Why I Am Not Voting for Hillary

I just finished reading some news articles about the "disappointment" growing in our population, especially by women, on the fact that Hillary Clinton, the first woman to run for and have a good chance for President, is now falling behind and losing momentum. From the reports it would sound that many in media are finding it compelling to write about how depressing or discouraging it all is when this all started, giving women hope that they would finally have their candidate. To me, however, it just shows the lack of purpose and the confusion of priorities in why people vote in the first place, sort of reinforcing what I have imagined for some time now: that a majority of Americans vote for the wrong reasons. The subtitles suggest that the real reason why many are not voting for Mrs. Clinton is that she is a woman, claiming discrimination against her as the cause. I find it disheartening that these statements are missing the boat; that the real reasons are being ignored. You are not supposed to vote for someone just because they are the first woman, or minority, to have a chance of winning. You vote because of the candidate him or herself. The qualities that make a true "political leader" should be examined and weighed in. It is sad that many write only their opinion of something without measuring all the points. Here is why i will not vote for Hillary.

My reason for not voting Mrs. Clinton's way takes us to plausible facts and, based on those facts, what I see in her as a potential leader. What is the definition of a leader? Is it a person who molds and bends themself to the will of the people? Is it a person who finds themself making sacrifices for the good of the many? What does the word "lead" refer to if not to directing, perhaps by example or some other way, the people to something better? To me, trying to be something to everyone is not what a true leader needs to be. Recent visits by Mrs. Clinton show that she is trying to look the part of everyone's friend to everyone. Whether it's having a beer with some down-to-earth small town people or lifting up a gun in hunting and fishing land, she is trying to say what every good politician says. Fit yourself and your personality into what ever situation you are in and copy whatever it is that the crowd wants or expects you to be to "them". But does that show who you really are, or does it hide the true self by pretending to be what each group of Americans wants you to be? That, my friends, is not what a true leader can be, and there will come a time when decisions will have to be made and every group will not be able to be satisfied. There is a big difference here between a "politician" and a true political leader. Leaders must "lead", even when it may not satisfy all constituents of every walk of life. You remember the old saying about having your cake and, well you know the rest. Hillary cannot be everything to everyone, but she is trying. She learned well from Bill.

Another point that must be considered is what you are remembered for saying, and how important it is to stick with what you say. Mrs. Clinton has a bad habit of changing her mind, or at least saying the opposite of what she said before, just to stay out of controversy. What it has done, however, is created more rather than less controversy. You see, a leader cannot simply keep changing his or her mind depending on the press received, or on poll results, or maybe on which way the wind blows. A leader has to believe in something and then go out and talk about it. What does Hillary really believe? Does anyone really know what she wishes to do if elected? Some have referred to it as "flip-flopping", but I call it simple weakness. Comments she has made about policy, about what she plans on doing, on whether or not she was "under fire" during a trip to Bosnia, tell you about the person. Can you forget what really happened, or is everything for a reason? If it happens every once in a while it can be chalked up to human traits, but when it happens all the time? The fact is, she has been doing this for a very long time, so what do you believe? It seems that recent attention has been spent on Mr. Obama and his connections, but let us look back to the Clinton's connections as well.

Has everyone forgotten about the Clinton connections to Chinese sources? Has it been forgotten that some supporters and donors have spent time in prison? What more questionable point needs to be made than who you hang around with? Or who supports you and why? When devious or dubious individuals openly support a candidate, no matter who it may be, then we must examine the reasons why, and how much support has been given. Yet, most Americans are being channeled towards reading and hearing about the Obama connections only! Is this a deliberate attempt to ignore the Clintons' ties to past characters of question, or is it simply how the media focuses on the short-term? I hate to think that Americans have such a short attention span as to root for someone on the moment rather than the body of work that person has done or supported.

Experience? Do you really think that Hillary's time in the White House has anything to do with her ability to run the country? It has been stated all along that a First Lady is not privy to governmental activities or decision-making. The job of the First Lady is to be mostly a good hostess and diplomat. A term plus in the Senate is not very long to be "experienced" in federal affairs. Of course, that can be said for Mr. Obama as well. Take what you can from it.

So what does Hillary bring to the table? I remember a quote from her a few months ago, about the fact that the American people could not afford what she wants to do as President. How interesting, and frightening, that very little thought has been put into this statement. Again, take from what a person says and learn what kind of a person, let alone leader, that person may become. Her idea appears to be to increase the size of government, and to increase the amount of power it has. What does that mean? It just means that when you are in power and you have the chance to increase that power, the natural thing to do is to follow through with it. It also means that as government grows it doesn't get less expensive; it gets more expensive. It also fills its own pockets because it can. And if government keeps growing, what kind of government will you eventually have? Hillary speaks of making the "rich" pay, but is she not "rich"? What was the Clintons quoted as claiming for earnings last year? Over 100 million dollars? Do you really think that she is going to make herself "pay" as a rich person? Or is this a bunch of propaganda to get votes? I know which answer I see as the truth. No one seems to know what kinds of policies and programs she wishes to bring to government because, as mentioned above, she changes her mind so often. Confused? Then why vote for her?

The big thing here is: many are disappointed because they saw in Hillary only one positive, hopeful trait. She had a chance to be the first female President of the United States. It is easy to blame sexism as the cause, but perhaps many more Americans than thought have realized the truth. She is not the best candidate running. Oh, we may not be completely happy with the rest of the candidates, but some suggest that it is the choice of the lesser of two evils. It may be just that, but our duty lies with voting the best possible candidate to the office. It is a big responsibility, but one each voter should take seriously. We cannot regret our decision later if we find that we, collectively, have made a mistake. The Presidency is the most powerful position in the world and we need to consider our individual and single vote as something as powerful. Hillary's wished for policies are flawed (if they even exist), her experience is meager at best, her words are doubtful and weak, and most importantly, she cannot make up her mind. A good leader, as I have learned teaching business for so many years, must be decisive and confident in the decisions, even if some do not agree with those decisions. I see none of that in her. In fact I see a person with ambition, perhaps even greed, and one who will do just about anything, or say anything, to gain power. It is a scary thing, to grant power to one who craves it to the point that actions and words are left to be ignored so that ambition can be fulfilled. It is a human trait and one to be examined.

In fact, Hillary Clinton has indicated in actions and words that the White House is supposed to be hers. She not only expects it to be hers, she doesn't seem interested in losing it. Look into her eyes and you can see unlimited and unstoppable ambition. It has nothing to do with her gender; there have been men and women through history who have shown the same traits. One must observe history to understand the magnitude of the actions of these people. To vote for a person only because you wish her to be the first woman President is to ignore the duty and responsibility of citizenship in the greatest country the world has ever seen. If we are to stay great we need to consider these things. I ask that you do so before entering the voting booth. I have heard some say they are thinking about not voting this time because there is no one who they like, or appeals to them. That may be true, but the other side of the issue is that it may permit millions of others to choose a candidate who is not right for the position. Logic and reason tell me this. And if you can reexamine why you are favoring one candidate or another, then you are on the right path. Whatever the cost, I do know that I will not vote for Hillary Clinton, and I have stated the reasons. One of those reasons is not because she is a woman. In fact, I am hoping that someday soon I will be able to vote for a woman (for the Presidency) because she is the best qualified candidate. I believe, although it is not now, that the time is near. We must, however, keep our heads and stay focused on the present. The next four years depend on it.