HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » I think I'm doing a re-th...

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 12:48 PM

I think I'm doing a re-think on Hillary...This "pile-on" of her is so ridiculous and just seems

so childish and immature, I'm embarrassed for those doing it. Look, I will never, ever be as excited and enthused about a candidate as I was (both times) for Barack Obama. That's just a fact and the truth. Hillary has said and done a lot of things that make me scratch my head and go WTH??? At times, Barack Obama has made me feel the same way. One of the positive things I've noticed about Hillary is that she has a tough skin. Dear Lord, she is going to need it and I also think she was a wonderful SOS. I'm still in the middle of my re-think but if/when she is the Democratic nominee, she would of course, get my vote...It's either her or Bib...errr...their guy and she would definitely be superior to any in the clown car...

46 replies, 2708 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 46 replies Author Time Post
Reply I think I'm doing a re-think on Hillary...This "pile-on" of her is so ridiculous and just seems (Original post)
monmouth4 Mar 2015 OP
hrmjustin Mar 2015 #1
TwilightGardener Mar 2015 #2
BlueCaliDem Mar 2015 #7
TwilightGardener Mar 2015 #8
TwilightGardener Mar 2015 #10
BlueCaliDem Mar 2015 #12
TwilightGardener Mar 2015 #15
BlueCaliDem Mar 2015 #19
TwilightGardener Mar 2015 #20
guillaumeb Mar 2015 #33
TwilightGardener Mar 2015 #41
guillaumeb Mar 2015 #43
TwilightGardener Mar 2015 #44
ChairmanAgnostic Mar 2015 #30
monmouth4 Mar 2015 #9
msongs Mar 2015 #17
el_bryanto Mar 2015 #3
blm Mar 2015 #4
OregonBlue Mar 2015 #5
meow2u3 Mar 2015 #6
Maedhros Mar 2015 #18
Skittles Mar 2015 #24
Maedhros Mar 2015 #25
Skittles Mar 2015 #27
Maedhros Mar 2015 #31
Skittles Mar 2015 #34
Maedhros Mar 2015 #36
Skittles Mar 2015 #37
Maedhros Mar 2015 #40
LittleBlue Mar 2015 #35
Hekate Mar 2015 #46
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #38
arcane1 Mar 2015 #42
cali Mar 2015 #11
dissentient Mar 2015 #13
HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #14
enough Mar 2015 #16
ND-Dem Mar 2015 #21
wyldwolf Mar 2015 #23
monmouth4 Mar 2015 #45
rhett o rick Mar 2015 #22
brooklynite Mar 2015 #26
liberal N proud Mar 2015 #28
Skittles Mar 2015 #29
monmouth4 Mar 2015 #32
Beacool Mar 2015 #39

Response to monmouth4 (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 12:50 PM

1. It has been disheartening on DU the past week.

 

It will get beter I hope.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monmouth4 (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 12:50 PM

2. Curious as to what you think she did that was "wonderful" as SoS.

Lasting accomplishments, list them:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #2)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 01:19 PM

7. Here are a few:

SoS Clinton visited 112 countries and she was instrumental in repairing the badly damaged U.S. reputation and image because of the damage the Bush regime left behind. Our allies needed to know that President Obama wasn't just another Bush, and as we've seen in the past three years, we need out allies. This was, in my opinion, one of her biggest successes.

She's advocated and expanded the role in global economic issues for the State Department and she's cited the need for an increased U.S. diplomatic presence, especially in Iraq, where the Defense Department had conducted diplomatic missions.

She's unveiled the Global Hunger and Food Security program, has prevailed over Vice President Biden to send an additional 21,000 troops to Afghanistan to support the troops already there.

She's saved the signing of a Turkish-Armenian accord that was about to fall apart.

Those are pretty lasting, aren't they?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #7)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 01:25 PM

8. First two paragraphs: fuzzy and unprovable.

Afghanistan surge: uh...not sure that was a great idea. Global hunger, that's good. Don't want Turkey and Armenia pissed at each other, that's also good.
Now for the trouble: Libya--WTF? Russian relations: They obviously didn't take her seriously. Syria: Not sure how arming the rebels to topple Assad would have worked, in retrospect. Egypt and the whole Arab Spring in general (except for Tunisia): didn't really work out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #8)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 01:32 PM

10. I do give her credit for emphasizing the importance of Asia to our interests.

So there is that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #8)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 01:33 PM

12. She's not perfect, and we can go back and forth on the pros and cons, but you asked

for lasting accomplishments and you were given them. I don't have any inclination nor desire to quibble with people whose minds won't change about her. I simply posted those accomplishments for those who are still open-minded enough to see that she hasn't been sitting pretty all these years.

The Clintons are highly respected around the world. They're revered by the people, even if some heads of States don't much care for them (and those people are in the minority). I believe Hillary Clinton would make an excellent leader for the United States compared to any other Democrat (outside of Barack Obama) we have because of the Clinton reputation around the globe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #12)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 01:43 PM

15. The double-edged sword with her is, people who admire her do so because of who

she is (less so because of concrete achievements). Your point about the Clintons being respected around the world and that she would make an excellent leader: those are personal traits you ascribe to her, not past accomplishments or future plans. She's famous for being famous, like a political Kardashian. That is both a strength and a weakness, and can cut both ways. If her image of Towering Clinton Might and Inevitability starts to crumble, what's left?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #15)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 01:59 PM

19. " If her image of Towering Clinton Might and Inevitability starts to crumble, what's left?"

The realization that the future of Obama's legacy is contingent upon a Democrat winning the White House, and with the exuberant amounts of money now necessary in order to run for president, Hillary is - up until now - our best bet.

ObamaCare is also a major reason to vote for the strongest Democratic candidate we have as well as ensuring that no Republican ever gets back into the White House. You can otherwise be certain, that should a GOPer finds his way back in, ObamaCare will be made history, bit by bit. Republicans haven't given up on dismantling Social Security or Medicare all these years, so you can set the clock to it that they aren't going to cease and desist attempting to dismantle ObamaCare.

Also, the Clinton legacy: 22 million net jobs, a 2.1% unemployment rate, strong on anti-terrorism before it was popular, justices like Bader-Ginsberg and Breyer appointed to SCOTUS in the next eight years, and protecting and expanding universal health care insurance, having the respect of congressional Democrats (something Obama was unable to get in his first four years) in order to push legislation through.

I don't see any other Democrat who can make these things happen. At least, not at this point. Maybe there'll be another Barack Obama when the primaries start, but barring another like him, Hillary Clinton is our best bet to keep the White House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #19)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 02:03 PM

20. I appreciate and understand your pragmatism.

"She/He Can Win" is a valid reason to support somebody, certainly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #15)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 04:19 PM

33. your comment could have been made about President Obama

and it was. The whole "past accomplishment" meme is often coupled with "a lack of experience" to disparage candidates. No one has experience being President prior to being President.

To say:She's famous for being famous, like a political Kardashian. That is both a strength and a weakness, and can cut both ways." completely ignores what she tried to do about health care reform, ignores her obvious abilities as a lawyer, and ignores her work as SOS. You may not like all or any of what she did as a corporate attorney, may not agree with her prescriptions for health care reform, may not feel that she accomplished anything of lasting value as SOS, but you cannot deny she accomplished things.

Comparing her to a Kardashian, or a Palin, could be seen by many as nasty, sexist, and reductionist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #33)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 05:02 PM

41. The Clintons have been in the public eye long enough for me to reasonably

assess what a Clinton Presidency would look like. From here, it looks like poorly-thought-out plans, poorly-managed PR issues, special prosecutors, and investigations all over again. I took a chance on an inexperienced Obama in 2007 rather than Hillary because he seemed to have more integrity and was more astute in general on a lot of things. I do not now regret that, and never regretted it. Do you have a better MALE shorthand example of "famous for being famous"? All I can think of is Kardashian and Paris Hilton. Sorry they're both female, but that's where we are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #41)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 05:20 PM

43. there is a big difference between would and could

When you say: " The Clintons have been in the public eye long enough for me to reasonably assess what a Clinton Presidency would look like." if you substitute could I would feel better. The past is not a guarantee of the future.

But talk of "special prosecutors and investigations" without explaining that partisan obstructionism by the GOP as motivation for both ignores history. The GOP used investigations and special prosecution to derail and obstruct the Clinton Presidency. Todays GOP has used the filibuster for the same reason.

Male shorthand for famous for being famous: Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Ben Carson, and many more. None of the aforementioned have accomplished anything in particular other than lower standards for political talk.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #43)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 05:26 PM

44. Jeb Bush is another Hillary Clinton. Not a very distinguished governor

(I lived in FL at the time) and I can't think of many achievements, but his reputation is based on who he is and not what he did. The others aren't exactly household names/towering figures in any respect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #8)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 04:17 PM

30. while I agree with a C+ or B-, in comparison to a kinda sleezy

predecessor, she was hands down, head and shoulders, A to Z, ahead by three lengths at the finish, better.

Damn, I tried to fit in one more cliche, but they all dried up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #2)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 01:30 PM

9. I guess "wonderful" was a bit of exaggeration and I don't recall her having any lasting

accomplishments. Of course, SOS was the least thing she ever thought of doing. I do think she acted professionally and with class. I know that's not much but that is all I have to work with at this point. When I compare her to Jeb, Rand and whomever else they have, she really does outshine them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monmouth4 (Reply #9)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 01:53 PM

17. she was implementing the poliocy of her boss, obama. she is not the one to criticize for policy nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monmouth4 (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 12:55 PM

3. I think that in the general most people will vote for Clinton in the general election.

I doubt many, if any, will vote for the Republican; some might stay home. But she's not the nominee yet. While she might get the nomination unopposed, she might well be challenged.

Those who believe she's a weak candidate, but the best one we have, are afraid that a challenge from the left will torpedo her campaign and give the election to the Republicanoids. They want to shut down any challenge now, so that she emerges from the primaries unbloodied with a full war chest.

Those who believe she's a strong candidate should welcome the challenge, and the opportunity for her to win over more of the Democratic base.

Those who think she doesn't represent their views want to see someone else get the nomination, or at least see her challenged so she has to move her positions to the left on some issues.

Bryant

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monmouth4 (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 12:55 PM

4. Don't like her much and didn't think she did anything significant as Sen or SecState….BUT...

I also don't fall for the faux scandal mongerers hyping this into a issue bigger than Watergate, either. Especially by those who saw nothing untoward in Bush WH actually DESTROYING millions of emails to protect them from being scrutinized by those investigating outing of Plame and wide scale firing of US attorneys for Rove's political games.

The Democratic candidate has my vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monmouth4 (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 12:55 PM

5. While she is no where near as progressive as I would like, she is still a damn sight better

than any of the mouth breathers the GOP has on offer. I think she is smart. I think she cares about the country. If my choice is Hillary or Jeb or Walker or Paul, there is no doubt in my mind how I would vote. She won't try to repeal the ACA and probably will try to add to it since it is one of her passions. She won't try to disrupt our negotiations with Iran because she actually does care about Israel and would like to see the ME safer. There are things I don't like but there is lots I do like too.

She also stands a much better choice of winning than anyone else in the Democratic party right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monmouth4 (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 12:57 PM

6. I'm not surprised conservatives have a problem with powerful women

But I'm shocked, shocked to find out some of us can't deal with women in power. I'm all but sure that's the real reason for piling on HRC: sexism, pure and simple.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to meow2u3 (Reply #6)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 01:54 PM

18. The "opposing Hillary's policies is sexism" talking point is worn out.

 

It just doesn't make any sense. You should find a new talking point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #18)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 03:01 PM

24. maybe YOU'RE who the one who needs new talking points

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #24)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 04:04 PM

25. I don't like being called sexist, especially when it's not true.

 

Your response to criticism of Hillary is to insult people. Try a valid argument instead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #25)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 04:14 PM

27. try valid criticisms of Hillary instead of hysterical assertions

THAT WOULD HELP

this over-the-top day after day bashing is RIDICULOUS - ENOUGH already

and is misogyny the main reason - maybe not - but it certainly IS a factor, as real as the racism aimed at Obama

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #27)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 04:17 PM

31. What "hysterical assertions" have I made?

 

You seem incapable of rational discussion, and just want to shout at people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #31)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 04:19 PM

34. the topic is HILLARY HYSTERIA

it is a raging infection on DU right now - ENOUGH ALREADY

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #34)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 04:24 PM

36. What "Hillary hysteria?"

 

You can't simply call criticisms of Hillary "hysteria" or "RW talking points" and expect anyone to take you seriously.

If a criticism is invalid, make your point with an actual argument instead of "JUST SHOUTING IT DOWN!!!!."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #36)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 04:30 PM

37. I see see why you're not seeing it

bye bye

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #37)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 04:56 PM

40. I stand in awe of your reasoning. [n/t]

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to meow2u3 (Reply #6)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 04:20 PM

35. Why do so many who oppose Hillary support Warren? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LittleBlue (Reply #35)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 06:47 PM

46. It's totally safe to support someone who is not going to run. They can never disappoint you.

Psych 101

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to meow2u3 (Reply #6)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 04:42 PM

38. There is a huge difference between Republiconism and Conservativism. The sexist Republicans

 

hate strong women, but real conservatives don't have a problem with her. HRC herself is conservative on most issues. The neocons love her foreign policy and of course Goldman-Sachs loves her economics.

The Republicons don't like her because she is a strong women, progressives don't like her conservative stands on important foreign policy, economic and strong support of the defense industry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to meow2u3 (Reply #6)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 05:15 PM

42. Good lord. That's the only reason someone can disagree with her??

 

I guess everyone who voted for Obama in the 2008 primaries was a sexist who can't stand powerful women? Does that include Obama too, since he ran against her?

Stupid, ignorant sentiment. What a shame to see it on DU

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monmouth4 (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 01:33 PM

11. I hear you. I really don't care for much of her politics. I don't like her

 

approach to politics, etc., but this email thing just seems insane.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monmouth4 (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 01:33 PM

13. Well, looks like this story will last for months, so I guess you will be a hard core supporter by

 

the time these bevy of news stories and investigations finally simmer down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dissentient (Reply #13)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 01:40 PM

14. It only looks that way because there isn't something newer and shinier to ponder

We're just one commercial aircraft lost in the Indian ocean from a month of other coverage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monmouth4 (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 01:44 PM

16. This has been a familiar pattern with both Clintons for decades.

Over and over, one gets fed-up and disillusioned about either one of them, and really disapproving of their policies and positions. But after a while the relentless nature of the criticism gets so out of hand that one starts to feel like joining their team just to push back against the onslaught. I'm sure by the time the election comes along, I'll be voting for Hillary just because I'll be so pissed at her enemies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to enough (Reply #16)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 02:12 PM

21. "I'll be voting for X just because I'll be so pissed at his/her enemies."

 

the pattern for a long time; on both sides of the aisle.

I want to have something to vote FOR.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to enough (Reply #16)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 02:22 PM

23. Actually the pattern is this...

People create trumped up "scandals" then whine about them incessantly. Even when MILLIONS are spent to investigate and prosecute them, the most we get is a blow job. But because people are tired of the incessant whining from the right (and the left) they give in like they do to crying babies. ANYTHING to shut the babies up. But after a little while they realize giving in to the whiners only empowers them.

The Clinton years were different, not because Republicans despised that Democratic president any less, but because of what they thought his particular sins were. They knew in their hearts that Bill Clinton was venal and duplicitous, and if you scratched any surface you'd find the corruption lurking within. But they didn't think he was betraying America, just that he was doing everything from running drugs to having his political enemies killed. There was no matter too trivial or ridiculous for them to investigate; it may have reached the height of absurdity when the Republican Congress heard 140 hours of testimony on whether the Clintons had misused the White House Christmas card list. And when he made for himself an actual sex scandal, all the resentments of the 1960s culture wars came gushing out, and at the end of it they were disgusted with a public that didn't share their moral condemnation.

By the time Clinton's administration was over, he did something that incensed Republicans more than all his previous sins put together: he got away with all of it, and in style. Impeachment failed, and the last Gallup poll of his term pegged his approval at a stunning 66 percent.

Barack Obama won't ever again get approval ratings that high, because of how polarization has intensified since then. But his term may well wind down without any of the mini or fake scandals of his presidency taking much of a toll. Should that happen, Republicans will insist that if they only had more time, and if only the media had paid more attention, and if only the public had its head screwed on right, then everything would have been different. But by then they'll be focused on Hillary Clinton, convinced that any day now they'll discover the scandal that will bring her down.


http://theweek.com/articles/542494/what-hillary-clintons-emails-tell-about-scandal-age-obama

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to enough (Reply #16)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 06:44 PM

45. I think you stated my feelings quite well...Thank you..n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monmouth4 (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 02:15 PM

22. She capitulated to Republicons. She is partially responsible for the deaths of thousands.

 

I can't overlook that, and don't see that she is our only choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monmouth4 (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 04:12 PM

26. Has Elizabeth Warren called for the immediate withdrawl of our trips from Iraq/Afghanistan?

Has she introduced legislation to rescind the IWR?

Doesn't that make her just as complicit?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monmouth4 (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 04:15 PM

28. So now you are thinking about supporting her?

Because if I had to guess, you never were in her camp.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal N proud (Reply #28)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 04:16 PM

29. that's the thing

I have not supported Hillary because of IWR but this shit going on every fucking day is SICKENING

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal N proud (Reply #28)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 04:18 PM

32. You are right, I was never in her camp but this piling on is a bit much and a good hard

look at their candidates is making me do a re-think...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monmouth4 (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 04:51 PM

39. In the long run, this tempest in a tea cup won't matter.

The only people who care for this level of minutiae are the media, political blogs and talk radio. The population at large doesn't give a damn about these things. They didn't care when Republicans did the same and they won't care now. This will not change anyone's mind, one way or the other. Those who support Hillary will continue to do so and those who don't like her will use this as one more reason not to do so. Nothing will change.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread