Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The Rising Tide of Populism in the Dem Party Spells Trouble for Hillary [View all]HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)127. Given her sucking up to corporate $...
...theres going to be a lot of mistrust of any progressive promises she makes. She's going to have a huge credibility gap.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
310 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Yes, I'm deeply angry over the corporate takeover of the party. And I'm not the only one
cali
Nov 2013
#131
Frankly I don't care whether the candidate is a man or a woman. So long as they have a RECORD,
sabrina 1
Nov 2013
#169
Well, gee, when you go to the "Ready for Hillary" website, the first face you see is DeBlasio's.
MADem
Nov 2013
#271
Ooooooooh--a gratuitous slam! A personal insult! Didn't take you long, did it? nt
MADem
Nov 2013
#275
In 2016 Warren will be 67; Hillary C.will be 69; after 2 terms, W=75; HC = 77.
Divernan
Nov 2013
#249
blue to the bone, don't ask that question. you assume that people won't vote for the nom.
roguevalley
Nov 2013
#211
From talking to dems I know, they will not vote for her if she receives the nomination. They will
sabrina 1
Nov 2013
#233
I'm with you. Hillary spells trouble for Hillary. We don't need Rethug lite.
InAbLuEsTaTe
Nov 2013
#269
I thikn now is the time for us to say "No we will not support her as the nominee for she is too
cui bono
Nov 2013
#247
Premise being Hillary can NOT change policies for the best... Hillary isn't Pol Pot
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#3
Premise being that her history is one that reveals her close ties to corporate interests
cali
Nov 2013
#4
Keyword: History, I'm going to wait and see what her plans are... I don't hate Hillary, I think she'
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#7
Again, people can change... after seeing Hillary in SOS role I'm willing to give her a chance
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#41
Good enough for me and explains a lot, all she has to do is try and make every attempt to stay
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#151
Labeling what's good enough for me is an indicative of purism, I'm not a purist. I'm not going
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#191
Yes, I wish life was full of perfect choice, it's not. On top of all this it sounds like the people
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#238
Not tippers for me, FDR would have been hated if you think TPP is bad. What she did as SOS
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#65
This is false, FDR had almost 4 terms as president and you think he didn't do ONE THING that
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#150
The purist here would throw her out the second she doesn't send every CEO to gitmo save COSCOs
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#152
Hillarys "extent" you think goes TOO far & others dont..an authoritarian or purist subjects others
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#192
I'm a real dem and I accept the ties she has. I'm not going to let others define "real dem" for me..
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#236
Supporters of Hillary could help her immensely by not referring to those who do not, as 'purists',
sabrina 1
Nov 2013
#174
I see a woman who is and can be flexible. Who's not stupid. Who may well see the trends that are
calimary
Nov 2013
#137
Well stated. Wish it was an OP. That last sentence. Thanks from I'm guessing quite a few of us.
libdem4life
Nov 2013
#160
Understood. Hey, I'm one of the legions for whom the Iraq War vote was a nonstarter.
calimary
Nov 2013
#244
I believe the premise is that Hillary wouldn't WANT to change the policies for the best.
djean111
Nov 2013
#5
We'll see, I don't see tons of corporatism about her now and even Warren couldn't be a purist in ...
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#8
I have a higher bar for a corporatist than those issue or even a couple. IMHO a person would have to
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#44
Again, out of Clinton I don't see the same "fuck government, it sucks" sentiment word or deed
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#51
FDR has actions that fit in that exact definition, he's a corporatist too? The purist would say yes
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#154
False on it's face and a valid comparison seeing FDR would've surpassed Hillary in corporate
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#237
Irrelevant who is making the comparison, the fact is HRC shouldn't be held to a higher bar than..
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#283
"rarely do." ... good we agree, RARELY doesn't mean impossible and the reason she deserves
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#289
I think my argument is pretty logical, don't judge Hillary over her tenure by a higher standard than
uponit7771
Nov 2013
#297
Hillary helped construct the TPP, and there are links elsewhere on DU for information
djean111
Nov 2013
#12
Hillary Clinton's Business Legacy at State Department (leading part in drafting TPP)
antigop
Nov 2013
#115
The actual premise is that Hillary Clinton is unable to understand polling and
grantcart
Nov 2013
#235
Think of Hillary's sacrifice, voting for the Iraq war in order to maintain her electability
Fumesucker
Nov 2013
#6
Imagine the horror of having to vote for war in 2003 in order to be able to save us in 2016?
Fumesucker
Nov 2013
#46
Hillary and The Carlyle Group. Hillary and Goldman Sachs. Hillary the Corporate Crony
cali
Nov 2013
#14
I think a lot of conservatism was masked by the fact we had a common enemy in Bush.
Jackpine Radical
Nov 2013
#34
Can I suggest that Bill de Blasio winning in NYC does not scale up to a national election?
brooklynite
Nov 2013
#16
Yesterday I read a socialist won a city council position in some city in Washington, I believe.
CrispyQ
Nov 2013
#39
I hate to expose myself to potential ridicule by making a whole OP about it, but
Jackpine Radical
Nov 2013
#59
Those in Seattle who want to show they support this change, there's a rally at 2:30 PM today...
cascadiance
Nov 2013
#175
There are a lot of conservadems posting here but hopefully they aren't the majority
cali
Nov 2013
#19
Lets face it: consrvative Dems cross party lines easier than do liberal GOP. Nixon and Reagan .....
marble falls
Nov 2013
#60
I am afraid a populist candidate might split the ticket ... It's too early to see how things could
YOHABLO
Nov 2013
#222
When you look at it from raw ambition. 2004 would have been the best time for HC to pounce....
WCGreen
Nov 2013
#26
There are lots of majority attractive messages. US jobs, living wages, affordable housing are a few.
L0oniX
Nov 2013
#69
many Americans don't know that Hillary is not a left-wing populist. Even many Democrats - even those
Douglas Carpenter
Nov 2013
#49
Both Hillary and her campaign staff believed in her 'inevitability' back then, too.
Ikonoklast
Nov 2013
#184
riiight. because that's the only alternative. If we don't nominate conservaHillary
cali
Nov 2013
#72
Yes she would. We don't need dynasties for one thing, particularly when they are right leaning and
sabrina 1
Nov 2013
#234
Here is a short excerpt of Hill's remarks in Vietnam from the State Dept website--
Jackpine Radical
Nov 2013
#93
The neoliberals and Wall Street mob are calling the shots in the Democratic Party.
duffyduff
Nov 2013
#91
Ironically Ms. Clinton will have the full force of Citizens United behind her.
rhett o rick
Nov 2013
#94
To think she'd be less corporatist after becoming president ... I can't...this map boggles.
ancianita
Nov 2013
#98
heh, a Milloy endorsement (but I thought gender equality was "woo" to those shills...)
MisterP
Nov 2013
#295
Welcome to DU. What if she is the Dem candidate, who would you vote/campaign for?
uppityperson
Nov 2013
#140
The rising disgust with Politics-as-usual spells trouble for Hillary.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Nov 2013
#155
another silly non-response to the OP. Now tell me why Hillary is a good candidate
cali
Nov 2013
#164
Don't forget her role in the NATO invasion of Libya, a country that is now in a tragic state of
sabrina 1
Nov 2013
#166
Yes, it was. In fact most Libyans had free access to HC, so they were way ahead of us in that dept.
sabrina 1
Nov 2013
#232
Clearly someone didn't get the memo about how Hillary is the inevitable nominee and
hughee99
Nov 2013
#172
Clinton is not my first choice for the nomination but by any objective standard she must be
totodeinhere
Nov 2013
#177
"The revolution of 1896 within the Democratic Party meant short term defeat...
polichick
Nov 2013
#207
True, and it's largely because of how far to the Right the Tea Party has gone. Frankly, overall,
libdem4life
Nov 2013
#183
Well, unlike "mystery meat" BHO, HRC is a known entity, a rightie. Send her to the GOP. They need
blkmusclmachine
Nov 2013
#201
I'd like to point out that this is asserted every presidential election cycle
wyldwolf
Nov 2013
#228