Why not Hiilary Clinton for president?

Re: Why not Hiilary Clinton for president?


She tries to play both ends against the middle. She attempts to be a centrist like Bill but doesn't have the charisma or charm to pull it off.

Her speaking voice is annoying and grates upon my ears; she doesn't have the comfortable style she needs in order to be a good orator.

Even more so, the majority of Republicans are dead-set against her, and many Liberals such as myself are as well, because she's more than half a Republican anways.

Even more so, I don't think she's electable. At all. It would be a waste of time and money. We're far better off running Wesley Clark or Barak Obama. And I will fight against her nomination tooth and nail.

Cycloptichorn

Hillary will crack down on flag burners but good.

Re: Why not Hiilary Clinton for president?


You do say "very seldom" as opposed to "never," but I've given my reasons so often that I hesitate to say them all yet again. If you do a search for posts by me containing the word "Hillary," you'll find them (and there has to be in the multiple pages' worth by now).

Cycloptichorn summarizes things pretty well. I place more emphasis on the second part of what he says -- I don't think I would mind a Hillary Clinton presidency as much as he would, but I am extremely skeptical of her ability to get there in the first place. She carries way too much baggage and is way too polarizing.

Re: Why not Hiilary Clinton for president?


Doesn't have the charisma or charm , Her speaking voice is annoying and grates upon my ears;
You have got to have better reasons than that top disqualify her.

Question is she smart enough. Does she have the experience? Do not agree wuith her political thinking and policies. Those are valid reasons to not vote for her. Not Charisma or the sound of her voice.

Re: Why not Hiilary Clinton for president?


Sorry, but I think that this has more to do with whether or not she will be elected than most anything else.

Hillary isn't stupid, she would muddle through the job the way a lot of presidents do. But she isn't a leader. She won't unite people, bring them together. She won't even unite the Dems, let alone all the people in the US.

I forgot my best reason! Here it is:

Can we please, please, have a president who isn't related to someone who has been president in the last 20 years? Our system isn't supposed to work this way...

Cycloptichorn

Where is Hillary on immigration control? I seem to recall that she takes a soft position.

I think that the immigration issue could be a major determinative in the election.

sozobe

Do I read you correctly? You do not want her to be a candidate because you believe she could not win.

If elected do you think she has the qualifications and experience needed?

I'd vote for that kid when he/she grows up.

Hillary goes conservative on immigration


By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is staking out a position on illegal immigration that is more conservative than President Bush, a strategy that supporters and detractors alike see as a way for the New York Democrat to shake the "liberal" label and appeal to traditionally Republican states.
Mrs. Clinton ?- who is tagged as a liberal because of her plan for nationalized health care and various remarks during her husband's presidency ?- is taking an increasingly vocal and hard-line stance on an issue that ranks among the highest concerns for voters, particularly Republicans.







"Bush has done everything he can to leave the doors wide open," said Robert Kunst, president of HillaryNow.com, a group dedicated to drafting Mrs. Clinton to run for president. "Hillary is the only one taking a position on immigration. She will win that issue hands down."
In an interview last month on Fox News, Mrs. Clinton said she does not "think that we have protected our borders or our ports or provided our first responders with the resources they need, so we can do more and we can do better."
In an interview on WABC radio, she said: "I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants."
"Clearly, we have to make some tough decisions as a country, and one of them ought to be coming up with a much better entry-and-exit system so that if we're going to let people in for the work that otherwise would not be done, let's have a system that keeps track of them," she said.
Unlike many pro-business Republicans, Mrs. Clinton also has castigated Americans for hiring illegal aliens.
"People have to stop employing illegal immigrants," she said. "I mean, come up to Westchester, go to Suffolk and Nassau counties, stand on the street corners in Brooklyn or the Bronx. You're going to see loads of people waiting to get picked up to go do yard work and construction work and domestic work."
In contrast, Mr. Bush backs a guest-worker program that allows foreign citizens entry into the United States and an eventual path to citizenship. One of the president's first acts after his re-election was to push for it again, before both domestic and foreign audiences.
Mrs. Clinton's position has been noticed by Rep. Tom Tancredo, a Colorado Republican and leading proponent of stricter immigration controls.
"She's not a dumb woman," Tancredo spokesman Carlos Espinoza said. "She's got a great liberal base, and she realizes there's no better way to draw in more conservative voters. She has really come out to the forefront on that."
With the vast majority of Americans in polls viewing illegal immigration as a serious problem, Mrs. Clinton also could make deep inroads in the conservative red states, especially those in the South that the Democrats have largely written off in recent presidential campaigns.
As the immigration issue has entered the debate over national security, the New York senator ?- representing the state hardest hit by the September 11 attacks ?- is uniquely positioned to take a firm stance on the issue, to the delight of some conservatives.
"More than any other leader of either political party, U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton has been focusing on immigration reform and border security ?- taking hard-line positions that appeal to frustrated Republicans in a move that could guarantee her enough support in red states to win the White House in 2008," conservative author Carl Limbacher wrote recently on NewsMax.com, which has chronicled many of Mrs. Clinton's statements on immigration.
Mr. Espinoza said the former first lady has become particularly vocal on the issue during and after the November election, in which Democrats performed so poorly.
"I think she's realizing how much this issue has grown since 9/11," he said. "If you talked about it before then, you were just a flat-out racist. Now it's this huge issue."
Moving to the right of even some Republicans, the former first lady told WABC she favors "at least a visa ID, some kind of entry-and-exit ID. And ... perhaps, although I'm not a big fan of it, we might have to move towards an ID system even for citizens."
Jennifer Duffy with the Cook Political Report said a conservative stance on immigration would be wise in the event Mrs. Clinton runs for president in 2008.
"Democrats are asking if it's really smart to nominate another Northeastern Democrat, and she is a Northeastern Democrat," she said. "It's probably smart to blur that perception a little."
But not everyone sees it as a wise a move.
"I think she is trying to move to the right, and immigration is one of the ways she is using to do it," said political strategist Dick Morris, who has a history of working with former President Clinton.
"I think this is a particularly misguided choice on her part, however, since two-thirds of Bush's margin this time was due to his closure of the Democratic margin of victory among Hispanics."
Mr. Bush lost the vote of Hispanics ?- many of whom are wary of tougher immigration laws ?- by only 10 percentage points this year, whereas he lost it by 20 percentage points four years ago, Mr. Morris said.
Mr. Kunst, whose Web site supporting Mrs. Clinton got thousands of hits daily right after Mr. Bush's re-election, said Mrs. Clinton is now the strongest Democrat for 2008 in terms of both popularity and financing.
Immigration is a good issue for her even as, he hopes, she holds onto her liberal credentials.
"It's not just about cheap labor anymore," Mr. Kunst said. "It's about security. We have to do something about it."


Hillary goes conservative on immigration


By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is staking out a position on illegal immigration that is more conservative than President Bush, a strategy that supporters and detractors alike see as a way for the New York Democrat to shake the "liberal" label and appeal to traditionally Republican states.
Mrs. Clinton ?- who is tagged as a liberal because of her plan for nationalized health care and various remarks during her husband's presidency ?- is taking an increasingly vocal and hard-line stance on an issue that ranks among the highest concerns for voters, particularly Republicans.







"Bush has done everything he can to leave the doors wide open," said Robert Kunst, president of HillaryNow.com, a group dedicated to drafting Mrs. Clinton to run for president. "Hillary is the only one taking a position on immigration. She will win that issue hands down."
In an interview last month on Fox News, Mrs. Clinton said she does not "think that we have protected our borders or our ports or provided our first responders with the resources they need, so we can do more and we can do better."
In an interview on WABC radio, she said: "I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants."
"Clearly, we have to make some tough decisions as a country, and one of them ought to be coming up with a much better entry-and-exit system so that if we're going to let people in for the work that otherwise would not be done, let's have a system that keeps track of them," she said.
Unlike many pro-business Republicans, Mrs. Clinton also has castigated Americans for hiring illegal aliens.
"People have to stop employing illegal immigrants," she said. "I mean, come up to Westchester, go to Suffolk and Nassau counties, stand on the street corners in Brooklyn or the Bronx. You're going to see loads of people waiting to get picked up to go do yard work and construction work and domestic work."
In contrast, Mr. Bush backs a guest-worker program that allows foreign citizens entry into the United States and an eventual path to citizenship. One of the president's first acts after his re-election was to push for it again, before both domestic and foreign audiences.
Mrs. Clinton's position has been noticed by Rep. Tom Tancredo, a Colorado Republican and leading proponent of stricter immigration controls.
"She's not a dumb woman," Tancredo spokesman Carlos Espinoza said. "She's got a great liberal base, and she realizes there's no better way to draw in more conservative voters. She has really come out to the forefront on that."
With the vast majority of Americans in polls viewing illegal immigration as a serious problem, Mrs. Clinton also could make deep inroads in the conservative red states, especially those in the South that the Democrats have largely written off in recent presidential campaigns.
As the immigration issue has entered the debate over national security, the New York senator ?- representing the state hardest hit by the September 11 attacks ?- is uniquely positioned to take a firm stance on the issue, to the delight of some conservatives.
"More than any other leader of either political party, U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton has been focusing on immigration reform and border security ?- taking hard-line positions that appeal to frustrated Republicans in a move that could guarantee her enough support in red states to win the White House in 2008," conservative author Carl Limbacher wrote recently on NewsMax.com, which has chronicled many of Mrs. Clinton's statements on immigration.
Mr. Espinoza said the former first lady has become particularly vocal on the issue during and after the November election, in which Democrats performed so poorly.
"I think she's realizing how much this issue has grown since 9/11," he said. "If you talked about it before then, you were just a flat-out racist. Now it's this huge issue."
Moving to the right of even some Republicans, the former first lady told WABC she favors "at least a visa ID, some kind of entry-and-exit ID. And ... perhaps, although I'm not a big fan of it, we might have to move towards an ID system even for citizens."
Jennifer Duffy with the Cook Political Report said a conservative stance on immigration would be wise in the event Mrs. Clinton runs for president in 2008.
"Democrats are asking if it's really smart to nominate another Northeastern Democrat, and she is a Northeastern Democrat," she said. "It's probably smart to blur that perception a little."
But not everyone sees it as a wise a move.
"I think she is trying to move to the right, and immigration is one of the ways she is using to do it," said political strategist Dick Morris, who has a history of working with former President Clinton.
"I think this is a particularly misguided choice on her part, however, since two-thirds of Bush's margin this time was due to his closure of the Democratic margin of victory among Hispanics."
Mr. Bush lost the vote of Hispanics ?- many of whom are wary of tougher immigration laws ?- by only 10 percentage points this year, whereas he lost it by 20 percentage points four years ago, Mr. Morris said.
Mr. Kunst, whose Web site supporting Mrs. Clinton got thousands of hits daily right after Mr. Bush's re-election, said Mrs. Clinton is now the strongest Democrat for 2008 in terms of both popularity and financing.
Immigration is a good issue for her even as, he hopes, she holds onto her liberal credentials.
"It's not just about cheap labor anymore," Mr. Kunst said. "It's about security. We have to do something about it."

Hillary Clinton voted to authorize the invasion of Iraq, and then compounded her error by explaining her vote in such a way that called into question her judgment, if not her sanity. Furthermore, as far as I can tell, she still supports the war in Iraq.

In comparison to that, her shameful support of a constitutional amendment banning flag burning is but a minor faux pas.

Yes, that's correct. I don't think the Democrats should mess around with a candidate who can't win -- and I think that unless the Republican opponent is a lame duck, she can't win. That's not a minor quibble, that's a very serious problem.

To take another example, I like Russ Feingold a great deal (a lot more than Hillary) but I don't think he can win. Therefore, I don't want him to be the Democratic nominee.

In terms of Hillary's experience, except for the first lady bit it's all been in New York. That's fine, but her popularity there says very very little about how she would do nationwide.

Again, if she does get the Democratic nomination, I will vote for her. But I am fervently hoping she does not get the nomination, because I think her nomination would ensure a Democratic loss and I don't think that's good for the country.

sozobe
That it seems is the prevailing reason. There is no question that if everyone will not support her candidacy because they feel she can't win.There is no doubt she won't, it is a self fulfilling prophecy.

Do you have a problem with this?

Cycloptichorn

I know what you mean. I've researched this pretty thoroughly though and I remain convinced that Hillary should not be the Democratic nominee. So if you have 1) a self-fulfilling prophecy vs. 2) knowingly encouraging a Democratic loss. Do you ignore the second just because you want to avoid the first?

I'll continue to research and read and talk to people and pay close attention to which way the wind is blowing and my mind may well change. Right now, I think her candidacy is a terrible idea.

Cycloptichorn

What I am still looking for are reasons why Hillary Clinton should not be president. "Qualifications ".

If that reasoning prevailed in 48 Truman would never have been elected.

I already gave you a long list of reasons why she should not be present; and yes, her lack of charisma and poor oratory abilities are a large part of this.

As for qualifications, as Joe Nation said, her support for the Iraq war disqualifies her from being the Democratic presidential nominee in my opinion.

Cycloptichorn

When Truman was elected, he was the incumbent president of the United States. I can think of no better qualification for the office of president of the United States.

Hillary Clinton is a socialist, for one thing, the most important thing for my reason of not wanting her to be president. She talks out of both sides of her mouth, she is a firm believer in "win by any means necessary', AND she has proven several times that she can be walked on by a man. She isn't strong enough mentally to run this country. I'm not saying she isn't intelligent enough, she's not strong enough.

Clinton-Obama Ticket Stirs Fear in GOP