If the Question is about Hillary

Then we need to ask a number of piercing questions about her and the way her campaign is being reported about. There is a big difference between the way the media portray a candidate and the way a candidate most likely feels about the way she is presenting her ideas.
At this moment, let's just focus on the whole notion of polling. I find it quite objectionable to turn the campaign process into a long and tedious horse race. Americans have a fascination with numbers and believe in numbers they can find surety. I don't think though most of them when asked can tell the difference between a factor and a percentage. So, if numbers are so great, what can we say about them other than that? If Hillary is ahead by 30 percentage points then what does that mean? It then becomes someone else commenting on the differences between numbers and the history of these differences and what they might predict.
The other way to report this campaign process though is much more interesting and has to do with what a candidate actually stands for and what he or she is promising to whom he or she will do when elected. Then a look at numbers can be interesting. But it is who gave how much money to whom and why. Looking at those numbers seems to provide more insight into what interests the candidate represents because no one gives money to someone they hope loses.
Then there is the more time consuming and less quantitatively reported coverage of the campaigns. In this type of coverage, it matters who said what, in what context and what it means. Then we can all sit down and discuss, for example, what is the vote for the Kyl-Lieberman bill all about? Why did Hillary for that and what was she looking to do?
How do you interpret her stance on war and on threatening war in instances that seem particularly Bush-like in their manner? I see it as a way of saying, vote for me because not much will change if you do. To me, that is the kind of impact a war mongerer has.
On the other side of the coin, there is Dennis who is not voting for war measures and is not equivocating about where he stands about this war, the coming war with Iran or any other war.
What press person has been willing to talk to him about these positions? Who has been industrious enough to get in there and talk to him about what a war economy does to us all? Who has talked to Dennis about how equal rights for every citizen translates into a call for war no more?
I could go on and on in this way, but go to his website and read each and every one of this positions on the issues you care about. Rather than re-iterate his comments, I am more inclined to put into perspective what the others are saying as opposed to what we can see documented of what Dennis has to say and beyond that, why, in all good conscience, it makes sense to vote for him.
Peace is a wonderful blessing and his message of strength through peace is the subversion of what the war mongers all believe. To them, peace only comes from the show of the military muscles. It is a sad statement about how we have been trained to think in this country that too many people agree with that idea without really examining it.
Ask yourself, are you interested in just being a number in this election or do you want to really have a voice and elect someone who will be able to articulate your concerns?
Then ask yourself, why not Dennis?