Discussion for article #245021
Of course he is. They run in the same circles.
6 Likes
A good friend who threatens to run as a spoiler if the voters don’t nominate her. An offer you can’t refuse, eh?
Don’t expect any Wall Street regulation from Clinton; no Glass Steagall, just an empty gesture at “something better” that fails, so she can say, you know, she “tried”.
7 Likes
God she’s nauseating.
3 Likes
Much like Ruth Bader Ginsberg owing to her friendship with Antonin Scalia.
4 Likes
I don´t have quite so visceral a reaction, but I am awfully tired of the ¨Life Styles of the Rich and Famous" aspect to the Clintons. Vonnegut said something along the lines of Republican Pols are rich people who profess no sympathy for the poor, whereas D pols are rich people who do express sympathy, but do little else. The Clintons are living embodiments of that slam.
9 Likes
The naivete here is astounding. I can’t believe anyone would be foolish enough to believe Sanders doesn’t have friends on the other side of the aisle.
8 Likes
Oh, do tell Plucky. I am always willing to be enlightened by someone with a more sophisticated understanding of American politics. I have learned recently that Berniebots are purple-faced shouters who will be entirely to blame if Hillary eventually loses. This apparently means that HRC´s campaign is such a well-run ship that it could not possibly be the source of her failure to inspire the masses. I´m looking forward to learning more!
BTW, the ¨naivite¨ that you see is not an inability to imagine that one might be friends with someone with whom you politically disagree, but rather that one could be so politically tone deaf as to call an oligarch ¨a good friend¨ in an election where some people want to address the obscene distribution of wealth in this country.
4 Likes
No, don’t say that! She’s pure like Bernie and Elizabeth Warren. They would never be friends with people with whom I have ideological disagreements! Never!
3 Likes
It doesn’t take a sophisticated understanding of American politics to understand that people who disagree politically can still be close friends. All that requires is a very basic, even child-like, understanding of human beings.
6 Likes
Call me naive, but I don’t believe that Hillary and Bill Clinton eat middle-class American children for breakfast. However, it’s completely tone-deaf statements like “He’s a good friend of mine…” that reinforces my suspicion that HRC’s got the retail political instincts of Martha Coakley.
What she should have said is something along the lines of this: “He’s a good friend of mine, but the reality is that a vote for Michael Bloomberg in November of 2016 is a vote for the Republican Party, and as a Democrat, I will not support or play any part in that.”
9 Likes
Please see my addition to my reply, as you seem to be misreading the reaction to her statement.
@bluestatedon: thank you, this is my view precisely.
That was a diplomatic response from a former diplomat. Why all the snark? Hillary Clinton is very likely to win the nomination, and if you holier-than-thou leftwingers don’t straighten up and start supporting her, you deserve what you get. I know, I was originally from New York City, where there was left, lefter and leftest. Best thing I ever did was get out of that place and go where there were other realities (not to mention excellent affordable housing!).
“He’s a good friend of mine,” Clinton said. “And I’m going to do the best I can to make sure that I get the nomination and we’ll go from there.”
This certainly sounds like Hillary’s pretty certain that Bloomberg is not going to run if she wins the nomination. Was this hashed out behind closed doors? Who knows?
Well, that’s jumping ahead of things. A brief response was the rignt one at the time, not a position statement. He hasn’t even announced a run. It is a veiled threat to Bernie, but why is that Clinton’s responsibility?
3 Likes
“Best thing I ever did was get out of that place and go where there were other realities…)”
Are you writing a mystery?
Oddly enough, I do support Clinton. If there was a primary here in Michigan tomorrow, I’d vote for Clinton without hesitation. That doesn’t mean I have to be slavishly approving of everything she says or does. Unfortunately, I see no evidence of any sort that either she or her campaign “brain trust” think it’s to her advantage to make sure that as many Sanders supporters as possible vote and contribute to her if she gets the nomination.
4 Likes
The center of gravity of elite opinion is basically liberal on social issues, and while more than willing to pay lip service to issues of economic justice, elites will offer band-aids to mitigate the effects of gross income/wealth inequality rather than do anything to fundamentally change the distribution of the the fruits of the economy.
The Democratic Party is basically in line with elite opinion, with perhaps some disagreements on the size of the band-aids needed.
The Republican Party is flailing, ironically, because they are schizophrenically trying to align themselves with scattered segments of populist opinion while crying that band-aids are expensive.
Bloomberg is already, effectively, a Democrat.
1 Like
Doesn’t change a thing. Because she also said she was going to do everything she could to get the nomination. She’s focused on winning the nomination, which is what she should be doing. Whether it’s Blomberg or Trump or McAfee threatening to run third party, her focus should be on the current race. And I’m sorry, but the overwhelming majority of Democratic voters will never hear this comment and certainly won’t give a shit if they do. How many times has Sanders referred to McCain or some other batshit Republican as his good friend? This is just silly.
4 Likes
Are you seriously asserting that you don’t see any negatives to a Clinton statement that appears to be blithely unconcerned about a Bloomberg attempt to sabotage a Sanders candidacy?
4 Likes