Meet the Caucuser – 3

Caucusgoer: Susan Webster

Age: 47

Candidate: Hillary Clinton

Hometown: Norwalk (about 10-15 minutes outside of Des Moines)

Candidate in 2004: Howard Dean, but wasn’t living in Iowa for the ’04 caucus.

Why Clinton?

“I think that it is going to be a horrible campaign. The Republicans have proven that they will leave no stone uncovered to find things to smear people with, and Senator Clinton has all her stones turned,” says Webster, “and I thin that’s critically important to understand that in this campaign.

One of Webster’s biggest concerns is health care, and she thinks Clinton has laid the groundwork to make a change. “I think her ability to work with the existing power structure in the healthcare industry -- even though I don’t like it -- will just blow them away. I think she’s taken the time and has built those relationships and has a program that’s really going to work.”

In terms of LGBT issues, Webster has a very practical outlook on marriage equality. “I get why the major candidates can’t all come out for more than civil unions, which we know is a separate and unequal solution,” she explains. “It’s a no-win issue for most politicians right now, but I’m sure that Senator Clinton will use the bully pulpit to help educate.”

A Second Choice? (In the Iowa Democratic caucus, if your candidate does not win the support of at least 15% of the people at your caucus site, he or she is not considered “viable,” and you must choose another candidate.)

Webster says John Edwards would be her second choice. “Edwards polled better against all the Republicans head-to-head [nationally],” says Webster of her runner-up.

Then why not make him your first choice? “I think the Clinton strategy is more sophisticated than any of the others,” she says. “Hillary gets criticized for being calculating and cold and then she gets called a politician, and I just put up my arms and go, you just described the job she’s running for… I want someone who is very thoughtful, very calculated, very strategic, and a politician. It’s a political job -- the last guy we elected sounded like he was fun to have a beer with, and look where we are.”

Iowa’s Political Culture

Webster understands some of the other states wanting to get into the primary mix earlier, but she also thinks Iowans take their envied position to heart. “Iowa sits in a unique position, and it makes us a lot more powerful nationally than I think people would hope,” she acknowledges, “but people here take this so seriously and pay so much attention to it and go out in horrible weather to seek these different candidates. We’re really concerned about how these candidates will do nationally. We really think at the national level.”

Comments

[DC]

Susan, thank you thank you thank you. We need a president like Hillary after 8 years of GW Bush. Thank you sooooo much for voting for the best candidate! Love 'ya from Texas!

[Cheryl]

I don't understand supporting Senator Clinton. She was beside Bill for the DOMA and Don't Ask, Don't Tell. You can say she didnt' sign them but in this campaign the former President Clinton hasn't hesitated to say what his wife will do, even mentioning names of people who say they weren't asked. She believes the federal government should leave decisions on the rights of the LGBT community to the States. Recent facts show that if a State recognizes civil unions no other State has too. So you get married in one State and then go to another and too bad. Doesn't the Senator see this as a form of discrimination or is it okay because we have the option of moving to a State that will recognize our relationship?
Then there's the fact that if a State legally recognizes your relationship and gives you the full rights of a married couple in that State you still get none of the federal rights of the married man and woman. Your estate does not have the tax exemption at death, you get no Social Security benefits from you deceased spouses work record, nor do any of your children and many others that there is not enough space to mention. I think you get the idea.
Point is what real civil liberties are there if the decision is done at only the State level? Isn't that just another lost opportunity? After all States can and do pass laws now but many are tied up in court and wouldn't a federal law greatly reduce or eliminate that?
Senator Clinton is an attorney and I believe is playing the politician's spin game. President Clinton played it well and got the support of the LGBT community and when he didn't need the votes or financial support anymore his true colors showed and I feel I was fooled once so shame on me and can't buy into it. She is just dumping the issue on States instead of facing it head on. We're not going away any more than the 'illegal' immigrants but she is more focused on giving them federal rights and leaving us behind once again.
I'm leaning to your second choice, John Edwards. I read his website and find his has the discrimination and civil rights side of the issue that I think needs to be in the Oval Office.