After Tonights Debate I Believe Hilary

[rsmith6621]

....Is full of HOT AIR and living in a reality much like bushie himself....she just doesn't seem to want to just come out and say she has made mistakes on a genuine level..simply she is un-believable...she has only a few more months left at the top...Edwards and Kucinich I think are rising even though it doesnt look like it now...unless Gore announces then all bets are off the table....


Thats my take....

[DFW]

1. I didn't see the debate here

And even if it had been broadcast, it would have been 3 AM or something here.

But I have contended all along that this is WAY too early to point to ANY foregone
conclusions. Maybe finally some here are waking up to the fact that NO candidate
has a lock on the nomination at this point, and that saying they do is wishful (or
pessimistic, depending on whom you support) thinking.

It has also been my contention that the only thing that could get Al Gore to reconsider
his decision not to run would be a meltdown by HRC. While I still doubt this will happen,
it COULD happen, and it wouldn't be wise at this point to say that anything is inevitable.
(Or impossible)

Who was John Kerry at this point in 2003? If Joe Biden ends up being the nominee, Kerry
will be telling him privately "I told you so!"

[KharmaTrain]

4. So Didn't 99% Of The Electorate

I just can't see people busting down the doors in Iowa or New Hampshire to watch these things and the endless number of these things has all but numbed all but the deepest diehards. Little of what was said last night will mean much in days or weeks to come other than yet another hoop for these candidates to jump through in the long endurance race that has become our presidential elections.

For those who wanted to find something bad about Hillary, you got plenty to chew on. But to think this one debate means much overall is giving this dog and pony show too much credit and underestimating the people who will be casting votes starting next January. There's so much more to winning an election than looking good on a Timmeh Russert TV show.

[helderheid]

6. These debates should be available to everyone. It makes me sick that they are only on cable tv and

internet (and that was sketchy).

[KharmaTrain]

8. Those Who Want Can See

Right now a vast majority of people could care less about an election a year or several months or states away. Canvass possible voters now and you'll find few who really have given thought to candidates or specifics in next year's election. If they are uhnhappy, it's a general malaise that "all politicians are scum" and are not only undecided on whom they want as a candidate, but if they're going to participate at all. At this point, I could easily see a large section of Repugnican voters sitting out the election out of total disgust...and possibly a fair number of Democrats as well.

The old chestnut is that people really don't get involved with elections until the final two weeks. Right now, unless you're in an early primary state, there's little being said or shown about next year...outta sight, outta mind. But once those political ads start rolling, door bells and phones ring...then you're talking an election.

[robinlynne]

10. not so. It was supposed to be avialable online. i tried to watch but they

made it
"unavailable' at the last minute. Whenever the debates are on regular channels i watch them.

[me b zola]

13. I agree

I also think that cspan should be on free, public television.

[Yael]

2. 19 Recs and 1 comment. Interesting.

I agree. The more I see of her, the less I respect.

We can and MUST do better.

[CoffeeCat]

5. Absolutely...

...the most important issues at this critical time are:
Saving our democracy, restoring policies that protect and
reflect the intent of the Constitution, reinstating our civil
rights by retracting much of the Patriot Act, ending torture and
a cease-and-desist on the PNAC NEOCON WARMONGERING.

Hillary doesn't seem interested in doing any of those things.

She's a horrible candidate. To steal a phrase from Donald
Trump--she's be a "disaster."

[Richard Steele]

3. K&R

[madokie]

7. when I first came here I was a gunho hillary supporter

and couldn't understand why so many here disliked her, some even bordering on hating her. I must say I am with the later group now, why, I can't put my finger on any one thing but overall I now see her as a person who more than anything wants to be pResident rather that be President. I want a President who is not afraid to take the bull by the horns so to speak and make decisions for us based on experience and knowledge, she kind of has those two covered but then again not really. I'll vote for her in the general election but I'll also be holding my nose while I do it. my preference is with Dennis, Joe, Chris, John or Bill. I could live with either of them
I'm suited up with asbestes so let it all hang out, ok

[Froward69]

9. no flame here I am glad you are

Seeing through her rhetoric to the truth.

[madokie]

12. I learned early on in life that you have to believe in something and then when you find out it is

wrong then change but first things first, believe in something

[DFW]

11. I am not and never was a gung-ho Hillary supporter (die-hard Gore/Dean)

But I have met her and spoken with her a few times, and from the general
impression I got, my bet is that she is as fed up with the image she is
putting out there as anyone. I think she wants to be the idealistic person
who tried to get universal health care put through in 1993, and is learning
the hard way that it is the TV image you create that gets you elected and nothing
else. As Howard Dean is just about the ONLY major Democratic politician I know
who is the same on and off camera, I bet they are all wrestling with what their
"expert" advisers are telling to be when the camera is on. The less their attempted
TV persona is like the real person, the more phony they come off. I have never met
Dennis Kucinich, but I'll bet he is one whose real life version is close to the one
he projects, as well.

I know this much--when I see what all of these people are forced to go though, I would
end up screaming and kicking over podiums at these "debates." Fat heads like Tim Russert
claim to be the impartial press? Gimme a break. I would react like Sarkozy. Ask serious
questions, or I'm outta here.

[saracat]

14. I have met both Hillary and Edwards I find Hillary snobbish and cold in person.Edwards is

exactly the same whenever I have met him.He is very sincere and considerate. He seems to like the orinary people. And he remembers peoples names! What a shocker. Hillary seems only interested in the big donors. And that is made really clear by her staff and Hillary herself. But that was just my impression based on a few occassions. I have seen nothing to alter my impression of either of them. And before I am jumped for my "bias" and "hatred' of Hillary, I was a huge fan of hers when I first met her several years ago.

[DFW]

23. I wouldn't jump you for that at all

If that's the impression she made on you, then that's how it is.
I haven't met Edwards, so you have the advantage on me there.

[kstewart33]

26. Oh geez, let's not elect a candidate based on personality!

That's what got Bush elected or at least the appearance of an amiable personality.

I don't care how cold and impersonal Hillary is. All I csre about is her experience, smarts, and work ethic.

[emilyg]

33. I met Hillary. Very warm and charming. Never met Edwards.

[LaloBorges]

35. This must be a Repub chat room

You are all a bunch of dreamers who would be setting yourselves up for a hard crash if any of the other candidates were to win the nomination. I do like Kucinich and I like what he says but if he became president he would dissapoint you all as, although it is what many of us would want; like ending the Iraq mess quickly, he would not be able to deliver as the reality is that the chimp and his cronies have made such a mess that it will take time, and more money, to "kind of" fix it.
Hillary has been an insider, and that is not as bad as you idealists believe it is, she knows how to work the system, and just the fact that Bill is on her side is also a very good thing.
Stop critisizing her and realize that she WILL win the nomination, so hold your negative energy for Giulanni, he is the one you need to learn about and unmask his lies.
If you continue on this hate road you will end up electing another republican (giulani), do you really want that? Do you want four more years of Bush?

[sniffa]

43. no it's DU

[MissDeeds]

15. Failure to admit mistakes bothers me

I had reservations about Hillary, but was willing to keep an open mind and see how she performed in debates. But her reluctance to admit that she made a mistake in supporting the Iraq war was a defining moment for me. We have a dolt in the White House now who will not admit having made mistakes. The last thing we need is another.

[Stardust]

16. Amen, MissDeeds.

[FREEWILL56]

17. Welcome to DU.

I too was open to all candidates in the beginning and then started registering in my head how they speak, vote, and what they propose. When I saw hillary spinning her little tail off about her voting for the Iraq war I went a bit farther to find her to be quite corporate friendly and then she killed any possibility with me when she voted yes on Iran. I also did not appreciate the ramrodding of rodham either like she had already been nominated because of a few internet strongarms and media pushes saying to me by proxy my vote doesn't count unless it's for her or I may as well be voting for the republicons. Don't ask them to take on any real issues with real answers or you get name called and bullied all with tactics I'd expect of repukes. I see voting for her as similar to voting for a repuke and I will not ever vote for a repuke and that does include DINOs.
Hillary is hillary's worst enemy in this case as she should've run on the republicon ticket with her spinning, voting, and stupid proposals all while showing underhanded tactics in running imho.

[judaspriestess]

18. maybe she doesn't want to be perceived as a "flip-flopper"

and have the media make that the headline 24/7 from now until the Democratic Convention.

[Cleita]

19. I didn't see the debate other than sound bytes that have

been replayed on radio and TV today, but one of my problems with Hillary is her allegations of things being complicated. She said this way back about her health care program that crashed in Bill Clinton's administration and apparently she said it again in the debate last night about war.

There is nothing complicated about either situation. It's about making the smart and moral choices. Whenever someone tells me an issue is complicated and doesn't want to answer a direct question, it tells me that they think either I'm too stupid to understand or they don't want to tell the truth.

She can't be against the Iraqi war nor an attack on Iran because she has already made deals with those who profit from those wars if they help her to win the White House in 2008. She can't offer a smart and progressive health plan because she can't piss off the insurance and pharma companies so instead what she will offer will be a costly gift to the for profit health care industry with little improved access to health care from those who need it. It the mean time either issue is too complicated for us peons to understand.

[creeksneakers2]

22. What deal exactly did Hillary make with those who profit

from wars? Any evidence of anything? Last night she said she was going to clean up the defense budget.

If Hillary can't piss off big pharma, why did she vote against the medicare prescription drug benefit, the biggest gravy train that ever came big pharma's way? Why does Hillary advocate allowing the US government to negotiate lower drug prices? Why is she in favor of allowing US citizens to import drugs from Canada? Hillary is against everything big pharma drastically wants.

If Hillary is in bed with the insurance companies, why is she planning to mandate that health insurance companies take everyone regardless of preconditions? Why does she favor mental health parity? Why is she excluding health insurance companies from participating in medicare?

If you think that Hillary could get a MAJOR entitlement program like universal health care passed while taking away the right to private insurance from a large majority of Americans who say they are satisfied with what they have, you haven't seen the polls. Big majorities are against having their insurance taken away. There is no way in hell anybody could get single payer health insurance signed into law as things stand presently.

Unfortunately, most issues are very complicated. If they were simple, they would have been solved already. Feeling offended or jumping to conclusions doesn't help ones understanding.

[Cleita]

25. The truth is not complicated.

She should try answering those questions truthfully instead of trying to make the inquirer seem too stupid to understand.

Open Secrets has her campaign contributions listed. That is the deal maker and if you are in denial about that, I'm selling shares to the Golden Gate Bridge. Interested? :sarcasm:

Yes, Hillary to her credit didn't sign on to the big PHARMA Medicare give away, but she's not ready to throw them under the train yet and she should.

If Hillary is in bed with the insurance companies, why is she planning to mandate that health insurance companies take everyone regardless of preconditions?

This is the deal breaker. To do this is really going to give tax and spend Democrats a whole new welfare system, for the corporate insurance industry that is. Congress won't pass this, neither conservative nor Democratic. She knows it. When it fails she will move on and we won't hear much about meaningful health care, except band aid remedies, until she finishes her term(s) in office just like hubby Bill.

[carolinablue]

27. WHAT???

I can't believe any thinking person would say Universal Health Care and what to do about the Iraq war are not complicated issues! As Albert Einstein once said " Everything should be made a simple as possible, and no simpler."

I think Hilary is trying to run a general campaign and not give the repugs a bunch of ammunition. I have been a John Edwards supporter in the past, but I dislike him more and more of late. He seems desperate and disingenious.

I think all these debates are a stupid idea. No one but us "die-hards" watch them. They do little more than give the enemy sound-bite material for the fall.

[Cleita]

29. Truth is not complicated.

The issues may require a lot of detailed information for the interested to follow up on, but answering a question truthfully is not complicated. To simply dismiss it as "too complicated" is not a satisfactory answer.

As far as desperate and disingenuous, I don't believe Hillary is desperate. After all I remember Bill Clinton saying that if he had run for a third term, he would have won. I think he is bringing that Machiavellian sureness to Hillary's campaign and she is very secure in the knowledge that she probably will win unless something unexpected happens, like not very many people voting for her.

However, Hillary has been very disingenuous on many occasions. It happens when you try to play both sides to the middle. You have to lie to someone or just refuse to answer the question by dismissing it as too complicated.

[Cleita]

30. Dupe.

[bonito]

20. K&R

[Joe Chi Minh]

21. I think the Republicans know they are such a busted flush now, that Hilary,

with Bill in the wings represents their "dream ticket". Somehow, I don't think Lieberman would cut it. Not that I would think Hillary has a chance.

[mckeown1128]

24. Very well said!!!

[WileEcoyote]

28. Like her or not

Hillary wins in the general election.

What's the GOP gonna do, smear her? They've been doing that for fifteen years.

In her way Hillary Clinton is running a lot like Ronald Reagan was in 1979 or so. Not from an ideological perspective but from a "real politic" level.

No one believed Reagan had much of a chance in 1979. Reagan himself didn't think he could pull it off. A friend of mine was in the room with him way back when and she said that Reagan didn't even believe the American people would support a Conservative like himself.

He was a joke on the American political stage: B Grade actor who showed a mean spirited form of governing California.

But Reagan won in 1980. Not easily but by enough.

It was name recognition and the public's perceived weakness in Jimmy Carter's handling of the presidency. Carter wasn't weak at all but Reagan was able to capitalize on various factors working against the president.

While Hillary isn't running against an incumbent she sure has a country ready to go back to the peace and prosperity of her last living arrangement in the White House.

She wins even if the GOP doesn't split their Christian vote to a third party. Just by GOP attrition Clinton gets maybe 350 electoral votes.

Game, Set Match. Whether you like her or not.

[Froward69]

31. Regan could act (somewhat) and sell Ice to Eskimos.

Hillary cannot act and cannot sell well. Hillary after waffling on the issue on national TV then came out and picked the WRONG side of the issue. fully 85% of voting Americans DO NOT support giving Illegals a drivers license. Regardless of political affiliation! It is a deeper issue than gaining Hispanic votes. it is an issue of national security. the independents will vote against her in droves... Like I have been saying. Hillary is the gop's dream opponent. not just easy to bash but easy to garner votes from as to she lacks the depth and understanding of the American people, as well as global affairs. She will loose the GE.

[WileEcoyote]

32. $500.00 bucks says she won't

[Froward69]

39. its ok I got

a grand on Biden in Vegas. With odds.

[WileEcoyote]

40. Good luck

See ya at the table around Christmas...

[emilyg]

34. And I like her.

[LaloBorges]

36. I repeat myself, on purpose

You are all a bunch of dreamers who would be setting yourselves up for a hard crash if any of the other candidates were to win the nomination. I do like Kucinich and I like what he says but if he became president he would dissapoint you all as, although it is what many of us would want; like ending the Iraq mess quickly, he would not be able to deliver as the reality is that the chimp and his cronies have made such a mess that it will take time, and more money, to "kind of" fix it.
Hillary has been an insider, and that is not as bad as you idealists believe it is, she knows how to work the system, and just the fact that Bill is on her side is also a very good thing.
Stop critisizing her and realize that she WILL win the nomination, so hold your negative energy for Giulanni, he is the one you need to learn about and unmask his lies.
If you continue on this hate road you will end up electing another republican (giulani), do you really want that? Do you want four more years of Bush?

[Basileus Basileon]

37. I am saddened that this

brief hunk of unhelpful, inarticulate "analysis" has so many recs.

[EFerrari]

41. Aside from attacking the messenger, what is your counter argument?

[Basileus Basileon]

44. First,

I'm not attacking the messenger. I never said anything about the poster. I'm attacking the message.

Second, a counter-argument requires there to have been an argument in the first place. Hillary is full of HOT AIR and living in a reality much like bushie himself is not an argument, it's a fat slice of ad hominem.

And third, the OP pretty much admits that it's bunk. The only claim in there the even approaches respectability is Edwards and Kucinich I think are rising even though it doesnt look like it now. So there we have "Edwards is doing better in the polls, even though Edwards is not actually doing better in the polls." Yes, that's convincing.

[2 Much Tribulation]

38. Interesting take. I think you may be right. nt

[Perry Logan]

42. The anti-Hillarites at DU have converted me to Hillary. Obama should sue his supporters here.

Edwards, too. The Hillary bashers are their own worst enemies, destroying their cause with every word they say. Just like the impeachment movement.