Breaking News

Rana said:
When people give reasons for not liking Hillary it usually centers on all the negative things the press has written about her.
Is her stance on the Iraq war the only reason you dislike her or are there others. I am genuinely interested in your opinions, thanks
Click to expand...
I don't dislike Hillary. She's unquestionably the one closest to my views, from a policy standpoint, of the major candidates. Where I feel uncomfortable with Clinton is that her vote for the immoral Iraq war is a serious black mark on her judgment. A lot of innocent people died because of her bad judgment in regards to the Iraq war and I don't take that lightly. I am also uncomfortable with the political inbreeding she represents. In a time of change another Clinton probably isn't in our Natons best interest. 2016 is not 1996.

Having said that I don't have the irrational knee jerk hostility that many have towards her. I think if elected she would work hard to govern well. I just don't think she will be particularly great at moving this nation forward and leading the kinds of changes the American people want and need. She represents a continuance of the status quo and their are lots of problems with the current status quo. Clinton doesn't strike me as being an effectual politician in terms of being a transformational leader. Which is also my biggest area of disappointment with Barry. I had high hopes for him. He turned out to be....meh...average...and considering the huge shit hole he inherited from Bush and the irrational congressional opposition from the GOP, I think he's to be commended but he was not the transformational leader that this nation wanted and needed. So major disappointment there.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I don't dislike Hillary. She's unquestionably the one closest to my views, from a policy standpoint, of the major candidates. Where I feel uncomfortable with Clinton is that her vote for the immoral Iraq war is a serious black mark on her judgment. A lot of innocent people died because of her bad judgment in regards to the Iraq war and I don't take that lightly. I am also uncomfortable with the political inbreeding she represents. In a time of change another Clinton probably isn't in our Natons best interest. 2016 is not 1996.

Having said that I don't have the irrational knee jerk hostility that many have towards her. I think if elected she would work hard to govern well. I just don't think she will be particularly great at moving this nation forward and leading the kinds of changes the American people want and need. She represents a continuance of the status quo and their are lots of problems with the current status quo. Clinton doesn't strike me as being an effectual politician in terms of being a transformational leader. Which is also my biggest area of disappointment with Barry. I had high hopes for him. He turned out to be....meh...average...and considering the huge shit hole he inherited from Bush and the irrational congressional opposition from the GOP, I think he's to be commended but he was not the transformational leader that this nation wanted and needed. So major disappointment there.
Click to expand...

Thanks Mott, much appreciated
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Good point actually Desh...I have over my adult life voted for more Republicans than Democrats though I will qualify that Desh in that the Republicans I have voted for, unlike todays GOP, have largely been sane.
Click to expand...

Well, sorry Mott, but I could question Reagan's sanity ;)
 
Rana said:
When people give reasons for not liking Hillary it usually centers on all the negative things the press has written about her.
Is her stance on the Iraq war the only reason you dislike her or are there others. I am genuinely interested in your opinions, thanks
Click to expand...
LOL..I'll spare you this time...:)
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I don't dislike Hillary. She's unquestionably the one closest to my views, from a policy standpoint, of the major candidates. Where I feel uncomfortable with Clinton is that her vote for the immoral Iraq war is a serious black mark on her judgment. A lot of innocent people died because of her bad judgment in regards to the Iraq war and I don't take that lightly. I am also uncomfortable with the political inbreeding she represents. In a time of change another Clinton probably isn't in our Natons best interest. 2016 is not 1996.

Having said that I don't have the irrational knee jerk hostility that many have towards her. I think if elected she would work hard to govern well. I just don't think she will be particularly great at moving this nation forward and leading the kinds of changes the American people want and need. She represents a continuance of the status quo and their are lots of problems with the current status quo. Clinton doesn't strike me as being an effectual politician in terms of being a transformational leader. Which is also my biggest area of disappointment with Barry. I had high hopes for him. He turned out to be....meh...average...and considering the huge shit hole he inherited from Bush and the irrational congressional opposition from the GOP, I think he's to be commended but he was not the transformational leader that this nation wanted and needed. So major disappointment there.
Click to expand...

we had a chance to seize the opportunity with Sanders..It would be revolutionary ( in the American political sense) to throw out the plutocrats of which Hillary is unquestionably a part of. Those opportunities come around maybe once in a lifetime.

Instead we are gonna get more of the same idiotic identity politics, slow motion incrementalism to nowhere, hyper-partisan gridlock. *blech*
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I don't dislike Hillary. She's unquestionably the one closest to my views, from a policy standpoint, of the major candidates. Where I feel uncomfortable with Clinton is that her vote for the immoral Iraq war is a serious black mark on her judgment. A lot of innocent people died because of her bad judgment in regards to the Iraq war and I don't take that lightly. I am also uncomfortable with the political inbreeding she represents. In a time of change another Clinton probably isn't in our Natons best interest. 2016 is not 1996.

Having said that I don't have the irrational knee jerk hostility that many have towards her. I think if elected she would work hard to govern well. I just don't think she will be particularly great at moving this nation forward and leading the kinds of changes the American people want and need. She represents a continuance of the status quo and their are lots of problems with the current status quo. Clinton doesn't strike me as being an effectual politician in terms of being a transformational leader. Which is also my biggest area of disappointment with Barry. I had high hopes for him. He turned out to be....meh...average...and considering the huge shit hole he inherited from Bush and the irrational congressional opposition from the GOP, I think he's to be commended but he was not the transformational leader that this nation wanted and needed. So major disappointment there.
Click to expand...

This basically sums me up as well. Hillary is not a change agent - and things do need to be changed.

I think Hillary's flaws are the same ones Bill had - they're very alike. They are both politically expedient, say-anything politicians. I don't think either has a core. They both look at polls before making major decision. They're both pretty phony. I think Hillary's Iraq vote is indicative of that - that was the way the wind was blowing that week, so she voted in favor (and probably also w/ the idea that she wanted to be President, and didn't want to be seen as "weak" when the time came).

But I don't think she's evil or worthy of hate or dislike, at all - certainly not the vitriol that is leveled at her. And Bill was the same as her, and was a great President for the '90's. Who knows - maybe the best kind of President IS someone without much of a core, who governs by polls.

All that said, I have made up my mind that I will not vote for Hillary. I'm getting off the "lesser of 2 evils" train. Whenever I vote going forward, I want it to be a vote that I'm proud of, and can justify to my kids & people who know me as being a principled vote.
 
Thing1 said:
This basically sums me up as well. Hillary is not a change agent - and things do need to be changed.

I think Hillary's flaws are the same ones Bill had - they're very alike. They are both politically expedient, say-anything politicians. I don't think either has a core. They both look at polls before making major decision. They're both pretty phony. I think Hillary's Iraq vote is indicative of that - that was the way the wind was blowing that week, so she voted in favor (and probably also w/ the idea that she wanted to be President, and didn't want to be seen as "weak" when the time came).

But I don't think she's evil or worthy of hate or dislike, at all - certainly not the vitriol that is leveled at her. And Bill was the same as her, and was a great President for the '90's. Who knows - maybe the best kind of President IS someone without much of a core, who governs by polls.

All that said, I have made up my mind that I will not vote for Hillary. I'm getting off the "lesser of 2 evils" train. Whenever I vote going forward, I want it to be a vote that I'm proud of, and can justify to my kids & people who know me as being a principled vote.
Click to expand...

Thanks, appreciated as well.
 
Thing1 said:
This basically sums me up as well. Hillary is not a change agent - and things do need to be changed.

I think Hillary's flaws are the same ones Bill had - they're very alike. They are both politically expedient, say-anything politicians. I don't think either has a core. They both look at polls before making major decision. They're both pretty phony. I think Hillary's Iraq vote is indicative of that - that was the way the wind was blowing that week, so she voted in favor (and probably also w/ the idea that she wanted to be President, and didn't want to be seen as "weak" when the time came).

But I don't think she's evil or worthy of hate or dislike, at all - certainly not the vitriol that is leveled at her. And Bill was the same as her, and was a great President for the '90's. Who knows - maybe the best kind of President IS someone without much of a core, who governs by polls.

All that said, I have made up my mind that I will not vote for Hillary. I'm getting off the "lesser of 2 evils" train. Whenever I vote going forward, I want it to be a vote that I'm proud of, and can justify to my kids & people who know me as being a principled vote.
Click to expand...
have you voted 3rd party before? I gota tell you the principled method is most unsatisfying - if politically correct ( not PC) thing to do..

I went for Johnson last time -Obama lost me over his foreign polices, and it didn't matter - but it was odd having no skin in the game..
Still I wasn't going to vote for Romney, and Trump?? he would have to show me much more "presidentialist" type abilities then just his
"believe me" refrain..

But like they say; the lessor of 2 evils is still evil, and I applaud your principled stance
 
anatta said:
have you voted 3rd party before? I gota tell you the principled method is most unsatisfying - if politically correct ( not PC) thing to do..

I went for Johnson last time -Obama lost me over his foreign polices, and it didn't matter - but it was odd having no skin in the game..
Still I wasn't going to vote for Romney, and Trump?? he would have to show me much more "presidentialist" type abilities then just his
"believe me" refrain..

But like they say; the lessor of 2 evils is still evil, and I applaud your principled stance
Click to expand...

Thanks. I actually voted for Johnson last time, too. I was a huge Obama guy in '08 - I bought in. I think after the Bush years, I was ready for anyone who spoke w/ intelligence, and I really believed he would be an inspirational leader. Needless to say, he was a disappointment to me overall. I don't think he was a terrible President, but he didn't follow through on the overall promise of his campaign.

It was the 1st time I voted 3rd party. I used to think it was a wasted vote, and a cop out. I was wrong on that. There is no way we'll ever get past the 2-party system - which is no longer working - unless more people vote their conscience and at least try to make whatever small statement they can that they will no longer support it.

It all kind of bums me out. In a nation of 300 million, we should be able to do much, much better. This election in particular, with 2 candidates that have historically bad unfavorability ratings, should make everyone at least ask, "how did we get here?" And what can we do to change that.
 
1602_10153418729616696_6842476517045812717_n.jpg


She probably needed them to furnish that mansion, that they couldn't afford, after the 2008 elections.
 
Freedumb never met an urban legend he didn't embrace.

"A viral graphic said that Hillary Clinton was forced to return about $200,000 worth of furniture, artwork and china that she had stolen from the White House. The statement contains several inaccuracies.

The Clintons returned about $48,000 in furniture, and they paid the government about $86,000 for other items. Any way you count it, the $200,000 figure is too high. According to top ethics lawyers, it’s at least debatable -- and at worst hyperbolic -- to say the Clintons "stole" the items. A congressional investigation found poor tracking of ownership and final disposition of gifts, which makes it hard to speak definitively of wrongdoing. In fact, two items the Clintons returned were ultimately sent back to them. Finally, it’s worth making clear that the "force" they responded to was political pressure, not legal jeopardy.

Accusations of stealing are serious and require a high threshold of evidence, unmet by the charges in this over-the-top graphic. We rate the claim Mostly False."

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...viral-image-wrongly-accuses-clinton-stealing/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top