Why I Support Hillary Clinton - updated

A well-thought out summation of where you stand, Sandy! So far, I could only see Dennis Kucinich doing the job.

I too support her for all those reasons and also because as my state's senator, when my friends and I needed help with certain things, she and her staff actually helped!

Amen, Sandy. While I expect Hillary will also be the one I vote for in '08, I want to hear answers from all the candidates, and I an there to applaud the answers that reflect a concern and an awareness. Chris Dodd and John Edwards have both addressed -- directly/indirectly -- the issue of mountain top removal coal mining. I have sent queries to Hillary, and hope to hear or read something from her that addresses environmental concerns such as this, if not specifically this. (I allow for the concept that if she was not aware, she would need to research the issue, and that takes time.)

I was fascinated to read that Argentina has a very similar situation of an educated, capable, courageous woman running for president also. We live in interesting times. When I was a child, they only told my brothers that they might one day grow up to be president.

"I support Hillary Clinton because I believe I can sleep at night with my life in her hands."

I was worried about this after reading this article. My humans said to ignore the Murdoch propaganda.

I support Hillary because the Republican Right Wing has conducted the nastiest, most malicious, most untruthful campaign of character assassination against her that I have ever seen. If they hate her that much, she must be right for America.
Well, that's not the only reason I support her, but I hope a lot of otherwise uncommitted people come to the same conclusion.

Well written, Sandy, though so far, I have yet to find anyone I trust or truly support.

I have a million things to do but came back one more time to read this. Something about it bothered me. I always knew you Sandy as a staunch supporter of Kucinich and to suddenly read this article from you is disturbing. Unless you really changed your views, I feel that this is a satirical look at Hillary's candidacy as seen thru the eyes of her supporters.

Is it?

OK, I can go do the laundry now and search the house for that illusive present I stashed away from the eyes of a grandkid and which I hid so well I can not find it now.

I was all for her until the Alabama appearance when she went all phony Negro spiritual, trying to suck up to the audience with that noxious performance...Every time I see her now, that sound bite comes to mind and makes me cringe. I really hope she does something to redeem herself and convince me she's more than just another do-anything-for-a-vote politician. So far, not so much.

I don't support Hillary. I didn't support Bill. Being an Independant, at this point, I haven't found anyone out there to actually trust or support and somehow those need to go together.
Having health-care would be truly nice.

I admire Obama and Edwards, but I am afraid that if either of them were nominated, the Republicans will win. My real choice is Gore, whom I consider the most qualified person in the country to be president. However, I am pretty sure Clinton is going to be the Democratic nominee. The Republicans are not running anybody who is even slightly interesting. I don't like some of her positions, particularly on the war, but she is going to be a competent, if not adventurous president. I have had enough adventures for awhile.

Well said Sandy. Personally, I never got over the aftermath of Whitewater. She did what she wanted to do, got caught, then did what she had to do to avoid taking responsibility--at least that's my personal impression of what transpired. I believe that she wants to be president so she can do some good for America. I'm not convinced that she wouldn't do just about anything to get that kind of power, and then use the ends to justify the means. I want to like and trust her, but I haven't for a long time.

I admire how you think and agree that Hillary " ...demonstrates extraordinary strength and independence, carefully balanced by loyalty and intelligence.
My only worry with her is that she is such a part of the political mess that consider themselves above all.

I am glad to read this thoughtful account of support. I have looked and listened in vain for similarly thoughtful reasons that people despise her. I have heard some petty personal reasons, some references to her positions on the war and other specific issues, but nothing that would justify the hatred expressed those who do.

As for being "part of the political mess" she understands that in order to govern, she has to be elected. Triangulation? Show me a poliltician who doesn't triangulate and I'll show you one giving a concession speech on election night. I only wish I didn't feel that her nomination has the same air of inevitability that Kerry's did.

Someone mentioned Al Gore -- I wish that he'd run again. A friend of mine has recorded two songs supporting Gore for President, one complete with an online video.

Who knows who we'll actually be able to vote for a year from now, though? Anything can happen.

I too believe she will be the Democratic candidate (or at least that is the one thing that I could possibly see myself "praying" for). I only hope that the number of candidates won't dilute the support for Hillary. If they do, then we may end up with a candidate that cannot win against the Republicans and we don't need that.

I think she is trustworthy. I think she's wise and intelligent. I would also vote for Al, he's my number one choice. I think if he ran, this time around he'd win (not that he didn't the last time!)

Hillary and Al are the only candidates I support. The others just can't do the job, in my opinion.

I don't think I've ever seen this cogent a statement of support for a political character in my lifetime. If she's half the person you believe her to be, she will be amazing. I'm intrigued that her star has continued to rise steadily and that she seems to become more and more comfortable in her own skin over time. We need such a person and I hope she will somehow defy the adage of Napoleon that abolute power absolutely corrupts.

I am hoping that Hillary won't make it into office and I especially don't want her national healthcare.

Al Gore is my first choice, but he isn't running.

Dennis Kucinich is my first choice of those who are running but I know (sadly) that my support is not enough to sway the opinions of the collective shallowness of the majority of Americans who claim they care about values but really care more about height.

All things considered, my support for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are equal. What he lacks in willingness to address the criminal activities of this administration, he balances with what I see as genuine goodness. I will risk snickers or wrath and admit that I follow gut instincts. Being in a room with Barack Obama feels good. His goodness and charisma permeate the atmosphere around him. Unfortunately, I believe America is still too bigoted to elect him.

Dannielle, unfortunately, I don't think Hillary is here to answer questions. I don't think she is here at all. I understand that this is a critical time for her and chatting with us or guessing words that start with the letter 'S' on Gather would not be the most efficient use of her time. However, if she checked out the site and decided to drop her name and image in here, I think she should accept all comments and place someone from her campaign in here to respond. Her Gather presence disappoints me.

While it's great that we, and Argentina, have women running for office, other countries have had female leaders – ironically, some of them countries that "we" want to put in panty hose and bras and force to liberate women our way. Sirimavo Bandaranaike, Prime minister of Sri Lanka three times, Indira Gandhi, Prime minister of India twice, Golda Meir, Prime minister of Israel from 17 Mar 1969 to 3 Jun 1974 and third women in the world to reach that post behind Sri Lanka's Sirimavo Bandaranaike (1960) and India's Indira Gandhi (1966), Elisabeth Domitien, Prime minister of the Central African Republic from 3 Jan 1975 to 7 Apr 1976, Margaret Thatcher, Prime minister of the United Kingdom from 4 May 1979 to 28 Nov 1990. First woman elected ruler in Europe, Maria de Lourdes Pintasilgo, Prime minister of Portugal from 1 Aug 1979 to 3 Jan 1980, Mary Eugenia Charles, Prime minister of Dominica from 21 Jul 1980 to 14 Jun 1995, second black woman ruler in the world, Gro Harlem Brundtland, Prime minister of Norway three times, Milka Planinc, Federal prime minister of former Socialist Yugoslavia from 16 May 1982 to 15 May 1986, Benazir Bhutto, Prime Minister of Pakistan from 2 Dec 1988 to 6 Aug 1990, and again from 19 Oct 1993 to 5 Nov 1996, Kazimiera Danutë Prunskienë, Prime minister of Lithuania from 17 Mar 1990 to 10 Jan 1991, Khaleda Zia, Prime minister of Bangladesh from 20 Mar 1991 to 30 Mar 1996 and again from 10 Oct 2001 to 29 Oct 2006, Edith Cresson, Prime minister of France from 15 May 1991 to 2 Apr 1992, Hanna Suchocka, Prime minister of Poland from 8 Jul 1992 to 26 Oct 1993, Kim Campbell, Prime minister of Canada from 25 Jun to 5 Nov 1993, Tansu Çiller, Prime minister of Turkey from 25 Jun 1993 to 7 Mar 1996, Sylvie Kinigi, Prime minister of Burundi from 10 Jul 1993 to 11 Feb 1994, Agathe Uwilingiyimana, Prime minister of Rwanda from 18 Jul 1993 to her death on 7 Apr 1994, Chandrika Kumaratunga, Prime minister of Sri Lanka from 19 Aug to Nov 1994, Chang Sang, Acting and ephemeral prime minister of South Korea, Beatriz Merino Lucero, Prime minister of Peru from 28 Jun to 15 Dec 2003, María Estela ('Isabel') Martínez de Perón, Served as president of Argentina from 1 Jul 1974 to 24 Mar 1976, Lydia Gueiler Tejada, Caretaker president of Bolivia from 17 Nov 1979 to 18 Jul 1980, Violeta Barrios de Chamorro, President of Nicaragua from 25 Apr 1990 to 10 Jan 1997. Ireland, Panama, Chile, Liberia, Georgia, and Finland have had female presidents. So, we are WAY BEHIND.

Duckie, this is not satire. I mean every word of this article and sincerely am grateful that I have this much faith in someone who is not my first choice.
Ruth, I was totally satisfied with the story behind that media clip that was taken out of context.

Marilyn, I am often confused by the "I'm independent" statement and am glad to see someone whose opinion I value use it so I can ask questions. Does your comment mean that you are looking only at independent candidates? If so, doesn't that mean you are not independent? I think I am one of the most independent thinkers I have ever known. Aligning myself with a political party whose principles closely match mine doesn't change that; I know that I am still able to look at all candidates and vote for the one that best represents my interests.

TH, for once I don't agree with you. At all. Those people were out to get her at any cost (to us), and still couldn't make those allegations stick.

Gary, EXACTLY! Thank you for "in order to govern, she has to be elected." I tried to open a discussion of that point on the thread of one of her articles the other day and she (or whoever is monitoring for her) did not accept my comment. I am extremely disappointed. "Show me a poliltician who doesn't triangulate and I'll show you one giving a concession speech on election night." Dennis Kucinch. I will still campaign for him until it's a done deal.

Thanks, everyone, for the great discussion.

Sandy, I'm well aware of the number of women who have risen to leadership of their countries, throughout history, but I love that you have it all presented here; we need to see that more often.

I was looking specifically at this moment in time when we here have finally approached the possibility that we might join the ranks of those countries.

Comparative histories between the two countries --Argentina and the U.S. -- would *suggest* that we'd be the first of the two to elect a woman president. That's if everything we claim(ed) about the U.S. was actually true.

Dannielle, I figured you were well aware of how far behind (and hypocritical) we are and thank you for inviting the opportunity to list some of the women who have led other countries.

Sandy, in light of this, I've been thinking that it takes more courage than we may have realized to be even where Hillary is now as a legitimate, front-running candidate, much less to face what awaits the first female U.S. president.

I could have missed it when I read thru your list of women world leaders Sandy, but I did not see the name of the first elected female president in Asia, Cory Aquino of the Philippines. She served from 1986 to 1992.

Dannielle, her courage is one of the character traits I admire most. She went into this knowing those who hate her (for no good reason, as Bert points out) would attack every thing from a hair out of place to her 'right' to love her husband.

Duckie, I missed that one, not you. Thanks.

I am disappointed that we haven't had a Right Wing flamer or two to contribute to this discussion, so that we could actually ask them why they hate her so much.
Or is it fear?

Bert:
I don't think they know why they don't like her, they just don't. The righties I've talked to (including some relatives) can't express it.

Good job, Sandy. I am primarily an Obama supporter, but I have appreciated and respected Hillary since I first saw her in winter of 1992 and will continue to do so as long as I can foresee. I'll go with whoever my party fields, because I like them all, but it will take no effort to sway me over to Hillary's side.

By the way, she is even more personable and engaging in person than she seems to be at a distance. I met her on her book tour. I had on the earliest "Bill Clinton for President '92" buttons ever made, and she recognized the design although she said she hadn't seen one in years. It's a rare couple that I can appreciate both halves of, but I got a kick out of this similarity to her husband.

Dean,
I understand your disgust with our political system...both parties are corrupt and unresponsive to the needs of the apathetic electorate. What should a concerned, informed voter do about this?
I wrote a piece about this issue after listening to a couple friends, one an "idealist" like you, the other a "pragmatist." It occurred to me that as long as the idealists and the pragmatist in the country continue to pi$$ on each other's legs, the Republicans were going to continue to win with their smaller, but more cohesive, bloc of voters. I called my article "Political Reform for Dummies."
Here is a link.

Impressive list of women leaders, Sandy--I'm wondering if the parliamentarian system allows people to fixate a little less on the person of the prime minister than the US presidential system--where the president has to be "perfect" in every sense, including height and good looks. Let's hope male gender and white skin have now been removed from the list of requirements for "perfection".

by opening with the statement that Dennis lost your primary support because of ignorance by the electorate, and closing with a promise to "campaign for" Kucinich

Dean, I did not say Kucinich lost my primary support, because he hasn't. I said he is my first choice of those who are running. I will campaign for him through the primaries, will support him always, but it would be absolutely absurd for me to give up my voice and my vote if someone else wins the nomination. I have to be realistic about the ignorance of the electorate and plan for my next campaign. If I come here (or anywhere else) and say horrible things about Clinton and Obama, because I think that is how I show support for Kucinich, it would be dishonest and unwise, and I'd look like a fool when I turn around in a few months to campaign for the winner of the primary race.

Kris, thanks for this statement: It's a rare couple that I can appreciate both halves of, but I got a kick out of this similarity to her husband. I feel the same way and it is as rare for me. Maybe our appreciation of what it is they share is what makes us respect her for things that others criticize.

Thanks for the link, Bert.

Aniko, let's hope. White skin and male gender have never represented perfection to me. Have you noticed that the women who are most likely to comment about "how worthless men are" are usually experienced only with white males and continue to place them in positions of power?

DW, I'm not surprised but I am disappointed.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071028/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/argentina_election

Argentina beats us to it!

Well, Sandy... there aren't many things in life I'm absolutely sure of, and this isn't one of them. Whitewater happened so long ago, I'd have to do some reading up just to retrace how I arrived at my personal conclusions. That makes me reluctant to debate the particulars, but willing to grant some benefit of the doubt.

As I recall it, Hillary's involvement in the real estate deal referred to as Whitewater seemed to me to be within the letter of the law--barely. I got the impression that she stretched the hell out of the intent of the law. The motive was profit, and money is power. Wanting to be wealthy and successful is nothing to be ashamed of. I just felt that when the scheme went sour, she got out of it by the skin of her teeth. She was prosecuted viciously, but not very competently. Interestingly, she didn't sell out the other people involved. What she did was refuse to accept any accusation that she had done anything wrong, and it didn't seem that black-and-white to me.

One of the other participants blew his brains out rather than face the music for his role in the thing. Of course, one mentally ill guy doesn't make an argument for Hillary's guilt. It does make a good argument that there was a lot going on there and we were probably only getting the sanitized version.

If she becomes the only non-Republican candidate with a chance of winning, I'll vote for her. Every vote of our lives is between a giant douche and a turd sandwich anyway.

Good for you Sandy.;-)
I'm a Edwards supporter myself , but whichever Democrat get the nomination I will fully support.
It is TOO IMPORTANT to stay away.

It may be my impression alone but Mrs. Clinton does not act as we expect a woman to act, she has a masculine stance with her tone and words.
This may be what some people do not like her and are not sure why.
She defies the classic image of the woman in politics.
Some of my feelings about her are:
She is strong in her beliefs, but in the past she has been naive at times in trusting others in business or personal life. Those experiences have made her wiser and a bit cynical.

She understand that consensus is a must to achieve objectives.
There have been occasions when she does not have all the facts and research needed before making a proposal.

I think in case of a disaster she would become even more decisive and controlled.
If she gets elected you will have 2 presidents, that may be helpful.

I am not making a decision til its time, do not have enough info.

I am not sure if the male majority of the politicos are ready for a woman in the White house.

For all the liberation and advances americans have achieved, in some areas we are regressing as ' education, civility, common sense, reasoning ability.
How can we vote if we do not understand why we are voting?

TH, "within the letter of the law" is the important part to me. Her attackers went after her as though she were some sort of, well, Halliburton, or George Bush, and that was far from the truth. If she did nothing wrong, I don't expect her to admit any guilt to appease a bunch of idiots who were obviously out to do anything they could to destroy her and her husband – and to me that seemed obvious enough. As for the guy who committed suicide, I don't think it is fair to hang that on anyone else. If I did, I would put other people way before her in the line of pushers-over-the-edge.

Don, I agree that "It is TOO IMPORTANT to stay away." From all I've seen so far, I think my last choice on the Democrat side is a much better choice than anyone on the Republican side. So, I fully expect to support whichever Democrat gets the nomination.

Rubicon, sadly, I share you concern: "I will not be comfortable that any of them will be sworn in until that day in 2009. I figure we are one new "crisis" away from martial law being declared and elections being suspended." And it scares the hell out of me. Dennis Kucinich is the only one I've heard make fair elections an issue, and that's disappointing. John Edwards is not one of my top choices because he and John Kerry conceded the 2004 (s)election while people in Ohio were still standing in line hoping they would get to vote some day. In my opinion, they threw all of our votes away and I might never completely forgive either of them.

I don't think it is at all "early" to make a statement of support (or non-support) about Hillary Clinton since every thought and move the woman has made in her life have been publicized for years. I am working on my "Why I support Barack Obama" and "Why I will vote for Dennis Kucinich" essays now. I think I know enough about both of them to be completely comfortable with my opinions.

Lea, I have no gender specific expectations so I will have to think about your first statement. I don't "see" that. Maybe I should feel it, however, since others have told me I think like a man. In my experience, males are more supportive than females of Hillary Clinton, especially young males. I think your point about knowing WHY we are voting is excellent. I tried to cover my WHYs is this article. To me, worldview and philosophy regarding individual freedoms and benefits are more important than specific issues. If I trust view and philosophy, I am comfortable that the candidate will support something that I can live with when things don't go exactly as s/he proposed (which is more likely than not).

A very well-thought out summary, and one that no one can dismiss without good reason. I would support nearly any democrat at this point, after the mess that GWB has made of this country.

I think she will be the candidate, and I think she will win. I hope that she will be strong enough to implement some immediate reversals of some of the damages.

I think Hillary Clinton is one tough lady, and I mean that in a positive sense. That toughness diminishes her apparent femininity, as lea c says.
This may be a deliberate action on her part. Many men are skeptical that a woman president could "stand up" to the other male leaders in the world. That she could make the tough decisions...to go to war, etc. Hillary may feel that she has to appear strong and resolute to gain the confidence of the American people that she will be a strong leader.

That's a good point Bert. For some reason I believe the toughness is more to cover up the vulnerability she may feel. When you are strong and confident you can be feminine and resolute.
Sandy you may be right, maybe all the men I talk to are republicans.
I had a conversation with one about politics and he called me Hillary at one point. I guess I also think like a man.

Sorry I am late to your article. Very nicely done, Sandy.

"All things considered, my support for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are equal. "

I agree, although I would lean a little towards Obama, if that was a viable choice. But I can stand behind Hillary for all the reasons you so succinctly outlines. I am always amazed at the venomous hate some people have towards her - and you are right in that they can never seem to come up with real reasons, just disparaging comments about Bill or her being a woman. I find that particularly distasteful, prejudiced and ignorant.

Anyway, I enjoyed your piece.

like you, dennis kucinich has my heart and mind, but so does bill richardson (and i believe he has the strongest chance to win against any republican they can throw at us). hillary is my senator (yes, i voted for her) and i fight for her whenever i need to. and although she has done good, she has disappointed me quite a few times. i know no one is perfect, and you have made some damn good arguments on her behalf...but i'm going to be stumping, hoping, and praying for richardson to get the nomination.

Sandy,
You said, "Marilyn, I am often confused by the "I'm independent" statement and am glad to see someone whose opinion I value use it so I can ask questions. Does your comment mean that you are looking only at independent candidates? If so, doesn't that mean you are not independent? I think I am one of the most independent thinkers I have ever known. Aligning myself with a political party whose principles closely match mine doesn't change that; I know that I am still able to look at all candidates and vote for the one that best represents my interests.

When I say I'm Independant, it goes way back to (this might be too much information, but it's an explanation), when I was raised by parents that would only vote their party.
From then on, I made up my mind that I'd always look at each candidate instead of only a party-line - therefore, I registered Independant. The reasons at the time were probabably as much guilt as anything, the desire to always vote my own mind, irregardless of party. That's all I meant, but I could've explained it.
So far and it's getting further in, I still have no idea of who to vote for and I have some serious questions about Hillarys healthcare. Or anyone's healthcare positions, as there are holes in them that need to be addressed and haven't been so far.

Sandy,

I don't know if I am way off base, but it seems to me you are a reasonable, caring, independent thinker. I think you should take a look at Hillary again, through her own words and deeds, and tell me if you still feel the same way:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7007109937779036019

Take a look at the real Hillary.

Very well written, very well out! I completely agree with you. I can't wait to see just how well Hillary does in the upcoming election!

Anyone shopping at Wal-Mart now or have you stopped shopping there because of Hillary? I wonder if she wins the presidency will all the claims of her husband raping or groping women stop or will Hillary start having sex with male interns? And can someone teach the Clintons to stay awake in public.

Funny how the Clintons didn't mind taking all that money Wal-Mart was giving ole Governor Bill back in his Arkansas days.

Oh those funny Clinton's...... whats with all the finger pointing. Really, you ever notice when Bill or Hillary speak they are always pointing...........

Here is the skinny of things:
http://www.zpub.com/un/un-bc.html - Bill Clinton
http://www.zpub.com/un/billc-5.html - Hillary Clinton

man these kids are funny

Sandy, nice article, well said - convincing me again that
in this race the intelligent, thinking, and mature people
are making the right choice. 10/10

>Really, you ever notice when Bill or Hillary speak they are always pointing...........

More evidence that they have a point.

Hello Sandy. if you ever get a chance to meet Hillary can you do me a favor?
Ask for her stance on this one important issue:
Why shouldn't Industrial Hemp be equal to Tobacco under the law ?
Ask her why she supports paying for childrens Healthcare by paying for it with tax on Tobacco products.
That type of logic seems circular to me.
This one issue delves into many other issues and I feel is something that must be answered by all the candidates.
If only somebody could get the question in front of the candidates.

Richard, I'll probably not get the chance to meet her, and I dropped out of her Gather group, since she did not accept my comments or questions. I agree with your positions, and am sure my daughter (who has a much better chance of meeting her) will ask your questions if she has the opportunity.

How will Hillary handle the economy when she's facing deepening debt herself ?

I'd like to see Hillary in the White House, because she will make a fine president. She already has plans and solutions and I'm guessing a team in mind.

I remeber the Clinton Miracle. Prosperity, good times.
I remeber how Hillary was vilified for being pro-Health Care. That is a virtue not a vice.
As well as she has done, is the Republican smear machine as impotent as Rush?

Perhaps Hillary has a 5% chance of getting nominated. This may be possible, for example, if she enters the convention with a majority of the popular vote. West Virginia and Kentucky primaries still to go.

Can Obama win if he is nominated? Today, I think he wouldn't and Hillary would. Next week , next month it could change. John Edwards' message didn't sell three months ago. Today , it might.

Fran, you just stood in front of the entire world and said you know the intimate details and conditions of another's marriage, as well as her thoughts. If that isn't a lie (an egotistical one at that), I don't know what is.

Also, if you are blaming Hillary Clinton (or any Democrat) for things not getting done over the fifteen years, I have little respect for your opinion.

Hope you meet reality soon.

I have always said (and still believe) that either Clinton or Obama would make a damn fine President. Kucinich, clearly, would be even better, but that's a moot point. Frankly, Clinton has already lost though she has difficulty admitting it, so that too . . . is a moot pont. Clinton has the experience and has been tested in the fire of an insidious smear assault on her and her husband. Frankly, I think most of the hate comes from the 'family first' crowd who seem pissed that she didn't leave Bill because the hatred of that man was SO extreme that some wanted to see anything bad happen to him. What the (F)right wingnuts don't seem to get is that the groundswell of support will go to either that wins the nomination . . . they seem to think whichever candidate does not get the nod will have all their supporters sit out the election giving McSame the win. Dream on!

"Should she convince super delegates to vote against the choice of people, or the party to give her an unfair advantage with Florida and Michigan, I will not respet her or the party."
What exactly does this mean? Super Delegates have always been able to participate. Am I to assume that simply because for the first time their input matters that it is somehow unfair? They can participate ONLY if they cannot make a difference? How is THIS fair?

Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~

"As for issues like social security none of our representatives pay or worry about social security, they know how to take care of their families, get big pensions etc."
Really? It's delusional . . . no . . . ignorant to think that our Representatives don't pay for or worry about Social Security. Also, Sandy's quite right . . . you 'opinion' that Hillary KNEW Bill was cheating is absurd! Please. Read something. Anything.

Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~

When you first published this, I was trying to steer clear of political articles (still kind of am, since politics depresses me). I never liked Hillary. I can't say exactly why but she was too much politician for me, like I always felt that, if push came to shove, she'd sell out way too cheap. I can't say it's true, just that I always felt that way.

A number of respected friends admire her so my impression may be way off. And, even so, I would readily have voted for her to avoid another warmongery republican in office. But she would not be my candidate of choice.

I suspect that there are others who hate her without a discernable reason. One could make a good case for that not being fair to her (and they'd be right), but, right or wrong, it makes electing her problematic. The people who hate Hillary (and I'm not there), really hate her. In my opinion, more than Bill, though why escapes me.

On the other hand, I'm still sorry I won't get a chance to vote for Kucinich.

Sandy,

Nice of you to re-post this. Your reasons for supporting Clinton last October have a nice ring, but I was glad to see your updated paragraph.

I have heard more than one pundit, politician, blogger suggest this:

"Look at the way the campaigns have been run... this is a good indication of the way a candidate would run the executive branch of government."

Given that observation one must ask if we want a leader who continues to rewrite the rules to match her desires? Do we want a leader who carefully divides us with whispers about race and gender? Do we want a president willing to buy votes with a gas-tax pander of the highest order?

How Hillary thinks is at question here. Her ambition is too self-serving, imo.

Kucinich was my first choice. I can honestly say now that I think Obama is an even better choice. I believe Obama's positions are close enough for comfort, his sincerity equal, and I think he has a bit of an edge in believability and diplomacy. The two of them on the ticket would make me very happy, but I don't expect that to happen.

Even though she has disappointed me lately, I still have a great deal of respect for Hillary Clinton. I appreciate her in the Senate, I think she would make a great president, I admire her strength, and I would love to have her as a friend. I just think Barack Obama has a better chance of healing this country and the world at this time.

What exactly does this mean? Doyle, I preach, and do my best to live, principles, rules, and truth above personalities. I've taken a bit of a beating recently from friends who thought I should have one set of principles for them and another set for everyone else. I was put on the list as an alternate delegate (not super). My principles tell me that means I could be called upon to represent a group of voters, not my personal choice. I expect super delegates to look at how people voted, and at how things went down in Florida and Michigan, and to make a decision based on principles and the rules.