Hillary Clinton is the current Democratic frontrunner who has plenty of experience in Washington as well as the criticisms and attention that come with it. Hillary's weakness, politically, is that she is a woman, and she is subject to unnecessary and elaborate criticism that male politicians would never face.
A study by The Woman's Media Center and She Should Run show that over 1,500 likely voters nationwide found that no matter what anyone says about a female politician, whether that be of attractiveness or in objectivity to her looks, her impact is still negative with voters. That means a woman could be running for president looking like Jennifer Lawrence, and another woman could be running for president looking like Rosie O'Donnell, and both of them would still be negatively affected by their looks. So already Hillary Clinton is fighting an uphill battle because she has to overcome something that she cannot change, and that is being a woman.
You may hate Hillary Clinton because of her emails; you may hate Hillary Clinton because she switches her opinions; you may even hate her because of the Benghazi attacks, but one thing for certain that cannot be disputed about Hillary Clinton is that she is willing to get things done no matter how the game is played. Having a president who plays dirty and strong arms politicians to get things done is not a bad thing; this nation was not built by people who were worried about stepping on other people's toes.
Now let me address her critics, whose political points are somewhat valid but otherwise completely influenced by conservatives. The email scandal is one that has been completely blown out of proportion. Conservatives act like this scandal has never happened in the history of our nation, those people are wrong. In fact, it is the exact opposite; every single Secretary of State that has used email as a resource for the government has been investigated for their emails.
This is a direct attempt by the far left and the GOP to discredit Hillary Clinton and question her political morality. Bernie Sanders knows it and has not attacked Hillary Clinton on these views because he knows the facts that surround them. My recommendation for these critics is for them to do research on the topics that they are criticizing Hillary Clinton about before actually saying anything about them. If we live in a nation of ignorance and blind accusation, then anyone could tell us anything, and we would believe what they say as a fact rather than a exaggerated opinion.
Second, people criticize her for switching her opinions, and this is also an unfair attack. What surprises me is that of all the politicians that should be criticized for switching their opinions such as many republicans, who play the opinion game according to the person to whom they're speaking; the most criticized person is not even a republican but a liberal who just so happens to also be a woman. The only reason why you keep hearing Hillary Clinton being criticized for switching her opinion is simply because she is a woman, and this sexist characteristic has been attributed to women for decades.
She is not the first politician to switch her opinion on a matter or multiple opinions; she is just the first woman to come within striking distance of an office that has an extreme amount of potential power in her hands, and, therefore, for men who see her as a threat, they must discredit her in the most sexist way possible. I see her switching her opinions as a good thing. Do you want a politician who votes toward the political climate of the society that they represent, or do you want a politician that completely goes off the rails from what the majority of American people see as right (ex: Donald Trump)?
You can hold up Bernie Sanders for being in the Civil Rights Movement all you want, but at the end of the day, the economic and systematic discrimination against people of color have not changed in any way, and if Sanders wants to hang his hat on that, then he certainly has not made much progress at all. The man has had no effect in Congress, even being called "not as someone who has accomplished a lot in terms of getting legislation passed."
He has now proposed a free college plan during a time when our nation is in one of the biggest deficits it has ever been in. Tell me what happens when foreign nations see a president put money toward free college but no money toward paying back for investors that help put the United States out of one of the worst depressions in its history?
Do you think that when this happens, we will be a nation that commands respect? And do you think that a nation that left little stability in the Middle East should just sit on the sidelines and watch the now unstable mess called ISIS continuously grow and promote a message of anti-American terrorism? Then why do people fault a politician for taking up those views and remaining strong but yet criticize her for switching her opinions on important social issues that exist within our country? The great thing about America is we are able to adapt our opinions freely, and to criticize a woman for doing that in a free country is just absurd.
Third, the Benghazi attacks. My question is whenever has a Secretary of State had a military authorization to send in troops by herself? The answer is never; our Secretary of State does not control our armed forces, and, therefore, she had no way of rescuing Ambassador Stevens without going through the Secretary of Defense, when, by then, Stephens had already been killed (do you really think Hillary Clinton would be directly responsible for the fortification of an embassy that these people broke into?).
If the republicans want to criticize big government, then maybe they should appropriately attribute the blame in scenarios that apply, such as the one above. If you have fallen into this Benghazi propaganda that the Republicans are spreading, then maybe you have missed the point already. The only reason why republicans are criticizing Hillary Clinton so much on something that happened in Libya is because the Republicans want to draw away from their responsibility in the single deadliest attack against American civilians in our nations history in 9/11, in which in front of a congressional committee the American people were told that everything that they had heard on what happened to secure our nations security prior to 9/11 was completely fabricated. Hillary Clinton went in front of a congressional committee for more than 11 hours and they still could not find anything. Then why do people hate her for these attacks?
If you want to feed into the political system that is filled with negativity about every candidate then that is fine. The same people who feed into that negativity are the same people who hold up the “Make America Great Again” signs for Donald Trump. Our nation is gradually turning from being one that looks upon its future in a positive way to a nation that looks at their future as one of uncertainty, negativity and fear. America's future is uncertain, but there was once a time where people saw that as an opportunity to change things rather than completely tear down everything that exists in our political system.
