Hillary Clinton: Qualifications to be President

[Siete]

in the end, some asshat decides who is and who isn't qualified to be POTUS, disregarding the Constitution.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Clinton retains the Obama coalition for 2008 and 2012, plus she doubles the margin in the female vote and makes inroads in the rural vote, which is what polling internals from beaucoup polls is showing.

Obama won in 2008 with 52.87% of the NPV. Double the margin of the female vote, lose some of the GOP crossover vote from 2008, add 3% to the rural vote and Hillary comes in right around 57%, which I have predicted at least 7 times in USMB now. And I am bookmarking this prediction every time.

Hillary: 2016 --- 57%.

Interesting you provide numbers for something that hasn't taken place.

No surprise she maintains that coalition. People like you voted Obama due to race. Why wouldn't you vote Hillary due to sex organ. It's how your kind operate. Pick a cause not a qualified person. In 2020, after Hillary doesn't win, what's next for you guys, a wetback.

That's what polling does. Are you really that ignorant? And do you think the GOP statisticians are not looking at this data?

LOL....

Polling provides predictions but aren't results.

Yeah, that's what Carl Rove and Megan Kelly (Faux News) wanted to believe in the 2012 election...........and what happened?

After the fact, polls can be compared to results. They aren't the same before the results.

Indeed, they can:

Statistikhengst s ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2013 and beyond The moment of truth how did the pollsters do

Indeed, indeed.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Her resume is SO strong that a Junior Senator from Illinois with who's ONLY real "qualification" was that he wasn't white beat her.

In the end, "qualifications" only matter to Dems/liberals when they think their guy has some.

Qualifications only matter if they help you to win, and then only if you can win...

 

[westwall]

She was elected because her husband had been Pres, that's it. The Democrat machine got behind her because they wanted her in that position to help them. When she was there what the hell did she do? C'mon mr. fluffer, there's lots of Senators out there. What the hell did she do in 12 years? Name the bills she co-authored. Name the committee's she sat on and the influential decisions she helped craft. C'mon. Show us something other than her despotism derived jobs.

OK.

In 2001-2002, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) sponsored or co-sponsored 656 pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

Of those 656, 161 were directly sponsored by her:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress


In 2003-2004, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) sponsored or co-sponsored 826 pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress


Of those 826, 138 were directly sponsored by her:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

So, during George W. Bush 43's first term in office, Clinton was part of 1,482 pieces of legislation, 297 of which were directly sponsored by her.

In 2005-2006, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) sponsored or co-sponsored 895 pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

Of those 895, 175 were directly sponsored by her:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

In 2007-2008, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) sponsored or co-sponsored 991 pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

Of those 991, 235 were directly sponsored by her:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

And in 2009. the last 19 days of the Bush 43 congress, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) sponsored or co-sponsored 19 pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

Of those 19, 2 were directly sponsored by her, even after the election of Barack Obama (D-IL) as our 44th POTUS and shortly before his inauguration:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress


GRAND TOTAL, for Hillary Clinton's 8 years as Senator from the great state of New York, she sponsored or co-sponsored 3,387 (THREE THOUSAND, THREE HUNDRED and EIGHTY SEVEN) pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

Of those 3,387 pieces of legislation, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton directly sponsored (meaning, she was the initiator) 711 (SEVEN HUNDRED and ELEVEN) pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

711 / 3,387 = 20.99% (21%) of all all of the legislation that had her name on it had her name as the main-sponsor.


Committee Assignments:

United States Senate career of Hillary Rodham Clinton - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Clinton served on five Senate committees with nine subcommittee assignments:

• Committee on the Budget (2001-2003)[1]
• Committee on Armed Services (2003-2009)[2]
  • Subcommittee on Airland
  • Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities
  • Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support
• Committee on Environment and Public Works (2001-2009)[1]
  • Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety
  • Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure
  • Subcommittee on Superfund and Environmental Health (Chairwoman, 2007-2009)
• Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (2001-2009)[1]
  • Subcommittee on Children and Families
  • Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety
• Special Committee on Aging.[3]

She was also a Commissioner of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe[4] (2001-2009).[5]

She also held two leadership positions in the Senate Democratic Caucus:

1. Chairwoman of Steering and Outreach Committee (2003–2006)[6][7]
2. Vice Chairwoman of Committee Outreach (2007–2009)[8]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You can click at the links to see EXACTLY what the legislation was. There was a ton of it.

Hillary Clinton was quite a workhorse in the US- Senate. Even her Republican colleagues were forced to admit this. She was also one of the most-in-attendance Senators in the US Senate during those 8 years and when she was not there, until the 2008 primaries, was in her home state of New York, bringing the issues to the residents of her state, which is what a Senator is supposed to do.


That is her record. People who think that she did nothing of consequence in the US Senate are total blithering idiots. They, like Westwall, are the fuckwads who are going to be completely rolled over by Steamroller Clinton in 2016.


And, just for shits and grins:

Let's compare her work record to Jim DeMint, who was also elected to two terms (did not completely serve out his second term) from 2005-2013:

Jim DeMint Congress.gov Library of Congress

His TOTAL legislation over 7.5 years: 2,032 total pieces of legislation that he sponsored or co-sponsored. Of that 2,032, Jim DeMint directly sponsored 753 piece of legislation. He directly sponsored slightly more legislation than Clinton, but his overall work record was decidedly less. Plus, she did this on top of running for President in 2008.

Any Republican out there know EXACTLY what Jim DeMint sponsored, by name?

Chuckle, chuckle.

Thank you. After 36 pages somebody finally posted something up we can look at. But seriously. That's it? 12 years and that's it? I see a lot of sponsoring of other peoples work. I don't see much of what SHE did.

Well, that was stupid of you. Shows how little you know about the legislative branch. She personally sponsored 711 pieces of legislation and HELPED to WORK ON the others, making a massive total of +3,300 pieces of legislation. So, no, she didn't just sponsor other peoples' work. Good Lord, are you REALLY that daft? Plus, she is one of the only freshmen Senators ever to get some of those choice committee assignments, it is no small deal.

We have not even started on her tenure as Secretary of State, but that will be harder, since most of her acclaim will come out in 100 years or so when secret files will be opened. Who knows what kind of catastrophes she averted as SOS, burt I am sure she put out a number of political and military forest fires. She was unbelievably loved and respected there, FAR MORE than Colin Powell (whom I liked) and Condoleeza Rice (whom I also liked).

Hillary Clinton is EMINENTLY qualified to be the next POTUS. No Republican can even get close to her.

Sponsoring is not creating. Learn the difference. It does say something though, that John Ensign a terrible Senator from Nevada, and a Repub did alomost as much, and that when the Repubs were out of power and he was a known idiot.

https://www.congress.gov/member/john-ensign/348?q={"search":["john+ensign"]}

 

[jasonnfree]

Her resume is SO strong that a Junior Senator from Illinois with who's ONLY real "qualification" was that he wasn't white beat her.

In the end, "qualifications" only matter to Dems/liberals when they think their guy has some.

So Obama was a white beater? Anyway, Obama's been voted in 2x by we the people, not appointed by the supreme court like a certain college ex cheerleader was.

 

[Delldude]

Maybe because they give a shit while Republicans would just as soon allow those without insurance to die

And yet, the reality of it is when O care gets fully up and operational, there will be more people dying than before. I am however, still waiting, with baited breath, for a list of Hillary's accomplishments.

What a pile of stupid bullshit, completely lacking in any foundation, with ZERO facts and ZERO data support. It's nothing more than a butthurt opinion because you dislike Hillary, who is the subject of the OP. Lol..... Please, let's come back to this in 2019. I will be laughing at you for a long, long time.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

Stat was is hilary's good accomplishments? Surely someone who believes in her must do so because she's accomplished something..... Gotta have more than a last name.. List them.

Hey she faked her way into a Senate seat. She faked her way into being Secof State. She lied about a bunch of stuff and got away with it. What more could you want? Oh, did I mention her vagina?

YOU ARE FILTH. Any man who would mention a woman's vagina in this context is not a man at all but a pathetic little worm.

Time to activate the 'C' word.

 

[Statistikhengst]

She was elected because her husband had been Pres, that's it. The Democrat machine got behind her because they wanted her in that position to help them. When she was there what the hell did she do? C'mon mr. fluffer, there's lots of Senators out there. What the hell did she do in 12 years? Name the bills she co-authored. Name the committee's she sat on and the influential decisions she helped craft. C'mon. Show us something other than her despotism derived jobs.

OK.

In 2001-2002, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) sponsored or co-sponsored 656 pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

Of those 656, 161 were directly sponsored by her:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress


In 2003-2004, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) sponsored or co-sponsored 826 pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress


Of those 826, 138 were directly sponsored by her:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

So, during George W. Bush 43's first term in office, Clinton was part of 1,482 pieces of legislation, 297 of which were directly sponsored by her.

In 2005-2006, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) sponsored or co-sponsored 895 pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

Of those 895, 175 were directly sponsored by her:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

In 2007-2008, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) sponsored or co-sponsored 991 pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

Of those 991, 235 were directly sponsored by her:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

And in 2009. the last 19 days of the Bush 43 congress, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) sponsored or co-sponsored 19 pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

Of those 19, 2 were directly sponsored by her, even after the election of Barack Obama (D-IL) as our 44th POTUS and shortly before his inauguration:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress


GRAND TOTAL, for Hillary Clinton's 8 years as Senator from the great state of New York, she sponsored or co-sponsored 3,387 (THREE THOUSAND, THREE HUNDRED and EIGHTY SEVEN) pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

Of those 3,387 pieces of legislation, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton directly sponsored (meaning, she was the initiator) 711 (SEVEN HUNDRED and ELEVEN) pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

711 / 3,387 = 20.99% (21%) of all all of the legislation that had her name on it had her name as the main-sponsor.


Committee Assignments:

United States Senate career of Hillary Rodham Clinton - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Clinton served on five Senate committees with nine subcommittee assignments:

• Committee on the Budget (2001-2003)[1]
• Committee on Armed Services (2003-2009)[2]
  • Subcommittee on Airland
  • Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities
  • Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support
• Committee on Environment and Public Works (2001-2009)[1]
  • Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety
  • Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure
  • Subcommittee on Superfund and Environmental Health (Chairwoman, 2007-2009)
• Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (2001-2009)[1]
  • Subcommittee on Children and Families
  • Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety
• Special Committee on Aging.[3]

She was also a Commissioner of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe[4] (2001-2009).[5]

She also held two leadership positions in the Senate Democratic Caucus:

1. Chairwoman of Steering and Outreach Committee (2003–2006)[6][7]
2. Vice Chairwoman of Committee Outreach (2007–2009)[8]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You can click at the links to see EXACTLY what the legislation was. There was a ton of it.

Hillary Clinton was quite a workhorse in the US- Senate. Even her Republican colleagues were forced to admit this. She was also one of the most-in-attendance Senators in the US Senate during those 8 years and when she was not there, until the 2008 primaries, was in her home state of New York, bringing the issues to the residents of her state, which is what a Senator is supposed to do.


That is her record. People who think that she did nothing of consequence in the US Senate are total blithering idiots. They, like Westwall, are the fuckwads who are going to be completely rolled over by Steamroller Clinton in 2016.


And, just for shits and grins:

Let's compare her work record to Jim DeMint, who was also elected to two terms (did not completely serve out his second term) from 2005-2013:

Jim DeMint Congress.gov Library of Congress

His TOTAL legislation over 7.5 years: 2,032 total pieces of legislation that he sponsored or co-sponsored. Of that 2,032, Jim DeMint directly sponsored 753 piece of legislation. He directly sponsored slightly more legislation than Clinton, but his overall work record was decidedly less. Plus, she did this on top of running for President in 2008.

Any Republican out there know EXACTLY what Jim DeMint sponsored, by name?

Chuckle, chuckle.

Thank you. After 36 pages somebody finally posted something up we can look at. But seriously. That's it? 12 years and that's it? I see a lot of sponsoring of other peoples work. I don't see much of what SHE did.

Well, that was stupid of you. Shows how little you know about the legislative branch. She personally sponsored 711 pieces of legislation and HELPED to WORK ON the others, making a massive total of +3,300 pieces of legislation. So, no, she didn't just sponsor other peoples' work. Good Lord, are you REALLY that daft? Plus, she is one of the only freshmen Senators ever to get some of those choice committee assignments, it is no small deal.

We have not even started on her tenure as Secretary of State, but that will be harder, since most of her acclaim will come out in 100 years or so when secret files will be opened. Who knows what kind of catastrophes she averted as SOS, burt I am sure she put out a number of political and military forest fires. She was unbelievably loved and respected there, FAR MORE than Colin Powell (whom I liked) and Condoleeza Rice (whom I also liked).

Hillary Clinton is EMINENTLY qualified to be the next POTUS. No Republican can even get close to her.

Sponsoring is not creating. Learn the difference. It does say something though, that John Ensign a terrible Senator from Nevada, and a Repub did alomost as much, and that when the Repubs were out of power and he was a known idiot.

https://www.congress.gov/member/john-ensign/348?q={"search":["john+ensign"]}

Quite right. Sponsoring is not always creating, but sometimes, it is. And either way, wading through that much material and honing and fine-tuning it is the fine art of being a Senator and requires time, intelligence and hard work, to say the least. I suspected that you would grab for straws as quickly as you could, since the quicksand under your feet is going to be, as the Germans say: gnadenlos.

 

[Statistikhengst]

And yet, the reality of it is when O care gets fully up and operational, there will be more people dying than before. I am however, still waiting, with baited breath, for a list of Hillary's accomplishments.

What a pile of stupid bullshit, completely lacking in any foundation, with ZERO facts and ZERO data support. It's nothing more than a butthurt opinion because you dislike Hillary, who is the subject of the OP. Lol..... Please, let's come back to this in 2019. I will be laughing at you for a long, long time.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

Stat was is hilary's good accomplishments? Surely someone who believes in her must do so because she's accomplished something..... Gotta have more than a last name.. List them.

Hey she faked her way into a Senate seat. She faked her way into being Secof State. She lied about a bunch of stuff and got away with it. What more could you want? Oh, did I mention her vagina?

YOU ARE FILTH. Any man who would mention a woman's vagina in this context is not a man at all but a pathetic little worm.

Time to activate the 'C' word.

Yes, I can imagine you doing that.
Classless Rrrrraging Rrrrrrighties do those type of things.

 

[Delldude]

Of course being First Lady is an accomplishment, especially one given the access that Hillary was. She met with world leaders, cabinet members, congressional leaders and dealt with the POTUS on a day to day basis.

Does any Republican have knowledge of the day to day workings of the White House?

Just that gives her more qualifications than any current Republican

How is being a door mat an accomplishment? Do you even know what the word means?

Hillarys exposure to Washington and global politics during her time as First Lady exceeds any current Republican.

You are welcome to try to prove otherwise

Then the Pubs are just gonna have to change the 'experience' benchmarks, from 'exposure to Washington', over to 'governance'.

At least Bubba Clinton had done a stint as a Governor of a State, before we gave him the keys to the White House.

We let a rookie junior first-term Senator from Illinois into the White House, and he managed to screw the pooch, and lose both houses of Congress.

There are, indeed, examples of Presidential success stories, under circumstances wherein the candidate had not governed, first.

But, after this last Presidency, I think the Nation is better off looking for someone who has actually governed, albeit on a State level, rather than giving the job to another political hack and manufactured celebrity, with nothing more than some time in the Senate, as credentials.

You can serve on a Leadership Committee, then go on to actually LEAD, and be successful, but you have a MUCH better CHANCE of succeeding, if you have already cut your teeth on another sizable Leadership opportunity (State governorship), and made most of your mistakes on somebody else's nickle, before trying to play The Palace.

Or so logic would seem to indicate, as a preferred pathway to the Presidency.

Experience in the office you seek beats being a governor

Hillary had eight years in the Whitehouse followed by four years as Secretary of State. She understands the job she is seeking

A governor understands internal politics of his state but has no understanding of international politics, Washington politics or the internal workings of the executive branch

Being a First Lady is not a time-tested and viable pathway to the Presidency.

A governor understands how to intertwine the work of an Executive Branch with a Legislative Branch and a Judicial Branch, albeit on the State level.

It's why so many Governors have made it to the White House, and why no First Ladies have made it to the White House.

Even merely within the timeframe from the passage of the 19th... the track record speaks for itself.

How many women have used being first lady to qualify them for candidacy?

 

[Statistikhengst]

How is being a door mat an accomplishment? Do you even know what the word means?

Hillarys exposure to Washington and global politics during her time as First Lady exceeds any current Republican.

You are welcome to try to prove otherwise

Then the Pubs are just gonna have to change the 'experience' benchmarks, from 'exposure to Washington', over to 'governance'.

At least Bubba Clinton had done a stint as a Governor of a State, before we gave him the keys to the White House.

We let a rookie junior first-term Senator from Illinois into the White House, and he managed to screw the pooch, and lose both houses of Congress.

There are, indeed, examples of Presidential success stories, under circumstances wherein the candidate had not governed, first.

But, after this last Presidency, I think the Nation is better off looking for someone who has actually governed, albeit on a State level, rather than giving the job to another political hack and manufactured celebrity, with nothing more than some time in the Senate, as credentials.

You can serve on a Leadership Committee, then go on to actually LEAD, and be successful, but you have a MUCH better CHANCE of succeeding, if you have already cut your teeth on another sizable Leadership opportunity (State governorship), and made most of your mistakes on somebody else's nickle, before trying to play The Palace.

Or so logic would seem to indicate, as a preferred pathway to the Presidency.

Experience in the office you seek beats being a governor

Hillary had eight years in the Whitehouse followed by four years as Secretary of State. She understands the job she is seeking

A governor understands internal politics of his state but has no understanding of international politics, Washington politics or the internal workings of the executive branch

Being a First Lady is not a time-tested and viable pathway to the Presidency.

A governor understands how to intertwine the work of an Executive Branch with a Legislative Branch and a Judicial Branch, albeit on the State level.

It's why so many Governors have made it to the White House, and why no First Ladies have made it to the White House.

Even merely within the timeframe from the passage of the 19th... the track record speaks for itself.

How many women have used being first lady to qualify them for candidacy?

And why not?

 

[Dad2three]

CBO: Bush Tax Cuts Responsible For Almost A Third Of Deficit In Last 10 Years (2001-2010)

The Obama forced a Dem-controlled Congress to extend GWB's tax cuts in their entirety, calling it "a substantial victory for middle-class families across the country."
Obama signs bill to extend Bush-era tax cuts for two more years
Someone here is dishonest, and it isn't anyone from the GOP.

Apparently westwall, the mod took down my TWO responses to YOUR OFF TOPIC BS, BUT DIDN'T TAKE DOWN THIS ONE. Weird

YOU brought up the Bush tax cuts, and so my post is no more off topic than yours.
Further, YOU brought them up, and so they, in their entirety, are fair game.

Now tell me:
Did the Democrats lie when they characterized GWB's tax cuts as cuts for the rich, or when they characterized them as a substantial victory for middle-class families across the country?

Weird, you don't note I was talking about an UNNAMED Mod (CONSERVATIVE) who felt that post WAS off topic and two of my posts (completly ripping your ass to shreds, again) removed, showing YOU that the CBO said Dubya's tax cuts cost almost 1/3rd of deficits BEFORE Obama/Dems were blackmailed into extending the tax cuts for EVERYONE except the top .08%. Obama/Dems wanted to get the top 2% which would create an estimated $4+ trillion MORE in fed revenues the next decade.




"Now tell me:
Did the Democrats lie when they characterized GWB's tax cuts as cuts for the rich,"


YOU tell me Bubba:


Bush Tax Cuts Have Provided Extremely Large Benefits to Wealthiest Americans

• The average tax cut that people making over $1 million received exceeded $110,000 in each of the last nine years — for a total of more than $1 million over this period.
• The tax cuts made the tax system less progressive
  
  Bush Tax Cuts Have Provided Extremely Large Benefits to Wealthiest Americans Over Last Nine Years mdash Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
  
  
  
  The Bush Tax Cuts Disproportionately Benefitted the Wealthy
  
  The Bush Tax Cuts Disproportionately Benefitted the Wealthy Economic Policy Institute
  
  
  
  
  
  January 8, 2007
  
  Tax Cuts Offer Most for Very Rich, Study Says
  
  
  Families earning more than $1 million a year saw their federal tax rates drop more sharply than any group in the country as a result of President Bush’s tax cuts, according to a new Congressional study.
  
  HOPEFULLY ONCE HILLARY IS PREZ, SHE'LL BE ABLE TO BOUNCE THE GOPers off the fukking walls as they deserve!

• 
  
  
  

 

[BULLDOG]

When in time does being First Lady make you qualified to do anything other than plan a party?

When it involves meeting with foreign leaders, when it involves writing major healthcare legislation, when it involves dealing daily with cabinet level officials, when it involves dealing with Congress

Hillary did it all as First Lady......what Republican has that level of experience?

Obama didnt have that experience. Does that mean he was unqualified?

Unfortunately, Obama is not running in 2016

Republicans are....none are as qualified as Hillary

Dodge that question.
If Hillary is qualified because she did all that shit then does that mean Obama wasnt qualified because he didnt?

Hillary is unworthy of being president. She lacks any relevant accomplishments and has managed to fail upwards her whole career.

In case that is true, then I expect the right will have no problem finding a clown car occupant to beat her. That must be someone who hasn't been heard from yet, because all the right wingers who have expressed even the slightest interest in running are clowns who don't stand a chance.

 

[Dad2three]

Sure is going to be pretty damn funny when after a community organizer beat the best the GOP had to offer US twice, this Hillary old timer with NOTHING (according to GOPers) to hang her hat on, hands the GOP's ass to them in 2016! lol

 

[westwall]

She was elected because her husband had been Pres, that's it. The Democrat machine got behind her because they wanted her in that position to help them. When she was there what the hell did she do? C'mon mr. fluffer, there's lots of Senators out there. What the hell did she do in 12 years? Name the bills she co-authored. Name the committee's she sat on and the influential decisions she helped craft. C'mon. Show us something other than her despotism derived jobs.

OK.

In 2001-2002, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) sponsored or co-sponsored 656 pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

Of those 656, 161 were directly sponsored by her:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress


In 2003-2004, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) sponsored or co-sponsored 826 pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress


Of those 826, 138 were directly sponsored by her:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

So, during George W. Bush 43's first term in office, Clinton was part of 1,482 pieces of legislation, 297 of which were directly sponsored by her.

In 2005-2006, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) sponsored or co-sponsored 895 pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

Of those 895, 175 were directly sponsored by her:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

In 2007-2008, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) sponsored or co-sponsored 991 pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

Of those 991, 235 were directly sponsored by her:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

And in 2009. the last 19 days of the Bush 43 congress, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) sponsored or co-sponsored 19 pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

Of those 19, 2 were directly sponsored by her, even after the election of Barack Obama (D-IL) as our 44th POTUS and shortly before his inauguration:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress


GRAND TOTAL, for Hillary Clinton's 8 years as Senator from the great state of New York, she sponsored or co-sponsored 3,387 (THREE THOUSAND, THREE HUNDRED and EIGHTY SEVEN) pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

Of those 3,387 pieces of legislation, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton directly sponsored (meaning, she was the initiator) 711 (SEVEN HUNDRED and ELEVEN) pieces of legislation:

Hillary Rodham Clinton Congress.gov Library of Congress

711 / 3,387 = 20.99% (21%) of all all of the legislation that had her name on it had her name as the main-sponsor.


Committee Assignments:

United States Senate career of Hillary Rodham Clinton - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Clinton served on five Senate committees with nine subcommittee assignments:

• Committee on the Budget (2001-2003)[1]
• Committee on Armed Services (2003-2009)[2]
  • Subcommittee on Airland
  • Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities
  • Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support
• Committee on Environment and Public Works (2001-2009)[1]
  • Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety
  • Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure
  • Subcommittee on Superfund and Environmental Health (Chairwoman, 2007-2009)
• Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (2001-2009)[1]
  • Subcommittee on Children and Families
  • Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety
• Special Committee on Aging.[3]

She was also a Commissioner of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe[4] (2001-2009).[5]

She also held two leadership positions in the Senate Democratic Caucus:

1. Chairwoman of Steering and Outreach Committee (2003–2006)[6][7]
2. Vice Chairwoman of Committee Outreach (2007–2009)[8]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You can click at the links to see EXACTLY what the legislation was. There was a ton of it.

Hillary Clinton was quite a workhorse in the US- Senate. Even her Republican colleagues were forced to admit this. She was also one of the most-in-attendance Senators in the US Senate during those 8 years and when she was not there, until the 2008 primaries, was in her home state of New York, bringing the issues to the residents of her state, which is what a Senator is supposed to do.


That is her record. People who think that she did nothing of consequence in the US Senate are total blithering idiots. They, like Westwall, are the fuckwads who are going to be completely rolled over by Steamroller Clinton in 2016.


And, just for shits and grins:

Let's compare her work record to Jim DeMint, who was also elected to two terms (did not completely serve out his second term) from 2005-2013:

Jim DeMint Congress.gov Library of Congress

His TOTAL legislation over 7.5 years: 2,032 total pieces of legislation that he sponsored or co-sponsored. Of that 2,032, Jim DeMint directly sponsored 753 piece of legislation. He directly sponsored slightly more legislation than Clinton, but his overall work record was decidedly less. Plus, she did this on top of running for President in 2008.

Any Republican out there know EXACTLY what Jim DeMint sponsored, by name?

Chuckle, chuckle.

Thank you. After 36 pages somebody finally posted something up we can look at. But seriously. That's it? 12 years and that's it? I see a lot of sponsoring of other peoples work. I don't see much of what SHE did.

Well, that was stupid of you. Shows how little you know about the legislative branch. She personally sponsored 711 pieces of legislation and HELPED to WORK ON the others, making a massive total of +3,300 pieces of legislation. So, no, she didn't just sponsor other peoples' work. Good Lord, are you REALLY that daft? Plus, she is one of the only freshmen Senators ever to get some of those choice committee assignments, it is no small deal.

We have not even started on her tenure as Secretary of State, but that will be harder, since most of her acclaim will come out in 100 years or so when secret files will be opened. Who knows what kind of catastrophes she averted as SOS, burt I am sure she put out a number of political and military forest fires. She was unbelievably loved and respected there, FAR MORE than Colin Powell (whom I liked) and Condoleeza Rice (whom I also liked).

Hillary Clinton is EMINENTLY qualified to be the next POTUS. No Republican can even get close to her.

Sponsoring is not creating. Learn the difference. It does say something though, that John Ensign a terrible Senator from Nevada, and a Repub did alomost as much, and that when the Repubs were out of power and he was a known idiot.

https://www.congress.gov/member/john-ensign/348?q={"search":["john+ensign"]}

Quite right. Sponsoring is not always creating, but sometimes, it is. And either way, wading through that much material and honing and fine-tuning it is the fine art of being a Senator and requires time, intelligence and hard work, to say the least. I suspected that you would grab for straws as quickly as you could, since the quicksand under your feet is going to be, as the Germans say: gnadenlos.

I believe that's what their staff is for. And you would have thought that a bill as important as O care would have been read by more than one Senator, but no. That wasn't even true. I do commend you though. You were the only person who actually came up with something to look at. I will be reviewing it for the next few days.

 

[westwall]

Sure is going to be pretty damn funny when after a community organizer beat the best the GOP had to offer US twice, this Hillary old timer with NOTHING (according to GOPers) to hang her hat on, hands the GOP's ass to them in 2016! lol

Yes, continually screwing the middle class is hilarious.

 

[BULLDOG]

Sure is going to be pretty damn funny when after a community organizer beat the best the GOP had to offer US twice, this Hillary old timer with NOTHING (according to GOPers) to hang her hat on, hands the GOP's ass to them in 2016! lol

Yes, continually screwing the middle class is hilarious.

So a right winger claims Hillary is trying to screw the middle class. I guess that is to be expected, with the way the right gets everything backwards. They were, after all, the ones who made such a big deal about FEMA Prisons, Death Panels, and BENGHAZI-BENGHAZI-BENGHAZI

 

[The Rabbi]

Sure is going to be pretty damn funny when after a community organizer beat the best the GOP had to offer US twice, this Hillary old timer with NOTHING (according to GOPers) to hang her hat on, hands the GOP's ass to them in 2016! lol

Yes, continually screwing the middle class is hilarious.

So a right winger claims Hillary is trying to screw the middle class. I guess that is to be expected, with the way the right gets everything backwards. They were, after all, the ones who made such a big deal about FEMA Prisons, Death Panels, and BENGHAZI-BENGHAZI-BENGHAZI

Is the middle class better off today than it was when Obama took office?
What policy differences does Hillary have to indicate she will make things better for the middle class?

You will of course deflect, insult, and do anything other than answer thsoe questions. Because you are hopeless.

 

[rightwinger]

How is being a door mat an accomplishment? Do you even know what the word means?

Hillarys exposure to Washington and global politics during her time as First Lady exceeds any current Republican.

You are welcome to try to prove otherwise

Then the Pubs are just gonna have to change the 'experience' benchmarks, from 'exposure to Washington', over to 'governance'.

At least Bubba Clinton had done a stint as a Governor of a State, before we gave him the keys to the White House.

We let a rookie junior first-term Senator from Illinois into the White House, and he managed to screw the pooch, and lose both houses of Congress.

There are, indeed, examples of Presidential success stories, under circumstances wherein the candidate had not governed, first.

But, after this last Presidency, I think the Nation is better off looking for someone who has actually governed, albeit on a State level, rather than giving the job to another political hack and manufactured celebrity, with nothing more than some time in the Senate, as credentials.

You can serve on a Leadership Committee, then go on to actually LEAD, and be successful, but you have a MUCH better CHANCE of succeeding, if you have already cut your teeth on another sizable Leadership opportunity (State governorship), and made most of your mistakes on somebody else's nickle, before trying to play The Palace.

Or so logic would seem to indicate, as a preferred pathway to the Presidency.

Experience in the office you seek beats being a governor

Hillary had eight years in the Whitehouse followed by four years as Secretary of State. She understands the job she is seeking

A governor understands internal politics of his state but has no understanding of international politics, Washington politics or the internal workings of the executive branch

Being a First Lady is not a time-tested and viable pathway to the Presidency.

A governor understands how to intertwine the work of an Executive Branch with a Legislative Branch and a Judicial Branch, albeit on the State level.

It's why so many Governors have made it to the White House, and why no First Ladies have made it to the White House.

Even merely within the timeframe from the passage of the 19th... the track record speaks for itself.

How many women have used being first lady to qualify them for candidacy?

It qualified her for Senator, then Presidential candidate, then Sec State

 

[M14 Shooter]

Her resume is SO strong that a Junior Senator from Illinois with who's ONLY real "qualification" was that he wasn't white beat her.

In the end, "qualifications" only matter to Dems/liberals when they think their guy has some.

So Obama was a white beater?

Not sure what thiat is apposed to mean or how you drew it from what I said.

Anyway, Obama's been voted in 2x by we the people...

If "qualifications" mattered to Democrats/Liberals, they would have voted for McCain.

 

[M14 Shooter]

YOU brought up the Bush tax cuts, and so my post is no more off topic than yours.
Further, YOU brought them up, and so they, in their entirety, are fair game.
Now tell me:
Did the Democrats lie when they characterized GWB's tax cuts as cuts for the rich, or when they characterized them as a substantial victory for middle-class families across the country?

Weird, you don't note I was talking about an UNNAMED Mod....blah blah blah...

Did the Democrats lie when they characterized GWB's tax cuts as cuts for the rich, or when they characterized them as a substantial victory for middle-class families across the country?
Still waiting for a response.