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
Editorials & Other Articles
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: NYTimes notices Hillary's natural affinity toward the neocons. [View all]betterdemsonly
(1,967 posts)35. Many people genuinely disliked the war. It isn't just hatred.
This isn't not a horse race. There is no reason to support them if their policies suck. They are not worthy of supporting just because they're democrats, apart from their policies. Obama did disappoint me, but no one else came forward to challenge him, and he is still less hawkish than Hillary would have been. Warren has more of a progressive track record than Obama or Hillary at this point, in 2008. I won't apologize in the least for rejecting her twice.
In other words. That is your opinion and so what!
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
49 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
NYTimes notices Hillary's natural affinity toward the neocons. [View all]
betterdemsonly
Jul 2014
OP
Neolibs and neocons are first cousins sharing their love in American Exceptionalism.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Jul 2014
#6
In Other Words, Sir: You Own To Membership In The Group Described In The Final Paragraph
The Magistrate
Jul 2014
#38
Gosh, does anyone wonder why "the Media" is pushing Ms. Clinton again as the inevitable?
Atman
Jul 2014
#12