Join the discussion: Has the public given up on Hillary Clinton?

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • cris Hamilton, IL
    June 25, 2014 8:29 a.m.

    She may have some qualifications but trust is more important and I don't trust anything that comes out of her mouth. She is a politician pure and simple. Will say and do whatever she has to in order to appease the American people.

  • RedShirtCalTech Pasedena, CA
    June 25, 2014 8:12 a.m.

    To "UtahBlueDevil" prove it, where are your sources. Everything that I found shows that there was no warning that the embassy was going to be attacked like the US received for Benghazi. All of the reports I found only had a travel advisory from the State department. Where do you get the information that the UN told the US to evacuate all non-essential people. Provide a verifiable source.

    You keep claiming that the US received warning, yet have NO PROOF. Provide your proof.

    With Benghazi MSNBC reported that the US was warned. See "Benghazi report: State Dept. didn’t heed security warnings" at MSNBC.

    Where are the similar news stories about anything you claim?

    To "Screwdriver" that is a nice distraction, but you do realize that the discussion is attacks on US embassies. I don't know of any US embassy located in New York. Also, FYI that atack was missed because of faulty Clinton era intelligence. Just read the Congressional reports on the attack. They found that Bush did everything possible based on the intelligence at hand.

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    June 25, 2014 7:05 a.m.

    @redshirtcaltech Just the mother of ALL attacks happened under Bush. Bush was warned of a pending attack and ignored it. Box cutters and boarding passes were all it took under Bush on 9/11. And that's the best case scenario.

    The more devious scenarios are a black flag attack to enable the neocons free reign. Bush hasn't explained how building 7 collapsed without being hit by anything nor how many experts say there was thermite present in the rubble of the twin towers.

    Republicans will no doubt investigate Benghazi until we're all blue in the face or a political squirrel runs across the room. I still remember the day I realized Rush Limbaugh was lying.

  • Bob K Davis, CA
    June 24, 2014 11:29 p.m.

    After seeing the headline and the very worst, most unflattering photo of Ms Clinton that I have ever seen, I didn't need to read the article.

    For the life of me, I do not understand why the Deseret News thinks it is cool to not only publish slanted views, but to use words and photos that unduly disparage whatever Democrat is involved.
    --- Where I come from this is "fighting dirty" and not very Christian.

    Fox, Breitbart, etc, are owned by folks who are in the business of playing dirty pool to put over their views and promote their candidates, not by a church.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    June 24, 2014 5:59 p.m.

    Redshirt... if a UN directive to remove all unnecessary personal just before the attack doesn't register for you...... I have no idea what level of truth would register.

    And yes, I have been to Yemen... several times. Not sure what your are referring to. Perhaps not a "vacation spot", but lots of people who do business go there often enough.

    A mortar attack, a UN warning, removal of all unnecessary personal, ... nothing like it. Trying again would be pointless because I am sure you would still not be able to see nothing will be an exact parallel, but "like" events happened frequent and often.

    I am sure you don't remember this headline either...

    "Horror at Fallujah / SAVAGE ATTACK: Bodies dragged through street, hung from bridge 4 U.S. contractors killed in ambush hours after 5 soldiers slain in Iraq"

    Oh thats right... no official warning on Fallujah... right? Completely different.... right? How selective our memories are. Completely different....

  • LOU Montana Pueblo, CO
    June 24, 2014 12:56 p.m.

    I would love to see Hilary in office. She scares the Republicans because she has a TON of dirt on all of them. Why do you think they work so hard to discredit her?

  • RedShirtCalTech Pasedena, CA
    June 24, 2014 12:52 p.m.

    To "UtahBlueDevil" thanks for admitting that there has not been any confirmation that the attack had been pre-empted by a warning like there was in Benghazi. Remember, within a few weeks of Benghazi the media had leaked that there were multiple warnings that an attack was immenant. In Yemen the State Department only knew that tempers were rising, but did not know of a specific planned attack on the embassy.

    Again, the american killed was NOT part of the embassy staff, nor was she a target. The administration was quite clear that she was an innocent bystander, unlike the staff in Benghazi.

    Actually Yemen was not a very friendly country. Prior to the September attack, there was a failed attack on the Embassy. The state department knew that the relations were strained, and that is why they had a travel advisory telling US citizens that Yemen was not a great vacation destination.

    Wanna try again?

    I am still waiting to see evidence anything like Benghazi occured under Bush.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    June 24, 2014 12:05 p.m.

    Redshirt - ok... lets try the direct quote then...

    "While U.N. officials would not confirm whether there have been any threats against them, on Oct. 18 the international organization increased its security level to "phase 3," which means family members and essential staff have to leave the country.

    "The U.N. Secretary General has temporarily increased the security level to phase 3 purely as an internal precautionary measure," resident coordinator Pratibha Mehta said in a statement. "U.N. essential staff will remain and we will continue to implement all UN programs and operations."

    Looks like evidence to me. As to casualties...

    "Armed with rocket propelled grenades and assault rifles, the attackers drove two cars packed with explosives into the embassy gate and sprayed it with bullets before being killed. Aside from the attackers, 13 others died in the incident, including an 18-year-old American woman of Yemeni origin."

    Associated Press Writer - 11/1/2008 9:32 AM

    You are assuming there was a cover up in Libya... not proven yet. This event also happened in a "friendly" country where local law enforcement made the arrest. Libya, is still basically governmentless country.

    Big difference.

  • Wonder Provo, UT
    June 24, 2014 10:42 a.m.

    @Screwdriver -- Even more recently than that. They praised her constantly until about a year ago when they calculated we are getting too close to 2016. Of course it was all a way to try to undermine Obama. It's all political strategy regardless of how they really feel. But the lemmings on the right suck it all in and are now going from thinking she's ok to thinking she's the spawn of Satan. The funny thing is, in 5 or 10 years, they will suddenly wake up and realize that Obama wasn't the anti-Christ, Kenyan, communist, socialist, cause of everything bad, they always "knew" he was, never realizing that all the red meat their leaders threw at them was only for political show.

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    June 24, 2014 9:27 a.m.

    All Hilary has to do is play some clips from 07' when republicans LOVED her for running against Obama in the primaries. They said the nicest things back then...

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    June 24, 2014 8:26 a.m.

    To "UtahBlueDevil" so what you are sayign is that of the 12 attacks that occured under Bush you have NO EVIDENCE that the US had any warning.

    You are wrong about Yemen, there was no warning. According to the NY Times article "10 Are Killed in Bombings at Embassy in Yemen" from September 17, 2008, NO US officials or employees were killed. 6 were Yemen guards and 4 were civilians waiting to come in. I think that the fact that the terrorists never got past the guard shack is a successful defense of the embassy and showing that it was secure. Plus, where is the coverup? Plus, within a day there were 25 arrests of the terrorists. It took the Obama administration 1 1/2 years to get one arrest.

    So again, how many of the 12 attacks on US Embassies were preceeded with warnings, and were followed up with the President covering up what happened?

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    June 24, 2014 5:53 a.m.

    "Tell us, of the 12 attacks that occured under Bush, how many had the warnings from the intelligence community and how many were in areas that other nations and relief organizations were abandoning?"

    Redshirt... your kidding, right? For example, The 2008 American Embassy attack in Yemen in Sana'a, Yemen on September 17, 2008, resulted in 18 deaths, that was carried out be l Qaeda, you are saying the Bush administration was unaware in advance of the threat by al Qaeda. You are saying that despite the fact that the same embassy came under attack just 6 months earlier... they had no clue. You are claiming all this despite the fact that the government said "On November 1, a Yemeni security official said the attackers had links to al-Qaida. He added that the United Nations had raised its security level in Yemen in response to such threats."

    So 18 died, the administration knew threat in advance.... and yet they still get a pass while Libya is viewed as a total collapse. Funny the double standard yet again. And it only took me 15 minutes research after looking up just one of the 12 events. Let the partisan dogs rest.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    June 24, 2014 5:51 a.m.

    "With 320 million people, surely we can find someone from outside these two families who can lead."

    Certainly we can. But with such things as Citizens United, the most necessary qualification is the ability to bring in big $$.

    Why does every American, R and D alike, work to get the big money out of politics. We are quickly becoming a country where those with the money can buy elections.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    June 23, 2014 7:53 p.m.

    I just hope she doesn't run. We don't need another Clinton, nor do we need another Bush. With 320 million people, surely we can find someone from outside these two families who can lead.

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    June 23, 2014 6:55 p.m.

    LDS Liberal -

    "She still IS married to a great politician."

    . . . A great public servant too, who led the nation, raised taxes for high earners against the will of the GOP, and presided over a nation at peace, a booming economy, and four consecutive budget surpluses.

    With Hillary, we also get her key adviser . . . William Jefferson Clinton.

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    June 23, 2014 6:50 p.m.

    2 bits -

    "But what actual "Accomplishments" does she have that qualify her to be President??"

    There's a good article in US News and World Report.

    . . . Entitled "Hillary Clinton's Accomplishments Speak for Themselves"

    Check it out.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    June 23, 2014 5:31 p.m.

    Instead of worrying about Clinton, why doesn't the GOP focus on itself and provide us with a candidate that we can get excited about?

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    June 23, 2014 5:25 p.m.

    Speaking of presiding over failure after failure...

    Today's GOP!

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    June 23, 2014 4:11 p.m.

    @2 bits
    Cottonwood Heights, UT

    She's mentally over her prime. She may have liked hardball politics when she was young.... but I think she's over that now.


    2bits -
    She's younger than Margret Thatcher was --
    and Lady Thatcher was Prime Minister for 10 years.

    Not to mention Reagan or your buddy Orrin Hatch...

  • ordinaryfolks seattle, WA
    June 23, 2014 4:02 p.m.

    I am no particular fan of Mrs. Clinton. And I wish the country had more choices than Clintons or Bushes. However, that being said, it is high time we had a woman in the office of the Presidency. And a smart, seasoned one is Mrs. Clinton.

    These poll articles are only meant to jazz up the Clinton phobics into their traditional hysteria. Polls go up and polls go down. It is more than 2 years before the election. Time will tell who actually is the nominee of each party. So, unless the paper is trying to stir up the conservative base, I don't know why we are even having this discussion.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    June 23, 2014 3:47 p.m.

    I recall all the public crying,
    the petitions to secede from the Union,
    the promises to leave the country --

    If President Obama was re=elected.

    He was, by a land-slide.
    The same Neo-Cons are still here,
    still crying the same crocodile tears.

    One can only imagine their re-action when President Hillary wins in 2016, and re-elected in 2020.

    It will be 2024 before the Republicans wake-up from the Tea induced coma,
    and actully be willing to consider a moderate Center-Right, Big Tent, Reagan-RINO, like;

    ambassador/Govoner Jon M. Huntsman Jr,
    General/Secratary Colin Powell,

    BTW -- For all the rhetoric,
    Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Mike Levin are doing more harm for the Republicans, and strengthen the Democrats,

    Than all the Benghazis, Birthers, Obamacare, Government Shutdowns combined...

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    June 23, 2014 3:11 p.m.

    IMO if anybody's given up on Hillary being President... it's Hillary.

    I think after Benghazi she's tired of big decisions and having every move scrutinized to the Nth degree by the media and your political opponents.

    I think she's over being President. She wants to be a Grandma (without all the pressures of the WH and the middle-east, and North-Korea and Russia distracting her all the time).

    She's mentally over her prime. She may have liked hardball politics when she was young.... but I think she's over that now.

    I think her brain injury was more serious than most people know. You don't stay in the hospital that long for a simple concussion. I think she's recovered from that. But I don't know if she wants to get back into a high-stress lifestyle right away.

    There's nothing more stressful than being President of the United States.

    Both Clinton and Romney have more wealth than they need. They have kids and grand-kids they probably want to see (without media and Secret Service lurking). I would not blame EITHER for not wanting to be President...

  • Go Big Blue!!! Bountiful, UT
    June 23, 2014 3:01 p.m.

    Here's hoping the public has given up on her!!!

  • Vanceone Provo, UT
    June 23, 2014 2:50 p.m.

    Vote for Hillary! She's a Democrat! And she's female! What else could possibly matter? Those two qualifications alone make her better than any Republican!

    Just because she's presided over failure after failure doesn't mean she's not presidential material! Just because her foreign policy as Secretary of State puts her in the running for worst job ever isn't a disqualifer!

    She is female! What else matters to Democrats? Surely not qualifications, competence, or experience? After all, what difference does it make?

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    June 23, 2014 2:40 p.m.

    To "Lane Myer" and how many of those attacks on the US embassies were preceeded with the number of warnings that we had in Benghazi? I would bet none. Even wose is the fact that the Red Cross and other nations were busy pulling out of Benghazi when Hillary made the decision to keep an ambassador there, while ignoring his request and the military offer for additional security.

    Tell us, of the 12 attacks that occured under Bush, how many had the warnings from the intelligence community and how many were in areas that other nations and relief organizations were abandoning?

    We can further examine her poor performance by lookin at her response. Of the 12 attacks under Bush, how many were mired in a cover up from the President on down? How many of the soldiers that died had their parents lied to by the Secretary of State?

    If you want to keep pressing the issue, we can see even more examples of how Hillary failed in her duties as Secretary of State.

  • ForTruth Taylorsville, UT
    June 23, 2014 2:38 p.m.

    The liberal media has already crowned Hillary "Queen" and unless she does something really dumb during the 2016 campaign, she will be the next President of the United States.

    The voters of this country were determined to elect a black president no matter the cost, and now they want the first woman president. I, for one, will not be voting for her.

  • OneWifeOnly San Diego, CA
    June 23, 2014 2:17 p.m.

    "Recent headlines have suggested that Hillary has brain damage, is old enough to be using a walker, and fondly remembers representing a child rapist when she still practiced law."

    Here's the problem. One only has to listen to Secretary Clinton for 5 minutes to conclude she does not have brain damage. One only has to watch for a minute or two to conclude she does not use a walker. This leads me to conclude the third headline is also a deliberate attempt to mislead the reader.

    Why does DN persist in trying to further mislead the public?

  • Cleetorn Fuaamotu, Tonga
    June 23, 2014 1:53 p.m.

    Numbers-shmumbers! Anybody who discounts Hillary at this point is not looking past the end of their nose. Having her as President is more than just a poassibility. It is a horrifying probability. We already have a foot in the grave with the current administration and many of those who have preceeded this one. Putting her in will put the last nail in the coffin. Not just conjecture but a terrible reality.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    June 23, 2014 1:41 p.m.

    She did vote for the Iraq fiasco.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    June 23, 2014 1:38 p.m.

    @2 bits
    Cottonwood Heights, UT

    She was married to a great politician (but I don't know if it rubs off on you by being married to him).
    She ran for Senate in New York and won (even though she's not a New Yorker).

    Senators don't need the same governing skills a Governor or a President needs to do their job.

    9:21 a.m. June 23, 2014


    She still IS married to a great politician.

    2 for the price of 1

    Presidents can't do anything without getting it through the Senate.

    Being President after serving in the Senate is a HUGE assist.

    Bbetter qualified than being a Govenor from Alaska, or egotistical Casino owner.

  • Lane Myer Salt Lake City, UT
    June 23, 2014 1:32 p.m.

    Redshirt: "as Secretary of State she showed her incompetence by leaving an ambassador in Libya when everybody was telling her that it was a dangerous situation."


    "There were 12 attacks on American embassies, consulates and compounds during the administration of President George W. Bush. In those attacks 60 people (excluding attackers) were killed, including 11 Americans....Embassy assaults have occurred throughout the 20th century and into the 21st, including incidents under Presidents Carter, Reagan, both Bushes, Clinton and Obama. One of the most notorious ones came in 1979 when revolutionary Iranians stormed the embassy in Tehran when Carter was president. The most deadly assaults came during the administration of Ronald Reagan. In 1983 a suicide bomber drove a truck loaded with explosives into a U.S Marine compound in Beirut, Lebanon, killing 241 Americans. There had been a warning. Just six months earlier, another bomber killed 63 people, including 17 Americans, during an attack on the U.S. embassy in Beirut. Reagan, whose calling card was "peace through strength," acknowledged that his administration had lacked the necessary intelligence to stop the attacks. "I think that terrorism is the hardest thing to curtail," he said at one point."

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    June 23, 2014 12:58 p.m.


    Re: "Compare her career to Mitt Romney's"...

    OK. Romney was a Governor (not MARRIED to the Governor). A popular Republican Governor of a very Democrat State I may add. Being MARRIED to a Governor, or a President... is NOT an accomplishment that qualifies YOU to be President!

    Palin never ran for President. But she was a Governor.

    Senators don't need the same governing skills a Governor or a President needs to do their job.

    IMO We should add a requirement for President that the candidate serve as a Governor first... so we can see if they have the management and leadership skills, and the ability to compromise... needed to govern and balance a budget, and make tough decisions...

    The Senate is just a debate-club. They don't govern. They talk a lot and posture for the cameras, and campaign, and carry the party's water... but they aren't real leaders making tough decisions. They are party-followers. But struggle when put in charge, where they have to make the final decision on everything (not just talk about it and debate it for the cameras).

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    June 23, 2014 12:50 p.m.

    Hilary hasn't accomplished anything of note or value. She was Bill Clintons wife - she became a NY Senator mainly due to her celebrity status and she served as Sec or State and oversaw the Benghazi scandal. Listening to her on Fox News she really has nothing to offer other than the old liberal re-runs that have already been a miserable failure. Numbers don't lie.

  • Henderson Orem, UT
    June 23, 2014 12:38 p.m.

    Real Mav is absolutely correct. I too find it funny that I've seen about 5 articles in the past 3 days about Clinton and zero articles about the investigations on Shurtleff and Swallow. In order to learn anything about them I have to go to the Trib or NY Times. Why? Locally, we have a very important election between a candidate that was smeared by the Payday loan lenders. They helped to finance the campaign for Dana Layton. I haven't read anything from the Deseret News about this. Yet, somehow the NY Times finds it relevant enough to report on it.

    Why doesn't the Deseret News stick to local issues?

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    June 23, 2014 12:10 p.m.

    The GOP must really fear Clinton if they're already daily producing anti-Clinton pieces and finding the most awkward pictures of her. It seems like readers will be punished to read anti-Clinton pieces non-stop for the next 2 years along with the usual anti-union and public education nonsense.

    My question is, why doesn't the dnews report anything about Swallow? Payday loan lenders? Corrupt legislators?

    A corrupt local government is far more relevant than a possible Clinton presidential run in 2 years.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    June 23, 2014 12:10 p.m.

    To "LDS Liberal" you do realize that until she was Secretary of State that she had no leadership experience. Then, as Secretary of State she showed her incompetence by leaving an ambassador in Libya when everybody was telling her that it was a dangerous situation.

    Tell us how she is able to empathize with us commoners. She has an Ivy league education, and spent a long time as first lady where she waited on by government employees.

    Did she have to campaign to be First Lady? Because that really isn't an accomplishment of hers, but is an accomplishment of Bill's.

  • E Sam Provo, UT
    June 23, 2014 10:50 a.m.

    I would vote for her over almost any Republican. But I would prefer a more authentic liberal.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    June 23, 2014 10:44 a.m.

    Compare her career to Mitt Romney's.

    She has accomplished so much more. There's no comparison.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    June 23, 2014 10:39 a.m.

    But what actual "Accomplishments" does she have that qualify her to be President??

    I mean BESIDES her awesomeness... and being a Democrat.

    Do you have any actual ACCOMPLISHMENTS that convince you she would be a good President?

    I mean saying you didn't even know our embassy had been asking for reinforcements... and the embassy is eventually overrun and our ambassador killed (and she blames a video, and then blames underlings for not telling her)... doesn't seem like she has the right stuff to run the State Department... much less the whole United States Government!

    IF you have some super-awesome things she has actually accomplished in her stellar political career... I'd love to hear about them. IF she has a lot of actual accomplishments... you may change my mind.

    What did she accomplish as a Senator? What bills did she propose? Did they pass? She voted FOR the Iraq war you know... yet that is only a liability IF you are a Republican???

    What did she accomplish as SOC? Benghazi?

    Tell me what she has accomplished that makes her so awesome! BESIDES being a Democrat...

  • KJB1 Eugene, OR
    June 23, 2014 10:35 a.m.

    With everything the right wing has thrown at her, she still leads every Republican by a comfortable margin. This "discussion" is little more than wishful thinking.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    June 23, 2014 10:22 a.m.

    @2 bits
    Cottonwood Heights, UT
    I seriously don't think she was EVER a "great" candidate for President.

    What have her major political accomplishments been???


    Haha - You're kidding?

    Let's see...

    She's holds a Doctorate from Yale University Law School.
    She was First Lady of Arkansas -- TWICE.
    She was the First Lady of the United Sates -- Twice.
    Senator of New York -- Twice.
    Scretary of the United States.

    I'm looking forward to another GOP Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachhmann, or Donald Trump to run against her.

    IMHO -- I don't think it's a Hillary is the best of all bestest candidates,
    so much as it is the public has just plain given up on the GOP.

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    June 23, 2014 9:56 a.m.

    2 bits -

    "What have her major political accomplishments been???"

    Her major accomplishment?

    She became a Democrat.

    That shows her perspicacity, mental acuity, and just plain good sense . . . And the ability to learn from her mistakes.

    Not many people realize that Hillary was once a Goldwater Republican, who actually worked for his campaign.

    . . . Of course, that was in her impressionable youth, when she apparently was not yet mature enough to make reasonable decisions.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    June 23, 2014 9:52 a.m.

    I would hate to be the last President of the United States of America. If Hillary Clinton is elected president, there will be enough of the anti-America people, with enough money, to bring down our nation, just to win a political battle.

    If she does run for the presidency, I would think her the bravest woman in history.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    June 23, 2014 9:46 a.m.

    Given up? She leads every potential Republican candidate head to head in just about every poll since the bridge scandal took down Chris Christie.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    June 23, 2014 9:21 a.m.

    I seriously don't think she was EVER a "great" candidate for President.

    What have her major political accomplishments been???


    She was married to a great politician (but I don't know if it rubs off on you by being married to him).

    She ran for Senate in New York and won (even though she's not a New Yorker).

    But what big things did she accomplish when in office? She voted FOR the war in Iraq. And then later tried to de-fund it (kinda like Lee trying to de-fund the ACA).

    In 2006 Clinton spent more on her reelection than any other candidate. And then promptly resigned and ran for President (and lost).

    So she doesn't have a great track record of winning elections. And she doesn't have a reputation for getting a lot done when she does win.

    I don't know what kind of President she would be. But if her leadership as Sec of State is any indication... I don't want her as President.

    I think she COULD win. But I don't think it would be as easy as Democrats hope.

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    June 23, 2014 9:09 a.m.

    Roaland Kayser -

    " A very interesting matchup would be Clinton vs Rand Paul"

    Yeah . . . another interesting loss for the Repubs.

    In fact, the Republicans could not field a candidate with a chance of beating Hillary Clinton.

  • Flashback Kearns, UT
    June 23, 2014 9:07 a.m.

    The public has turned on Hillary because they figured out that she can't be trusted.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    June 23, 2014 8:32 a.m.

    From what I've read it's the more liberal Democrats who are not too thrilled with Clinton. She has a very cozy relationship with Corporate America, and very hawkish views on foreign policy. A very interesting matchup would be Clinton vs Rand Paul. A Hawkish Democratic Internationalist against a Dovish Isolationist Republican. People might be confused.