So why in the world would someone support the same type of individual for president and not someone who made it on their own merits?
2007-07-31 13:45:13 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Hillary was a huge part of her husband's success as everyone well knows.
2007-07-31 13:52:06 · answer #1 · answered by Jackie Oh! 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Some people think she would be a good President. I personally do not and find appalling that America seems to be okay with this dynasty type of Presidential candidates. The same two families will have controlled this country for over 30 years if she wins. New blood is desperately needed to change direction of this country.
2007-07-31 20:49:25 · answer #2 · answered by Stephanie is awesome!! 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Hillary Clinton pushed many different reforms and policies out of her own intelligence, motivation, and initiative.
President Bush hasn't really done much at all. He managed to turn a budget surplus into a deficit, led us into a recession (although he recovered it with a profitable war), and he has absolutely no idea what to do with Iraq. On top of everything, many of his colleagues are constantly being convicted with monetary scandals which isn't really helping his record-low approval rating.
Aristocratic power in this case has two different types of people from two different perspectives.
2007-07-31 20:52:13 · answer #3 · answered by khanomtom83 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't think Hillary Clinton is part of any sort of 'dynasty.'
She made it on her own merits. She's done a lot of good work!
2007-07-31 21:27:21 · answer #4 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not true Bush Sr. and Bill Clinton were intelligent people. Only difference between Hillary and W is Hillary speaks much, much, much, much, more betterer.
2007-07-31 20:52:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Bubba's an aristocrat? Well, I'll be hornswaggled. I guess aristrocrat just got redefined.
2007-07-31 22:45:50 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Scary thought isn't it. Hillary is an obvious phony just as Bush 2 is an obvious imbecile.
2007-07-31 20:47:58 · answer #7 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
merits...what merits...the clinton legacy has merits...I DONT THINK SO... LETS LOOK AT IT AGAIN...
- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- First president to be held in contempt of court
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad
- First president disbarred from the US Supreme Court and a state court
2007-07-31 20:48:26 · answer #8 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
actually... if you read a list of her accomplishments, both before and after meeting bill, they are very impressive. i don't think she inherited anything from bill.
i don't know if i am voting for her, but facts are facts
2007-08-01 02:05:44 · answer #9 · answered by knhglassey@sbcglobal.net 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋