Nope, absolutely not, she had every right to run. Anyone who wants to run, should be able to run.
I think that knowing her high negatives and that she was under FBI investigation, that it was a selfish decision on her part to run because her risk of losing was high and the consequences of that happening were horrible. As we have learned.
Many of us did. And then we worked hard and spent a lot of money to try to help her win in the general.
Regardless of the reasons, the fact is she had very high negatives in the public opinion polls. I am not saying they were for legitimate reasons, just what the facts are.
Fact is that even today her approval rating is still lower than Trump’s.
You can argue that the facts should not be what they are or wish that they weren’t, but that does not change them.
She thought that she could overcome her high negatives, but she couldn’t. Now we are paying the price.
And who cares what Colin Powell did? She called her use of a private email server “dumb.” Her word, not mine.
Yes, I understand that you can’t bear anybody criticizing Hillary while she is on her $14 million book tour. Or criticizing Obama while he is getting his Wall Street pay-off at $400,000 per speech.
Too bad.
Meanwhile:
“The Democrats are in their deepest congressional rut since the class of 1946 was elected, and hold the fewest governors’ mansions–15–since 1922. Of the 98 partisan legislatures in the U.S., Republicans control 67. During Barack Obama’s presidency, Democrats lost 970 seats in state legislatures, leaving the party’s bench almost bare. The median age of their congressional leadership is 67, and many of the obvious early presidential front runners will be in their 70s by the 2020 election.”
So you can keep defending the architects of this mess, but I won’t.
The nation should have a set of laws dictating what you can do and how much you can make doing it. Maybe decree what job you’ll have once leaving home. We’ll call it the “China System”. Make Obama the first person subject to it. This freedom crap doesn’t cut it.
Actually, there have been (still are?) laws regulating lobbying before and after holding federal office. Obama even had rules like that in the White House when he had to pretend to care.
But $400,000 per speech is a very nice payoff for bailing out Wall Street with billions in taxpayer dollars and not prosecuting a single financial crime from the sub-prime mortgage scam that caused the great recession.
The US Federal Reserve and central banks around the world took steps to expand money supplies to avoid the risk of a deflationary spiral, in which lower wages and higher unemployment led to a self-reinforcing decline in global consumption. In addition, governments enacted large fiscal stimulus packages, by borrowing and spending to offset the reduction in private sector demand caused by the crisis. The US Federal Reserve’s new and expanded liquidity facilities were intended to enable the central bank to fulfill its traditional lender-of-last-resort role during the crisis while mitigating stigma, broadening the set of institutions with access to liquidity, and increasing the flexibility with which institutions could tap such liquidity.[269]
This credit freeze brought the global financial system to the brink of collapse. The response of the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank, the Bank of England and other central banks was immediate and dramatic. During the last quarter of 2008, these central banks purchased US$2.5 trillion of government debt and troubled private assets from banks. This was the largest liquidity injection into the credit market, and the largest monetary policy action, in world history.
During the last quarter of 2008, these central banks purchased US$2.5 trillion of government debt and troubled private assets from banks.
Obama inauguration date, first term: January 20,2009
"The Senate has approved the $700 billion financial rescue plan in a just two days after the bailout failed in the House.
The bailout was approved in a 74-25 vote. Both presidential candidates, Sens. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, and John McCain, R-Arizona, voted in favor, as did Democratic vice presidential candidate Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware."
So there’s that.
Where are the articles about all the financial crimes that the Obama Administration prosecuted?
So, you’re reduced to trying to come up with (not) clever witticisms?
The numbers don’t lie:
“The top 1% of families saw their income grow by 37% between 2009 to 2015, from $990,000 to $1.36m. The incomes of the other 99%, however, grew by just 7.6% during that time – from $45,300 in 2009 to $48,800 in 2015.”
That was by design.
Obama Mission accomplished. No wonder the bankers are so happy. First they profited from their crimes, then they got taxpayer bailouts, and then they did not have to go to jail.
So all good for the top 1%! And now who do YOU think is paying Obama $400,000 per speech?
Not the poor and middle class. We got screwed by the bankers and Obama.
But Obama is a Democrat so all good, right? The actual results of his policies don’t matter to you, apparently.
@tena
I am glad that you’re happy with things. Some of us are furious, okay?
There are some neat tricks in life that often insulate a person from such travails. First you attend school. Pay attention. Read a lot. Bust your ass to get good grades. Scrap and fight to get into a good college.Then repeat the same process all over again with the reading and paying attention and getting good grades.
It’s fricking amazing the 6 figure jobs to be had taking those simple steps.