Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

If Hillary Got The Dem Nomination, Would You Vote For Her

Elections Pre-2008 Primaries Hillary Clinton

  • Please log in to reply
100 replies to this topic

Poll: Would You Vote For Hillary Clinton For President (40 member(s) have cast votes)

Apparently There Is Speculation That Hillary Clinton Could Be The Dem Nominee

  1. I'm A Dem And I'd Vote For Her (6 votes [15.38%])

    Percentage of vote: 15.38%

  2. I'm A Dem and I Don't Know If I'd Vote For Her (6 votes [15.38%])

    Percentage of vote: 15.38%

  3. I'm A Dem and Wouldn't Vote For Her (3 votes [7.69%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.69%

  4. I'm An Independent And I'd Vote For Her (4 votes [10.26%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.26%

  5. I'm An Independent But I'm Undecided About Voting For Her (5 votes [12.82%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.82%

  6. I'm An Independent And Wouldn't Vote For Her (9 votes [23.08%])

    Percentage of vote: 23.08%

  7. I'm A Republican And I'd Vote For Her (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  8. I'm A Republican And I'm Undecided If I'd Vote For Her (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  9. I'm A Republican And I Wouldn't Vote For Her (4 votes [10.26%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.26%

  10. It Depends On Who The GOP Nominee Is (2 votes [5.13%])

    Percentage of vote: 5.13%

If You vote NO, why not?- OR if voted Yes pleases mark #9

  1. I Don't Like Her, She's Too Pushy (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. I Beleive Her Opinions Change With The Political Wind (8 votes [20.51%])

    Percentage of vote: 20.51%

  3. I Don't Like Her Policies (3 votes [7.69%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.69%

  4. She's Bill Clinton's Wife (2 votes [5.13%])

    Percentage of vote: 5.13%

  5. Too Conservative (1 votes [2.56%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.56%

  6. Too Liberal (4 votes [10.26%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.26%

  7. She's Unelectable Because She Polarises People Along Party Lines. (4 votes [10.26%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.26%

  8. She's A Woman (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  9. I voted for her in the first half- so no entry here (17 votes [43.59%])

    Percentage of vote: 43.59%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#41 veganmom

veganmom
  • Islander
  • 1,408 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 09:34 AM

Something to be said for "entertainment value," or as I'd put it, fame/personality.
Perhaps people would be interested in politics again, and for a more positive reason than they are now.
Might serve her well, too, as she attempts to rebuild all our totally destroyed relationships with foreign powers/the world community, many of whose leaders already know her and had a good relationship with her and the president at that time.

#42 Ogami

Ogami
  • Islander
  • 2,976 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 10:35 AM

Veganmom wrote:

Might serve her well, too, as she attempts to rebuild all our totally destroyed relationships with foreign powers/the world community, many of whose leaders already know her and had a good relationship with her and the president at that time.

Are you referring to those countries like Russia, France and Germany who profited off of Saddam Hussein's blood-soaked dictatorship? Yeah, we really pissed them off for standing up to that evil thug.

If there was one single peace protest held here or in Europe against Saddam Hussein, I never heard about it. But we sure heard from these lowlives and scum when we moved to remove Saddam Hussein from power, you never heard such a hue and cry from the so-called "peace" activists. The only peace they approve of is the peace of the dictator and his dead opposition. Then all is peaceful in the world, in that sick view.

Is it really a credit for Hillary if she is perceived as the friend of more world leaders than Bush? The majority of the world is run by thugs and dictators, why would you want more of them as your friend? Far better to have the world's dictators fear and respect the U.S. than love us. Such love would be a foolish illusion, which people like Hillary fail to realize.

-Ogami

#43 veganmom

veganmom
  • Islander
  • 1,408 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 10:51 AM

I actually think it's more a general perception that we have gone from forging alliances and friendships to acting unilaterally and invading based on outright lies.

We used to walk a fine diplomatic line, being the world's only real superpower but still seeking allies and forging bonds.
We are now perceived generally as more of a bully, taking advantage of our status to act alone, as if we have the right to be in charge of everything and do what we want and everyone better stay out of our way.
It's easy (though shortsighted) to be the only superpower and act like a bully. It's tougher to be a superpower and act as a team player.

Not arguing FOR Hussein, of course. No one would.
Just wishing for more alliances and less resentment.

#44 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 11:34 AM

View PostOgami, on May 10 2006, 11:35 AM, said:

Veganmom wrote:

Might serve her well, too, as she attempts to rebuild all our totally destroyed relationships with foreign powers/the world community, many of whose leaders already know her and had a good relationship with her and the president at that time.

Are you referring to those countries like Russia, France and Germany who profited off of Saddam Hussein's blood-soaked dictatorship?

As opposed to the non-blood-soaked kinds?  

Quote

Yeah, we really pissed them off for standing up to that evil thug.

The world is filled with evil thugs, and we're in bed with a lot of them.  (Pakistan's evil thugs, for example; Saudi Arabia's, for another--and Bush likes to skip hand-in-hand with that dictator, which doesn't seem to bother you.)  The point is: we stood up to the wrong one.  

Bush's mandate from the American People (and, for that matter, from the world) was to obliterate the terrorists who caused 9/11.  Instead, after a half-assed, ultimately FAILED attempt to deal with them in Afghanistan, he refocused on his previous goal: revenge against a two-bit dictator who posed this country no threat whatsoever.  Way to go, Decider.  Really nailed that one.

Quote

If there was one single peace protest held here or in Europe against Saddam Hussein, I never heard about it. But we sure heard from these lowlives and scum when we moved to remove Saddam Hussein from power, you never heard such a hue and cry from the so-called "peace" activists.

It's called a war of aggression.  Look it up.  

Quote

Is it really a credit for Hillary if she is perceived as the friend of more world leaders than Bush?

Yes.

Quote

The majority of the world is run by thugs and dictators, why would you want more of them as your friend?

As outlined above, the thugs and dictators, for the most part, LOVE Bush.  He's been a boon to their regimes.  When we say world leaders, we mean our TRADITIONAL ALLIES, which Bush has alienated to an unprecedented degree.  The next president, no matter who he or she is, will be charged with rebuilding those relationships Bush has degraded or destroyed.  

That will be the next president's work--and, if successful, his or her legacy.  Cleaning up Bush's messes.  Whoever it is has their work cut out for them, that's for sure.

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#45 veganmom

veganmom
  • Islander
  • 1,408 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 11:38 AM

View Post_ph, on May 10 2006, 04:34 PM, said:

That will be the next president's work--and, if successful, his or her legacy.  Cleaning up Bush's messes.  Whoever it is has their work cut out for them, that's for sure.

Not to be overly depressive, but I think it's going to take most of the world and a lot of brainpower to clean up this mess. Hillary being smart and having relationships with world leaders may be just what we need. How many countries would take any other next American president with a HUGE grain of salt? But they may already know her. It may be the head start we need. We can't spend 8 years rebuilding these destroyed relationships and making up for the damage. We need a foot in the door.

#46 Ogami

Ogami
  • Islander
  • 2,976 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 11:50 AM

Veganmom wrote:

I actually think it's more a general perception that we have gone from forging alliances and friendships to acting unilaterally and invading based on outright lies.

The Oil for Food program was an alliance based on a lie. France, Germany, and Russia profited hugely from kickbacks from Saddam Hussein, while his people were deliberately starved of food and medical supplies so that Saddam Hussein could keep himself and his cronies in power.

Why would you want France as your ally in such a circumstance? Or Germany? Or Russia? I would not. Alliances for the sake of appearances are not in this country's interests, despite Senator Kerry's losing campaign slogan. Simply wanting the world to like us is not realistic. If you want the world to like you, let China or someone else be the leading superpower. Then America will be liked when we're no longer number one.

People who fail to understand the reasons why America is disliked will never understand why the world will never love us. It's not because of Bush, it's because of America's position, economically and militarily.

-Ogami

#47 Ogami

Ogami
  • Islander
  • 2,976 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 11:52 AM

_Ph wrote:

Bush's mandate from the American People (and, for that matter, from the world) was to obliterate the terrorists who caused 9/11. Instead, after a half-assed, ultimately FAILED attempt to deal with them in Afghanistan, he refocused on his previous goal: revenge against a two-bit dictator who posed this country no threat whatsoever. Way to go, Decider. Really nailed that one.

Bush's critics declared Afghanistan a failure before, during, and after, non-stop, for the entire five years we've been there. I hardly expect that tune to change, too many people have too much invested in their notions about the "failure" of our war on terrorism to ever change their views. I don't expect anything different from the "Bush distracted us from Bin Laden" crowd, ever.

-Ogami

#48 veganmom

veganmom
  • Islander
  • 1,408 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 11:57 AM

View PostOgami, on May 10 2006, 04:50 PM, said:

People who fail to understand the reasons why America is disliked will never understand why the world will never love us. It's not because of Bush, it's because of America's position, economically and militarily.

-Ogami

Pretty much have to disagree with you there. We've had a preeminent position for a number of years now, and have only truly been hated and resented over the past, I don't know, say 6-7 years?

Don't want love. Just want respect and cooperation. You don't get either by telling the world, "My way (based on stuff I made up) or the highway."

#49 veganmom

veganmom
  • Islander
  • 1,408 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 11:59 AM

BTW, Ogami, not to be stupid or to drag this off topic, but who's the picture? It's driving me crazy because it's so familiar.
Thanks.

#50 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 12:12 PM

Ummmm guys, no offense here but this is a poll about Hillary Clinton. I realise how and why it's veered off into the war, 911 etc... but the last thing I want is for this thread to totally spin out in an ugly way.

Quote

BTW, Ogami, not to be stupid or to drag this off topic, but who's the picture? It's driving me crazy because it's so familiar.
Thanks.

Hey Veganmom, the picture is of an actor on Battlestar Galatica.
Posted Image
Posted Image

#51 veganmom

veganmom
  • Islander
  • 1,408 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 12:14 PM

Thanks, Lin!!!

I have trouble disagreeing with anything Ogami says with that hunk o' cuteness staring out at me..... :D
Didn't mean for it to sound like it was getting ugly, but to get it back on track, yeah, I'd definitely vote for her. God, I hope she runs.

#52 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 12:23 PM

No problem veganmom and that wasn't directed at anyone in particular as being snarky. I just don't want it to slide into snarkiness (and you know how quick that can happen when Iraq, 911 etc...) gets thrown in the mix.
Posted Image
Posted Image

#53 veganmom

veganmom
  • Islander
  • 1,408 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 12:25 PM

Snark?
HERE?!?!?!?

When such touchy, opinion-filled subjects come up, and people (raising my hand) have such unassailable positions????
Naaaaaah.

I mean, Hillary isn't a bit polarizing. We need SOMETHING to discuss.
:D  :D  :D

I am loving this topic, though. Thanks for starting it.

#54 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 01:49 PM

View PostOgami, on May 10 2006, 12:52 PM, said:

_Ph wrote:

Bush's mandate from the American People (and, for that matter, from the world) was to obliterate the terrorists who caused 9/11. Instead, after a half-assed, ultimately FAILED attempt to deal with them in Afghanistan, he refocused on his previous goal: revenge against a two-bit dictator who posed this country no threat whatsoever. Way to go, Decider. Really nailed that one.

Bush's critics declared Afghanistan a failure before, during, and after, non-stop, for the entire five years we've been there.

That's quite simply not true.  There was unanimous support for Afghanistan before and it remained unanimous up to the time it became clear Bush was diverting billions of dollars and thousands of troops from the real mission (to get Bin Laden) to the personal crusade (to get Hussein, who not only didn't attack us, but *couldn't* attack us).  

Quote

I hardly expect that tune to change, too many people have too much invested in their notions about the "failure" of our war on terrorism to ever change their views.

A lot of people are changing their views these days--They just happen to all be Republicans.  "Bush's Critics," as of this moment, include 7 out of 10 registered voters, including nearly half of all Republcians.  

I wonder if you would share your reaction to that fact with the group?

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#55 MuseZack

MuseZack

    132nd S.O.C.

  • Demigod
  • 5,432 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 02:11 PM

Hillary's odious triangulation and seeming lack of core principles aside, by 2008 we will have had 28 years (!) with a Bush or a Clinton in either the presidency or vice-presidency.  Enough already!  The United States is in danger of becoming a latin American or south Asian oligarchy where power periodically switches between two famous families and their parties.  Are we a democracy or not?
"Some day, after we have mastered the wind, the waves, the tides, and gravity,
We shall harness for God the energies of Love.
Then, for the second time in the history of the world,
we will have discovered fire."
--Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

#56 Ogami

Ogami
  • Islander
  • 2,976 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 02:46 PM

Veganmom wrote:

Don't want love. Just want respect and cooperation. You don't get either by telling the world, "My way (based on stuff I made up) or the highway."

Sorry, but I don't buy it. When Europe begged Bill Clinton to act in Bosnia, it was because countries such as Germany and France did not want to lead, did not want to make an effort to help anyone, and we came in and unilaterally stopped the Serbians. No United Nations. We did it because other countries looked to us to lead the way.

But when their fat contracts with Saddam Hussein were threatened, these same countries didn't want America to lead the way. These same countries that begged us to stop ethnic cleansing in their backyard didn't care if Saddam Hussein continued to "cleanse" his little corner of the world.

So when these countries tell us we'd have their "respect" if we didn't act in Iraq, I say to hell with them and their lying respect. They look to America to lead when it suits them and then abandon us when we need their help. Their respect is worthless, and to lose it is to lose something we never got from them in the first place.

-Ogami

p.s. Baltar is a bit handsomer than I am.

Edited by Ogami, 10 May 2006 - 02:47 PM.


#57 Ogami

Ogami
  • Islander
  • 2,976 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 02:51 PM

Ph wrote:

That's quite simply not true.

This is what I love about debating you, Ph, because whatever the topic, I can usually find an article on CNN to support my position. I'd find an article on FoxNews, but they don't carry the same clout (I suppose) as CNN does regarding this Administration.

There was unanimous support for Afghanistan before and it remained unanimous up to the time it became clear Bush was diverting billions of dollars and thousands of troops from the real mission (to get Bin Laden) to the personal crusade (to get Hussein, who not only didn't attack us, but *couldn't* attack us).

Well................ That unanimous support as you term it lasted a matter of months, Ph, two to be exact after we invaded Afghanistan:

Daschle says war fails if bin Laden not found
February 28, 2002 Posted: 3:20 PM EST (2020 GMT)

http://archives.cnn....rism/index.html

Oh, my memory on the lack of Democrat unity goes back a long way, thank you very much.

-Ogami

#58 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 03:17 PM

Quote

Quote

There was unanimous support for Afghanistan before and it remained unanimous up to the time it became clear Bush was diverting billions of dollars and thousands of troops from the real mission (to get Bin Laden) to the personal crusade (to get Hussein, who not only didn't attack us, but *couldn't* attack us).

Well................ That unanimous support as you term it lasted a matter of months, Ph, two to be exact after we invaded Afghanistan:

That's nice, Ogami.  Only trouble is, you claimed the "unanimous support" never existed in the first place.  

ogami said:

Bush's critics declared Afghanistan a failure before, during, and after, non-stop, for the entire five years we've been there.

Emphasis mine.  While I commend you for attempting to post proof, what you posted doesn't remotely prove what you alleged.

You also side-stepped my question:

Quote

Quote

QUOTE
I hardly expect that tune to change, too many people have too much invested in their notions about the "failure" of our war on terrorism to ever change their views.


A lot of people are changing their views these days--They just happen to all be Republicans. "Bush's Critics," as of this moment, include 7 out of 10 registered voters, including nearly half of all Republcians.

I wonder if you would share your reaction to that fact with the group?

Edited by _ph, 10 May 2006 - 03:18 PM.

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#59 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 03:32 PM

Uh Ogami, I read your link and it doesn't back up your claims in any way. The opposition you speak of isn't even present in that link. Which basically said we needed to get Bin Laden and the other leaders of Al Qaeda. So where's this big opposition to the war on the part of Dems that you speak of?
Posted Image
Posted Image

#60 MuseZack

MuseZack

    132nd S.O.C.

  • Demigod
  • 5,432 posts

Posted 10 May 2006 - 04:00 PM

This is comedy gold.  The cited article is former majority leader Daschle saying in 2002 that the war on terrorism would be in danger if we didn't find Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar.  Four years later, those two still haven't been found, in large part because in early 2002 resources were already being pulled away from Afghanistan to plan for the Iraq invasion.  And as a result, Al Qaeda's leadership is safe and sound in Pakistan's tribal regions and the Taliban is regrouping and threatening to destabilize Afghanistan.  Not only does it completely fail to back up Ogami's assertion (big surprise there), Daschle looks like a prophet in that article.
"Some day, after we have mastered the wind, the waves, the tides, and gravity,
We shall harness for God the energies of Love.
Then, for the second time in the history of the world,
we will have discovered fire."
--Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Elections, Pre-2008 Primaries, Hillary Clinton

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users