Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ram2008

(1,238 posts)
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:28 PM Sep 2015

Hillary's inability to answer ANYTHING directly is infuriating and will be her undoing.

Time and time again Hillary refuses to be direct with what exactly her positions are, where she stands, or what she plans on doing. She will answer a question like a lawyer in a courtroom and refuse to give anything substantial for fear of being tied down. This amount of scriptedness and inability to actually LEAD will be her undoing either in the primary or the General election.

Her Keystone pipeline non-answer today was absolutely ridiculous, and so was her failure to actually call for more debates, so I did a bit of digging and found a pattern.

On Keystone XL (no this is not the onion):

I have been waiting for the administration to make a decision,” she told a town hall crowd at the Concord Boys and Girls Club in New Hampshire. “I can't wait too much longer. And I am putting the White House on notice. I am going to tell you what I think soon because I can’t wait.”


On Debates:

“I have said from the very beginning I look forward to debating,” Clinton said. “I will certainly show up anywhere the Democratic National Committee tells us to show up. Because I want us to have a good exchange of ideas and to make sure that Democratic voters first, and then general voters to follow, see exactly what we stand for and what our positions are.”


On Glass Steagal:

"I am not interested in just saying there’s one answer to the too-big-to-fail problem," Clinton said. "We have a too-big-to-fail problem still and we have to figure out the best way to address it, and I will be talking more about that. But I am not going to be pointing at any one change and saying, you know, ‘that’ll solve all our problems.’ Because I just don’t think that is an accurate assessment."


On TPP

"...we need to keep upping our game both bilaterally and with partners across the region through agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP. Australia is a critical partner. This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field."

"The president should listen to and work with his allies in Congress, starting with Nancy Pelosi, who had expressed their concerns about the impact that a weak agreement would have on our workers to make sure we get the best, strongest deal possible,"

"There are some specifics in there that could and should be changed. So I am hoping that's what happens now -- let's take the lemons and turn it into lemonade,"


On her server being wiped:

"I don't know how it works digitally... like with a cloth or something?"


On whether or not her husbands crime bill perpetuated racism:

"I do think that a lot of what was tried and how it was implemented has not produced the kinds of outcomes that any of us would want," she said. "But I also believe that there are systemic issues of race and justice that go deeper than any particular law."


On Medical Marijuana:

"I'm a big believer in acquiring evidence, and I think we should see what kind of results we get, both from medical marijuana and from recreational marijuana, before we make any far-reaching conclusions," Clinton told KPCC in July


On NSA spying:

"But I do want you to get the bad guys, because I don't want them to use social media, to use communications devices invented right here to plot against us. So let's draw the line. And I think it's hard if everybody's in their corner. So I resist saying it has to be this or that. I want us to come to a better balance."


The list goes on and on and on... notice a pattern? I'm sure you all can find other cases of this.
168 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hillary's inability to answer ANYTHING directly is infuriating and will be her undoing. (Original Post) ram2008 Sep 2015 OP
OH PLEASE!!!!! bigdarryl Sep 2015 #1
Typical Non-Response billhicks76 Sep 2015 #51
I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt Boomer Sep 2015 #100
I Stopped After Seeing Her Ties To Bush Sr billhicks76 Sep 2015 #109
Heh. SusanCalvin Sep 2015 #136
she can craft the answer that gets the most votes. AlbertCat Sep 2015 #145
Good Hillary type response. Katashi_itto Sep 2015 #117
You got the number one response slot and all you've got is that? nm rhett o rick Sep 2015 #153
7 out of context snippets each logically unworthy of any conclusion sown together to reach another conclusion? Fred Sanders Sep 2015 #2
hardly. she's consistently evasive. it's who she is cali Sep 2015 #4
big Daryl and Fred defend her no matter what. roguevalley Sep 2015 #45
So, where does she stand on the Keystone Pipeline? We know where sabrina 1 Sep 2015 #5
The OP is a logical trainwreck, there is nothing to discuss, which was my point. Fred Sanders Sep 2015 #7
Where does your candidate stand on the Keystone Pipeline? This is an easy sabrina 1 Sep 2015 #12
There are 7 clipped quotes to reach 7 conclusions in the post, and 1 final one, all unconvincing, that is all I am saying. Fred Sanders Sep 2015 #24
There are not 7 conclusions, only 1 ram2008 Sep 2015 #30
Plenty of time until it's too late. Fuddnik Sep 2015 #31
Exactly. SusanCalvin Sep 2015 #137
Thank you. I am completely opposed to the Pipeline and have been since it sabrina 1 Sep 2015 #46
Believe me, I am as passionate about the Keystone pipeline as any other thing. If Clinton comes Fred Sanders Sep 2015 #48
if she is not willing to take a stance on major policy issues questionseverything Sep 2015 #81
+1 BeanMusical Sep 2015 #140
No debates to this point Thespian2 Sep 2015 #106
"...plenty of time for clarity and persuasion." Paka Sep 2015 #93
Well, we know where YOU stand, then...there's still no good reason for your candidate to be vague. Ken Burch Sep 2015 #102
It is defeatist. LuvNewcastle Sep 2015 #120
I dont understand. Bubzer Sep 2015 #55
Post removed Post removed Sep 2015 #71
It's easy to say the OP is a "logical trainwreck" but harder to actually give evidence. Tell us her rhett o rick Sep 2015 #155
Which way is the wind blowing? 840high Sep 2015 #41
+1 leftofcool Sep 2015 #6
She has a loyalty to this administration and really doesn't want to undermine Obama. Laser102 Sep 2015 #29
That is so perfectly logical a thought that I am sure you will be soon be showered with praise. Fred Sanders Sep 2015 #36
I thought her loyalty was JackInGreen Sep 2015 #42
The Constitution? I didn't think any of these issues threaten our Constitution. Laser102 Sep 2015 #60
she is seeking the trust of our votes and refuses roguevalley Sep 2015 #94
And she will captain her ship JackInGreen Sep 2015 #103
. merrily Sep 2015 #130
Jenga!!! bvar22 Sep 2015 #50
+1 cui bono Sep 2015 #80
I don't think loyalty to the administration has a thing to do with this. merrily Sep 2015 #125
Except she's already attacked this administration jeff47 Sep 2015 #92
Bingo. She doesn't want to answer the question. It's that simple and it's obvious. merrily Sep 2015 #126
If her loyalty to the Obama administration prevents her from taking her owwn stances on things, JDPriestly Sep 2015 #101
Bingo. nt SusanCalvin Sep 2015 #146
It doesn't do anything to affect this adminstration for HRC or anyone else running in 2016 Ken Burch Sep 2015 #104
Her opinions don't affect Obama AgingAmerican Sep 2015 #149
Oh plez. That's a terrible rationalization. If she wants to be president she should tell us how rhett o rick Sep 2015 #156
I think the correct spelling is "colander" - you know, the thing with lots of holes in it? erronis Sep 2015 #47
If they are out of context, then you can put them into context for us? Bubzer Sep 2015 #52
So, what are her positions on the aforementioned topics? Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2015 #67
Please post her statements expressing her stance on each of the issues she equivocated on in her JDPriestly Sep 2015 #98
Then please find us her "in context" responses that actually tell us where she stands. I can't rhett o rick Sep 2015 #154
We can add fracking and college tuition to the list in the OP to which she has failed to rhett o rick Sep 2015 #159
Why is she 'putting the administration on notice'?? What does the administration sabrina 1 Sep 2015 #3
It's a use of language that more than equates her with Obama HereSince1628 Sep 2015 #9
It is sort of the perfect non-answer kenfrequed Sep 2015 #10
Well, it makes her look like she doesn't want to tell us where she stands. That's sabrina 1 Sep 2015 #14
Her advisors want to keep her fluid kenfrequed Sep 2015 #20
+100000000000000 azmom Sep 2015 #33
It's a meaningless, tough-sounding slogan n/t arcane1 Sep 2015 #28
I can't believe the interview with Wolf MattP Sep 2015 #8
Hillary has too much class to call anyone a liar. leftofcool Sep 2015 #13
She could stand to use better words now to state her positions the op listed. Bubzer Sep 2015 #56
completely agree ibegurpard Sep 2015 #11
Welcome to Hillary's Waffle House nichomachus Sep 2015 #15
I Was Just Thinking The Same Thing The River Sep 2015 #19
^^^this^^^ & The only thing she doesn't waffle on is war. L0oniX Sep 2015 #25
ROFLMAO SoapBox Sep 2015 #35
Mmmm, policy waffles Fairgo Sep 2015 #65
Thanks for the laugh Depaysement Sep 2015 #95
Assuming you can get in. A lot of the time, there's just no access. merrily Sep 2015 #128
Yet she's the only one cranking out actual policy proposals. SonderWoman Sep 2015 #16
What are her policies on the Keystone Pipeline? On the TPP? On the sabrina 1 Sep 2015 #18
Cue some comment about getting all that information at the debates. Bubzer Sep 2015 #57
I realize that quantum physics and recent quantum chromodynamics theories suggest ChairmanAgnostic Sep 2015 #21
Ah, more insults from the Bernie crowd. SonderWoman Sep 2015 #26
look who's talking. ah, the irony of you of all people cali Sep 2015 #39
You've laid out plenty of insults as well. Bubzer Sep 2015 #61
Yeah ibegurpard Sep 2015 #70
designated martyr MoveIt Sep 2015 #75
Hair shirts for everyone! Scootaloo Sep 2015 #89
Brownie points for cool vocabulary! kjones Sep 2015 #142
I see your fan club is out and about. leftofcool Sep 2015 #90
Ah, your fans are here... Katashi_itto Sep 2015 #118
Oh yeah. Puglover Sep 2015 #124
As best I can recall, during my first few months here, I was timid. Posted a lot of LOLs and K & Rs merrily Sep 2015 #131
Oh, I suspect she's been around more than that Scootaloo Sep 2015 #150
It would be real easy to counter what the "Bernie crowd" is saying by actually giving us some rhett o rick Sep 2015 #158
Lol! beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #27
Yeah. That one is a keeper. sarge43 Sep 2015 #32
! Fuddnik Sep 2015 #37
what a load of garbage ibegurpard Sep 2015 #43
Its easy when industry writes them for you! MoveIt Sep 2015 #74
Huh? smiley Sep 2015 #83
"She's the only one cranking out policy proposals". "He's cranking out policy proposals..." DisgustipatedinCA Sep 2015 #91
What policy questions has Bernie refused to answer? JDPriestly Sep 2015 #105
LOL! merrily Sep 2015 #129
There are no "policy proposals". The OP gives her stands on issues. If you have better info rhett o rick Sep 2015 #157
This message was self-deleted by its author Corruption Inc Sep 2015 #17
Hillary is desperate to avoid debates. backscatter712 Sep 2015 #22
Infuriating to people who already hate her, sure. Some people prefer the GWB "I don't do nuance" DanTex Sep 2015 #23
Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2015 #53
Yes, wanting to hear definitive policy positions is a clear sign of hate. Scuba Sep 2015 #121
She hasn't been told what to think by her owners hifiguy Sep 2015 #34
Sleepwalking through the issues AgingAmerican Sep 2015 #38
However, she is excellent at evolving (aka waffling) and speaks argle-bargle fluently. Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2015 #40
of course, she has to run everything by her marketing team and image consultants. bowens43 Sep 2015 #44
And Goldman. hifiguy Sep 2015 #63
As a supporter of the Fight for $15, I'm furious, for sure Dems to Win Sep 2015 #49
Unkind to HRC. I'm sure she meant that the minimum wage should be higher than $15 in places merrily Sep 2015 #132
The pattern is to consider both sides to be wrong and devise a plan to get both sides to shut up. Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2015 #54
they honestly think this waffling will let them appeal to both sides of any issue MisterP Sep 2015 #58
I have noticed that she doesn't give Duval Sep 2015 #59
There should be no confusion houston_radical Sep 2015 #62
K&R - Great questions. Good OP.. It's esp. disturbing seeing all 7 in one place. -nt- 99th_Monkey Sep 2015 #64
This "deferring to her ex-boss" line is baloney. Jim Lane Sep 2015 #66
i don't understand why this is such a difficult task for clinton elana i am Sep 2015 #68
So just how many things have been listed upaloopa Sep 2015 #69
Just checked the website houston_radical Sep 2015 #73
So she has positions right? upaloopa Sep 2015 #76
Seriously? houston_radical Sep 2015 #78
propaganda site. nuff said cali Sep 2015 #85
None of this bodes well for an HRC presidency. Secretive? Evasive? Dismissive senz Sep 2015 #72
"Secretive, evasive, dismissive." hifiguy Sep 2015 #77
Thanks for that. It's been a long time senz Sep 2015 #84
That's a pretty low bar. hifiguy Sep 2015 #86
Yep he was one of the worst. But even he was better than senz Sep 2015 #115
I've probably read at least a dozen books on Nixon. hifiguy Sep 2015 #166
So you're comparing Hillary to Richard Nixon now? ConservativeDemocrat Sep 2015 #97
Your link is, at least temporarily, unpersuasive. Ed Suspicious Sep 2015 #112
It's fair in some respects hifiguy Sep 2015 #165
The worst aspects of all of the last three administrations put together. The Green Manalishi Sep 2015 #107
Depressing indeed. senz Sep 2015 #116
Did a Google Search on two issues where HRC is mum d_legendary1 Sep 2015 #79
It shows her cowardice and lack of conviction Android3.14 Sep 2015 #82
Passive and indecisive Scootaloo Sep 2015 #87
That is a whopper totally beyond description. hifiguy Sep 2015 #88
Among several big reasons this is #1 for me. Indepatriot Sep 2015 #96
Perfectly Clear portlander23 Sep 2015 #99
Perfect timing, thanks for the laugh! canoeist52 Sep 2015 #108
"I hope that clarifies and that this could be the last word on those words..." sorechasm Sep 2015 #167
It's good politics. Kang Colby Sep 2015 #110
But the nomination doesn't belong to her. Maedhros Sep 2015 #162
She has to catch the fly ball first, and then catch the guy stealing third base. sorechasm Sep 2015 #168
She's like Jello. Try to nail her down. EEO Sep 2015 #111
These don't represent all of her replies but ... Kablooie Sep 2015 #113
You forget what she does say. She thinks Congress is shameful towards women for defunding Planned McCamy Taylor Sep 2015 #114
Yeah, she's all heart... Ino Sep 2015 #119
Lol! BeanMusical Sep 2015 #152
K&R Thanks, ram2008. Scuba Sep 2015 #122
Most issues don't have clear definitive answers. DCBob Sep 2015 #123
here's how you answer then: ibegurpard Sep 2015 #127
Ms. WindFinger von Weathervane. [nt] Jester Messiah Sep 2015 #133
It was a viable strategy when she was running unopposed Babel_17 Sep 2015 #134
This is the kind of thread that turns us against each other Onlooker Sep 2015 #135
I have no problem being "against" Hillary supporters. Maedhros Sep 2015 #164
Her non-answers reveal her positions. I can answer pretty accurately for you. NorthCarolina Sep 2015 #138
This ^ AlbertCat Sep 2015 #147
Kick and R BeanMusical Sep 2015 #139
...and don't forget! disndat Sep 2015 #141
She's saying what most politicians would say to avoid confrontation 4dsc Sep 2015 #143
Shhhhhhhhhh! AlbertCat Sep 2015 #144
I'll Have More To Say On This........... NonMetro Sep 2015 #148
Almost like the tRump Faux pas Sep 2015 #151
Yes a couple more are college tuition and fracking. Her responses to both were rhetoric. rhett o rick Sep 2015 #160
It may be infuriating to many rock Sep 2015 #161
she's running a perfect pre-internet campaign: all image and no substance yurbud Sep 2015 #163
 

billhicks76

(5,082 posts)
51. Typical Non-Response
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 03:05 PM
Sep 2015

That's all you got? Trust me this is a major reason people in our own party can't stand Hillary. Have you ever seen so much antipathy toward a candidate on our side? I haven't and it's because so many of us realize she isn't actually on our side. Her inability to give a direct answer is a hallmark of someone who doesn't tell the truth.

Boomer

(4,159 posts)
100. I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 10:36 PM
Sep 2015

It's not so much that Clinton is evading the questions. She's waiting for the focus group results so she can craft the answer that gets the most votes.

 

AlbertCat

(17,505 posts)
145. she can craft the answer that gets the most votes.
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 11:27 AM
Sep 2015

Who cares what she really thinks? As long as the answer panders.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
2. 7 out of context snippets each logically unworthy of any conclusion sown together to reach another conclusion?
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:32 PM
Sep 2015

And have folks checked the calander?

The depths to which some will go......it is amusing, have to grant you that.

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
4. hardly. she's consistently evasive. it's who she is
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:35 PM
Sep 2015

And the you're just bashing bull doesn't work with me, so save it.

roguevalley

(40,656 posts)
45. big Daryl and Fred defend her no matter what.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:47 PM
Sep 2015

Trump says he'll figure it out when he's president too.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
5. So, where does she stand on the Keystone Pipeline? We know where
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:36 PM
Sep 2015

Sanders stands. Let's start the debate, we don't need to wait for DWS to 'allow' debates, we have enough information from the candidates to do it without DWS.

I can defend my candidate's position on this issue.

Here's your chance to debate on behalf of YOUR candidate.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
7. The OP is a logical trainwreck, there is nothing to discuss, which was my point.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:39 PM
Sep 2015

Being outraged all the time means no one is going to care when a real outrage happens.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
12. Where does your candidate stand on the Keystone Pipeline? This is an easy
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:48 PM
Sep 2015

issue to take a stand on for any Democrat.

What do you mean 'there's nothing to discuss'?? Are you seriously of the opinion that voters don't CARE about this issue, particularly Dem voters and Independents, and yes, even some Republicans?

I want to see this discussed, it matters to this country. If you don't, why? Why is it not important to you? Are YOU for it or against it?

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
24. There are 7 clipped quotes to reach 7 conclusions in the post, and 1 final one, all unconvincing, that is all I am saying.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:06 PM
Sep 2015

Though, I might add the Keystone pipeline is an abomination.

I have written several posts on the carbon impact of heavy Alberta tar sands crude being transported across America in vast quantities and now available for export.

I am not pleased that Clinton is not more clear in this, but there is plenty of time for clarity and persuasion.

I can dig my posts up for you if you like, I am very familiar with the topic and it is a very important issue, politically and environmentally.

What is your position?

ram2008

(1,238 posts)
30. There are not 7 conclusions, only 1
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:21 PM
Sep 2015

And that is of Hillary obfuscating and refusing to take a solid stance on controversial issues.

Fuddnik

(8,846 posts)
31. Plenty of time until it's too late.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:21 PM
Sep 2015

She's just trying to run out the clock, before committing to anything. It's going to backfire on her badly. It already is.

SusanCalvin

(6,592 posts)
137. Exactly.
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 10:22 AM
Sep 2015

Much the way we were told - here - to wait until TPP was finalized (until it was too late) before discussing it.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
46. Thank you. I am completely opposed to the Pipeline and have been since it
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:49 PM
Sep 2015

began, I have followed the issue closely and nothing convinces me there is anything good about this at all. In fact, it is a regression of where we ought to be going regarding our energy policies.

So we agree on this, and think you for your response. I hope every Democratic candidate will use the microphone and press coverage they now have to educate the public on this.

Only one person can win the nomination, but ALL candidates can use their candidacies to get issues like this into the public consciousness and even if the don't win, they will have done a lot of good by doing so.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
48. Believe me, I am as passionate about the Keystone pipeline as any other thing. If Clinton comes
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:54 PM
Sep 2015

out supporting it I am going to have to re-evaluate, but I think she agrees fully with Obama....she does at least need to say that soon.

In the meantime I believe she is not "waffling" - a loaded term, inappropriately used - she is not willing to take a major policy position while her ex-boss still has 18 months in his term of President.

I am of the belief that is the respectful and honorable and graceful thing to do, and she does it despite the criticism she knew that would attract.

That is my opinion.

Rugby World Cup opening game is on.

Talk to you later!

questionseverything

(9,631 posts)
81. if she is not willing to take a stance on major policy issues
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 07:01 PM
Sep 2015

she should not be running for dog catcher not alone president

Thespian2

(2,741 posts)
106. No debates to this point
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 11:24 PM
Sep 2015

The Clown Car wins the media wars, by hogging press coverage...Seems that DWS, that putrid piece of perversity, keeps the Democrats as hidden as possible...is she working to elect a few more of her Repukian friends?...

Paka

(2,760 posts)
93. "...plenty of time for clarity and persuasion."
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 09:00 PM
Sep 2015

Like when? After she gets elected? These are questions I want answered before I vote.

 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
102. Well, we know where YOU stand, then...there's still no good reason for your candidate to be vague.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 10:52 PM
Sep 2015

She keeps acting as if the country is permanently right-of-center and that we can only slip a few minor changes in on the side when nobody's looking. She sounds(and has no reason to sound)as if she can't accept that it's even possible for progressives to win the argument or set the terms of debate.

It's a defeatist tone, and nobody gets elected by sounding defeatist.

LuvNewcastle

(16,820 posts)
120. It is defeatist.
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 07:17 AM
Sep 2015

It's the same sort of mealy-mouthed weaseling we used to hear from Dems in the 1980's because they were too fucking scared to stand up to the GOP. These are different times and we deserve better candidates.

Bubzer

(4,211 posts)
55. I dont understand.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 03:41 PM
Sep 2015

Last edited Sat Sep 19, 2015, 11:52 AM - Edit history (1)


How exactly are:

~ Keystone XL, an attempt to utterly destroy the environment for addition profits for the vile and anti democratic Koch Brothers... who will in turn ensure that women and PoC continue to get oppressed,

~ Debates, the gold standard for determining the worthiness of a candidate is being arbitrarily set by someone with a known bias, and inappropriately attempting to influence the outcome of the vote. This is the epitome of being undemocratic.

~ Glass Steagal, the repeal of which opened the floodgates to allow all the actions that precipitated and caused the recession. An issue which cuts to the lifeblood of this country.

~ TPP, the single most dangerous consideration that has come to light in a very long time. It has the capability of making the recession experienced through the repeal of Glass Steagal seem like a pleasant dream filled with clouds and fluffy bunnies by comparison.

~ NSA spying, performing illegal spying. Possibly manipulating gathered data to discredit people they don't like. Certainly gobbling up all your phone and internet usage data, without even so much as a "by your leave".

all issues that don't deserve real outrage?

Response to Bubzer (Reply #55)

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
155. It's easy to say the OP is a "logical trainwreck" but harder to actually give evidence. Tell us her
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 01:29 PM
Sep 2015

stands on issues.

Laser102

(816 posts)
29. She has a loyalty to this administration and really doesn't want to undermine Obama.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:20 PM
Sep 2015

I understand that. Taking positions against the administration before they decide some of these issues may be seen as opportunistic. She can't win with some can she?

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
36. That is so perfectly logical a thought that I am sure you will be soon be showered with praise.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:24 PM
Sep 2015

Why are so many folks at DU so eager to swallow any load presented?

JackInGreen

(2,975 posts)
42. I thought her loyalty was
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:36 PM
Sep 2015

Supposed to be to the Constitution and the people she would represent....may that's just me thinking wrong though.

Laser102

(816 posts)
60. The Constitution? I didn't think any of these issues threaten our Constitution.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 03:56 PM
Sep 2015

As far as loyalty to the American people goes, she has a long history of serving her country and the people of this country. I have never understood the narrative being pushed by the media, repugs, and others of her being untrustworthy. The email stuff is an example of this. Turns out everything she has been saying has turned out to be true. Even Bernie Sanders has defended her. She will answer all of these questions. I have no doubt about it. Just not in others time frame.

roguevalley

(40,656 posts)
94. she is seeking the trust of our votes and refuses
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 09:03 PM
Sep 2015

to give an answer to a question that is imperative to those she wants to trust her. It is asinine for her to not give a forthright answer yes or no about the topic. It just reinforces the perception that she lies and is in thrall to the 1%. WHERE IS SOMEONE TO TELL HER TO STOP!? She has the worst advisers here. It is just so same again.

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
50. Jenga!!!
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 03:03 PM
Sep 2015

I could not have said it better!

Hillary's "loyalty to the administration" concerns her way more than any loyalty to the majority of America's Working People, OUR future, or the Environment!


In case "The Centrists" here have wondered what we mean by Putting Party above Principle,
your post is a perfect example

That is WHY I support Bernie.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
125. I don't think loyalty to the administration has a thing to do with this.
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 09:11 AM
Sep 2015

She does not want to answer the question.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
126. Bingo. She doesn't want to answer the question. It's that simple and it's obvious.
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 09:12 AM
Sep 2015

The attempt to paint that over as nobility is laughable and transparent.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
101. If her loyalty to the Obama administration prevents her from taking her owwn stances on things,
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 10:48 PM
Sep 2015

She probably should not be running.

 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
104. It doesn't do anything to affect this adminstration for HRC or anyone else running in 2016
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 10:54 PM
Sep 2015

to let the electorate know what their OWN positions now. It's not reasonable to expect the voters to just "trust" that the candidate will be good in office if she or he hasn't said anything specific during the campaign.

Get elected vague, stay vague in office.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
156. Oh plez. That's a terrible rationalization. If she wants to be president she should tell us how
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 01:35 PM
Sep 2015

she stands. It wouldn't hurt the current admin at all. She is avoiding commitment and trying to slide into the nomination without having to actually discuss issues. She is afraid of debates, not that I blame her.

The reason she is afraid to discuss issues is that she is on the side of the 1% on the issues.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
98. Please post her statements expressing her stance on each of the issues she equivocated on in her
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 10:31 PM
Sep 2015

statemenrts in the OP.

I'd like to know where she stands on those important issues. I'd also like to hear her plan for continued funding and expansion of Social Security.

She is not communicating as well with voters as Bernie does.

She does not seem to have thought her philosophy or ideas through before announcing she would run.

I realize that she does not have the experience with voting on public policy that Bernie has. She was only on the line in the Senate forless than eight years while Bernie served in Congress forat least 24 years plus years makiing deecisions as mayor of Burlington.

But still, she owes it to voters to let them know her policies on all the issues possible.

She does not have the experience we need in the White House. Her inability to give straightforward answers on voters' questions about issues that are so commonly discussed in the news is troubling. What would she do if elected if she has so much trouble figuring out what she thinks about basic, controversial issues.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
154. Then please find us her "in context" responses that actually tell us where she stands. I can't
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 01:27 PM
Sep 2015

find anything that tells anything concrete about her stands on issues. She is very evasive and if you don't agree, it should be easy to prove.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
159. We can add fracking and college tuition to the list in the OP to which she has failed to
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 01:41 PM
Sep 2015

provide clear ideas where she stands. If you don't agree, show us her proposals.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
3. Why is she 'putting the administration on notice'?? What does the administration
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:34 PM
Sep 2015

have to do with HER decisions?

I don't get it, do they think we are stupid?

We KNOW what the right decision on the Keystone Pipeline has to be.

How about LEADING for a change?

How about not blaming other people for decisions you make, such as her finger pointing at Biden re the Credit Card bill?

I agree, it IS infuriating and frankly if my candidate were doing this he wouldn't be my candidate.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
9. It's a use of language that more than equates her with Obama
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:42 PM
Sep 2015

it suggests her opinion is important enough to change the outcome

If you can sell people that stuff, you'll look important

kenfrequed

(7,865 posts)
10. It is sort of the perfect non-answer
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:46 PM
Sep 2015

It sounds challenging but does not reveal the position from which she is challenging. It maintains that she has a definitive position without revealing it while giving the impression that it may be in contrast to the administration.

But yes, it is a typical non-answer.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
14. Well, it makes her look like she doesn't want to tell us where she stands. That's
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:51 PM
Sep 2015

all I get from it. And in light of her previous answer 'I'll tell you after the election', it's a perfect way to solidify for voters that this is not someone they can trust to LEAD on an issue as important as this is.

kenfrequed

(7,865 posts)
20. Her advisors want to keep her fluid
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:56 PM
Sep 2015

The whole point is they want to be able to collect as much campaign revenue from the petrol industry while keeping her position as amorpheous as possible for the general election.

The problem is that it reveals a deep stupidity of the pundit class in both taking their base for granted and failing to realize the importance of turning them out on election day.

And that is just looking at it in terms of strategy.

In terms of good public policy and looking out for the environment (and ourselves) it is even more absurd. No one should be in favor of this pipeline and we should be sinking tons of money and resources into developing renewable resources.

MattP

(3,304 posts)
8. I can't believe the interview with Wolf
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:42 PM
Sep 2015

Why wouldn't she just call Carly a liar, that interview made me want to put my head through a wall

leftofcool

(19,460 posts)
13. Hillary has too much class to call anyone a liar.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:49 PM
Sep 2015

She will eventually do so but it she will use better words. Carley won't even know what hit her.

ibegurpard

(16,685 posts)
11. completely agree
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:47 PM
Sep 2015

Doesn't want to take the heat for a position so she avoids taking a stance. This contributes to the untrustworthiness impression. I sure don't trust her.

The River

(2,615 posts)
19. I Was Just Thinking The Same Thing
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:56 PM
Sep 2015

Every time I hear her non-answers I feel like I've just walked into a Waffle House.

Fairgo

(1,571 posts)
65. Mmmm, policy waffles
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 04:48 PM
Sep 2015

I like my policy like I like my hashbrowns...scattered, smothered, and covered.

 

SonderWoman

(1,169 posts)
16. Yet she's the only one cranking out actual policy proposals.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:51 PM
Sep 2015

And Bernie is king of deflection and redirecting to only what he wants to talk about.

Although, to O'Malley's credit, he's cranking out policy proposals too.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
18. What are her policies on the Keystone Pipeline? On the TPP? On the
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 01:56 PM
Sep 2015

horrific, women and children destroying Welfare Reform bill which as far as I know, though it's hard to tell, she still supports?

What is her position on a National HC system? What policies has she put forth to support this?

Where does she stand on forever WAR? What policies has she put forth to end the neocon policies that have so destroyed so many countries leading to the horrific humanitarian crisis we are witnessing as refugees flee those nations targeted by neocon policies?

What policies has she put forth on any of these issues?

How about Glass Steagal?

How about deregulation of the Media?

How about the Private Prison industry?

I have no idea where she stands on anything other than the 'safe' issues such as abortion which all Dems must take a position. We KNOW that, but what about all the other important issues?

ChairmanAgnostic

(28,017 posts)
21. I realize that quantum physics and recent quantum chromodynamics theories suggest
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:00 PM
Sep 2015

That we live in an incredibly small bit of the multiverse, but may I inquire in which one you reside?

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
39. look who's talking. ah, the irony of you of all people
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:26 PM
Sep 2015

whingeing on about others being insulting.

Bubzer

(4,211 posts)
61. You've laid out plenty of insults as well.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 04:05 PM
Sep 2015

I suppose we can blame that on the entire Hillary campaign right?

merrily

(45,251 posts)
131. As best I can recall, during my first few months here, I was timid. Posted a lot of LOLs and K & Rs
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 09:27 AM
Sep 2015

Not a lot that was controversial or confrontational. When people come in with both guns blazing, it makes me wonder.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
158. It would be real easy to counter what the "Bernie crowd" is saying by actually giving us some
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 01:40 PM
Sep 2015

data. What are her wonderful proposals you keep telling us about?

smiley

(1,432 posts)
83. Huh?
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 07:10 PM
Sep 2015

I don't know how you can type that with a straight face. If she was cranking out policy proposals we should be able to answer every one of the points made in the OP. Yet, not a single person responding in support of HRC is able to do this. Sanders on the other hand has bombarded us with actual policy proposals. And O'Malley, well I haven't heard much that didn't sound like a Sanders policy proposal.

Have a great day!

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
91. "She's the only one cranking out policy proposals". "He's cranking out policy proposals..."
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 08:23 PM
Sep 2015

I think this is the part where I rest my case.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
105. What policy questions has Bernie refused to answer?
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 11:13 PM
Sep 2015

He does not answer questions that are calculated to get him to bad-mouth other Democrats or talk about non- issues.

He answers policy questions at least on the big issues like the Keystone pipeline, too big to faiil banks, etc.

Huge difference.

Bernie has been answering voter's questions on Ed Scultz and Thom Hartmann for years now. He is used to answering voters' questions.

Hillary is good at raising money from rich people.

My mother used to say that you get good at things you practice.

Bernie has been practicing thinking about issues and answering voters' questions and he is good at it.

Hillary has been giving speeches and raising money from wealthy people. That is what she is good at.

I want a president like Bernie who focuses on the issues and the people.

How well a candidate schmoozes for money with big donors doesn't impress me. It is irrelevant to the job of governing.

I want Bernie to win in great part so that we can get rid of the big money and corruption in our politics.

Shameful that a candidate can't answer the basic questions that Hillary can't seem to answer.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
157. There are no "policy proposals". The OP gives her stands on issues. If you have better info
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 01:38 PM
Sep 2015

then share it please.

Sen Sanders tells us loud and clear where he stands on issues.

Clinton has yet to commit on any of the key issues.

Response to ram2008 (Original post)

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
22. Hillary is desperate to avoid debates.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:00 PM
Sep 2015

She still remembers Obama eating her alive on the debate floors in 2008, and because she knows her positions on issues like the NSA or TPP are ones her base and the American voters won't like, the last thing she wants is a fair debate.

She knows she'll get called out on her lies, she knows she'll get shellacked by Bernie, so she's having her toady Debbie Wasserman-Schultz block as much debating as possible.

And it's sinking the entire party. The Republicans get to spew their lies and propaganda unchallenged, while the Democrats sit silent and cede ground to them.

When the primaries are over, if Hillary is the nominee, the right-wing and the corporate media wurlitzer are going to turn the Swiftboating machine on her, and she will not be able to shrug it off. She'll try the same lame tactics John Kerry tried, and get pasted.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
23. Infuriating to people who already hate her, sure. Some people prefer the GWB "I don't do nuance"
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:03 PM
Sep 2015

approach, sure, but those are mainly Republicans.

Response to DanTex (Reply #23)

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
121. Yes, wanting to hear definitive policy positions is a clear sign of hate.
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 07:48 AM
Sep 2015

Damn, Dan, is that all you got? No wonder your candidate is tanking.

 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
34. She hasn't been told what to think by her owners
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:23 PM
Sep 2015

about some things.

And as for the things about which she has been informed of their position, disclosure would reveal her to be the abject tool of the oligarchy that she, in truth, is.

 

AgingAmerican

(12,958 posts)
38. Sleepwalking through the issues
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:25 PM
Sep 2015

She even calls herself a 'moderate'. She can't even take a stand on what she believes philosophically.

 

Dems to Win

(2,161 posts)
49. As a supporter of the Fight for $15, I'm furious, for sure
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:58 PM
Sep 2015

The Fight for $15 leaders had a convention a few months ago. Hillary called in and said "I want to be your champion."

Then, a few weeks later, someone asked her directly if she supports a $15/hour minimum wage. She said that she wasn't sure that $15/hour was right for the entire country.

Steam rolling out of my ears. She wants to be the champion of the Fight for $15 movement but won't commit to their goal? I wish I could tell her to just go away.

There is no where in the country a person can pay all their bills and live a dignified life without public assistance on anything less than $15/hour.

The phrase 'working poor' is an abomination. People who work full time should not be poor!

Bernie gets this, so he will certainly get my vote.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
132. Unkind to HRC. I'm sure she meant that the minimum wage should be higher than $15 in places
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 09:33 AM
Sep 2015

like NYC and Boston, where the COL is so high.




(I really crack myself up sometimes.)

MisterP

(23,730 posts)
58. they honestly think this waffling will let them appeal to both sides of any issue
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 03:52 PM
Sep 2015

it's "covering all the bases" and "triangulating" and only turns off a few DU-style wonks, with their unrealistic expectations and "third of a third" status on the political spectrum, which runs neatly Greens-Dems-Pubs, bounded by the Dems' left and the Pubs' right

this happened when they tried to "make race an issue": it'd be easy, it'd "hurt him with certain sectors," it'd keep the discussion tied up in rhetoric rather than facts; one way or another they can keep him at 49.9%, he'll slip up on something, he'll say something to turn off either the Deer Hunters for Jesus or Brady types (who're always seen as "single-issue voters&quot , or either the pro-Palestine or -Israel side

they think they're fighting just another campaign

 

Duval

(4,280 posts)
59. I have noticed that she doesn't give
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 03:53 PM
Sep 2015

clear answers on issues. However, she seems to be getting better at it, since Sanders' stand on issues is resonating so well with so many.

 

houston_radical

(41 posts)
62. There should be no confusion
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 04:15 PM
Sep 2015

Hillary, like her husband, like Obama, like the pack of blue-dog democrats that infest the US Congress and Senate are centrist DLC democrats - THEY ARE NOT LIBERAL

Centrist = (Who is funding her campaign) + (What she says, which is covered very well in this piece)

There is no mystery

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
66. This "deferring to her ex-boss" line is baloney.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 04:52 PM
Sep 2015

I want to know what each candidate, if elected, would do about that major issue that the next President will face in early 2018. My problem is that I don't know know what the question will be. All I have to go on is their records with past decisions and what they say now -- about their general principles and about how they would handle specific decisions that we can ask them about.

It's likely that the Keystone issue will be resolved, one way or the other, before January 20, 2017. That doesn't matter. Hearing a specific answer from each candidate is valuable to get an idea of how they'll handle other issues.

I completely agree with the OP about Clinton's tendency toward vagueness and platitudes. I also think that, in the long run, she's doing herself no favors. Her biggest problem isn't that millions of Democrats might disagree with her about the Keystone pipeline. Her biggest problem is that millions of Democrats, including many who plan to vote for her anyway, see her as being excessively "political" -- of saying whatever will advance her candidacy rather than fighting for her genuine convictions. Any specific statement about Keystone would lose her some votes from the people who disagree with her but would get her more votes from people who would gain respect for her.

ETA: After I wrote the above, I read today's electoral-vote.com and found agreement:


Clinton to Give Keystone Pipeline View Soon


Yesterday in New Hampshire, Hillary Clinton said that the construction of the Keystone Pipeline is one of her favorite issues—but she wouldn't say whether she was for it or against it. In a nutshell, this is her problem with a sizable chunk of the Democratic Party. She is too cautious and many people think she doesn't really stand for anything. It is like saying: "Wait, when I get the focus group results back, I'll let you know what I really think." She could probably defend either a yes or a no and get some credibility with the left wing of her party. If she is for it, the argument is that making the U.S. more self sufficient in energy means fewer wars in the Middle East about oil. That would sell. If she is against the pipeline, she could say it is for environmental reasons. But not having an opinion is where Sen. Bernie Sanders trumps (sorry) her. Sanders is against it and has always been against it. Clinton doesn't seem to realize that her sitting on the fence doesn't really help her.

elana i am

(814 posts)
68. i don't understand why this is such a difficult task for clinton
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 04:56 PM
Sep 2015

for progressive/populist dems there is only one right/logical answer to these questions. these are questions that she should be able to answer succinctly and with NO hesitation.

ok maybe i do understand. her indecisiveness and prevarication implies progressive/populist principles are not going to be her answer.

upaloopa

(11,417 posts)
69. So just how many things have been listed
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 04:57 PM
Sep 2015

that will be her undoing.
I know you won't do it but correctrecord.org has a lot of Hillary policies. No you won't find any Bernie slams there just slams at repubs.
Or a neutral site is http:\\www.ontheissues.org/Hillary_Clinton.htm

 

houston_radical

(41 posts)
73. Just checked the website
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 05:39 PM
Sep 2015
Keystone, Glass Steagal, email, crime bill, NSA spying are not mentioned
No position on the debates appears

Medical marijuana
Medical marijuana now; wait-and-see on recreational pot. (Jul 2014)
Medical marijuana maybe ok; states decide recreational use. (Jun 2014)

TPP
TPP must produce jobs, raise wages, & protect security. (Apr 2015)
Chief advocate for Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). (Aug 2014)
TPP agreement creates more growth and better growth. (Aug 2014)

http://ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Free_Trade.htm#21
Clinton saw herself in the middle of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) during her husband's presidency. She supported deals with Oman, Chile and Singapore during her tenure in the Senate. As secretary of State, she was a chief advocate as talks commenced surrounding the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), one of the largest worldwide deals in recent history

http://ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Free_Trade.htm#23
At the State Department, Clinton didn't address specifics in the negotiating process, but told attendees at an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum conference that she hoped it would "create a new high standard for multilateral free trade."

'nuff said
 

houston_radical

(41 posts)
78. Seriously?
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 06:12 PM
Sep 2015

no positions on most of the issues in the piece, ok for Medical Marijuana, but not good for TPP. I don't see how this is positive for her.

 

senz

(11,945 posts)
72. None of this bodes well for an HRC presidency. Secretive? Evasive? Dismissive
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 05:23 PM
Sep 2015

of the people's right to know -- and thereby dismissive of the people themselves?

Very bad traits for a president. That, along with the enemies lists, brings to mind another president from the early 1970s.

Do we really want four years of this for the country? Can we afford it?

 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
77. "Secretive, evasive, dismissive."
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 06:11 PM
Sep 2015

I've seen a POTUS like that before. Hmm let me think a minute,

oh yeah, it was THIS guy! Who was "not a crook." As if.

 

senz

(11,945 posts)
84. Thanks for that. It's been a long time
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 07:19 PM
Sep 2015

since I've observed him, and now, with a lot more experience of the world, I can see traits that I wasn't consciously aware of back then -- like his self-pity and defensiveness and...a lack of maturity that I had never noticed before. What a sad, pathetic person; how did he ever become president? A lot of ego, undoubtedly. So even though H shares some traits with him, I don't think she's anywhere near as self-pitying, defensive, and immature.

Wow. I like her better than Nixon! That's nice to know.

 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
86. That's a pretty low bar.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 07:37 PM
Sep 2015


But she's more personally arrogant than Nixon was. Nixon had a lifelong inferiority complex, exacerbated by the Kennedys just because they were who they were, and his capacity for self-pity was boundless. The best "psychological" biography I ever read about the Trickster was Fawn Brodie's "Richard Nixon: The Shaping of His Character." A deeply researched and damning indictment if ever one there was.
 

senz

(11,945 posts)
115. Yep he was one of the worst. But even he was better than
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 03:09 AM
Sep 2015

Dubya.

You must be quite a politics enthusiast if you read books on Tricky Dick. But of course it is interesting to find out what makes these people tick. Maybe I'll see if the local library has Brodie's book.

As for Hillary, it's doubtful if there is an honest biography. Seems like they'd be either hatchet jobs or hagiographies. Bernie would make an interesting subject for a thoughtful biography. Rare person, almost unbelievable. We are so lucky to have him at this time. Hope we don't blow it.

 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
166. I've probably read at least a dozen books on Nixon.
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 05:24 PM
Sep 2015

I find the pathology of his personality fascinating. I was politically precocious and an RFK supporter when I was 12 - devastated when he was killed. Just how someone like Nixon, with his rabidly paranoid jealousies, monumental insecurity,sheer meanness, personal awkwardness and absolute untruthfulness could ever become President and then get resoundingly re-elected was a deeply intriguing puzzle to me, and I became something of an amateur Nixonologist. I think it all started with Hunter Thompson's coverage of Watergate in Rolling Stone.

Nixon was at least an interesting specimen. His Chimperial Fraudulency was just a cretinous and sociopathic asshole, and a boring one at that. Cheney reminds me of no one so much as Martin Bormann.

ConservativeDemocrat

(2,720 posts)
97. So you're comparing Hillary to Richard Nixon now?
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 10:24 PM
Sep 2015

In other words, you're not only making disingenuous arguments, you're making reprehensible ones as well.

This is what I've come to expect from Sanders supporters on the D.U. Nothing but hate filled vomit.

But you'll of course be on a hair trigger if some Hillary supporter anywhere in the country points out Americans refuse to vote for socialists. Explaining basic facts about the US electorate is an "attack".

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

Ed Suspicious

(8,879 posts)
112. Your link is, at least temporarily, unpersuasive.
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 12:16 AM
Sep 2015
Under Maintenance
The site is currently unavailable due to routine system maintenance.
We are sorry for any inconveniences this may have caused. The site should be available again shortly.
Em manutenção
O site está atualmente indisponível devido à manutenção rotineira do sistema.
Lamentamos o inconveniente. Em breve, o site estará disponível novamente.
メンテナンス中
このサイトは、定期的なシステムメンテナンス中のため現在利用できません。
ご不便をおかけして申し訳ございません。 間もなく、また利用できるようになる予定です。
 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
165. It's fair in some respects
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 05:14 PM
Sep 2015

The obsessive, decades-long pursuit of the office, the willingness to say anything and make any deal to advance herself, the secrecy and tendency to be dismissive of what others regard as legitimate concerns.

There are undeniably significant similarities.

The Green Manalishi

(1,054 posts)
107. The worst aspects of all of the last three administrations put together.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 11:24 PM
Sep 2015

TPP, no Glass-Stegall or any financial reform, the Military Industrial Complex unfettered and with a blank checkbook. Knowing that supporting the ACA, which is really a huge gift to the insurance industry and some pandering, er, recognition of LGBT and POC concerns will be reason enough for any of us to vote for her instead of any repub.

d_legendary1

(2,586 posts)
79. Did a Google Search on two issues where HRC is mum
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 06:18 PM
Sep 2015

Common Core: Republicans and some Democrats are against it and if she says she's for it then she might piss off everyone. Apparently she was proud of No Child Left Behind before she was against it so who knows.

Wall Street reform: Besides Glass-Steagall there is no word if she favors more stricter Wall Street reforms such as breaking up the banks or stricter punishment for White Collar crime.

I don't trust Clinton since too many people don't know where she stands but are quick to defend her. Its hard to get behind someone who has to be informed what she should be standing for.

 

Android3.14

(5,402 posts)
82. It shows her cowardice and lack of conviction
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 07:04 PM
Sep 2015

But at least she put the White House "on notice".

What a total loser.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
87. Passive and indecisive
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 07:59 PM
Sep 2015

Surprising, for someone who - ah - "brought peace to northern Ireland"

...that claim is never not gonna make me laugh.

 

Indepatriot

(1,253 posts)
96. Among several big reasons this is #1 for me.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 10:08 PM
Sep 2015

No firm stand = no conviction = nebulous relationship to truth.

sorechasm

(631 posts)
167. "I hope that clarifies and that this could be the last word on those words..."
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 07:25 PM
Sep 2015

Thanks for the laugh portlander23!

 

Kang Colby

(1,941 posts)
110. It's good politics.
Fri Sep 18, 2015, 11:54 PM
Sep 2015

No need to reveal her hand to the rethugs. The nomination belongs to her, so at this point she is focusing on the GE, which makes sense. Why waste the political capital now?

 

Maedhros

(10,007 posts)
162. But the nomination doesn't belong to her.
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 02:18 PM
Sep 2015

It belongs to the Democratic electorate, who may decide to bestow it on her.

sorechasm

(631 posts)
168. She has to catch the fly ball first, and then catch the guy stealing third base.
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 07:30 PM
Sep 2015

She's playing an old game, in a new ball park, with new players, and new rules. She doesn't seem to get that.

Kablooie

(18,572 posts)
113. These don't represent all of her replies but ...
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 12:21 AM
Sep 2015

she is a consummate politician which means that she may offer answers which allow multiple interpretations and in this election that quality could easily become a detriment.

McCamy Taylor

(19,240 posts)
114. You forget what she does say. She thinks Congress is shameful towards women for defunding Planned
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 02:02 AM
Sep 2015

Parenthood. She says that Muslims should not be targeted based on their ethnicity or religion. Every time someone is oppressed, Hillary is out there front and center defending their rights. And she does it bluntly. The public sees and remembers. She defends the defenseless. Children can't even vote, meaning she is not doing it for votes. She is doing it from the heart. And oh, how Americans love politician with heart.

Ino

(3,366 posts)
119. Yeah, she's all heart...
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 07:15 AM
Sep 2015
Women & children will get their fair share of whatever's left over after the corporations & banks & rich cash in their IOUs for all the cash they're throwing at her campaign.

She's all heart...




"Every time someone is oppressed, Hillary is out there front and center defending their rights."
Including gay marriage.... after 2013... finally.

She's all heart, and no one else ever defends the oppressed.

DCBob

(24,689 posts)
123. Most issues don't have clear definitive answers.
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 08:34 AM
Sep 2015

Last edited Sat Sep 19, 2015, 09:11 AM - Edit history (1)

I know many like simple yes/no, black/white, up/down but most issues are not that way.. they are usually in the grey area... unless you are not a very complex thinking person.

ibegurpard

(16,685 posts)
127. here's how you answer then:
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 09:16 AM
Sep 2015

"I'm always open to new and better information but I believe that..."

When people know what your values are they will trust you even when you make decisions they might disagree with.

Babel_17

(5,400 posts)
134. It was a viable strategy when she was running unopposed
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 09:54 AM
Sep 2015

When no one else was speaking up for our party's principles, as a candidate, her reticence on many issues wasn't noticeable enough to hurt her candidacy. It was arguably bad for the state of discourse in our country, like the decision of DWS to limit debates, but that's not the specific issue here.

This is the crux of the matter, the HRC campaign is like a huge monolith, and showing a marked limit in its flexibility, and ability to respond to developments. It's like they've evolved to deal with certain expected challenges, and according to a plan, and that's it. It's a moribund campaign. It's like the Energizer Bunny, it makes noise, and it has motion, but it lacks anima (life force)*.

*... it's a terrible dream.
It's depressing to
dream about that rabbit.
It's got no brain, it's got no blood.
It's got no anima.
It just keeps banging on those
meaningless cymbals endlessly,
and going and going and going.


http://www.moviequotedb.com/movies/grosse-pointe-blank/avgrating/page_3.html


 

Onlooker

(5,636 posts)
135. This is the kind of thread that turns us against each other
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 10:04 AM
Sep 2015

My husband supports Hillary. I support Sanders. I know that no matter what both of us will vote for the Democratic nominee because they are both good and the alternative is truly dangerous. But, this is the kind of thread that generates ill-will and does nothing but dampens enthusiasm. At this point, it seems to me DU is doing more harm than good for the Democratic nominee. We need to find a way to respect each other.

 

Maedhros

(10,007 posts)
164. I have no problem being "against" Hillary supporters.
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 02:31 PM
Sep 2015

They are working hard to try and elect a candidate who:

* Helped George W. Bush by voting for the Iraq War Resolution
* Helped plan the atrocity in Libya, then gloated over the result
* Supports institutional racism by installing private prison industry lobbyists as fundraising bundlers in her campaign
* Undermined American workers by helping draft the TPP
* Supports the Keystone XL pipleline
* Stakes out an aggressive posture via Iran by suggesting Reagan was not belligerent enough

I vehemently oppose all of these things, and I'll be damned if I'll just roll over and say "Aw, shucks, they aren't so bad I guess..." just in the name of having a kumbaya moment on DU.

If they want to be against Bernie supporters because we're trying to elect a candidate that supports the opposite of these things then, in the words of a once-respected Democratic President, "I welcome their hatred."

 

NorthCarolina

(11,197 posts)
138. Her non-answers reveal her positions. I can answer pretty accurately for you.
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 10:35 AM
Sep 2015

On Keystone XL pipeline: She's 100% for it. If she was even the slightest bit against it, knowing where the public stands on the issue, she would ABSOLUTELY proclaim her position. Since she's silent, you know she's for it. That was an easy one.

On Debates: DWS has H's back and will take the heat for fewer debates. That frees H to publicly call for more debates, even though fully aware it ain't gonna happen...right Debbie Wink*Wink. That was an easy one.

On Glass Stegal: If she was FOR re-instituting it, given the mood of the voters, she would be screaming it from the hilltops. She isn't, so she is obviously against even the premise of Glass Stegal. That was an easy one.

On TPP: She helped to draft it, Bloomberg News praised her monumental efforts in single handedly being a major force behind it as SoS. It is ludicrous to even consider for a brief moment that she "may" be against it. That was an easy one.

On Server being wiped: "You mean like with a cloth or something"? Did you happen to catch the lameness of her response? In 2015 she has absolutely NO IDEA what the term "wiped the server" means? Really? She did it, she knows it, she had her reasons, and if you think she had "no idea" then you are simply a buffoon. That was an easy one.

On Bubbas crime legislation: Didn't you get the memo, it was not the legislation BUT "how it was implemented". Little old us had absolutely "no idea" it would be used against PoC to ruin millions of lives. If she thought it was a failure, or that it should be legislated away with...she would emphatically say so because it would improve her lot with the voters. She won't say that, so the answer is obvious "hubby's policies are working as intended". That was an easy one.

On Medical Marijuana: 'We need more evidence'. Do we really? TPTB have informed her it ain't gonna happen...not now. She is obediently dodging the subject. She may actually be personally FOR this one, but she will nevertheless, succumb to the masters bidding "NO MEDICAL MARIJUANA". That was an easy one.

On NSA Spying: Again, given the mood of the country on this issue, if she was against such actions by the NSA, she would have already stated it publicly. That was an easy one.

 

AlbertCat

(17,505 posts)
147. This ^
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 11:51 AM
Sep 2015

Even if "NorthCarolina" is wrong on some of these.... it's HOW IT APPEARS!

IOW... we are left to make up our own minds on her positions because she keeps tap dancing.


It reminds me of how she lost the last primary mostly.

disndat

(1,887 posts)
141. ...and don't forget!
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 10:44 AM
Sep 2015

The email mess - H.C.'s mother of all evasions with her tech helper invoking the 5th.

 

4dsc

(5,787 posts)
143. She's saying what most politicians would say to avoid confrontation
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 10:49 AM
Sep 2015

but in this era of confrontation her business as usual approach is not going to work. Sorry for her.

Faux pas

(14,585 posts)
151. Almost like the tRump
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 12:19 PM
Sep 2015

and all his (h)uge secret plans. Any thinking person wants answers with specifics for craps sake.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
160. Yes a couple more are college tuition and fracking. Her responses to both were rhetoric.
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 01:47 PM
Sep 2015

Where Sanders says that qualifying students should get free college paid for from taxes from the 1%, Clinton said that no student should have to go in debt and that growing the economy would help (note growing the economy helps the 1% more than anything).

Where Sanders is against fracking altogether, Clinton has softened her pro-fracking slightly by saying she might phase in banning some fracking on some land (government). That is a nothing statement if I've ever heard one.

rock

(13,218 posts)
161. It may be infuriating to many
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 02:11 PM
Sep 2015

But she goes her own way. It's what actually endures many of us to her.

yurbud

(39,405 posts)
163. she's running a perfect pre-internet campaign: all image and no substance
Sat Sep 19, 2015, 02:23 PM
Sep 2015

just avoiding major gaffes doesn't win the prize anymore

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Hillary's inability to an...