English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

don't put because she is better than the current one. thanks.

2007-11-23 06:45:57 · 18 answers · asked by JH 3 in Politics & Government Politics

18 answers

She would have. Unfortunately, she flip-flop too much.

Citizens should understand politics. It's not about US; it's about them acquiring power, financial wealth-overall prestige. Career criminals and illegal immigrants have more rights than law abiding citizens.

There will not be a President, etc. who will honor their words. It is the citizens of the land who must make a change for the better.

2007-11-23 06:54:52 · answer #1 · answered by flying hi 1 · 5 0

I'm neither a democrat or a republican i just call my self a concerned citizen of the USA. Right now I'm rather concerned that any sane rational person would even consider giving his or hers vote to Hillary. People Ive talked to that would vote for her will do because she is a woman and she happens to have the last name Clinton. And its a shallow baseless line of reasoning, like voting for Edwards because he is cute or because Obama happens to be a black man. Shes a candle in the wind always flitting this way and that but never standing straight. Look beyond the facade of Hillary and you will find an empty shallow shell. A shell that contains a vicious shallow conniving shrew that will stoop to anything to obtain the ultimate prize. Would she make a good president? NO The answer to a trivia question? YES!!!

2007-11-23 15:25:22 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

No president has all the answers. I believe she would bring to office the advantage of two heads instead of one. She would not be the first to ever make a mistake nor would she be the last. Her qualifications are as good as any running, and her husband would definately be an asset where he has been in office and is known by many others in higher offices. If you believe the others haven't made mistakes your kidding yourself. President Clinton didn't have us at war, he left us in the blue instead of the red, and defined what oral sex is. He got caught in his lie, where as many others have skated by. Get real! I don't care if it's Big Bird. If I figure they can do a good job I'll vote for that one. Im democratic but I'll vote for the one i truly feel is the best one to fill the presidential office, regardless of sex ,race, or color. It's still to early to decide just which one, but at least listen and be willing to vote no matter what party or sex they are, as long as you honestly think they will get the job done.

2007-11-23 15:14:53 · answer #3 · answered by mandm68 6 · 0 1

no, because she is just a continuation of the same damn policies of the bush/clinton's. there was no difference between the bush administration and the clinton administration. a few here and there, but the main thing was selling out this country to corporations and war.

people forget about clinton's wars with bosnia, kosova, somalia, sudan, serbia and frequent bombings on iraq.

these administrations have brought on a size of government that is incomprehendible. we had the intelligence and prior warnings of the 9/11 attacks prior to all of this new specialized "anti terror" laws to "protect" us.

if we went back to our 1997 levels of spending, we could eliminate the irs completely. this is what ron paul wants to do.

private schools across the US average tuition is $7500 per year. our public school systems get over 10k per child from the federal government. bigger government is never the answer.

ron paul wants to eliminate the department of education for this reason. its a waste. that money could go so much further if it was collected at the state levels. more accountability. this is all ron paul wants. more power given back to the states. the states should have more control and power over themselves. this is how it was designed.

look at katrina, they were refusing private citizens with boats into the flood zones of new orleans. BIG GOVERNMENT DOESN'T WORK.

hillary clinton has envisioned the biggest government imaginable. she is on record stating that she has many ideas, but america can't afford them all. this government has turned out a 9 trillion dollar debt over the last couple of decades of bush/clinton. her ideas will only make that debt grow.

i think hillary will be just as much blood thirsty as her husband and the bush's are. what is there to make me feel differently. she voted for the iraq war, RON PAUL didn't. she voted to label the iranian revolutionary guard a terrorist group. what this does is allow bush to attack iran without a declaration of war. this is illegal!!! i dont trust hillary for nothing. she hasn't earned. she has earned distrust. we need a government that is transparent. not one that is as secretive as she is.

down with the establishment.
down with hillary clinton.

2007-11-23 15:12:10 · answer #4 · answered by ashleyrobinson 2 · 1 0

Definitely, she will run the country fairly similar to the way her husband ran the country, doing revolutionary things like following the oath of office and enforcing the laws established by congress, which include fighting white collar crime, enforcing laws against the employment of illegals, forcing businesses to follow regulations, protecting our borders, not invading other countries, responding to national crisises, ect., ect., ect.. You know, all those things that made the nineties so successful.

Hillary does not promote nationalized health care, and those who claim otherwise have not read her plan.

Hillary should not reveal her hand before the general election, so the dirty deeds repub boys can distort any and all statements grossly out of hand.

All you who are against the Clintons, why do you hate prosperity?

2007-11-23 15:04:38 · answer #5 · answered by poet1b 4 · 0 1

No, she's never run anything, she has never had a major success in legislation, she has never run a business or made a payroll, she has a long record of fabrication, she won't answer a straight question. She flip flops at every turn and with every audience. Need I say more? Oh yeah, Republicans only hate her because she's a strong woman, I forgot that one.

2007-11-23 14:53:14 · answer #6 · answered by Homeschool produces winners 7 · 7 0

Any of the other democratic canidates would make a better president than her.

She'd be nothing without Bill.

2007-11-23 15:13:31 · answer #7 · answered by Fred Head 4 · 1 0

No. She won't make decisions. I remember when I was in Iraq reading about a game of chicken she and Obama played on one of the Iraq funding votes. Neither wanted to vote before the other. Finally, he voted, and within the minute, she went up and voted the same way he did.

2007-11-23 14:51:21 · answer #8 · answered by DOOM 7 · 8 0

No !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
but where are all the Hillary supporters, I was interested in reading any good reasons for wanting her as Pres.

2007-11-23 14:58:05 · answer #9 · answered by My Baby! 7 · 3 0

No.

She brings nothing to the table other than warmed over socialized theories on what SHOULD work, not on how the world really is.

2007-11-23 14:59:04 · answer #10 · answered by Mark A 6 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers