Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

asuhornets

(2,405 posts)
Thu May 26, 2016, 01:56 PM May 2016

Hillary Clinton is about to break the ultimate glass ceiling on every level.

Hopefully, our first woman president.

First woman to win the nomination for president on both sides.

Had to withstand over 25 years of slander and still standing-I don't think anyone knows how hard that is - including myself.

In 2008, America voted for our first black president it was remarkable, and now on the verge of having our first woman president is incredible.

This is a good feeling and no one will be able to take that feeling away from me and you either.

156 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hillary Clinton is about to break the ultimate glass ceiling on every level. (Original Post) asuhornets May 2016 OP
I don't want to take away your good feeling. cali May 2016 #1
thanks asuhornets May 2016 #2
I do, because of the dead on the ground. JackRiddler May 2016 #69
Thank you, Jack Riddler! Peace Patriot May 2016 #142
Yes. Thank you. JackRiddler May 2016 #154
Hear! Hear! Peace Patriot May 2016 #155
We are long overdue for a woman to be elected POTUS... Yurovsky May 2016 #3
Name one Democratic woman that is as qualified as Hillary Clinton. n/t asuhornets May 2016 #5
I'd trade a thinner resume for less scandal... Yurovsky May 2016 #7
This message was self-deleted by its author artislife May 2016 #12
well hopefully you will change your mind about voting for her asuhornets May 2016 #14
Not really. seekthetruth May 2016 #82
There is much daylight between Clinton and Trump, as a matter of fact asuhornets May 2016 #84
Of course there a huge difference on social issues... seekthetruth May 2016 #87
You are so wrong..Foreign policy has to be stern and steady--that's Hillary. asuhornets May 2016 #96
Help her with what? seekthetruth May 2016 #108
It's that attitude that is costing your candidate the election. n/t JTFrog May 2016 #153
On some things.....On others that get to the core of our system? Not so much Armstead May 2016 #85
plz explain? asuhornets May 2016 #97
Oh you know what my answer is going to be Armstead May 2016 #107
Those "go to" statements are tired angrychair May 2016 #95
Your words: asuhornets May 2016 #103
Ahh, yes peggysue2 May 2016 #137
Not the one that ran the racist campaign against our current president Ned_Devine May 2016 #152
This message was self-deleted by its author artislife May 2016 #13
She's a good Senator--but lacks the qualifications--in my opinion...nt asuhornets May 2016 #17
This message was self-deleted by its author artislife May 2016 #25
Hey in politics ruthless is the name of the game. But I do not believe Hillary Clinton asuhornets May 2016 #28
This message was self-deleted by its author artislife May 2016 #39
Morning Joe? Why? asuhornets May 2016 #40
This message was self-deleted by its author artislife May 2016 #41
Morning Joe is doing what is in the interest of the Repug Party? asuhornets May 2016 #43
This message was self-deleted by its author artislife May 2016 #47
Perhaps it is the truth because you agree with his negative assessment about Hillary Clinton. n/t asuhornets May 2016 #49
Andrea Mitchell -- Not exactly a Clinton-basher -- was all over this on MJ Armstead May 2016 #86
What else is Andrea Mitchell going to say? Leave Hillary alone? asuhornets May 2016 #111
All repugs get out bed early to bash Hillary...LOL asuhornets May 2016 #113
I would never use qualifications to pick my president. Dawgs May 2016 #20
Dick Cheney---I agree with you on that one.....nt asuhornets May 2016 #22
Why not H.W. Bush? nt Dawgs May 2016 #23
I didn't like him either, but Cheney was and still is pure evil...nt asuhornets May 2016 #50
Elizabeth Warren, Nancy Pelosi, Loretta Sanchez, The Velveteen Ocelot May 2016 #61
You know that most of those women you listed are not qualified. That's what we r talking about here. asuhornets May 2016 #65
What is your definition of "qualified"? The Velveteen Ocelot May 2016 #77
Last name Clinton -- The only qualification that counts Armstead May 2016 #88
I would not pick anyone from your list.....nt asuhornets May 2016 #114
I wouldn't pick a lot of them either, but that doesn't mean The Velveteen Ocelot May 2016 #115
They are qualified for their job in Congress.......eom asuhornets May 2016 #118
And how are their qualifications inferior to Hillary's with respect to the presidency? The Velveteen Ocelot May 2016 #121
During her debates with Sanders...She knew the intricacies of every aspect of government asuhornets May 2016 #122
That doesn't answer the question of why she is qualified and all those other women The Velveteen Ocelot May 2016 #124
I'm sure Warren could hold her own in a debate with Clinton. Hillary Clinton in my opinion is asuhornets May 2016 #126
Hillary's temperament, knowledge of foreign policy and negotiation skills The Velveteen Ocelot May 2016 #128
Ok..then why is she winning...everybody can't be stupid...they see the same things in her that I see asuhornets May 2016 #129
Your initial premise was that she is the only "qualified" Democratic woman. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2016 #131
Thank you, Velveteen Ocelot! That was beautiful! Peace Patriot May 2016 #149
Well said! The Velveteen Ocelot May 2016 #150
Easy seekthetruth May 2016 #78
I love Warren,but not for President asuhornets May 2016 #109
Why not? seekthetruth May 2016 #119
Warren is an excellent progressive liberal Senator. asuhornets May 2016 #120
"Hillary is qualified because she has to be"? The Velveteen Ocelot May 2016 #123
Yes because she has to be uniquely qualified asuhornets May 2016 #127
Obama beat her in 2008 The Velveteen Ocelot May 2016 #130
Do you give her credit for anything? She won NY. Yes she is beatable, but she's winning right now asuhornets May 2016 #133
Patty Murray. Next dumbass question. opiate69 May 2016 #90
#HRCistheNominee...pic.... riversedge May 2016 #4
LOL...Indeed.....n/t asuhornets May 2016 #6
the last glass ceiling would be "Pope"....IJS nt Jack Bone May 2016 #53
If she does get the nomination, I am excited about breaking the glass ceiling democrattotheend May 2016 #8
that's nice of you say..thanx asuhornets May 2016 #10
Anytime democrattotheend May 2016 #16
LOL...i would like to see that myself. asuhornets May 2016 #18
Hadn't thought of that in ages. I bet he'd do it, if Hortensis May 2016 #44
I didn't know that! democrattotheend May 2016 #72
Then I got to repay the smile from your fun idea. Hortensis May 2016 #101
I thought I remember reading that he submitted a recipe to some competition in 2008 democrattotheend May 2016 #106
That was when I liked her a lot loyalsister May 2016 #100
And some people can't stand it workinclasszero May 2016 #9
"I'm happy to see an historic event just 8 years after the last one. "---me too asuhornets May 2016 #19
Infinitely better than 50. Hortensis May 2016 #45
This message was self-deleted by its author artislife May 2016 #11
We party at the ballot box workinclasszero May 2016 #15
I don't know about that. if she wins - i suspect there will be parties eveywhere...n/t asuhornets May 2016 #21
Probably. But probably not like 2008 democrattotheend May 2016 #24
" Probably. But probably not like 2008"...I agree with that.. asuhornets May 2016 #26
I never though Obama would fix everyone's problems either democrattotheend May 2016 #29
I agree... I hope she is inspirational and optimistic.....n/t asuhornets May 2016 #31
This message was self-deleted by its author artislife May 2016 #27
Gotta raise money for the Party....n/t asuhornets May 2016 #30
This message was self-deleted by its author artislife May 2016 #38
Yep... deathrind May 2016 #32
And deadly shards of glass will rain down on our heads and bodies. Autumn May 2016 #33
If Hillary wins, I'm confident in her ability to lead. So much experience this woman has...n/t asuhornets May 2016 #46
Ya know I don't have that confidence. She didn't do very well at State. Autumn May 2016 #51
Seriously? Fed. Gov. Rec.? I work for the State of Georgia and we get records request all the time asuhornets May 2016 #56
Then you fit in Hillary perfectly, except Hillary wasn't a rank and file government employee. Autumn May 2016 #64
Hillary broke the rules, not the law. That does not disqualify her from being president. asuhornets May 2016 #66
She violated the law, but there is not public evidence of a crime, yet. morningfog May 2016 #75
No evidence...then no case....n/t asuhornets May 2016 #116
She lied, that's in the report and yes it does. You have a good day eom Autumn May 2016 #76
Clerky stuff. And Congress needs to adequately fund and Upgrade the State Dept IT. riversedge May 2016 #67
"Clerky stuff"? Hillary couldn't even do an adequate job as a clerk according to you? Autumn May 2016 #70
Absolutely... asuhornets May 2016 #71
They upgraded the guidelines and regulations starting in 2005 to 2011. It's in the report. Autumn May 2016 #74
Ah, after another 5 months of Trump posturing Hortensis May 2016 #48
No I don't think her snowflakes will be fluffy and happy . More like a biting blizzard. eom Autumn May 2016 #52
Paul Krugman divides Sanders followers into Hortensis May 2016 #55
I support Bernie. Krugman doesn't know me so I'm not interested in his description of Autumn May 2016 #58
Well, imo, you should be. I'm certainly interested Hortensis May 2016 #60
Whoa! Just checked your profile. Definitely a CDR, Hortensis May 2016 #63
Actually I like Hillary. I met and talked to her a couple of times. I supported her till the very Autumn May 2016 #68
This message was self-deleted by its author NowSam May 2016 #34
19 days and counting nt geek tragedy May 2016 #36
This message was self-deleted by its author NowSam May 2016 #80
good luck with that nt geek tragedy May 2016 #91
This message was self-deleted by its author NowSam May 2016 #98
But she is worthy..people are actually voting for her...Does that count for anything? asuhornets May 2016 #42
This message was self-deleted by its author NowSam May 2016 #79
If you are looking for a politician to be honest and have integrity--you will never find one. asuhornets May 2016 #81
This message was self-deleted by its author NowSam May 2016 #83
If someone is evil then they are evil---there is no lesser--evil is evil. asuhornets May 2016 #89
This message was self-deleted by its author NowSam May 2016 #99
Evil how? n/t asuhornets May 2016 #105
I'm right there with ya' on the good feeling postatomic May 2016 #35
.... asuhornets May 2016 #37
Did the Brits feel the same way about Margaret Thatcher when she became the Prime Minister in 1979? imagine2015 May 2016 #54
Thatcher was a conservative.. Clinton is a progressive--And I am sure you disagree...n/t asuhornets May 2016 #57
I will agree that she is more progressive than Margaret Thatcher. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2016 #132
ok ..good ... we agree on something... asuhornets May 2016 #134
She caused so much of the accusations to fly over the years by her own dealings. bkkyosemite May 2016 #59
If someone is in the position to make decision after decisions then yea, asuhornets May 2016 #62
"mistakes"...she has lied repeatedly, had bad judgement in crucial issues, flip flopped, thought bkkyosemite May 2016 #73
Come on now...what you just wrote was absurd...eom asuhornets May 2016 #117
ImWithHer........kick oasis May 2016 #92
I'm kicking right along with ya...n/t asuhornets May 2016 #104
And the rest of the country will be cut to shreds mindwalker_i May 2016 #93
ho hum loyalsister May 2016 #94
Husband/Wife co-impeachments are certainly historical. HooptieWagon May 2016 #102
Yup, that alone makes her an awesome woman. Thanks. Nt seabeyond May 2016 #110
you bet... asuhornets May 2016 #135
And the first woman politician as venal and corrupt as Nixon. hobbit709 May 2016 #112
That's a heckuva glass ceiling to break... The Velveteen Ocelot May 2016 #125
K&R. It will be historic! lunamagica May 2016 #136
This message was self-deleted by its author TM99 May 2016 #138
She would never compromise national security....nt asuhornets May 2016 #139
This message was self-deleted by its author TM99 May 2016 #140
Breaking the rules are different from breaking the law. asuhornets May 2016 #141
This message was self-deleted by its author TM99 May 2016 #143
The voters did not reject her she's winning asuhornets May 2016 #144
This message was self-deleted by its author TM99 May 2016 #145
Um, no Carolina May 2016 #146
Untrue... asuhornets May 2016 #147
Yes, HRC Carolina May 2016 #148
The Good Stuff! yallerdawg May 2016 #151
This message was self-deleted by its author artislife May 2016 #156
 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
69. I do, because of the dead on the ground.
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:07 PM
May 2016

Never forget.

Before Her Assassination, Berta Cáceres Singled Out Hillary Clinton for Backing Honduran Coup | Democracy Now!

http://www.democracynow.org/2016/3/11/before_her_assassination_berta_caceres_singled



Thatcher, Merkel did it a long time ago - they are also not friends to women or men down below.

I like the glass ceiling metaphor - the shards falling in Libya, in Honduras, in Detroit...

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
142. Thank you, Jack Riddler!
Thu May 26, 2016, 09:18 PM
May 2016

Honduras is IT for me. I can never get past it.

When I first saw this subject line about women and "breaking ultimate glass ceilings," I thought of something ironical. I thought, yeah, the highest level woman ever to be indicted for breaking national security laws, FOIA laws and laws against obstruction of justice.

But I won't go with irony, not with the beautiful Bertha Caceres' photo up there, and thinking about her murder at the hands of the fascists whom Clinton put in power.

Clinton may or may not be indicted in her current scandal, depending on how the weathervane of our political life is spinning, but it is clear that she will never be indicted for the women's lives that got smashed to bits as the result of her actions in Honduras, Libya, Syria, Iraq.

That is the tragedy of Clinton's faux feminism. Feminism in Clintonland is never having to say you're sorry for being as destructive and bloody-minded as men can be.

Massive, systematic rape of uppity women in Honduras, too, and LGBT people targeted as well. Clinton admits, in her emails, her determination that the democratically elected president of Honduras--a good man who was helping the poor and encouraging labor unions and grass roots movements--would never be returned to his rightful office. She saw that he wasn't. She funded the fascist coup government with our money, and literally installed the fascists in power, who are using ex-military death squads to eliminate the opposition, which, in Honduras, has many female leaders, especially with regard to protecting Mother Earth and restoring democracy.

It is unforgivable. Democracy destroyed. Lives destroyed. Hope destroyed. All that is good and beautiful destroyed.

 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
154. Yes. Thank you.
Fri May 27, 2016, 01:09 AM
May 2016

Beautiful post. I wish it was enough to say the truth as it is. Maybe soon it will be! This story doesn't end in July, or November, or January. It's not about Bernie - and he wouldn't think so, I do believe - it's about justice and peace and rational development! Enough of this failed establishment creating a bloody mess with everywhere and everything they touch!

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
155. Hear! Hear!
Fri May 27, 2016, 03:16 AM
May 2016

Such a "Matrix" we are living in, where bloody war & greed = feminism, and Bernie Sanders--Bernie Sanders!--is a sexist and a racist!

Everything so illusory and so upside down and inside out. David Brock's world. Karl Rove's world. A world in which Henry (2 million dead) Kissinger is friend and advisor to Hillary Clinton! And we're supposed to think it's all...liberal?

Justice and peace and rational development seem like a dream ghost from a distant shore.

Yurovsky

(2,064 posts)
3. We are long overdue for a woman to be elected POTUS...
Thu May 26, 2016, 02:07 PM
May 2016

I just wish it were just about any other Democratic woman.

Hopefully she will surprise me by winning & then governing to the Left of where she is campaigning.

Yurovsky

(2,064 posts)
7. I'd trade a thinner resume for less scandal...
Thu May 26, 2016, 02:29 PM
May 2016

and less enthusiasm for supporting corporate and Wall Street interests.

I could go into detail but I'd rather not rain on your parade. You are excited about having a woman POTUS, and if I were a woman, I might be more excited about HRC. I would have liked my mother to have lived long enough to see a woman President, and I realize many older women may never get another chance. I have to respect that, even though I doubt I can bring myself to vote for HRC.

Response to Yurovsky (Reply #7)

asuhornets

(2,405 posts)
14. well hopefully you will change your mind about voting for her
Thu May 26, 2016, 02:42 PM
May 2016

There are stark differences in the Democratic Party when compared to the Republican Party--it's glaring.

 

seekthetruth

(504 posts)
82. Not really.
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:24 PM
May 2016

Domestic, social issues like marriage equality, abortion, immigration, guns....sure. But those pale in comparison to the overwhelming issues of our day: global warming, war, terrorism, the economy, minimum wage, our broken healthcare system, trade deals, income inequality, student debt, and credit/consumer debt.

Based on the more critical issues, there isn't really that much daylight between Trump and Clinton when you get down to it.

The social issues wont bring our infrastructure down.....the more critical ones will.

That's why I don't trust Hillary or Trump.

asuhornets

(2,405 posts)
84. There is much daylight between Clinton and Trump, as a matter of fact
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:27 PM
May 2016

It's night and day. Clinton is nothing like Trump---on social issues and policy.

 

seekthetruth

(504 posts)
87. Of course there a huge difference on social issues...
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:32 PM
May 2016

....but foreign policy and the economy, they're more similar than different.

asuhornets

(2,405 posts)
96. You are so wrong..Foreign policy has to be stern and steady--that's Hillary.
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:40 PM
May 2016

Hillary knows all the intricacies when it comes to foreign policy -- hands down. Trump?whateva Economic policy--this is the main reason I support Hillary and she said her husband is going to help her---that's even better.

 

seekthetruth

(504 posts)
108. Help her with what?
Thu May 26, 2016, 06:33 PM
May 2016

Offshoring more jobs, more support for the oil industry? More disastrous trade policies......

Dear god...... American foreign policy has to be stern and steady? Libya, Iraq?

Seems like we've been like drunken Viking berserkers hell bent for killing everyone unless they succumb to our form of neoliberal democracy!

You need to read up on your recent history....news flash..... we've been acting kinda like arrogant dumbasses with our big guns.

 

Armstead

(47,803 posts)
107. Oh you know what my answer is going to be
Thu May 26, 2016, 05:21 PM
May 2016

It's the ongoing debate.

She is too close to, and part of, a system that has produced excessive concentrations of wealth and power, with severe effects on the majority of the population. It is a system in which Big Bidness, Wall Street and the Elites have far too much influence and control over government and the Democratic Party. It has stifled the possibility for true progressive reforms to provide important services and protect the public interest.

I could go on and on into specifics, but won't bother.

angrychair

(8,594 posts)
95. Those "go to" statements are tired
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:39 PM
May 2016

And lost their luster long ago. When did voting become about their race or sex?? I campaigned and voted for PBO, in primary and GE, not because he was black but because he was the best candidate. Him being black played no part in it what-so-ever.

Lastly, please, please, stop telling people to vote against the republican and tell them why they should vote for a Democrat (that does not include language related to the candidate's sex or the color of their skin).

TRump is a piece of shit, marching the gOP right off a cliff but he is no more going to destroy the world than the previous gOP asshat that was in office. Talking about tRump in "end of the world" terms comes out sounding like childish, hyperbolic nonsense.
We have been losing our ass in midterm elections and more importantly in state governments across the country.
The "vote against the evil teapublican" bullshit is not working. Are they? Yes. Sadly, saying so doesn't win us elections.

Start selling people on why to vote for Democrats and not why they should vote against teapublicans.

asuhornets

(2,405 posts)
103. Your words:
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:51 PM
May 2016

"not because he was black but because he was the best candidate." This is why I am voting for Hillary-she is the best candidate. Not because she is woman, but because she is qualified, and so happens to be a woman

"TRump is a piece of shit" I could not agree with you more.

"he is no more going to destroy the world than the previous gOP asshat that was in office." I disagree to the tenth degree. Trump will destroy the world-period. He should not be near the whitehouse. And it is not childish to think so.

"We have been losing our ass in midterm elections and more importantly in state governments across the country." I agree but I think we need another Howard Dean as head of the DNC. DWS, i don't dislike her, but she is not doing a very good job.

peggysue2

(10,811 posts)
137. Ahh, yes
Thu May 26, 2016, 08:29 PM
May 2016

It's always 'another' woman who would be preferable. Never the woman standing in front of you with every credential imaginable.

If only we could find that 'perfect' woman to satisfy those who would absolutely say "yes" to women in power. Only not 'this' woman or this moment or . . . .

Funny how that works.

 

Ned_Devine

(3,146 posts)
152. Not the one that ran the racist campaign against our current president
Thu May 26, 2016, 10:43 PM
May 2016

Not the one under investigation by the FBI

Not the one with the 19% trustworthy polling

Not the one that gave multiple speeches at $250K a pop to the very banks that collapsed our economy and won't tell us what she said to those institutions

Not the one who has no clear message other than "We can't allow Trump to take the White House"

Response to asuhornets (Reply #5)

Response to asuhornets (Reply #17)

asuhornets

(2,405 posts)
28. Hey in politics ruthless is the name of the game. But I do not believe Hillary Clinton
Thu May 26, 2016, 03:06 PM
May 2016

is ruthless. I suspect if someone steps on her foot, they better get off of it.

Response to asuhornets (Reply #28)

Response to asuhornets (Reply #40)

Response to asuhornets (Reply #43)

 

Armstead

(47,803 posts)
86. Andrea Mitchell -- Not exactly a Clinton-basher -- was all over this on MJ
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:31 PM
May 2016

She got out of bed early to talk about how serious this was

 

Dawgs

(14,755 posts)
20. I would never use qualifications to pick my president.
Thu May 26, 2016, 02:53 PM
May 2016

Because there are some really evil mean that were more qualified than any of the people that ran this year.

Dick Cheney and Bush Senior being two.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,281 posts)
61. Elizabeth Warren, Nancy Pelosi, Loretta Sanchez,
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:00 PM
May 2016

Sheila Jackson Lee, Jane Harman, Maxine Waters, Eleanor Holmes Norton, Louise Slaughter, Marcy Kaptur, Barbara Boxer, Debbie Stabenow, Maria Cantwell, Patty Murray, Diane Feinstein, Barbara Milkulski, Mary Landrieu - all have more experience in government than Hillary. Most of the women on this list have decades of experience in the House and/or the Senate. That's not to say I think all of them would be good presidents, were they to run - some would be terrible - but it's absurd to say Hillary is the most qualified woman the Democratic Party has to offer, at least if we assume qualified = experienced.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,281 posts)
77. What is your definition of "qualified"?
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:14 PM
May 2016

Of course they are all qualified; most have more government experience than Barack Obama had when he first ran, for example. Technically, to be qualified to be president all you need is to be at least 35 years old and a natural born citizen. In any event, "qualifications" can be pretty slippery.

Which of the following candidates would you vote for?

#1: Lawyer in private practice, elected to a state legislature, then to the U.S. House; chairman of the Judiciary Committee, appointed ambassador to Russia; elected to the U.S. Senate and reelected twice; appointed Secretary of State; then ambassador to Britain.

#2: Small-town postmaster and surveyor; served four terms in a state legislature and one term in the U.S. House; practiced law for another 12 years.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

If you picked #1 you picked James Buchanan, who is generally considered to have been one of our worst presidents ever. #2 was Abraham Lincoln.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,281 posts)
115. I wouldn't pick a lot of them either, but that doesn't mean
Thu May 26, 2016, 07:06 PM
May 2016

they aren't qualified - that is, educated, experienced, knowledgeable, etc. How are any of these women not qualified even though most of them are as well-educated, and all have more experience in government than Hillary?

By the way, the fact that you like or agree with someone does not count as a qualification.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,281 posts)
121. And how are their qualifications inferior to Hillary's with respect to the presidency?
Thu May 26, 2016, 07:21 PM
May 2016

Hillary served two terms as a senator and four years as Secretary of State. Most presidents had been senators or representatives or state governors. Are you suggesting that someone is not qualified to be president unless they've been a Secretary of State (like James Buchanan, a very incompetent president)? Obama was a one-term senator. Bill Clinton was a governor. Eisenhower was a general with no experience at all as an elected official. So: What specific qualification does Hillary have that nobody else has, making everyone unqualified but her?

asuhornets

(2,405 posts)
122. During her debates with Sanders...She knew the intricacies of every aspect of government
Thu May 26, 2016, 07:25 PM
May 2016

Foreign policy knowledge--outstanding..There is no denying that. People hate her with personal reasons. Voting for a president should not be personal.. But based on who can do the job. Obama earned my vote..And so has Hillary..

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,281 posts)
124. That doesn't answer the question of why she is qualified and all those other women
Thu May 26, 2016, 07:29 PM
May 2016

are not. I didn't say she was unqualified; I said a number of other women are at least as qualified as she is. So how is Hillary special in a way nobody else is? I think Elizabeth Warren could clean her clock in a debate.

asuhornets

(2,405 posts)
126. I'm sure Warren could hold her own in a debate with Clinton. Hillary Clinton in my opinion is
Thu May 26, 2016, 07:38 PM
May 2016

uniquely qualified, in that, when the republicans had 17 candidates she was more qualified than all of them. All of the candidates--republican and democrats in this primary season--does not have her qualifications including Sanders. As far as the women you listed, may meet the standard qualifications-but it takes much more than the standard qualifications. Temperament, knowledge of foreign policy, negotiation skills, etc.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,281 posts)
128. Hillary's temperament, knowledge of foreign policy and negotiation skills
Thu May 26, 2016, 07:42 PM
May 2016

are all, shall we say, debatable and subject to argument. I am quite confident that there are other women who are equally capable in those areas, particularly women who have been in congress for decades. Hillary isn't as special as you think she is. Her judgment is certainly questionable, as the email debacle is starting to prove.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,281 posts)
131. Your initial premise was that she is the only "qualified" Democratic woman.
Thu May 26, 2016, 07:47 PM
May 2016

If she wins the nomination this time it won't mean there are no other qualified women. It will mean only that none of them ran against her. Elizabeth Warren could have beaten her easily.

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
149. Thank you, Velveteen Ocelot! That was beautiful!
Thu May 26, 2016, 10:33 PM
May 2016

That's all Clinton supporters can say--she's just so very "qualified."

Is it because she got "blooded" in Libya, or earned her imperial stripes smashing Honduran democracy?

"Qualified" to do WHAT?

I can't think of any significant thing she's done in our interest, and her worst actions are indefensible in a knowledgeable, progressive forum. Her supporters keep saying she's "qualified." What does it mean?

She's possibly "qualified" to serve the interests of Wall Street and the "military-industrial complex" and a goodly number of foreign governments, like the Saudis, that have bought themselves a piece of the White House. Who else is she "qualified" to serve? Who else has she served?

I say, "possibly 'qualified,'" because, if she couldn't even successfully "wipe" her private, insecure email server, to prevent exposure of damning emails of all kinds (including one on Honduras, and several indicating she knew hackers were after her server), if she is that incompetent, if she is that incapable of covering her own ass in the snakepit of Washington DC, she won't be able to serve anybody at all.

There is so much material already for the RW morons in Congress to present her with Articles of Impeachment the day after she's inaugurated, if she gets there, it's totally reasonable to assume that the next four years will be one long impeachment. She will have no time for anything else.

She's "qualified" to generate scandals. She's "qualified" to make a half a billion dollars from Wall Street in two years' time. She's "qualified" to get a few things done that RW morons might agree to--sending U.S. troops to Syria, nuking Iran (advisor: Robert Kagan), overthrowing another Latin American government (advisor and friend: Henry Fucking Kissinger), laying the U.S. workforce flat on its back and ex-ing out every environmental law we ever passed, with TPP, appointing another Citizens United/corporatist to the Supreme Court. They might even dampen down the impeachment hearings as a trade.

But we can forget $12/hr or anything else that might help most people (let alone that "unicorn and pony" $15/hr).

A waitress running a busy diner full of hungry customers with smart mouths would be more qualified to run the U.S. government in the interests of all, than Hillary Clinton.

A head nurse in an emergency room, managing heart attacks, gunshot wounds, kids with broken limbs, and all manner of bleeding, vomiting, fainting patients, would be more qualified to run the U.S. government in the interests of all, than Hillary Clinton.

A Catholic Worker nun running a soup kitchen would be more qualified.

A gardener putting fresh vegetables on her table and on all her neighbors' tables, and donating the rest to the Food Bank she runs would be more qualified.

A mother with three kids, and two jobs, and sick and elderly parents would be more qualified.

Really! What are our priorities for managing things and getting things done? What do we WANT done, and what are the "qualifications" for that?

Does not the word "qualification" include the word quality? What is the quality of what is being done? Whom does it serve?

Running a national security-leaking, conniving, war-mongering State Department is not a qualification to be president.

Being a U.S. senator does not qualify you to be president. It depends on what you vote for, what you stand for, who you are. Clinton was for the Iraq War, for the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act and for weak and watered down banking regulation, among other things.

Being the wife of a president doesn't qualify you to be president. It depends on how well you run that office and what you use your influence to do. Eleanor Roosevelt was well-qualified to be president. She worked tirelessly in the interest of the poor and the forgotten and the excluded. Very little that Clinton did as First Lady qualifies her to be president, and a lot of what she did was harmful, especially to the poor, the forgotten and the excluded.

We need to talk about quality, not just "qualifications." There are thousands of people with impressive resumes for president. What is the quality of those resumes? What was the quality of their actions? What is the quality of their values, their ethics, their intentions?



The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,281 posts)
150. Well said!
Thu May 26, 2016, 10:38 PM
May 2016

Hillary is smart. She has a good resume. She would probably be a competent administrator (if you keep her away from computers). But there are a lot of ways of looking at what is meant by "qualified," and you have made some excellent points.

asuhornets

(2,405 posts)
120. Warren is an excellent progressive liberal Senator.
Thu May 26, 2016, 07:16 PM
May 2016

Obama was the exception....You don't get many of those in your lifetime. Hillary is qualified because she has to be.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,281 posts)
123. "Hillary is qualified because she has to be"?
Thu May 26, 2016, 07:27 PM
May 2016

What the hell does that mean? That's a totally circular statement and it makes no sense at all. Anyhow, my point (above) is not that she isn't qualified (she's over 35 and a natural born citizen, the only qualifications the Constitution requires), but that plenty of other women are at least as qualified as she is. Hillary is not so unique and special that nobody can compete with her. You carry on like she's this awesome, perfect being like Jesus or something.

asuhornets

(2,405 posts)
127. Yes because she has to be uniquely qualified
Thu May 26, 2016, 07:42 PM
May 2016

If she was not she would have been out a long time ago. No she is not Jesus. But she is smart as hell. Anyone can compete against her, but the ones that did lost and/or losing.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,281 posts)
130. Obama beat her in 2008
Thu May 26, 2016, 07:45 PM
May 2016

and Bernie has been giving her serious competition this time. She is definitely beatable, and she could even be beaten by Trump because she has so much baggage. She won her first senate election only because she carpetbagged her way into New York to take advantage of an open senate seat with virtually no competition.

riversedge

(69,731 posts)
4. #HRCistheNominee...pic....
Thu May 26, 2016, 02:09 PM
May 2016



Mia Brett ?@QueenMab87 May 21

#ImWithHer lets shatter the last glass ceiling! #CaliforniaPrimary #HRCistheNominee




democrattotheend

(11,605 posts)
8. If she does get the nomination, I am excited about breaking the glass ceiling
Thu May 26, 2016, 02:31 PM
May 2016

That is one of the things that does excite me about her, even though she's not my first choice for other reasons. As a little girl I really admired her for defying the stereotypical role of a first lady, and I still do.

democrattotheend

(11,605 posts)
16. Anytime
Thu May 26, 2016, 02:43 PM
May 2016

One thing I am looking forward to if she is the nominee is seeing Bill Clinton compete in the first lady baking competition shortly before the election. I remember railing in 2004 about how sexist that tradition was, and my dad said "do you think Bill Clinton will compete in it when Hillary runs?" I bet that competition will get a lot more attention this year than it usually does, since Bill Clinton will be the first male and the first former president to compete in it.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
44. Hadn't thought of that in ages. I bet he'd do it, if
Thu May 26, 2016, 03:38 PM
May 2016

it's held, and have fun.

I just looked and see no mention other than old "why are we doing this sexist crap" articles from 2012, but I did learn that it started as damage control by HILLARY CLINTON after her comment about not sitting home cooking was used against her so effectively.

Now, that's the kind of irony that really makes me hope to at least learn what the first gentleman's favorite cookie recipe is.

democrattotheend

(11,605 posts)
72. I didn't know that!
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:10 PM
May 2016

I thought it was a tradition that had been around for a lot longer than that. That is ironic!

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
101. Then I got to repay the smile from your fun idea.
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:45 PM
May 2016

Irony is absolutely the word.

Turns out Bill entered Family Circle's bake-off with his cook's oatmeal cookie recipe when Hillary ran the first time. Too funny. I'd be interested in knowing if he has another favorite that doesn't require him to go off his stringent diet.

democrattotheend

(11,605 posts)
106. I thought I remember reading that he submitted a recipe to some competition in 2008
Thu May 26, 2016, 05:09 PM
May 2016

Along with Michelle Obama and Cindy McCain, because the recipes were submitted long before the actual contest.

One thing I was confused about from the article - do the candidates' spouses actually bake the cookies, or just submit recipes? I am kind of hoping it's the former because it will be amusing (and historical) to see Bill Clinton put on an apron and bake cookies.

loyalsister

(13,390 posts)
100. That was when I liked her a lot
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:44 PM
May 2016

Then it fell through when she took on the role Tammy Wynette celebrated.

Response to asuhornets (Original post)

democrattotheend

(11,605 posts)
24. Probably. But probably not like 2008
Thu May 26, 2016, 02:58 PM
May 2016

If she is elected I will be very relieved and a little excited, but not like I was in 2008. To be fair, I don't think we would see the same kind of excitement even if Bernie won. Obama was a once in a generation candidate in terms of his ability to inspire, and there was also excitement of taking back the White House after 8 years of Bush.

Part of me is going to be sad on January 20, 2017 no matter who is sworn in.

asuhornets

(2,405 posts)
26. " Probably. But probably not like 2008"...I agree with that..
Thu May 26, 2016, 03:04 PM
May 2016

If Hillary wins, I will not be sad, but I will not be naive into thinking that Hillary will fix all of my problems. She may very well do things I don't like, but I know she has the smarts to take care of business..

democrattotheend

(11,605 posts)
29. I never though Obama would fix everyone's problems either
Thu May 26, 2016, 03:08 PM
May 2016

But he made the future feel bright at a time when it was otherwise bleak and scary. I hope that if she gets the nomination, once she pivots to the general election, she will take a more optimistic tone and talk about what is possible instead of what isn't. I have no doubt that she is smart, hard-working, tenacious, and capable, but I think she needs to do a better job of painting an optimistic picture of what the country will be under her leadership.

Response to asuhornets (Reply #21)

Response to asuhornets (Reply #30)

Autumn

(44,765 posts)
33. And deadly shards of glass will rain down on our heads and bodies.
Thu May 26, 2016, 03:14 PM
May 2016

Metaphorically speaking of course but it's gonna to hurt.

Autumn

(44,765 posts)
51. Ya know I don't have that confidence. She didn't do very well at State.
Thu May 26, 2016, 03:48 PM
May 2016

The State Department Inspector General Report shows she wan't very good at doing a big part of her job, not to mention the whoppers she has told that were exposed in that report. She was very weak in management skills.

Here's a little snip for ya.

The Federal Records Act requires appropriate management and preservation of Federal Government records, regardless of physical form or characteristics, that document the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, and essential transactions of an agency. For the last two decades, both Department of State (Department) policy and Federal regulations have explicitly stated that emails may qualify as Federal records.

As is the case throughout the Federal Government, management weaknesses at the Department have contributed to the loss or removal of email records, particularly records created by the Office of the Secretary. These weaknesses include a limited ability to retrieve email records, inaccessibility of electronic files, failure to comply with requirements for departing employees, and a general lack of oversight.


https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2842460/ESP-16-03-Final.pdf

asuhornets

(2,405 posts)
56. Seriously? Fed. Gov. Rec.? I work for the State of Georgia and we get records request all the time
Thu May 26, 2016, 03:56 PM
May 2016

and can't find half of the stuff people are requesting...It happens...But other than that -she will make a great president?

Autumn

(44,765 posts)
70. "Clerky stuff"? Hillary couldn't even do an adequate job as a clerk according to you?
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:08 PM
May 2016
You are priceless. She's gonna make a great president but she can't do a little clerk job.


clerk
klərk/Submit
noun
1.
a person employed in an office or bank to keep records and accounts and to undertake other routine administrative duties


"Clerky stuff"

Autumn

(44,765 posts)
74. They upgraded the guidelines and regulations starting in 2005 to 2011. It's in the report.
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:11 PM
May 2016

She chose not to follow them.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
48. Ah, after another 5 months of Trump posturing
Thu May 26, 2016, 03:42 PM
May 2016

on TV as president-to-be, and I bet that rain will feel more like snowflakes. Nice, fluffy happy ones. Give it time. My granddaughter's name is Autumn, btw. She just turned 7 and likes being the only one.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
55. Paul Krugman divides Sanders followers into
Thu May 26, 2016, 03:55 PM
May 2016

five general categories. Which do you think you are?

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/05/23/the-truth-about-the-sanders-movement/?login=email&ref=opinion&_r=0&mtrref=www.nytimes.com&assetType=opinion

Btw, the article by the two political scientists he links to early on is extremely interesting, "Do Sanders Supporters Favor His Policies?" but it just might feel a little "blizzardy."

Autumn

(44,765 posts)
58. I support Bernie. Krugman doesn't know me so I'm not interested in his description of
Thu May 26, 2016, 03:58 PM
May 2016

Bernie supporters, or Hillary supporters for that matter.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
60. Well, imo, you should be. I'm certainly interested
Thu May 26, 2016, 03:59 PM
May 2016

in knowing why people behave politically as they do, and that certainly starts with me.

Autumn

(44,765 posts)
68. Actually I like Hillary. I met and talked to her a couple of times. I supported her till the very
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:04 PM
May 2016

end in 08. I don't want her nowhere near the White House.

Response to asuhornets (Original post)

Response to geek tragedy (Reply #36)

Response to geek tragedy (Reply #91)

Response to asuhornets (Reply #42)

asuhornets

(2,405 posts)
81. If you are looking for a politician to be honest and have integrity--you will never find one.
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:23 PM
May 2016

Politicians switch from one issue to another all the time ----to get votes----that's what they do..ALL OF THEM.

Some have honesty and integrity, but it is not absolute.

Response to asuhornets (Reply #81)

asuhornets

(2,405 posts)
89. If someone is evil then they are evil---there is no lesser--evil is evil.
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:32 PM
May 2016

If you don't participate then you lose your right to complain about what is going on in your country. Is Hillary perfect? Hell no. But Trump don't give a shit about anyone--ANYONE. The last president we had like that was GWB---and he did everything with a smile just like Trump will do.. Ya see it is all a game to Trump. But life is not a game.

Response to asuhornets (Reply #89)

postatomic

(1,771 posts)
35. I'm right there with ya' on the good feeling
Thu May 26, 2016, 03:17 PM
May 2016


Hillary Clinton has had to endure twice the amount of HATE. She has had to work three times as hard to compete with the males.

No more of this shit. It's time for the old white guys to take a nap.

 

imagine2015

(2,054 posts)
54. Did the Brits feel the same way about Margaret Thatcher when she became the Prime Minister in 1979?
Thu May 26, 2016, 03:54 PM
May 2016

The "Iron Lady" led the right-wing and its attacks on the working class and unions of Great Britain.

She broke Britain's "ultimate glass ceiling" but I don't think that was a giant step forward in the fight for women's rights and equality in Great Britain.

It's policies that are primary, not gender.

You can have a corrupt women leading the government.

Now I'd like to see someone like Elizabeth Warren run for President. She's not a reactionary or a "centrist conservative moderate".

asuhornets

(2,405 posts)
62. If someone is in the position to make decision after decisions then yea,
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:01 PM
May 2016

u make mistakes along the way.

bkkyosemite

(5,792 posts)
73. "mistakes"...she has lied repeatedly, had bad judgement in crucial issues, flip flopped, thought
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:11 PM
May 2016

it funny about a rapist and a 12 year old..that laugh is just creepy..when talking about the dead in Libya and on and on..but don't want to waste my energy typing.

loyalsister

(13,390 posts)
94. ho hum
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:37 PM
May 2016

Not really. She got where she is by taking on machismo leadership qualities. Out Bushed Bush's callousness with "We came, we saw, he died." Her overall approach is masculine. Graceless and ruthless.

I find it sickening and sad my vote for the first woman president will be cast with great reluctance.

 

HooptieWagon

(17,064 posts)
102. Husband/Wife co-impeachments are certainly historical.
Thu May 26, 2016, 04:50 PM
May 2016

But I see no positive results coming out of it. In fact, it will probably shut the door to presidential aspirations of more qualified women for several decades.

Response to asuhornets (Original post)

Response to asuhornets (Reply #139)

Response to asuhornets (Reply #141)

Response to asuhornets (Reply #144)

Carolina

(6,960 posts)
146. Um, no
Thu May 26, 2016, 09:47 PM
May 2016

Hopefully not...

Private servergate is turning from here a drip, there a drip to a steady drip, drip, drip of lies, obfuscations, revelations and suspicions... A private server intentionally used for shady deals between the State Dept and the Clinton Foundation slush fund, dealings that thereby could not be scrutinized using any pesky FIOA queries.

It's the kind of slime that reeks of Nixonian corruption

Response to asuhornets (Original post)

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Hillary Clinton is about ...