Why or why not ?
2007-12-11 19:43:33 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
after her cookie baking comment and her not standing by her man comment, I'm surprised that any woman in the USA would trust her or even think about voting for her
Edit
and if that isn't enough for all the cookie baking wife's and mothers out there
go back and read what Paultewing said she is also a Liar and a thief
2007-12-12 16:32:45 · answer #1 · answered by hmm 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
NOT! The W. J. Blythes (nèe Clintons) are as power-hungry as any despot in history, and they have a string of unexplained deaths a battalion strong about them. Back in Arkansas years ago, they worked in tandem to frustrate justice for certain persons with legitimate grievances. The Whitewater collapse stank of foul play, even though Federal prosecutors never did zero in on sufficient evidence to convict anyone of felony charges.
Not surprisingly, the Blythes have two answers for every question, just as did de Santa Anna during the 1830's and 1840's in Mexico (doing everything he could to bulldog the Mexican Congress into enacting his measures at the time, even while the United States Army was inbound after Palo Alto and Resaca de la Guerra).
2007-12-11 20:14:59 · answer #2 · answered by B. C. Schmerker 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
properly, i think of the Clinton call is standard sufficient that it somewhat does advise some thing, some thing very helpful to 3 electorate and very detrimental to different electorate. i'm going to be the 1st to admit that i grew to become into incorrect to underestimate the charm of Hillary Clinton. as quickly as she grew to become into stated as a skill 2008 candidate following the 2004 election, I undergo in concepts thinking, she's unelectable, she would be ready to't win something Kerry did no longer win. On paper, a incredibly liberal lady Senator from long island, i do no longer think of might have the skill to win outdoors of Kerry's blue states, yet there is a few thing diverse approximately Hillary Clinton, and that's the undeniable fact that many working type electorate do have faith the Clinton style, they loved and depended on President Clinton and thought that he did a sturdy job. So, to 3 diploma, i'm bowled over that she has finished so properly with working type electorate, i presumed that grew to become right into a real skill placing out for a John Edwards or an Evan Bayh or a Mark Warner. yet i think of you in addition to could could desire to undergo in concepts that he opponent is, enable's be honest, a liberal black guy from Chicago, consumer-friendly to color as an "elitist" or an "city liberal". So between the two, Sen. Clinton might theoretically come out on good with working type Democrats in rural states. i think of you're making a sturdy factor approximately this anti-Clinton company wing of the Democratic party, which i think of the media ignored and disregarded until it somewhat began to teach itself, the Kennedys, Kerry, Dodd, Richardson, between others, possibly desiring greater of a bite of the party that the Clintons have ruled when you consider that 1992, throwing their help to Sen. Obama, believing that he might destroy open administration of the party to 3 diploma. yet you should be maximum appropriate, the possibility of two consecutive Democratic presidents being from the Clinton kin might extra solidify their administration of the party, and probably many formidable Democrats feared that.
2016-11-26 00:08:46 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well early in her career she touted health care and mothers this and that which I always thought was nothing more than her political "gimmick."
I actually like Hillary in some weird way but no I won't vote for her simply because it really is another way for Slick Willy to get back under the international limelight and I've just about had enough of him.
hhmmm.... that's not really an answer is it?
No I don't trust her.... well maybe a little...
2007-12-11 20:08:53 · answer #4 · answered by Pi 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
NO. NO. NO. Have people forgotten about the Whitewater investigation, Vince Foster, Stealing furniture when she moved out of the White House, etc.? That makes her a Liar and a Thief in my book.
2007-12-11 21:01:23 · answer #5 · answered by Johnny Reb 5 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Absolutely.
When Hillary wins , as she said years ago "You get 2 for the price of one" We will be back when the world respected us.
The Clinton Years were Great! Hillary '08!
2007-12-11 19:58:10 · answer #6 · answered by vinny 5 · 1⤊ 5⤋
No more than my cat could be trusted with the life of a loose rat.
2007-12-12 21:26:27 · answer #7 · answered by wider scope 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
No, Have you ever had the feeling that something terrible was going to happen?
That's how i feel about her being president.
Her and the Bush family are to friendly behind closed doors but like enemies in public.
I would vote for just about any one before I would vote for her.
I think she would loose because many democrats would actually vote republican before they would vote for her.
2007-12-11 21:48:14 · answer #8 · answered by letfreedomring 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
You've got to be kidding?
This is a woman who moved to NY just to be Senator and represent people she has never known.
She is also the only American first lady to be subpoenaed for criminal behavior (Whitewater), though no wrongdoing was found.
For me, a veteran, this is a woman who came out in full strength in support of her husband's plan, "Regime Change in Iraq", in full support and belief of Saddam's WMD programs, and supported Bush publicly for the invasion.
She is now undermining our efforts with the influence of her position and distancing herself from the president.
That makes her, in my eyes, unworthy of Commander in Chief. She has no clue what it means to be loyal or committed.
2007-12-11 19:56:19 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 2⤋
No.
Why? Her history in the White House in the past alone speaks in volumes, let alone how she demonstrates her trustworthiness in the Democratic debates.
2007-12-11 20:00:35 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋