HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » The Hole in Hillary’s Fli...

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 11:41 AM

 

The Hole in Hillary’s Flip-Flop Excuse

The Hole in Hillary’s Flip-Flop Excuse

She keeps saying new information makes her change her mind on policy. But what new information?

Hillary Clinton has a propensity to change her mind on big issues. She has reversed her positions on gay marriage, immigration, gun control, the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact, mass incarceration and the Iraq War, and some believe her recent stand on the Keystone XL pipeline constitutes a flip, too.

Everybody agrees that changing facts can justify a change in one’s view. But Clinton’s insistence that learning about “new” or “better” information propels her reassessments prompts this question: What was the new information?

To my knowledge, no new “information” about gay marriage emerged from the day she endorsed civil unions for same-sex couples to the day she demanded the right to same-sex marriage. The immigration, gun control and mass-incarceration issues have been similarly unrippled by shocking new findings. Likewise, the information required to make a stand against the Iraq War was not hidden. Other senators found it and took that position! Perhaps the anti-war information escaped Clinton’s notice—in which case, bad on her—or perhaps she viewed it and decided not to act on it—in which case, double-bad on her. And who among us had a better vantage from which to assemble an encyclopedic view on the Trans-Pacific Partnership than Clinton? She praised it endlessly while secretary of state, but pulled a moonshiner’s turn last week to skedaddle away from it.

If Clinton lived in Gobles, Michigan, had no library card and no Internet connection, we could accept her new-information excuse. But for the past 25 years, Clinton has had some of the best researchers at her disposal—a private staff, a campaign staff, the wizards at the State Department staff, a senatorial staff, the busy beavers from the Congressional Research Service and the White House staff. And, in fact, every indication and story we know about Hillary Clinton’s policy work belabors just how much she studies and learns. So if new or better information has been the impetus for her policy shifts, she must concede that she has a fat history of taking the wrong position in the early going and then requiring a re-do. The constant need for re-dos appears to indicate that she’d make a lousy surgeon and a bad 3 a.m. president.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/10/democratic-debate-hillary-clinton-flip-flop-213247#ixzz3qumxy6T2

71 replies, 5252 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 71 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Hole in Hillary’s Flip-Flop Excuse (Original post)
FreakinDJ Nov 2015 OP
cantbeserious Nov 2015 #1
Autumn Nov 2015 #2
FreakinDJ Nov 2015 #5
Autumn Nov 2015 #11
DhhD Nov 2015 #17
FreakinDJ Nov 2015 #36
kristopher Nov 2015 #37
dreamnightwind Nov 2015 #56
DhhD Nov 2015 #58
Scootaloo Nov 2015 #53
Doctor_J Nov 2015 #3
Tierra_y_Libertad Nov 2015 #4
Faux pas Nov 2015 #6
99Forever Nov 2015 #7
FreakinDJ Nov 2015 #8
99Forever Nov 2015 #9
stupidicus Nov 2015 #13
Iwillnevergiveup Nov 2015 #47
MissDeeds Nov 2015 #24
nolabels Nov 2015 #63
840high Nov 2015 #27
AikenYankee Nov 2015 #39
BeanMusical Nov 2015 #40
Paka Nov 2015 #46
99th_Monkey Nov 2015 #10
Thespian2 Nov 2015 #45
GoneFishin Nov 2015 #54
Ms. Toad Nov 2015 #12
daleanime Nov 2015 #18
BeanMusical Nov 2015 #41
Scuba Nov 2015 #42
avaistheone1 Nov 2015 #48
riderinthestorm Nov 2015 #14
Ferd Berfel Nov 2015 #15
AlbertCat Nov 2015 #16
Live and Learn Nov 2015 #19
AzDar Nov 2015 #20
Fred Sanders Nov 2015 #22
Bubzer Nov 2015 #28
AzDar Nov 2015 #35
azureblue Nov 2015 #21
A Simple Game Nov 2015 #32
Jim Lane Nov 2015 #34
Jack Rabbit Nov 2015 #23
cosmicone Nov 2015 #25
Bubzer Nov 2015 #29
That Guy 888 Nov 2015 #31
humbled_opinion Nov 2015 #50
cosmicone Nov 2015 #67
Dawgs Nov 2015 #64
MissDeeds Nov 2015 #26
azmom Nov 2015 #30
reformist2 Nov 2015 #38
cherokeeprogressive Nov 2015 #33
smiley Nov 2015 #57
humbled_opinion Nov 2015 #43
Depaysement Nov 2015 #44
Corruption Inc Nov 2015 #49
PatrickforO Nov 2015 #51
JDPriestly Nov 2015 #52
treestar Nov 2015 #55
kenfrequed Nov 2015 #59
treestar Nov 2015 #62
Dawgs Nov 2015 #66
treestar Nov 2015 #68
kenfrequed Nov 2015 #71
Dawgs Nov 2015 #65
treestar Nov 2015 #69
Dawgs Nov 2015 #70
Dodo Nov 2015 #60
TheFarS1de Nov 2015 #61

Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 11:45 AM

1. Yes - The Flip Flopper In Chief - Has - Flopper Flipped - One Too Many Times To Be Credible

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 11:56 AM

2. We knew what was going on with Bush and Iraq after 9/11. We knew what was behind the Iraq war drums

and the morphing by them of 9/11 and Iraq. We knew. If we knew and understood what their game was, a Senator who is privy to more information than we had to have known it also. The Iraq war vote was politically expedient for Hillary. The loss of life from that one action, theirs and ours is the stain that blots out and covers all else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #2)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 11:59 AM

5. The Iraq war vote was politically expedient for Hillary

 

Damm the innocents who lost their lives

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #5)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:18 PM

11. That is the truth. She has that on her hands.

It was so horrifying to watch all that. Knowing what the Bush administration was doing and wondering why the leaders at that time were covering their eyes to the madness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #11)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 01:02 PM

17. War was for the profiteers, not the people. In 2011-12, Clinton and her team helped remove

the control and reduce the salaries of the Mexican workers in their nationalized Oil Industry, in order to help in the turn over, to the Mexican 1%, foreign investors and foreign fossil energy companies. We did not hear about that step Right from the corporate media. That was done by Clinton using US State Department diplomacy instead of shock and awe warring. She is the fulcrum of the pitchfork. Sanders is the fulcrum of the voters and grassroots movers.

In my opinion she represents privatizers for profiteering, and can not flip-flop over to government regulation. Re-regulation means to be in keeping with the needs of Americans, not the needs of the wealthy, world corporate TPPers. The wealthy need Hillary Clinton only to keep the pitchforks from coming out. She has and will flip-flop on everything except keeping Wall Street in check. IMO, Clinton will take a step farther Right if she becomes President. During the last Debate, she said that she would take Obama's policies and plans a little deeper. IMO, the third way has already extended the New hand, and with Hillary, a visual public step to the Right, would be coming, and will be televised by corporate media. After the Nov 2004 elections, in a publicly televised speech, Bush said that the American people gave him a green light to do anything he pleased.

Adding on edit: Above, I wrote that Clinton can not flip from privatization to government re-regulation, That is why she cannot say that she has a policy to reinstate Glass-Steagall. IMO she must be lying about her now non-support of the TPP. She is putting off having Plans because you cannot serve two masters; the 1% and the People. Her fence riding is crumbling here on DU too.

Please see the links that I have added in a down thread reply. I waited one day before adding, because I wanted to see if the fence 1% would like to fence from this Reply. They seem to be missing. Lately they come in at the end of a long thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DhhD (Reply #17)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 06:33 PM

36. That is HUGE

 

got a link for that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #36)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 07:18 PM

37. Probably from this reporting by DeSmogblog.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DhhD (Reply #17)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 07:20 AM

56. Great post

I see the world as you do, at least what you discussed in your post.

I hadn't heard about the issue of the Mexican oil workers' salaries, if you post a follow-up or link I would like to read up on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DhhD (Reply #17)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 08:46 AM

58. Adding several links to the destruction of PEMA. Clinton delivered Mexico to the TPP.

Hope you can read several of these:

https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=AwrSbgcblEBWIpgAehKl87UF;_ylc=X1MDOTU4MTA0NjkEX3IDMgRmcgMEZ3ByaWQDVldVc3J3aVJTUEdyeVlWY3lHSXFFQQRuX3JzbHQDMARuX3N1Z2cDMTAEb3JpZ2luA3NlYXJjaC55YWhvby5jb20EcG9zAzEEcHFzdHIDSGlsbGFyeSBjbGludG9uIGFuBHBxc3RybAMxOARxc3RybAM3NARxdWVyeQNIaWxsYXJ5IENsaW50b24gYW5kIHRoZSBQcml2YXRpemF0aW9uIG9mIHRoZSBNZXhpY2FuIE5hdGlvbmFsIE9pbCBJbmR1c3RyeQR0X3N0bXADMTQ0NzA3MjgwNA--?p=Hillary+Clinton+and+the+Privatization+of+the+Mexican+National+Oil+Industry&fr=sfp&fr2=sa-gp-search&iscqry=

Here is one, from the search link above, with Abby Martin:

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Wikileaks-Hilary-Clinton-Pushed-Mexicos-Oil-Privatization-20150810-0011.html

snip
The country's hydrocarbons have been constitutionally managed by the state-owned company, Pemex since 1938, after the Mexican oil expropriation.

The website identifies three U.S. officials as being key in this process of pushing for an opening of Mexico’s energy sector: David Goldwyn, the first U.S. International Energy Coordinator who was named by Clinton in 200; Carlos Pascual, Goldwyn's successor and former U.S. ambassador to Mexico; as well as Neil Brown, a former top-level staffer for Senator Richard Lugar.

“Mexico officials remain extremely sensitive about any public — especially US — comments regarding energy reform and production,” reads a February 2010 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Mexico, prior to a visit to the country by Goldwyn. “We should retain the (U.S. government's) long-standing policy of not commenting publicly on these issues while quietly offering to provide assistance in areas of interest to the (Mexican government).”

This content was originally published by teleSUR at the following address:
"http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Wikileaks-Hilary-Clinton-Pushed-Mexicos-Oil-Privatization-20150810-0011.html". If you intend to use it, please cite the source and provide a link to the original article. www.teleSURtv.net/english

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #5)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 05:14 AM

53. She certainly wasn't representing the will of her constituents

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 11:57 AM

3. That was a lie, cooked up by her handlers to give the drones something to say

 

The minions swallowed it. Everyone else rolled their eyes and filed it under, "pandering example number 832"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 11:57 AM

4. Yes. But, when she makes a "Hard Choice" to flip she looks "presidential". According to some.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 11:59 AM

6. K N R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:03 PM

7. Weathervanes gotta spin in the wind.

No real stances, no real morals, just an undying hunger for power.

My psychologist wife says there is a term for that kind of personality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #7)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:05 PM

8. With all "Trials and Tribulations" it makes one wonder what could possibly motivate

 

a person to seek more of that same abuse - and we all know its coming

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #8)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:07 PM

9. It's simply called being obsessed.

There really is no rational answer to your question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #8)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:37 PM

13. becoming the 1st female pres will be much more historic

 

than simply being the forgiving wife of a sex-addicted pres.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stupidicus (Reply #13)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 02:37 AM

47. B-I-N-G-O, stupidicus

My politically astute pappy (RIP) said of Hillary years ago, "She's VERY ambitious."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #7)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 02:16 PM

24. Nailed it

 

It's all about winning at any cost. That's why she doesn't have a clear platform and why she is continually evolving. She's for whatever it takes to win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MissDeeds (Reply #24)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 10:49 AM

63. I might overlook the ambitious 'do whatever you can to win' .

Its goes deeper than though, more of cynical position taken. It's one where the ideals are of that; nobody will notice, nobody of influence will care, nobody will be able to put two and two together to see why it's wrong, the few that it might hurt will not be able to reciprocate or respond to it, or then lastly if all else fails, one will acknowledge it and push it away like it's old news.

It all was a calculated set of moves to get the largest pool to draw from to help in the ascending up the ladder.


My biggest problem with mostly all of it is that it's not original, inventive or even offering up much of an alternative view. In other words, even a fool could guess the next move from the current trajectory. That not be a leader of any sort, that's just being a cog in a machine. It also doesn't inspire me much

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #7)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 02:25 PM

27. Yep

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #7)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 09:36 PM

39. Have to agree. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #7)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 10:18 PM

40. "Weathervanes gotta spin in the wind."

Sounds like the tittle of a country song. Someone should compose it and give it to HRC as her campaign tune.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #7)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 12:19 AM

46. That says it all,

"just an undying hunger for power." She will stop at nothing in her quest to be President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:16 PM

10. But if Hillary changes her mind, it's for a good reason

 

but it's not science, and it's not 'new information', it's political expediency, calculated
to erase -- as much as possible -- ANY difference between her and Sanders on issues
many Progressive voters care deeply about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #10)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 11:23 PM

45. I think you are correct...

I would add that I don't think the 1%er has changed her mind on any of these important issues...she simply SAYS she has "evolved"...Bullshit...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #10)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 06:07 AM

54. Of course, you are correct.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:36 PM

12. New information = new polling information

(or other similar intel) that tells her the other side of the issue is better for her politically.

So - it is accurate to say she is changing her position based on new information. It is just not the kind of new information she is implying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #12)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 01:11 PM

18. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #12)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 10:27 PM

41. +1 Is there a single issue that she wouldn't flip-flop on if the polls were saying that it would

be good for her campaign?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #12)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 10:30 PM

42. Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #12)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 02:40 AM

48. Got it.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:39 PM

14. Yup, agreed nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:45 PM

15. On has to be prepared to ignore an awful lot

to support her.

Is she a Democrat, or, a disenfranchised republican?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:55 PM

16. People flip flop

 

like the article says....when there is new info or results don't pan out...

And everyone can do it.

But "serial evolving".... again and again... at convenient times....

And remember, the position changed FROM was also politically expedient at its time.

It's just too much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 01:11 PM

19. K&R nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 01:12 PM

20. Again, I ask: HOW can anyone TRUST her?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AzDar (Reply #20)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 02:00 PM

22. Meme du jour, and for the rest of the campaign because that is all there is left for the right wing.

As you say, it is about trust (or TRUST)....and always has been, which is why Clinton has been reinforcing that trust and winning the party polling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #22)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 02:43 PM

28. Reinforcing trust? Are you trying to start your own meme?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bubzer (Reply #28)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 06:17 PM

35. ...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 01:19 PM

21. I read the diary

and the responses and the word "Specious" applies to all. Hyperbole and conjecture, along with much mind reading, too. And a lot of verbal whacking off. You want to support your candidate? Do so by comparing how he or she is more qualified to address issues that are critical to America and back them up with reasoning and facts.

To deconstruct:
"She keeps saying new information makes her change her mind on policy. But what new information?
Hillary Clinton has a propensity to change her mind on big issues. She has reversed her positions on gay marriage, immigration, gun control, the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact, mass incarceration and the Iraq War, and some believe her recent stand on the Keystone XL pipeline constitutes a flip, too"

Yep. Some of us learn from our mistakes, correct them and move forward. Maybe you don't. Besides, when you link to politico, you blow your creds right out of the water

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azureblue (Reply #21)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 03:35 PM

32. All of us do make mistakes and learn from them.

But unlike Hillary, hundreds of thousands of people don't die when you and I make a mistake. Do you want the person making decisions about your life and the lives of your children and grandchildren to learn as they go? You set the bar pretty low for someone you wish to place in a position to do that over and over again. Basing decisions of that scale on politics is wrong and never justifiable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azureblue (Reply #21)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 06:13 PM

34. It's your criticism that's specious

 

You write:

You want to support your candidate? Do so by comparing how he or she is more qualified to address issues that are critical to America and back them up with reasoning and facts.


That's exactly what the OP does. It gives examples of how Clinton has a history of taking wrong positions, even though the information leading to a better conclusion was available to her at the time. That's a reason to prefer candidates who do better at getting it right initially. The Presidency doesn't offer an unlimited scope for do-overs.

You also write, as to her flip-flops:

Yep. Some of us learn from our mistakes, correct them and move forward.


That's what she did as to Iraq. I give her some credit for, however belatedly, recognizing a mistake. On other issues, though, she has NOT admitted a past mistake. Instead, as the OP correctly states, she's tried to pass it off as new information. The TPP is a good example. She was an ardent cheerleader for it. Then, in the campaign, faced with an unexpectedly strong challenge from her left, she switched. She tried to pass off her change as being based on the new information of the final text, but she hadn't even seen the final text. Furthermore, AFAIK she's never explained what was supposedly different between the version she endorsed and the version she opposed.

She would have more credibility if she'd said, "When we were negotiating this in secret I thought it was a good idea. Over the last couple years, though, after I left government, some late-stage drafts have been leaked and have been analyzed by various NGOs, like the AFL-CIO, Sierra Club, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Medecins sans Frontieres. They've pointed out considerations I'd overlooked before, so I now think that the version I called the "gold standard" was actually a bad idea." That would've been better than her falsely stating that she had merely said she hoped it could be the gold standard, and falsely implying that her change of position was based on changes reflected in the final text.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 02:08 PM

23. What new information?

The latest public opinion polls, what else?

Now, where did that weather vane go?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 02:20 PM

25. Meh

 

People have digested her positions and are still supporting her 2:1

All this is a waste of perfectly good electrons on the internet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cosmicone (Reply #25)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 02:46 PM

29. Then why do you bother to reply?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cosmicone (Reply #25)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 02:50 PM

31. Name recognition, people have been familiar with the name Clinton for a couple of decades nationally

 

I doubt most people polled who said they would vote for Clinton could name her positions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cosmicone (Reply #25)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 02:58 AM

50. People ? What people?

You live in an echo chamber because, If you think for a minute she will win the GE your nuttier than, well than Ben Carson....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to humbled_opinion (Reply #50)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 11:47 AM

67. 50-60% of the people with votes

 

if you subscribe to the notion of scientific polls

Otherwise, you're welcome to believe Bernie is winning all 50 states

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cosmicone (Reply #25)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 11:38 AM

64. Great argument.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 02:21 PM

26. K&R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 02:47 PM

30. Why is the party trying to shove

Her down our throats? She is so flawed as a candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azmom (Reply #30)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 07:36 PM

38. Because she's the candidate of Big Money, and everyone in the DNC is on board with Big Money.


In the end, politics is just a business. And national politics is Big Business, sadly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 03:43 PM

33. "a fat history of taking the wrong position in the early going and then requiring a re-do"

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cherokeeprogressive (Reply #33)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 07:43 AM

57. I just grabbed your flip flops

Great graphic. Thanks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 10:49 PM

43. Don't Worry after she

wins the Primary she will change them all back again.... and believe me many here will cheer her for it...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Sun Nov 8, 2015, 11:21 PM

44. The new information . . .

. . . was new polling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 03:12 AM

51. I would have a lot more respect for Clinton if she was more honest.

She should just say, "You know, I really want to be president because I think I could be a very good one. But I've discovered the American people are waking up to issues that most of us have ignored in Washington up until now. So, I've changed a bunch of my positions because I see now that I was wrong. I promise that if you vote for me I will do my very best to represent the real interests of the American people."

I think it might make a difference. Or maybe not. Our political 'game' is based on fabrications, half-truths, secrecy and downright lies. Most cannot change or will not.

That's why I am supporting Bernie Sanders because with him you don't have to worry about that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 03:53 AM

52. K&R.

Sorry, but thinking people can't support Hillary.

Who knows what you are supporting when you do?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 06:23 AM

55. Everyone should know everything available at all times

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #55)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 09:45 AM

59. She has been running for president for literally years.

I think she had time to get her positions fight last April. Her TPP and XL flops were only changes she made running into the debate because she didn't want those questions on the table.

And it worked. Sanders and O'Malley actually had to bring it up in their answers to other questions during the debate. There wasn't much time spent on trade or the environment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #59)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 10:13 AM

62. why shouldn't people change their opinions as they find out more?

If everyone were so rigid, nothing would ever advance.

If everyone who opposed gay marriage in 1980 had to continue to still oppose it lest they flip flop, we would not have gay marriage now.

The TPP is complex and she did not flip flop, she said it was not as good as she wanted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #62)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 11:41 AM

66. Wouldn't be better if we elected someone like Bernie, that has been correct from day one?

 

We can't afford to have someone that makes decisions as President, only to say that new information shows they were wrong after they leave office.

I mean that's what you are arguing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dawgs (Reply #66)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 12:26 PM

68. nobody is correct from day one except

a know-it-all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #62)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 02:19 PM

71. Right...

But that is just spin. The thing actually got IMPROVED in early October to cut the patent protections on medications to less time than the US was trying to negotiate. Basically, if you take her at her word, she must have therefore liked it BETTER when there were stronger protections for big pharmacuitical companies that would have made medications more expensive. Granted it is still bad, but it has always been bad, even when she was trumpeting it's "gold standard."

She merely put out her statement a few weeks before the debate because the unions were steaming mad at the TPP. Either she negotiated this pact and managed to know nothing about it, or this was an entirely cynical act.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #55)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 11:39 AM

65. Bernie has ALWAYS been correct on civil rights, the Iraq war, TPP, and keystone.

 

Why has Hillary been wrong on all of those until just recently?

Come on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dawgs (Reply #65)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 12:26 PM

69. oversimplification at its best

congrats!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #69)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 01:07 PM

70. No problem. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 09:51 AM

60. The word "Camp Weathervane" is very, very apt

 

for her campaign.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

Mon Nov 9, 2015, 09:54 AM

61. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread