5 Reasons Why Hillary Clinton Would Make a Great President

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by thermodynamic, Apr 30, 2016.

  1. thermodynamic Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #1

    Post title reflects article headline, as you will see:


    http://bluenationreview.com/top-reasons-vote-hillary/

    I'll get the popcorn, the article is compelling but those who disagree will hopefully convince fence-sitters with a little more detail, and if the detail includes Benghazi or personal email server, please go into detail justifying the double standard and free pardon Reagan and Bush got for their equivalents to Benghazi (e.g. Lebanon) and Bush Jr's personal email server with 22 million deleted emails and conservatives didn't seem to get wound up over that (but clearly think Clinton, with a much smaller situation, is the devil incarnate or something, SMH)...
    --- Post Merged, Apr 30, 2016 ---
    Addendum - 112 more reasons, though some might overlap:

    https://www.hillaryclinton.com/feed...hillary-clinton-should-be-our-next-president/
    (I imagine a number of those questions will be brought up in the debates, where I would hope her competition - Trump - will be as resolute with a plan to be able to successfully fight for. )
     
  2. thewap, Apr 30, 2016
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2016

    thewap macrumors demi-god

    thewap

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    #2
    Wow.. the 5 reasons she lists are just...:confused:

    I will go with evil incarnate.:D

    Screen Shot 2016-04-30 at 22.55.04.png
     
  3. jkcerda, Apr 30, 2016
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2016

    jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #3
    Millions of displaced refugees and 100's of dead disagree with her being a good president
     
  4. edk99 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Location:
    FL
    #4
    That list reads like a Letterman top 10 list.
     
  5. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
  6. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #6
    Some of those are kind of silly. The qualifications portion lists achievements from 30+ years ago and include being first lady as a qualification. The rest aren't any better. They're nice biographical material, but they're neutral in this context.
     
  7. Populism macrumors regular

    Populism

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2014
    #7
    Honest to jesus I think you're a bot, thermodynamic.

    I mean, just read your sentence.
     
  8. The-Real-Deal82 macrumors 601

    The-Real-Deal82

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #8
    Well she's the best you guys have got out of a pretty poor line up.
     
  9. A.Goldberg, May 1, 2016
    Last edited: May 1, 2016

    A.Goldberg macrumors 68000

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #9
    Wait these are legit reasons? Is this a joke? This literally looks like the content off a click-bait site. My opinions of Hillary aside, I'm not sure but I don't find this a very compelling article.

    She was elected Senior Class President of Wellesley College :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
    I'm sure Wellesley College Class President is much like running a country. Perhaps should have commented on her decades of experience in politics and government.​

    Graduated with honors from Yale Law School before completing another year of graduate studies.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
    Cool, theres a lot of other educated people in the world. Theres est 1.22 lawyers too in the US. I have a doctorate, does that make me a better leader?
    Took a “summer job” on Senator Walter Mondale’s committee for migrant workers in 1971 :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
    I actually interned at a pharmacy in CT in College that served many migrant workers from the local tobacco fields. They didn't have insurance, so we sold them the drugs at wholesale cost- unlike CVS who'd charge $60 for $3 worth of medication.
    Worked on Presidential campaigns of Barry Goldwater (1964), George McGovern (1972), and Jimmy Carter (1976) :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
    Barry Goldwater 1964? Hillary was 17 years old and in High School. Give me a break. I certainly can't imagine her playing chief strategist. Barry Goldwater was a Republican too. McGovern was 1972, she would have been 25 here too. I'm pretty sure most campaigns will utilize your labor if you're willing.​

    Designed to put a focus on maternal an infant health, the GHI has implemented strategy to improve medical facilities, reduce the spread of HIV, and lower infant and maternal mortality rates. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
    You mean the Obama Admin GHI? Obama's name is on that and I'm not sure Hillary should want her name on it. The GHI was heinously underfunded from the original proposal and last I checked turned put to be a big flop.​

    First Gentleman Bill Clinton :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
    Cool...? Sorry if we're voting for President based on the charm of the spouse, I'd be stuck voting for Trump. I would be very conflicted with that decision.​

    It’s About Damn Time :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
    Is it? That's not an argument. (Ok, I cherry picked- the real comment was because she's a woman and the US deserves a woman president. I'm all for women's rights and equality and advancement, but I will vote for the person most inline with my philosophical and political outlook-- not based on his/her gender. To vote for a woman just because she is a woman is just as intolerant as a man voting for a man because he not a woman.)
    Sorry, this is probably among my most worthless and obnoxious posts of all time. But really, I don't like Hillary and I can objectively think of 5 persuasive comments about her that actually mean something. :eek::eek::eek:

    I self proclaim the record for most rolleyes in a post.
     
  10. Meister Suspended

    Meister

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
  11. decafjava macrumors 68000

    decafjava

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Location:
    Geneva
    #11
    Disagree, Sanders is a far better option IMO than Clinton.
     
  12. The-Real-Deal82 macrumors 601

    The-Real-Deal82

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #12
    Well you know who to vote for then ;)
     
  13. decafjava macrumors 68000

    decafjava

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Location:
    Geneva
    #13
    If I were American I would, :p.
     
  14. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #14
    I could only come up with three.

    1. Trump
    2. Cruz
    3. Kasich
     
  15. thermodynamic thread starter Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #15
    D-o-e-s n-o-t c-o-m-p-u-t-e. :)
     
  16. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #16
    So you will vote for Paul Ryan? :p
     
  17. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #17
    Hey, if the Republicans can attack her on this point, than the Democrats can certainly use it too.
     
  18. mrkramer macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #18
    I don't see much difference in voting for Hillary because she is a woman and voting for Trump because he will keep out the scary brown people. Both stances are bigoted, and shouldn't be used to justify voting for a candidate.
     
  19. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #19
    Was it not as a senate staffer that she was fired for a lack of ethics?

    Her cattle futures $100,000 was a money-raising scam deal from the git-go.

    Her attitude toward the Secret Service and toward the military reveal much about her insofar as any patriotism.

    The Clintons basically stole furniture from the White House when he left office. He? Loved the furniture?

    She did all that poor-mouthing about being broke, ignoring her $8 million advance on her memoirs. IOW, a liar.

    She bad-mouths Wall Street as a campaigner, not mentioning the millions she's been paid by Wall Street to give speeches. Hypocrisy.

    And from what I've read from those who have had to deal with her as other-than-sycophants, she has all the personality of an irate wolverine.

    But to me, the worst is her membership in the NeoCons, as just another (bleeping) war monger. Remember, she was all for going into Iraq because of WMDs, until it became politically expedient to bad-mouth Bush II. Now, she's part of the cabal that wants to start a war with Russia.
     
  20. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #20
    Ridiculous. The last thing she would want is a war with Russia. It wouldn't be good for either country.
     
  21. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #21
    Sanders, Trump, and Kasich are superior choices. In fact, Hillary and Cruz are equally and uniquely loathsome.
     
  22. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #22
    Sure. Trump is a superior choice if you want to hire a guy that knows nothing about the office he is running for. When a person's wife and daughter have to tell you to be "more presidential" that's a sign that perhaps you aren't cut out for the job and shouldn't be running for it. As for Kasich, how can he be a superior choice when hardly anyone wants to vote for him? Winning only one state isn't too good.
     
  23. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #23
    MadeTheSwitch, if you don't think Hillary would play the machismo game with Putin, why else would she be on board with the "get tough" rhetoric crowd? Are you aware of the NeoCon love affair with the Wolfowitz Doctrine? Has she not supported this warlike maneuvering being done by the NATOphiles? Remember, Bush I and Gorbachev agreed that if Gorby didn't object to the reunification of Germany, we would not expand NATO eastward.

    We lied.

    Irony: We went bat-guano nutzoidal here in the US in 1962 over Soviet missiles in Cuba. But now we call Russia "aggressive" for her resentment at our placement of NATO troops, materiel and missiles immediately adjacent to her border. Ignorance of history, for Hillary and Obama et al? Arrogance? Hypocrisy?

    Was not Hillary supportive of Nuland's efforts to suborn the duly elected government of Ukraine? Spending some of that $5 billion of our tax dollars? What part of Ukraine fronts the Atlantic?

    The abject failure in Libya in the removal of Khaddafi was on her watch, with her support: "We came, we saw, he died." Yup. And Khaddafi's armaments have gone to ISIS, Al Qaeda and Boko Haram. Great success story, demonstrative of her acumen in foreign policy. Grade F.
     
  24. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #24
    They are there because of the history of Russian aggression in Eastern Europe. Aggression which continues to this day. I shouldn't have to explain the difference between that situation and Cuba to you.
     
  25. throAU macrumors 601

    throAU

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Location:
    Perth, Western Australia
    #25
    She's corrupt as hell, stores classified material on insecure home server infrastructure, flip flops on basically every issue (check her history on LGBT issues), in bed with Wall Street, the list goes on.

    That said, given the above she's probably the ideal US president if recent history is any judge.
    --- Post Merged, May 2, 2016 ---
    So why are US warships off the Russian coastline? Why has the US been overflying Russia since the cold war?

    The US is just as aggressive if not more so than Russia - you don't see Russia stationing aircraft carriers off the coast of North America in international waters now, do you?
     

Share This Page