Anonymous said:

To give you some idea of what life is like for me, it takes over half of my monthly income to keep a roof over our heads, the lights on, the heat on, and the water running. This doesn't include gas, food, clothing, and vehicle maintenance. The only reason I can pull this off is a lot of creativity and a complete lack of pride.

Well me too, anonymous. I don't think your life and mine are all that different. But I have never been married and I was a student for an awfully long time and can't say life was ever any different for me, so I never think about expecting it to be any different. I am not criticizing you, just making you aware of the fact that the position you find yourself in is not all that unusual. Really.

Secondly, having financial pressure is still no reason to look for a candidate that you think will alleviate some of that pressure. It never happens. The disagreement here is whether it's better to have a centrist person who compromises (a la bill) or to hold out for better. But the fact is, very few people who read Salon would ever say "Oh, I guess I'll not vote, rather than cast a ballot for Hilary!" We all know what's at stake.

It's jsut that after 8 years of the ultimate smirking chimp as president, who has the gaul, the audacity to think himself a brilliant leader, it's human nature to hope for something significantly better.... rather than something incrementally better.

Finally, requiring EVERYONE to buy insurance is not a health plan. What it is, is a way for insurance companies to get people who will not be filing claims to pay into their coffers anyway. That is not going to help you---who it sounds, is approaching that time in life when things are going to start costing money to get treated. Hilary continues to support an unpopular war because she represents the state of New York, whose constituency is in favor of middle east security and military support. She has approved every proposal for Bush, whether it was initially to grant him power, whether it was to extend the budget, and she continues to be a hawk on all of her foreign policy positions, going so far as to accuse Obama of being an amateur when he said he would meet with foreign (and potentially hostile) dignitaries during his first year.

Hilary may be centrist, but that is not to say she remains wholly liberal. She may be able to get things done, but how is that different from more of the same offered by Republicans? I was always a Gore supporter, and even a staunch Kerry Supporter (once even offering to read the Book of Mormon in exchange for a John Kerry vote! I read it, and the guy STILL wouldn't vote for Kerry!) and so I understand the frustration associated with voters who claim there is no difference between the right and the left, but with Hilary and Mit Romney? Hilary and John McCain? (Giuliani... well ok, I concede on that one, but let's not go there). Your lot in life, Anonymous, is not going to be all that different if ANY of these centrists get to the Oval Office.

I am not saying we need to look for Ralph Nader types (God, I still hate that man)---but I think we can do better than Hilary.

Notreadytomakenice has it perfectly correct:

The trouble is, we are opposed to her POLICIES. She's a warmonger. She's in bed with the insurance companies. She's way too centrist on almost every issue. She doesn't feel our pain. We do not trust her with the power that the Bush Crime Family has amassed for the Executive branch. The fact that she's a woman is irrelevant.

Marginalizing female candidates and NOT voting for them because they are women (as has been the case up until now) is the ONLY thing worse than insisting that women support her because she is a woman. The men who have been posting in a self-righteous fervor about how vicious women are to other women, are just lame and looking for a fight where one doesn't exist. She is the only woman candidate, but that does NOT make her the best candidate. Give women credit for being willing to say, "we've waited this long, we can wait a little longer."

The list of Hilary's ethical transgressions (and notreadytomakenice has listed them nicely) would make even a Republican blush. If Hilary were more ethical and less money-grubbing, I'd say "More power to you!" But she is clearly ready to embrace Dubya's brand of executive power, namely, "I have political capital, I have earned it, and I intend to spend it."

No thank you.