Hillary - Liberals Only (tradition, choices, choice, America, experience)

[lilithu]

I was wondering if we could have a discussion about Hillary in the Liberals Only discussion forum. That is, I would like the thread not to get derailed by attacks by people who hate her. Nor do I want the discussion to be about liberals defending her. I'd like, if at all possible, to have a reasoned discussion about what liberals, progressives, and left-leaning moderates think her chances are. And whether she's any good for the party.

What do you think about where she stands on the issues?

Are there other relevant considerations besides issues?


(Critical opinions are welcome. Just no bashing. Period. And if you can't tell the difference beteen criticism and bashing, don't post.)

[linwood]

I would like this discussion but unfortunately I`m a bit ignorant as to any details of her positions.
I plan to remedy that soon.

I`m concerned not so much with her stance on issues as to the perception even many moderates have of her being classist.
Like I said in an earlier post this may very well be unfounded but how do you dispell it?

I`m not exactly a "liberal" per say but I`m not a "conservative" in the current definition of the word.

Edit:
I`m concerned with her "flip=flopping" in the Iraqi war.
She voted for..now votes against.
I understand her rationale is that Bush messed it up but it was pretty obvious the war was being pushed on false grounds before it started.

[doppelgänger]

I have grave doubts about her ability to represent the interests of working families because of her indebtedness to corporate donors. She represents the old Democratic party to me - the DLC and the Blue Dogs. To me they are "Republican Light" and a perfect example of why the Democrats were kicked out of power in '94 and didn't come back into power until it joined up with the Netroots/Grassroots momentum - primarily over the war.

Having a progressive-liberal view on politics, I think our President should be primarily beholden to working men and women who make up the overwhelming majority of the electorate.

As long as the Republicans are dumb enough to let Iraq continue to be an issue in 2008, she'll still be able to win, because she'll get the independent and progressive vote against a greasy Neo-con like McCain. But if the Dems want a real future leading this country, it won't be with pols like Hillary, Kerry and Lieberman.

[lilithu]

Thanks for the response linwood.

Originally Posted by linwood

I would like this discussion but unfortunately I`m a bit ignorant as to any details of her positions.
I plan to remedy that soon.

This might help:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Hillary_Clinton.htm

Let me just say that I think her record on women's rights, BGLT rights, and civil liberties overall is good. As well as her limited record on the environment.

But I am alarmed by her co-sponsoring legislation to ban flag burning. What the heck is that? Yet elsewhere she voted against a similar amendment. What the heck is that?

Her conservative stance on immigration bothers me too.

Originally Posted by linwood

I`m concerned not so much with her stance on issues as to the perception even many moderates have of her being classist.
Like I said in an earlier post this may very well be unfounded but how do you dispell it?

I actually do think she's a little classist but am not as concerned about it as you. Mainly because I think that most politicians are classist. The real question is to what extent?

Originally Posted by linwood

Edit:
I`m concerned with her "flip=flopping" in the Iraqi war.
She voted for..now votes against.
I understand her rationale is that Bush messed it up but it was pretty obvious the war was being pushed on false grounds before it started.

A lot of politicians are going to have to deal with that one. I don't hold it against people if they change their mind in the light of new evidence. Unlike Bush, I take that ablilty to change one's mind as a strength, not a weakness. I agree with you that there was plenty of reason to distrust the war from the beginning. But ya know what? I have several intelligent friends who favored the war (and some still do). The climate of fear that 9/11 caused is hard to combat.

The only thing that bugs me about her shifting positions on Iraq is that she has had shifting postions on other issues. Which then makes me wonder if I can trust her to mean what she says/votes or is she just selling out her principles for votes?

[standing_alone]

I'm not as familiar in depth with many of her stances as I should be (having never cared too much about her to do serious research, but now that she's running for president, I'll be looking into that more). It's hard to find any politician that I can really get behind with my typically leftist positions, but I find enough in Hillary's positions to at least consider voting for her. She wouldn't be my first choice to vote for ever, but she's probably one of the more realistic choices, as in at least having a shot at winning. I wouldn't be enthusiastic to vote for her, but I would grugingly vote for her to keep a worse Republican candidate out if I felt the need to.

To answer your questions more directly:

Originally Posted by lilithu

What do you think about where she stands on the issues?

I like that she's pro-choice and she is okay on the issue of gay rights - enough so that I wouldn't feel like I was totally selling myself out too much to vote for her. I find her ideas on education to be acceptable. Most importantly, I like that she recognizes our nation's need for affordable health care. Not being the most financially well-off, under the current system I would never consider seeking help because I can't afford it. I haven't been to a doctor in over a decade. However, I don't think she will deliver on this. Also, unfortunately, I doubt our health care system will ever be made affordable because most people care more about extra spending money in their pockets to buy useless status junk rather than having useful services. So where she gets credit from me, it doesn't matter because I doubt we'll ever get affordable health care and don't think she will be able to or try to get it.

I don't like her whole "protect children from violence on TV and in videogames" thing and like linwood, have a problem with her "flip-floppy" record regarding the Iraq War.

She doesn't come off to me as concerning herself too much with middle-class Americans. I think she's more concerned with coporate intrests than the people's interests, like most politicians.

Are there other relevant considerations besides issues?

I'm typically a strictly issues-voter (with considerations for "electable-reality"), but Hillary is going to run into problems just because of the strong dislike of her. People see her as arrogant (what politician really isn't?) and dislike her for Bill's conduct during his presidency (criticizing her for not leaving him). There's also the whole Whitewater thing, which I wouldn't be surprised in the least to see brought up in the election.

Like I've said, she would never be my first choice, I'm more fond of Obama, I suppose (he just has little government experience). But she is a realistic choice. Any vote I'd cast for her would be done grudgingly, as I've said. Of course, most votes for Democrats are cast grugingly by me. That's one sorry political party.

[Fluffy]

I notice that Wikipedia has recently (in the last few weeks) added an article entitled Political views of Hillary Rodman Clinton. It might serve as a good starting point for non-Americans and a stepping stone for those who wish to find out more. It is both comprehensive and (largely) accurate.

Hillary is both what I would expect and what I would not vote for unless my only other option was a more traditional Republican. Unless she did an Arnold, she simply would not get elected in Britain due to her stance being further right than our own Conservative party and so, as a Brit, she does not go far enough on too many issues for me to give her my vote. Strangely, on the single issue of censorship, the exact opposite is true but this is a rather minor point.

I get the sense that she is where she is due to the traditional American base (what you guys refer to as "Moderates") and in a more liberal country, she would be much happier to take a firmer (and more liberal) stance on issues such as gay marriage. In other words she seems to be more reactionary then genuine and so I wouldn't trust that she would stay on the same course throughout her term, politics being what it is.

[des]

My concern about Hillary is how much "she believes in anything" anymore. I think she once did, but wonder if the system has changed her. Otoh, what I may be seeing is more style than substance. However, I think the points like sponsoring a flag waving amendment-- I believe that was a clear cut thing of trying to get the "right" to like her better. I don't really think her stance on the war is too convincing. Her stances on civil rights of all,that sort of thing, are what I most like about her.

OTOH, I see she is touched by the system as well as changed by it. She has been there and done that, so to speak. That does give her some experience and maturity and that wouldn't be a bad thing. But we see in someone like Cheney where experience and maturity can just run amok. (I'm not saying she's that bad.) But let's just say I think she is competent.
I also think she's very smart. I'd probably vote for her but it wouldn't be my happiest vote. The happiest idea I have is Bill as "First Gentleman" (?!).

Electibilty: hmm, I have heard that the Republicans do fear her. But I also think there are many independents that might vote Democratic who wont' vote if she is on the ticket.

I fear Obama doesn't really have the experience or gravatis (sp?) for the role (yet). The other contenders are very far down on the list, but we know from the past that sometimes names emerge quite late-- maybe doesn't mean much.

I actually like Gore. He has experience, both domestic and foriegn; was an early open opponent of the war, and is very strong on the environment (since I think we have wasted time on this, a really big thing).
Perhpas with Obama or Richardson (for the western and Hispanic vote). Gore already won once! ;-)


--des

[SPQR]

Do Libertarians count?

Personally, I don't think the nation is yet ready for a female president. Also, I don't think Hillary is the right woman either. I agree with her on some points, mainly on Iraq and immigration, but her stance on gun control is abhorrent to me. I will never, for the life of me, vote for a gun grabber. The 2nd Ammendment is the Ammendment that protects all others.

[nutshell]

What do you think about where she stands on the issues?

I did to research more. I'm not sure where she stands. As Dopp. pointed out above, she may be in the pockets of big corp. That works as an advantage and disadvantage. The advantage: The Clintons have a major fund-raising edge over other democrat contenders. Disadvantage: See Dopp's post.

Are there other relevant considerations besides issues?

The morning she made her announcement I was surprised to hear Chris Matthews of MSNBC describe her as a "long shot." Because of the attention she receives from the media (far more than any other candidate - even Obama) I always considered her as the dem. front runner. I thought about Matthew's comment, however, and came to the same realization he did. She is a long shot because she is so polarizing. She also is off to a rough start - her announcement was flawed and she isn't performing well in Iowa (thus far - it's early).

It will be interesting to see what happens.

[Mathematician]

Originally Posted by lilithu

I was wondering if we could have a discussion about Hillary in the Liberals Only discussion forum. That is, I would like the thread not to get derailed by attacks by people who hate her. Nor do I want the discussion to be about liberals defending her. I'd like, if at all possible, to have a reasoned discussion about what liberals, progressives, and left-leaning moderates think her chances are. And whether she's any good for the party.

What do you think about where she stands on the issues?

Are there other relevant considerations besides issues?


(Critical opinions are welcome. Just no bashing. Period. And if you can't tell the difference beteen criticism and bashing, don't post.)

I'm not voting for someone who voted for the Iraq War, defends the decision, and also has a history of supporting censorship.

Her stance on issues are the most relevant considerations. Articulation comes next.