Why not Clinton...

[PrincessFiona]

OK...I have to know.....

Yes, Obama is the current rock star playing for the "in" crowd...but...why are so few people here giving Hillary Clinton a serious look? I'm perplexed. I have heard so many negative things (not here) about Clinton in the last few weeks...about her hair, suits, being a beeyotch, not being feminine (ie she should wear skirts and soften her make-up) etc. I believe she is being judged by a double standard.

But if you vote based on the issues....can you tell me what sets Barack Obama apart from Hillary Clinton.

I would vote for Obama too...so don't misunderstand my post...but here is my concern:

Obama has been actively working in the Senate for what...a year... :huh: He has no military service and his CV is pretty...empty for now. He is high on hope and change, but he doesn't have a strong record to back it up with. Hillary Clinton has made her political mistakes, but she has a fairly solid record that you can look at in terms of her votes etc.

If the Junior Senator from Illinois goes up against John McCain (the grouchy old man <that I still like >) who seems to have less charisma but is a war hero and has a great deal more experience....I think Obama will lose. I say this because my republican dad has all but begged me to vote for Obama. "Kris, he's the best candidate. Don't vote for Clinton". Why would my DAD..Mr. Swiftboat veteran himself...want Obama on the ticket for the dems? I think it's because the republicans have electile dysfunction this time around and have no good candidates and he thinks that Obama is beatable. I also think that might be why some in the media are really giving Obama a free pass on everything while Hillary seems to be taking a nasty beating by members of CNN and MSNBC etc.

Again, I'm just curious, and I think everyone should vote for the candidate that represents them and their interests the most.

But what makes Obama the "clear" winner that has so many people feeling like they are being swept up in a movement that will never come again? That is kind of freaky to me. He's a great speaker, but....what else?

Kris

Re: Why not Clinton...

They are incredibly similar in their views. Incredibly similar. And if HRC is the nominee, I will certianly vote for her.

- I don't like the idea of 2 families controlling our country for 24 / 28 years. According to Harpers: 1/4 of the population of this country has never known a president not named bush or clinton. if hill takes two terms, that'll go up to 1/3.

- I don't like how she's doing the 'pick and choose' - throw a little, partially true nugget out there, out of context - and see what damage it can do. The "schilling for Rezko" thing really bugged me. I looked it up and he billed 5 hours for Rezko. 5 hours. In lawyer world that can mean he looked over a file! It's not as though he was their corporate attorney! It's like the right-wing & their emails screaming that Obama won't put his hand on his heart for the pledge of allegience.

- I like what he's proposed for college education. He wants to give students a $4000 grant, for which they will do some kind of work -- community service, etc.

- I like his agressive and open stance on energy, and raising mileage standards. He's not cowtowing to anyone, and I really appreciate that.

- I like that he's a junior senator. I like that he's fresh and new. I like that he's -- yes, I'll say it -- hopeful. I don't feel like rotating chairs is getting the job done. Yes - the world was a much better place when Bill Clinton left office. But the Clintons will bring with them loads of baggage, enemies, people intent on focusing on ANYTHING bad. I feel as though Obama can be a fresh, new start -- and I feel that that is what we need.

I don't think that he's easier to beat than HRC. I honestly feel the opposite way. I think the Obama campaign has done an amazing job of galvanizing the youth vote, and the African American vote. I think HRC has so many people with SUCH strong feelings about her. There are so many dems that just HATE her, and would flip towards a McCain MUCH more quickly than they would with Obama. Even as I've been out looking for t-shirts, etc. ... the Obama - over - Hillary ones (not made by his campaign, of course) are just MEAN. "Bro's before Ho's" , and references to her being a beeyotch. I've said from the start that I felt she was just soooo divisive, I was afraid she couldn't win.

[PrincessFiona]

Re: Why not Clinton...

Great response, Jenn! Thanks.

The only thing that I would want to add is that the Rezko thing is actually more than that. Obama has had a 17 year relationship with him and was invovled in some land purchases with Rezko...including his own home and the lot next door. I do think that is something interesting.

I think both Obama and and Clinton have thrown out attacks that are silly...that's politics though. The whole "fairy tale" thing was a low blow by the obama folks who have tried to make it look like Bill and Hillary are racist or something. I think that is wrong. The Obama folks have done plenty of picking and choosing.

I have to say that I'm personally turnd off by his air of arrogance....He has made a few remarks that I find to be..well...arrogant. And...I do believe that there was a snub that happened at the State of the Union that night....that I find to be unprofessional.

I do share your feelings about the Clinton-Bush-Clinton thing...but I think I can look past that.

I liked reading your thoughts...thanks.

Re: Why not Clinton...

Of course he's arrogant. She is too. It just gets called "bitchy" and "unapproachable" when it's a woman. We've talked a few times about the monster sized egos these folks must have. It takes some serious chutzpah to say "I should be the leader of the free world".

I'll 2nd what Julia said. I trust him to surround himself with smart people and actually listen to them (to compensate for his lack of experience).

[Vanquisher]

Re: Why not Clinton...

The problem is, as I see it, that the president CAN do things without listening to advisors or Congress. Stem cell research, vetoes, and all sorts of executive orders that have left me wondering if the president really is under our system of checks and balances. Furthermore, lifetime justice appointments to the Supreme Court can shape our nation incredibly!

I will vote for whichever democratic candidate wins the election, and I hope that we have a democrat in the White House next January, but I am concerned that Senator Obama is a little naive in what he thinks he can accomplish, and I am worried that will lead to a one-term appointment. I think it will take a few years, at least, to get out of the recession we are currently in and the other messes to boot. Nothing goes as fast as we think it should, and red tape and beaurocracy abounds.

I would rather see Senator Clinton get the nomination, but I would be pleased to vote for Obama in November as well. I do hope that whoever gets the nomination crushes the republican contender.

[DCJenn]

Re: Why not Clinton...

My concern is that there are a whole lot of people who will vote for for the anti-Hillary. Period. Not necessarily based on what she stands for but because of the visceral reactions people have to her.

If it's a McCain vs. Clinton election, there will be a lot of moderates who will vote for McCain because he's not Hillary and they won't lie awake at night stressing about it. (my brother is one of them)

Jenn

Re: Why not Clinton...

What Jenn said. My book group -- that voting block of soccer moms -- mostly feels the same way. Basically that Hillary is the right woman to be the first woman president because of the negativity that will undoubtably follow her.

My objection to her is more along the lines of what Julia said in wanting a president with a last name other than Bush or Clinton. And in my case really wanting a president with a last name other than Bush.

Also from the book group files...though it is great to have two viable candidates who are not the "old white guy", there was a feeling of "we are going to have a black president before we have a woman president." I don't think anyone (in my book group) wants to vote for her just because she is a woman but rather they want a more desirable woman candidate.

And...I think Bill Clinton's manner of campaigning for her turns people off.

[PrincessFiona]

Re: Why not Clinton...

The anti-hillary vote is a concern...and I think that's why I'm so interested in hearing the various reasons why dems oppose her. To me, it seems that she is not doing anything politically different from Obama in terms of strategy, but is being judged much more harshly by the media and others.

I do think that there are a lot of policy similarities between her and Obama, but the politics of hope thing is ringing a little stale in my ears because though I hear about "change", I don't hear a lot of concrete talking about policy...listening to him is like listening to a...motivational speaker....but I wonder how realistically he can accomplish the things he says he will.

Also....he seems to stand for one policy and then another....like the whole decriminalizing marijuana thing. He ran for the senate in Illinois with the idea of decriminalization as one of his platforms...this is in line with Senator Dodd...(who was my favorite of all of them, btw...even beating out Hillary in my heart. I don't know why, but I just loved Dodd ). At the debates, Obama then raised his hand in opposition to the idea of decriminalizing. There have been a few of these issues that have raised eyebrows for me.

I have a problem with the fact that Hillary voted initially to give Pres. Bush the power to go to war with Iraq...but she has never come out and said that she didn't....She has explained why she made that choice then and what a difficult choice it was...but...Obama at one point said he didn't know how he would have voted if he had had the chance....then says he was against the war from the beginning...but also voted identically to Hillary Clinton when it came to funding issues.

So there is a part of me that feels like Obama is not being genuine.

That being said, if he is the nominee, I'll most likely vote for him on the principal that the republicans do not deserve another term.

Those are just my thoughts though, and I don't mean them as an attack on anyone else's ideas or whom they support. I think the dems had very interesting candidates this time around. I just wish that Biden and Dodd had stayed around long enough to have their voices heard too.

[DCJenn]

Re: Why not Clinton...

People's reactions to Sen. Clinton are based a lot more on their reaction to her as Mrs. Clinton than what she's done in the Senate or what she's saying she'll do as president.

Jenn

Re: Why not Clinton...

People's reactions to Sen. Clinton are based a lot more on their reaction to her as Mrs. Clinton than what she's done in the Senate or what she's saying she'll do as president.

Jenn

I agree.

Re: Why not Clinton...

one phrase comes up a lot on NPR: Clinton fatigue

btdt, don't want a Clinton again, don't want that Clinton whom seems like she has done nothing over the years but try to make herself electable in a way that feels very disingenuous, don't want Clinton and Clinton in office (I think this is being a real issue for voters, we don't need 2 Presidents IYKWIM)

I am in the ABC camp: Anyone But Clinton camp

In saying that, I'm not all together Rebublican either. Honestly I wish we could pick people to take over certain areas. That we could elect the person best for International Deplomacy, Education, Health Care, Economy, Imigration - because no one really votes for all I want. It's almost a half for/half against that seems to come when I look at who is campaigning. And that makes me feel uneasy, voting for someone who only has half of my interests at stake. And which half should I make more important? But I will die before I vote for Hilary Clinton.

I actually liked Edwards.

[PrincessFiona]

Re: Why not Clinton...

I remember when Jeb Bush was contemplating running that a lot of republicans were excited about it......another Bush...woohooo.

It is sad that there is an ABC vote.....because I don't believe Hillary Clinton is being judged on who SHE is and what SHE stands for...she is being taken down by the media elite who still claim that she has clung to her husband's coattails.

I wonder if they have considered that maybe Bill Clinton would have never become who he is without HER? She is the one that stepped aside, supported him and his campaigns...and waited her turn...and now she's being judged for being his wife, standing by her man, for his policies and mistakes. That seems silly to me.

If Hillary Clinton were...Hillary Rodham...and weren't married to Bill Clinton (and never had been) would anyone here feel differently about voting for her simply based on HER record?

Re: Why not Clinton...

I don't think this has to do with her record -- and like you said, that probably isn't fair.

I think it has to do with the strong negative feelings held for her by the right. Fair or not -- that is another debate. No matter who is elected president, there will be some sort of allegation of wrong-doing or something along the way (maybe not...). With Hillary Clinton, I think that will start out of the gate and be significantly more frequent and serious than it would be with another candidate. It will be whitewater and travelgate and vincegate etc all over again but without a honeymoon period.

eta: I changed my mind a bit. I don't think it has to do with her record as a NY senator. I do think her time as first lady does counts as a record. People formed strong opinions of her then, too strong to overlook in the face of her time as a senator. I don't really understand the hatred towards her but it isn't going to go away. It probably isn't fair but it is what it is and I don't think will change. I am less excited about her because of the baggage she will bring with her.

[GrayMatterWife]

Re: Why not Clinton...

My concern is that there are a whole lot of people who will vote for for the anti-Hillary. Period. Not necessarily based on what she stands for but because of the visceral reactions people have to her.

If it's a McCain vs. Clinton election, there will be a lot of moderates who will vote for McCain because he's not Hillary and they won't lie awake at night stressing about it. (my brother is one of them)

Jenn

Jenn: I think you have hit the nail on the head. A lot of people won't vote for HRC because they genuinely disagree with her politics and ideas. However, there are probably just as many who won't vote for her because they just can't stand her and they can't give a really good reason why.

Honestly, I think it's weird how emotional and visceral people's reactions are to her (I think I have many reasons that I can clearly and unemotionally delineate for my position on her! ). But that seems like it would be her biggest hurdle to overcome. If people didn't like her policies, she could maybe modify her positions to adopt a more centrist or otherwise paletable approach. But so many people don't like her. As a person. Maybe it gets manifested in shallow jokes about her "practical" hair or matronly suits or off-putting shrill laugh, but beyond the late night show humor, those are pretty unmeritorious reasons for rejecting someone for political office. The fact of the matter is, a lot of people's rejection of her is just extremely personal. It's something inherent about her that she can't change.