From what I know of them, my vote is now with Clinton. I think she is far more intelligent than the American public ever knew and she has proven her abilites as a Senator. And I fully believe her White House years give her insights no other person beyond a previous President can have.
I was interested in hearing more about Obama as someone in the Democratic future, as I feel he currently lacks enough experience. But I have not been impressed by his team playing hard ball so early on. This country has been divided enough...I don't want to see that be his main focus versus hearing more about his views.
And I really believe a great many folks YEARN for a Clinton White House again. The economy was solid, foreign policy seems like a lifetime ago before the damage Bush has done to the USA, and well I could go on and on. The talking heads will spin things, but it is a fact the country was in a much better state than it is today. I feel Hillary played an important part in that, and I'd love to give her a shot in the Oval Office chair!
As for color and race, right now I feel that is the novelty issue but the election is a long time away. I think when it gets closer those of us with brain cells will move past it and care about the issues and who would do the best job in office.
2007-02-25 11:43:30
·
answer #1
·
answered by FineWhine 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Hillary has done everything she can to disquise herself over the past 6 years. She has whored out to every and any individual that would be able to assist her run, and threatened any who didn't support her. We still do not know who everyone was that she had FBI files stolen and kept in her office while first, um, I really can't put lady. She has a temper that is very much NOT becoming of someone that is that close to "the" button. If John Lurch Kerry was a flip flopper, I really can't imagine what you would catagorize the Hillary. She plays every role as a role. She has been playing the country as a bunch of bumpkins.
To the idiot that suggested that either Hillary or, get this, a guy named Hussein and only a consonant away from our most hated terrorist over ANY republican. Ok, let's take a look at something you dumbwad. No attack on US soil since 911. You may have still been in diapers then, so I'll cut you some slack - but maybe you can look it up. An improving economy WHILE a war is being waged to keep your sorry but clean. More jobs available year after year, more poor folks owning their own homes than ever before. And to boot, 50 million people freed from the bonds of slavery under brutal dictators. Yes we have lost over 3000 great soles. More were lost in almost any battle of any war in our past - battle, not the whole blessed war. More were lost during "peace time" of any 4 year period of the other Clinton as president - so look child, don't just go with the MTV version of I Hate Bush- think, even if it were just for the first time.
2007-02-25 19:07:32
·
answer #2
·
answered by E F 1
·
1⤊
2⤋
Hillary Clinton brings vast experience to the post, not only as a very active former first lady of both both the United States and the state of Arkansas, but also as a prominent lawyer and a U.S. Senator. Unfortunately, her stand on the war and her refusal to admit that she made a mistake reveals a fatal flaw in her character, and I will not vote for her unless she reverses her position.
Senator Obama has been an opponent of the war from the start. He was also a prominent lawyer before he ran for public office, and he has demostated his leadership ability as a community organizer in Chicago. His leadership and popularity have nothing to do with his race. I have not yet decided whom I will vote for in the Illinois primary, but if the election were today, I would support Obama over Clinton.
2007-02-25 18:51:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
I would go for Obama. I remember when he had initially said he had not wanted to run but unlike most of the others in the race on both sides of the aisle, his constituents encouraged him to do so. I am also tired of all the so called "experienced" ones that have touted that tripe. If they were so experienced, they all should have had the balls to stand up and say no when Bush decided to take us to war in Iraq when that country had nothing to do with the attack on this country. Barack Obama has supported the war in Afghanistan but has from the very start said that invading Iraq would be a mistake. In the IL state legislature, he had demonstrated an ability to work with people from both sides of the aisle and was able to author legislation for the Earned Income Tax Credit for low income families, worked for legislation that would support residents who could not afford health insurance, and helped pass bills to increase funding for AIDS prevention and care programs.
While running for the seat he now holds, he was endorsed by the IL Fraternal Order of Police because they felt he was willing to listen and compromise when necessary even though he believes in some form of gun control.
Besides, I think he has the best shot, Hillary has been the front runner but the Republicans and others have not tried to tear her apart yet. Obama before he even announced was subjected to the smear campaigns. Republican tactics from previous election cycles, show that they only attack those they fear can defeat them.
Hillary, I think, overreacted to the David Geffen comments which shows she has particular sensitivities that can be exploited. Hillary might appear as the better candidate on paper but she has been trying to skate just on what she and her people think the people want to hear instead of what is really important and thus really has no stance at all except to appear hawkish on the war.
Nader needs to stay home. All he has done is aid in the destruction of this country. His siphoning off of key voters in 2000 has resulted in our being stuck with a president who has borrowed more money than all others combined, cut taxes in a time of war, started a war of choice-Iraq especially since they had nothing to do with the attack on us.
2007-02-25 18:47:29
·
answer #4
·
answered by thequeenreigns 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
It is still very early and a lot can and will happen before the election. However, if the election were held today, I would vote for Obama. I think he is our best hope for lasting positive change. I think his diverse, global background, obvious intelligence, leadership skills and strong good character will enable him to be the president we need in this day and time. I tihnk he has the ability to bring people from all points of view together.
I think Hillary is still too much polarizing a figure and would only further divide this country. I have respect for her in some areas, but I wouldn't want her to be my president .
2007-02-25 18:40:18
·
answer #5
·
answered by kiraalt 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
The Clinton's had the worst Marriage the most dis functional in the History of the presidency and yet they want to rub our noses in it again. If they had any feelings for the American people they would spare us from this
2007-02-25 22:36:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by Ibredd 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
well the thought of having a black president seems great but the fact is color is not or should not be the issue at this moment it is who is better for the job and from my view point i see hilary as the one that has my vote
2007-02-25 18:41:28
·
answer #7
·
answered by ms_quisha1 1
·
2⤊
2⤋
Definitely Obama!!
2007-02-25 18:34:34
·
answer #8
·
answered by busymom 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
Obama. He has a great vision for America, The guy is inspiring.
2007-02-25 18:54:17
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
If she's nominated, I'll vote for Hillary.
Hillary Clinton biography:
http://clinton.senate.gov/about/biography/index.cfm
Hillary Clinton’s chances:
http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2007/01/21/sen-clinton-ahead-in-democratic-race-poll/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftoday.reuters.com%2Fnews%2Farticlenews.aspx%3Ftype%3DtopNews%26storyid%3D2007-01-21T160400Z_01_N21442189_RTRUKOC_0_US-USA-POLITICS-POLL.xml%26src%3Drss%26rpc%3D22&frame=true
Hillary’s accomplishments:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200610u/green-interview
Video - DNC – Her own words:
http://www.democrats.org/a/2007/02/hillary_clinton.php
Clinton vs Obama
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1587191,00.html
2007-02-25 19:14:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋