General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPlease say no to Hillary Clinton in 2016!
It seems she is already the nominee in the eyes of the media. But there are so many reasons she should not be the democrats nominee. Unless we are satisfied with the status quo and i dont think we'd be here if we were happy with how things are going.
First off she is part of the 1% and part of the problem.
She is a supporter of free trade, reagonomics, the federal reserve, the drug war, the prisons for profit, the police state,
She voted for the wars in iraq and afghanistan.
She is for US globalism and the US acting as the world police.
She has been living off the public payroll for more than 20 years. She is a washington insider and nothing is going to change under her presidency.
We need somebody from outside the beltway. Somebody with new ideas and somebody with the courage to follow through on the vision of hope. A person who sees the change this country needs and is willing to strive for the dream of freedom and equality.
Hillary is part of an old generation and an old way of thinking. It is time for the country to rise above to a new level of enlightenment. We could make life wondeful for every citizen in this country we just need the courage to make the change.
We need somebody that will fight for a living wage for all full time employees. We need somebody that will get universal health care. We need somebody that will stop the redistribution of wealth to the top. That will stand up for workers rights. Unions. Small businesses. Local goods and services, national companies. Alternative fuels. Zero point energy. Public utilities, better infrastructure. Treasury printing its own money. Disbanding the fed and paying the insterest back to the people where it belongs.
Who is this person. I dont know but there has to be somebody better than Hillary.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)People who haven't been born yet will invent time travel so they can have the privilege of voting for her.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)lewebley3
(3,412 posts)I was middle class after Bill and Hillary got elected
They were successful for most of the American people,
Unemployment was African Americans in country was
down to low single digits.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)I didn't get the memo.
QuestionAlways
(259 posts)Is she the most progressive possible candidate, no, once again. But the most progressive Democratic candidates have said they will not run if she runs or they will have to change their registration in order to run as a Democrat.
But she will be different from the Republicans on woman issues, gay rights, helping children and families to survive with an in tact safety net, higher minimum wage, etc. But she will not bring wholesale changes in basic economic relationships which would scare the 40% of moderate third way democratic and independent voters who are necessary to win elections. She is by far the strongest candidate we have at this time, even if it is only to break the glass ceiling and make history as we did in 2008.
But if that is not enough, think of the Supreme Court, which is the only realistic way Citizens United will be overturned, With a more progressive court the 2016 election will effect american history for the next 20 years.
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)lewebley3
(3,412 posts)Check the polls she has all the support right now, if she runs on
Obama record, and Obama is out there with her she cannot lose.
Also with Sherri Brown from Ohio as VP, Howard Dean as DNC Chair!
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)Sherrod Brown would make a great VP...and a great President after following Hillary into the White House!
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)I like the way she fights, she won Calf, New York, and all the blue states,
Obama caucus states. More democrats voted for her in primary than him.
She never quit, she has been a democrat most of her life time.
obxhead
(8,434 posts)She began political life as a Republican and has continued that mindset throughout her entire political career.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)She only was republican when she was young, when the GOP
was liberal, and GOP was a big tent.
Republican use to be liberal, Nixon started the EPA, they also
used to be for planned parenthood: and as bad Regan was to
this country re raised the cap on SS. Republican always supported
unemployment Bfs.
Hillary has given most of her life to the democrats.
lark
(23,099 posts)Hillary is WAY too corporatist for my taste and I'd love to be able to vote for Bernie or Elizabeth instead. However, if neither of those 2 win the nomination, would you vote for another Bush or for Mittens? Hell no, I hope I can say with confidence. She may not reverse the sucking up of money by the 1%, but she won't undo SS or Medicare, won't end abortion, and could make things better for the working class by raising the minimum wage.
She's not my first choice, but she's not batship RW crazy, so I will vote for her if she's the Democratic nominee. Hoping I get to vote for someone I really want to be president, but prepared to vote for the "not as bad" choice if not.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)Question 8. Do I have to register as a Democrat, Republican, Independent or some other party in Vermont?
Answer: No. There is no party registration in Vermont.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Hillary Clinton's leading role in drafting the TPP
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101667554
Hillary Clinton and Trade Deals: That Giant Sucking Sound
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016101761
Hillary Clinton Cheerleads for Biotech and GMOs
http://www.democraticunderground.com/112772326
Dissecting Hillary Clinton's Neocon Talking Points - Atlantic Interview
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017209519
NYTimes notices Hillary's natural affinity toward the neocons.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025205645
Hillary Clinton, the unrepentant hawk
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024876898
More from Hillary Clinton's State Department: The fascistic TISA (Trade in Services Agreement)
http://m.thenation.com/blog/180572-grassroots-labor-uprising-your-bank
How Hillary Clinton's State Department sold fracking to the world
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251376647
Hillary Clinton Sides with NSA over Snowden Disclosures
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101695441
On the NSA, Hillary Clinton Is Either a Fool or a Liar
http://m.thenation.com/article/180564-nsa-hillary-clinton-either-fool-or-liar
Corporate Warfare: Hillary Clinton admits role in Honduran coup aftermath
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025601610#post29
The Bill and Hillary Clinton Money Machine Taps Corporate Cash
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025189257
Hillary's Privatization Plan: TISA kept more secret than the TPP
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014829628
Hillary Clinton criticizes Obama's foreign policy 'failure'; strongly defends Israel
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014867136
Some of Hillary Clinton's statements on Social Security.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024379279
Hillary Clinton's GOLDMAN SACHS PROBLEM.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025049343
Ring of Fire: Hillary Clinton - The Perfect Republican Candidate
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017209285
How Americans Need Answers From Hillary Clinton On TPP, KXL, Wall St & More
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017181611
Hillary Clinton Left Out By Liberal Donor Club
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025809071
Why Wall Street Loves Hillary
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016106575
Hillary Clinton: Neocon-lite
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101684986
Interactive graphic of Hillary Clinton's connections to the Forbes top 400 (Follow link in post)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025824981#post9
Nyc72dem
(63 posts)when she was up against Obama and I'll be saying no again!! 🏉😄
Jakes Progress
(11,122 posts)will you vote then?
The description above sounds a lot like Obama. But you won't get to choose between his brand of third way and hers. He can't run again. If you have been happy with Obama, you will be happy with Hillary.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)We don't want a choice between two Republican mindsets and if Hillary is the "Democratic" candidate that's what we'll have.
And no real liberals are happy with Obama and they won't be happy with Hillary either. That's why we are saying no to Hillary. We don't need another moderate republican president such as Obama. If you wonder why I say that just check my last journal entry. He calls himself that.
Jakes Progress
(11,122 posts)I'm not a fan of third way either. My problem is the invective flung at Hillary for the same positions and actions that are praised when Obama does them. I don't think candidates are what we should be arguing now. That is the politics of personality. It is too easy to demonize this man or that woman without regard to what they really do. We should be arguing policy. The policy of this "alternative" to Hillary campaigned as a progressive and administered an executive branch that was something to the right of richard nixon.
That said. We won't get a choice. Hillary will likely be our candidate. I think it better to trap her into progressive positions during the campaign and hope that she might be less willing to ignore her promises. Didn't work with Obama, but, hey. Citizens united just made public what was already happening. Our candidates will be chosen by others.
Color me cynical.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)Jakes Progress
(11,122 posts)there would be a difference between Hillary's first term and Obama's third, you are lightly informed and easily swayed.
But you seem to be a positive and happy person. That is a good thing. Go with that. I am not to positive or happy with what has happened with my party.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)Go Hillary GO!!!
Cleita
(75,480 posts)her fan. There is better and we have to get behind them.
marym625
(17,997 posts)From the moment she voted for the war. Actually, before that but that was the nail in the coffin for me
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)I said no to her in 2008.
I will do the same in 2016.
marym625
(17,997 posts)Where did you get it? I love it! !!
marym625
(17,997 posts)Please? Pretty please?
Skinner will make it one of the set ones if you share it with him.
It's great!
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Slap a ".jpg" on the end of that and you've got the image. Please feel free to submit it to the DU smilie fairy for inclusion in the pile 'o smilies.
marym625
(17,997 posts)Thank you so much!
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)access to the full information they needed before the vote, which is what changed HIS mind, and that some of them didn't go look at that information, Hillary being one of them, that sealed it. It told me she wanted to be able to say she believed the lies. That was a huge deception.
So, no, I will not be supporting her.
marym625
(17,997 posts)And still that vote will piss me off. How could little old me know there were no WMD but the Senate didn't? Huh? How? Someone please explain that to me.
Fucking lying pieces of shit money, power hungry asswipes. Weak, spineless, murdering bastards.
Arrrggghhh!!!!
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)Saved a lot on my adjective allocation for the month.
None of the information was even secret, it was readily available on the TV, newspapers, internet, etc...
marym625
(17,997 posts)Haven't done that in a while. But I think about what we did......
We should be on our hands and knees apologizing, paying restitution, rebuilding on our dime and prosecuting the main culprits.
Sorry. I can't think about this without flipping out.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)marym625
(17,997 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)marym625
(17,997 posts)Means a lot coming from you!
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)marym625
(17,997 posts)marym625
(17,997 posts)I truly can't even think about what we have done without blowing a gasket
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)... or in this case, an UNprincipled stand.
Jakes Progress
(11,122 posts)dislike our president.
I'm sick of those kinds of those kind of politicians too.
Jakes Progress
(11,122 posts)for the war was terrible.
But conducting and expanding the war and the bush surveillance and the drone war is okay-dokey.
Not a fan of her record either. But she did what she voted. Obama didn't.
marym625
(17,997 posts)Where exactly did I say that?
Jakes Progress
(11,122 posts)you in with the silly people who think there is a difference between Hillary and Obama.
Actually, there might be. She voted for the war and helped conduct it. Obama voted against the war, campaigned against the war, got elected and awarded a prize for doing so, then carried on with the bushwar. Does that count as honest? Doesn't get my vote, but . . .
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Warren - no interest to run as she mentioned numerous times.
O'Malley - my Governor for 8 years. Decent progressive but lost the Governorship for his LT Gov and can be boring while speaking.
Sanders - Good choice but has made no attemp to change parties yet.
Dean - good choice, but endorsed Hillary.
Webb - ok choice but kinda moderate.
So who? Serious question.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)I like Warren, I like Sanders, I am open to fresh voices. I am not open to someone who has sold their soul to the vampiresquids of wall street like Hillary has.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)There are many Dems out there who are just as "bad" or worse than her by the measurements laid out in the OP.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)hfojvt
(37,573 posts)Are progressives supposed to be against the Fed? Just like Paulbots?
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)but I'd rather have a national bank in government hands (and pay the interest to ourselves) instead of the current set-up.
Kinda doubt the Paulbots would agree with that.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)fbc
(1,668 posts)Maybe he can switch parties.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)WhiteTara
(29,710 posts)Maybe I'm wrong, but he was being a bit sarcastic. The chance of our nominee not being Hillary is fairly slim.
I was being facetious.
But... there's a grain of truth to it: Even Romney has been using populist rhetoric very recently. Now, of course I don't believe a bit of it coming from a guy who made his fortunes destroying American businesses and putting people out of work.
But it does go to show how out of touch the mainstream Democratic party is these days when even Republicans are talking about the wealth gap while they continue to put their weight behind Blue Dogs and Wall Street darlings like Hillary Clinton.
pkdu
(3,977 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)We need to kick the conservatives, including H. Clinton-Sachs into the other party where they belong.
H. Clinton showed in 2002 that she has zero integrity. Her stand on Iraq was the same as Bush. Do you forgive them both?
Cha
(297,205 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Thank you in advance.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)rMoney is trying to change the packaging, but not the contents. It is still all about tax cuts for the rich, deregulation, etc.: that will fix everything!
WDIM
(1,662 posts)That would be interesting.
I like Warren I hope she changes her mind.
Sanders would be a dream.
Im hoping for a voice to come through thats maybe unknown on national scale. Like Clinton in 92 wasnt a huge national name and came in as the underdog. Everybody likes an underdog.
pacalo
(24,721 posts)why the writing style in the OP doesn't match the writing style in your reply to yeoman6987. If the OP was written by someone else, please include the attribution in the OP.
WDIM
(1,662 posts)My replies are usually more informal.
pacalo
(24,721 posts)redstateblues
(10,565 posts)An avowed socialist will not be elected President of the U.S.
bullsnarfle
(254 posts)the rightwings plaster "he's a (gasp!) EVIL SOCIALIST!!!" all over your t.v., mail, the net, etc., 24-7, with Koch Bros mega-funds. Will probably work too, seeing as their fan base is so damned ignorant. Too bad, he's one of the only people in D.C. that's worth a rat's ass, IMO.
And then again...it wasn't too long ago that I would have thought (with all the %@! bigots of voting age in this country) that a black man might never be elected president, at least not in my lifetime.
Maybe, just maybe, we should never say "never"?
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)are people who would never vote for him regardless. I don't think it would be as big a detriment as conventional wisdom would indicate. Something that could be a problem: RWNJs spending 6+ years hyperventilating about Obama being a Socialist...and thereby tarnishing the term for a new generation.
appalachiablue
(41,131 posts)Sanders and Warren are top pics for me. Dean's great but declared he'd support Hillary. Welcome to DU.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)How can two sitting senators be "from outside the Beltway"?
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)But I will back Bernie Sanders if he becomes a Democrat. And I think he will.
I could be wrong, but I think he is going to run and just has to announce that he will run as a Democrat. He has to get his percent of the vote over 4%. Because I want to see him and/or Elizabeth Warren or maybe both debate Hillary. Hillary is not a good debater.
She is rather smug and doesn't think on her feet as well as say Obama or maybe even Biden.
She learns her stuff, but she doesn't own it.
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)heh
Yavin4
(35,438 posts)Warren has said "no" several times already.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Not me. I made a pledge when those bastard Democrats chose to bow before King George and give him authority to destroy Iraq and the US middle class. I pledge to never support any Democrat that betrayed us and went arm in arm into that war.
They are all responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. May their gods send them to hell.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)$$$ rules in both parties. Anyone who is for Hillary is a centrist, not a Democrat. Real Democrats do not bend over to corporations. Either get back to our FDR roots or admit you are with the 1%. No more facade candidates with smooth speeches and false promises.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)I'm NOT centrist, but I'm NO loser, either. So far, SoS Clinton has got everything in place to win the White House, and that's all that matters to me - WINNING. All my hopes and dreams of moving this country forward on a more progressive path will be dead and buried if we can't get a Democrat into the White House and win back the Senate in 2016 (we'll have to wait for 2020 to have a chance to win back the House when it's time for Republicans to gerrymander again and we can stop them).
Also, for the left-leaning Indies who wax poetic over FDR, please stop doing that history revisionism and CYA. In his time, FDR was constantly attacked by people from his left flank. Constantly. FDR was attacked for being too close to Wall Street, that his New Deal was too pragmatic and didn't go far enough, and he was criticized for "preferring conservative rather than liberalism". Do any of these ring a bell?
Now, all of a sudden, FDR's become the Left's shining beacon of liberalism? Give me a break.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)He fought the Wall Street Dems of those days. He had ALOT of republican help to achieve all that he did. Republicans weren't the party they are today. There's alot of history there to be proud of, and he fought Wall Street & WON & our country WON.
Until a Democrat deregulated.(& he deregulated alot more than just Wall Street regulations.)
And now we have Hillary, Wall Street's Darling. Rubin & Summer's Darling.
The only thing worse than A Republican is a Republican with a (D) behind their name.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)detractor of President FDR from his Left.
This is what Schlesinger wrote about what Gov. Long said in early 1935:
"Long retained deep suspicions of some of Roosevelts associates. A day or two before the inauguration, he came to (FDR advisor and braintruster Raymond) Moleys room at the Mayflower, kicked the door open, chewed on an apple, and said pugnaciously, "I dont like you and your goddamned banker friends!"...and in May denounced the administration on the ground that it was dominated by the same old clique of bankers who had controlled Hoover. "Parker Gilbert from Morgan & Company, Leffingwell, Ballantine, Eugene Meyer, every one of them are here whats the use of hemming and hawing? (Schlesinger, The Politics of Upheaval 54-55)
Sound familiar to you, Riverlover?
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)It has timelines and references galore. It's illuminating, educational, and FREE. The excerpts are written by notable and highly respected Historian David Kennedy, a Pulitzer prize winner for his book, "Freedom from Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945" (Oxford History of the United States) Paperback April 19, 2001.
dflprincess
(28,075 posts)Certainly, even Eleanor would have liked him to be further left than he was.
But he did do a few good things, the CCC, WPA, PWA, TVA, Rural Electric Authority, Social Security, the SEC, FDIC, Glass Steagall.
Let's face it, compared to today's Third Way types (you know, the crowd that repealed Glass Steagall and wouldn't have a lot of problems destroying Social Security?), FDR looks like a Socialist.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)He saved capitalism , from itself.
dflprincess
(28,075 posts)I said compared to today's Third Way types who are content to let Wall Street run wild and attack Social Security, he looks like one.
Remember his "economic bill of rights" you'll never see Clinton and her crowd proposing anything like that. (Oh, maybe during campaign season, but it will be forgotten after the election).
reimaginethis
(25 posts)You should just become a Republican. You seem to be their biggest cheerleader.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Last edited Fri Jan 23, 2015, 09:03 PM - Edit history (1)
And I've clearly stated that should she win the nom, I will vote for *you her. How about you, reimaginthis? Gonna stay home and give your vote by default to Jebbie Bush or Mittney? Do tell.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Your slip is showing. Again.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)Freudian slip?
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Little Star
(17,055 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)I'm a registered Democrat. I don't even need air quotes.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Only Republicans refer to the Democratic Party as the Democrat Party.
Freudian slip, perhaps? That would explain the posts I've so far read from you.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)That tells me all I need to know about you.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)BeanMusical
(4,389 posts)So if Hillary is the nominee you'll vote for reimaginthis?
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)to the Dem Party is okay to vote for? But people who won't vote for the Republican policy are the Republicans?
Um... okay.
We've just had a self-described moderate Republican. We need a REAL Democrat. Someone who remembers what Dems are supposed to stand for. Someone who is actually on the left.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)But you go ahead and keep ignoring substance and just react emotionally as you just did.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)A mere step from calling a person a criminal, thieve or liar.
WDIM
(1,662 posts)Sure Hillary is going to have the war chest and the media bias on her side, but with a ground swell movement the people could bring in our candidate.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)them and put the fear of God into them right up until the S&L crisis in the 1980s and until 2008.
Both he and Teddy Roosevelt valued government that was close to free from corruption.
The banking cabal in D.C. to which the Clintons are very close is about as corrupt as you can get. They are so corrupt they think they are the government.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Bravo!
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)davidpdx
(22,000 posts)This seems like a full blown meme now. I've heard at least one or two other DU member use similar terms. I think it is funny how someone who is part of the Democratic Party can try to tell someone they are not welcome.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)It's a damn lie.
Excellent post.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)And so they will make sure she wins...the media will declare her the winner early.
And even if she were to win the presidency nothing would change, so it is a win win.
Warren or Sanders are our best choice, but I suspect the pressure will come to bear against them, and we will be fed with bullshit to convince us it is good.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)They are not "bent over" in any sense.
fbc
(1,668 posts)The democratic party is never going to stop going for republican-light as long as we keep voting them in as the lesser of two evils.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Republican.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Telling people "but that means you're voting for a Republican!" is a poor GOTV strategy. Really? The best that can be said for a candidate is that they're not a member of the other party? That's unlikely to fire up reluctant or disinterested voters.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)If the Democrat wins, that uncast ballot is for the Democrat.
If a Republican wins, that uncast ballot is for the Republican.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)It's not an endorsement of either party, but a condemnation of both.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)A write in is a statement that the choice presented is irrelevant.
An uncast ballot is acceptance of the outcome regardless.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Both a write-in and a non-vote are ways to indicate that the choices presented are unacceptable/irrelevant to the voter. Both are tacit acceptance that someone the voter does not support will be elected. Functionally, they're equivalent, and neither choice can/should be read as an endorsement of one major candidate over another.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)It's an acceptance of the outcome regardless. The ONLY protest votes cast are wither third party votes or write in votes.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Either way, we get Rethug.
YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)Well, I guess Bush and Obama are both Republicans, and are "equally" bad.
reimaginethis
(25 posts)Just wow.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)xmas74
(29,674 posts)If she's our nominee I'll campaign and vote for her. I live in a very red area and don't want that to extend all the way to the WH. Not voting for the party candidate in the general election is the same as handing over your vote to the other side.
dflprincess
(28,075 posts)to vote in any other races in your area. Or, at least, just file a blank ballot - in most areas it's the only way you can say "none of the above". And it shows you were paying attention and didn't just not vote out apathy.
SomeGuyInEagan
(1,515 posts)Candidates down ticket need your consideration. This election's local candidate may be the next election's state candidate.
fbc
(1,668 posts)AndyTiedye
(23,500 posts)The only way to move the party leftwards is in the primaries. There. Is. No. Other. Way.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)Do you see us moving right? Or left?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)onehandle
(51,122 posts)Hmmmm.........
fbc
(1,668 posts)Make the democratic party give us a democrat if they want our votes.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)They're hoping that you can convince a few tens of million more. I hope they'll send you a Thank You note afterward since they'll be able to take back the White House, because you can bet your behind that Republicans and Teabaggers, no matter how disenchanted they are with the establishment Republican Party, WILL VOTE and they WILL VOTE Republican.
Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #20)
Post removed
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Now you're just pushing absurd points.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)so maybe your perception is the problem, not my post. I mean, you even brought up...Zell Miller?! Now that's bizarre.
Like I said, whoever wins the nom will get my vote. I'll be outraged in the primaries and vote for the better candidate, but when the dust settles and the majority decides on a Democratic nominee, I will vote for that Democrat because - and this may come across as bizarre again to you - I want a DEMOCRAT TO WIN.
And, by the way, you've got a real attitude for someone who only has 23 posts who has yet to prove to be a Democrat around here while accusing me of being a Republican. I've been here since December 2004. My Democratic bona fides are proven. How about yours?
fbc
(1,668 posts)Here's how they don't win: a progressive democrat in the white house.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Should a Republican capture the White House in 2016, the American people WILL LOSE. Period.
Although this might be too little for all-or-nothing people like you, fbc, I would like to defer you to the wise idiom: better to have ONE bird in the hand than two in the Bush. Pun intended.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)fbc
(1,668 posts)If Hillary Clinton is a representative democrat, then I guess we need a new party.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)No, DU is not representative of the Democratic voter base. Far from it.
There's a lot of petty provincialism and wishful thinking around these parts.
YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)bluedigger
(17,086 posts)Just argue the issues and quit worrying about who has the biggest dick.
hatrack
(59,585 posts)bluedigger
(17,086 posts)Oh, well, maybe next time - I've been trying for years now.
Autumn
(45,079 posts)Hmmmm......... Some people see hate, others see a fairly new poster laying out damn good reasons for someone other than Hillary.
ecstatic
(32,701 posts)ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)Lot of concern trolling here.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Because a lot of us will not forgive her betrayal. We will find an alternative. It will be an uphill fight because the Oligarch money is on Clinton-Sachs. Funny how some Dems (?) will side with the Oligarchy when the chips are down.
project_bluebook
(411 posts)She will make a great republican president.
Response to project_bluebook (Reply #14)
reimaginethis This message was self-deleted by its author.
TheProgressive
(1,656 posts)I will vote for Senator Sanders. I will vote for Senator Warren.
But I will not vote for Clinton. If she is the nominee, I hope there is a
good Green Party or Independent candidate.
Response to TheProgressive (Reply #15)
Agschmid This message was self-deleted by its author.
TheProgressive
(1,656 posts)Why?
Response to TheProgressive (Reply #116)
Agschmid This message was self-deleted by its author.
TheProgressive
(1,656 posts)I will never, repeat never, vote for a republican who is a registered Democrat.
Clinton is a republican...
It is called integrity. And I plan on sticking to my integrity.
Maybe everyone should 'stick to integrity'....
And reading comprehension is our friend...!
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)In fact, it is my opinion that such a move completely lacks any integrity at all.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)help him sell the IWar. She has zero integrity. She is too smart to be fooled by the biggest fool ever, she is too smart to believe the lies, so why did she betray the Democratic Party and side with the worst President in our history. She has zero integrity.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)I don't care who endorses her, she has betrayed the Democratic Party, the American people and is as much responsible for the deaths in Iraq as George Bush. Do you forgive both her and Bush?
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Fuck the extreme left who cannot accept facts.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)you don't agree with?
A "good liberal" wouldn't have been caught dead bowing down to George Bush and helping him sell the war. A "good liberal" would have stood their ground and told the Republicans to go to hell. But not H. Clinton, she said to her close friend, "George, how can I help sell this war."
To you H. Clinton is a liberal and those that want freedom and liberty are "extreme left". You have no idea what liberal means.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)you should tell us why. Why does a Democrat disparage other Democrats. Especially those that are fighting hard for the 99%. Tell me what issues do you disagree with the "extreme left". They don't like fracking how do you feel? They don't like the TPP, how do you feel? They don't like torture, how do you feel? They don't like the Patriot Act, Wall Street bailouts, Arne F'n Duncan, Thomas F'n Wheeler, Penny Pritzker, drone killings, unlimited war in the middle east, NSA domestic spying, etc. How do you feel on those issues? If you disagree with the left, speak out.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Its like a devastatingly destructive tsunami, a wall of money to drown everyone but her, & her corporate & bankster sponsors who want continued control over govt policies...
Clinton plans to astound, intimidate with fundraising like nothing youve seen
1/22/15
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/230306-clinton-plans-to-astound-intimidate-with-fundraising-like-nothing-youve
tclambert
(11,085 posts)Who can drum up more money? Probably no Democrat can match Clinton. Warren is certainly more popular. But what big money people would back her? And what about Republicans? Will the Kochs throw so much money at the election they can drown Hillary?
Let's hope the Republicans have a really destructive primary fight and burn hundreds of millions just to get the nomination.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)I like women are ambitious, its want it takes to get power, and
when Hillary gets she will put forward a progressive agenda
on behalf of America.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)that you do not vote!
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)working it as we speak.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)My mind is made up. I'll only support another Democrat if they are capable of defeating Hillary in the primaries.
BP2
(554 posts)Sad but true.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)And she wears magic underwear?
Really?
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)by her imminent candidacy.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)I know there is a lot of trash talking, I read it over and over, the same things she is accused of being a corporatists can be delivered to Sanders and Warren. I have not investigated other possible candidates but saying Hillary is too far right and a Dino or Republican when she and Warren is rated the same in the chart of being left does not hold water. Gotta come up with a better story. She is very familiar with security concerns and more experience than others on this issue. Truth and facts should be given and the talking points FOX and Rove provide is just talking points. They do not have a match for Hillary just as they did not have for Obama.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)are going to suck all of the oxygen out of the political room with their primaries and the DEM's will be left standing out in the cold until the general.
This only works for incumbents which, as much as she might think she is, she is not.
WDIM
(1,662 posts)I guess we will see this fall.
MissDeeds
(7,499 posts)If she is the nominee, I will write in the candidate of my choice.
Response to MissDeeds (Reply #55)
Post removed
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)sabbat hunter
(6,829 posts)and discarded.
benz380
(534 posts)...that I didn't support a warmongering corporatist. I'll write in Warren and vote for other REAL Democrats down ballot.
Enough of feeling guilty about someone I vote for supporting war and the TPP. As far as SCOTUS appointments, Hillary will choose whoever her Wall Street masters tell her to.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)down pat, right down to the "don't vote" message. Write-ins are the equivalent to not voting, but of course you know that.
Welcome to DU.
benz380
(534 posts)lewebley3
(3,412 posts)We need to stick together as we did with Obama, if
you don't back the democratic nomination you are backing
the GOP. Voting is not just a personal choice is for the
betterment of your fellow Americans. That is why I voted
for Obama with pinch of nose, otherwise MCain, would have
destroyed SS.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)lobodons
(1,290 posts)If she is the Dem Nominee. Would prefer Warren, but who ever the Dem. nominee, then YES YES YES!!!!
Response to lobodons (Reply #56)
Post removed
riversedge
(70,214 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)a pod. Never in a million years. If the Democratic Party has sold out to the Oligarchy and runs Clinton/Goldman-Sachs, then the country is toast.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)"We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering.
They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob. Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me and I welcome their hatred."
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1936
WDIM
(1,662 posts)FDR was the one that proposed an economic bill of rights be added to the constitution. You'd never see Hillary propose these rights as amendments and guaranteed to all people.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)SheilaT
(23,156 posts)First off, we went through this before. Explain to me again why she's not now halfway through her second term?
She represents nothing new, and is in fact a throwback to the worst of the "centrist Democrats" that have done all of us ill.
While supporting her is reasonably admirable, even if I don't, what is inexplicable to me is that her supporters honestly believe that she's bullet-proof because she's been thoroughly vetted because of the campaign on 2008. Are you collectively out of your minds? If she becomes the nominee, every single thing that was ever held against her in the past will be brought up again. And again. And again. Not to mention, this time around she has a record as Secretary of State. You think Benghazi is over and done with? How the Republicans will deal with it will make the swift-boating of Kerry look like a love fest.
The only way she would win the election is 1. If the Republicans nominate someone who is so genuinely unacceptable to the general voter (Romney? Paul Ryan? Rand Paul? Chris Christie?) that even more of them will stay home than Democrats 2. If in the next two years reasonably sensible voters will finally see through the hypocrisy and genuine evil intentions of the Republicans with regard to things like Social Security, Medicare, overall financial doings and start voting in their own self interest. Not that Hillary really represents the self interest of the Middle Class. She is quite firmly aligned with the corporate class, and anyone who doesn't get it is simply mistaken.
As for Elizabeth Warren, keep in mind that she was not at all keen to run for the Senate seat she now holds. Ordinary Democrats need to start going to events she's attending and tell her how much she matters to us and how important it is that she run for President.
And then we all need to be nurturing a new generation of politicians.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Very well said.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)I try, although I don't always succeed, to make worthwhile posts here. I am truly disturbed by the Hillary worship, both here and outside of DU. To me it's a blind fascination with a particular possibility, in this case the First Female President. We saw it in 2008, and I had many arguments both here and in the world outside of DU. The scary thing back then was the fierce determination of the Hillary supporters not to give up. They were labelled PUMAS -- Party Unity My Ass -- for those of you too young to have experienced this. There was a genuine possibility that the PUMAs could completely undermine Democratic unity if the Hillary supporters simply picked up their bats and balls and left the field. On one hand I admire such loyalty -- I was an original Deaniac and so I understand -- but on the other there was a real chance these die-hards would either destroy the party, or at the very least lose the election for us. In the end, thanks in no small part to Hillary's genuine graciousness in defeat, we hung together and won in 2008.
But there's a sense of, "Okay, now it REALLY is Hillary's time" that ignores the reality of the current political situation.
I'm a genuine political activist. I've run for office. I've given money. I've met many of the major players. And this is NOT Hillary's time. The time is for someone else. I'd like it to be Elizabeth Warren, but I'm no prophet. I do know that if we reach back into the past and nominate Hillary Clinton, even if she wins, we'll be aligning ourselves with a lost and obsolete past. We need to be looking to the future, as a party and as a country.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)Unless her Democratic opponents are completely incompetent at running a campaign, they are going to remind Black voters of that. It is kind of hard to get the Democratic nominee without Black voters.
Of course, these are Democratic pols we're talking about. So it wouldn't surprise me in the least if they forget "hard working White people", attempts to suppress the Black vote in Las Vegas, Ferraro, Bill's dog-whistling, etc.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)I was not aware of a racist campaign on her part, but that may be simply because I myself am white, and therefore sometimes don't notice such things.
BklnDem75
(2,918 posts)I'll vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is. Good luck campaigning against Democrats you don't agree with.
George II
(67,782 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Frances
(8,545 posts)When Obama won the nomination, I worked hard for him.
I expect most Dems will work for Hillary if she wins the nomination.
Of course, I'm old enough to remember when some young people in CA told me that they could not vote for Brown against Reagan just because Brown was the lesser of 2 evils.
I'm not stupid. I saw how that worked out. I won't make that mistake.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)fadedrose
(10,044 posts)is not believe the polls.
I never do. And change the TV station every time they say how so many Dems support her. You and I don't, and there are plenty like us, right here in Du.
sunnystarr
(2,638 posts)want us to believe you. I don't. There would never, and I mean NEVER, be a reason I wouldn't vote for the Democratic candidate. There's only ONE requirement. Be a Democrat. I don't care which kind and where the stars and stripes fall. While some will give their wedge issue d'jour, there's really only one issue. Not voting or voting for a 3rd candidate is voting AGAINST the Democratic candidate and FOR the Republican candidate. That's just reality. It's why the Dems lost so many seats in Congress in 2014 - the Dems stayed home.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)nt
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)and the Democratic Party got the worst thrashing it had ever received in an election since Reconstruction. Granted, there were no progressive candidates to speak of on the Democratic side (the main progressive Democratic candidate was forced out of the primary before the voters could decide), but the main progressive issue that was popular in the state-- raising the minimum wage-- was taken away from the Democrats when it became a stand-alone ballot initiative.
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)A lot of folks were disappointed in 2008 when Obama won when they wanted Hillary so bad, and they continued to support her all through his presidency, and they seemed more loyal to her than to him. That's being a real democrat? I don't think so. Hillary was okay with it, but her supporters were not, and showed it plenty these past 7 years, and have said she was the frontrunner in the next election since he was inaugurated in 2009.
Bill didn't talk to Obama for a year, and his disappointment was more like anger....
Her husband is allowed to act the way he did and I'm supposed to pull the lever smiling even tho I don't choose her as my candidate?
I had to think back to see who I supported in 2008, and it was Biden. But as soon as Obama got the nomination, Biden was history. I had a new President and was so proud of him and America for voting for him.
I will vote for her because I have to. I am a Democrat who hopes the polls are wrong.
Tommy2Tone
(1,307 posts)and it's not even close. A no for Clinton is a yes for Mittens.
SCantiGOP
(13,869 posts)Seems like a lot of people here are willing to take the chance on a Republican President reshaping the Supreme Court so they will control everything.
And, we know for a fact that some trolls are paid by the Koch boys and others to sit on boards like this. I imagine they love a thread like this.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Now they want it to be Clinton vs Bush: Round II.
I wonder if she's called Gore about being her VP.
ecstatic
(32,701 posts)Focus. On. Who. You. Think. Should. Run. Tearing down the only frontrunner comes across as trollish.
fbc
(1,668 posts)Why should we focus on who we think should run?
I'll focus on who actually runs. There will be other democratic nominees and they will most likely all be better than Hillary Clinton
byronius
(7,394 posts)IMO.
Hawaii Hiker
(3,166 posts)Unless the Democratic nominee is Joe Manchin, (who isn't ever going to run anyway, nor would he win), i will always vote for the Democratic candiate for President....SCOTUS (and the other courts as well) are too important to stay at home and pout if my preferred Democratic nominee doesn't win the nomination...
Logical
(22,457 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)that will never forgive her betrayal.
mackerel
(4,412 posts)Oilwellian
(12,647 posts)and I have faith that my fellow Democrats will vote against Hillary Kissinger-Clinton in 2016!
Duval
(4,280 posts)and that's a super good thing. You also echo some of my concerns. What worries me are our MSM and the other Corporations and their $$. I think Warren is who we need and Bernie Sanders would make a very good VP, unless HE wants the Presidency. We would need to get out there and campaign as never before. Can we do it? Can I do it?
I know I have at least one more campaign inside and none of us can do it alone.
Thank you WDIM
BootinUp
(47,144 posts)Ignorance is not a personal flaw, it just means you need to edumucate yourself. The first thing I recommend you do, is actually read some of the things she has written, OR actually listen to some of the things she has said. AFTER THAT, please come back and try again!
840high
(17,196 posts)ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)This time around in just a short time, without even stating she's running she's made too many statements that worry me. The most recent is about XL Pipeline. Sure, I would love to see someone like Sanders or Warren, but know it's just not realistic. I also think both of them can be extremely effective in the Senate at this point in time.
I really wish MSM would just STOP promoting Hillary day after day, constantly trotting out poll numbers. She really worries me and something in my gut keeps telling me we should be able to find someone else to support. I'm amazed that Democrats are simply falling in line behind in the same way that Repukes do. I refuse to get into post after post going tit for tat with supporters here who not only will attack me, but post long lists of her qualities. I'm sure she has many pluses, but for me I have serious concerns about all the ties she has to Wall Street, and other huge corporations.
AND, I'm surprised that she's already flubbed questions posed to her and her outright dancing around the questions she's asked. I'm worried and find myself very conflicted about my negative feelings and uncomfortable about the prospect of having to vote just so the other side won't win. I'm old enough to remember a completely different Democratic Party. I realize changes always happen and can move more to the middle, but my heart needs to "feel" comfortable doing it. At this point in time, Hillary makes me very uncomfortable.
JMHO.
840high
(17,196 posts)NYC Liberal
(20,136 posts)Despite what you might read on DU, Hillary is, in FACT, a liberal.
FDR was part of the "1%" even more so than Hillary.
Bernie Sanders is a "Washington insider". So are pretty much all the Democrats who have any chance at winning the nomination (let alone the general election).
Hillary supports unions. She supports a living wage. She supports small businesses.
As for the Treasury "printing its own money" -- that one is particularly bizarre because it already does. And the Federal Reserve returns ALL profits minus operating costs to the Treasury every year.
totodeinhere
(13,058 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)Some of these comments are so patently ridiculous, the commenter has to be living in a bubble. You can hardly be out in the world in the USA and think Hillary is Republican registered as a Democrat.
WDIM
(1,662 posts)About Hillary.
But you're wrong about the treasury printing its own money. Those are federal reserve notes not treasury notes that we use as currency. Federal Reserve is a corrupt affiliation of the worlds top banksters who are living fat off the poor. When has the federal reserve ever been auditted? Everything the fed does is shielded from the light of day. Its books are closed to the public, its board members are anonymous. There is no public disclosure what so ever of its operations. Its a ponzi scheme setup to ensure the rich stay rich.
DFW
(54,378 posts)The only one I'm definitely saying "NO" to at this point is the Republican nominee.
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)It drives me nuts that NO ONE has emerged in the past 20 years to take their place in presidential politics. How can that fucking be? We have no successful, charismatic senators or governors who can run? Not a single goddamn one? How is that possible?
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)At lest two Justices will be appointed by the next President.
You are OK with whoever Republicans appoint.
Republicans control the House and the Senate.
You are OK with whatever bills they pass.
That is what not voting is. Voting for the worst possible side.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)rosesaylavee
(12,126 posts)I am hopeful that there are more candidates out there to support than Clinton. However, if she is the nominee, I will have to support her. As I did with Pres. Obama as he was not my initial choice in 2007-2008 either.
Tho she keeps saying she is not running this time 'round, I would support Elizabeth Warren with everything I've got.
Vinca
(50,270 posts)I sure as hell won't be voting for old "Cat Scratch Fever." I could live in lala land and write in "Bernie," but we all saw how the 2000 election shook out.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)LWolf
(46,179 posts)since I first "met" her on 60 minutes with Bill in '92.
sabbat hunter
(6,829 posts)Warren to be the nominee, and if she ran I would vote for her in the primary. But if HRC is the Democratic Party nominee, I will vote for her, as she will be FAR better than anything the GOP puts forward.
sellitman
(11,606 posts)Absolutely!
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)partly because I think she's the best hope for Democrats to retain the Presidency in 2016, but mostly to watch the spittle-flecked outrage go to 11 at DU, as the anti-Hillary True Democrats lose their fucking minds at the prospect of her in the White House.
Sid
Autumn
(45,079 posts)brooklynite
(94,541 posts)Autumn
(45,079 posts)support her as the nominee or as a candidate.
CrispyQ
(36,463 posts)for all the good it will do. Clinton is part of the status quo that got us here & she's not going to get us out.
One of the 99
(2,280 posts)Half of what you wrote is pure BS worthy of FAUX News.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)I live in CT, where the DEM candidate will likely win, so I am free to explore other options.
That being said, if Hillary runs and wins, I'll be fine with it. I just do not plan on voting for her.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)MineralMan
(146,298 posts)They might well not vote as you desire, but that's always a possibility.
If you'd like a different candidate, you should start encouraging a specific candidate to run in the primaries and support that candidate as much as you possibly can. It will not be easy for anyone to win a presidential primary against Hillary Clinton. Any successful opponent should already have stated that he or she will run. Delays in declaring candidacy will not help.
Many people have strong feelings against Hillary Clinton. If they hope to defeat her in the primaries, though, they need to get started in convincing their candidate to run. Time is going by fast.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Thank you.
rtracey
(2,062 posts)If Hillary Clinton does not run or does not win the primaries, a republican will become president.
Who do you want to run...
Elizabeth Warren.... she said she won't run over and over and over, and she is a progressive sweetheart, but is she in the moderate line of sight?
Joe Biden..... ummmmm Joe Biden is Joe Biden.....sorry I don't think so
Martin O'Malley.... past MD governor...high tax and spend democrat, not what we need... and I am from MD so....great Mayor of Baltimore though, needs to serve as Senator when Barbara M. retires....
Senator Bernie Sanders.... great guy, I like him, independent.... no traction, needs to change parties, very socialist, may turn moderates off.
You say someone from outside the beltway...find someone, tell me who and I will look close at them, but right now, I need to have someone with a D after their name as president, because this country will implode if and "R" is elected, with an "R" controlled congress
NotHardly
(1,062 posts)If facts and consideration were the rule then emotionality of political choices would be less numerous.
We have a social, economic and political reality now and in the immediate (yeah, long run too) future. Hilary Clinton would be a perfect choice for us, although I fear that being a woman is more to the point of the fear and hate mongering I see directed at her. Misogyny is far stronger in this country than the hate of persons of color or non-European ethnicity. Then there is that little agism sneaking in as well which is always a perfect storm when combined with misogyny.
(As for outside the beltway, I would only have you cast your gaze to Kansas, much of the south and Wisconsin to suggest reconsidering that as any real sort of solution or reality.)
I agree we have many of the needs noted ... living wages, jobs, infrastructure, health care, education, etc. However, none of that will come by dreaming up some mythical creature, even a President needs a people and party to back them and a people and party with the long view instead of the short hop. And, we need action along with all that hope one touts about.
Should she choose to run, I will be working for her, donating my hard earned cash (again) and voting for her. Some research will demonstrate that as a Representative of NY and Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton got results... and we have real need for that as we go towards our future.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Nor will I. Ever.
Pacifist Patriot
(24,653 posts)Pretty much on my radar through political cartoons and DU. Still seems like an awful long time to me. Has a "front runner" before candidacy is even official ever gone the distance? No such thing as a foregone conclusion almost two years out.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)experience, we have already experienced the "go it alone" rule of Bush. It was a failing decision. You can bury your head in the sand and continue to accept more "Boston Bombings" or you can walk everyday with your eyes wide open.
You said, "We need somebody that will fight for a living wage for all full time employees. We need somebody that will get universal health care. We need somebody that will stop the redistribution of wealth to the top. That will stand up for workers rights."
You may not know Hillary co-sponsored several bills in the Senate to increase the minimum wage? You can't continue to believe the Rove and FOX lies, they do not want Hillary to run, why, right now they do not have a candidate which polls to beat Hillary and right not Hillary polls highest to win 2016 presidency. Hillary tried for universal health insurance, she could not get it past the GOP congress.
Don't cut off your nose to spite your face, you will lose every time.
Mr Dixon
(1,185 posts)She is shoe-in, even with all us DUers raising questions about her past and her integrity the problem is that the majority of voters are morons and easily misled by the media and the million being spent in campaign ads. Truth is the 1st casualty.
George II
(67,782 posts)some specifics should be listed too. Why don't we ever see that?
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)Hillary is the democrats best choice, I have already
started working for her. I had to old my nose and support
Obama.
George II
(67,782 posts)...without specifics. If she is in favor or against the things he/she listed, surely that person could have given us specifics.
Metric System
(6,048 posts)SmittynMo
(3,544 posts)Once you reach a certain age, and your whole life is dedicated to your career, and it doesn't matter how bad or good you were, you win. It seems to apply to Hollywood and Politics.
Pretty sad, isn't it. What ever happened to actually EARNING 1st place?
I'm sorry, but I agree with a lot of what WDIM has posted.
I am going to find it hard for me to vote for her.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)This comment say no to Hillary could have been written by GOP
troll.
Hillary is a fighter for people!!!
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)And the POWERFUL people. Her BFFs are the top management of Goldman Sachs and undisputed war criminal and monster Henry Kissinger.
She does not give one tinker's damn about the ordinary people in this country. Her nest has been well-feathered and it's time to repay the favors.
Response to WDIM (Original post)
Corruption Inc This message was self-deleted by its author.
brooklynite
(94,541 posts)So, that knocks out Sanders (73) and Warren (65) as well?
aka-chmeee
(1,132 posts)RationalMan
(96 posts)If it were a choice between Hillary and any of the clowns or terrorists in the Republican party, I would welcome her candidacy.
Her age is a concern. The fact she is part of a political dynasty from a husband that was a governor and then a two-term President, she herself a two-term U.S. Senator and then Secretary of State is of concern. The Founders expected our elected leaders would not be career politicians but rather ordinary folk (in those days of the landed gentry) who would serve a few terms and then return to agrarian life.
I agree with probably half of her policies and vehemently disagree with the other half from war, etc. But if I compare what I could expect from a Hillary presidency (first woman!!!!) and any of the potential GOP candidates, Hillary is mountains above them.
I would prefer though to see the Democrats start to cultivate a new generation of leaders. I am especially impressed with the Castro brothers from Texas.
Pyrzqxgl
(1,356 posts)I'd sure like to see some progressive competition in the primaries that could perhaps push her thinking to the left and at least make her aware that there is a lot of progressive thought out there and just maybe if she wants to win, she might consider our thoughts & ideas.
lexington filly
(239 posts)"Hillary is part of an old generation and an old way of thinking."
Where did you get that idea? There are plenty of Progressives who are of Hillary's generation. For instance..... ME..... just as there are young conservatives. I think Hillary's politics are more a function of economic "station," limited experience with typical Americans because of that station, and so her capacity for empathy and imagination are really limited too. Otherwise, I absolutely agree with you.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,173 posts)Whatcha gonna do?
I'd rather see Warren run, and win the primary.
If Hillary gets in, as others have said, she will be socially liberal as far as women's rights, gay rights, minimum wage increase.....but on the big important issues, she won't be much better than any of the GOP candidates.
There is only one compelling reason to vote for her. And that is the Supreme Court appointments. Sure she'll nominate yet another corporate shill, but they will be OUR corporate shill. Like Kagan. That is only if a damn Con judge will ever step down or just die already! Everyone thought Obama's first term would lead to an overturning of the Republican dominance in the SCOTUS, then it was for sure in the second term. I think these Republican rat bastards are going to hang on for another 8 years if they have to, even if their minds and bodies have gone. It doesn't take much just to sign their name on a verdict that John Roberts tells them to. Hell he'll hold their hand and sign it for them.
BeeBee
(1,074 posts)ARE big important issues.
WDIM
(1,662 posts)A vote uncast is a voice unheard.
Alkene
(752 posts)--- ---
(Dry humor)
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)I will never forgive her for that Iraq War vote. We needed her and she abandoned us on the senate floor for 30 pieces of political silver. She would never betray Goldman Sachs the way she betrayed us.
Wonder if the political heat she avoided was worth the hundreds of thousands who died for a lie.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)hopemountain
(3,919 posts)unless she gets the nomination. but, i don't see how that is going to happen with her warhawk, pro-wallstreet, silence on environmental issues, and tppip. she might as well be a republican.
tartan2
(314 posts)as a done deal. Hillary will be the first female POTUS. We will just be going thru the motion of electing a new President. I really don't believe that this country has voted a President since 1960. We've been allowed to think we have but actually haven't...
benz380
(534 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)There is nothing more important than stopping Hillary or any other Third Way corporatist from being shoved down our throats as the Democratic nominee in 2016. No accepting "inevitability" or fast-forwarding to that outcome, because that is the outcome we need to prevent.
That's the corporate goal, because if corporatists succeed in doing that, they have ensured the continuation of their predatory corporate agenda no matter who is elected.
Corporate Republicans and the corporate Third Way are not just another flavor of politician within an essentially functioning representative government. They are building perpetual war, a police and surveillance state, and using our own laws and intelligence agencies to empower corporations over the will of the American people to dismantle democracy itself.
Hillary Clinton's leading role in drafting the TPP
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101667554
Hillary Clinton and Trade Deals: That Giant Sucking Sound
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016101761
Hillary Clinton Cheerleads for Biotech and GMOs
http://www.democraticunderground.com/112772326
Dissecting Hillary Clinton's Neocon Talking Points - Atlantic Interview
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017209519
NYTimes notices Hillary's natural affinity toward the neocons.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025205645
Hillary Clinton, the unrepentant hawk
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024876898
More from Hillary Clinton's State Department: The fascistic TISA (Trade in Services Agreement)
http://m.thenation.com/blog/180572-grassroots-labor-uprising-your-bank
How Hillary Clinton's State Department sold fracking to the world
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251376647
Hillary Clinton Sides with NSA over Snowden Disclosures
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101695441
On the NSA, Hillary Clinton Is Either a Fool or a Liar
http://m.thenation.com/article/180564-nsa-hillary-clinton-either-fool-or-liar
Corporate Warfare: Hillary Clinton admits role in Honduran coup aftermath
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025601610#post29
The Bill and Hillary Clinton Money Machine Taps Corporate Cash
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025189257
Hillary's Privatization Plan: TISA kept more secret than the TPP
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014829628
Hillary Clinton criticizes Obama's foreign policy 'failure'; strongly defends Israel
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014867136
Some of Hillary Clinton's statements on Social Security.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024379279
Hillary Clinton's GOLDMAN SACHS PROBLEM.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025049343
Ring of Fire: Hillary Clinton - The Perfect Republican Candidate
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017209285
How Americans Need Answers From Hillary Clinton On TPP, KXL, Wall St & More
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017181611
Hillary Clinton Left Out By Liberal Donor Club
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025809071
Why Wall Street Loves Hillary
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016106575
Hillary Clinton: Neocon-lite
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101684986
Interactive graphic of Hillary Clinton's connections to the Forbes top 400 (Follow link in post)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025824981#post9