Or do you think she was just being fairly questioned on her ever changing positions on issues? And do we really want someone for President who every time they feel pressured they're going to go,"But I'm just a girl,why are you picking on me?"
2007-11-01 22:37:24 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
These debates are supposed to be exchanges between the candidates to flush out where they stand on the issues. If Hillary was "attacked" for taking an absurd position, then flip-flopping on it two minutes later as Edwards pointed out - I would think that would be fair game. And her "men ganging up on me" routine is just plain pathetic.
She's trying to say that she can be the leader of the free world and she's whining over debating tactics? Give me a break already.
2007-11-01 22:49:28 · answer #1 · answered by Michael M 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
If pointing out her flip flopping and other things in a debate with the goal to make you (each debater) look like the best person for the job then yes they attacked her. If she wins the nomination (all things are pointing that she will) wait until she is debated against by the Republican nominee. She just doesn't have what it takes to be president and the U.S. will be better of without her winning. Her socialistic ideas are the opposite of what we used to be and need to get back to. Which is smaller not bigger government and less not higher taxes and less regulations instead of more. And being a conservative I don't hate her like someone said in one answer, I just thing she is so wrong in her way of wanting to change this country into a socialistic 3rd world country. And that will be what will happen if she gets the job. Maybe because we as a whole have become so complaisant and such whinners we deserve the misery her presidency would bring. It would for sure give the moaners something real to cry about! lol
2007-11-01 23:04:17 · answer #2 · answered by crusinthru 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Hillary made a huge target of herself with the way she answered the question about illegal immigrants being allowed to be licensed to drive in the State of New York as prescribed by the Governor of New York. She attempted to 'soft shoe' a very volatile and passionate issue and failed miserably opening herself to hard realistic responses from her opponents in the debate.
I think her response reveals a part of her political prowess more than anything else. I can't believe that she thought she could get away with that kind of response and that the American people would find it acceptable. It's alarming because it shows a lack of insight in the manner of what the majority of people in the United States think about that hot topic.
It reflects a weakness of her understanding of the American people and, I believe, could have been handled much better.
Thanks
2007-11-01 23:19:37 · answer #3 · answered by telwidit 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I don't think the point is if she was getting picked on or not, I think the important thing is how she handled it. I mean really, if she can't handle some rich boys like Edwards throwing some insults her way, then how in the world is she going to be able to handle Iran and North Korea? My bet is...not very well. A president needs to be able to give the people straight answers (we should know where they stand on everything...which we don't on Hillary).
2007-11-02 20:21:32 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
WHAT in simple terms say you're for Hillary one hundred%. anybody thats been following this as a results of fact the beginning up can inform you that they became perplexed on who they wanted to vote on as a results of fact the two of their subject concerns are an identical. confident Hillary did solid on the tip yet palms down Obama became the winner for the duration of this debate.
2016-11-10 00:58:08 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Before this week no one dared to oppose her, let alone asked a pointed question. That's because the Clinton family has a nasty way of dealing with those who do. I've heard of how her hubby, "Slick Willie" was notorious for having the IRS run random audits of people who stood against them while he was in office. No doubt her spin doctors will come to the rescue and attempt to paint her as the next Mother Theresa.
2007-11-01 23:05:47 · answer #6 · answered by Dan K 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
They weren't picking on her any more than any one else. And yes I expect her to cross back on her own trail several times during this campaign.
Hillary better be able to hold her own in this little forum.
Imagine John Kennedy in the Cuban Missile Crisis telling Kruschev to be gentle.
2007-11-01 22:55:54 · answer #7 · answered by CFB 5 · 5⤊ 0⤋
I don't think so. Watch the Drivers License part again, she contradicts herself 3 times in two minutes, and needs to be confronted for that kind of stuff.
2007-11-01 22:50:42 · answer #8 · answered by Rabullione 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋
No to bring up her evasive by agreement maneuver is great she lies at least 50% of the time depending on who shes talking to.
2007-11-01 23:59:50 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
perhaps and my point here would be when you consider the 'MESS" that the clintons created in the last presidency, dont you think its long overdue? this is NOT guilt by association, its guillt clearly by participation and most die hard liberals could really care less.
- 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
2007-11-01 23:17:42 · answer #10 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋