Five Reasons No Progressive Should Support Hillary Clinton

Right, but sometimes, at least in my case, the part I don't like can win out. Thinking, chuckling, of Rand Paul this time around (no way), and another guy that I rather liked last time, forget his name, Gary something, a republican, who I agreed with on some stuff and was put off by the rest - but it wasn't really an issue since I have still preferred Obama. I tailed off on that, but some of my appreciation is reforming itself (if only....)

Nods.

I'd probably end up spoiling my ballot a lot in the US.

Couldn't have voted for Obama the first time round - too far right for my liking ... and then he proceeded to slide further.

I didn't vote Obama in the primary, but once he had the nomination, I saw no real alternative. I felt the same about Bill Clinton, second time around and feel that way about Hillary.

The parties talk you into this when then sell "the world is going to end if the other guy wins!"

No vote is a perfectly good option. So is voting for the person who best represents your views, even if they are a fringe third party candidate. make the parties work for your vote.

that's an attitude/approach I'd like to see more of

He's too far right for me too. And then I got highly aggravated when he kept trying to compromise, starting out compromising. I could go on re things I'm unhappy about in his time in office, but, in a world gone mad, he is one of the saner folk to me.

I see the point, but one or two individuals doing it is tossing potential power into a waste basin. It needs to be a movement. I used to be quite politically involved, but am busy now 'stayin' alive', oh, and watching.

WOOPS! Thought he was a democrat. Obviously I dident know anything about him. Thanks Frank, I might have voted for him and had to commit hari cari.

He's a republican who appears to be to the left of many democrats.

At this time I dont believe their is such a thing as a liberal republican. Hell you can count the liberal democrats on one or two hands.

Holy cow Beth. I was thinking too young. I've got kids older than he is.

Democratic Support For Hillary Clinton Drops 15 Points, Poll Shows

by unapologeticliberal777Follow for unapologeticliberal777

Tweet
170 Comments / 170 New

In a stunning shift, in a new poll released on March 19, 2015, Democratic support for Hillary Clinton's anticipated presidential campaign is tanking amid growing controversy over her use of personal email when secretary of state, but most Democrats are for now sticking by their party's presumed candidate.

Support for Clinton has dropped a full 15 percentage points since mid-February among Democrats, with as few as 45 percent saying they would support her in the last week, according to a Reuters/Ipsos tracking poll.

Even Democrats who said they were not personally swayed one way or another by the email flap said that Clinton could fare worse because of it, if and when she launches her presidential campaign, a separate Reuters/Ipsos poll showed.

The online poll of 2,128 adults from March 10 to March 17 revealed that Americans, including two-thirds of Democrats, said they were aware of the controversy surrounding Clinton's decision to use her personal email rather than a government account, along with a personal server, when she was the top U.S. diplomat from 2009 to 2013.

More than a third of Democrats and 44 percent of political independents agreed that the email issue has hurt the former secretary of state politically.

"I admire the fact that she has been so strong on a lot of different things, she stands up for what she believes in, but I do think the emails will hurt her, unfortunately," said Patricia Peacock, 49, of Lewiston, Maine, who took part in the survey.

Clinton has tried to tamp down accusations that she used her personal email account to keep her records from public review, which would support an old political narrative that Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, are secretive and seek to play by a different set of rules.

The poll found that 46 percent of Democrats agreed there should be an independent review of all Clinton's emails to ensure she turned over everything that is work related. And 41 percent of Democrats said they supported the Republican-controlled congressional committee's effort to require Clinton to testify about the emails, the Reuters/Ipsos poll showed.

The poll found that half of Democrats said they thought Clinton was composed during the March 10 press conference, but 14 percent found her evasive and 17 percent said she avoided answering questions directly.

Survey respondent Tom Trevathan, 74, a retired math professor from Arkansas, said he was "less than happy" with Clinton's performance at the news conference.

"It reminds me of a history she has had not responding thoroughly to inquiries," Trevathan said. "If she would be more open about the situation, and show more leadership in saying what she did and why, I think it would be better."

The way Clinton has handled the issue of her emails is exactly why everyone in the party should question whether she can handle being the nominee. David Axelrod was on MSNBC for a week begging her to get out in front of the situation but it took her a week to do so. It's the 2008 campaign all over again.

The House is now going to subpoena her server and is pushing to have a third party look at every single email she deleted, all 50,000. Do you see the train wreck coming? I do - deleted emails about Benghazi and a whole host of other issues that she "accidently" deleted that will erupt in the fall of 2016.

The email issue, rightly or wrongly, is having a huge impact, clearly amongst even Democratic voters. It's time some other candidates jump in the nominating process because clearly Clinton is having issues again running her campaign.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

Huntsman seems a good candidate. I could vote for him against Hillary. Hillary is maybe even more a conservative than Huntsman.

Only as spoilers in the US voting system. I'd like third party candidates if there is a runoff if no candidate gets 50% of the vote.

I think born in 1960 is too old to be a relevant politician.

I want younger candidates across the board, with fewer political debts.

Like I said, I'd only want third parties if there was a run off if no candidate got 51% of the vote. I want a majority elected President, not a spoiler candidate with a plurality president. If you need a simpler explanation I'll draw it out for you with a crayon.

Have one election with anyone who wants to run. Then have a run off with the top two. And why are people still going to the polls? do it by mail.