2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThe Problem I've Always Had With Hillary Clinton
I like Hillary Clinton and I'd vote for her over anyone on the Right in a heartbeat. I have no interest in the faux "scandals" the Right-wing hate machine churns out year after year. My complaint is that Hillary Clinton, much like Bill Clinton, is a corporate Democrat. She has done the calculation that Wall Street will back someone on the Left and someone on the Right. She wants to tap into all that Wall Street cash even though you and I and she knows the strings that come with that cash. Of course Bernie Sanders supporters are licking their chops at this analysis of Clinton but even though I completely support the ideas Bernie has put forward, without support from establishment Democrats and even a few fed-up Republicans, Bernie will spend 4 years being blocked at every turn much like Obama has been.
So tell me, do I support the corporate Democrat or the guy nobody will work with?
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)mmonk
(52,589 posts)daleanime
(17,796 posts)who are you willing to work with?
HFRN
(1,469 posts)Clinton's free-trade advocacy is hitting labor where it lives
Competition helps both sides, she says. A Buffalo deal yielded a few jobs.
July 30, 2007|Peter Wallsten | Times Staff Writer
BUFFALO, N.Y. To many labor unions and high-tech workers, the Indian giant Tata Consultancy Services is a serious threat -- a company that has helped move U.S. jobs to India while sending thousands of foreign workers on temporary visas to the United States.
So when Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) came to this struggling city to announce some good news, her choice of partners was something of a surprise.
Joining Tata Consultancy's chief executive at a downtown hotel, Clinton announced that the company would open a software development office in Buffalo and form a research partnership with a local university. Tata told a newspaper that it might hire as many as 200 people.
The 2003 announcement had clear benefits for the senator and the company: Tata received good press, and Clinton burnished her credentials as a champion for New York's depressed upstate region.
But less noticed was how the event signaled that Clinton, who portrays herself as a fighter for American workers, had aligned herself with Indian American business leaders and Indian companies feared by the labor movement.
http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jul/30/nation/na-buffalo30
"Outsourcing will continue. There is no way to legislate against reality. We are not in favor of putting up fences."
Hillary had said on Feb 28 in India, according to a report by the Asia Times. Kirwin also cited her position as co-chair of the Friends of India Caucus in the Senate, a group of senators that supports issues important to India, including outsourcing and H-1B and L-1 visas, as another reason behind the ITPAA's decision to give the award to the prospective Democrat presidential nominee.
(Press Trust Of India, 3/5/05)
mmonk
(52,589 posts)If you are more aligned with Bernie, then vote for him. What exactly do you lose? Same with any candidate.
Joe Nation
(963 posts)That's what. 4 years of the status quo.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)The House is too gerrymandered to go our way. And I don't get how it pertains to your choice in the primaries.
Trajan
(19,089 posts)The Big Deal is this - We want our Democratic leaders to STOP the flow of American jobs to foreign lands ...
The picture in the OP disgusts me ... It is disgusting to all US workers who are struggling to make a household work ...
The question might be - Are those who don't care 'What the Big Deal is' hurting their fellow citizens by blithely ignoring the factual displacement of millions of workers, by simply shrugging their shoulders and saying 'huh? ... So what!'
Joe Nation
(963 posts)Who will keep us moving forward?
SonderWoman
(1,169 posts)And corporations only play by the rules Congress creates, so our main focus should be winning back senate. And I believe a Democrat has a better chance of rallying the Dem base than an Independent.
Joe Nation
(963 posts)I want the right person for the job regardless of gender, race, or any other demographic.
riversedge
(70,299 posts)Hillary channels Elizabeth Warren in campaign bid - Apr. 13 ...
money.cnn.com/2015/04/.../hillary-clinton-elizabeth-warren/
CNNMoney
Apr 13, 2015 - Hillary Clinton's campaign announcement sounds strikingly similar to liberal-darling Elizabeth Warren...but will Hillary's policies be equally as progressive? ... Hillary is going to be picked apart like the rotting carcass she is.
Hillary Clinton Is Sounding Like Elizabeth Warren - YouTube
Video for Hillary Clinton sounds like Elizabeth Warren▶ 6:46
Apr 15, 2015 - Uploaded by Secular Talk
On Morning Joe Wednesday morning, host Mika Brzezinski said that Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton was ...
Why Hillary Clinton is sounding a lot like Elizabeth Warren ...
www.msnbc.com/.../why-hillary-clinton-is-sounding-a-lot-like-elizabeth-...
Mar 4, 2015 - Krystal Ball speaks with Democratic donors, politicians, and celebrities about what issues they'd like to see Hillary Clinton champion at the 30th ...
Hillary Clinton Is Sounding A Lot More Like Elizabeth ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../hillary-clinton-elizabet...
The Huffington Post
Jul 2, 2014 - Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) says she isn't running for president, but her rhetoric is still being heard on the campaign trail. On Monday ...
IOWA HILLARY sometimes sounds like Elizabeth Warren ...
www.politico.com/playbook/0415/playbook17892.html
Politico
Apr 15, 2015 - IOWA HILLARY sometimes sounds like Elizabeth Warren ... educators here at Kirkwood Community College, Hillary Clinton ... outlined four big ...
kenfrequed
(7,865 posts)That she is "sounding more like Elizabeth Warren" without actually coming out boldly and specifically on policy that deals with the problems of concentration of wealth, banking, and Wallstreet.
And she does this while still taking money from those very groups.
I have trouble supporting someone that claims they will stand up to the banks on Thursday after cashing their checks on Tuesday.
Hillary doesn't oppose TPP.
Hillary doesn't support reinstating Glass Steagall.
Ridiculous comparison.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)Actually Bernie has good experience working with everyone for years. He won't put up with any nonsense.
Joe Nation
(963 posts)artislife
(9,497 posts)Is it because she is closer to what they want to pass through or is it because she a will easily cave ...er..compromise? What is important to you..The future or having the same incremental change.
I think we are at a flash point. ..maybe even past it.
Joe Nation
(963 posts)Part of it is that they don't want to be seen as being mean to a woman, part of it is that she would be better than an outsider because of her ties to the corporate world(better for them anyway), and a part of it is her broad range of experiences. Incremental change or even just maintaining the status quo is probably Clinton's eventual impact. Bernie's eventual impact, hard to tell. He hasn't exactly been the most effective Senator but he is exactly where we need to take this country.
artislife
(9,497 posts)Of whom you feel will be best for you. That's cool.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)Outsider of what? Of bought politicians? I think Bernie has been a great senator. I'm not trying to be difficult but I do think that Hillary will go with the flow as she did with her Iraq vote.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)The GOP MIGHT cooperate with Hillary on things they already want, but would you really want to see those particular things accomplished?
I can just see, for example, repeats of the various forms of deregulation in the 90's that were "bipartisan" achievements of the previous Clinton WH.
Personally, I think that kind of achievement we don't need.
ericson00
(2,707 posts)especially given their public venom, and Bill Clinton was "buy one get one free." She'll do great!!
INdemo
(6,994 posts)About Bernie Sanders is the fact if he wins the nomination than it will then be clear the "revolution" at that point is successful.
So then through his general election campaigning he asks voters to send to Washinton a Congress that will work with him and at that point voters will respond positively.
So the idea of not having a Congress to work with then becomes a non issue.
dsc
(52,166 posts)the House, in particular is very, very gerrymandered in favor of the GOP. I admit NC is an extreme case, but I do live here so I will use it. In 2012, we won the two party Congressional vote by a smallish margin (about 1 percent), for that we got a 9 - 3- 1 division of seats. 9 solid GOP, 3 very sold DEM, and 1 virtual tie which we won by about 650 votes. In 2014, we lost the two party Congressional vote by about 2 percent or so, the division was 10 - 3 in favor of the GOP. The closest races was lost by nearly 7 points. Unless we win the 2 party Congressional vote by around 10, the GOP will have at least 9 seats here and likely 10. If we don't win by at least 5 they will have a 10 - 3 advantage period. We could have the God Jesus ticket running in NC as a Democrat and it wouldn't win by 10.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)Bernie wouldn't be the silvet bullet, but it would help to set conditions for longer progress towards move the spectrum away from the GOP supremacy.
Fred75
(22 posts)I'm sure that if Bernie Sanders gets the nomination to run for President, he will also talk
about the support he will need to push his agenda through.
Fred75
INdemo
(6,994 posts)Juicy_Bellows
(2,427 posts)The movement on the ground will be something unseen before. I believe the groundswell of support and the tools of this modern age will bring a congress that will work for us. It's better than picking someone the Republicans will work with.
We have to try - isn't it worth trying? I sure as shit think so.
Joe Nation
(963 posts)If there is one constant in the Democrat side of the aisle, it is that many of them look to elect a savior. There is no one-person savior coming to rescue us. I think that is what Obama is saying when he says, "Make me do it". We can elect anyone we want but unless we get behind that person before, during, AND especially after the election is over, nothing will change.
I get sort of irritated by Democrats that think this guy or that woman is going to come in and rescue us from the dreaded Republicans. It doesn't even make sense if you think about it. We know that we live in an Oligarchy not a Democracy so why would anyone think that any single person could override the entire power of the Oligarchs? No one could, but the masses rising up in support of a leader could accomplish exactly what we need to take back this country for the American people.
Juicy_Bellows
(2,427 posts)I do think Bernie has the best chance to mobilize the people. I think you'd agree he yas a better shot at mobilization than Hillary.
Joe Nation
(963 posts)are less likely to be looking for a savior in the first place. Those looking for a savior would probably more likely be in Hillary's camp. Just my opinion.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)Nobidy thinks Sanders would be a savior.
But we do see him as a leader of a much larger movement that has been stifled for years, and is bubbling up to the surface and beginning to gain more popular support.
Sanders himself says "I can't do anything....unless you all do something too. This is about a larger movement."
And personally I think that would help to move the "default" position closer to where it should be.
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)Didn't get much cooperation either.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Joe Nation
(963 posts)That doesn't say much about her or them.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Sanders has 40 years of experience working with others in Congress. I give him the nod here.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)with the guy nobody will work with. Why? Because we saw what triangulation did for us in the Clinton administration: welfare reform, Glass-Steagall, NAFTA, the communications act, tough on crime laws and more. What did we get? The economy of the rich got richer. The economy for most of us stagnated. The top end improved for a while - the bottom started down and has not stopped. Corporations gained power while the people lost power.
If Bernie turns out to not be able to get them to work with him even if our movement backs him up he will still have the veto and executive orders and the chance to appoint judges to the SCOTUS and in this Democrats will support him because they have to. Plus he will have the bully pulpit and will not hold back. We will know we are getting the truth from him. He will talk to us about what he wants to do and why. And we understand him because he understands us. But most of all because we trust him.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)By reading your OP I would say you have already decided to vote Clinton or maybe even someone else.
oasis
(49,407 posts)Think about it.
daredtowork
(3,732 posts)if Hillary isn't doing anything that addresses your concern?
The reason Bernie has so much appeal is that people want domestic policy. Obama was supposed to bring that (remember Hope and Change?) He didn't bring all that much. For some reason once someone becomes President of the United States, they almost forget about the people who live in this country (except for their billionaire donors) and turn to deal with International problems.
So Hillary will get people to "work with her" on the latest International incident. So what. Nothing will happen on the problems that concern you and me.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Then, what do you suppose the real obstacle is in being blocked at every turn.
I think it's the guy or gal who would be "blocked".
It's also the people who get burned by the guy or gal who would be blocked.
Meet the new boss
. Same as the old boss
.
Personally, I don't think people want to be fooled again. We're way past the point in believing whoever gets elected could actually negotiate anything.
It's more of a question of, "So tell me
do I support the Democrat who has never lied about what we must do, or the one that the majority can "work with"?