Why I'm so cynical of the Hillary campaign...

[MellowDem]

I think Hillary is a moderate conservative on a lot of economic issues. I feel that revolving family political dynasties are not good for democracy. I think she will be the corporate candidate of choice for Democrats. I don't really like Hillary much as a candidate.

And yet I have to vote for her because of our archaic first past the post two party system.

That depresses me. It makes me cynical.

I know there is a difference between the Democratic and Republican parties, and I know she is the lesser of two evils, but I want more choice than two, I want proportional representation and multiple parties. I don't want to vote for the corporate candidate from one of two parties every time that is the least evil.

It's hard for me to understand any enthusiasm for Hillary, it comes across as perverse to me, like being enthusiastic that I get to pull a lever that dumps sewage on me instead of radioactive waste.

The most understandable is that she would be the first woman, but even this seems somewhat hollow given that the first woman will be a former First Lady with corporate connections, which just seems to reinforce the point that the game is rigged.

The second most understandable point for enthusiasm of Hillary is that she's not a Republican candidate. No doubt, the Republicans can make even a candidate I personally dislike seem quite likeable, but this just further depresses me.

I don't get enthused on these two points, I get reminded why the American system of government is fucked. I know there are people with my perspective on here, and I know we come across as Debbie Downers to those who are enthusiastic.

I do think Hillary and Democrats will do well in 2016, as they usually do on presidential election years and will continue to going forward, given demographic shifts, and the only thing I'm even kind of excited about is certain social conservative ideology failing, and seeing the reaction the the right imploding slowly, but that's a very cynical excitement.

So please understand where I and some others are coming from, why the Hillary enthusiasm can turn our stomachs, make us roll our eyes and maybe even
cause us to criticize the likely presumptive nominee. It's not a joyous occasion to us, it's pretty damn somber and depressing.

Once the general election really heats up, we'll be forgotten, and many of us will be suddenly enthused by our hatred for the greater of the two evils, a pretty poor but understandable reason. It will make us try and forget all the cynical stuff for a bit.

But remember come next Presiential primary, if we still have growing wealth inequality, if we still don't have universal health coverage, if we still have too big to fail banks, and if we still have no progressive Presidential candidate that's not corporate sponsored, you'll see our sad somber faces again. In other words, focusing on the root cause of the problem, at all times, may not be fun, but it's the only way these problems will ever get fixed, IMHO, and some other's as well, so please excuse our cynicism.

[JaneyVee]

1. Cynicism has never accomplished anything and is....

The antithesis of progressivism.

[MellowDem]

8. Call it skepticism then...

But I'm just being honest that the current situation is breeding lots of cynicism in me and others, because there is no effective legal tool of change at this time.

Most people are too apathetic to be cynical, from what I see.

[VanillaRhapsody]

15. 75% of the Democratic party are apathetic?

I think not!

[MellowDem]

16. No...

But a good portion of both parties are, then the 40 percent that don't show up to vote...

[VanillaRhapsody]

17. A good portion of the 75% that support Clinton are apathetic?

wrong....not hardly...

[MellowDem]

18. Yes, as in, they don't show up to vote...

in Presidential or off year elections, and not just Hillary supporters, everyone.

[upaloopa]

2. We don't always get what we want.

I would venture to guess that 100% of us here want this race to be something better than it is.
The only way it will get better is if we win in 2016. Maybe then we can get constitutional amendments to make it better for future generations.
If we lose it will get worse.
Now maybe all 10,000 of us can write an OP telling the rest of us what we don't like about the way it is today.
Or we can work together to beat the Repubs in 2016 and maybe get a chance to improve things.
If all you do between now and then is post
about what you don't like about how things are you aren't helping them to change in my opinion.

Edit to add this:
I read a lot about the Dust Bowl days. One thing that came up a lot was that people in desperate hard times then did not do much complaining because everyone was in the same boat and did not want listen to each other complain. It does nothing to enumerate what we all already know.

[JI7]

3. netanyahu got elected in a multi party system. rahm Emanuel won

In an open runoff election.

Why do you assume a different system will give you something different or better ?

[MellowDem]

6. Netanyahu won...

Because the majority couldn't form a coalition.

I think it would be better to have some representation of various perspectives then only two monolith parties.

I don't think it would solve everything, but it would be better IMHO.

[JI7]

7. yes but in terms of who gets into office

It won't change much.

[DanTex]

14. I agree it won't much change who get's to be leader. But I still think it would be good.

It would mean more liberals getting into congress, I think. The green party (or whatever) wouldn't get enough votes to rule, true, but they would actually be able to get people into congress, unlike now. And also, people could vote green without worrying about potentially handing the election to Republicans, which could help turnout on the left.

[BlueCaliDem]

10. "it would be better to have some representation of various perspectives then only two monolith part"

Doesn't work AT ALL. All those various Parties have to compromise in order to get anything done, and that's messy and rarely progressive. The Netherlands has a parliamentary system, and the various political Parties from PETA-like parties to conservative have to find common ground and compromise.

No different than what Democrats and Republicans have to do in Congress today, only, less messy and muddied.

[MellowDem]

13. I'm not sure its less messy...

But I am sure it is more democratic and representative, especially given first past the poll, where our Congress has more Republicans in it even though more people voted Democratic overall.

[JI7]

4. How about local and state elections ?

[Faux pas]

5. Kickin'

[shraby]

9. Two words will make me vote for the Democratic candidate..SUPREME COURT

Nuff said!

[BlueCaliDem]

11. Me, too. We can't afford more pro-Corp Cons to dismantle our rights with impunity

and from which there is NO appeal.

We need to continue to vote Democratic Party until Bader-Ginsberg decides to retire, and Kennedy and Scalia either keel over in their seats a la Rehnquist or voluntarily retire so that a Democratic president can appoint their successors and neuter the power of the Roberts' Court. Otherwise, we're screwed.

[whatchamacallit]

12. Apparently the "choice" is

dogshit or dogshit covered in flies.

[Rilgin]

19. Extremely Good Description of My Feelings

I am surprised at the responses in this thread. You have described your own feelings and been very careful about not making your claims universal.

Your reasons for being skeptical or cynical about this election resonate with a good number of posters on this site and in the world who I talk to. Not everyone but a lot.

You pretty much hit everyone of my reasons for being unenthusiastic and thinking that in some ways we are choosing between scylla and charbodis on the economic issues.

I think you are right we will continue to make progress on social issues as we sink deeper into income inequality. We will have a perfect world where all races, genders and sexual preferences will have the purely equal opportunity to seek a job in a shrinking job pool which does not provide any kind of a good life. I suspect that this social equality in principle might even give everyone of all races genders racial preferences an equal opportunity to be one of the 40 people who own 90 Percent of everything in the world.

Further, your mention of "revolving family dynasties" as a significant issue is not discussed enough. One of my questions about Hillary's judgement (nothing about policy) is that this concept alone did not cause her to not run. Even is she had exactly the policies that I liked and was the smartest person on the planet I think that reinforcing this concept alone should have made her make an internal decision not to run. Even Barbara Bush in a coherent moment knew this (although probably has backed off this). It is bad for democracy regardless of the candidate's qualifications or abilities.

Again mostly because your post had many critical responses, I wanted to give you a strong response on how good your post read to me.

[Dems to Win]

20. I'm also not the slightest bit enthused about Hillary as the first woman president

I've been so unenthusiastic about Hillary as the first woman president idea that it has alienated me from organized feminism and Emily's List for the past 2 decades or so. There are many other women who could have been pushed and promoted as first woman president, but all the energy has been directed toward Hillary.

What a message to send to young girls: Any girl in America can grow up to be president. All you have to do is find and marry a man who will be president first!

I'm disgusted that the feminist vote in 2016 is shaping up to be a vote to return Bill Clinton to the White House as first horndog. I barely, reluctantly agreed that Bill's wrongdoing with Monica and Paula Jones was not a high crime worthy of impeachment, but it was plenty wrong, and I'm not at all thrilled at the idea of elevating him to the position of First Gentleman. Bill should have suffered the same fate as Monica -- no prestige, unable to get a job, a punchline for comedians. Damn I don't want him back in the White House.

My feelings about returning the Clintons to the White House are so negative (though I will vote for her if she's the nominee) that it is very hard for me to imagine her winning. Democrats need lots of enthusiasm and high voter turnout to be victorious. I can't imagine Hillary inspiring that kind of turnout. I just hope I'm wrong about this....

[lovemydog]

21. I'd support a Barbara Lee / Bernie Sanders ticket

with total enthusiasm.

I voted for President Obama twice and still support him both here and offline. I feel he took over during great economic crisis and did all he could to prevent that crisis from worsening.

Now I feel our country must build on the recovery in a whole variety of ways. Toward peace and prosperity for all, not just the few. Universal health care, free day care, raising wages, eliminating tax loopholes for the ultra rich, strengthening regulation of Wall Street, free tuition for community colleges, reducing military spending.

Going further left is our best chance to give working people a fair shake. We need this in Congress too. Right now I feel the best opportunity for that is at local levels. And a strong primary field, with people to the left of Hillary Clinton expressing the less corporate side of things.

I understand exactly where you're coming from MellowDem. I do hope Clinton's team also hears what we are saying. I think they've gotten off to a good start in terms of listening and in terms of expressing that there's a lot we can do to make things better for working people. I happen to believe policies like those advocated by Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and Barbara Lee are more in line with where I feel our country should be heading.