Reasons Why Hillary Clinton Will Not Be The Democratic Nominee for President

Bill Thompson

Rookie
Apr 20, 2008
5
5
1
When Bill Clinton came to Microsoft to give a speech, he was received warmly by a crowd who were impressed by his wisdom and his view of a better, more helpful and compassionate world. People naturally are drawn to and appreciate an intelligent, well-spoken person who can think on their feet. He touched on a lot of issues and he had a lot of great one-liners in dealing with world events such as "Osama bin Laden likes technology just like the west likes technology. But bin Laden likes it exclusively and the west likes it inclusively". While the crowd was left pondering this gem, Clinton would either throw out either another line of insight, or a line of wisdom or a line of encouragement. This left the group constantly intrigued and mentally stimulated.

There was a question-and-answer period at the end of this speech and Clinton answered each with detail and precision. One woman asked if he could hold a Cabinet position in a Hillary presidency. Specifically, I believe she asked if he could be secretary of state.

The former president said, "That is a good question. The answer is no." And then he explained that a law was passed – I believe during the Lyndon Johnson administration – that said an immediate family member of the president can not be in the cabinet. This had something do to with Bobby Kennedy being in John Kennedy's Cabinet and a president can not or should not have to fire a family member. President Clinton went on to say that he thought that this was actually a very good idea.

This makes me wonder because Hillary was in charge of revamping the Health Care system during Bill Clinton's presidency. But on the other hand, this really was not a position of power.

(#1) A Hillary Clinton Presidency will not Mirror the Years of the Bill Clinton Presidency
This leads me to the first reason why Hillary Clinton will not be the Democratic nominee for president.

I always suspected that the only reason why many people liked Hillary Clinton was because of the run-off charisma from her husband. When I first noticed her surfacing as a candidate for president, I was at a loss as to why so many people liked her and they seemed to like her very much. I went to several liberal and progressive web forums. They seemed to be upset by my just asking the question as if I was questioning some divine prophecy. Trying to get into the heads and understanding how liberals think is often difficult. Ann Coulter might be wrong about a lot of things, but one thing I think she gets right is that Liberalism is like a church. You can not question the divine doctrine or those who are appointed the Pope of the Church of Liberalism – doing so will get you banished from the Progressive web forums.

Regardless, without any other reason for supposing why people liked Hillary, I was left with only the name recognition and the face recognition and their subconscious appreciation of happier times. When all possible reasons are discounted, the only reason left, no matter how improbable, is the only possible explanation.

My suspicions were confirmed by several people who would openly admit "I miss Bill" when I am talking about having a president Hillary.

Well, it is time for me to officially burst this bubble. As Bill Clinton said himself, he can not be placed into any real position of power in a Hillary presidency.

So now ask yourself this. If you could erase Bill Clinton from the picture – if you could remove the association between Bill and Hillary, would you still be excited about Hillary Clinton being president?

You might tell yourself that since Hillary seemed to be a powerful player when Bill was president, it might work the other way. It would not. The two have very different personalities and ideologies and interpersonal skills and management styles. Bill is a charismatic intellectual while Hillary is a driven, ambitious and power-hungry leftist ideologue. Switch the seats of power and you have a very different administration and, as a result, a more troubling future for our country.

Being the wife of Bill Clinton should not be a reason why you would want to support Hillary. A Hillary Clinton Presidency will not be any way like the Bill Clinton Presidency.
 
Another political troll. I would have but thought maybe in this case then but if why or somehow and this one but if why. I wonder if there is a script they follow. Shallow and boring.
 
There are no leftists today, there is only the broadening middle.

Very astute.

Conservatism has embraced economic extremism with its belief that governnment should have no regulatory power over powerful corporations. The other extreme is communism (which is dying out) where government has complete control over business.

In between extremes are progressives, who believe in balancing the interests of rich and poor, so that the most people possible can enjoy life.

Allie's RNC dogma proves her limited mind which sees issues as a binary choice of extremes, with no ability to grasp or analyze the varying, infinite shades in between.
 
Thanks. As I said, she seems to reflect the views of most of the country which makes her more in the center than the other two.

I disagree. She's nowhere near the center. McCain would be the closest to the center.

Hillary has just used her time in the Senate to try and edge her way towards the center -- a tactice that worked successfully for Bill.

Then, compared to Obama, who ISN'T closer to the center?
 
I disagree. She's nowhere near the center. McCain would be the closest to the center.

Hillary has just used her time in the Senate to try and edge her way towards the center -- a tactice that worked successfully for Bill.

Then, compared to Obama, who ISN'T closer to the center?

No... McCain USED to be closer to the center. Now he's gone waaaaaaaaaaaay right....
 
Very astute.

Conservatism has embraced economic extremism with its belief that governnment should have no regulatory power over powerful corporations. The other extreme is communism (which is dying out) where government has complete control over business.

In between extremes are progressives, who believe in balancing the interests of rich and poor, so that the most people possible can enjoy life.

Allie's RNC dogma proves her limited mind which sees issues as a binary choice of extremes, with no ability to grasp or analyze the varying, infinite shades in between.

What you are calling "progressives" have been historically called socialists and they aren't in the center of anything. Balancing the interests of rich and poor is called wealth redistribution, a staple of socialism. Midcan is exactly that which he denies -- a leftist.

The idea that the extremes no longer exist is ridiculous. You cannot have a middle without them.
 
What you are calling "progressives" have been historically called socialists and they aren't in the center of anything. Balancing the interests of rich and poor is called wealth redistribution, a staple of socialism. Midcan is exactly that which he denies -- a leftist.

The idea that the extremes no longer exist is ridiculous. You cannot have a middle without them.
I never said that "the extremes no longer exist"; I said the opposite. Conservatives and communists still exist. What Americans call "the Left" is actually closer to the middle.

Wealth redistribution exists under all systems. It's just a matter of degree and direction.

My statement about balancing interests regards power, not wealth. FDR set rules that empowered workers so they could negiotate on a more even plane with corporations. Before that, corporations held all the power and workers had little to none.

Wealthy interests organized to do business, but called it socialism when workers organized to protect their own interests. As unions grew, so did the middle class. Reagan weakened the unions, and the middle class squeeze began. His policies effected a redistribution of wealth from workers to the wealthy.

Those who advocate a return to pre-FDR policies do not understand how squalid and desperate life could be for all but the richest Americans. FDR created the large middle class that realized the American dream for more people than ever before.
 
I never said that "the extremes no longer exist"; I said the opposite. Conservatives and communists still exist. What Americans call "the Left" is actually closer to the middle....Those who advocate a return to pre-FDR policies do not understand how squalid and desperate life could be for all but the richest Americans. FDR created the large middle class that realized the American dream for more people than ever before.

Excellent post.


"Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite." John Kenneth Galbraith
 

Forum List

Back
Top