Discussion for article #241725
Uh, Hillary, you’re in the pocket of Wall Street, so I think that I’ll take a Democratic Socialist over a sell-out Democrat. I was a small business owner for many years and Sanders more accurately captures my feelings. Oh, and thanks for this. I was really waffling over supporting you. I’m feeling the Bern!
13 Likes
Good line: "“And I don’t think we should confuse what we have to do every so often in America, which is save capitalism from itself.” That’s what we do need to do. I doubt we will have a socialist overnight revolution or “mass movement” such as Sanders wants (and I wonder a bit at the obvious egomania of imagining he could inspire it…but oh well). Short of that, keep Democrats in power longer. Besides some of the commissar wannabes in socialists I know are not terribly pleasant as a prospect…/
3 Likes
Although his response about emails was pure brilliance, as was his response to BlackLivesMatter, his performance thus far has solidified my support for HRC. She’s whooping his ass all over this stage. Hell, so is Martin O’Malley.
3 Likes
Misleading headline. She said nothing like that. I expected more than clickbait from TPM when I paid for a prime membership. (And I’m supporting Bernie)… I just think TPM should hold itself to higher standards than this kind of provocative silliness. Please. Think, before you put words in people’s mouths.
9 Likes
I politely disagree. Hillary has been very good indeed, but so has Bernie. While he’s had a hiccup or two, his passion is shining through and his message has been very strong. I, too, am feelin’ the Bern!
7 Likes
I’m not, nor is social media. Its actually kind of comical how deeply out of their depth the rest of the field is compared to HRC.
3 Likes
I agree that the whole Democratic field is excellent. But Hillary is part of the Wall Street problem and she isn’t addressing this. How is she going to deal with this?
5 Likes
She’s talking about it right now.
1 Like
“I never took a position on Keystone until I took a position on Keystone.” - HRC
And she only just took a position on Keystone very recently, so not really a good stance for her to take considering how long Keystone has been an issue.
5 Likes
Why did she need to take a stance earlier? I like that she waited out of respect for the president. It wouldn’t have made a damn bit of difference if she’d nixed it a year ago or a month from now.
4 Likes
Wow! I’m just struck with the level of detail over policy that all of the candidates are talking about. What a contrast with the clown show that is the Republican Party.
7 Likes
Agreed! My boyfriend just made a similar comment, saying it’s refreshing to hear actual issues being addressed and not just the fear-mongering that is ever-present amongst Republicans.
Plucky, her stance on Keystone, TPP, BLM, etc., etc., all seem to be closely tied to the evaporation her finger experiences while held up in the wind. You will forgive the casual observer for questioning the depth of her dedication to progressive issues, despite the mastery of her delivery.
4 Likes
Of course it would have made a difference! A strong voice coming out in support of environmental protections and opposing Keystone? Yes, that would have been a very good thing. As she hasn’t been SoS for a while now, there was no need to wait for anybody, including the President.
3 Likes
I wish people would also respect that she was a member of the current administration and there are things she simply doesn’t want to go against the president, especially issues on which he’s laid out his position. For example, she gave the administration as much time as possible before taking a stance on Keystone until she could wait no longer. Also, as a member of the administration, it was her JOB to support TPP whether or not she actually supported it completely. She served the president, not HRC.
As for BLM, she’s been the most vocal supporter of BLM on the stage. She was the first to take private meetings with them and she never made the mistake of saying, “all lives matter”. But I don’t understand how she’s somehow impure for having moved her stance on BLM but Sanders is pure as the driven snow where it concerns guns and, well, BLM.
3 Likes
No, it would’ve been something that made liberals feel all fuzzy, but wouldn’t have done a damn thing to move the needle one way or the other. It would’ve been utterly pointless, except to give the MSM another issue over which to salivate and scream that HRC is thumbing her nose at the president.
1 Like
Plucky, her tendency toward shifting emphasis on her positions depending on political circumstances predates her term as SOS. I don´t doubt that her heart´s in the right place; I do doubt her inclination to vote her conscience (e.g., her vote for the Iraq War, despite ample evidence at the time as to why that was a terrible idea).
2 Likes
I don’t doubt that some really great, smart Democrats voted to give their president the authority to go to war in Iraq. I don’t doubt that many thought they were doing the right thing, Clinton included.
Frankly, I have no problem with people shifting their positions. It’s what intelligent people do. They change their minds as more information and evidence prove their previous position wrong. It’s exactly what Sanders is doing on guns.
3 Likes
I can see the headlines tomorrow: “Who won the Democratic Debate?”. Well as far as I’m concerned, the Democratic Party won! Suck it Republicans.
7 Likes