To me she is arguing against actually needing change, we just need to go back to Clinton 90s, if you are so partisan you think the Clinton era is the best we can do, i guess this will work for you.

Also her body language is so aggravated and angry, she almost seems pissed that anyone would even suggest not going back to the 90s is the best idea.

I don't really know what you think is so strong about this?  I think her plea for her candidacy was way better.

Edwards Beats Hillary Again.

Why is it ok to call Edwards angry but it's sexism to say the same of Hillary.  

Some Democratic partisans will worry that this will remind people of why they hate Hillary. It will remind them of her negatives. It could make them think to themselves, do we want to go through it all again with the Clintons. Maybe we need change.  And "change" leads them to think about Obama.

your patients health care thing didn't pass, and barack, you voted for the horrible energy bill. actions speak louder than words.

"Making changes is not about what you believe..."

I think this is part of the problem that Hillary Clinton has politically and as a leader, she seems to have separated her most deeply held beliefs, which I think are deeply progressive, from what she thinks is practical and accomplishable.  Certainly you can make change through hard work, but when you separate that from your core beliefs, your accomplishments will reflect it.

She talks about the National Guard and reserve members who have access to healthcare, but what she doesn't mention is the quality of that health-care, which if it's anything like the rest of America, or those who have to deal with the VA hospital system, is abysmal.  So she's made incremental changes, and helped to get people something in this atmosphere which is controlled by the Bush White House, and the obstructionists on the Republican side, even though the Democrats have a majority in Congress, but what she got them was something that they should've had already.  So instead of nothing, National Guard members are now getting what they shouldn't have been deprived of in the first place, what was their rightful due for serving this country.  Come on Hillary, can't you do better than that?

"I'm running on 35 years of change."

Sorry Hillary, you haven't been in government service for 35 years, unless you count your time in the White House, as the wife of the president, and as the wife of the governor of Arkansas.

You know I don't really like the idea of the first woman president, of Hillary's age especially, riding into the White House on the coattails of her husband and his record as governor and president, as she did in the Senate.  If Hillary had actually put in 35 years of government service actually changing things and getting things done, and earning her way to the White House, I think I would find it far easier to get behind her. But to me she has not only proven nothing with her time in the Senate, but quite the opposite, she's shown herself to have become a loyal member of an established system which is broken and dysfunctional.  

I want the first woman president to have actually earned her way into that office, and be willing to shut down the whole damned government in taking a stand against something like the invasion of a sovereign nation and sending this country into a trumped up war, when she knew it was entirely unnecessary.  If Hillary had done that, and lost her Senate seat in the process, I think that I would have a real reason to get behind her.

"I'm running on having taken on the drug companies, and the health-insurance companies, taking on the oil companies."

Some nice rhetorical flourish here, and yet what have you accomplished in your time in the Senate by taking on all of these companies, a few crumbs for the American people, but no real change.  What did we all gained by way of your advocacy, very little or nothing, isn't that so Hillary?

"We don't need to be raising false hopes of our country about what can be delivered."

The argument over change is ridiculous and I'm tired of it.

This debate helped no one, just reaffirmed people's beliefs.