Anonymous wrote:Same here. Get ready for a mediocre next 4 years, whoever actually wins.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Me too. I think Hillary is actually quite qualified, but she's got so much baggage and I'm not fond of her on a personal level so I'm not sure I'd feel great about voting for her. I love Bernie's message but I simply don't think they are realistic for the US.
I will not vote for a Republican.
I'm a moderate who thinks differently. Clinton has the skills, but she also has an incredible lack of integrity. She has proven for 30 years that she will do whatever she wants, whenever she wants, will ignore laws, will ignore ethics standards and will lie to cover up what she has done. Expediency and personal gain (usually political) are her only guidelines. While a person like this can operate as a senator or cabinet member like Secretary of State, such a person should not serve as the President.
I have not voted for a Republican since George HW Bush, but I will not vote for Hillary Clinton.
Regarding OP's question about Biden, he too was my candidate of choice, but he has a very good reason for declining to run. His adult son just died in May and his family is still grieving. He is not ready for a hard presidential campaign and his family is not ready to be pushed back into the forefront of the media circus. Right now, they are the media equivalent of B-listers and they do not want to be pushed back to the A-list. They also need more time to mourn which they won't have if he was making a presidential run. I have never lost a child, but I have known friends who have. And every family is different with how long it takes them to grieve. But I have never seen a family lose an adult child, especially one that they were close with, who have been able to move past the grief in less than a year. I know some that 2-3 years later are still having problems coming to grips with the loss of their child. Six months? He's not even close to being able to put that behind him. I'm not even sure that come election day next year that he'd be ready to run for President, let alone actually hold that office.
Moderate here too, and I disagree. Hillary has pretty average lack of integrity, nothing "incredible" in my mind for a professional politician.
Now, my problem with her is this. She's 68. Other than aggrandizing her own career, what was she accomplished in all that time? How is the world a better place because of her work in the White House, in the Senate, in State?
Marco Rubio is equally unaccomplished, but at least he's only 44.
You need to check out HRC's record. It's pretty impressive and readily available by Googling Hillary Clinton Accomplishments. Lots of positive accomplishments for the poor, women, children and veterans over the years. She sponsored/drafted a raft of legislation.
Anonymous wrote:Hillary is as smart, unprincipled and dishonest as Bill, but without his endearing (to some) rogue qualities. I can't fathom why O'Malley -- who seems like a mix of Clinton's and Sanders' better qualities, while avoiding Hillary's stench and Bernie's nuttiness -- isn't getting more traction given this field. Thoughts?
Anonymous wrote:Hillary is quite capable and will end up being a very tough and wily President. I'm OK with that - we need a leader like that to (1.) deal with a do-nothing Congress and (2.) deal with our foreign adversaries. She, along with George HW, will probably be the most prepared and experienced first-term President in modern history.
As for her "dishonesty" and self-promoting "agenda," she's no worse than any other person grasping for power (political or economic/corporate). Sadly, politicians of every stripe are classic narcissists. They're not like the "rest of us" who just want to have a comfortable life and enjoy our time with family. Every person running for President has a desperate and pathological need for power and public recognition.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Me too. I think Hillary is actually quite qualified, but she's got so much baggage and I'm not fond of her on a personal level so I'm not sure I'd feel great about voting for her. I love Bernie's message but I simply don't think they are realistic for the US.
I will not vote for a Republican.
I'm a moderate who thinks differently. Clinton has the skills, but she also has an incredible lack of integrity. She has proven for 30 years that she will do whatever she wants, whenever she wants, will ignore laws, will ignore ethics standards and will lie to cover up what she has done. Expediency and personal gain (usually political) are her only guidelines. While a person like this can operate as a senator or cabinet member like Secretary of State, such a person should not serve as the President.
I have not voted for a Republican since George HW Bush, but I will not vote for Hillary Clinton.
Regarding OP's question about Biden, he too was my candidate of choice, but he has a very good reason for declining to run. His adult son just died in May and his family is still grieving. He is not ready for a hard presidential campaign and his family is not ready to be pushed back into the forefront of the media circus. Right now, they are the media equivalent of B-listers and they do not want to be pushed back to the A-list. They also need more time to mourn which they won't have if he was making a presidential run. I have never lost a child, but I have known friends who have. And every family is different with how long it takes them to grieve. But I have never seen a family lose an adult child, especially one that they were close with, who have been able to move past the grief in less than a year. I know some that 2-3 years later are still having problems coming to grips with the loss of their child. Six months? He's not even close to being able to put that behind him. I'm not even sure that come election day next year that he'd be ready to run for President, let alone actually hold that office.
Moderate here too, and I disagree. Hillary has pretty average lack of integrity, nothing "incredible" in my mind for a professional politician.
Now, my problem with her is this. She's 68. Other than aggrandizing her own career, what was she accomplished in all that time? How is the world a better place because of her work in the White House, in the Senate, in State?
Marco Rubio is equally unaccomplished, but at least he's only 44.
You need to check out HRC's record. It's pretty impressive and readily available by Googling Hillary Clinton Accomplishments. Lots of positive accomplishments for the poor, women, children and veterans over the years. She sponsored/drafted a raft of legislation.
Anonymous wrote:If I had to vote today I couldn't vote for any of them. I have zero confidence in any of the candidates even keeping our head above water let alone fixing anything.
Seriously. I almost feel like I should research one of the lesser know of the 37 or whatever republican candidates just to see if I like any of them.
WTF?
Why didn't Joe Biden run? At least he's a politiciany politician and somewhat amusing.
Anyone else just have zero hope for 2017?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Me too. I think Hillary is actually quite qualified, but she's got so much baggage and I'm not fond of her on a personal level so I'm not sure I'd feel great about voting for her. I love Bernie's message but I simply don't think they are realistic for the US.
I will not vote for a Republican.
I'm a moderate who thinks differently. Clinton has the skills, but she also has an incredible lack of integrity. She has proven for 30 years that she will do whatever she wants, whenever she wants, will ignore laws, will ignore ethics standards and will lie to cover up what she has done. Expediency and personal gain (usually political) are her only guidelines. While a person like this can operate as a senator or cabinet member like Secretary of State, such a person should not serve as the President.
I have not voted for a Republican since George HW Bush, but I will not vote for Hillary Clinton.
Regarding OP's question about Biden, he too was my candidate of choice, but he has a very good reason for declining to run. His adult son just died in May and his family is still grieving. He is not ready for a hard presidential campaign and his family is not ready to be pushed back into the forefront of the media circus. Right now, they are the media equivalent of B-listers and they do not want to be pushed back to the A-list. They also need more time to mourn which they won't have if he was making a presidential run. I have never lost a child, but I have known friends who have. And every family is different with how long it takes them to grieve. But I have never seen a family lose an adult child, especially one that they were close with, who have been able to move past the grief in less than a year. I know some that 2-3 years later are still having problems coming to grips with the loss of their child. Six months? He's not even close to being able to put that behind him. I'm not even sure that come election day next year that he'd be ready to run for President, let alone actually hold that office.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The Democratic machine has kept the non-politician out of the public race so far. Maybe look into Lawrence Lessig and see if you like him?
Not that he'll win the primary, but I think people would like Lessig if they realized he was running.
I'm sorry, but Lessig is a ridiculous candidate. His entire premise was that he would run on a single issue (campaign finance reform), implement those reforms and then immediately resign. And now he acknowledges that this was a foolish idea and claims to be running as a real candidate who will not resign immediately.
How can anyone take him seriously as a presidential candidate?
Lessing just quit.
Anonymous wrote:You can either skip that part of the ballot or write a name in. Heck, you can write your own name in if you want.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm a moderate who thinks differently. Clinton has the skills, but she also has an incredible lack of integrity. She has proven for 30 years that she will do whatever she wants, whenever she wants, will ignore laws, will ignore ethics standards and will lie to cover up what she has done. Expediency and personal gain (usually political) are her only guidelines. While a person like this can operate as a senator or cabinet member like Secretary of State, such a person should not serve as the President.
I'm the other moderate. I think you've been snookered by the anti-Clinton media messaging. She certainly has her own political warts and missteps, just like any other politician, but saddling her with lines like "incredible lack of integrity" is the sort of vague whisper attack that gets us nowhere IMHO.
I'm the PP you're responding to, and no, I don't think I've been snookered. I've been a voting american for over 30 years and have watched the various Clinton scandals unfold each time. Whitewater, Travelgate, Filegate, and the email controversy. Throughout her career she has consistently exhibited a case of apathy towards the law and ethics practices. And while there are other candidates who have had one or two missteps and mistakes, she has significantly more questionable actions and events in her career than just about any two other candidates out there.
I also think, as I mentioned, that there are still many offices and political jobs that she can hold with those issues, one's where there is more oversight of ethical misconduct, but the Presidency is job that I think is too hard to pin down and that her lack of integrity will be a huge impediment to getting the job done. I think her ghosts and her way of doing business will be a huge hindrance to performing the presidential duties and would detract from her being an effective president. She would be spending more time responding and spinning her story than she would doing the work. We need a candidate with a lot less political baggage than this.
Anonymous wrote:Sorry but n this field of 20+ candidates, if you can't find ONE that can keep the country's head above water, you are looking at the wrong things. You are trying to find someone you like, not someone who can govern. I am a hard core liberal, but even I could find three Republicans who are capable of not running us aground.