And?

Not grouchy just curious as to your point. I find the poll amazingly unsurprising. Dems really on the whole like her, independents like her and Republicans not so much. Even on the blogs I'm not seeing much difference. Questions as to if this is the best thing for her, questions about the Bill vetting, but on the whole fairly positive. The negatives around the blogs tend to be louder or harsher, if you will, hence the sense that there is more of it. I think it falls within the 12% margin of not so thrilled. As for me I'm fine with it.

I was a very active supporter of Hillary during the primaries. I believe she is a woman of action and a woman with a conscience. She truly cares about America and wants to leave a legacy. I was very upset when Obama won the Democratic primaries and crossed party lines and supported McCain. When Obama won I was crushed. After watching his interview on 60 minutes I was greatly impressed by his humility and his sense of America.

If he does make Hillary Clinton his Secretary of State, I will then believe that he plans to put America first and is not a vengeful, childish man. No one is better equipped for that job than Hillary. Her 8 years in the Whitehouse gave her a great opportunity to know foreign leaders and to know somewhat how they should be dealth with. She is a tough and intelligent woman and no one will kick her around. I believe that if Hillary joins the Obama team he will have the best team player he can have. She will not undermine him as that would only hurt her and America. No one can say that woman does not love America. Having Bill Clinton as a husband is a major plus. Whether people like it or not he is beloved by many. His decision to be completely open in the vetting process shows that he is also serious about getting behind Obama. With Obama's lack of experience the Clinton's would be a GREAT ASSETT to his team. Good move Obama. You are moving up the totem pole in my ratings. Showing some maturity in the decisions you are making. Putting America first which is very important. Thank you President Elect Obama. You have a lot to prove to 46 percent of us and this is a good start.

The ant-war crowd has becoming increasingly alarmed by the Obama cabinet picks - most except for Obama himself, voting for the resolution to go to war against Iraq....it's always easier to ask others to sacrific in the front lines; so, why doesn't a politician like Hillary, Bill and Chelsea pick up arms and go fight the good fight in Afganistan - I'm told by Obama et al that IS where the next war on terror needs to be dealt with.

.....Obama now equalling the phony Liberal and more like the "Yes, We Can" Wuss....

Well I don't like her as SOS at all. I think it is a BIG mistake and I hope it doesn't happen. Remember that she voted for the Iraq war and I think she would try to leverage and manipulate foreign policy.

I am still hoping for Bill Richardson as SOS. But whatever Obama decides is what will be.

Well, for what it's worth:

I don't like the idea of Hillary in SoS. For starters, it's the one area where she and Obama have had the largest amount of disagreements and there is nothing to suggest that Hillary is a good foot soldier.

Second, I don't like the idea of her in such an important national position for the same reason why I didn't want her as Prez nor as VP. And the same reason why I didn't want to see GWB in the White House (though there were other reasons there as well). It's all quite simple: it's simply too much concentration of power within a single family - especially when her husband is still active on the world stage.

I won't rehash the arguments I made during the primary, but suffice it to say that we should have "term limits" for this type of concentration of power which naturally leads to corruption. You can't stop corruption in general, but you can impede its progress. This has nothing to do with partisan politics or personalities... I just don't want to be living in a Roman Empire, even if Augustus is the first Emperor. The succeeding generations weren't worth it. The types of political dynasties we already have (Jesse Jackson Sr/Jr, Pelosi, Bushes, Clintons, etc.) are bad enough, we don't need to continue the trend into the highest levels of the Executive Branch.

PS; Clearthinker, don't expect the Clinton "dynasty" to fade away in our lifetime, I'm betting Chelsea caught the fever this election season, and we will see her again in some political capacity.

And rightly so. She's smart and savvy and gives a great stump speech, so why shouldn't she have a chance to make her own name in the game?

And as for Jesse Jackson Jr., while I respect his Pop immensely, I think the younger may outshine the elder before it is over. Junior's managed to forge his own, much more mainstream political career.

Legacies can be good or bad. It should be neither a qualifier, nor an exclusionary factor.

We just suffered one of the worst, but still it doesn't mean we should exclude the best and the brightest just because they have or had a parent in politics.

Interesting that 12% of Democrats opposed, but they are awful noisy on teh innernet, eh? Must be them cell phones they are missing again.

I keep reading all of these comments that talk about how strong she is, how much of a fighter she is, how she'll put America first, etcetcetc.

Sorry folks, but Hillary is not strong, she's not a fighter, and she absolutely does not put America first. And it isn't Bill who's the problem. It's Hillary.

One profound difference between her and Obama has impressed me from the beginning. Where he speaks of unity and calls upon Americans to work together, Hillary never misses an opportunity to sell herself. With Obama it was always "We"; with Hillary it was always "Me".

When she wanted to show how much more experienced she was than Obama, she would trot out her "resume". Only problem is that the folks who actually worked on the different negotiations she claimed to have a hand in crafting, all said the same thing--she had little or no effect.

Remember Tuzla? "I have combat experience--I got shot at." No she didn't. Yet despite repeatedly being called out she looked right at her challengers and said, "Yes, I was there and yes I got shot at". Finally she admitted that "Well, I apparently said some things that upon reflection I suppose didn't happen quite the way that I recalled them happening".

She kept whining about sexist reporting--sorry, folks but it wasn't as widespread as she and her supporters claimed. She made repeated false accusations against Obama. She took her case to the pseudo-right-wing television talk shows--essentially sleeping with the enemy. She tried every tactic--whether honest or not--to discredit Obama.

And this is the person folks want for Sec'y of State? Hell no!

The last thing we need is to see this self-absorbed, self-aggrandizing, manipulative little bully in any position of authority in this or any other administration. And don't kid yourselves. The only reason she wants SoS is for the chance to trumpet her "experience" in eight years when she runs again.

To Hillary, it ain't about serving America. It's always about serving Hillary.

A few months ago, polls also showed that the majority of Democrats favored Obama choosing Clinton as his running mate. So what?

Obama has been more responsive to the public than Bush, but in the end he still makes his own decisions.

Let's take a trip down primary memory lane shall we?

Hillary to obliterate Iran

I especially like this little ditty. It has many of Hillary's atrocities rolled into one:

Hillary's fear mongering at its finest

We want THIS PERSON to be Secretary of State? The person who his going to have to use diplomacy?

Did we not elect Obama to get away from this BS? Hillary was right about one thing, the world does watch our elections closely. And they don't seem to suffer for primary amnesia like we are.

Hillary for SOS. That is not change we can believe in. :)

Does anyone else find it odd that every Republican, elected or on TV, loves Hillary "war hawk" Secretary of State idea?

Republican praise is a sure way to know a decision is extremely counter to progressive values.