Is she independent in her view or does her hubby also support this ideal? She is popular, and considered to be one of the brightest women in US America, so if she is voted in you may have to consider that a lot of people also support that thinking?
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 3231 100%
Yes, for some reason, she IS considered one of the smartest, brightest women in the world. However, I can't for the life of me figure out WHY! What has she EVER accomplished, on her own? Even her (in)famous book, It Takes A Village, was ghostwritten. The only thing she has done is get elected, and she did that because of her notoriety as the First Lady, not because of any innate talent or ability.
Sure, a lot of people think the same way as her. They want the United States to be just like Europe - failing. They blame America for all the troubles in the world. They seem to think that if only we would become like France, all our troubles would be over. And, they are right. We would all be poor, except for the elites, such as Hillary Clinton, the Kennedys, and the Kerrys. But, a significant portion of the US seem to sincerely want that.
That is what makes her so dangerous. She is a figurehead for the insane portion of America.
Oh, yes, perhaps Bill does support the same things. It is hard to say, since nobody knows what he really believes.
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 854 85.4%
I know she was in the board of directors in Yale University, yet again there are so many women who have accomplished much more than she did. Maybe because of Bill Clinton's personality and weaknesses, people in general always thought that Hillary was the one behind a lot of Clinton's decisions...and even if that's the case, based on Clinton's history as US President, that will not make her a very smart woman on my book.
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 1089 100%
Bill cheated on Hillary with a very ordinary looking intern and she chose to stay with him. That is not very smart in my books.
I have always been puzzled at how and why Hillary is so popular? Has she actually achieved anything politically? If she wasn't the former president's wife, would anyone know who she was? Should politics be more about personality and marketing than policy creation?
International Level: Negotiator / Political Participation: 453 45.3%
Unfortunately, with the first televised debate among presidential nominees (Nixon and Kennedy), US politics became a whole lot less about what you believe in and more about how good you look on TV. All that people could talk about after that debate was how nervous, sweaty and uncool Nixon appeared, while Kennedy seemed so calm and good looking. Clinton, from Arkansas, was a nobody before he got infront of the camera during his first election and charmed the media and the US. Interestingly enough, he was admitting to having an affair with Jennifer Flowers during his campaign - seems to be some sort of habbit don't you think? I mean NO ONE outside of Arkansas knew who this guy was before he got infront of the camera. Ross Perrot came from nowhere to get 20% of the vote against Clinton and Bush. How did he do it? TV and a message that sounded right to many people! It is unfortunate his running mate was SOOOO bad on TV (Ret. Adm. Stockdale). Stockdale appeared as nothing more than a confused old man on stage and he with Perrot were the butt of a lot of comedians jokes following his performance. As unpopular as he was and is, Bush Jr actually made Kerry look bad on stage during their debates. IMO, Bush's performance during the debate had more to do with his winning re-election than any policy that he unveiled at the debate. It was all about making Kerry look bad in front of the camera and remain cool doing it (and that he did). It really should be about the policy and message rather than who trades better quips on a debate stage, but it really is not these days.
Edited: Vincenzo on 24th Oct, 2006 - 12:49am
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 863 86.3%
Hillary is popular *in some places* but not everywhere. I don't think she would win as the first woman president in America. I think more people would get out and vote specifically to defeat her.
Perhaps some folks would vote for her simply because Bill would be right there with her, and they might feel that he was actually in the driver's seat behind the scenes.
The Clintons both have shady reputations, in my opinion. It would be a big disaster to have them both in office again, regardless of whether or not Bill was VP or FG.
It looks like Barak Obama may be running in 2008. I'd vote for him before I'd vote for Hill & Bill.
In my opinion, of course.
Roz
International Level: Ambassador / Political Participation: 595 59.5%
Quote=NIGHTHAWK
QUOTE |
We would rather vote for Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden than Hillary. They are far less dangerous to the United States. |
QUOTE |
She is a Liberal's liberal. |
International Level: Politician / Political Participation: 102 10.2%
If Hillary was a worse threat than Osama or Bin Laden why is she not in Guantanamo Bay?
I think this topic raises a wider debate about why candidates with little substance can enter politics. I don't know a great deal about Hillary but she seems to have very little policy or leadership values to offer. It seems so obvious she has parachuted into office on the back of Bill's ride. I can't understand how she can enter politics given her lack of experience? Is it too easy for rich or famous people to become running candidates in the US?
International Level: Negotiator / Political Participation: 453 45.3%