OK Dems, let's hear your reasons you think she would be the best person to be elected President and be the leader of the free world! What does she bring to the table.

Don't bother comparing her to Bush, just in case you're one of those who doesn't know he's not running.

Our system does not lend itself to electing the "best person" to be president. It rewards people who are ambitious, are likable or at least not too unlikable, seem "presidential," and can raise a ton of money. The "best person" is probably someone we've all never heard of.

A better question might be: is Hillary the best choice of all of those now running for 2008? At this point I think I'd prefer Obama or Edwards, but I could support Hillary if she's nominated. I prefer her over all the choices on the Republican side.

Historical predictions about whether someone would be a good president have usually been wrong. Few people had high expectations of Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, or Franklin Roosevelt just as they were taking office, yet they have turned out to be among our best presidents ever.

Andrew

The question remains unchanged.

I wouldn't vote for her if she was the ONLY one on the ticket! The only thing she brings to the table is a different direction from the disaster we currently have in the White House now.
Remember this..... If Hillary gets elected it's the EXTREMEIES that did this and it's just a reaction do the mess they created.

She has recently discussed helping home owners, who have poor loans. That's a focus on ordinary Americans kind of approach, I think is key.

She has many years working with and learning from many labor causes. My wife and her have met, on more than one occasion. Said meetings were not in fancy hotel rooms, but plain old buildings where difficult work was being done. Those conversations were just good conversations --like one could have with another person one knows. No worries about saying the wrong thing.

In fact, when confronted with disagreement, she listens and learns. Leading is not being right all the time, it's leading! She knows this difference. That's a really great thing to have in a President.

That same experience that makes her somewhat jaded and part of the system we all have a problem with, does also mean knowing a lot of people and having things to draw from.

If she ends up being the first woman President, expectations will run very high. That's in our favor generally.

She is not stupid.

There is considerable strength of character demonstrated in how she has handled Bill over the years. That's largely rational behavior. A very good indicator of having an ability to engage people and processes without having to also battle emotional issues, that are not warranted.

I don't think she would be the best. I think that would be Edwards. However, I do think she would be very good. At this point, that's a significant improvement that is needed.

IMHO, she is gonna get the nod. I find her working hard to address the issues one by one. Given the love / hate affair many people have, and her high name recognition, I expected to see different numbers than I'm seeing.

That's not playing out as expected. Not sure what it means, but I do know it does resonate with the value in simply being known. Politically, there is a lot of value in that, given it's not all been marginalized. With Hilary, that's the case, leaving her with the ability to still set expectations.

She is not stupid.

I will give her that.

I doubt you'll see the Republican party candidate on Letterman. She will be on this Thursday I believe and Bill will be on Sep 4th.

"OK Dems, let's hear your reasons you think she would be the best person to be elected President and be the leader of the free world! What does she bring to the table."

Is it OK if I don't believe she would be - yet? Or is this just an exercise? I mean, do you want us to believe it? Or just practice debating?

( I'm not asking that with sarcasm ).

Hillary will make a fine president. Personally, I'm firmly behind Obama at this point and hope he wins the nomination. If not, it will be Hillary, and I will happily vote for her. I believe she has the experience and leadership needed, has the connections to fill her cabinet with competent people, and will see to it that America's priorities come back to the common man, not the top 1%.

Hillary is very bright, and obviously has some background as to what the job entails ... I wouldn't count her lack of experience in elected office count against her, she is very shrewd and knows what she's doing.

That said, I don't trust her. She lacks some things that her husband had in spades, namely diplomacy and political savvy. Bill did a fantastic job of working with the hand he was dealt and making the best of what was a bad situation after the 1994 Republican Revolution ... he worked WITH the GOP majority and got a lot of things done on a bipartisan level.

I don't think Hillary can do the same, she is reviled in the GOP circles and she is not well liked within her own party. She also flip-flops ... she wants us to think she is a moderate, when she is a bit left of that. There are other candidates I would consider from the Democrats, I am intrigued by Obama (to be honest, I find his brutal honesty and willingness to call it as he sees it refreshing) and am a BIG Bill Richardson fan ... it would take a LOT for me to vote for Hillary over most of the GOP candidates, none of which I am enamored with.

If Hillary ran against Dubya though, she'd get my vote! My God I thought I would never say that!

If Hillary ran against DUHbya though, she'd get my vote!

As would 75% of America.

I don't care if she ran against Kim Jong Il I would NEVER vote for her. I’ll vote ABC (Anybody But Clinton)

I believe that this upcoming election is going to 2 two things, neither of them are good for the US.

1 - Divide the country more so than it already is.

2 - Truly be a "Pick the less bad" person. There is no one really good that I have seen yet that makes me think "There would be a good President"

Me as well!
BUT....
HODAD

Hillary over DUHbya anyday!
Ill over DUHbya!
Castro over DUHbya!
Hell, Ill and Castro over NIXON!

If Hillary can divide the country more than what George W Bush has, then I have seriously underestimated her abilities.

Skybill, you wouldn't vote for a Democrat no matter what. What does count are the people on the fence...and that will come down to (IMHO) more of the same or a new direction.

Us fence-riders I feel will dictate what happens in 2008 more than any time in recent history. There are SO MANY of us that lean to the right that are disenfranchised with the current regime and the overall direction of the GOP that we will strongly consider voting for a Democrat before another knucle-dragger.

Is there something wrong with that? I know that people like Herb are not interested in my vote, I am simply not conservative enough so he has no interest in me voting for his candidate. At least most in the Democratic party seem interested in my vote.

>>>"and that will come down to (IMHO) more of the same or a new direction."


Earth to Vitology, earth to Vitology. They're going to get a new direction regardless of who they vote for. Bush ain't running.

I'd vote for a Democrat if they had the views that I support.

1 - Anti-Abortion.
2 - Pro 2nd Amendment.
3 - NO MORE TAXES.
4 - No more socialist programs. (#3 would limit #4)
5 - Smaller Government.

There's more, but I have to go BBQ some MDP. (marinated dead pig)

I presume you didn't vote for Republicans in the last few elections, Skybill, after they gave you bigger and bigger government since Bush took over in 2001, including the Medicare prescription drug benefit? Do you consider Medicare and Medicaid socialist programs you would simply do away with?

Do you agree with Dick Cheney that "deficits don't matter" and that it's OK to keep borrowing as much as you want?

Andrew

No Deane, the GOP will still be the GOP without Bush in charge, which is the "same thing". A Democrat would be "something different." I don't see the same thing beating something different right now.

Don't forget the campaign slogan during their first Presidential campaign in 1992. Vote for one, and you get both.

We did. Do you really want to try that again?

Absolutely!

We could do a whole lot worse.

Oh wait, we ARE!!!

Stonewall writes:
Don't forget the campaign slogan during their first Presidential campaign in 1992. Vote for one, and you get both.

We did. Do you really want to try that again?

Compared to the last 7 years? In a heartbeat!

Andrew

And, I suppose you believe too, that they will unite the American people as they did so well during Clinton I.

She has far too much baggage, and a track record that will give her zero chances of ever being respected in any position she might occupy, by a very large segment of the population.

I fear that the Presidency itself would suffer a blow should she ever hold it. It must represent something far more a position of power which can be utilized to gratify, whatever it is, that motivates either of those two, but especially her, to seek it.

One thing is certain however, the welfare of the nation as a whole won't be receiving anything more than lip service should she be elected.

Stonewall said.. I fear that the Presidency itself would suffer a blow

What? Again?

Stonewall writes:
And, I suppose you believe too, that they will unite the American people as they did so well during Clinton I.

Clinton left office with a 65% approval rating. Compared to the current Occupant that's as united as you can get.

She has far too much baggage, and a track record that will give her zero chances of ever being respected in any position she might occupy, by a very large segment of the population.

And what's your point? Bush has somehow managed to govern when his approval ratings linger around 30% - and some of those people who still "approve" of him probably meant George H. W. Bush. While Hillary might have a few of the problems you suggest, Bush's are far, far worse.

I fear that the Presidency itself would suffer a blow should she ever hold it.

If the institution of the presidency can survive Bush II, it can survive Hillary in office for eight years, having an affair with Monica while taking bribes and admitting to having had Vince Foster knocked off in 1993 (for which she could just pardon herself). The damage this Idiot has done to America and the presidency is so immense that Hillary in her wildest, dark fantasies couldn't do 10% of the damage Bush II has done.

Andrew

"let's hear your reasons you think she would be the best person to be elected President"

I'll vote for her if she is the lesser of the 2 evils. Period.

And Andrew nails it (as usual).

Simple Answer: She Wouldn't.

End of Thread!

(bump)

my answer to deane's question: "She is not stupid."

>>>"I'll vote for her if she is the lesser of the 2 evils. Period."

That's what we did when Bush was running. Did it work?

No.
The Supreme Court appointed the loser.

*plonk*

A *plonk* from Merk!

I'm honored!