**This is an op-ed piece and is no way affiliated with The BHS Blueprint’s collective views, but is a personal view of the authors**

It is no secret that Hillary Clinton and her husband, former president Bill Clinton, have developed what is supposed to be an unstoppable political machine. In this election cycle, pro-Hillary Clinton super PACs have raised $41,207,059 to support her in her White House run. The campaign itself has raised in excess of $115 million. These contributions are used to run pro-Hillary television ads, pay chief campaign staff, and to spread her message. Her message is everywhere, but it fails to resonate. Why? Clinton’s problem isn’t the availability of her message, it’s not even its content, it’s her. People may be more receptive to her ideas if they could trust her, but Hillary Clinton does not possess the trust of many Americans. In a December 2015 poll, only 35% of Americans said that Clinton was trustworthy. In New Hampshire exit polls, 5% of democrats that thought honesty and trustworthiness was the most important factor in a candidate selected her on their ballots, compare that with Bernie Sanders’ 93%, and it becomes nearly laughable.

Secretary Clinton has many faults, some of which should disqualify her from attaining the presidency.

In 2004, Hillary Clinton said of gay marriage, “I believe marriage is not just a bond but a sacred bond between a man and a woman.” Ten years prior to even that, she supported the Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as the union between one man and one woman. However in 2013, she reversed her opinion, which is curiously close to the time when the talk of 2016 presidential runs began. It’s also curious that on the day gay marriage was legalized, she acted as if she had been leading the charge. Tweeting, “Proud to celebrate a historic victory for marriage equality—& the courage & determination of LGBT Americans who made it possible. – H,” doesn’t seem to befit someone who had supported a law that made gay marriage illegal on a federal level.

She’s also changed her view on her vote for the Iraq war. As a Senator, Clinton voted for the war in Iraq. While running in 2008, she stood by that vote, refusing to call it a mistake. However, the former Secretary of State has reversed her opinion, saying in her 2014 book Hard Choices, “I thought I had acted in good faith and made the best decision I could with the information I had. And I wasn’t alone in getting it wrong. But I still got it wrong. Plain and simple.” I have no doubt that she does feel that she got it wrong, and many congresspeople got it wrong. But her unwillingness to admit so in 2008 hurt her then, and she shouldn’t be forgiven now.

Early 2000s Hillary seems to be a totally different person than the one running for president today. Her views shift faster than the wind to coincide with what is popular opinion in the U.S. Now, people can change their stances, but most people don’t just go along with the latest opinion polls.

Hillary has stated that her plan on Wall Street is tougher than Bernie Sanders’ plan. However, pesky little things called “numbers” and “math” get in her way. Bernie’s plan would tax 0.5% on stock trades, 0.1% fee on bonds, and a 0.005% fee on derivatives trading. Clinton, in contrast, has a plan that only focuses on “high-frequency trading” which is a program trading platform that uses powerful computers to transact a large number of orders at very fast speeds. While this tax would increase revenue, it would come nowhere near competing with Bernie Sanders’ plan, which would generate billions in taxes. Saying that she’ll be tougher may sound good, but facts are not on her side.

Hillary Clinton was the untouchable candidate in 2008, and she lost. Now, eight years after that defeat, it seems like more of the same. The people can’t trust her, and she’s given good reason for the people to be wary. When she was asked about if she’d been truthful with the American people Clinton said, “I’ve tried to, always. Always.” It’s nice to know she tries, but trying definitely does not mean succeeding. And she hasn’t succeeded. Every politician will embellish and lie, that’s become an unfortunate truth in politics, but Hillary has made her share of wildly false statements over the years. In 2008, she untruthfully stated that then-Senator Obama wanted to “bomb Pakistan,” something that was not nearly representative of his views at any time. Secretary Clinton has also lied about being fired upon by snipers in Bosnia when she was First Lady, a claim that couldn’t be verified by any sources (Brian Williams, anyone?). These are just two examples, but her best effort has obviously not been good enough before; why should anyone believe her now?  
Hillary Clinton has not been honest with the public she claims to serve. Ever. Yet, she expects people to want to put a dishonest, self-serving, lifetime-bureaucrat in the country’s highest office (unfortunately, those types of people make up the majority of candidates running in this election cycle). Clinton should not ascend any further in the ranks of politics. The presidency should be a seat reserved for those with actual convictions and beliefs, something that the former Secretary just doesn’t have.