it is to deliberately distort positions like her stand on women's rights. The fact is, she and Obama were in widespread agreement on issues in 2008. The chief debate was over the mandate, which he ended up implementing anyway.

I have never made decisions about political candidates until close to when I go to the caucuses (or primaries when I lived in those states). But all of these hostile posts against Clinton (many by people who will brook no criticism of Putin) has convinced me to support her, even though she has not yet declared. I have never taken such a position before in my life. So you can thank yourself and others who wage their Jihad against Clinton for generating support for her. I am not alone in reacting that way. You all have done more for her campaign that millions in ads ever could.

[NanceGreggs]

67. You tell it!!!

[VanillaRhapsody]

77. Agreed!

[obnoxiousdrunk]

26. unrec ...push poll.

[hrmjustin]

27. Unrec.

[Cal Carpenter]

29. The odds are, we'll get both

[BlueJazz]

30. H comes before J

[dissentient]

31. Wow, what an eye-opener! (pun intended) We now have 72% voting they would rather have a sharp stick

poked into their eye than support Hillary.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

33. Reminds me of Jesus' admonition that you shouldn't look at the spec in your neighbor's eye...

Reminds me of Jesus' admonition that you shouldn't look at the spec in your neighbor's eye when you have a log in your own.

[Renew Deal]

39. Of DUers that chose to pick an option

It's about as credible as a Move On online poll.

[stevenleser]

66. People show their true characters when they become desperate

Some folks here are desperate for someone other than Hillary, and in that desperation they are willing to engage in and support the ugly practice of push polling.

[Fumesucker]

70. That's very perceptive, Steven

A great many Americans are indeed desperate, desperately sinking into a financial quagmire from which many of them will never extricate themselves before they die and like most people sinking into a quagmire they are reaching out for anything they can grab that will keep them from going under.

I'm a little surprised that you are so sympathetic to their plight, that hasn't been a characteristic that I've noted before in you.

[stevenleser]

74. I'm not sympathetic to the anti-Hillary crowd here. But you already knew that.

And instead you chose to be passive aggressive.

[Fumesucker]

98. Perspective is important

Perhaps if you were desperately sinking into an economic quagmire you would have a bit more sympathy for others who were also.

[VanillaRhapsody]

79. thats very perceptive Fumesucker

Most Democrats want another Democrat elected to continue to fix those issues....after all most Democrats realize Rome wasn't built in a day...

Perhaps they are choosing the Democrat that has double digit leads over all Republican potential candidates....because even more can be done if we defend the progress we have made....instead of taking 2 more steps back by electing a Republican again....Perhaps those Democrats that support HER 50 point lead....know something you don't seem to!

[Fumesucker]

99. Hillary is too much like Debbie Wasserman Shultz

Entirely too willing to set policy for personal gain, Hillary's vote for the Iraq war made that absolutely clear. $3,000,000,000,000 was the eventual size of the blank check she wrote to Dubya for his Iraq war porn. Hillary went with the option that she thought would preserve her political viability, she trusted Smirk to be smart and Sneer to be honest, a fuckup of colossal magnitude, $428 for every man woman and child on the planet, that's what Hillary's political ambition cost.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026251262

Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s office offered to change her position on medical marijuana if a major Florida donor recanted his withering criticism of her, according to emails obtained by POLITICO.

The proposal to Orlando trial lawyer John Morgan was straightforward: retract critical statements he made to a reporter in return for Wasserman Schultz publicly backing his cannabis initiative that she had trashed just months earlier. Morgan declined the offer with a sharp email reply sent to a go-between, who described the congresswoman as being in a “tizzy.”

[VanillaRhapsody]

112. Says the Left Leaning Independent!

Strongly Favors topic 1:
Abortion is a woman's unrestricted right
(+5 points on Social scale)

Lift ban on stem cell research to cure devastating diseases: Favors topic 1
Respect Roe v. Wade, but make adoptions easier too: Favors topic 1
Alternatives to pro-choice like forced pregnancy in Romania: Strongly Favors topic 1
Must safeguard constitutional rights, including choice: Favors topic 1
Remain vigilant on a woman’s right to chose: Favors topic 1
Keep abortion safe, legal and rare: Favors topic 1
Being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion: Favors topic 1
Supports parental notice & family planning: Opposes topic 1
No abortion for sex selection in China: Opposes topic 1
Voted liberal line on partial birth & harm to fetus: Favors topic 1
Endorsed Recommended by EMILY's List of pro-choice women: Favors topic 1
Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record: Strongly Favors topic 1
Expand embryonic stem cell research: Favors topic 1
Sponsored bill providing contraceptives for low-income women: Favors topic 1
Sponsored bill for emergency contraception for rape victims: Favors topic 1
Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance: Strongly Favors topic 1
Provide emergency contraception at military facilities: Favors topic 1
Ensure access to and funding for contraception: Favors topic 1
Focus on preventing pregnancy, plus emergency contraception: Favors topic 1
NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP: Favors topic 1
NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime: Favors topic 1
YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives: Favors topic 1
NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions: Favors topic 1
YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines: Favors topic 1

Strongly Favors topic 2:
Legally require hiring women & minorities
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Some world leaders are still misogynistic: Favors topic 2
Some world leaders are still misogynistic: Favors topic 2
We’ve come a long way on race, but we have a long way to go: Strongly Favors topic 2
Apologize for slavery, but concentrate on civil rights now: Favors topic 2
Human rights are women’s rights: Neutral on topic 2
Women’s rights are human rights: Favors topic 2
OpEd: "18 million cracks" meant "lingering sexism": Strongly Favors topic 2
Equal pay is not yet equal: Strongly Favors topic 2
1988: Instituted gender diversity Report Card within ABA: Strongly Opposes topic 2
Argued with Bill Clinton about diluting affirmative action: Strongly Favors topic 2
Shift from group preferences to economic empowerment of all: Neutral on topic 2
Sponsored bill maintaining role of women in armed forces: Favors topic 2
Rated 96% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance: Strongly Favors topic 2
Recognize Juneteenth as historical end of slavery: Strongly Favors topic 2
Re-introduce the Equal Rights Amendment: Strongly Favors topic 2
Reinforce anti-discrimination and equal-pay requirements: Favors topic 2
Ban discriminatory compensation; allow 2 years to sue: Favors topic 2
Sponsored bill enforcing against gender pay discrimination: Strongly Favors topic 2

Strongly Favors topic 3:
Comfortable with same-sex marriage
(+5 points on Social scale)

Increase America’s commitment against Global AIDS: Favors topic 3
I re-evaluated & changed my mind on gay marriage: Favors topic 3
DOMA discrimination holds us back from a more perfect union: Strongly Favors topic 3
I support gay marriage personally and as law: Strongly Favors topic 3
Let states decide gay marriage; they’re ahead of feds: Favors topic 3
2004:defended traditional marriage; 2006:voted for same-sex: Strongly Favors topic 3
Federal Marriage Amendment would be terrible step backwards: Favors topic 3
Gays deserve domestic partnership benefits: Strongly Favors topic 3
Military service based on conduct, not sexual orientation: Favors topic 3
More funding and stricter sentencing for hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3
Rated 89% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance: Strongly Favors topic 3
Provide benefits to domestic partners of Federal employees: Strongly Favors topic 3
YES on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3
NO on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage: Strongly Favors topic 3

No opinion on topic 4:
Keep God in the public sphere
(0 points on Social scale)

Partner with faith based community in empowerment zones: Strongly Favors topic 4
Tap into churches to avoid more Louima & Diallo cases: Favors topic 4
Community involvement helps, but only in short term: Favors topic 4
Link payments to good parenting behavior: Opposes topic 4
Allow student prayer, but no religious instruction: Opposes topic 4
Character education: teach empathy & self-discipline: Favors topic 4
Change what kids see in the media: Favors topic 4
Co-sponsored bill to criminalize flag-burning: Favors topic 4
Rated 0% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-Family-Value voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 4
Rated 100% by the AU, indicating support of church-state separation: Strongly Opposes topic 4
NO on recommending Constitutional ban on flag desecration: Opposes topic 4

Strongly Favors topic 5:
Expand ObamaCare
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Outcry if AIDS were leading disease of young whites: Favors topic 5
Lower costs and improve quality and cover everybody: Strongly Favors topic 5
Supply more medical needs of families, & insure all children: Strongly Favors topic 5
Medicare should be strengthened today: Favors topic 5
Smaller steps to progress on health care: Favors topic 5
Guaranteed benefits & focus on prevention: Neutral on topic 5
2006: If I can't do universal coverage, why run?: Strongly Favors topic 5
Universal health care will not work if it is voluntary: Strongly Favors topic 5
Universal health care coverage by the end of my second term: Strongly Favors topic 5
We need a uniquely American solution to health care: Favors topic 5
Health care initiatives are her first priority in Senate: Strongly Favors topic 5
Establish "report cards" on HMO quality of care: Favors topic 5
Invest funds to alleviate the nursing shortage: Favors topic 5
Let states make bulk Rx purchases, and other innovations: Opposes topic 5
Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record: Strongly Favors topic 5
Preserve access to Medicaid & SCHIP during economic downturn: Strongly Favors topic 5
NO on means-testing to determine Medicare Part D premium: Favors topic 5
NO on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit: Favors topic 5
NO on $40 billion per year for limited Medicare prescription drug benefit: Opposes topic 5
YES on increasing Medicaid rebate for producing generics: Favors topic 5
YES on negotiating bulk purchases for Medicare prescription drug: Strongly Favors topic 5
YES on expanding enrollment period for Medicare Part D: Favors topic 5
NO on limiting medical liability lawsuits to $250,000: Opposes topic 5
YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D: Favors topic 5
YES on overriding veto on expansion of Medicare: Favors topic 5

Strongly Opposes topic 6:
Privatize Social Security
(-5 points on Economic scale)

1997: Hillary warned against privatizing Social Security: Strongly Opposes topic 6
Soc.Sec. one of greatest inventions in American democracy: Strongly Opposes topic 6
Social Security protects families, not just retirees: Strongly Opposes topic 6
All should join the debate now to preserve future solvency: Opposes topic 6
Create Retirement Savings Accounts: Favors topic 6
Rated 100% by the ARA, indicating a pro-senior voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 6
NO on establishing reserve funds & pre-funding for Social Security: Opposes topic 6

Strongly Opposes topic 7:
Vouchers for school choice
(-5 points on Economic scale)

OpEd: Common Core recycled from Clintons in 1980s and 1990s: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Fully fund special education & 21st century classrooms: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Supports public school choice; but not private nor parochial: Opposes topic 7
Vouchers drain money from public schools: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Fight with Gore for public schools; no voucher “gimmicks”: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Charter schools provide choice within public system: Opposes topic 7
Vouchers siphon off much-needed resources: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Parents can choose, but support public schools: Opposes topic 7
Supports public school choice and charter schools: Favors topic 7
Solemn vow never to abandon our public schools: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Offer every parent Charter Schools and public school choice: Opposes topic 7
Rated 82% by the NEA, indicating pro-public education votes: Strongly Opposes topic 7
YES on funding smaller classes instead of private tutors: Opposes topic 7
YES on funding student testing instead of private tutors: Opposes topic 7
YES on $5B for grants to local educational agencies: Opposes topic 7

Strongly Opposes topic 8:
No 'rights' to clean air and water
(+5 points on Social scale)

$5B for green-collar jobs in economic stimulus package: Opposes topic 8
Voted against and consistently opposed to Yucca Mountain: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Scored 100% on Humane Society Scorecard on animal protection: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Remove PCBs from Hudson River by dredging 200 miles: Opposes topic 8
Rated 89% by the LCV, indicating pro-environment votes: Strongly Opposes topic 8
EPA must do better on mercury clean-up: Opposes topic 8
Grants for beach water pollution under Clean Water Act: Opposes topic 8
Strengthen prohibitions against animal fighting: Strongly Opposes topic 8

Opposes topic 9:
Stricter punishment reduces crime
(+2 points on Social scale)

Longtime advocate of death penalty, with restrictions: Strongly Favors topic 9
Address the unacceptable increase in incarceration: Opposes topic 9
Mandatory sentences have been too widely used: Strongly Opposes topic 9
Give kids after-school activities to prevent gangs: Opposes topic 9
Spend more time with kids to prevent violence: Opposes topic 9
Supports citizen patrols & 3-Strikes-You’re-Out: Favors topic 9
Supports “Three Strikes” and more prison: Strongly Favors topic 9
End hate crimes and other intolerance: Favors topic 9
Require DNA testing for all federal executions: Opposes topic 9
Increase funding for "COPS ON THE BEAT" program: Opposes topic 9
Reduce recidivism by giving offenders a Second Chance: Strongly Opposes topic 9
YES on reinstating $1.15 billion funding for the COPS Program: Opposes topic 9

Strongly Opposes topic 10:
Absolute right to gun ownership
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Rein in idea that anybody can have a gun anywhere, anytime: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Against illegal guns, crack down on illegal gun dealers: Opposes topic 10
Get assault weapons & guns off the street: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Background check system could prevent Virginia Tech massacre: Opposes topic 10
Congress’ failure at Littleton response inspired Senate run: Opposes topic 10
Limit access to weapons; look for early warning signs: Opposes topic 10
License and register all handgun sales: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Gun control protects our children: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Don’t water down sensible gun control legislation: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Lock up guns; store ammo separately: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Get weapons off the streets; zero tolerance for weapons: Opposes topic 10
Prevent unauthorized firearm use with "smart gun" technology: Opposes topic 10
NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence: Strongly Opposes topic 10
NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers: Strongly Opposes topic 10

Strongly Favors topic 11:
Higher taxes on the wealthy
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Rescind tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 a year: Strongly Favors topic 11
Pay down debt & cut taxes within balanced budget: Favors topic 11
GOP tax plan would hurt New York’s students: Favors topic 11
Rated 21% by NTU, indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes: Strongly Favors topic 11
Rated 80% by the CTJ, indicating support of progressive taxation: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on raising the Death Tax exemption to $5M from $1M: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on allowing AMT reduction without budget offset: Favors topic 11
YES on reducing marriage penalty instead of cutting top tax rates: Favors topic 11
YES on spending $448B of tax cut on education & debt reduction: Favors topic 11
NO on $350 billion in tax breaks over 11 years: Strongly Favors topic 11
YES on extending the tax cuts on capital gains and dividends: Strongly Opposes topic 11
YES on $47B for military by repealing capital gains tax cut: Favors topic 11
YES on retaining reduced taxes on capital gains & dividends: Strongly Opposes topic 11
NO on permanently repealing the `death tax`: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on supporting permanence of estate tax cuts: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on raising estate tax exemption to $5 million: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax: Strongly Favors topic 11

Favors topic 12:
Pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens
(+2 points on Social scale)

Introduce a path to earn citizenship in the first 100 days: Strongly Favors topic 12
Consider halting certain raids on illegal immigrant families: Favors topic 12
Deporting all illegal immigrants is unrealistic: Strongly Favors topic 12
Illegal immigrants with driver’s licenses puts them at risk: Opposes topic 12
Oppose granting driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants: Opposes topic 12
More border patrolling on both Mexican AND Canadian borders: Opposes topic 12
Anti-immigrant bill would have criminalized Jesus Christ: Strongly Favors topic 12
Sanctuary cities ok; local police can’t enforce immigration: Favors topic 12
Comprehensive reform to get 12 million out of shadows: Strongly Favors topic 12
Sponsored bill covering child resident aliens under Medicaid: Favors topic 12
Sponsored bill funding social services for noncitizens: Favors topic 12
Rated 8% by USBC, indicating an open-border stance: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on continuing federal funds for declared "sanctuary cities": Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on establishing a Guest Worker program: Favors topic 12
YES on building a fence along the Mexican border: Strongly Opposes topic 12
YES on eliminating the "Y" nonimmigrant guestworker program: Neutral topic 12
NO on declaring English as the official language of the US government: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on comprehensive immigration reform: Strongly Favors topic 12

Favors topic 13:
Support & expand free trade
(+2 points on Economic scale)

Chief advocate for Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): Strongly Favors topic 13
TPP agreement creates more growth and better growth: Favors topic 13
Smart, pro-American trade: NAFTA has hurt workers: Strongly Opposes topic 13
No fast-track authority for this president: Opposes topic 13
Defended outsourcing of US jobs to India: Favors topic 13
1980s: Loved Wal-Mart's "Buy America" program: Opposes topic 13
Globalization should not substitute for humanization: Opposes topic 13
Supports MFN for China, despite concerns over human rights: Strongly Favors topic 13
Build a rule-based global trading system: Favors topic 13
Rated 17% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on removing common goods from national security export rules: Favors topic 13
YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam: Favors topic 13
NO on extending free trade to Andean nations: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on establishing free trade between US & Singapore: Favors topic 13
YES on establishing free trade between the US and Chile: Favors topic 13
NO on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on free trade agreement with Oman: Strongly Favors topic 13

Opposes topic 14:
Maintain US sovereignty from UN
(-3 points on Economic scale)

US support & no-fly zone, but UN troops on ground in Darfur: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Support UN reform because US benefits: Opposes topic 14
Engage in world affairs, including human rights: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Keep Cuban embargo; pay UN bills: Opposes topic 14
2002 Iraq speech criticized both Saddam and U.N.: Opposes topic 14
2002: Attacking Iraq "not a good option" but authorized it: Favors topic 14
Urged President to veto UN condemnation of Israel: Favors topic 14
Voted against Levin Amendment: it gave UN veto over US: Favors topic 14
Dems believe in fighting terror with cooperation: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Restore habeas corpus for detainees in the War on Terror: Opposes topic 14
YES on preserving habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees: Strongly Opposes topic 14
YES on requiring CIA reports on detainees & interrogation methods: Strongly Opposes topic 14
NO on removing need for FISA warrant for wiretapping abroad: Strongly Opposes topic 14

No opinion on topic 15:
Expand the military
(0 points on Social scale)

There is no safe haven for the terrorists: Favors topic 15
Our troops are stretched; so increase size of military: Favors topic 15
Rated 100% by SANE, indicating a pro-peace voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 15
Extend reserve retirement pay parity back to 9/11: Favors topic 15
Improve mental health care benefits for returning veterans: Favors topic 15
YES on requiring on-budget funding for Iraq, not emergency funding: Opposes topic 15
YES on limiting soldiers' deployment to 12 months: Opposes topic 15

Strongly Favors topic 16:
More enforcement of the right to vote
(+5 points on Social scale)

Presidents should reveal donations to their foundations: Strongly Favors topic 16
Voter suppression revives old demons of discrimination: Favors topic 16
Stand for public financing and getting money out of politics: Strongly Favors topic 16
Move to public election financing, not banning lobbyists: Strongly Favors topic 16
Verified paper ballot for every electronic voting machines: Favors topic 16
Called for ban on all soft money in 2000 campaign: Favors topic 16
Prohibit 'voter caging' which intimidates minority voting: Favors topic 16
YES on banning campaign donations from unions & corporations: Favors topic 16
YES on banning "soft money" contributions and restricting issue ads: Favors topic 16
NO on establishing the Senate Office of Public Integrity: Opposes topic 16
NO on allowing some lobbyist gifts to Congress: Strongly Favors topic 16

Favors topic 17:
Stay out of Iran
(+2 points on Social scale)

OpEd: More aggressive than most Dems on foreign policy: Opposes topic 17
Smartest strategic choice is peace: Favors topic 17
Extend peace treaties to Palestinians, Syrians & Lebanese: Favors topic 17
Foreign aid spending is only 1%; lead by remaining engaged: Strongly Favors topic 17
Up to the Iraqis to decide the future they will have: Favors topic 17
Demand Bush to explain to Congress on his plan on Iraq: Favors topic 17
Deauthorize Iraq war, and don’t grant new war authority: Strongly Favors topic 17
Phased redeployment out of Iraq, beginning immediately: Strongly Favors topic 17
Withdraw troops within 60 days after taking office: Strongly Favors topic 17
Voted for Iraq war based on available info; now would not: Favors topic 17
Progressive Internationalism: globalize with US pre-eminence: Favors topic 17
No troop surge: no military escalation in Iraq: Strongly Favors topic 17
Require Congress' approval before military action in Iran: Favors topic 17
YES on authorizing use of military force against Iraq: Strongly Opposes topic 17
NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007: Strongly Opposes topic 17
YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq by March 2008: Strongly Favors topic 17

Strongly Favors topic 18:
Prioritize green energy
(-5 points on Economic scale)

$100B per year by 2020 for climate change mitigation: Strongly Favors topic 18
$100B per year by 2020 for climate change mitigation: Strongly Favors topic 18
Remove energy dependence on countries who would harm us: Strongly Favors topic 18
Stands for clean air and funding the EPA: Favors topic 18
Reduce air pollution to improve children’s health: Favors topic 18
Ratify Kyoto; more mass transit: Strongly Favors topic 18
Supports tradable emissions permits for greenhouse gases: Favors topic 18
Keep efficient air conditioner rule to conserve energy: Strongly Favors topic 18
Establish greenhouse gas tradeable allowances: Strongly Favors topic 18
Rated 100% by the CAF, indicating support for energy independence: Favors topic 18
Designate sensitive ANWR area as protected wilderness: Favors topic 18
Set goal of 25% renewable energy by 2025: Strongly Favors topic 18
Let states define stricter-than-federal emission standards: Strongly Favors topic 18
Gas tax holiday for the summer: Opposes topic 18
NO on terminating CAFE standards within 15 months: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on targeting 100,000 hydrogen-powered vehicles by 2010: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on removing consideration of drilling ANWR from budget bill: Favors topic 18
YES on reducing oil usage by 40% by 2025 (instead of 5%): Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on disallowing an oil leasing program in Alaska's ANWR: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on banning drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Favors topic 18
YES on factoring global warming into federal project planning: Favors topic 18
YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies: Strongly Favors topic 18

Opposes topic 19:
Never legalize marijuana
(+2 points on Social scale)

Medical marijuana now; wait-and-see on recreational pot: Opposes topic 19
Medical marijuana maybe ok; states decide recreational use: Opposes topic 19
Divert non-violent drug offenders away from prison: Strongly Opposes topic 19
Address drug problem with treatment and special drug courts: Strongly Opposes topic 19
End harsher sentencing for crack vs. powder cocaine: Opposes topic 19
Require chemical resellers to certify against meth use: Favors topic 19

Strongly Favors topic 20:
Stimulus better than market-led recovery
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Wealthy should go back to paying pre-Bush tax rates: Favors topic 20
Want to restore the tax rates we had in the ‘90s: Favors topic 20
Help people facing foreclosure; don’t just bail-out banks: Strongly Favors topic 20
Minimum wage increases haven’t kept up with Congress’ wages: Strongly Favors topic 20
Co-sponsored bills totaling $502B in spending thru 2005: Strongly Favors topic 20
End Bush tax cuts;take things away from rich for common good: Favors topic 20
Social issues matter; wrong time for tax cuts: Strongly Favors topic 20
Use tax dollars to upgrade infrastructure, not for stadium: Strongly Favors topic 20
America can afford to raise the minimum wage: Strongly Favors topic 20
Just Say No to GOP tax plan: Strongly Favors topic 20
YES on increasing tax rate for people earning over $1 million: Strongly Favors topic 20

[A Little Weird]

154. You keep posting this

But her support of the TPP and expansion of H1B is more than enough reason to oppose her (not to mention her Iraq war vote). The middle class is on it's death bed and she is ready to put it in the grave.

Favors topic 13:
Support & expand free trade
(+2 points on Economic scale)

Chief advocate for Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): Strongly Favors topic 13
TPP agreement creates more growth and better growth: Favors topic 13
Smart, pro-American trade: NAFTA has hurt workers: Strongly Opposes topic 13
No fast-track authority for this president: Opposes topic 13
Defended outsourcing of US jobs to India: Favors topic 13
1980s: Loved Wal-Mart's "Buy America" program: Opposes topic 13
Globalization should not substitute for humanization: Opposes topic 13
Supports MFN for China, despite concerns over human rights: Strongly Favors topic 13
Build a rule-based global trading system: Favors topic 13
Rated 17% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on removing common goods from national security export rules: Favors topic 13
YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam: Favors topic 13
NO on extending free trade to Andean nations: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on establishing free trade between US & Singapore: Favors topic 13
YES on establishing free trade between the US and Chile: Favors topic 13
NO on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on free trade agreement with Oman: Strongly Favors topic 13

[merrily]

32. I wanted to vote we stop poking around for loyalty oaths and rebellion oaths, but that was not an

option.

Can't we hold this stuff at least until the primary ends?

[VanillaRhapsody]

52. I vote we take what DEMOCRATS want....you know like that Primary Election

that Hillary Clinton has a 50 point lead in?

We have a PRIMARY....that is the ONLY loyalty oath that counts!

[guillaumeb]

57. no

we have to form a circular firing squad and each person can fire at the person they feel is the weakest Democrat in the group. That way the Tea Party types who always come out to vote can elect another GOP lunatic.

[bigwillq]

59. Hide thread is your friend.

I support any and all posts on this topic and about any candidate.

[merrily]

171. And we're both free to post our different opinions about that.

[11 Bravo]

43. If Hillary gets the nod, will you bite your tongue and follow ...

the rules governing this internet forum; or you will display the courage of your convictions, speak your mind, and get served with your pizza?

[VanillaRhapsody]

54. In the case of many....that will be a crow pizza!

[libdem4life]

44. Seems like a pandering post ... either/or, yes/no, black/white ... not a call for

intelligent discussion.

[peace13]

53. I thought about passing..

but I am so sick of this and can not imagine going through another primary with this woman. I am sorry but I just can't do it. We need something other than what we have had. A stick in the eye it is.

[MADem]

55. PASS--Disruptive, divisive META. IMO. nt

[murielm99]

69. This is one of the most stupid

fucking polls I have ever seen. Don't complain about the push-polls done by the repubbies if you are going to post something like this. It is offensive.

[stevenleser]

76. A disruptive meta complaint about Hillary supporting DUers packaged as a push poll

Lovely

[OKNancy]

78. This is a stupid post and an idiotic poll

[Go Vols]

83. I'll vote for her if there is no other D choice

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/hillary-clinton-favorable-rating

[99Forever]

91. Honestly...

... had your poll not had quite so insulting wording, I would have voted. I will not ever vote for Hillary Clinton, but I see no need to belittle her.

[NanceGreggs]

92. The term "Hillary is inevitable" ...

... was coined by political pundits and the MSM back in 2008 - until it became apparent that Obama would be the nominee. So they've brushed it off and trotted it out again.

I have not seen any Hillary supporters here telling anyone that Hillary is inevitable, nor have I seen them telling anyone that "they have no other choice".

"... and even if they did, they can't win against insert Republican candidate here." At this early stage of the game, Hill is polling extremely well in head-to-head match-ups with various possible Republican candidates. That is simply a matter of fact at this point. It is also a matter of fact that other possible Dem candidates would not do well in such match-ups - despite their supporters' insistence that they would.

"When they tell us how inevitable Hillary is, or how unbeatable she is, there is no long list of accomplishments. There isn't a vision for America that will inspire. The most that the supporters tell us is that she's better than any Republican."

I can't imagine that you haven't seen the Hillary supporters who have posted, over and over, her list of accomplishments in response to the many, many OPs claiming that her record is lacking in achievement. To say that "the most that the supporters tell us is that she's better than any Republican" is blatantly false, as even a quick perusal of DU posts amply demonstrates. In fact, I haven't seen a single Hill supporter state that "she's better than any Republican" as the sole reason for voting for her. Not one. If you have, you might want to provide a link to prove that assertion.

As for Hillary's failure to "inspire", you seem to be taking the position that because she doesn't inspire YOU, no one is inspired. The polls/surveys that show her in the lead against all GOP comers suggest otherwise - unless, of course, you also take the position that her many supporters are all mindless idiots who see Hill as the better alternative to a Republican, without considering any other factors. That is not only insulting to those who believe she'd make a good president, it is insulting to anyone with common sense.

"More people would prefer Hillary as President over a sharp stick in the eye. This isn't saying that she's a great candidate who is able to unify people to vote for her. It's just given two pretty lousy choices, she is slightly less objectionable than the alternative." Again you find it necessary to insult Hillary supporters by declaring that their only motive in supporting her is that she's "slightly less objectionable than the alternative".

I suppose it never occurs to people like yourself that Hill's support comes from intelligent, well-informed, politically savvy people who think she brings a wealth of experience and expertise to the table. Just as Obama supporters have been dismissed as "mindless cheerleaders" on this site, so Hill supporters are already being cast in the same light. And what is glaringly obvious is the fact that what those who label others as "mindless cheerleaders" are really saying is "anyone who supports a candidate that I don't support is an idiot, based on the fact that I don't support them."

"So what is going to motivate people to go through this." Well, I think that's obvious. There are many motivations that get people out to vote: they believe in the ability of a particular candidate to move the nation in the direction they want, they take their participation in the process seriously, they feel that one candidate over the other is more reflective of their own values, they see a (D) in the WH as preferable to an (R) in that position, they are cognizant of history enough to know that the traditional role of Republican presidents has been to totally fuck up the nation, while Democratic presidents have traditionally managed to clean up the mess - the list is lengthy, but I think you get my drift.

"So we have to inspire people. We have to give them something to vote for." Whether you like it or not, Hillary is giving people something to vote for - a woman who continues to inspire, who has proven her political worth, who has demonstrated her resilience in the face of adversity, who has handed her Republican detractors their asses more than a few times, who has refused to be intimidated by those on the other side of the aisle, who has weathered storms created out of whole cloth by the "gotcha committee" of the right-wing, and who has proven her mettle time and again when confronted with the fabrications of those who have reduced her many accomplishments to a know-nothing chick whose only worth is the fact that she is married to a former POTUS.

The fact that you obviously agree with the RW's assessment of Hill's non-qualifications for the office of POTUS speaks for itself - and then some.

[AtomicKitten]

94. Racked your brain and can't think of a single reason the inevitable meme stuck?

Maybe this will ring a bell:

[DeSwiss]

96. Ouch!

[NanceGreggs]

102. OMG!!!

What a shocker!!!

All politicians, when asked if they think they will win an election, say no, absolutely not - and then go on to explain how they're going to lose.

Love the FOX-News style of editing here. She gets cut off in mid-word - did the rest of her answer not fit the agenda being promoted?

[Savannahmann]

115. Ok, perhaps I'm wrong.

So tell me why you support Hillary. What issues has she come out for that speak to the Democratic Party faithful or the Liberal base of the party? Was it her vote creating a double standard on Bankruptcy? You know the one where individuals could no longer write off debt, but corporations still could? http://www.ontheissues.org/SenateVote/Party_2001-236.htm

That really showed those deadbeats who were abusing the Bankruptcy system. The idea by the way was that with this, Credit Card Companies would be able to lower the interest rates because of fewer losses to Bankruptcy. Has it worked? Anyone?

Perhaps it's her vision for the future. http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/21/politics/hillary-clinton-canada-future-vision/

Help strengthen the Middle Class. Wow, that's way more courageous. After spending months in "hiatus" to consult with her advisors, she came out after the President's state of the Union and said What he said.

No grand plans were developed during the Hiatus. No strategy other than saying pretty much inane meat and potatoes populism that someone else fostered first. What leadership. What astonishing vision.

Perhaps It's the Clinton Foundation support for Free Trade. You know NAFTA that cost about a million US jobs in Agriculture alone and probably half again that many in the automotive sector. With her determined attitude to protect and strengthen the Middle Class, perhaps Hillary will oppose the TPP. I can't find anything saying she is opposed to it. But keeping in character she would probably support it since the Clinton Foundation held a big free trade conference. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michele-swenson/nafta-the-transpacific-clinton_b_5523327.html

Here are her statements in support of the TPP. http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Free_Trade.htm

So Middle class can get screwed under the TPP, but she's the best choice because?

Well darn. I'm trying to find a reason that the intelligent and dedicated Clinton supporters would support her. Marijuana. Perhaps that's why. Her clear and concise statements on Marijuana might be the reason. http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Drugs.htm

Nope. Medical Marijuana now. July 2014. Medical Marijuana maybe June of 2014. One month and she went from maybe to sure? What changed? Did someone finally show her a poll that showed people support it?

So why do the Clinton Supporters line up behind Hillary? It obviously isn't her support of the Middle Class since her votes on Bankruptcy reform harmed the Middle Class terribly, and her support for the TPP would gut the middle class. That pretty much rules out supporting her for her economic vision. So what is left? What positions of Hillary do the people support?

Because right now, the polling is name recognition. Everyone has heard of Hillary for more than two decades. Most people don't follow politics enough to know the other names. So it would be like asking who your favorite singer is of the following choices. Brittney Spears, Annabel Jones, or Nancy Unger. (I made up the last two so I have no idea if they are singers or not) The results would show that Brittney was a hands down favorite. Now when people heard them sing, they might choose someone else, probably given my opinion on Brittney, but that is another discussion. So you can't say that Brittney is the greatest singer of all time and destined to win a Grammy because she's the people's favorite in that poll.

So tell me, why do people support Hillary? If it is just about the common issues, like Gay Marriage, then find me a Democrat who doesn't support Gay Marriage. That one individual, and I have to assume there is at least one, would not be my choice for President either. But using that common issue, I say common issue because as far as I know every Democrat supports it, as the main reason to support Hillary is asinine. Because in an effort to defend that one common issue you'll sell out every other demographic that we would need to vote for us. If the choice is between a Republican who will reward their corporate sponsors, and a Democrat who will reward totally different corporate sponsors, who wins? It doesn't matter, because we all lose and the average person knows it and that's why they don't turn out to vote.

If we want to lose, we'll run Hillary. I'm certain we'll lose. But even if we win, we still lose. Because we will have elected another corporatist into the White House. The only thing that we'll agree with the Republicans who will still be in control of Congress on will be screwing the little guy. Unless it's abortion or Gay Marriage, then we'll stand up and fight, or something.

[NanceGreggs]

124. At this point in time ...

... I support Hillary, first and foremost, because she polls so well in head-to-head match-ups with any possible Republican contenders.

I want a candidate who can win the general election - and she obviously can. I want a (D) in the WH, and will do anything I can to see that happen.

It's amusing to see people who are "too principled" to vote for our best shot at keeping the position of POTUS in Democratic hands. IMHO, there is nothing "principled" about allowing another four-to-eight years of Republican rule.

Hillary is not perfect - but then, no contender is. But she's still the far better choice than any Republican.

"If we want to lose, we'll run Hillary. I'm certain we'll lose." The current polling says otherwise.

And before you hit me up with the "she's no different than a Republican" meme, take a look at the possible, if not probable GOP wannabes, and tell me how the likes of Jeb Bush, Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee, et al will be "no different" than Hillary.

I'm a Democrat - I vote to WIN, not to stand on the sidelines and bitch about how "standing by my principles" was far more important than handing the governance of my country over to some GOP asshole.

[Savannahmann]

131. You realize you proved my point.

I asked why people like her in response to a post that said principled and intelligent Democrats support her. I listed the issues, and showed she's weak, or wrong on most of them. That reduced it to name recognition.

Then you try to say I'm wrong, and prove my point. You do realize that don't you? The only reason you support her is because other people say they would choose her this far out of the beginning of the primary cycle. That's like saying the most popular color is blue and that's why you like it. It may be a good way to choose a car color, but it's not a good way to choose a President.

What happened to the Democratic Party? We had giants in our party for a hundred years. We had FDR who saved the nation from the Depression. Who turned the Second World War into a battle for the four freedoms. Who united the world behind principles that we could respect.

We had Truman. A man who stood up to the Generals and fired the most popular General in history because it was the right thing to do. Truman who decided that the use of nuclear weapons would be ordered by the President, and only the President.

We had JFK. A man who inspired a nation. A man who stood up and said no to Missiles in Cuba.

We had good Presidents too. Carter who led by example, and who stood on the ground at Three Mile Island to give the people confidence that the problems were not that bad.

We had Senators who tore the roof off the building in oratory that brought tears to the eyes. We had Congressmen who pounded the podium demanding change.

Now we have Debbie Wasserman Schultz who will change her opinion on an issue if a Donor wants her to and will just be nice and keep the cash rolling. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026251262

And we have Hillary. We're supposed to line up behind her because everyone else is. Her vision for the future is puerile. Her record is questionable. Her achievements are mediocre. But she's the favorite because everyone says she is. Do you really think those poll numbers will remain when the campaign starts in earnest? Do you really think that she'll be able to coast to victory based upon nothing more than name recognition? Because the GOP thinks they can win. Worse, they're going to be playing seriously to win. They're not going to roll over and die because we hate them. They're not going to concede the election because Hillary is the favorite just like she was eight years ago. They are going to come up with plans, proposals, and ideals that sound good even if they quote some damned thing out of context like the good fences make good neighbors nonsense.

So ask yourself why you are choosing Hillary. Ask yourself if it is your hatred of the GOP that is causing you to jump on the first bandwagon along even though it has a one man band that is not playing terribly well. Because that show is going to get real old as the campaign continues. We aren't choosing a most popular sitcom where name recognition is all that matters. We're choosing a President, and we shouldn't settle for so little this early. If we're going to settle, it should be at the end of the race, not the beginning.

[NanceGreggs]

134. "I listed the issues, and showed she's weak, or wrong on most of them ...

... That reduced it to name recognition."

So sorry. I didn't realize that your opinion of how she is "weak or wrong" should be taken as the final word on the topic, and how anyone who disagrees with your assessment should simply defer to your better judgment.

It is not a matter of "lining up behind her because everyone else is". It is a matter of putting forward the best candidate we have to defeat any and all GOP contenders, and supporting that candidate.

If Hill wins the general election in 2016 - which looks probable - I am completely prepared for the whinging that will follow for the next four-to-eight years from people who will go to their graves declaring that some other Dem would have won, if only they'd been given a chance. I've heard that about Kucinich for years - despite the fact that he couldn't garner enough support to be elected dog-catcher-in-chief in his own state.

I'm in it to win it - and if Hill is our best shot at that win, she's got my support. And it's not like she has nothing to bring to the table, despite your assessment that she doesn't.

[Warren DeMontague]

110. I don't understand. Are we talking about voting for her in the primary, or the general?

In the general, fuck yes, I will support the nominee. If it is her or not.

[workinclasszero]

138. Is this a joke?

What are you people going to do if Hillary is the nominee? Its not a done deal yet, but it looks "inevitable".

Sen Warren has said numerous times she is not running, supports Hillary and just had a meeting with her a few days ago.

I don't think Bernie Sanders will help the teabaggers get the white house either.

So...

What. Will. You. Do. when Hillary is the nominee???

I plan on voting a straight democratic ticket, top to bottom and will encourage everyone I know to do the same!

[Savannahmann]

139. If I must post it again. I will.

Previously I've said that I'd vote for Hillary. I said I'd do it while wearing a clothespin over my nose. I said I'd probably vomit afterwards. I even said I'd certainly need a shower after.

But now, after reading the responses from the pro Hillary types. I honestly don't know what i'll do if, if hell, when she wins the nomination. I' may even just put my feet up and relax. I live in Georgia. The chances of Georgia electing Hillary is pretty much as near as makes no difference zero. So my vote probably won't make a damned bit of difference. And if I sit it out. and she is put in the White House, I can honestly say that that it isn't my fault. Perhaps such an activity will salve my conscience. Perhaps I'll cast my ballot anyway, and vote Green, or Progressive, or just write Mickey Mouse in.

Honestly, I don't know.

[Agschmid]

147. You have that right.

It's probably a better idea to be engaged in the process...

Right now there is a power vacuum, and in politics that sucks.

[Savannahmann]

152. The problem isn't a power vacuum. The problem is conventional wisdom.

Conventional wisdom is a killer. It falls under "everybody knows" and nobody challenges that conventional wisdom.

Polling is vital. It can tell us what the mood of the public is, what they want, what they are looking for. But Polling without information is useless. If the person being polled isn't a political junkie, like most of the users here, then that persons opinion is at best uninformed.

A better poll would be to ask those politically uninformed what issues they consider important. Then to see if they like proposals put forth by Liberals. The usual answer is yes, they like the proposals put forth.

But we don't ask those questions, or I should say rarely do we ask them. Instead we go for the easy questions. Like who do you prefer. Hillary or Warren. Most people don't know Warren, so they answer Hillary. The Conventional Wisdom worshipers jump up and down and announce that Hillary has it sewn up. Yes, she won the popularity contest, but not the contest of ideals, because none were examined.

Conventional Wisdom says a great many things. Our Politicians today are masters of embracing this conventional wisdom. In some speeches, they may challenge the Conventional Wisdom, but rarely do they do so in action. Almost never is it a platform during an election. You can't fit a challenge to Conventional Wisdom into a thirty second campaign ad.

But you can challenge it. One of the last to do so was Ronald Reagan. While I detest his policies, and abhor his time as President, we could have learned a lot from him. President Reagan painted pictures with his words, and delivery. His Trickle down my back economic plan was panned by Republicans as Voodoo economics. It was referred to in even less favorable terms by Democrats. Yet, he got it through a Congress that was solidly Democratic. How? How could he have done so? He went to the people, and sold it to them. Asking them to help him help them. Brilliant presentation, and brilliant strategy. Tip O'Neil said that the budget and tax cuts were dead on arrival. Senator Kennedy said that it would never pass the Senate.

Remember Star Wars? Every scientist in the world told us it was impossible to do what he wanted done. The Technology did not exist and wouldn't for at least twenty years, perhaps even more. Yet Reagan was able to sell it and did so challenging the existing conventional wisdom of Mutually Assured Destruction that had worked for more than four decades to prevent Nuclear war. People got behind the idea of taking action to protect the nation against a threat that had existed for so long.

Reagan is a damned asshole who fucked up a lot of things. We're still paying for many of those things. Yet, he was successful at shaping and motivating public opinion. No one since has been as successful. No one since has challenged conventional wisdom with such determination, and was willing to risk their political future so effectively.

I hate Reagan's policies. I am honest enough to admit that his tactics were effective in implementing a flawed strategy. He was a good salesman. But History has plenty of other great leaders who were able to inspire. In the Democratic Party I've mentioned many times FDR, JFK, and Truman as the big three of the last Century. They were able to reach out to the people. They were able to talk to the people, and inspire trust. But after JFK, we lost it somewhere. We lost the ability to pick candidates who were inspiring, and could exude a genuine air of astonishing competence.

LBJ didn't have it. He risked his political career on a doomed war, and he lost. Carter was a great man. He led by example, wearing a sweater to show the nation that he had turned the heat down in the White House during the energy crisis. Showing the world that he would never ask something of his people that he would be unwilling to do himself. Carter stood on the ground at Three Mile Island and announced that the crisis was under control. We believed him, because he had shown that he was a leader who led by example.

Bill Clinton was the first of the modern era of Presidents. Easily dissuaded by polling and trained by advisor's not to rock the boat too much, a little rock now and then, but not more than that. No challenging of the conventional wisdom, and no grad plans for the future. Just a little progress is all he promised. Minuscule is a better term. I've been asking, where are the greats? Where are the statesmen or women who will stand up and challenge the conventional wisdom? WHere are the leaders who will march forward with strong and determined steps seeing obstacles as things to overcome?

President Kennedy said we were going to the Moon not because it was easy, but because it was hard. Because by doing those hard things, by accepting the challenges that doing the hard things entailed we would become better than we were. President Kennedy said he could not promise we would be first, but if we did not make the effort, we would be last. Look at that speech sometime. Look at it and see the dare that Kennedy laid down before the people. We're doing it because it is hard. Now look at the politics of today. We can't do it because it's hard. Because if you dare, and fail, you will go down in history as a fool, a failure, and a dreamer. So we don't dare. We don't dream of something amazing. We accept the mediocre because it's safer, and conventional wisdom tells us not to risk too much as we stretch for something out of reach. It's better to wait until a ladder comes along.

[treestar]

155. If someone wants to run against Hillary

there is plenty of time for them to do so. Even Hillary hasn't declared.

This passive attitude about "what we are given" in a country where we have the freedom to make our way with support of any candidate is the issue. Some people just want to play the victim, roll over and demand things of people who have no reason to answer these complaints, because there are others out there doing something positive.

EW does not want to run. Find one who does.

[TheKentuckian]

173. Other: Seems the plan is that I get the stick in the eye either way but I'm not going to endorse it.

[Agnosticsherbet]

176. Only Republicans think Hillary Clinton is inevitable...

She scares them.