Rate Senator Clinton's leadership in our party over the last six years

[Guaranteed]

on a scale of 1 to 10.

I've hardly said a word about her over the last few months, and hopefully this will be my last mention of her for many to come.

[lapfog_1]

1. If you call "wet finger in the wind" leadership...

with a great deal of pandering to perceived (and real) AIPAC directed policies.

'Cause I don't.

[patricia92243]

2. Which is good - 1 or 10? She has led the same as any senator.

[Guaranteed]

3. 10 is the best.

And, no, she hasn't led like any other senator. Other senators have spoken out on issues. Feingold, Kerry, Kennedy, Levin, Boxer, Leahy. They've taken stances on things. Said what they believed was right.

Keep in mind you're also talking about the Democrat with the highest name recognition in the country. Saying that she did just the same as, say, Senator Akaka...well...that's really not saying much.

[wyldwolf]

6. Just because you don't agree with Clinton doesn't mean she hasn't said what she feels is right.

She has taken stances - just not YOUR stances, obviously.

[Guaranteed]

24. Alright, let's hear them.

You could give me an example of her position on what to do about Iraq, if you want.

[Critters2]

31. Listen to the sound of silence..... nt

[blm]

18. Rummy's firing in 2003-4? DSM inquiry? Lead a filibuster? Crafted withdrawal plans?

.

[MrCoffee]

32. and there are so many Democratic Senators who fit that description?

name one. just one.

[karynnj]

33. John Kerry is the obvious one

[blm]

35. John Kerry. Ted Kennedy and Russ Feingold did 2 out of 3.

.

[Brazenly Liberal]

4. I'm gonna get a thrashing from HRC backers, but here goes

She's done a creditable job on some serious issues (Iraq excepted) in the Senate, for the most part, I suppose. BUT that's not what leadership is about. Leadership is about seeing a clear vision of where we ought to be headed and convincing others to go there. HRC is about seeing where we are we are already headed and saying "I must follow the people. Am I not their leader?"

Molly Ivins' column, linked in another thread, has more than a grain of truth in it: Even if cynically negotiating the center by silly nonsense pandering like the flag burning amendment could be called leadership, HRC has miscalculated the center. It's a lot farther to the left than the MSM and the Senator from New York think it is.

Molly's column:
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0120-30.htm

edited to note "iraq excepted"

[Radical Activist]

14. I'd be happy if Hillary followed the people.

She doesn't. She follows the pundits, the media conventional wisdom, the wealthy contributors and the powerful. She follows a certain set of people that I, and most other Americans, are not part of.

[ShrewdLiberal]

5. I gave her an 8

She pushed to help secure billions after 9/11 for New York, and with Chuck Schumer led the charge to save our military bases, like the one in Niagara Falls, near where I live. That base was doomed to close before she fought the tough fight to save it. I watched her on television live before the commission and she impressed everybody. She's done a lot of other things that went under the radar. I think she's been effective for New York. And the vast majority of New Yorkers feel the same, as her 67% re-election landslide proves. She picked up 12% more votes this time around.

And as for her leadership nationally the past six years, she's one senator of 100, and was a minority one at that--in a Northeastern state despised by the Southern aristocracy that has held the reigns of power since 1994 in the Congress, and who corrupted all levels of government.

This begs the question, but how has Obama's leadership been? What has he accomplished? I'll take Hillary's accomplishments over his anyday. She's given New York some major results, things that make a difference for the better in peoples lives. How about John Kerry? He's made nothing but an ass of himself. John Edwards? Give me a break. Al Gore? Now we're talkin'. He was right about the war, the environment, Bush policies overall, and a whole host of other issues both foreign and domestic. I would vote for Gore over Hillary, but I'd vote Hillary over all the others we know are running or thinking about it. Experience matters. Those who say it doesn't are deluting themselves. Hillary Clinton was First Lady and a soon to be 2-term senator. She's seen the inside of presidential power, and has the greatest of advisors in Bill Clinton.

She gets ripped here constantly, and I'll probably get ripped for sticking up for her. So be it. She's my senator, and I'm proud that she is. And she will get my vote unless Al Gore runs.

[sendero]

7. Being effective for NY..

... does not necessarily translate to be an effective president for the country.

My biggest objection to HRC is that I do not believe she can overcome the negative image of her that has been carefully constructed by the VRWC for 15 years. It's just too much.

Beyond that, I don't really respect her because her opinions/statements/actions with respect to the Iraq war, which are little better than the DictatorTot's.

That is not going to play in Peoria in 2008 either, Americans want out of this ill-fated star-crossed "war" now and if we are still there in 2008 they are going to want out even more. Hillary will no doubt do the switcheroo and claim she is against it, but the Repugs are not going to let her get away with that either.

If we cannot do better than HRC, we'll get what we deserve.

[ShrewdLiberal]

8. I see your points

Trust me. I've been lurking at DU a while now. I know the scope of hatred for Hillary.

Anyway, the question-begging poll, and I do think it begs the question, for it's obviously a poll set up as a presupposition of being against her, is reactionary; namely reacting against her running for president.

All I'm saying is that the question is about her national performance as a Democratic leader. Again...this begs the question...but what the hell can a senator accomplish nationally when she is in a minority party without the presidency, the Congress, and the Supreme Court? The answer is obvious--not much nationally! She's one of 100 in a minority party. That's why she accomplished things where she could at the state and local levels in New York. Pushing for funding for reconstruction after 9/11 by guilting the Federal government to be compassionate for the victims--medical care upgrades and additions, police, fire departments, monetary aid, etc. And saving our military bases, and securing funds for border security along the American/Canadian border. That's what a good senator does. I find it amazing she accomplished the things she did under the circumstances our party found itself in. Lest we forget we had a horrible governor in New York for what seems forever now, who was so incompetent it is sickening. Now we got Spitzer, a Godsend.

Hate her all you want. I understand. But just know there's a silent majority of us who are sitting back watching, supporting Hillary. Angry by what we see and hear. And when the time comes, we will be there for her. We are liberals, too. We love the Democratic Party, and love our country. And we are ready for the battle of ideas and what's to come (personal attacks that have already begun in our own party), just as we were with Bill Clinton.

I think she will win the states John Kerry won. I have no doubt. I think she can pick up one more, Ohio, to put her over the top. I have faith in her.

[KoKo]

10. I think you are misreading the feeling about Hillary by people here who

are Democrats that we "Hate" Hillary. Most of us who were around on the internet trying to defend the Clinton's (since 1996) against the Partisan Witch Hunt against them feel that they didn't defend us once they were out of office. Some of us feel the Clinton's threw us under the bus.

The flaws of the DLC Clintons and their caving to the RW became more obvious when they left. I applauded Hillary running for Senator and defying the logic of the RW Hate of her. But, she has been no friend to the non DLC Democrats on the War and by her movement to the Right.

So, what you pick up here on DU is not "Hate" of Hillary (except by maybe some Freeper Trolls who come over to stir up trouble) but disappointment at the Clinton's cozying up to the Bushies, and their policies which like the 1996 Telecommunications Bill caused us to have to deal with an explosion of the very same Hate Media that tried to impeach Bill and flamed the Monica situation. NAFTA and other bad policies have left their legacy more tarnished than we would ever have imagined.

If she is the candidate I will support her. But going from one "dynasty" to another is not what I would be happy with.

[oasis]

12. Hill will get Ohio. Ken "Fix it Man" Blackwell is out of business.

BTW, welcome to DU.:hi:

[sendero]

13. I don't hate HRC..

.... I just think she is:

1) mediocre beyond belief

2) cannot be elected

It's really as simple as that, and as for her ideas, she really doesn't have any. Lobbyists who pay her millions do however.

[sandnsea]

30. Wake the country up to a failed war policy?

No, that wasn't Hillary and no, Murtha didn't do it alone. Other Senators managed to shape national policy discussion. Hillary wasn't among them.

I also wouldn't give her any more credit for 9/11 money than George Bush or anybody else. It didn't take any talent or effort to get 9/11 money for New York.

She kept a military base open? Whooo. That changed my mind. :eyes:

She's going to have to step out and really lead and she hasn't done it yet.

[juajen]

23. I agree, wholeheartedly

She's my lady. Only Gore could make me think twice, too.

[blm]

26. Kerry made an ass of himself or MEDIA LIED as usual BECAUSE he was OPPOSING BUSH?

Kerry called for Rumsfeld's firing 3 times in 2003,4. Hillary stayed quiet until 2005.

Kerry called Bush out on Tora Bora right after it happened in Dec 2001, and stayed on him about it for the next 3 years and Hillary stayed SILENT, and would not back Kerry up once about it.

Kerry sent a letter of inquiry for the Downing Street Memos and Hillary wouldn't sign it. You think that's Kerry making an ass of himself or Hillary being an ASSet to Bush, yet again?

Hillary could have LED the Alito filibuster as Kerry and Kennedy requested other senators to lead it because he was scheduled in Davos meetings for his senate finance duties. No senator stepped up and Kerry stepped up BECAUSE NO OTHER SENATORS would do it.

Kerry's withdrawal plan for Iraq was certainly listened to by the Iraq Study Group - Hillary added NOTHING and the transcripts of her appearance there proves it.

Hillary was an ASSet to Bush again when he LIED about Kerry insulting the troops because he believes people are so stupid they would believe him, and so did HILLARY.

Millions of Democrats defended Bill Clinton for YEARS for dropping his pants and Hillary scolds Kerry for dropping a focking PRONOUN?

The coverup wing of the Democratic party - that is what Hillary represents and leads - just like Bill.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

[karynnj]

34. Kerry has accomplished similar things for Massachusetts

He did far more for the party in 2006 - even if you include the joke that left out a pronoun. There would have been NO Senate discussion of Iraq in 2006 if it were not for Kerry (and Feingold's) insistance. That WOULD ave affected the election far more than the joke (which from the last week polling did nothing or good.)

Kerry moved the debate on Iraq in 2005 with his October 2005 plan - in particular it with Feingold's plan were the force behind the Levin amendment - which they worked on with Levin. Kerry brought up issues like announcing we wanted no permanent bases and the fact that the role of US soldiers doing search and destroy missions in a country where they knew neither the language or the culture did raise the consciousness of many people. Kerry could speak from experience on this.

Kerry and Feingold have on issues from Iraq, Afghanistan, the War on Terror, privacy rights spoken out against Bush - Hillary called for Rumsfeld to be replaced - 3 years after others and said the Congress was like a plantation. She has a BIG voice which makes it sad that she chooses not to use it. (Also if you are going to condemn Kerry for misspeaking a joke, why does Hillary get a pass on a joke where she soked about Ghandi, a beloved leader, was a gas station attendanyt in St Louis. This was intentional and she saw nothing wrong with it. As someone who was asked why she would say this by a very hurt Indian American, I think it refects worse on her than Kerry's unintentional gaffe.0

Kerry also pushed to keep Alito off the Supreme Court - when the NYT was literally begging "someone" to do it - though they made it clear Kerry wasn't who they wanted. As the NYT said after the defeat, this was a battle that could have been won. Kerry, who was not on the judiciary committee did everything in his power - including making a brilliant speech on the day of the cloture vote that spelled out Alito's out of the mainstream ideas on the unitary President. The Centrists in the party - who voted against him AND against the filibuster were hipocrits. Hillary, who didn't want the filibuster was less than sincere as she made a speech which was strongly against him.

Kerry, by the way, was said in 2004 to have a far superior plan to Hillary's healthcare fiasco. In fact in her book, after that went to defeat she takes credit for helping Kennedy and Hatch get S-Chip passed. S-Chip was based on work done jointly by Kennedy and Kerry - Kerry as Jr +Senator was replaced as sponsor by Hatch to get bipartisan support as is customary.

[mtnsnake]

9. Shows how out of synch DU is with mainstream Democrats

Clinton's been a good leader, not just for our party, but for our country. She's gained the respect of people on both sides of the aisle, not an easy task.

[KoKo]

11. There are alot of "Progressive Dems" on DU and out on the Blogs.

What you are seeing is reaction against DLC Policies. We are Democrats, too and have a right to try to make our feelings known in our party. Dontcha think? :shrug:

[blm]

27. Then name everything she's been leading on that MATTERS the last 6yrs.

.

[Radical Activist]

15. In what way has she lead?

I'm reading this thread to find some mention of her showing leadership. I haven't seen much other than saving some military bases.

She has an unprecedented national voice she could use to change the debate in America, but I haven't seen her use it.

[IndianaGreen]

16. What do the numbers represent?

Does a "1" mean top notch, or does it mean piss poor? You have to put some values to the range.

[blm]

17. Let's see, did she attack Bush on Tora Bora? Support Rummy's firing in 2003 and 2004?

Sign DSM letter of inquiry? Lead a filibuster of Alito? Draw up a withdrawal plan for Iraq?


If you said NO to all, you'd be RIGHT.

[IndianaGreen]

19. Did she agree with John Murtha's call that the war was lost?

Did she endorse Kerry's troop withdrawal resolution?

The only good thing I could say about Hillary is that she didn't go to the GOP side of the aisle, like Lieberman did, in opposing Kerry's Iraq withdrawal resolution.

Hillary has shown a great deal of leadership in running the many focus groups she relies on to determine the safest position to take regarding a controversial issue.

[sandnsea]

29. Hey, she was busy protecting the flag

Even though the flag has been under absolutely no threat in eons. Gawd, if that's what passes for leadership.. :crazy:

[MrSlayer]

20. I'd say it has been non-existent.

You can't lead when you can't make a decision or stand behind anything at all. Everything she says and every move she makes is for pure political expediency.

[Guaranteed]

25. I think even calling it political expediency is being generous.

It seems to me she does her best to stay out of the spotlight entirely, at least on a national level. Leaders that don't show up can't help us.

[LiviaOlivia]

21. Triangulation is a model of hope?

Maybe in a gunfight but not in real life morality. Has she really even proven herself as a true advocate for the the people of state of New York? Not from what I've read.

[Tinksrival]

22. She may be a good Senator........but leadership?

She has not been a leader that I have seen or heard.

[sandnsea]

28. Just like with ISG - she's MIA

She never steps in front on anything important. But flag burning or video games or bashing other Dems - well then she's johnny on the spot.

I do not understand anybody who could give her a 10 on leadership. She hasn't led on anything at all.

[GreenArrow]

36. the blind leading the blind

.

[election_2004]

37. I'd give her about a 5

She's been a competant enough senator, but has done nothing in terms of LEADERSHIP to make her stand out.

In other words, hardly presidential material.