Message auto-removed

[Name removed]

[brooklynite]

1. 11 hours at the Benghazi! hearing comes to mind...

[NWCorona]

2. I've applauded Hillary for that performance many times but that isn't the same. nt

[apnu]

3. There was this election in 1992 where she was front and center on stage.

And then there was this other time in 1996, where it happened again. But after years of "Travelgate" and "Whitewater" scandals.

So vetted, yup.

[Marr]

5. Wait... you're serious? /nt

[apnu]

7. Yes, yes I am.

The FLOTUS is part of the process. Voters can and do consider the Presidential's spouse as part of the package. In addition, the FLOTUS is something of an unofficial ambassador and dignitary of the United States, playing an important role in the Executive Office projecting and negotiating policy with foreign heads of state.

It is ignorant to think the FLOTUS does not have a role in the modern American government.

In addition, both then in 1992 and all through Bill Clinton's Presidency, Hillary Clinton was a policy force to be reckoned with. She was involved in politics and matters of State for the whole of eight years. Republicans and the noise machine made such a ruckus about it.

Do not forget that the health care push that happened in Bill Clinton's first term was her baby. She was directly invloved in that and pushed for Single Payer as an option. She famously lost that fight, but everybody then knew that was her baby. Republicans complained loudly at the time that Hillary "wore the pants" in the White House.

So yes, vetted. I don't care what you think the FLOTUS role is and what you think Hillary did when we she was FLOTUS, but Americans certainly vetted her then, and have vetted her since both as a private person and Senator from New York.

[artislife]

10. Barf

[apnu]

15. Barf how?

This is what the FLOTUS does.

Jackie O... Laura Bush... Nancy Reagan... Hillary Clinton... Eleanor Roosevelt... all were assets used by the President for one reason or another. On paper the FLOTUS has no power, but in practice, the position has enormous influence in modern American politics.

A major part of Hillary's success, thus far, is her history with the American people. It also happens to be a two-edged sword, as people who dislike her, look back on all that and too.

She's been vetted, weighed, measured, scrutinized and all that.

I know she's not your choice, and that's OK, but its naive to say she's not been vetted.

[Maedhros]

21. That's...comical. [n/t]

[apnu]

25. What's funny about it? (nt)

[Maedhros]

28. It confirms and reinforces the concept of the Clinton Personality Cult.

Judging a candidate's fitness for office by ignoring her problematic track record of poor judgement and instead concentrating on her celebrity.

[apnu]

29. No it doesn't

You misunderstand my point and are talking about something else.

FYI, I already voted for Bernie, I just choose not to jump on the avatar bandwagon.

I'm saying the American public has vetted Clinton. Meaning they've looked at her and they've pretty much made up their minds.

Vetting doesn't necessary mean acceptance in all cases. One can be vetted and found wanting.

Given the millions who've chosen Bernie in this primary, many do not think she passes the muster, 9,298,846 people to be exact. But it is also true that 12,432,097 have looked at Hillary Clinton and found her satisfactory.

How each of those 21,730,943 people decided, was it some positive memory from the past, or revenge, or her celebrity,I cannot say.

But it is true that Bernie did have a celebrity problem early on. Not any more after collecting so much more than he was projected to do early on. But I think Hillary's lead has help from her name recognition. Its a powerful thing in American politics. It comes up in our history all the time.

[Maedhros]

31. Oh, I agree with the name recognition. That's Hillary's primary strength, because politically

she has not done much that would be considered positive by progressives.

I'm saying the American public has vetted Clinton. Meaning they've looked at her and they've pretty much made up their minds.

Yes - they have based their assessment on her personality (she's a "strong woman," etc.) rather than upon consideration of her policies or actions. In fact, large numbers of her supporters very pointedly have ignored her prior positions in favor of her intangibles.

[apnu]

32. "by progressives" yes. Clintons are moderates, we all know this.

Naturally progressives reject Hillary, she is right of them on the political spectrum. Close to center actually. From a progressive point-of-view, Hillary looks like a Republican. She's not, considering the time, energy, and money they've thrown at her for 24 years to bring her down, but to the progressive, she's not going in the right direction.

Progressives are pretty far left, and the further way from the center one is, the less they tolerate compromise. This is true of the tea party also. Hillary Clinton is a compromise candidate. A vote for her, as of today, is a vote to deny the hot mess that is Trump and the Republicans. This will be the defining question of each remaining primary state and the GE from this day forth now that Trump is the last man standing.

I agree on your point of personality. But then that's how most Americans vote in most elections.

Obama won on personality, he makes us feel good about ourselves. He still does.

W won on being the "guy to have a beer with", he got a lot of votes because of that.

Clinton won on being "hip" and "young" and "fresh" His saxophone, playing stint was huge.

And I'm sure we can go back through each election and find the same. FDR, springs to mind, also won on personality and emotional appeal.

Only a handful of Americans at any given time, decide on policy and actions.

Let's be real for a moment and acknowledge that a lot of Bernie people here support Bernie because they dislike Hillary as a person. When pressed, many of them will admit they simply do not like her, as a person.

As much as I'd like politics to be an intellectual exercise, I know it is is not.

[Maedhros]

34. Selecting leaders based upon "who I'd rather have a beer with" is a bad idea.

It may be the prevalent method these days, but it still results in bad governance.

[Kall]

30. Oh dear.

[leeroysphitz]

14. LOL. My wife is a nurse can I take your blood? n/t

[apnu]

16. I don't understand what you mean. (nt)

[rock]

18. I believe leeroysphitz is trying an analogy

Trying being the operative word.

[apnu]

19. It seems to suggest that Hillary wasn't a person until now and...

... was some sort of appendage to Bill Clinton.

But I'm not sure, the post is cryptic.

[rock]

22. My point

It's a fouled analogy. And, yes, the post is cryptic.

[Goblinmonger]

23. Wait, I thought the Clinton presidency wasn't supposed to be held against her.

But now it's cool?

[apnu]

24. Nobody I know has said that.

People here have been laying into Hillary in this primary for Bill's sins from day one. In some ways, they're right, the Clintons have always been a political team, even back in the Arkansas days.

Its obvious that Hillary has been "vetted" by the American public. Her history and name recognition are as big, probably bigger than George W. Bush.

[jehop61]

4. The eight years

of the Clinton presidency where they both were constantly under attract from murder to firing White House employees over travel planning.

[artislife]

11. It was interesting to actually read up on Travelgate in these last few months

I didn't know what the hoopla was about, but reading a dry account of why it was a big deal and what actually happened was informative.


She was wrong, in my opinion.

[JoePhilly]

6. She's been demonized for over 2 decades ... and she's still kicking ass.

[procon]

8. You mean 'vetted' as in Trump using the National Inquirer, twitter, anonymous blog entries,

quotes from Putin, and other important stuff he finds on the Intertubes as his go to sources for oppo research? Look, regardless of any amount of 'vetting', the Republicans and you lot from the anti-Hillary crowd hereabouts, will never be satisfied.

Like all the nonsense the Republican have tried to use against Obama, these whimsical Hillary folkloric tales will also take on a life of their own. Trump will not be deterred, so be happy in your shared quest to undermine the leading Democratic candidate.

[artislife]

12. That means Laura Bush was vetted. hee.

[vintx]

20. And Kim Kardashian too... Cause apparently tabloid rumors

count

[apnu]

27. She was.

The Bush White House would wield Laura Bush like a pillowy shield to deflect and diffuse anger against W. Didn't work out well, bu she alone, out of every member of that Administration, left office with positive poll numbers. Laura Bush was well liked by the American public, still is.

The FLOTUS is part of the Executive Branch and has a function, though not one specified in the Constitution. Look at Jackie Kennedy and Eleanor Roosevelt, they also had roles to play.

[Garrett78]

13. She's been the target of attacks for decades now.

From her time as First Lady (in Arkansas) to now. There are few people who have been more vetted than Hillary Clinton.

While many youngsters (like people who weren't even born yet when Bill Clinton was elected POTUS, much less Governor of Arkansas) may not be aware of the history, the rest of us are.

[Sunlei]

17. you can list her decades of 'work experience'? what part of her decades do you think need 'vetting'?

[LonePirate]

26. Is this a thread where DUers are wishing and hoping for the Repub to destroy the Dem in the GE?

[SheenaR]

33. I have heard the line

that she has been under attack for two decades. That's what happens in political office. It happens when you are the President's wife.

What they have in store for the GE dwarfs what she has seen. But nobody is willing to admit that on team Clinton. Trump will not give one shit about going after her for everything she has done during that time.

[CorkySt.Clair]

35. 14:59....14:57...14:55...and so on.

[Skwmom]

36. Since 2008 there is a boatload of stuff they will use.

[Blue_Tires]

37. You're trying too hard...

whoever you are....