2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary supporters, which Hillary do you support?
This is in reference to the apparent rebranding since July. Based on her two persona's, as a Hillary supporter, which personna has garnered your vote?
| 2 votes, 2 passes | Time left: Unlimited | |
| "I take a backseat to no one," Clinton told a New Hampshire audience in July, "When you look at my record in standing up and fighting for progressive values." | |
0 (0%) |
|
| "You know, I get accused of being kind of moderate and center," Clinton told the audience at a Women for Hillary event in Ohio in September. "I plead guilty." | |
2 (100%) |
|
| 2 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided. | |
| Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll |
|
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)I am still above doing a similar "poll" on Sanders on his waffling gun control positions, but it is tempting.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)of the two positions is the real draw. What's wrong with that?
sibelian
(7,804 posts)Why not? It's a free country.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)rather than assist in evolving......there is a line, fuzzy as it is.
sibelian
(7,804 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)response by Sanders that left these two gun control options open.
sibelian
(7,804 posts)You can't be held responsible for how people respond to it, providing the options you give are a fair representation of the spectrum of possibility and questions the audience on subjects that are actually pertinent.
There is such a thing as misrepresentation through manipulative questioning, but if your intentions are clear to yourself and you are able to explain them, why fear that accusation?
Fearless
(18,458 posts)
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I think he's confused about who the real enemy is.
Logical
(22,457 posts)NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)and based on actual statements made by Sanders I promise i'll answer it. However, you would be expected to provide the same courtesy in my poll.
Autumn
(48,962 posts)Fearless
(18,458 posts)
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)All I want to know is whether Hillary supporters are drawn to her because they believe her to be a progressive, or whether they are drawn to her because they believe her to be a moderate?
I didn't make the statements, SHE did. They can't both be true, so which is the draw? Hillary the progressive or Hillary the moderate? Why is that so taboo when it's on her own proclamations?
Fearless
(18,458 posts)Of posters from several years back, who rarely if ever post, now having 90-95% of their posts in the last sixty days, all in pro-Hillary arguments.
There is evidence of coordinated attacks on posters from outsiders with a distinct pro-Hillary stance.
Call it fishy, but it's the same suspects each time.
And it's remarkable how quickly they find each other in threads.
I would not name names and I would never suggest any sort of thing. But its one hell of a coincidence.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Fearless
(18,458 posts)sibelian
(7,804 posts)...who does not seem to be able to state her position on key issues, they are now expected to vote for someone who doesn't even have a political tendency from which such positions can be extrapolated and asking for information regarding such a tendency is an attack.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)If i didn't use her actual words...but the fact is that I did post exact quotes. They are completely disparate positions, albeit separated by time. I seriously would like to know if her supporters are backing her because they believe her to be a moderate, or because they believe her to be a progressive. For my part, I am drawn to Bernie because i know him to be a true progressive with a long track record to back it up; also he has never claimed to be any other position. So there, I indicated why I support MY candidate, so lets see some truth telling by the Clinton supporters. Which is it, Hillary the progressive, or Hillary the moderate that garners their vote?
Such a simple freakin question and everyone gets bent out of shape? Makes no sense.
sibelian
(7,804 posts)Asking for a political persuasion is now offensive.
I'm surprised no-one's posted "yawn" or that roffle smiley.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Don't ya'll get tired on junk like this?
sibelian
(7,804 posts)Which is it?
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)Geez...get a grip people it's a simple question.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Fearless
(18,458 posts)
Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)
Fearless
(18,458 posts)
sibelian
(7,804 posts)Perhaps her apparent disinterest in nailing her colours to the mast is not unique to her.
riversedge
(80,809 posts)sibelian
(7,804 posts)Not even hot lava?
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)MOE is no longer infinity...woe is you. 
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)I'm a Bernie supporter so I could really care less what political stripe Hillary chooses to identify as this month. but I AM curious as to which of the two personas her supporters believe in...the moderate centrist one, or the progressive one. Why is that so difficult for her supporters to indicate?
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Hillary is towards the center on some things, more progressive on other things.
Why is that so difficult for you to understand?
Bernie has said he could never be a Democrat ... yet now he says that he can be a Democrat.
Is Bernie a liar?
Which Bernie should actual Democrats believe?
Hey ... this is a fun game!!!!!
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)That's a new one.
NanceGreggs
(27,835 posts)- Socialist Scholars Conference in New York City, April 1990.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)the best to use, but I do understand where he is coming from in his statement. The Democratic Party has strayed far to the right of it's roots, so I have to say that I completely agree with much of what he said in reference to the Democratic Party because I know full well that he was referring to the Democratic Party as it exists under DLC, and now New Dem/Third-Way control.
That's exactly why he is running AS a Democrat, in an attempt to bring the party back to the Party of the People instead of the Party B of Wall Street. I am completely in tune with which incarnation of the Democratic Party he would be hypocritical to run as.
Fact of the matter though, the needs of America's poor and middle class far outweigh some statement in reference to a political party. It's really not about "party", nor should it be. It's quite simply about "people". It is for me anyway.
So put away your daggers and thumb-screws and just defend your candidate on the basis of her centrist beliefs, and I will do likewise for Bernie and his Librul, or Socialist, or Whatever you want to label him, beliefs...and may the BEST advocate for the people win...for America's sake.
NanceGreggs
(27,835 posts)I posted the first quote without comment, and I did not make reference to any other candidate. So if you're perceiving that "daggers and thumbscrews" have been brought out, that's obviously your own paranoia at work.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)but I can assure you I have no paranoia. I believe I clearly stated my case and my position.
As I said, I too agree with his statements knowing full well they were directed at the incarnation of the Democratic Party as it exists under DLC/New Dem/Third-Way control.
So I would posit to you that Sen. Sanders is running as a Traditional Democrat, not as a modern day Third-Way 'democrat' aka DWS/Clintons/McCaskill/you get the picture, so perhaps it's not so hypocritical at all. It more a matter of perspective.
NanceGreggs
(27,835 posts)And you immediately went to the idea that I was taking out the thumbscrews. If you have that hard a time dealing with what he himself has said, that's your problem, not mine.
So he's running as a "traditional Democrat", is that is? Funny he didn't distinguish between types of Democrats when he made those statements, nor has he made that distinction now - now that he wants the support and votes of the party he refuses to be a member of.
HE said it would be hypocritical for him to run as a Democrat. I guess it's not so hypocritical after all - now that it serves his political ambitions to do so.
stonecutter357
(13,045 posts)
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Both progressive and moderate at the same time...
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)To each of you I respect your position and reasoning, and I believe you answered truthfully. Too bad the rest of your camp is too fearful to put their cards on the table. Kudos to you
For myself, I have grown weary of the "moderate centrist" approach, but I also realize that we may stem from very disparate lives and experiences that lead us each to the choices we make, so know that I don't fault you in your choice in the slightest. Onward to the primaries and may the best candidate win!
reformist2
(9,841 posts)sibelian
(7,804 posts)If we have a situation where Hillary supporters don't know or won't say which of the two main political tendencies on the left Clinton has claimed for herself prompts their support it becomes difficult not to assume that their support for her emerges from non-political causes.
They don't have to answer at all, of course. It's entirely up to them.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)this post was not intended as snark in the slightest. However, we have a candidate who has now jockeyed between two different political positions and I was quite curious WHAT political stripe of the two she has offered, that they gravitate to in lending her their support. Kind of, do they truly know what they are supporting, as well as what do they THINK they are supporting; a moderate or a progressive. Instead, with the exception of three honest supporters, all I get is snark.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)
You got back exactly what that OP deserved.
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)seems more planning went into the first spontaneity update, but I don't know if that's good or bad! HELP!
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)
Ino
(3,366 posts)She is such a phony.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I just wish we hadn't lost Jon Stewart.
Oh well, he deserves a life with his family too, after getting us through the Bush years he more than deserves it.
Autumn
(48,962 posts)to use Hillary's very own words in two separate statements that she actually spoke in public where it's on record that completely go against each other!!!!
You know if Bernie knew you were quoting Hillary's own statements he would get a tummy ache!!!
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)I don't really even know her, so how could I possibly "hate" her? However, I DO know her to be the moderate centrist that she claims to be (most recently), and it is obvious that her supporters that honest enough, and brave enough, to answer the poll are aware of that as well, and that's fine...for them I'm sure and i have no beef with it, to each his own. However, as a progressive myself, her centrist politics just aren't a fit for me. It's really as simple as that.
sibelian
(7,804 posts)and that's MEAN! It's MEAN not to vote for people who want to be president and people who don't vote for people who want to be president are BAD PEOPLE full of HATE.
People who don't want to vote for Hillary need to take a good long look at themselves and realise that they are all twisty turny freakazoid noobs who don't get stuff and that they HATE her and they SHOULDN'T.
Voting for someone because NOT voting for them means you hate them is a REALLY REALLY REALLY GOOD REASON TO VOTE FOR A CANDIDATE!
In fact, it's the BEST reason.
Autumn
(48,962 posts)
sibelian
(7,804 posts)But, hey. Sometimes a sledgehammer works better than a scalpel!!!
Autumn
(48,962 posts) 
?w=300
hibbing
(10,597 posts)
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)BASH BASH BASH, always using her own words to BASH Hillary.
sibelian
(7,804 posts)"Progressive"? "Moderate"? HAH. How limited are our imaginations! Such dull, petty creatures we have become! Endlessly dividing things into simplistic, uni-dimensional categories like the ant-brained wannabes we really are!
What adjective do we need to understand her other than the word "HILLARY"? For THAT, my dear beam_me_up_scottie, is the NUB of her ideas, yes, the CENTRE, the AXIS, the NE PLUS ULTRA of political victory-gettingness, the core of her political philosophy and the engine of transfinite brilliance that's going to take us home... the only thing she needs... her HILLARYNESS. YES.
Do you no see that Hillary is a political philosophy IN and OF herSELF!? She is beyond our comprehension! She need not even have the "D". In fact, we should all be petitioning the DLC to change their name to the HLC!!!
Why is she inevitable? Because she's Hillary! Why does her being Hillary make her inevitable? Because the other candidates are NOT inevitable, therefore, being the opposite of the other candidates, she cannot be OTHER than inevitable! THAT'S LOGIC. It's YIN and YANG. It is a TALE as OLD as TIME.
Her political power is BEYOND TIME and SPACE and MORTAL KEN and only through our shallow misperception do we stumble into the foolishness of having ANY expectations of her, in which we reveal our lumpen self absorption!
HILLARY + POLITICS = HILLARY.
In questioning her we show only that WE DO NOT UNDERSTAAAAAAAND....
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Hillary 2016: I'll let you know where I stand when I'm elected!
sibelian
(7,804 posts)Of course it will, because Hillary is RIGHT! Why can't people SEE IT? That's how we know what right and wrong are, by listening to Hillary!
If we didn't think what she does is right, it's because we HATE her. And the reason we hate her is because secretly we know she's RIGHT. And her RIGHTNESS makes us feel funny and wrong and so we LASH OUT IN FEAR AT WHAT WE DO NOT UNDERSTAND LIKE CAVEMEN THOWING ROCKS AT THE MOON.
Criticising Hillary comes from hating her which comes from being confused about the wrongness in ourselves because of her rightness and just proves that she is EVEN MORE RIGHT!
AND THAT'S THE TRUTH.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)You must keep adding to your greatest hits!
sibelian
(7,804 posts)It's actually completely and indescribably stupid. I didn't pay much attention to it. It has dimensions of stupidity that are so stupid they're practically crystallising out into reality as a newly discovered solid kind of stupidity.
To be honest I've seen almost no-one use the phrase for ages...
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)
MineralMan
(151,268 posts)Sheesh!
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)confident in posting their position. I will gladly say I respect THEM for their honesty, and for standing by their position on the political spectrum. The rest I suppose simply prefer to hide behind a faux veneer of populism. Cowards? Nah, I won't say that...I'll leave that for them to decide for themselves.
sibelian
(7,804 posts)can't see how this poll could be seen as contraversial.
The left in the states can be roughly divided into Progressive and Moderate.
It is primary season, wherein candidates are put forth for leadership.
It's really NOT a problem to find out what foot candidate is supposed to be striding out on.
At least... it shouldn't be...
Some Hillary supporters here seem to be having some problems with the idea of the question being asked.
So. doesn't that strike you as just a leeeeeeeeeeeeetle bit....
... fucked up?
She IS an actual politician, yes?
Maybe she's not a politician. Maybe she's just a Hillary. A new kind of leader that just IS. A leader that leads because if she doesn't get to lead we're all being mean.
It would be striking out into new territory, for me, I have to say, I've never really heard of someone being voted into the the most powerful job on the planet because NOT getting there would reflect badly on those responsible for providing her with her well-deserved leadership role. I've always been under the impression that we're supposed to vote for politicians based on their qualities, not as part of a self-examination process revealing that we are bad people full of hate if we don't give them what they want.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)So you are correct. You can't see how this poll could be seen as contraversial (sic).
Just sayin...
sibelian
(7,804 posts)She's either a progresive or a moderate, you can't be both. That's not controversial (thannks for the spell-check).
Is the controversial bit that she said both and can't be both? Is that the "attack"? Because, to be frank, it's past the stage where her endless shifting of positions could be seen as a subject for discussion, really it's just a fact. It isnt a debatable issue, so that's not controversial either.
Is the controversial bit that her supporters are now placed in a position of having defend something that's totally impossible to defend? "Come on, let's play fair, we have to score SOME points?" That's not a controversy. Nobody here is required to make anyone else's case for them.
Presumably there is something?
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)So the OP states in defense of this thread: "It would only be an attack if i didn't use her actual words".
And then the OP goes on to tell another poster to put away their daggers and thumb-screws when merely quoting the OP's candidate without commentary and without any derogatory commentary about the OP's candidate's supporters (you know, not insinuating they were cowardly, etc). It's classic cognitive dissonance on display throughout the entire thread.
So yea, keep singing la la la as long as you want....
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)taught_me_patience
(5,477 posts)I really don't care that everybody knows that. If you want, you can put me on ignore so that you never have to come across moderates on a forum again.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)would I put you on ignore? I see no reason to do so from my perspective. I'm just tired of meaningless tit-for-tat accusations about the candidates that prevents the two factions from discussing specific issues. Take for instance Social Security or healthcare. The two candidates have very different approaches to these problems, and yet there is never any discussion of the differences. Why?
Bernie is for a Medicare solution for all, whereas Hillary is more in line with the Obama approach of keeping things in the realm of private insurance. it's no secret to any of us and yet have you ever seen an actual discussion between the two factions explaining WHY they feel their candidate is tacking in the correct direction on a specific topic such as this? I know I haven't, but if there were a link to somewhere on DU where meaningful discussion of the sort actually transpired I think I'd fall outta my chair in shock.
I appreciate your openess, it's a bit refreshing on DU for a change. Not really sure why you immediately fall back to "if you want to put me on ignore". I don't use the ignore feature because I believe it is counterproductive to a site where meaningful discussion transpires. Of course the part about "meaningful discussion" has yet to really happen, but I am hopeful that some day it will.
Nevertheless, thank you for your response and hope you have a great day!
taught_me_patience
(5,477 posts)The other week, there was a poll about whether people supported medicare for all. I was the only person who voted against it. I then posted about why I don't support medicare for all and figured people would be interested in a discussion around it. It was completely ignored. So I pretty much assumed it was one of those polls to "bring out the trolls" and put them on ignore. Your poll had a similar feel. Moderates are treated almost worse than Republicans here, and I'm slowly drifting away from DU because of it. The simple fact that DU consistently polls 90% Bernie, shows me that many other moderates have left too.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)is that I thought if we could get to a point where folks were open about their political stripes, then we would be able to get beyond the snipping back and forth and really discuss the nuts and bolts of where we are at on issues of importance.
The Bernie folks are obviously in the liberal camp, however there was a bit of a cloud on the Hillary camp as even the candidate herself has taken on two disparate positions as evidenced in the poll itself. I'm glad to see that there were at least four of you who held the spirit of your convictions enough to vote in the poll, and I do believe one poster had selected Hillary the progressive for a bit but then changed to no answer. So I would have to question, did that supporter believe Hillary to be a progressive in the truest sense of the word but then had second thoughts? Don't know and probably doesn't matter, but like you I too feel that there isn't much discussion anymore.
For me, I see healthcare as a basic human right that should be readily available to any citizen without fear of consequence. I do understand that others such as you have pointed out do not share my views on the subject, so I think for one that the subject of healthcare solutions would be a good topic for debate between the two camps. It would be great to see, but I suspect such an effort would quickly devolve into the standard "you just want a free pony", and then that would be the end of it.
Is the idea of DU as a place for discussion simply a bridge too far? Perhaps.
Anyway, thanks for the responses, I appreciate it. Enjoy your day. I'll be spending the weekend trying to stay dry here.