Honestly do not know why..
It can't possibly be the shrill, rough personality. She can't even pull off 'phony-friendly' like her pretend husband Bill can,,
So it has to be her accomplishments, right?
What did she accomplish as First Lady other than insist she was not going to be baking any cookies?
What did this bitch accomplish as US Senator?
Can you even remember what state she carpetbagged and represented?
Name a single piece of legislation that she authored or even co-signed? Surely you can,, The rotten snake was a Senator for two terms after all, serving 8 before moving up the power-ladder to Secretary of State...
An analysis of Federal Election Commission records, by TIME, which was published on 23 October 2015, showed that the 2012 Republican donors to Romney’s campaign were already donating More to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign than they had been donating to most of the 2016 campaigns of Republican candidates!!
She must be one Old used up, wrinkled Whore to Wall Street and the banks for so many Republicans big-wigs to actively spend to try to put her in the White House
Ideologies be damned.. Profit first for the 1%
Was she a good Secretary of State? Did she accomplish Anything positive?
In a word.. Nope!
The lives of all but the top 0.001% of the population there are hell because of this.
On June 28, 2009, the Honduran military grabbed their nation’s popular democratically elected progressive President, Manuel Zelaya, and flew him into exile.
The AP headlined “World Leaders Pressure Honduras to Reverse Coup,” and reported: “Leaders from Hugo Chavez to Barack Obama called for reinstatement of Manuel Zelaya, who was arrested in his pajamas Sunday morning by soldiers who stormed his residence and flew him into exile.”
She refused even to commit the U.S. to using the enormous leverage it had over the Honduran Government to bring that about.
The coup government made no bones about its being anti-democratic. On July 4th, 2009, they announced that the new government of Honduras was withdrawing from the Democratic Charter of the Organization of American States.
As the UN and the rest of the world in withdrawing economic support for the coup regime in response, Clinton just remained silent.
Though all international organizations called the Honduran coup illegitimate, and refused to recognize the leader chosen by its junta, the Obama Administration, after more than a month of indecision on this matter, finally came out for Honduras’s fascists.
Obama, after a month of silence, caved silently. Instead of his using the bully pulpit to smear the new fascist government, Obama just joined him in it, silently. Why?
And Obama caved.
Amnesty International issued a report in late 2009 documenting widespread police beatings and brutality against peaceful demonstrations, mass arbitrary arrests and other human rights abuses under the dictatorship.
The Obama administration and Hillary specifically remained silent about these abuses as well as the killings of activists and press censorship and intimidation. To date, no major US media outlet has bothered to pursue them.
The matter in Haiti was similar but less dramatic, and so it received even less attention from the U.S. Press.
On June 1, 2011, the Nation headlined "WikiLeaks Haiti: Let Them Live on $3 a Day," reporting that:
"Contractors for Fruit of the Loom, Hanes and Levi’s worked in close concert with the US Embassy when they aggressively moved to block a minimum wage increase for Haitian assembly zone workers, the lowest-paid in the hemisphere, according to secret State Department cables....
The factory owners told the Haitian Parliament that they were willing to give workers a 9-cents-per-hour pay increase to 31 cents per hour to make T-shirts, bras and underwear for US clothing giants like Dockers and Nautica. But the factory owners refused to pay 62 cents per hour, or $5 per day, as a measure unanimously passed by the Haitian Parliament in June 2009 would have mandated.
And they had the vigorous backing of the US Agency for International Development and the US Embassy when they took that stand."
Hillary Clinton's State Department pushed hard to reverse the new minimum wage law.
"A deputy chief of mission, David E. Lindwall, said the $5 per day minimum 'did not take economic reality into account' but was a populist measure aimed at appealing to 'the unemployed and underpaid masses.'"
Bitch-dog Clinton was the Administration’s leading proponent of regime-change, overthrowing Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. That worked out disastrously.
“We came, we saw, he died!” - Real Hillary quote referring to Gaddafi
Hillary’s success at overthrowing Gaddafi served brilliantly the purposes of the U.S. aristocracy and of the jihadists who are financed by the Saud family and the other fundamentalist Sunni royal faimilies in Arabia.
Even if she doesn’t become President, she has already done enough favors for those royals so as to be able to fill to the brim the coffers of the Clinton Foundation.
She was also the Secretary of State when the 2006-2010 drought was causing a massive relocation of population in Syria and U.S. State Department cables passed along up the chain of command the Assad government’s urgent request for aid from foreign governments to help farmers stave off starvation due to excessive droughts.
The Clinton State Department ignored the requests and treated this as an opportunity to foment revolution there.
It wasn’t only the Arab Spring, in Syria, that led to the demonstrations against Assad there. Sunni jihadist fighters streamed into Syria, backed by the U.S., Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey.
Replacing a secular government by a fundamentalist Sunni Sharia law regime would end Syria’s alliance with Russia
Thus, Obama worked with other fundamentalist Sunni dictatorships in the region — Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Kuwait, and Turkey — to perpetrate a sarin gas attack in Syria that they’d all blame on Syria’s Ba’athist leader, Bashar al-Assad, even though the U.S. and its Arab partners had actually perpetrated it.
"I worry too much that Secretary Clinton is too much into regime change and a little bit too aggressive without knowing what the unintended consequences might be.
Yes, we could get rid of Saddam Hussein, but that destabilized the entire region. Yes, we could get rid of Gadhafi, a terrible dictator, but that created a vacuum for ISIS.
Yes, we could get rid of Assad tomorrow, but that would create another political vacuum that would benefit ISIS."
Nuland then became the organizer of the February, 20 2014 coup in Ukraine, which replaced a neutralist leader of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, with a rabidly anti-Russian U.S. puppet, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, and a bloody civil war.
Nuland is obsessed with hatred of Russia so we of course love her
This is because the backward nation is next door to Russia and the U.S. aristocracy has, since communism ended in the Soviet Union in 1990, been trying to surround Russia by NATO missiles, most especially in Ukraine.
President Obama hid from the public his hostility toward Russia until he became re-elected in 2012 but then, once he was safely re-elected, immediately set to work to take over Ukraine and to add it to NATO.
Then, in his National Security Strategy 2015, he identified Russia as being by far the world’s most “aggressive” nation.
The money for that bombing-campaign came from taxpayers in U.S. and EU, and also from the IMF, in the form of loans that saddled Ukraine with so much debt it went bankrupt on October 4, 2015, as determined by a unanimous vote of the 15 international banks that collectively make this decision.
The infamously high corruption in Ukraine went even higher after the U.S.-EU takeover of Ukraine. After Ukraine’s bankruptcy, the IMF changed its rules so that it could continue to lend money there, until the people those regions are either exterminated or expelled.
Hillary Clinton is determined to carry this anti-Russian hostility through as President, even though she lies as Obama does and so, similarly, won’t say it during the Democratic primaries. But the takeover of Ukraine was an Obama operation in which she played an important role, to set it up.
But Dem voters remember the Bill Clinton Presidency far more positive and nostalgic than it really was and seem to credit Hillary with accomplishments and accolades she never actually achieved
That is why only fools & imbeciles will vote for Hillary, which is of course why she may very well win the Democrat primaries.