Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am a Democrat and I gladly support Hillary. In fact, I was a Republican for over 20 years and switched parties so I could vote for Hillary in the primary 8 years ago. I stayed a Democrat since then and am glad to support Hillary in 2016 also. I voted for her in the 2016 primary even though I like Bernie a lot.
She is one strong person to put up with the constant smear campaigns from the Republicans.
She's been favored to win the presidency all along and she's still ahead in the polls, even with the email scandal.
The GOP thought they would win the election by smearing Hillary. Instead, the GOP handed the election to Hillary when they elected Trump. Now the GOP is going to lose to Senate and possibly the House, especially since they are still focused on smearing Hillary. In the mean time they have modern day Hitler as a candidate and he can't even get along with people in his own party.
Smear campaign, huh?
Is that what we call all of her issues? All of her lies? All of her unethical behavior?
Is it a smear campaign when HILLARY said she dodged sniper fire in Bosnia, but the recorded VIDEO showed her taking a sunny stroll down a read carpet?
Hillary Clinton is Hillary Clinton's worst enemy.
And Hillary Clinton sycophants are the enemy of informed people.
In a way, I feel that Hillary was forced on me by the Republicans. Kasich was my first choice, but nope they didn't want him. I would have been OK with Bush but he was a no go. Probably would have voted for Rubio instead of Hillary; so much for that idea. Nominating Trump has pretty much backed me into a corner; so Hillary gets my vote.
In the 2008 Primary, I was rabidly pro-Obama and anti-Clinton.
Even so I was surprised and impressed by how graciously she conceded to and then supported Obama. She's the consummate team player.
Last summer when the Primary started heating up, I preferred her to Bernie but was wishy-washy at best in my support. As the year went on I read a few books about her but only one grabbed me - Kim Ghatttas' The Secretary: A Journey with Hillary Clinton from Beirut to the Heart of American Power. It's an objective and scrupulously annotated account that sheds a lot of light on her primary battle with Obama, her tenure at State, her leadership style, and her approach to political, governmental, and global issues. That book more than anything tipped me over to becoming a committed supporter.
DH, who's a political junkie and has actually read ALL the Caro books on Bill Clinton, had been telling me that Bill always insisted Hillary was the smartest, hardest working, and most competent person he had ever known in his life. I had dismissed that as Bill's attempt at spousal flattery but Ghattas' book convinced me he was on to something.
Then of course there was the remarkable resilience, intelligence, poise, and competency she exhibited in the 11-hour congressional Benghazi grilling. That's when I became a dedicated, enthusiastic supporter.
In addition - this is not small thing to me - I became increasingly impressed by the praise heaped upon her by the many many people who have known and worked with her for years and who endorsed her candidacy. That alone set her apart from every other candidate in both parties.
She's not a perfect candidate. No one is. But she's the most qualified candidate in my lifetime and I'm 67 y.o.
Last edited by biscuitmom; 07-09-2016 at 02:12 AM..
I'm a Democrat, and I support Hillary because her policies are solid and she's unquestionably qualified. I'm not really a fan of her as a person, but I don't choose presidents the same way I choose friends. I leave it to the Republicans to vote for drinking buddies.
At first I really wanted her as a great second choice to Sander's, which is kind of unusual for someone in the Sander's camp. But the aggression against Hillary and the traditional Democratic Party by Sander's supporters really turned me off all the while, though I didn't give up on Bernie until The California loss.
I do feel like there was actually more pressure to vote Sander's because the meme being spread around liberal forums was Hillary was a terrible choice. But I've always thought a lot of Sander's supporters acted and still are acting terribly towards Clinton. But not only that, demonizing a front running candidate that much is just not smart politics.
Count me in as a Democrat who is not unhappy with our choice. I don't feel she has been forced on the party, I feel like she has earned this spot. I can't think of anyone who is more qualified or more prepared for the job.
The nonstop Republican witch hunts against the Clintons--for things that many in the GOP do as well but get a pass on within their own party--have done nothing to dissuade me. I watched the first run of this Republican farce play out through the '90s. It seems like smear campaigns are the only play the GOP has. It proves to me that the Republicans have no ability nor desire to actually govern.
I'm not unhappy either. I wanted to vote for her in 2008 but ended up having to vote for Obama instead.
I was interested in Bernie early on - but after numerous interviews, debates, and town halls, I began to think Clinton was the one who might actually accomplish some of my ideals.
I am a Democrat and I gladly support Hillary. In fact, I was a Republican for over 20 years and switched parties so I could vote for Hillary in the primary 8 years ago. I stayed a Democrat since then and am glad to support Hillary in 2016 also. I voted for her in the 2016 primary even though I like Bernie a lot.
She is one strong person to put up with the constant smear campaigns from the Republicans.
She's been favored to win the presidency all along and she's still ahead in the polls, even with the email scandal.
The GOP thought they would win the election by smearing Hillary. Instead, the GOP handed the election to Hillary when they elected Trump. Now the GOP is going to lose to Senate and possibly the House, especially since they are still focused on smearing Hillary. In the mean time they have modern day Hitler as a candidate and he can't even get along with people in his own party.
In a way, I feel that Hillary was forced on me by the Republicans. Kasich was my first choice, but nope they didn't want him. I would have been OK with Bush but he was a no go. Probably would have voted for Rubio instead of Hillary; so much for that idea. Nominating Trump has pretty much backed me into a corner; so Hillary gets my vote.
I think you have touched on the quandary a lot of voters find themselves in.
There are a lot of moderate liberals who could have voted and accepted a Kashich presidency; he has a record of accomplishment, has shown himself to be willing to compromise for the common good, and was liked as a Governor well enough by the citizens of his state.
But the feeling everyone and everything in D.C. is rotten beyond the hope of repair is strong in both parties once more.
Far too many folks believe that somehow a business expert is the equivalent of a political expert, a foolish belief, as the two professions are very different.
Too many folks believe that an outsider is un-corruptible, another foolish belief, and one that already shows vividly how false it is. Our Congress is full of former outsiders who had no political experience at all, and they've done nothing to assuage our common frustrations.
Bernie is not an outsider at all. He's been in Congress for decades, so he was better fit for the job than a person like Trump or Carson. Trump has not shown himself to ever be satisfied with what he has, like Bernie.
Hillary has always shown more ambition than Bernie, so there are parallels between Sanders and Trump, in their outsider-ship, but that's all the comparison to be found.
There are comparisons in Trump and Clinton in their ambition, but that all the comparison to be found in them, too.
The voters were asked to think triangularly this time; experience vs. novice, outsider novice vs. experienced outsider, and experience vs. experience.
We are used to thinking in a two-way offering, not a three-way offering. It's hard to change what we are all accustomed to thinking, especially in politics.
The elections of 2010, 2012, and 2016 haven't changed anything in Congress. Why? Because we have elected far too many political novices. Continuing to elect them in hopes something will change if we just do what we did some more is idiotic.
Political skill is very difficult to acquire. A subtle art few can understand and even fewer can use with ability, even after decades in office. Real leadership that accomplishes the voters' desires is so rare that there are always a small handful of officials who know how to do it.
It's the mental equivalent of dropping the side of a skyscraper exactly onto the bolts in the base that will hold it up. No sane person would expect a hotel financeer to operate the 40-story crane that lifts the wall, but somehow, they are willing to hand over a much more delicate job to the same person.
After all, if the guy who put the deal together did run the crane, and the wall fell down, it's only one wall of one skyscraper. If the same guy failed in the White House, the entire nation would fall down. Trying to replace the nation is a hell of a lot harder than rebuilding one wall of a tall building.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.