I hear a lot of people say they don't like her but no one ever states why. So I'm just wondering why you don't like her.
For me she has 8 years experience in the white house and seems to be a very smart woman. I could see myself voting for her. I really do think we need to change the political party in office.
2007-07-02
06:16:53
·
18 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Elections
serious answers only please. I want opinions backed up with facts.
2007-07-02
06:17:38 ·
update #1
Bush is amoral and people still voted for him. That's politics for you. I still don't see a valid reason
2007-07-02
06:24:18 ·
update #2
Firestorm please do go on.
2007-07-02
06:25:17 ·
update #3
because she is NOT capable of "leadership" ... see article
2007-07-02 06:27:42
·
answer #1
·
answered by Indiana Frenchman 7
·
5⤊
2⤋
You're right -- we need to change the political party in office, but what we need now is someone with no affiliation to either the Republicans or Democrats. Both parties have it wrong, and neither of them is truly representing the interests of the American people. The recent vote on immigration is a shining example.
I have no problem voting for a woman as President of the United States -- but not Hillary. She has shown all too clearly that she is only interested in one thing: POWER. Ask yourself: Why did she run for the Senate in New York instead of in her home state of Arkansas? Could it be that she knew she didn't have any chance of getting elected, so she went shopping and found out she could run in New York (a state known for its decidedly liberal bent) without even being a resident? Why was it so important that Hillary get into government? She has a degree and experience in law, so it's not like she couldn't get a job elsewhere, right? The only logical conclusion left is that she has her own political aspirations that have NOTHING to do with doing right by the American people.
If you want an interesting eye-opener, get a copy of "The Truth about Hillary" by Edward Klein. The commentary about the real dirt of the Clinton Administration (Whitewater) is sorely lacking, but you'll find out all kinds of interesting things about what really went on in the White House. And I'll tell you this much: I have a friend who works for the Secret Service and was assigned to the White House during the Clinton Administration, and on more than one occasion he had to intervene in physical altercations between Slick Willie and Hillary. This public personna of the Clintons as a happy, enduring married couple is a sham, and that's just one example of how Hillary has two faces.
2007-07-02 13:31:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
2⤋
Experience in White House as a wife is a qualification for running the most powerful country in the world?
Would you let your doctor's wife perform surgery on your Mom because she's married to a doctor?
What are her qualifications?
- One term as Senator of a state she never lived in before? Hardly.
- Held one job for any length of time and many of her partners in the Rose Law firm have time in jail for crimes committed during her tenure there.
- Hasn't proposed a single piece of legislation while in the Senate. That kind of go get 'em attitude will work real well in the White House.
- Blames other people for her husband's infidelity. Yeah who is she kidding?
- Demands Barack Obama return money from contributors that she and Bill solicited and received donations during their campaigns. What?
- One idea she had as wife in White House was a socialized medicine scheme that would have increased government hiring by 25%, cost every taxpayer thousands, and setup over 350 oversight committees to review and direct your medical care. How well does your HMO work with one gate keeper? Even the democratic controlled congressional budget office said that her proposal would have doubled the Federal budget.
And that was her only public idea. Wow would hate to see what her other ideas are.
- Refused to surrender subpoenaed Arkansas law firm records. Then states for two years she can't find them. When one day they show up miraculously on a table in the middle of the most guarded house on the planet and she doesn't know where they came from or how they got there from Arkansas.
Lack of honesty, low moral character, no real life experience or job related background would prevent me from voting for her.
Maybe we do need a change, I don't know but why would you vote for the most inexperienced candidate? Yes she's smart but that's not enough to be President in my book.
And don't compare her to Bush. 1) I'm not a Bush fan and 2) She's not running against Bush.
2007-07-02 14:02:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by Fred F 3
·
3⤊
2⤋
She is very smart and cunning. I hear her talk of the "children" all the time but cannot find one thing that she has done for any child. She and her husband have corrupted every position they held ..No other people have used ANY means possible to win and then not get caught as the Clintons. She being the smarter of the two makes me shudder to think what she could get by with if elected. Just look up her previous jobs and see the line of deceit and people used by Hillary. This woman just wants power and I believe will stop at absolute nothing to get it. As for reasons she is not well liked......She never admits to being wrong, WILL NOT apologise, and cannot tell a truth. Run as far as you can from this woman who means you and your family no good.
2007-07-02 13:35:48
·
answer #4
·
answered by kdh&J 2
·
5⤊
3⤋
Smart enough to submit her plan for socilaized medicine (even Castro laughed) that led to the Republicans gaining Congress and the Contract with America.
Smart to know that political expediency always trumps morals and principals.
Screw Hillary. I'm waiting for Chelsea in 2016.
2007-07-02 13:25:48
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Oh, she is smart. Smart enough to stay with a husband who is a serial cheater because she sees the political benefit she can milk from it. Smart enough to make Vince Foster's murder look like a suicide. Smart enough to get over Travelgate, Filegate, Rose Lawfirm Scandals. Smart enough to move to a powerful state like NY and get elected Senator as a springboard to her Presidential aspirations. Smart enough to put on a different accent and spin depending on who she is speaking to.
Oh, she is smart. And amoral. And ego-maniacal. In my opinion. I am certainly not afraid of smart women. I wish Condi Rice would run.
Thatgirl, I read your additional comments - this is NOT about Bush. Keep the focus on YOUR own question - it is all about Hillary. Just as I answered.
2007-07-02 13:20:53
·
answer #6
·
answered by ItsJustMe 7
·
9⤊
2⤋
I think it would be refreshing to have someone smart and presidential in the white house after 8 years of Bush incompetence and embarassment. Imagine Hilary giving a press conference and answering questions on her own like other presidents and not having everything written out and handed in to Bush ahead of time so someone can tell him what to say.
2007-07-02 13:56:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by SueB 3
·
0⤊
4⤋
It's not that I don't like her, well maybe a little. It's more like I don't like what she is, another politician, another lawyer, & someone who thinks "we" should be grateful she is running instead of "her" being grateful she's even in the running. But that's pretty much how I feel about all of them. They all act like we should go along with whoever is shoved in front of us & we should be happy with who the "parties" select for us to pick from. I'm not happy & will not vote for anyone in the running right now.
2007-07-02 13:42:23
·
answer #8
·
answered by Fab 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
I can think of at least five reasons right off the top of my head.
1. Supports socialist policies, such as taking profits from private industries.
2. Supported the Kennedy-Bush-McCain immigration bill in spite of 80% of the American people opposing it
3. Constantly shifts positions on the war in Iraq, depending on which is most popular and her audience (The term is "flip-flopping")
4. Supports government censorship including that of the failed Fairness Doctrine (a clear violation of the first ammendment)
5. Like most democrats, supports raising taxes on middle and upper-class citizens; redistribution of wealth (again, socialism)
Shall I go on?
2007-07-02 13:24:05
·
answer #9
·
answered by Firestorm 6
·
11⤊
2⤋
Because she is promising to violate the Bill of Rights.
If she is promising that now, while she is campaigning, imagine what she will do to the constitution if actually elected.
Oh, and she's a socialist as well, which is a bad thing.
2007-07-02 13:29:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by Ricky T 6
·
4⤊
1⤋
Rottenham Clinton should not ever be allowed to serve in any political capacity as she is a cheater, a liar, a murderer, and a thief. Thank you.
2007-07-02 13:41:53
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋