The hate definitely is largely factional rather than rational. Lets face it: the right hates her because she’s a powerful and assertive woman. How many times has she been described as being a bitch, a lesbian, a new age witch, and so forth by the right wing pundits? How many times does the completely meaningless fact of her maiden name come up over and over? How many times her supposed power cabal that has the power to murder people like Vince Foster? And all for what? This was long before she had a political career of her own. The right just loved smearing her with everything they had back then as a corollary to attacking Bill, and after she became a politician, they forgot that when it comes to actual politics, it’s nice if the smears even make sense.
To go directly to the OP, she brings up the extreme on both sides. She is more likely to be hated or loved then mildly disliked or mildly liked by the people.
Not necessarily – see post #13.
I don’t see her as power-hungry, and I don’t see where others get that impression.
I do see her as a loyal Democratic party hack, who will put the party above anything else. The only reason she took the New York Senate seat is becasue the Democrats wanted her–because of her high profile and her husband–there. It wasn’t her idea.
I agree that, like Bill, she isn’t liberal enough.
If she is the nominee in '08–which I find highly unlikely–I will vote for her, reluctantly, as I did with Kerry. Personally, I’m hoping Edwards is the nominee.
Link no work.
Oh please. She moved back to NC for the express purpose of running for the Senate. Are you seriously suggesting that ‘where your mother lives’ establishes residency? I never said she was* from* Kansas. I said that she established residency in a state for political purposes, and not because she chose to live there. Just like Clinton. If she could have been elected in Vermont, she would have moved to Vermont. She saw a political opportunity, and she took it. She ran for Jesse Helms’ seat against a card carrying liberal (Skipper Bowles) and won. Do you think this was just a by product of re-locating? She and Bob had planned all along to move to freaking Salsibury? The home of Aunt Bee? Have you been to Salsibury? (Rhetorical. I’m sure you have.)
She had not lived in NC for forty years before her Senate run. She is as much of a carpet-bagger as anyone can be today.
So reducing the size of the federal government is a bad thing now? Why do I feel like if a republican did it, it would be good?
Isn’t that just a bullshit conspiracy theory?
I used to kinda like Hilary… until she started making waves with her moronic views on video games.
Except that insofar as the canning was apparently done in order to give the work to Clintonite cronies, there’s a cause for contention that it was not the right thing to do. BUT it’s really just a vulgar favoritism/crass use of authority charge (and nowhere near the scale of contracts directed, say, in Haliburton’s direction).
The Vince Foster thing, OTOH, yeah, it has always sounded crackpot to me. So the man could not take the heat and had a meltdown: Horrible for him, but I just don’t see the criminal plot.
Ayuh. So much and so definitely and so obviously so that I just can’t understand anyone bringing it up at this late date. What were you thinking, ralph?!
Oh - I never heard that one before. I remember Bill Clinton did eliminate a lot of White House staff positions in order to pare down the budget. That was widely reported in the news. I hadn’t heard about Hillary supposedly firing people and rehiring cronies.
If you can’t trust Wiki, who can you trust?
Some people still can’t recognize a smear campaign when they see it, though.
Hmmmm…Wikipedia says “Historically, a change of administrations usually resulted in a brand new Travel Office staff.” Not a great source, though. Anybody know if that’s true? Is it actually common practice for a new administration to replace the travel staff? Can’t see how that would be a bad thing if every other administration has done it.
Misread as: “caning the White House Travel office staff”
(why not? they’ve accused her of everything but!)
At the end of the day, what matters is this: New York loves her. She’s done a pretty good job as Senator, as even many NY Republicans admit. Keep in mind that New Yorkers don’t suffer fools gladly. If she did a shitty job she would be all but stoned to death. Bill’s much loved, too. Who’da thunk it: a Southerner in NYC (with a conspicuous Souther accent, no less!) not derided as a hick? That takes talent, folks. If it had been up to me, I’da given him a third go-round.
Change “Democratic party” to “DLC”, and I’ll agree with you there.
What I find amusing are all the right-wing nutjobs who equate Hillary Clinton with the “far left” – which is little more than a conservative bogeyman. From what I’ve seen, the genuine “far left” folks don’t think too fondly of her (or Bill) either.
“Bill Clinton was the best Republican President we ever had.” --Michael Moore
She’s smarter than the lot of 'em. Not that that’s saying much… 
I don’t know if she’s “generally hated.” I don’t like her. I don’t like her stances on Iraq, I don’t like the way she sucks up to the conservatives on same-sex marriage and flag-burning and video games and the like. Does every politician do this sort of thing? Many do. But those many aren’t being shoved at me constantly.
Just as I wish Barry Bonds would retire so that people would just shaddup already, I wish Hillary Clinton would go away.
But, since I want the Reps firmly out of power for a few years, I can’t think of a potential Dem nominee I wouldn’t vote for ahead of her, and I can’t think of a potential Rep nominee I would vote for ahead of her.
Come on, ralph is the most credulous person on the SDMB, if not the planet.
You’ve noticed, surely.
-Joe
Sleazy deals? The Clintons lost about $450,000 in the failed Whitewater project. All they did was invest their money in a development that went belly-up. Ken Starr’s bloodhounds examined every particle of Whitewater, and they found the Clintons to be innocent of any wrongdoing.
In futures trading, you either lose your original investment, or you make a lot of money. She made money, and Starr found nothing shady in it.
The Travel dustup has been covered already. “The crooked Rose Law Firm?” Where’d you get that concept? Cite?
Foster’s death was extensively examined, not covered up. Bernie Nussbaum? Nah, it was Linda Tripp. :eek:
If you are basing your judgement of “pretty unscrupulous” on your list of phony charges, you are wrong, Ralph124c. Go back and look at the facts, and see if you still think Sen. Clinton is pretty unscrupulous. If you back away from unscrupulous, and you still say she’s pretty, I won’t ask you for a cite.