Assuming she wins the nom, who would be in her cabinet?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

Huma, obviously, as chief of staff.
Sidney Blumenthal, either as SecState, head of the NSC, or head of the CIA/NSA?
Victoria Nuland as UN ambassador
John Bolton as special advisor on the Middle East
David Koch in charge of reforming Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid
Jamie Dimon as SecTreas
Rahm Emanuel as health and human services
Don Blankenship as head of the EPA

Who else?

[LexVegas]

1. Losing hurts, huh? Get it out of your system...it's ok. nt

[ChairmanAgnostic]

2. I am being serious.

If you can't see that, go to your room and play there.

[sufrommich]

17. "I am being serious"

No you're not.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

19. mind-reading - the new hillarian talent.

How sweet.

Take a closer look at my list. Name one person she would not name.

Huma? Sidney? Jamie? Maybe not Bolton, but not because of any policy disagreements. There are none. Age, perhaps.

[Firebrand Gary]

3. Let it all out...

We can hug it out afterwards.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

8. Don't threaten me like that

I want nothing to do with her or her fans.

[Bluenorthwest]

11. Dr Caligari as Sec of Snark and Assholery?

[NurseJackie]

4. Oh, you poor thing. There, there! C'mere ... awww ... it'll be okay.

[Beowulf]

28. False sympathy.

[NurseJackie]

30. Oh good! You noticed! I thought maybe I was being too subtle.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

45. yeah, really funny.

Did you se what Salon posted today?

This is the kind of “hard-edged rhetoric about the world” Clinton uses, as the Times describes it. The report notes that Clinton has long “channeled [the] views” of her father, “a staunch Republican and an anticommunist.”

The article barely acknowledges Clinton’s leadership in the disastrous 2011 NATO war in Libya, mentioning the country just once. Yet, in February, the New York Times Magazine already devoted roughly 13,000 words to covering Hillary’s uniquely hands-on role in the catastrophic regime change operation.

The almost 7,000-word story also mentions Bernie Sanders only one time, and reduces his campaign to a “progressive insurgency.”

There is no question that Clinton is more hawkish than her opponent. The Vermont senator is not a peacenik, having backed the devastating U.S. war in Afghanistan, and the NATO bombing of Serbia before that. Yet Sanders has injected rare anti-war ideas into the mainstream Democratic debate.

And this is who you want ruining our country?
Read the whole article here:
http://www.salon.com/2016/04/27/democrats_this_is_why_you_need_to_fear_hillary_clinton_the_ny_times_is_absolutely_right_shes_a_bigger_hawk_than_the_republicanse/

[NurseJackie]

46. Not just me ... have you seen the vote count?

You should take a peek. It's really impressive! Did you notice that Bernie has fewer votes than even Donald? That's a big wow!

Salon editorial? GMAFB! What's next: HA Goodman?

Face it ... It's over for Bernie. Nothing you post will change that.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

48. do you have a functioning brain?

Do facts and history matter to you?

Are you so blindly in favor of her that you refuse to even hear evidence and facts which tend to tarnish her aura?

My gosh, we are talking about a potential for starting WWIII with her holding the nuclear codes (hopefully on a secure server, rather than a FOIA avoiding private, unsecured server in a closet). Doesn't that have any impact on you?

[NurseJackie]

49. Are you calling me stupid?

Did you have a chance to look at the vote counts?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

50. it is an inquiry.

An honest inquiry, given your preference of changing the subject and constantly harping on vote totals.

[NurseJackie]

54. HA! :-D "An honest inquiry" (Yeah, right! :-P)

But I can certainly understand why Hillary's vote totals (and DELEGATE totals) are a distressing subject for you.

I think someone should let you know that your doom and gloom, dire consequences, WWIII, Civil War II, Locusts, Plague, Earthquakes and Tidal Wave posts won't make a bit of difference.

From this point forward, no matter what you say, the FACT remains that BERNIE WILL NOT BE THE NOMINEE.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

58. I have heard broken records that play more informative tunes.

Do you even care what sort of person she is and what kind of judgment she has displayed in the past?
Or are you on a mission here?

[NurseJackie]

61. I've had more productive conversations with my pets.

She's the sort of person who has more votes and more delegates that Bernie.

What's your mission? It can't be that you want to "help" Bernie win ... that ship has sailed.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

67. Then, do continue.

With your pets. I am sure that they are far more amused than we.

You are here just to create trouble. WHY? What drives you to do so?

[Svafa]

53. Of course the MSM can say this now that she has basically secured the nomination.

[Beowulf]

62. There's little that's subtle about you, NJ

or funny either.

[NurseJackie]

65. Coming from you, that means a lot to me. Thank you very much! :-P

[betsuni]

5. Satan?

[Hiraeth]

6. DWS= somewhere.

[auntpurl]

7. Tough night for you guys last night.

Hang in there.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

9. Tough night for the country, truth be said.

[auntpurl]

10. The country will be great.

But it's tough to realise that the message that resonates so strongly with you doesn't resonate with the majority of voters. I've been there. Not this cycle, though. This cycle I am hand-in-hand with the beautiful diversity of the Democratic base.

[Bluenorthwest]

13. It's a big giant East Coast/West Coast divide, the East still jails kids for pot and passes anti gay

and anti trans laws, the West is moving forward. I count the Hillary wins as the return of the Reagan Democrats, conservatism and traditional WASPiness is back in fashion.

[auntpurl]

14. I don't think it's East/West

and I suspect Hillary will win California and put that theory to rest.

I also don't think it's open/closed primaries as so many Bernie supporters allege.

I think it's a simple case of diverse/homogenous, all other things being relatively equal, and in that the Democratic party has absolutely no chance without its diverse base, I feel very much on the right side of history here.

Interesting analysis:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1810518

[ChairmanAgnostic]

15. you are probably correct. Then why is Hillary pissing

away any chance to create a big tent?

[auntpurl]

16. I don't think she is.

I think Bernie is missing unity opportunities.

Look, whatever you think of Hillary, you can't deny that after she lost in 2008 she put on her big girl pants and went out there and endorsed Obama without ANY reservations. She stumped for him like her hair was on fire. That is CLASS. That is party loyalty, and unity. She urged her supporters in the strongest terms to vote for Obama. She worked her ass off getting him elected.

And I believe without doubt she would have done the exact same thing for Bernie, should he have won the nomination. So when Bernie comes out with "Hillary will have to win my supporters over on her own", I'm not impressed with his commitment to unity and defeating Republicans as the ULTIMATE GOAL.

Hillary is not excluding anyone. People are disqualifying themselves because they don't like her or her policies. That's everyone's right. But she has a love and kindness theme to her campaign and has said several times now that Bernie and his supporters have more in common with Hillary and her supporters than what divides them.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

20. Unity at the cost of one's soul is too high a price.

She is just plain wrong on many issues. She has too many ties to Wall. Her push for a putsch in Syria and Libya has created a mess that will take decades to fix. Libya - it was a stable country, that thought it had agreements with the west. And now look at the mess she created there.

And what of her vaunted experience? Putting Nuland in charge and creating messes in Ukraine and NATO?

We are supposed to unite a fatally flawed candidate who is more often right than wrong? Why?

[Beowulf]

64. But the country won't be right.

I'd rather have a morally right country than a great one.

[Broward]

12. Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense.

They saw eye to eye on the Iraq War.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

21. and the surge.

[mcar]

18. LOL

[Ino]

22. Rachel Maddow - press secretary (nt)

[2pooped2pop]

23. dws

[BernieforPres2016]

24. Henry Kissinger as Secretary of State

That old war criminal is never going to die.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

25. lol. this post is all sorts of pathetic.

i guess we are all in the anger stage, in the stages of grief. at least we are getting past denial.

[Hiraeth]

57. oh. are WE now.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

59. i am hopeful that people stop lying to themselves

[Hiraeth]

60. 9 million voters lied to themselves and Oh By The Way. There is another woman running

and running on the #1 issue that is dear to Bernie's heart ... just sayin'

[Kip Humphrey]

26. David Brock, Secretary of Propaganda

[workinclasszero]

27. *pats head*

[Codeine]

29. So many sadz. nt

[TransitJohn]

31. Goldman Sachs, same as currently. eom

n/t

[Katashi_itto]

32. DWS somewhere

[ChairmanAgnostic]

34. Remember when they relegated Carol Mostly Wrong

to New Zealand? And she still managed to screw it up by horribly insulting the locals?

I suspect that putting her in a White House office or as the head of a Department would be a step too far, even for the likes of Hillary. Now that she has served her purpose of fucking with anyone who dared oppose the queen, I suspect that she will be discarded like everyone else who did their thing and now wants her quid pro quo. Much like that newly worried dude over at Dkos.

American Samoa - THAT is where they hid Moseley Braun after her NZ fuck up.

[Katashi_itto]

41. Lol, I'd forgotten!

[MineralMan]

33. Up to her, I imagine. Right now, I'm not

worried about that. We have a November election to win. She has said that her cabinet will look like the nation, and that at least half of the cabinet appointees will be women. You can expect POC to be represented, along with other minority groups, too.

I suspect that most of those on your list will be not among them. Maybe Huma Abedin. She'd be a good Chief of Staff, I'm sure. She's smart, effective, and knows Hillary's thinking on most topics.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

35. do you really think she would dare appoint SecTreas

that did NOT come from Chase or some other major bank?

[nemo137]

37. Well, she's a US president, so no

I'm like 90% sure that even Bernie would end up appointing someone with some kind of Wall Street experience, although he'd find someone who'd left for a University or liberal think-tank. That cabinet seat is basically a liaison role.

[MineralMan]

39. Frankly, I have no idea.

I'm really not involved in politics at that level of complexity. I'm sure that she will appoint someone with long experience in financial matters. I can't imagine any other course. Anyone who is qualified for that position will come from a financial background. I'm less interested in that than in the ideas of her appointee. I'll wait and see.

We aren't voting for cabinet officials. We're voting for someone who will appoint people to those positions.

Between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, I'll gladly prefer Clinton to make those appointments.

[cherokeeprogressive]

36. “Well, I am going to have a Cabinet that looks like America, and 50 percent of America is women.”

That was her promise when Maddow asked her Monday what her cabinet would look like. Her cabinet WILL be 50% women.

http://theslot.jezebel.com/hillary-clinton-promises-that-half-of-her-cabinet-will-1773099821

[MineralMan]

40. Sounds good to me. There are plenty of superbly qualified

candidates for every position who are women. Our government should absolutely reflect the population, in my opinion.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

43. Ted Cruz' wife was a bigwig at CHase

so she would fit the bill.

Sarah Palin and Hillary agreed on Iraq and the surge.

Carly Fiorina in charge of the FED?

Jan Brewer in charge of the VA?

[Goblinmonger]

68. I really hope she means that.

It will be nice to see an openly LGBT cabinet member. And an atheist.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

38. Lackies.

[qdouble]

42. Some potential members (according to berniecrats)

[img][/img]
[img][/img]
[img][/img]
[img][/img]
[img][/img]

[Scuba]

44. SOS, Kissinger. SecDef, Kagan. Labor, Koch.

[frylock]

47. Insiders and yespeople.

[Agnosticsherbet]

51. She said half he cabinet will be women. So that is the limit of my prediction for President Clinton

Cabinet Members.

[fasttense]

52. Pete Peterson in charge of privatization of Social Security.

[jwirr]

55. No one that will do anything for any of us.

[Maedhros]

56. Whomever Wall Street tells her to select. [n/t]

[Yurovsky]

66. Ding ding ding!!! Winner winner chicken dinner!!!

The HRC supporters are in complete and total denial that she is nothing more than a wholly owned subsidiary of Goldman Sachs. She will do NOTHING that upsets her corporate ownership. I don't think these greedy fuckers (WS) care about social issues (thankfully), but on economic issues, the 1% will do just great, while the rest of us get the shaft for 4-8 years while Hillary and Bill funnel hundreds of millions into their slush fund and jet-set around the world on AF1 on the taxpayers dime.

Single payer? $15 min wage? Peace as a foreign policy and decreasing defense budgets? Meaningful action on climate change? Wall Street reform? Tax increases on the super-rich?

If any of these issues are taken up by Hillary and are actually a priority for her administration I'll lead her 2020 fundraising team. Something tells me that ain't gonna happen...

[Dem2]

63. Adoph Hitler in charge of ...

I don't want to get in trouble, just trying to be as cynical as the O/P is.

[pantsonfire]

69. Donald Trump?