Does Clinton's extended exposure to Republican assault make her a better prospective President, or just a less vulnerable candidate? I think some case could be made for the former, but I'd like to hear exactly what she thinks that case is.

I love to see all the people who thought Hillary was a forgone conclusion to gain the nomination coming around, with their support for the superior candidates.  That is you JMU

Bill Clinton on Charlie Rose stated that it's a crap shoot voting for a candidate who has only served in a federal office for one or two years.

As far as I know, Bill Clinton never held any federal elected office prior to becoming president, which means that Clinton had the same prior experience as Dubya, Reagan, and Carter.  In any event, core values to me are more of an indication of successful leadership than experience with the fake Capitol Hill brood.

Hillary's only notable experience and leadership have been failing to achieve universal health care and leading us into Iraq.  In the mid 1990's we held the White House, both houses of congress and more than 80% of Americans wanted universal healthcare but Hillary managed to blow it and give the Healthcare industry exactly what they wanted and now they are giving Hillary most of their money to maintain the status quo.

I could have sworn that was Bush, Cheney, and the "neocons."

"with conviction I support this resolution" -- Hillary Clinton leading Democrats into Iraq, October, 2002

Hillary could have led an effort to keep us out of Iraq but she failed to see the stupidity of Bush and the neocons.

"What I am opposed to is a dumb war" -- Barack Obama, October, 2002

Why don't you just make your case for Barack Obama instead of saying stuff like this?  I mean, you're going to argue that John Kerry, John Edwards and everyone else who voted for that resolution "led Democrats into Iraq?"  You're going to let Bush, Cheney et al. off the hook?  As far as I'm concerned, it's the Bush Administration's war, 100%, period end.  Next topic.

Bush could never have entered Iraq without the support of Senate Democrats.  Edwards has admitted the mistake and apologized for it.  You and Hillary are still in denial.

but you're almost singlehandedly turning me off of him with your attitude.  Do you really think this line of attack helps win people over to Obama?  Not me, that's for sure.

Obama wasn't even IN the Senate, so he didn't have to make that decision.   Anyway, I could care less about how people voted in 2002/2003.  I want to know what their vision is for the country moving forward, what their positions on the issues are, how experienced they are, etc.

to see what they will do in the future.  Hillary blew healthcare but gave the healthcare industry exactly what they wanted and she failed to see the consequences of her vote to give Bush a blank check.  Hillary will tell anyone, anything to get into the White House but she has nothing but poor experience, poor leadership and horrible judgment.

Please somebody tell me what good experience she has and what has she led on?

I did forget she led the smear campaigns againt Bill's mistresses and she did do a good job of that despite the fact that Bill admitted in his own book that he testified under oath to having sex with Gennifer Flowers.  

Hillary.  Congratulations.

The fact that Obama wasn't part of the Iraq war is a big plus with many people.  Obama can run against a Republican without being tied to the war or Bush.  Hillary and Edwards can not.  Most of the Republican candidates, except for McCain would look like a fresh start compared to Hillary or Edwards.  

not Hillary or Dodd or Biden or Kerry. So you're singling out Hillary?

Earth to Todd Smyth: We're all Democrats here. All you're doing is hurting Obama's chances by acting this way. I like Obama, but you've officially pissed me off. How does that help Obama's chances? Go back to DailyKos with this crap.

But Hillary has claimed to be an influential and experienced Senator, ready to lead on day one and she stood up and made a speech in support of giving Bush a blank check to start an illegal war while at the same time Obama didn't just oppose the war, he explained how it would inflame the Muslim world against the US and strengthen the recruiting arm of Al Queda, which it did.  He then went on to lay out the priorities we should have pursued like focusing on Bin Laden, Al Queda and loose nukes.  

That is a clear and fair distinction between catastrophic judgment and good judgment.

to say she showed "leadership" on the 2002 Iraq resolution.

She claims to be a leader with experience.  What has she led on and what experience?  Her legislative success is incredibly anemic.  However, her support from WallStreet and wealthy private industry is more impressive than Bush's.

Rather than getting side-tracked with attacks on Todd, and his support for Obama, how can Hillary's past success or lack of it, not be a fair question for Todd to ask?

I look to this site for answers, including predictions on how a Hillary presidency will act, and whether it will be good for the country.  Frankly, her votes, including the votes for war in Iraq, the more recent Iranian resolution, and the support of the anti-flag burning amendment, really repulse me.  

Please someone convince me otherwise that I should vote for her, and for the record, I am undecided between Obama or Edwards (though Kucinich is my ideological favorite).

 

ry---but I believe she, Barack, Biden, Edwards, would distinguish themselves if they were elected--not a dummy in the bunch. And as for a slipup or 2 about any subject, well just look at what the breeze over the garbage dumps blew into office over these last 6+ years and be thankful over what our candidates have to offer.

and can stand the heat. Funny...most Americans would like to hear those words to ensure that we have a strong candidate who can stand up to the Republicans..."And I've been dealing with their incoming fire for 16 years, and I'm still here."  But somehow you've twisted that statement into a negative for whomever you support.  

For those of you that support other Democratic candidates, that's fine.  But to unfairly distort her history is pathetic and shows the weakness of your knowledge and you weakness in supporting the Democratic Party candidates.  

Leave it to the political campaigns themselves to duke it out....