Support NeoGAF

[Morrigan Stark]

1. Her foreign policy history is simply awful. One of my main reasons for disliking her.

2. She is incredibly secretive. Considering we're coming off of Obama's hugely failed promise of "transparent government" I'd really like to see that reverse direction. Very unlikely with Hillary.

3. I don't trust that she'll do the right thing if it's unpopular. Her history on same-sex marriage, for instance, doesn't instill confidence. The TPP situation is grey as well.

4. Her "contributions" to the prison-industrial complex in the past, including three strikes and her support of a lot of the crime policies in Bill's terms, do not make me happy.

5. She's not into space exploration and related technologies to the degree that I want. This is actually one of the main things I want in a candidate and I'm almost always disappointed.

6. She's old and out of touch with today's technological society.

7. She lacks any kind of charisma. Even when I agree with what she's saying I feel compelled to disagree or at best tune out. It's shallow but it's a real reaction, sorry.

8. Not a fan of political dynasties. I don't like that if (when) she's elected, 24 of my 36 years of life will have been under a Bush or a Clinton. Tired of the aristocracy.

9. Iraq War.

10. Patriot Act.

There's more but I'll stop here.

Finally, some good reasons in there. I don't agree with everything, but at least you don't resort to lame, vague rhetoric. Points 1, 4, 5 and 10 are the most valid IMO, especially if she hasn't walked back on those things. Point #9 I give it a pass because she clearly regrets that vote at least.

I think points #6 and 7 are patently silly though.

 

[thelastcrusader]

She's second probably only to Jeb. It all has to relate back to the political dynasties bullshit. What are the odds that the people best suited to run the country all happen to be related to each other? Has absolutely nothing to do with her vagina, and shame on you for accusing me of that.

Also, it's just like, why would I give a fuck if she was a woman? What a lame ass argument. Nothing I said had anything to do with sex. The more I think about your response, the more frustrated I get.

Typical response man. Get used to it. If you don't agree with Obama for any specific reason then you're a racist. If you don't agree with Clinton then you're a sexist. Both are perfect people who have never ever done anything wrong in their lives ever.

 

[Nafai1123]

She's second probably only to Jeb. It all has to relate back to the political dynasties bullshit. What are the odds that the people best suited to run the country all happen to be related to each other? Has absolutely nothing to do with her vagina, and shame on you for accusing me of that.

Also, it's just like, why would I give a fuck if she was a woman? What a lame ass argument. Nothing I said had anything to do with sex. The more I think about your response, the more frustrated I get.

Uhhh shes extremely qualified to be President, Clinton or not.

 

[xxracerxx]

She's second probably only to Jeb. It all has to relate back to the political dynasties bullshit. What are the odds that the people best suited to run the country all happen to be related to each other?

Politician marries politician....both are in it for the long haul.

Not sure how that is a bad thing. She is qualified for the position of President, no matter who her husband is.

 

[Xe4]

She's second probably only to Jeb. It all has to relate back to the political dynasties bullshit. What are the odds that the people best suited to run the country all happen to be related to each other? Has absolutely nothing to do with her vagina, and shame on you for accusing me of that.

Also, it's just like, why would I give a fuck if she was a woman? What a lame ass argument. Nothing I said had anything to do with sex. The more I think about your response, the more frustrated I get.

Hillary isn't related to Bill... talk about a political dynasty when Chelsea decides to run.

 

[EightBitNate]

Uhhh shes extremely qualified to be President, Clinton or not.

Regardless of that, I just find the idea of relatives becoming Presidents very un-democratic.

Hillary isn't related to Bill... talk about a political dynasty when Chelsea decides to run.

Semantics. You know what I mean.

 

[ColdLasagna]

I don't dislike her strongly but any dislike comes from reasons you could also attribute to 99.9% of politicians so, for me, it's less a "her" thing than it is a "them" thing.

Kinda specific "Hillary" things:

-This isn't necessarily her fault, but it irks me something fierce that, by 2024, it's likely that 16 of the past 24 years of Democratic presidents will have come from the same marriage. I don't feel that I even have to imply any nefarious behavior on the Clinton's part to get across why that's unsettling. In a country of 300+ million where we at least like to feign impartiality and the idea that votes truly matter, the odds should be astronomical that things could fall into place the way they have. Again, not her fault. Not saying she doesn't have sufficient merit for the job. I'd vote for her over any democratic or Republican nominee since my first election (2008), except for Obama.

-I'd like to see politicians on the left do more to differentiate themselves from the right in matters of national security/foreign military intervention. Yeah, she's better than whateverthefuck Trump and Pence would roll out. It just seems to me like she errs on the side of military action more than I'd like. However, I do recognize that I might be a bit naively "soft" on this issue. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan started when I was a middle schooler and they haven't been much more than tremendous wastes of money and, of course, human life. Conflict in the middle east has been kinda THE story in our world for like 15 years now. I came into adulthood with this shit and I'd like to see things handled differently in the future.

-Republicans have industries they bow a bit too for fund-raising/single-issue-voter reasons (fossil fuels, guns) and I don't think it's too conspiratorial to think that Democrats acquiesce to banks/wall Street in a similar, admittedly less egregious, manner. I think the Clinton's are at the forefront of all this "third-way" stuff and I think this is a natural consequence.

-I think any liberal politician, that wants to have an opinion on race relations, needs to go hard against the war on drugs. If you're not doing so, you either have a weak grasp of the damage it has caused, or you have ulterior motives (pharma lobby, private prisons). I just don't think, at this point in history, there's any middle ground on this issue.

Legit.

 

[exmachina64]

She's second probably only to Jeb. It all has to relate back to the political dynasties bullshit. What are the odds that the people best suited to run the country all happen to be related to each other? Has absolutely nothing to do with her vagina, and shame on you for accusing me of that.

Also, it's just like, why would I give a fuck if she was a woman? What a lame ass argument. Nothing I said had anything to do with sex. The more I think about your response, the more frustrated I get.

Our political process doesn't select for the people best-suited to run the country, it selects for people who are able to network with other politicians, raise money, and demonstrate charisma. Ability to run the country is a happy bonus.

 

[Xe4]

Regardless of that, I just find the idea of relatives becoming Presidents very un-democratic.



Semantics. You know what I mean.

They're not a dynasty. If Michelle decided to run after Obama, that wouldn't be a dynasty either.

The Kennedy's are a dynasty, the Bush's are a dynasty.

John/John Quincy Adams are a dynasty. The Trudeau's are another dynasty. Even those are stretching the term a bit, because unlike the Bush's or Kennedy's there are only two members
of the family.

The Clinton's are a power couple, and unless you can name me another Clinton who have took office, I'm going to retain that opinion.

 

[Krejlooc]

She implicitly supported SOPA, like many democrats.

 

[erlim]

I think she has overwhelming support here. I'm sure if you could poll in GAF, 99.9% of the people would strongly favor Hilary Clinton.

 

[xxracerxx]

I think she has overwhelming support here. I'm sure if you could poll in GAF, 99.9% of the people would strongly favor Hilary Clinton.

99.9%? No.

 

[biggersmaller]

I dislike her specifically because:

• She shamed and silenced her husband's victims.
  
• She lied about emails that were most likely set aside to avoid FOIA inquiries.
  
• The tripling of foreign contributions to the Clinton Foundation during her Secretary of State tenure is shady as fuck.

I also dislike her for the main reason I dislike many DFL candidates.

• She stumps against corporate America while simultaneously taking campaign contributions (bribes).
  
• On social issues she takes a spineless "whichever way the winds are blowing" approach.
  
• Claims of supporting diplomacy over war, then demonstrating little restraint in voting for/managing massive foreign military campaigns.
  

 

[EightBitNate]

They're not a dynasty. If Michelle decided to run after Obama, that wouldn't be a dynasty either.

The Kennedy's are a dynasty, the Bush's are a dynasty.

John/John Quincy Adams are a dynasty. The Trudeau's are another dynasty.

The Clinton's are a power couple, and unless you can name me another Clinton who have took office, I'm going to retain that opinion.

I don't see any major difference. The issue without political dynasties is that power is rotated among the same family. It sounds like your counter-argument is that they're technically not related.

Why am I the only getting picked on for mentioning that I dislike her for this reason lmao

 

[B-Dubs]

They're not a dynasty. If Michelle decided to run after Obama, that wouldn't be a dynasty either.

The Kennedy's are a dynasty, the Bush's are a dynasty.

John/John Quincy Adams are a dynasty. The Trudeau's are another dynasty.

The Clinton's are a power couple, and unless you can name me another Clinton who have took office, I'm going to retain that opinion.

DeWitt Clinton! And don't forget his father George Clinton!

 

[Acorn]

I think she has overwhelming support here. I'm sure if you could poll in GAF, 99.9% of the people would strongly favor Hilary Clinton.

Supporting her over Trump doesn't really imply they like her though, just that they realise how fucking awful a human being Trump is.

It probably is mainly people that 'like' her here though.

 

[MIMIC]

They're not a dynasty. If Michelle decided to run after Obama, that wouldn't be a dynasty either.

The Kennedy's are a dynasty, the Bush's are a dynasty.

John/John Quincy Adams are a dynasty. The Trudeau's are another dynasty.

The Clinton's are a power couple, and unless you can name me another Clinton who have took office, I'm going to retain that opinion.

You know dynasties are defined by family lines, not blood, right?

But that's beside the point. The concern is about a very select group of people having continued power.

 

[xxracerxx]

DeWitt Clinton! And don't forget his father George Clinton!

That George Clinton ruled the funkadelic parliament for too long!

 

[Heaven Shard]

Call Trump a lot of things but you can't call him a liar.

During the debate; the number of comments that were either lies or mis-statements:
Trump: 34
Clinton: 4
https://youtu.be/6YuI5T-gGlM?t=230

In a week's worth of speeches,Trump averages one falshood every 3 minutes and 15 seconds.
https://youtu.be/6YuI5T-gGlM?t=241

 

[B-Dubs]

That George Clinton ruled the funkadelic parliament for too long!

Not that George Clinton, the other one. Jefferson's VP. His son DeWitt was responsible for the Eerie Canal.

 

[MillionStabs]

She constantly lies. I don't want someone like that as Commander in Chief

 

[GurgleBot20]

Regardless of that, I just find the idea of relatives becoming Presidents very un-democratic.

Why? Are people being forced to vote for these relatives? Should we just take away rights to public office as soon as someone becomes president?

 

[Xe4]

I don't see any major difference. The issue without political dynasties is that power is rotated among the same family. It sounds like your counter-argument is that they're technically not related.

Why am I the only getting picked on for mentioning that I dislike her for this reason lmao

I don't know if you're getting picked on, I just disagree with you. Again, the term is power couple. The Clinton's were both politically active, so they decided to get married. It happens all the time, just in this case both were crazy ambitious. Shit, they didn't even share the same name until Hillary was shamed into changing hers.

You know dynasties are defined by family lines, not blood, right?

When people think of dynasties, it brings to mind a huge family that is completely intertwined with politics, and it is a reference to dynasties in China, or other monarchical systems, which tends to be a negative connotation. I don't think a couple both being in politics are a dynasty, and to be honest I don't even think the Adam's or Trudeau's are really a dynasty either, just a son following in their father's footsteps.

DeWitt Clinton! And don't forget his father George Clinton!

lol

 

[Tranqueris]

This should be an interesting thread. I'll just leave this little nugget here.

Clinton is one of America's most honest politicians.

But she said that one lie about sniper fire in Bosnia that some people on here like to bring up like it's the most horrible sin imaginable.
So that means she's always gonna be the biggest liar in the world to me

What distinguishes "flip flopping" from "I just got some new information, and it appears I was wrong beforehand"?

When everyone including Obama does it, it's called evolving and listening to what the voters want, aka how fucking politics works. When Hillary does it, it's flip flopping and pandering.

 

[xxracerxx]

She constantly lies. I don't want someone like that as Commander in Chief

I got some bad news for you.

 

[To Far Away Times]

I have always voted against against anyone running that supported the Patroit Act or War on Iraq.

I won't vote for Trump so I'll write in Bernie on the presidential vote, vote against any congressmen who supported that either of those dealbreaker issues and then for the leftovers I'll vote Democrat down the ticket.

 

[excelsiorlef]

She lies! Call Trump a lot of things but you can't call him a liar.

Trump is the biggest liar in the race...

Wtf is this?

 

[Xe4]

f

I have always voted against against anyone running that supported the Patroit Act or War on Iraq.

I won't vote for Trump so I'll write in Bernie on the presidential vote, vote against any congressmen who supported that either of those dealbreaker issues and then for the leftovers I'll vote Democrat down the ticket.

Did you vote for Obama in 2012, and would you vote for Biden? I'm not accusing you, just seeing how your political ideology works, and who you voted for if not them (if you were of age, that is).

 

[anaron]

how the hell are the Clinton's a political dynasty with four presidential runs between each other?

 

[The Lamp]

She's second probably only to Jeb. It all has to relate back to the political dynasties bullshit. What are the odds that the people best suited to run the country all happen to be related to each other? Has absolutely nothing to do with her vagina, and shame on you for accusing me of that.

Also, it's just like, why would I give a fuck if she was a woman? What a lame ass argument. Nothing I said had anything to do with sex. The more I think about your response, the more frustrated I get.

"Manufactured" is a useless and unsubstantial criticism

 

[Valonquar]

Because she is incompetent, disregards the advice of the experts around her & does what she wants. When caught in a scandal about the email server, she then denies everything and just bribes her way out of it with money from her foundation full of questionable funding sources. She believes calling all of this a simple mistake is enough and laughs it off, and appears to be getting away with it.

When the question about cyber security came up on Monday's debate, I just shook my head at the answers from both candidates. Hilary just has it worse since she has already illustrated she can't take cyber security seriously.

There's her attempts to label games (from the 90's mind you) as containing pornographic content...think about that. Her work with Liberman & Gore to add Parental Advisory Lyrics to music, and similarly the ERSB labels on games, was largely after failures at attempts to OUTRIGHT BAN THEM ENTIRELY. Even the usual suspects like Mortal Kombat & (ugh) Night Trap back then were NOTHING compared to the usual stuff found in a PG-13 horror movie. I get that it's honorable to try to shield small children from the horrors of the world, but honestly it's a load of bullshit.

Lying about flying in under sniper fire was an extremely poser move too.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

Trump is the biggest liar in the race...

Wtf is this?

A joke, I'm pretty sure.

But yeah it does become hard to tell...

She constantly lies. I don't want someone like that as Commander in Chief

Hell, even Googling "most honest politician" returns... Clinton as first result xD Google a shillary cuck confirmed!
https://www.google.ca/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=most honest polician

Because she is incompetent, disregards the advice of the experts around her & does what she wants. When caught in a scandal about the email server, she then denies everything and just bribes her way out of it with money from her foundation full of questionable funding sources. She believes calling all of this a simple mistake is enough and laughs it off, and appears to be getting away with it.

This is a rather dishonest spin on what actually happened. I dare say it is downright false.

There's her attempts to label games (from the 90's mind you) as containing pornographic content...think about that. Her work with Liberman & Gore to add Parental Advisory Lyrics to music, and similarly the ERSB labels on games, was largely after failures at attempts to OUTRIGHT BAN THEM ENTIRELY. Even the usual suspects like Mortal Kombat & (ugh) Night Trap back then were NOTHING compared to the usual stuff found in a PG-13 horror movie. I get that it's honorable to try to shield small children from the horrors of the world, but honestly it's a load of bullshit.

Yeahhhh I don't think you have, if you honestly still think Hillary is coming for your video games.

 

[Xilo]

how the hell are the Clinton's a political dynasty with four presidential runs between each other?

I think the idea is that they have also been a governor and a senator, and one worked as secretary of state...those are all political positions.

 

[Eidan]

She's second probably only to Jeb. It all has to relate back to the political dynasties bullshit. What are the odds that the people best suited to run the country all happen to be related to each other? Has absolutely nothing to do with her vagina, and shame on you for accusing me of that.

Also, it's just like, why would I give a fuck if she was a woman? What a lame ass argument. Nothing I said had anything to do with sex. The more I think about your response, the more frustrated I get.

Your entire argument hinges on ignoring her actual qualifications, and disqualifying her candidacy because she was married to a former president. That's pretty weak.

If not, and you simply think she isn't qualified, explain how. Just saying she's "manufactured" only leads me to think your real issue is that she wanted to be president, and cultivated the experience that made her qualified to be so, which as I said before, is never an issue when a man does it.

 

[xxracerxx]

Because she is incompetent, disregards the advice of the experts around her & does what she wants. When caught in a scandal about the email server, she then denies everything and just bribes her way out of it with money from her foundation full of questionable funding sources. She believes calling all of this a simple mistake is enough and laughs it off, and appears to be getting away with it.

Proof?

 

[Piecake]

Because she is incompetent, disregards the advice of the experts around her & does what she wants. When caught in a scandal about the email server, she then denies everything and just bribes her way out of it with money from her foundation full of questionable funding sources. She believes calling all of this a simple mistake is enough and laughs it off, and appears to be getting away with it.

I honestly can't tell if this is a joke or not. Where the hell are you getting this from? Bribing people with her foundation money to cover up the email scandal? Wtf?

Moreover, she disregards the advice of experts and does want she wants?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hIFDaGs8l8

How do you explain that then?

 

[hydrophilic attack]

This "political dynasty" argument feels pretty misogynistic to me. Like the only reason she has done well is because of her husband, and not due to all her work throughout her career

 

[Vincent Grayson]

I think the idea is that they have also been a governor and a senator, and one worked as secretary of state...those are all political positions.

But that also makes a lot of sense. Working your way from lower levels of government to president is probably a good thing, given the exposure it gives you to different areas of government.

 

[JZA]

I still hate the fact that she voted to approve the invasion of Iraq, and also approved the Patriot Act twice. After watching Trump's behavior during the debate, I feel a lot better about voting for Clinton just to stick it to that guy.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

I mean, do you expect any candidate for President to make the right choice all the time?

Of course not. But the fewer Iraq war-sized whoopsies in a person's history, the easier to buy what they're selling in the future.

 

[Tranqueris]

Proof?

1-800-CALL-SEAN.

 

[TaterTots]

I can't help but laugh when people post the "pants on fire" chart. I can't even take it seriously even if true.

 

[EightBitNate]

"Manufactured" is a useless and unsubstantial criticism

Watching her dabbing, the hot sauce in my bag swag (I get that she actually does like hot sauce), the so-called "burns" she posts on Twitter...She comes across as a very fake individual.

 

[Nerd_Incognito]

This sums up why I don't like her.

Reluctantly voting for her.

 

[Bolivar687]

I think the odds are in her favor that she will probably be a great President. But it's hard to respect anyone who endures international humiliation in order to advance their own political ambition. She did not just enable and condone her husband's attempts to sexually exploit women in politics, she did her part to cover it up as well. It's also off-putting when a politician decides for a group of self-governing people, who she's never lived among or with, that she is going to represent them in Congress. There are many Democrats I would prefer to see in the White House and it is well documented how they bullied many of them out of running, in the case of Joe Biden, against his son's dying wish. That is inarguably deplorable and it undermines the Democratic party to have such a coronation. Politics is a business controlled by a duopoly. It should be disturbing when one party does not have a fair and transparent nomination process. Now we have evidence of more ethical improprieties to force out the only candidate that refused to get out of the way.

She has been on the very, very wrong side of international relations. The Clintons have been frontline advocates for globalization, leading to horrifying living conditions to those in peripheral countries abroad, while imploding our manufacturing cities at home into centers of self-perpetuating crime and poverty. She didn't just vote for the Iraq War - she advocated for it, convincing her colleagues that it was, in her words, an "inevitability." She has no trademark breakthrough in foreign policy but the world has irrefutably become a more dangerous and intolerant place under her tenure as Secretary of State. We have evidence that her office was complicit in the Arab spring and was impotent during the breakdown in negotiations with Iraq that led to withdrawal and ISIL. It blows my mind how anyone can look at the timing of her resignation and genuinely believe she left of her own free will. She was fired because she failed, and likely broke the law while doing so. There's a reason why Obama threw her under the bus at the time instead of unequivocally coming to her defense.

Her radicalization on family issues has room for only one interpretation - either she does not care about these issues or she does not care about her convictions. There is no middle ground. It is impossible for any theist to obligate taxpayers, against their conscience, to pay for abortions of convenience. She claims to believe in God and claims to believe in science yet both theology and embryology concur that the unborn child is a tangible being of significant consequence. Termimating any pregnancy for any reason at all cannot possibly be a progressive women's right when every 2016 poll confirms the majority of American women oppose abortion outside limited cicumstances. Instead, it is a barbaric legacy of our prehistoric tribal ancestors and the hallmark of the eugenics and population control which attenuate every authoritarian regime in history. Clinton knows much about history, science, and philosophy - she drew upon all of them when she opposed same sex marriage in the 90s. She will say anything and do anything to increase her political capital among the left.

There is no shame in taking all of this into account and voting for her as the better candidate. But the adoration I've seen on GAF for the people who seek to rule them is incredibly troubling at times.

 

[Talladega Knight]

I dislike her because of her history of being rude to and treating the people who protect her like shit (Secret Service). I'd rather her as President than Trump though.

 

[xxracerxx]

Watching her dabbing, the hot sauce in my bag swag (I get that she actually does like hot sauce), the so-called "burns" she posts on Twitter...She comes across as a very fake individual.

Is this your first election?

 

[jmdajr]

Hell, even Googling "most honest politician" returns... Clinton as first result xD Google a shillary cuck confirmed!
https://www.google.ca/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=most honest polician

Poor Jeb.

 

[VistraNorrez]

I can't help but laugh when people post the "pants on fire" chart. I can't even take it seriously even if true.

Why? It's from Poltifact, a very well researched website, and the terms are just how they rank truths and lies.

 

[anaron]

I dislike her because of her history of being rude to and treating the people who protect her like shit (Secret Service). I'd rather her as President than Trump though.

this is valid and something that definitely bugs me about her.