If Hillary Clinton elected to run for president, would YOU vote for

Jump to Last Post 1-14 of 14 discussions (86 posts)
  1. gmwilliams profile image86
    gmwilliamsposted 10 years ago

    her? Why? Why not?  Ms. Clinton seem to have the best qualifications for president. She also has political experience and is a quite savvy person?

    1. Kathryn L Hill profile image78
      Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      No. Cuz she fell and hit her head.

      1. profile image0
        mbuggiehposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        Perhaps a better question to ask, and one that is answered in the affirmative if history is a guide of any value is:

        Is it time---finally,  for a women to be elected President of the United States?

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image78
          Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          - Perhaps, but only if she were more of a man.

          1. profile image0
            mbuggiehposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            Time will tell. If a woman is going to be elected president in 2016, it is likely that it will be Clinton. She is relatively moderate---the main reason she lost the 2008 Democratic Party primary to Obama.

            Like the Republican Party base, the Democratic Party base is, essentially, comprised of extremists uncomfortable with moderate candidates with  moderate positions and who have a track record of compromise and working across the aisles.

            1. Kathryn L Hill profile image78
              Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this

              - women need to work on their respectability in general, referencing Tina Fey (...who greatly influenced and ruined the public perception of Sarah Palin's character,)  and Amy Poehler at the Emmys. Women need to gain status while maintaining their roles or they won't be taken seriously.. and that is very tricky.

              1. Zelkiiro profile image85
                Zelkiiroposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                Don't be silly. Sarah Palin ruined her own reputation by being infuriatingly brain-dead.

                1. Kathryn L Hill profile image78
                  Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  She spoke the truth. She fought for what she believed in. That is just not enough is it?

                2. profile image0
                  mbuggiehposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  I must admit, I thoroughly agree with this assessment of Ms. Palin.

                  She is not only uninformed, but uneducated---particularly in politics and in anything remotely related to being president (or vice-president) and she seemed to think that her essential lack of information and education qualified her for the presidency.

                  And no, saying what one believes---especially when much of it is lies and/or disinformation,  is definitely NOT enough if one is seeking to be President of the United States or seeking any leadership position.

                  That said, specifically what "truth" did Palin speak?

                  Was it death panels? Was it equating Democrats and terrorists? Was it Paul Revere warning the British? Was it North Korea as the ally of the United States? Was it Alaska sharing a land border with Russia? Was it her repeated references to "blood libel"?

                  Or maybe her "truths" are her positions against stem cell research? Against feminism? Against same-sex marriage? Against gays and lesbians serving openly in the military?

                  Or perhaps her utterly nonsensical views (if one can call them that) about foreign policy, federalism, social security, taxation, national defense?

              2. rhamson profile image70
                rhamsonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                Palin is a ditz. She panders to the fears and hopes of people to get some degree of authority. She has no answers and is in it for herself and no one else.

                1. profile image0
                  mbuggiehposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  I am entirely amazed that the fact that she is a "ditz" and in it for herself---and herself alone, is lost on some people.

                  1. wilderness profile image94
                    wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                    Thinking that any politician is in it for you is a major error.  Palin probably cared more about people and the country than most politicians, but that isn't saying much.

                  2. profile image56
                    Education Answerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                    Palin is not as polished.  She comes off as flaky or a "ditz" to some people.  Hillary Clinton knows how to play politics.  That can be good, and that can be bad.  Palin says exactly what she's thinking; you get honesty from Palin, campaign-damaging honesty.  With Clinton, you get slick, savvy political responses.  She doesn't come off flaky or "ditzy," but you may or may not know what she's really thinking.  Every response from Clinton is analyzed and thought out while Palin shoots from the hip and puts her opinions, however popular or unpopular, out in the open. 

                    Hillary Clinton isn't in it for herself too?

    2. profile image0
      Brenda Durhamposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Why would I vote for someone who resigned her position in order to escape transparency and responsibility for her actions?

      People, even Republicans, hinted that Sarah Palin was a "quitter" when she decided to quit her Governorship.
      And yet, not one word have I heard against Hillary Clinton for being a quitter or for being the bullying whiner that she is.

      Not to mention, of course, that her social non-values are scary,  just like Obama's.
      And the fact that she is and will continue to be pushed into the political eye by liberals simply because she's a woman.   That's just plain wrong.    That's how we got the mess we now have----people wanted a "new" face just for the sake of saying they're so open and free and tolerant.   First, a black man.   Next,  a woman, simply because she's a woman............crazy.

      Oh yeah and I agree she hit her head.  ha.  hmm.    Not sure that changed anything though;  she was just as bad before she had her "accident"..........

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image78
        Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        You are a very brave person, Brenda. Many would respect her more if she had at least left her husband!  Why in the world did she stay after all the shenanigans he pulled with other women?
        But, then we all overlooked (In blind obedience) his shenanigans...after all, oval office experiences are not actual sex...
        He was a great role model for the youth. Not.
        Our country has never been the same. She could have done something, said something.
        - nothing...
        quiet as a cat.
        Meowing at us to love her.
        for what?

        1. profile image0
          Brenda Durhamposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          What do you mean?
          It's the truth!
          What's brave about saying that?

        2. Zelkiiro profile image85
          Zelkiiroposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          Seems everyone you don't like is a "bully."

          Do you actually know what "bully" means, or are you just that thin-skinned that any insignificant thing can offend you?

        3. AMFredenburg profile image74
          AMFredenburgposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          She had announced she was stepping down from the position of secretary of state long before Benghazi and that she wasn't going to do a second term, and she did ultimately testify. And I guess I object to your characterization of people who put a "black man" into office just because he was black. I voted for Obama twice, and black had nothing to do with it. It's not as if a bunch of people got together and voted for Snoop Dog; the man is qualified and rational and has some compassion, and that's what we need right now. *If* I choose to vote for Hillary Clinton, it won't be because of her gender but because I feel she's the best qualified and the person who most matches what I believe is good for the country.

        4. Jean Bakula profile image91
          Jean Bakulaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

          Hillary never resigned her position as SOS. She served her 4 year term, and decided against another term. She was sick, and rumor has it that she and Obama don't really get along anyway. Comparing her to a moron like Sarah Palin, who quit her governorship in the middle of a term, is ridiculous. Palin had political stars in her eyes and thought she could do better, but was unable to.

          1. rhamson profile image70
            rhamsonposted 8 years agoin reply to this

            Hillary "We have to raise the minimum wage and implement President Obama's new rules on overtime."
            This is more Obama rhetoric with a GOP majority Congress?  The only progress in this direction is on the state level. At least Bernie makes a $15.00 per hour promise and not a wishy washy maybe $12.00 per hour as Hillary. Bernie wants a voter revolution to throw the slime bags in the way of progress out of Congress through the vote. Hillary wants to work with the same people who have been paid off like her.

            Hillary "I'll crack down on bosses who exploit employees by misclassifying them as contractors."
            Ohh, ahh, they are all quivering in their boots. Another loophole will fix that with the lawyers in charge of the purse strings in Congress.

            Hillary "Let's establish an infrastructure bank that can channel more public and private funds, channel those funds to finance world-class airports, railways, roads, bridges and ports."
            Fat chance that will not be financed by us unless the Wall Street gang is willing to give up any of its’ power and influence which she is also a slave too, nothing will happen.

            Hillary "I'm committed to seeing every 4-year-old in America have access to high-quality preschool in the next ten years."
            Based on what sliding scale is she going to make that happen? Bush couldn’t even get the slimebags in Congress to fund “No Child Left Behind”. What makes anybody think that could happen?

            Hillary "I support the Buffett Rule, which makes sure that millionaires don't pay lower rates than their secretaries."
            Fat chance getting that by her handlers.

            Hillary "I have also called for closing the carried interest loophole, which lets wealthy financiers pay an artificially low rate."
            Another copy of Bernie’s platform. Unless we unite as Bernie says neither one has a chance of making that happen. Once again She is rubbing against her handlers.

            Hillary "When the government recovers money from corporations or individuals for harming the public, it should go into a separate trust fund to benefit the public. It, could for example, help modernize infrastructure or even be returned directly to taxpayers."
            When have you ever seen the government collect a penalty or overage and give it directly to us?

            Hillary "I've proposed a new $1,500 apprenticeship tax credit for every worker [businesses] train and hire."
            Apprenticeships run by who? The individual business’s? This would only benefit short time employment as the employer would only train those individuals to work their specific needs and not a well-rounded trade savvy worker.

            Hillary "I've called for reviving the New Markets Tax Credit and Empowerment Zones to create greater incentives to invest in poor and remote areas."
            Who did she call? Anybody answer? Ridiculous!

            Hillary "I will soon be proposing a new plan to reform capital gains taxes to reward longer-term investments that create jobs more than just quick trades."
            Without jobs there is no need to create a single program that rewards investment. Who wants to invest in a business that has no customers or at the very least a robust economy of consumers? Government never has created a job that wasn’t deficit spending for the taxpayer.

            Hillary "I will offer plans to rein in excessive risks on Wall Street and ensure that stock markets work for everyday investors, not just high frequency traders and those with the best – or fastest – connections."
            Really? She has refused to bring back Glass/Steagall repeatedly as her handlers know that would be something with teeth. Bernie is fighting for this in every speech he makes.

            Hillary Another engine of strong growth should be comprehensive immigration reform….Bringing millions of hard-working people into the formal economy would increase our gross domestic product by an estimated $700 billion over ten years."
            What GDP? We are trading at such deficits we can’t possibly catch up to anything like that as we are spending faster than we can accumulate. With the trade agreements she has endorsed the GDP will decline as precipitously as with all the past presidential trade policies.

            http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne … h-20150713

            1. Jean Bakula profile image91
              Jean Bakulaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

              I think Sanders has a lot of good ideas. But once the campaigning gets more serious, and he gets labeled a Socialist (a self admitted one) they are going to tear him to shreds with that. I agree with him that if Socialist countries have certain programs that work, why not try it here? Our two party system stopped working long ago. But whenever we try to have a 3rd party, it just takes enough of a percentage away from one of the other two candidates, and depending on who you like, it hurts your choice.

              If I thought Sanders had a chance to win I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. But I really don't think he can do all he promises either. His answers are always vague, and about the "revolution." Hillary has been pulled farther to the left than she is comfortable, and the R's keep moving farther to the right, thinking that's what the people want. But instead of having less government interference, they even want to interfere with family planning and religion, wanting legislation to tell families how to run every detail of their lives. No party is true to what they used to be.

      2. profile image0
        mbuggiehposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        Perhaps the people best able to answer this question are the people of New York whom Secretary Clinton represented in the US Senate before she joined the Obama Administration as Secretary of State.

        She was elected to the Senate with 55% of the vote and re-elected with some  67% of the vote.

      3. rhamson profile image70
        rhamsonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        It depends on who runs against her. She has history and skeletons in the closet but if the GOP focuses on that and not the merits of their own candidate they will lose again. I expect another dirty nonfactual presentation from both sides as usual so that the underlying backroom deals will be hidden or thought to be hidden.
        America will be side tracked with scandals, non issues and innuendo so as to muddy the waters and not get anything done. And the lemming electorate will come out and vote again to return to their slumber for another four years.

    3. Kathryn L Hill profile image78
      Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years ago

      You are right, of course.

    4. profile image0
      Brenda Durhamposted 10 years ago

      It's impossible to really know why she stayed with Bill.
      It's possible she's just a forgiving person,  but there are rumors of her own preferences in the area of personal sexuality,  and also evidence seems to point to her desire to keep politically attached.

      I just know I've seen evidence of her emotions being bottled up big-time.   When she lost the nomination to Obama,  she backed him in a speech telling her followers who would've voted for her, to now vote for Obama.   But she said it so robotically that I knew she had a hard time saying it.   
      And on the flip side, at the Benghazi hearings she spazzed out;  bad temper she has when she's crossed.  I was thoroughly ticked off myself when she tried to bully the American people the way she did.   She's on an ego trip like Obama is,  and doesn't like being accountable to anyone including the American people.

      1. profile image0
        Onusonusposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        I find it odd that she stayed with Bill and now demands that Anthony Wiener's wife leave him.
        http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09 … e-history/

        1. wilderness profile image94
          wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          Looks like we now have two sets of moral police; the repubs and the dems.

          Aren't we lucky!

          1. AMFredenburg profile image74
            AMFredenburgposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            The notion, if true, that the Clintons are telling Mrs. Weiner to ditch Anthony or get lost sounds pretty cynical, but to me there is a difference between Bill Clinton's randy behavior and Anthony Weiner's. Network news isn't reporting what Anthony Weiner texted, but luckily the cable networks are, and some of it includes violent sexual ideation to the point that it's scary. I'm not running for office, and I'm probably not the only one to think that running away from the guy is a good idea.

          2. profile image0
            mbuggiehposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            I hear you.

          3. profile image0
            Onusonusposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            I got news for you. Whenever someone makes a law, it's always based on a moral standard of some kind.

      2. aliasis profile image74
        aliasisposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        First: I think why she stayed with Bill is her own business. Bill and Hillary are politicians, leaders, and so on - their personal business is their personal business. And couples do work through affairs. I'm sure it was a very tough time for them, but I'm more concerned about their politics than their relationship.

        Second: Of course it was probably hard for her to say "vote for Obama." I mean, it's hard for any candidate to throw in the towel and try to channel support to your rival. Especially a presidential candidate. Bottling up emotions is what public figures have to do - everyone has to keep face and keep control of their feelings, and consider what they believe to be "the greater good."

    5. AMFredenburg profile image74
      AMFredenburgposted 10 years ago

      I would consider voting for her, and would certainly vote for her rather than any Republican on the horizon, but I do have reservations in that she doesn't seem able to turn on a dime. I think she got bogged down in bureaucracy after the earthquake in Haiti; we should have had boots on the ground and food and water distributed in hours, not days or weeks.

      1. Jean Bakula profile image91
        Jean Bakulaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

        The port was destroyed in the earthquake, and everything had to be airlifted. I don't know what that entails, it's not a really safe way to get heavy boxes or packages of food down to people. I would also have liked to see the people get help faster. I think we probably did the best we could at the time. From what I read, the situation is still not much better in Haiti.

    6. aliasis profile image74
      aliasisposted 10 years ago

      Yep, I would vote for Hillary Clinton. She's not perfect, but she's good - smart, very hard-working, gets involved with the people she represents, and certainly has more than enough experience. I agree with most of her politics and thing she's overall done a great job in her previous positions.

      And anyway, what would the alternative be? The way the Republican party is going (extreme conservative as of late, don't even try to reach out to youth, women and minorities) I doubt I'd like their candidate more.

    7. Wayne Brown profile image80
      Wayne Brownposted 10 years ago

      Personal life aside, I vote for someone to hold office because I perceived a leadership skillset.  I do not hold that perception with Ms. Clinton and see nothing of interest in her holding the office as it applies to the welfare of this nation's future.  I believe she has had more than ample time on the stage to demonstrate her ability to lead and in the end it all comes back to her words on Benghazi..."What difference does it make now, Senator?"  Anyone so willing to brush so many questions aside and and just get on with things does not fit my definition of a leader in any shape or form.

    8. innersmiff profile image66
      innersmiffposted 10 years ago

      Economic illiterate, police-statist, war-hawk . . . yup, she has perfect qualifications for the presidency, based on the buffoons we've seen in the office over the past 100 years or so. To answer your question: if I was American, and voted at all - hell no.

    9. sannyasinman profile image58
      sannyasinmanposted 10 years ago

      Vote for NOBODY

      NOBODY will keep election promises
      NOBODY will listen to your concerns
      NOBODY will help the poor and unemployed
      NOBODY cares!
      NOBODY tells the truth!

      If NOBODY is elected, things will be better for everyone

      1. rhamson profile image70
        rhamsonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        That is exactly what they wish us to do. No troublesome votes to worry about and no promises to catch them at in the next election. What we should focus on is the issues and our resolve to get them addressed. If we say it loud enough and long enough they will have to take them on as we unite in one voice. The problem is that the two party system allows only a choice against the other choice. No compromise or objective thinking is allowed and the deadlock stays in place. The system lives and breathes on this and we have to not be sidetracked by the silly issues that divide us.

        Term Limits, Publicly Financed Campaigns and Lobby Reform are the key to changing the slime pit on the hill.

    10. Kathleen Cochran profile image75
      Kathleen Cochranposted 8 years ago

      Yes.  Of the republican or democrat field, she is the only candidate anywhere near qualified to be president.

    11. Live to Learn profile image59
      Live to Learnposted 8 years ago

      Not in a million years. I lost respect for her as First Lady and she has done nothing to change my opinion of her since that time.

    12. Kathryn L Hill profile image78
      Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago

      It could be Donald vs Hillary. yikes Oh My Gosh! What has become of US?????

    13. RJ Schwartz profile image88
      RJ Schwartzposted 8 years ago

      What accomplishments?  She took up space in the Senate, only three meaningless bill bear her name, plus she missed tons of roll calls.  She was a dismal failure as SOS - think Arab Spring, Benghazi, and of course the Iran Nuclear Deal she worked on - probably will get us all killed eventually. 

      I'm sorry, but we need a leader, not someone who hides behind a YouTube video facade

      1. colorfulone profile image76
        colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this

        As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton made a deal with Japan after the Fukushima Nucler Power Plant explosion, to allow Japan to send food to the US without testing for radiation.   So, we are basically an experiment to see what the effects are.  While reports say that there has been a huge increase in cancer in Japan since the Fukushima spill.  Other countries were smart, and stopped Japan from sending food and many other products that may contain radiation, such as makeup.

        Hillary Clinton emails listed...including the ones that disappeared.
        http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/20 … shima.html

        1. Jean Bakula profile image91
          Jean Bakulaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

          Whether it's the Senate, Congress, Secretary of State, or the military, major decisions are not made alone. So I don't see how you can say Clinton had NO accomplishments. There is no person more qualified to be President, she knows how to make deals because she has relationships with Republicans in the Senate. What major accomplishment did Condi Rice have as SOS? I must have missed it. And W. let his Daddy's friends run everything. Plus all politicians make deals with more info than the public has. Hillary has been cleared of Benghazi many times, it's conservatives who want to keep it alive so their hate has a place to go. After what Trey Gowdy put her through, and mourned there was no new info, she deserves a medal. She told the congress she needed more troops and money, and they denied her that. Benghazi is on them.

          I guess you like the hate filled rhetoric of Trump? Most of what he wants to do is illegal. Nobody can harass Muslim neighborhoods, it's a civil rights violation and smacks of Nazi Germany.. I do believe other leaders and countries in the Middle East have to step up and start their own efforts to fight ISIS, because it's giving Islam a bad name, and these maniacs are only 1% of Muslims. Still, why shouldn't they get off their butts and have their own coalition?  A President needs permission to bomb a country. Out of 19 Republicans, there wasn't one good one. Well, I liked Lindsey Graham, he has a lot of experience having been the Judge Advocate General, (among other things) But he realizes you can't just kick 12,000 people out of the country, especially when they were born here.

          1. rhamson profile image70
            rhamsonposted 8 years agoin reply to this

            "On March 11, Hillary Clinton gave a speech. One member of the media asked her what she thought were the major accomplishments of her tenure as Secretary of State.

            She answered, "My accomplishments as Secretary of State? Well, I'm glad you asked. My proudest accomplishment in which I take the most pride, mostly because of the opposition it faced early on, you know. The remnants of prior situations and mindsets that were too narrowly focused in a manner whereby they may have overlooked the bigger picture and we didn't do that. Very proud. I would say that's a major accomplishment."

            Wow! Killer speech, Hills. I can hardly wait until 2016 so you will be able to speechify to your little heart's content. It will be interesting when you come to Missoula if you will be able to get the local libs to lower themselves to screaming and wailing and chanting and crying in your presence like the current fool in power did."    Scott Boyer, Hamilton [1]

            This is the typical gobily gook Clinton espouses as she bulldozes her way to the Presidency. She will be elected as we have a populace that cannot understand the media circus nor the political savvy of a polished politician such as Hillary Clinton. Four to eight more years of the same politics as usual will be the result of this ordained presidency. What we fail to understand or respond to is how much longer can we afford these shills.

            [1] http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons … ements.asp

            1. colorfulone profile image76
              colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this

              I missed that speech...but that's normal for me, because when Hillary opens her mouth the BS flows out. She has really pissed off a lot of Democrats (hundreds of thousands) with her far left nonsense.   Jim Webb is one of the biggest Dem icons and he endorsed Trump. No doubt it was Hillary's mis-handling of Benghazi that influenced him.

              1. Rodeon profile image58
                Rodeonposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                Well said. But I think everyone should be given a second chance, etc. smile

              2. Rodeon profile image58
                Rodeonposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                Who knows Hillary Clinton might end up being the best president ever? And in any case, if she gets elected, she would be the first of her kind: 1st female President of America.

                That would put some extra weight on her shoulders, and she might carry out something really exceptional as a president.

                1. colorfulone profile image76
                  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                  Hillary voted for the Iraq War.  Then, she supported the Obama administrations decision to pull out of Iraq without leaving forces to keep a resurgence by extremist terror groups from taking over.  But, then the Islamic State of Iraq emerged, created by and supported by the United States / CIA.  A lot of innocent blood has been shed.  Hillary is a warmonger, there would be continual war with her as president.  She is bought and paid for by her puppet-masters / Wall Street / Bankers / Corporations, etc.  I don't trust that anything good could come out of a Clinton II presidency.  The Clinton I was bad enough.

                  1. Rodeon profile image58
                    Rodeonposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                    Who, among this year's presidential candidates, do you really like (if there's any)?

                    1. colorfulone profile image76
                      colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                      For many reasons I support a Trump presidency.  #1 is that would bring a gridlock to the United States, primarily it would decrease the creation of laws and the agenda of the legislation who are bought by the world crime syndicate, and they are all in it together playing us / one another off each other. They are technocrats, the elites.

              3. rhamson profile image70
                rhamsonposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                It's not even far left that bothers me with her. She identifies with every cause out there and then takes it on as her own that she has been fighting for her whole life. She has quite a penchant for retro-active history. If the topic needs her stamp on it she makes up her own story to re-enforce her position so you will vote for her. She is so transparent and I don't know how anybody could get behind this sack of slime bag hypocrisy.

                1. Castlepaloma profile image75
                  Castlepalomaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                  Have you ever seen an assume advance ape sh*t throwing fests by illegitimate meat puppets piled any higher or deeper?

                  Would you not be more intelligent not to vote for your mafia monopoly owned slave masters.

                  I'ts so sad to watch them steal half your money and use it to kill mostly women and children by the millions. Vote them all, they are all bought and paid for. Even if Trump was highly honest ,which he is not, because did a job for him and know from inside about him. The real owners of America would shoot him like JFK.

                  1. Jean Bakula profile image91
                    Jean Bakulaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                    They all lie, or exaggerate what they think they can accomplish. Trump is attracting people who are fed up, which is OK, but he is also attracting bigots and troublemakers. Being an outsider may not be a benefit, because he may not realize all the checks and balances he will be subject to if he wins.

                    Sanders claims to be an outsider, but he's a sitting senator. He has some good ideas, but mostly seems to be stuck in the 1960s. I believe he is sincere, but have doubts about what he could accomplish. Revolution has its place, but he may as well be playing John Lennon's Revolution as his campaign song, or Age of Aquarius.

                    I still think Hillary has the most experience. She knows how the system works, the other two don't. Is she perfect? NO. Does she lie? Of course. They all do.

                    So what's the alternative? Nobody vote? Everyone has to vote earlier, in their local elections, so better people can be elected. The country is too divided, and there isn't anything anyone can say that will bring conservatives and liberals together. And that's a shame, because of the labels, it gets understood that each of the groups stands for a host of issues, where most people are conservative on some issues and more liberal on others.

                    1. Castlepaloma profile image75
                      Castlepalomaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                      CNN list of top sins in America is mostly related to sex, then there is pot and cheating on your income tax. Non of this is the Government's business and it's all unconstitutional toleit paper now. Making the Government the greatest criminals toward our human rights and freedom.

                      If an Alien ever came down and I had to explain my leader. The Alien would have to label this planet :No intelligent beings here:

                      We give our leaders half our money, to boss us around every day. Take our freedom rights away, debt us for life and our children. To pollute our air, water,and mostly our food. To kill us, steal from us, repeat the same overseas. Public servant have the most unsatisfied job in the nation which is the greatest waste of time in human history.

                      Now I dare anyone to vote with an honest conciseness. It's much better to ignore them or better still to lock up the top leaders.

    14. colorfulone profile image76
      colorfuloneposted 8 years ago

      "So I don't see how you can say Clinton had NO accomplishments."
      - Jean Bakula

      I don't remember ever having said that.   I know I have read about Hillary's lack of accomplishments on different sites though.

      "What major accomplishment did Condi Rice have as SOS? I must have missed it." 

      I'm sure there are several sites with information for you to read about that...I don't know.

      Hillary, has not been cleared of Benghazi...Obama's DOJ doesn't seem to want to indict her and its not for lack of evidence that the FBI has.  She seems to be above the law for now. 

      "Most of what he (Trump) wants to do is illegal."   

      REALLY?  Please provide proof of that.   

      Clinton could be considered a founding member of ISIS by being a member of the administration when the vacuum was created in Iraq. (2013) She could have resigned instead.

      1. Castlepaloma profile image75
        Castlepalomaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

        I don't know if Trump means what he says.
        If he dose, world war 3 will come sooner with even greater suffering.

        Otherwise vote them all, they are all the same. They will all have their scribes to dictate by their debtor puppet masters along with the Media. When we allow them to build roads schools and hospital they were healthy and good. Not anymore when we allow them to run our live and keep paying higher for it

    15. ptosis profile image66
      ptosisposted 8 years ago

      For those who  want a good overall background of Ms Clinton then  see the comment section of http://www.coronadonewsca.com/opinion/i … badd4.html

      where  Sally Smith posted at 4:17 pm on Fri, Mar 25, 2016. :

      "When Bill Clinton was president, he allowed Hillary to assume authority over a health care reform. Even after threats and intimidation, she couldn’t even get a vote in a democratic controlled congress. This fiasco cost the American taxpayers about $13 million in cost for studies, promotion, and other efforts.

      Then President Clinton gave Hillary authority over selecting a female attorney general. Her first two selections were Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood – both were forced to withdraw their names from consideration. Next she chose Janet Reno – husband Bill described her selection as “my worst mistake.” Some may not remember that Reno made the decision to gas David Koresh and the Branch Davidian religious sect in Waco, Texas resulting in dozens of deaths of women and children.

      Husband Bill allowed Hillary to make recommendations for the head of the Civil Rights Commission. Lani Guanier was her selection. When a little probing led to the discovery of Ms. Guanier’s radical views, her name had to be withdrawn from consideration.

      Apparently a slow learner, husband Bill allowed Hillary to make some more recommendations. She chose former law partners Web Hubbel for the Justice Department, Vince Foster for the White House staff, and William Kennedy for the Treasury Department. Her selections went well: Hubbel went to prison, Foster (presumably) committed suicide, and Kennedy was forced to resign.

      Many younger votes will have no knowledge of “Travelgate.” Hillary wanted to award unfettered travel contracts to Clinton friend Harry Thompson – and the White House Travel Office refused to comply. She managed to have them reported to the FBI and fired. This ruined their reputations, cost them their jobs, and caused a thirty-six month investigation. Only one employee, Billy Dale was charged with a crime, and that of the enormous crime of mixing personal and White House funds. A jury acquitted him of any crime in less than two hours.

      Still not convinced of her ineptness, Hillary was allowed to recommend a close Clinton friend, Craig Livingstone, for the position of Director of White House security. When Livingstone was investigated for the improper access of about 900 FBI files of Clinton enemies (Filegate) and the widespread use of drugs by White House staff, suddenly Hillary and the president denied even knowing Livingstone, and of course, denied knowledge of drug use in the White House.

      Following this debacle, the FBI closed its White House Liaison Office after more than thirty years of service to seven presidents.

      Next, when women started coming forward with allegations of sexual harassment and rape by Bill Clinton, Hillary was put in charge of the #$%$ eruption” and scandal defense. Some of her more notable decisions in the debacle were:

      She urged her husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit. After the Starr investigation they settled with Ms. Jones.

      She refused to release the Whitewater documents, which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special Prosecutor.

      After $80 million dollars of taxpayer money was spent, Starr's investigation led to Monica Lewinsky, which led to Bill lying about and later admitting his affairs.

      Hillary’s devious game plan resulted in Bill losing his license to practice law for 'lying under oath' to a grand jury and then his subsequent impeachment by the House of Representatives.

      Hillary avoided indictment for perjury and obstruction of justice during the Starr investigation by repeating, “I do not recall,” “I have no recollection,” and “I don’t know” a total of 56 times while under oath.

      After leaving the White House, Hillary was forced to return an estimated $200,000 in White House furniture, china, and artwork that she had stolen."

      1. rhamson profile image70
        rhamsonposted 8 years agoin reply to this

        Now that's the Hillary we have come to know and forget. What is funny is some will bring up other past candidates indiscretions as a defense to these. There are better candidates.

        1. Castlepaloma profile image75
          Castlepalomaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

          Yes much better candidate's - The collective consciousness of the people,  the true leader's throughout history with vast majority of positive change. Not the collective rich debtor slave masters and their minions for centuries.

          1. rhamson profile image70
            rhamsonposted 8 years agoin reply to this

            This is just another ego trip for her trying to make her life relevant to history. I still want to know what she has accomplished except chaos.

            1. Castlepaloma profile image75
              Castlepalomaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

              Why vote for the a lesser of two evil.
              Henry Ford quoted. If people really knew what the Federal Government is doing to the people. The people would have a revolution the next mourning.
              We can keep local governments and their taxes.
              Just abolish Federal Government, Fed taxes and bankers. Then watch the vast majority of the debt, guns, war, terrorist and basic living heal it's-self.

              1. rhamson profile image70
                rhamsonposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                I don't see a plausible way of abolishing the Federal Government as the states would become embroiled in jurisdictional and common defense issues for starters. What would be a big improvement is making the Federal Government more representative of it's constituency.

                1. Castlepaloma profile image75
                  Castlepalomaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                  Greed and power is absolutely corruption.
                  The owner of this country will not grow conciseness, they are too soiled from doing anything they want. Only small grass groups and the masses will make change. It happens throughout human history, it must happen again now.

                  Mark my words,  either we put our scumbags top owner in prison or we will have a World War 3 war Feberal are the largest crimimal organizion in the world.

                  I'm already preparing for the US dallor cash and have two isolated landbase sustainable community  ready. US has turn from greatest country in world to a confederation of caged soiled chickens.


    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

    Show Details
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
    ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)