Why Do YOU Oppose Senator Clinton? Again, Forget Groupthink

[CorpGovActivist]

Dear HRC Opposer,

Why do *YOU* oppose Senator Clinton's bid to be the Democratic nominee? Forget groupthink, lemming memes, sheeple herding, and all other forms of collective behavior. What's YOUR principal reason for seeking another nominee to carry the banner into the General Election?

Thanks for registering your opinion.

- Dave

[Hepburn]

1. OTHER:

My choice is: All of the above. Bottom line ~~ I do NOT trust Hillary Clinton and see her as Bush Lite and a corporate shill who will lose to any of the Repiggies who are running...including Ron Paul.

JMHO

[CorpGovActivist]

9. Scottie Owners...

... are a strange breed.

:toast:

- Dave

[Hepburn]

41. Hootman, Fellow DUer!

That we are indeed. Me small lassie would agree with thee!

:hi:

[CorpGovActivist]

74. Hootman, Yeself!

We've had one in our family for decades now, and bury them lovingly with bagpipe music playing!

; )

- Dave

[niceypoo]

14. The republican candidates are all basket cases

and all of them are running as Bush clones who want the war to go on forever. Which ever democrat gets the nomination will win. All of our candidates are corporate, it is the nature of our system. It is the only way they can get enough money to be competitive. The problem is systemic and only public financing of elections will take the corporate money out of it. Until that happens we are stuck with the corporate bribery system we have now. If we had public financing of elections, Kucinich would most likely be the front runner and people wouldn't bother talking about such shallow litmus tests as 'electability.'

[Hepburn]

42. Soooooooo.....

....if others are supposedly corporate shills, too, that excuses Hillary being one??

(I think not.)

[mckeown1128]

66. 300 million people....we should not have royal families...

In any other country when a president or prime minister uses their influence to put their wife or child into office we call it tyranny. They influence th media and other politicians to get the momentum to win and we call it democracy.

[2hip]

77. You're being polite

"War-mongering Corporate Whore" is the term my household uses in reference to H. Clinton. We regularly crush her head when we see her on TV.




              Edwards '08 tees!

[MonkeyFunk]

2. one of these days

you'll post something positive about a Democrat.

[CorpGovActivist]

4. Have Many Times, My Friend

:hug:

- Dave

[Zueda]

3. Other...for all of the above.

Also...Which former president are you refering to here?...

"I believe that she carried too much water for the former President to advance her own ambitions"

I beleive she carried water for the last couple presidents.

[CorpGovActivist]

5. Hmmmm...

... maybe that one should be left as is, just to see if others amplify on the point.

- Dave

[Alexander]

47. Seconded.

[cali]

6. Many of the above, though I went with her IWR

as a baseline. But there's more. I've never forgotten Travelgate and her imperious behavior in that. I've never forgotten the accounts of how arrogant and tone deaf she was while heading up the healthcare taskforce. I don't like the way she's campaigning. She's very close to being obscured by Bill. I think the Clintons have long been involved with underhanded crap- think Norman Hsu and other big donors. I could go on. Lord, how I could go on.

[MH1]

7. Other - What cali said.

[CorpGovActivist]

8. There, There...

... have some tea and a nice biscuit.

: )

- Dave

[havocmom]

10. Yep

HRC is not the best we can offer.

[riverwalker]

11. her "hardest decision"

Not bothering to read the NIE on Iraq before making "the hardest decision I'll ever make". It was not "hard" enough to inspire her to spend several hours obtaining the facts before voting on IWR. How about making a few phone calls to any one of many connections made during the frickin' 8 years as First Lady? Hell, old ladies like me, armed with an old computer knew more about the NIE and reality of Iraq's threat than she did. I am convinced she DID know the truth, and voted for the war anyway. And that is why I will always despise her.

[CorpGovActivist]

13. Little "old ladies like me, armed with an old computer"

:rofl:

A toast!

:toast:

"To little old ladies, like you, armed with an old computer!"

- Dave

[Virginian]

23. Me too.

Hell, old ladies like me, armed with an old computer and a slow dial-up internet connecction knew more about the NIE and reality of Iraq's threat than she did.

But I have to admit, I had the advantage of reading the posts here on DU.

[Lugnut]

40. I may as well pile on.

A toast to us little old ladies armed with computers who knew more about the NIE and Iraq than our congresspersons who should have known more than we did. I'm not even sure that's a legitimate sentence. :toast:

[CorpGovActivist]

75. GRANNY FIGHT!!!

:rofl:

:hug:

- Dave

[RaleighNCDUer]

12. Other. She owns just one issue, abortion rights, and I am not a

one issue voter. What good is it to put a safe abortion rights judge on the SC, if that justice agrees with the right on privacy, civil rights, 4th amendment, and all the other issues she's shown to be willing to compromise on?

[CorpGovActivist]

82. Thanks for Taking a Larger View n/t

[dkf]

15. I believe her core motivation is to keep and retain power.

I think she will use any tactic, especially dirty ones to win. She will use our own prejudices and faults and the worst in us as she sees fit instead of asking us to be better people.

[CorpGovActivist]

84. Thanks! n/t

[madrchsod]

16. she believes that the power of the state is the agent of change

and i disagree with her on that issue.

[CorpGovActivist]

17. You Dirty...

... libertarian, you!

: )

- Dave

[hulklogan]

18. She does not support full marriage equality for GLBT Americans. n/t

[CorpGovActivist]

20. Have You Seen the Candidates' Videotaped Responses...

... at the VisibleVote forum, sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign, and LOGO?

http://visiblevote08.logoonline.com/

Each candidate who appeared has archived videos in the middle of the main page.

For me, this is just one key issue on which I could not find common ground with her, once I started actually reading her policy positions (such as they are).

Best,

- Dave

[sonroadera]

19. Her decisions seem to be based on the results of polls and advisors

She has no spine.

[CorpGovActivist]

24. Welcome to DU!

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

- Dave

[DiamondJay]

21. i'm against dyansties

i just don't wanna see Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton, its not good for our democracy, and discourages young people from ever wanting to be prez cuz they know that only the oligarchy will ever get there

[CorpGovActivist]

99. Welcome to DU!

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

- Dave

[Virginian]

22. She is in favor of raising the H-1b quotas.

She wants to bring in twice as many high tech employees from South Asia to take jobs that Americans DO want.

I would like to see a limit on the number of non-citizens who can work on US government contracts. With the economy the way it is, we need to employ more people who are already here. Some of these contracts are awarded to companies that are 75% or more non-citizens. I would like to see that percentage reversed so that US Government contracts require at least 75% US citizenship.

There is a lot of money being made here. In one of the jobs I had, the contracting company gets about 50% of the money paid for each employee. That means that if the contract pays $100k to the company per employee, the employee only gets $50k, after the administrative costs, the company makes a healthy profit. The more contract employees, the greater the profit. The owners of that small business could have retired in luxury after just that one three-year contract.

One of the reasons for hiring a contractor over hiring an employee is accounting.
The money paid to the contracting company for the contract employee is listed as the purchase of an asset on the books, whereas, if the same or less money had been put towards hiring an employee, that would be listed as a liability.

In that job, one of the contractors actually refused to work with me and told me to send him one of my newer co-workers to work with. The new guy wasn't even working on my project. I wasn't sure if he preferred the other guy because he was MALE or because he was Indian.
In the next job, I needed data in a specific format from a contract employee. I could not get him to put it in the correct format and had to get a MALE co-worker to ask for it before he would deliver what I needed.
That was just two examples, there were more.
Bring back the Equal Rights Amendment, we might need it.

[Virginian]

37. But, if she wins the Democratic nomination,

I will vote for her because she is a far better choice than any of the Republicans.
I would just rather have someone else as our candidate.

[Occam Bandage]

25. Three reasons.

1. I prefer to vote for a candidate who did not support the IWR.
2. I believe she is weakest in the general election.
3. I believe eight years of Obama will be more productive than eight of Clinton; her polarization will not disappear come December.

[CorpGovActivist]

79. Occam's Aftershave!

Thanks! I love your screenname.

- Dave

[CorpGovActivist]

26. In Much Less Time...

... this poll surpassed the number of voters than the supporters' poll, where the leading answer is "electability."

Interesting trendlines.

- Dave

[CorpGovActivist]

43. About 50% More Votes Here Than in the Support Poll n/t

[Nimrod2005]

27. I dislike the person Hillary.

[Strawman]

28. I think her "pragmatism" makes her too accomodating to conservative ideas

That all of the insiders and lobbyists and corporate media elites have convinced her are "mainstream." My sense is that she is a good person and, my hope is that as president there is a buried idealist that might re-emerge. It's too much of an insider's game for people like her and Bill and James Carville and Karl Rove and Mary Matalin. It's not that they don't have convictions, and I'm sure they think they are doing what is necessary to accomplish good things, but I just think they get wrapped up in all these little Washington intrigues that at the end of the day don't matter and are tiresome to an ordinary citizen like me. At the end of the day, I don't feel like she would represent me as well as someone like John Edwards. Her and Bill will try to triangulate just to the left of the Republicans to maximize their appeal to voters and people that write big checks. There may be a strong strategic case to be made for that approach. I'm just tired of it. I'm tired of the Third Way. I want the liberal way. The way that gave us a stable middle class before Reagan unleashed the type of predatory capitalism that has been the status quo for the last 25 years.

[cosmik debris]

29. I promised my Mother I would NEVER vote for HRC

I will not break that promise.

[CorpGovActivist]

102. Are You John McCain?

:rofl:

- Dave

[beachmom]

30. I picked other:

1. She is not honest oftentimes, and I don't trust what she says because of this.

2. She has not been a teamplayer for the Dem party, nor has her husband. They were silent during most of the Bush years (even praising him!), were not only not particularly helpful for Gore or Kerry, but often undermined their campaigns. Hillary piling on against Kerry during The Joke confirmed to me that they don't care about the party, just themselves, since this was one week before a midterm election, and her betrayal gave the story another day of negative coverage on Kerry instead of negative coverage on the disasterous Bush presidency and Republican corruption. Ditto Bill Clinton's smear attacks on Obama right now, possibly alienating swaths of our Dem base for a short term gain for his wife.

3. She was too cautious in the Senate, and did not show leadership on any of the big issues of our day. She did not oppose Bush vehemently. She didn't go out on a limb for a great cause. She only did what was safe.

4. I oppose dynasties, and think Bush/Clinton should end. That is not what our country is about.

5. Torture. Extraordinary renditions began during the Clinton administration. Because of this, I am not certain Hillary will end it (see #1 to why her reassurances she will fall on deaf ears for me).

6. Iraq. Because she is so cautious, I think she will be bullied into staying there for a very long time.

7. Secrecy in her health care initiative in '93 also scares me. I want open government, not secret government. She also was stubborn and wouldn't listen to what Senators were telling her, on how to compromise so that it would pass. Has she really changed enough not to show this stubborness again?

8. She is not willing to admit mistakes. I see no humility to her at all. Haven't we had enough of presidents who refuse to admit when they make a mistake?

9. I fear that the authentic Hillary Clinton made an appearance at the debate the other night, completely nasty to Obama while enjoying every minute of it. I fear that Taylor Marsh's blog represents what Hillary really thinks deep down.

10. Bill Clinton back in the White House. It will be a CIRCUS, guys.


I am different from many here, in that I am less critical of some of Clinton's policies in the '90s. The issue for me is character and moral principles. The Clintons (that's who we're voting for, not just Hillary) have shown they will lie when it serves their purposes. I am so TIRED of being lied to after 8 years of Bush. I want honesty.

[CorpGovActivist]

109. Thank You for Such a Thoughtful Response! n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

31. She's a neo-lib and an opportunist seeking power for the sake of power.

She operates under the "The winning is everything" principle which trumps every other principle she may have.

Fortunately, she shows no interest in winning my vote, and I have no interest in giving it to her.

[Jed Dilligan]

32. All of the above, plus

I think the extreme nastiness here is mostly coming from her (self-described) supporters. To me, the hardcore rank-and-filers represent the soul of the campaign. Having criticized both her and Obama at different times, I can tell you that the reactions from each camp are quite different...

[CorpGovActivist]

36. You Might Search on...

... "griefers" and "griefing" in the GD section.

- Dave

[Jed Dilligan]

39. I read that one

I can't search yet but I think my paycheck's coming today (1st in several mos.)

Yeah, it's definitely griefing going on. Does Hillary have anything to offer me as a candidate? I wouldn't know, because as soon as anyone questions her anointment, they get griefed.

[CorpGovActivist]

44. What's the New Job? n/t

[formernaderite]

33. i couldn't help myself

i voted that we'd already repaid her with the senate seat...lol no but seriously, the clintons triangulation and dismissal of the issues that concern progressives was emblematic ofhis white house years. Do I need more? NOOOO thanks. I also find the whole nepotistic approach to nominating family members into higher office abhorrent. I criticize the right when they do it..and I think the public kinda finds it distasteful as well. Do I think hillary is electable in the general? NOOOO, I think she's alienated too many people, and the way she's carrying on with Obama will just alienate the rest.

[CorpGovActivist]

34. I Couldn't Help Myself, Either...

... which is why it was a choice.

; )

- Dave

[crawfish]

35. I don't trust her.

She tells us she'll end the war in Iraq, but she never voted against it. She tells us she'll reform health care, but she receives more money from HMO companies than anybody else.

I believe her top motivation is power. She might do some good things, but those are not her primary purpose, and whatever might conflict with that purpose will be sacrificed. I just cannot trust somebody like that.

[CorpGovActivist]

115. Thanks!

Welcome to DU!

- Dave

[Az_lefty]

38. you need an "all of the above" answer.

plus being very nasty and narcissistic.

[CorpGovActivist]

51. Life Is All about Choices *wink* n/t

[Raine]

45. Other ... All of the above. nt

x( :thumbsdown:

[CorpGovActivist]

50. What a Mug!

:rofl:

All bunched up and scrunchy, like someone gave you pickled spinach to eat.

- Dave

[Raine]

56. yup

:D

[mathewsleep]

46. other

i think she's to divisive. not her fault. but she'd have a hard time getting things down due to the hatred against her.

[CorpGovActivist]

110. Thanks! n/t

[hfojvt]

48. Why isn't there an option for "I don't"?

Then the admins could tombstone the traitors who select it. :evilgrin:


I hope I don't get tombstoned for making this joke :hide:

[CorpGovActivist]

49. All I Can Say Is...

1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grbSQ6O6kbs">Bring out yer dead!

2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsJcYed0fyw">Pies lesu Domine dona eis requiem.

- Dave

[hfojvt]

54. at least the first link did not lead

here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=7372076#7375430

[CorpGovActivist]

55. That's Hilarious! Missed That One! n/t

[Norwood]

52. Other

-Shes too cozy with corporate interests
-Her voting record is very suspect(Flag burning, Iran vote, etc.)
-She will lose the general election
-She will continue the country's gradual move to the right
-Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton...No thanks
-Shes DLC, I want a liberal president not a left leaning republican
-I hate the fact that her campaign and the media christened her the nominee before the primaries even started. To me it seems like she feels shes entitled to it and doesn't have to actually earn it.

I think many people here seriously underestimate just how disliked she is around the country. Shes the only candidate that will that can really fire up the republican base.

[CorpGovActivist]

106. Thanks!

I think you hit the nail on the head, and pounded it in flush and clean. A rout!

- Dave

[democrat2thecore]

53. Other: I *DO NOT* Trust the Clinton's - no way - no more -nt

[Laurab]

57. I chose "Can't win the GE," but really it's all of the above,

and much more. And almost everyday something new gets added to the list. The way she is conducting her campaign sickens me.

Last night, Stephen Colbert showed a few clips from the SC Dem debate, and announced the winner to be "The Republicans", and I agree with him. When someone will do absolutely anything to win, it scares me.

[CorpGovActivist]

59. Clintons, Categorical Imperative; Categorical Imperative, Clintons

If it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander. And you can bet the GOP is taking a good hard gander at what the Clintons are doing to redefine what's "OK to do" in primary politics for the general.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Kant">Immanuel Kant is my favorite philosopher. A gross oversimplification of his concept of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative">categorical imperative: a secularization of The Golden Rule.

- Dave

[Laurab]

67. I actually read your link for once!

Yes, they are lowering (or raising, depending how you look at it), the bar for primary politics. I saw the word "moral" a lot on the wiki page. It is probably the lack of a moral compass, at least in what they do, that bothers me more than anything.

Did you get my email about not being able to post without my email being shown? Did I mess something up?

[CorpGovActivist]

92. I'll Fix That for You Later This Evening

Thanks for letting me know.

- Dave

[CorpGovActivist]

58. 91 Votes Here, Only 56 Votes in the Support Clinton Poll ...

... and I can't help but wonder what that means for "electability," in the GE.

- Dave

[THUNDER HANDS]

60. clinton fatigue

I want this country to elect someone not of the bush-clinton families.

[CorpGovActivist]

95. CFS n/t

[ZinZen]

61. All of the above

and Bill's co-opting the nomination with distortions and lies has lead me to believe that the Clintons are all gaining power for themselves and to hell with whoever gets in their way. I voted for Bill twice by the way, and had fond memories of him. Not anymore. I am not a blind Obama supporter, (I just committed to his campaign a week before Iowa). I cannot believe what selfish liars the Clintons are. That disturbs me to my very core and it should every other rational Indy or Dem. So I just hope Obama or Edwards wins. Those are the only two who will get my vote.

[CorpGovActivist]

111. Thanks!

Very well said.

- Dave

[wisteria]

62. Other.

We need new blood in the Democrat party. I for one do not want to go back in time and relive the old Clinton years. Frankly, I don't believe you can go back a relive what some seem to think were the glory days. The had their time to serve our Country, it is time for an honest and fresh start. I don't want to see the old crowd re-instilled in the White House. I don't want to see Terry McAulliffe's face on TV or hear Carville rant on about how wonderful the Clinton's are. I don't want to hear about more Clinton shady deals or more nights in the Lincoln bedroom given as a gift to those offering big donations to the Clinton's. I don't want to hear about another Rich like pardon, or White Water or Vince Foster again. I want a new invigorated party. I think it is time to get rid of the cobwebs. And, since all of our leading candiates's positions are similar I don't think we would be missing out on much with Senator Clinton not in the White House.

[CorpGovActivist]

108. Thank You!

Nicely said.

- Dave

[some guy]

63. Moi?

I didn't like the Bill Clinton years all that much. I think the country continued drifting to fascist empire and decline. I think an HRC Presidency would continue that trend, assuming the empire doesn't completely collapse in the next dozen months.

I think we're past the tipping point and collapse is inevitable, but it would be nice to see someone at least try to stop it, or prepare for the hard landing and aftermath.

[CorpGovActivist]

64. Vous!

Merci.

- Dave

[LWolf]

65. For various reasons:

I don't trust her. I haven't trusted her since I first met her on that interesting 60 minutes appearance she did with BC when he was running against George I.

I don't like the way she won't take a clearcut stand on key issues.

I don't like the way she deflects pointed questions, or specific discussions, by cheerleading Democrats and redirecting attention to "The Republicans." Political sleight of hand.

I don't like the IWR vote, the Patriot Act vote, the war funding votes, the Kyl/lieberman vote, or the reasoning she gives behind those votes.

I don't like her relationship with corporate donors; I think she'll serve their interests before mine.

I don't like some of the people running her campaign.

I don't like her relationship with Wal Mart.

I don't like the way she has tried to manipulate the delegates in question due to inner-party conflict.

Those reasons are enough to keep her "off my table."

[CorpGovActivist]

104. Thank You!

Very well said.

- Dave

[Armstead]

68. All of the Above -- Plus just sick of being disappointed in them

I rember starting out the 90's with a reasonable degree of hope that the election of Bill Clinton would move the US in a more progressive -- or at least liberal -- direction.

However it became clear that Clinton was not on the side of change. He was on the side of perpetuating the status quo.

Time after time, on issue after issue, he either sold out or repudiated or ignored gold ol' Democratic Liberalism and progressive reform.

I got really sick of seeing the Democrats under Clinton watch while the Corporate Steamroller continued to rape the US.

[CorpGovActivist]

93. I Often Wonder...

... what JFK would say to the man who admired him so much?

[JMDEM]

69. Corporate Shill IMHO.

It just boils down to that. Period. Oh, and the Kyle-Leiberman bill. Cannot forgive her for that.

Corporate power is our true struggle here, folks. I think Clinton will continue the increase in corporate power and the decrease in our own power.

I may be wrong. I hope I am wrong if she wins the primaries.

[CorpGovActivist]

70. I'm Inclined to Agree...

... with your entire post. Interestingly, the HRC supporters are a lot less vocal in the other poll.

- Dave

[Avalux]

71. Your poll doesn't emcompass all of my reasons. Here they are:

1. Hillary is dishonest. TThis was apparent to me before she ever decided to run for president. She learned how to lie well to protect Bill politically because of his indiscretions; she enabled his bad behavior.

2. Hillary is a corporatist. Her dealings with corporations support my belief she cannot make policies that will benefit the people because she is beholden to them.

3. Hillary is power-hungry. She will maintain all provisions made by Bush expanding presidential power; no repeal of the Patriot Act, etc.

4. Hillary is the status quo. On top of not repealing Bush boo boo's; she will do nothing to change the way business is done in Washington. Lobbyists will continue to rule the day.

5. Hillary's support of Bush's war.

6. Bill back in the White House. Uh, NO.

7. Democrats will lose the GE and it won't be pretty. Reasons 1-6 assume Hillary would win the General Election. She can't. Her nomination will be wrought with Republican attacks catapulting us back to the days of Slick Willie and all the bullshit that went along with it. What kind of sick self-destructive tendency do Democrats have who would bring this upon the Party?

[CorpGovActivist]

83. Thank You Very Much!

Well said.

- Dave

[Vinca]

72. Where's "all of the above?" nt

[CorpGovActivist]

78. See #72 n/t

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

73. For me, it's mainly about Iraq

In her speech on the Senate floor during the Iraq Resolution war debate, Hillary Clinton referenced the fact that the Clinton Administration's official policy since 1998 was regime change, not just disarmament and containment. This policy was based upon Congressional legislation signed by Bill Clinton aimed at replacing Saddam Hussein. The Congress limited the regime change to only the option of helping Iraqi dissidents inside the country to take arms and depose their leader. However, in her IWR speech, Hillary Clinton reiterated her regime change policy but also called the 1998 legislation just an "option" of which there could be several including overt military action. She also stated that, if a military option were the last resort, she preferred the military option with the support of the UN, in the case that Saddam Hussein refused to disarm. Therefore, it wasn't so much that she was against military action; she just wanted military action and regime change with the full support of the UN and other allies. She also stated in her speech that even if Saddam Hussein disarmed and allowed full inspection, that she would still seek regime change in Iraq. She specifically stated that containment and disarmament was not enough. And in May, 2005, Hillary Clinton appeared before AIPAC at their annual conference and ratified her position on the war, stating that "we will stay in Iraq as long as it takes", thereby signifying that, in her opinion, the occupation of Iraq was a good thing. It was only later, when Americans rose up and voted the GOP out of many offices in 2006 and expressed strong anti-war sentiment that Hillary Clinton changed her tune. These are some of the reasons why I can't trust Hillary Clinton. As President, will she also call for regime change in other places around the world?

[CorpGovActivist]

76. Thank You! n/t

[Individualist]

80. She's a DLC member

[CorpGovActivist]

81. Guilt by Association, NotSoDumbKnollWilliam?

[Melinda]

85. She's not just a DLC member, she's a DLC Team Membership Leader....

My reasons for opposing HRC:

All corporate funded DLC (The DLC is an organization conceived to service boardrooms and money above all else. About two hundred corporations comprise its Board of Advisors (fee: $5,000), and nearly 100 pay the cost to be on the DLC's Policy Roundtable ($10,000 each). For $25,000, around 30 corporate executives are members of the DLC Executive Council. Enron sat there, along with Philip Morris, Texaco, Chevron, and Dupont.

Plus, they loath the left wing of party, you know, activits and pretty much any cause group, basically the people who are known as the Democratic base.


IWR

Was for torture before she was against torture

Was against use of ethanol before she decided to support ethanol

Was for illegal immigrants before she became against illegal immigrants

Rupert Murdoch hosted a fund raiser for her.

Supported Bush on:

All Iraq War funding
Flag burning
video game bansV
Bankruptcy (WJC vetoed basically same bill 2x as President)
Her vote to label Iran’s Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization

Her membership in "The Fellowship".

Her latest flip-flop on FL and MI delegate seating

She's unable to admit mistakes.

Her high negatives within the democratic party.

She polarizes people (just look at the antipathy her at DU!)

She's ruthless- slash and burn

Dynasty. Hubris.

And this is just off the top of my head.

I will never, ever vote for HRC.

[Melinda]

86. I don't like getting lost; Repose- Why I will never vote HRC

Reposting my reasons for opposing HRC:

All corporate funded DLC (The DLC is an organization conceived to service boardrooms and money above all else. About two hundred corporations comprise its Board of Advisors (fee: $5,000), and nearly 100 pay the cost to be on the DLC's Policy Roundtable ($10,000 each). For $25,000, around 30 corporate executives are members of the DLC Executive Council. Enron sat there, along with Philip Morris, Texaco, Chevron, and Dupont.

Plus, they loath the left wing of party, you know, activits and pretty much any cause group, basically the people who are known as the Democratic base.


IRW

Was for torture before she was against torture

Was against use of ethanol before she decided to support ethanol

Was for illegal immigrants before she became against illegal immigrants

Rupert Murdoch hosted a fund raiser for her.

Supported Bush on:

All Iraq War funding
Flag burning
video game bansV
Bankruptcy (WJC vetoed basically same bill 2x as President)
Her vote to label Iran’s Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization

Her membership in "The Fellowship".

Her latest flip-flop on FL and MI delegate seating

She's unable to admit mistakes.

Her high negatives within the democratic party.

She polarizes people (just look at the antipathy her at DU!)

She's ruthless- slash and burn

Dynasty. Hubris.

I will never, ever vote for HRC.

[CorpGovActivist]

87. Love Your Reasoning and Your Avatar! n/t

[Melinda]

88. Thanks :)

And thank you for providing a postive thread where I can reasonably explain my position without the appalling infighting that constitutes the majority of DU-primary territory!!

It's refreshing and you made my DU day. :hug:

[CorpGovActivist]

89. You Bet!

:hug:

Interestingly, the Hillary supporters have let the poll about why they support her languish.

- Dave

[swoop]

90. I voted 'other'...

Hill and Bill bring too much negative drama with them. I don't want the 1990's back. And she's dishonest; the right hand claims to not know what the left is doing (but you find out later it was doing SOMETHING.)

[CorpGovActivist]

91. The Origin of the Word Sinister...

... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinister">is tied up in the left hand.

- Dave

[Guaranteed]

94. It's her simple lack of leadership despite years of opportunity. nt

[CorpGovActivist]

97. Thanks! n/t

[CorpGovActivist]

96. 144 Votes = A Gross...

... rejection of the electability meme.

- Dave

[krabigirl]

98. I don't. Not voting for her, but I don't *oppose* her.

[CorpGovActivist]

100. Thanks!

Not every poll is applicable to every voter.

- Dave

[AngryAmish]

101. Hillary Clinton = Nixon

She has no goal but power. If she could have acheived power by being a GOP-bot, then she would have. However this opportunity presented itself to her, so she took it.

[CorpGovActivist]

117. Isn't That a Little Harsh? n/t

[TheWraith]

103. All of the top five. NT

[xxqqqzme]

105. I like Edwards' policies better.

It has nothing to do w/ her. I heard all the candidates last April @ the CA Dem Party Convention. I was very impressed w/ Edwards and Richardson, in that order. I was singularly unimpressed w/ HRC & disappointed in Obama - I was really looking forward to hearing him but alas, he came across flat and steeped in generalities on the issues.

[CorpGovActivist]

116. I Agree with Your Headline n/t

[JSK]

107. Numbers one thru four.

n/t

[CorpGovActivist]

114. Thanks! n/t

[butterfly77]

112. I will give you their reasoning...

they hate her because she didn't divorce her husband, which is none of their damn business and stupid as hell..

[CorpGovActivist]

113. Sounds Like You May Support Her...

... and there's another poll for expressing those thoughts.

Thank you.

- Dave