I think that the point isn’t that @Happy_Lendervedder himself would stay home, but that a lot of other folks would. Because Clinton would make a terrible president, and an even worse campaigner. Still much better than Trump, of course, but some folks find themselves unable to hold their nose and vote for bad over worse.
If you can’t have the best…of well anything. Mediocre is not available.
Bad and THE worst are all you got.
You’re a fool to choose THE worst.
Simple logic.
She maybe expected you to recognize two very common phrases:
“The lesser of two evils”, and “Don’t cut off your nose to spite your face” .
I’m a progressive. I liked Hillary well enough, though she wasn’t far enough left for me. I didn’t (and still) don’t think Bernie could have won.
I voted for her with no hesitation at all. I could see what was coming down the track. Not voting was stupid then and will, without a doubt, be stupider this time.
I saw it described once as: Hillary would come in rearange things, tweek stuff, do a bit of policy, etc.
trump would roll in, overturn the furniture, and shit all over the Resolute Desk. It was an apt description of what dump did.
I’d vote for her again in a hot second.
Also, her “badness” as campaigner/President (though not displayed by everyone here) was always weighted by sexism and misogyny. The rethugs started banging that drum decades ago, and never stopped.
On the contrary, American sexism made him a near-perfect candidate to run against a woman. A known, proud sexual predator who boasts of being a “pussy grabber” was ideal for collectively slapping women in the face for the crime of a woman becoming a serious candidate for President. Trump was in part elected as collective punishment for women not “knowing their place”. It the same principle as putting a rapist on the Supreme Court; it’s not a downside, it’s part of the point.
As the saying goes, “the cruelty is the point”. If you want to know why the Right does anything, look for the hate, look for the cruelty and you’ll find their motive.
Two terrific posts in a row, IMHO. I agree with every word of both. (Czarcasm’s too, for that matter).
@Sylvanz (Dang, why can’t we just have a “like” button like a normal board?)
Agreed. Adding my kudos to all for their thoughtful posts.
So much agree with @Sylvanz.
Hillary Clinton was a bunch of stuff. Evil was not one of them.
I told people back then, if she missed her chance by the misogyny peanut gallery’s hateful noise, we’d be sorry for 20-25 years to come.
I think she would’ve been a respectable prez.
The old white men with their antiquated beliefs just couldn’t stomach a woman in the oval office.
The piper has to be paid.
Most of my top picks for President are women. Just not Hillary Clinton. And feminism is one of the reasons why I didn’t want her elected, because if she had been, the message it sent would have been “Women can do anything, if they just marry the right man”. Which still isn’t as bad as Trump, of course, but it’s definitely not good.
Interesting point. Hillary accomplished plenty more or less “on her own,” but it’s impossible to know what her life (and history) would have been like had she never married Bill.
It’s somewhat parallel to how the US still hasn’t shown that it’s ready for a Black president, in the sense of “culturally and genetically rooted mainly in the once-enslaved African American experience.” Like Hillary with Bill’s political status, Obama did marry into that other world, though. 
Since the verdict in New York came in, it’s a rock solid, undeniable fact that Trump committed crimes to win in 2016. She wasn’t a terrible candidate. She wasn’t even a bad candidate. She narrowly lost a an election against a criminal syndicate that had the help of the FBI, KGB, and KKK.
You are blaming the victim.
She could have run a better campaign, but a policy wonk pitted against a psychotic demagogue who has no moral floor, has the backing of an array of US enemies, in a election system that already grossly favors the demagogue aka the electoral college? She had a rather slim chance, as it turned out.
I would vote for my own dog, I’d vote for my own dead dog, over Trump, much less a perfectly sane centrist Democrat.
She was First Lady entirely because she was married to Bill.
Her campaign for the Senate was based on her being married to Bill.
Her first campaign for President was based on her time in the Senate, and because she was married to Bill.
Her appointment as Secretary of State was because of her campaign for the Presidency, and because she married Bill.
Her second campaign was based on her being a Senator, Secretary of State, and being married to Bill.
Unless you’re just referring to what she did before becoming First Lady? She was an accomplished lawyer… but that’s not really much of an accomplishment, on the scale we’re looking at, here. Plenty of other people, plenty of other women, are accomplished lawyers.
Except, as I understand it, Bill Clinton’s campaign pitched Hillary Clinton own political savvy as part of his campaign. He said he would actually use her as part of his administration, and actually did give her tons of political things to do while in office, more than any other First Ladies.
She then ran on that policy experience she gained. She did NOT run saying “I was Bill Clinton’s wife, so you should vote for me.” She ran on showing what she did while she served as first lady. That’s not the same thing.
And then that showed that she didn’t need Bill at all, which is why she could then run for President. She ran on being Senator. She did not run on being Bill’s wife. Bill’s popularity was declining by that point.
And then she got the job of Secretary of State because she ran for president and that he thought she could do the job. That’s not a vanity job. She as not given such an important role because she was someone’s wife.
So, sure, she used her marriage to Bill to get started. But that’s not enough to get her where she wound up. We don’t know what would have been had she not married Bill, and pursued another way to political power.
Because there’s no way she wouldn’t have tried.
I would love to see Hillary run again.
Chauvinists, Sexists, Misogynists (Hillary Clinton REMIX) (youtube.com)
I’m content to know that she’s grinning ear to ear over Trump’s initial set of felony convictions.
But that’s not what this thread was about. As the OP says, someone asked who was bad enough that you’d stay home rather than vote against Trump. And you said “Hilary Clinton.”
That’s not just saying she was a bad candidate, or that she ran a bad campaign. It’s saying she’s at least as bad as Trump. That even after what he did on January 6, it still wouldn’t be worth it to vote Clinton to stop him from taking power again.
It may not be what you meant, but it is the plain meaning of what you said.
I think if Trump were to be reelected he would be lucky to stay in office six months before the Twenty-Fifth Amendment would get invoked. Seriously, he’s starting to sound more and more like Hitler circa April 1945.
How many people around here posted things like “I’m voting for Hillary, because she has White House experience”, or “I’m voting for Hillary, because I liked the Bill Clinton presidency”, or “I’m voting for Hillary, because that way we get two Presidents for the price of one”? In fact, how many people gave any reasons for supporting her (in the primaries; by the general, the reason to support her was obvious) that didn’t ultimately reduce to “she’s married to Bill Clinton”?
So what did she do in politics before Bill was President?