To Those who would Vote for Hillary CLinton...

in_hiding79

HIllary sucks ass, Obama will win...he just has too!!

Get_Right

anotherclone wrote:

Here's the thing I don't understand. I've noticed that people are quick to say why they don't like someone. Be it you don't like someones lack of experience or whatever. But when pressed to say why they DO like someone, suddenly that's a bit harder to say. Easy to complain about what you don't like, hard to say something positive about what you do like.

I guess I mean, its easy to say Obama isn't who you feel can get us out of the foreign policy mess. But what makes you feel that Clinton is? I believe she actually only has a couple more years of working "experience" in office than Obama. Correct me if I'm wrong with that. How does that make her more experienced to solve foreign policy matters? Has she been in the trenches negotiating with the enemy herself?

few years? eight years in the white house, few years as a senator
and Bill by her side-yes I think that makes her a bit more qualifed than a rookie senator. An the jury is still out on Obama in my house-but my general feeling is he needs more experience on the federal level.

And I most certainly feel that the choices for democrats are not good-in terms of having a candidate that the nation can get behind.
As I have debated with MasterFramer, it will be tough for either to win-especially if McCain gets the GOP nomination.

Get_Right

in_hiding79 wrote:

HIllary sucks ass, Obama will win...he just has too!!

Thank you gorgeous for your insightful political analysis.

cornnifer

Get_Right wrote:

I respect your views, but disagree. I like Obama-he is a good candidate, and I like what I hear. Im not sure he is the guy I want cleaning up our foreign policy mess. But its irrelevant anyway as far as Im concerned.

i'm not trying to be a dick, but so far, here's what i've gathered from you:

A: Its completely acceptable to vote for clinton based solely on the fact that
she is a woman.

B: Its completely acceptable to overlook lies, slander, corruption,
underhandeness and dirty, deceitful campaiging, and embrace them as
presidential behaviors.

i present to the OP, and everyone else, here the typical hillary clinton supporter. Here's the profile, folks.

MasterFramer

Get_Right wrote:

See thats the point you all miss, I think they are all shady-thats a given for me in politics.

And your man Obama looked pretty shady standing next to ole Teddy.

Yeah yeah yeah all politicians are evil, pick the lessor of the two. Come on man...

cornnifer

Get_Right wrote:

few years? eight years in the white house, few years as a senator
and Bill by her side-yes I think that makes her a bit more qualifed than a rookie senator. An the jury is still out on Obama in my house-but my general feeling is he needs more experience on the federal level.

And I most certainly feel that the choices for democrats are not good-in terms of having a candidate that the nation can get behind.
As I have debated with MasterFramer, it will be tough for either to win-especially if McCain gets the GOP nomination.

Eight years in the white house is not experience. Sorry. The white house pastry chef has more years in the white house than that. Maybe we should all vote for the white house pastry chef. They have more "experience". Furthermore, as long as were being honest (hard, i know, for a clinton person) Obama actually has more years in an elected office than does cunton.

ledvedderman

cornnifer wrote:

Eight years in the white house is not experience. Sorry. The white house pastry chef has more years in the white house than that. Maybe we should all vote for the white house pastry chef. They have more "experience". Furthermore, as long as were being honest (hard, i know, for a clinton person) Obama actually has more years in an elected office than does cunton.

This is very true. I'm not knocking Get_Right at all, but do you think Laura Bush could run on experience if she were to run for President?

Get_Right

cornnifer wrote:

i'm not trying to be a dick, but so far, here's what i've gathered from you:

A: Its completely acceptable to vote for clinton based solely on the fact that
she is a woman.

B: Its completely acceptable to overlook lies, slander, corruption,
underhandeness and dirty, deceitful campaiging, and embrace them as
presidential behaviors.

i present to the OP, and everyone else, here the typical hillary clinton supporter. Here's the profile, folks.

A: Yes. I think that wanting to have a female in the white house simply because it may be good for the feminist cause is ok. Same is true for Obama. I think it would be good for our country to elect either one. A woman or a black in the white house would be good-put a crack in the ole boys network. Unless of course, they are totally incompetent-and I cant say that about either one.

B: While I think you are exaggerating quite a bit, I expect that from politicians. At least to a certain degree. I simply do not hold a grudge for whitewater or monica.

As far as being typical, I highly doubt that, but remember, you still dont know why I support her. All of your points are irrelevant to that.

MasterFramer

Get_Right wrote:

A: Yes. I think that wanting to have a female in the white house simply because it may be good for the feminist cause is ok. Same is true for Obama. I think it would be good for our country to elect either one. A woman or a black in the white house would be good-put a crack in the ole boys network. Unless of course, they are totally incompetent-and I cant say that about either one.

B: While I think you are exaggerating quite a bit, I expect that from politicians. At least to a certain degree. I simply do not hold a grudge for whitewater or monica.

As far as being typical, I highly doubt that, but remember, you still dont know why I support her. All of your points are irrelevant to that.

Bro the Clintons are part of the good ole boys network!!!

Get_Right

cornnifer wrote:

Eight years in the white house is not experience. Sorry. The white house pastry chef has more years in the white house than that. Maybe we should all vote for the white house pastry chef. They have more "experience". Furthermore, as long as were being honest (hard, i know, for a clinton person) Obama actually has more years in an elected office than does cunton.

ok so know you are comparing an oxford trained first lady who was intimately involved in her husbands presidency to a pastry chef-that is weak and is in no way analogous-you are just looking for baseless ways to attack her because you think she is dishonest.

And your right about Obama AT THE STATE LEVEL-hilary has been a senator longer and has what three times the federal experience.

MasterFramer

Not to mention there is something wrong when a country would vote a father, husband, son, wife as presidents.

Get_Right

ledvedderman wrote:

This is very true. I'm not knocking Get_Right at all, but do you think Laura Bush could run on experience if she were to run for President?

Your argument is at least logical.
Do you think laura bush was involved in her husbands presidency?
I dont and that makes a difference.

And we are talking about a bush here, so that automatically dumbs her down to being unelectable.

Get_Right

MasterFramer wrote:

Bro the Clintons are part of the good ole boys network!!!

I see why you say that.

Get_Right

MasterFramer wrote:

Yeah yeah yeah all politicians are evil, pick the lessor of the two. Come on man...

not that they are evil, but that there is a certain degree of manipulation and deception when its comes to politics- and that its a constant

maybe its because I live in NY and have lived through Cuomo and Guiliani.

cornnifer

MasterFramer wrote:

Not to mention there is something wrong when a country would vote a father, husband, son, wife as presidents.

Its a darn good thing hillary stands no chance in a general election. Otherwise i could easily see it. Bush sr. Slick Willy Clinton, Bush Jr., Billary Clinton, Jeb Bush, Chelsea Clinton. Shit, by the time she came around to it, Chelsea coud claim 16 YEARS WHITE HOUSE EXPERIENCE! She be a fucking shoe in.

cornnifer

Get_Right wrote:

not that they are evil, but that there is a certain degree of manipulation and deception when its comes to politics- and that its a constant

maybe its because I live in NY and have lived through Cuomo and Guiliani.

On one hand you have a "certain degree of manipulation" on the other hand you have the fucking clintons. Talk about outrageous comparisons.

ledvedderman

Get_Right wrote:

Your argument is at least logical.
Do you think laura bush was involved in her husbands presidency?
I dont and that makes a difference.

And we are talking about a bush here, so that automatically dumbs her down to being unelectable.

A lot of people criticize Hillary for the failure of Hillary-Care in the 90's. That was a great extent of her involvement with the Clinton White House, and soon after that the powers that be decided that she should have a smaller role in the administration.

Is it fair to criticize her because of the failure of her health care plan since she was so involved in the Presidency to run for President based on that experience?

anotherclone

Get_Right wrote:

few years? eight years in the white house, few years as a senator
and Bill by her side-yes I think that makes her a bit more qualifed than a rookie senator. An the jury is still out on Obama in my house-but my general feeling is he needs more experience on the federal level.

And I most certainly feel that the choices for democrats are not good-in terms of having a candidate that the nation can get behind.
As I have debated with MasterFramer, it will be tough for either to win-especially if McCain gets the GOP nomination.

So, being married to the former President counts as experience in solving foreign policy matters? How so?

I'm not trying to argue with you on a personal level, but I don't see how that logic adds up. I want you to try to explain it to me so I can see if your way. Honestly, I really mean that. I'm open to trying to see how that jives for you.

Seriously agree with you about McCain. I think he's going to be a tough one to beat.

Get_Right

anotherclone wrote:

So, being married to the former President counts as experience in solving foreign policy matters? How so?

I'm not trying to argue with you on a personal level, but I don't see how that logic adds up. I want you to try to explain it to me so I can see if your way. Honestly, I really mean that. I'm open to trying to see how that jives for you.

Seriously agree with you about McCain. I think he's going to be a tough one to beat.

I think Hilary was a bit more involved in policy making than your average first lady-people used to complain she was too involved!-and I was just adding that to her list of experience-it is just one piece of her CV. But yes I think her experience in the white house makes a difference, not huge one, but a difference.

But in any event, and as I have said, my reasons for supporting her really have nothing to do with all of this. Its personal.

It is going to be tough for the democrats to win. Nothwithstanding the fact that GWB was the worst president i recent history.

MasterFramer

ledvedderman wrote:

A lot of people criticize Hillary for the failure of Hillary-Care in the 90's. That was a great extent of her involvement with the Clinton White House, and soon after that the powers that be decided that she should have a smaller role in the administration.

Is it fair to criticize her because of the failure of her health care plan since she was so involved in the Presidency to run for President based on that experience?

I could care less about any of her positions... she's dirty and she is divisive. Lets give someone that isn't quite the institution the Clinton's are a chance. Republicans HATE the Clintons... republicans and independents are voting for Obama when they can. Why wouldn't we all want someone that actually has a chance to bring people together and make some progress. Look at what has happened with this divisive administration we have had for the past 8 years. I can't understand ONE good reason to give Hillary your vote...

Just read this... she's already saying one thing doing another. So shady...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012902998_pf.html