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

MBS

(9,688 posts)
54. I agree, and would add one more thing
Mon Aug 11, 2014, 01:26 PM
Aug 2014

I agree with everything you wrote, but would add one more thing:
the timing of these public remarks is for me a character issue, since it indicates:
-lack of diplomacy (even as ex-SoS!), discretion and loyalty, to Obama personally, and as a fellow Democrat . The Clintons themselves reportedly put so much value in loyalty to them: unimpressive, at best, to see that their concept of loyalty doesn't seem to go both ways.
-lack of empathy: Given all that's going on , at home and abroad right now, and how much undeserved flack that O is getting right now from all the Monday-morning quarterbacks (especially the Republican contingent), and drawing on her own experience as SoS and as First Lady, I would have thought that she could have summoned enough empathy to give a more generous account. But she didn't
-overall lack of classiness.

As a contrast, I simply can't imagine Sec. Kerry pulling a stunt like this, even if he were to still entertain ambitions for higher office (which he doesn't).

If she is the nominee, I will vote for her, since any Republican alternative is sure to be much worse. (And, no, I will not waste my vote on a third-party candidate). But I am not feeling good about the situation, for all the reasons you articulated.

But much can happen between now and 2016. There is so much volatility everywhere. I truly believe that there are going to be a lot of upsets in both 2014 and 2016. Hopefully, the Dems can keep their message loud and clear in both elections - and hopefully, we will prevail.Because, to state the obvious, the current Republican party is destroying our democracy.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

i think she really is more hawkish JI7 Aug 2014 #1
+1 jaysunb Aug 2014 #2
I think that was huge rufus dog Aug 2014 #63
I think so too - and that seemed to be the case in Afghanistan karynnj Aug 2014 #5
+1 davidpdx Aug 2014 #12
I think she truly believes in American Exceptionalism. joshcryer Aug 2014 #18
She is more big business and big bank, at least she and Bill were in Arkansas LiberalArkie Aug 2014 #33
Except her voting record is not on corporations first, more for the consumer. Thinkingabout Aug 2014 #34
Hillary is a war hawk. And that's something that won't ever change. blkmusclmachine Aug 2014 #3
Same as every other politician with no skin in the game. Ikonoklast Aug 2014 #26
Either 1 or 2 she's wrong for the country. My guess more sell out less principle on point Aug 2014 #4
It's one and two. And here's three: she's totally shallow on foreign policy, she spent TwilightGardener Aug 2014 #6
Bingo! nt Euphoria Aug 2014 #30
she will out-republican obama lol nt msongs Aug 2014 #7
she was a "Goldwater Girl" back in the day pleinair Aug 2014 #28
She was too young to vote for Goldwater. She campaigned for McCarthy in 1968, Thinkingabout Aug 2014 #36
She campaigned for Rockefeller in 1968. She worked at the Republican National Convention that year. ieoeja Aug 2014 #51
She did in fact change in 1968 from GOP to liberal democrat. Thinkingabout Aug 2014 #52
She volunteered for Goldwater although she was too young to vote. Jim Lane Aug 2014 #53
She was raised in a GOP home but has campaigned for Democrats since voting age. Thinkingabout Aug 2014 #55
She approached 2008 as if she "deserved" the nomination JayhawkSD Aug 2014 #8
Both her and her supporters davidpdx Aug 2014 #13
Good point. n/t JayhawkSD Aug 2014 #41
Where is this Hillary crowd you speak of? LordGlenconner Aug 2014 #57
I guess you should take a look at more than the few threads you have admitted to checking davidpdx Aug 2014 #59
I have LordGlenconner Aug 2014 #60
I never said that she hasn't been criticized davidpdx Aug 2014 #61
If you say so LordGlenconner Aug 2014 #65
She was SOS so she will run on foreign policy. CJCRANE Aug 2014 #9
She has to prove she has bigger balls than any man and by god, given the chance, she will do it. CBGLuthier Aug 2014 #10
Frankly, I think there is the idea out there that Skidmore Aug 2014 #11
We have also seen some big foreign policy blunders or reversals CJCRANE Aug 2014 #14
Rand Paul is not an option for me to even consider. Skidmore Aug 2014 #15
I agree on all points. CJCRANE Aug 2014 #16
The MSM wants a horse race. joshcryer Aug 2014 #17
Is America ready for more interventionism? CJCRANE Aug 2014 #19
Things are stable domestically. joshcryer Aug 2014 #24
But the impression was CJCRANE Aug 2014 #31
Who cares if Clinton picks some "moderate liberal"? The person would be a powerless token TheKentuckian Aug 2014 #35
People who set their sights to 2024? joshcryer Aug 2014 #37
The vice Presidency is no springboard to the big chair save via death, 2024 is not even TheKentuckian Aug 2014 #38
That view is not in line with reasonable reality. joshcryer Aug 2014 #43
Ok, fine what about the other 99.90% of issues the court reviews? TheKentuckian Aug 2014 #47
It's because she's so weak on domestic policy/economics. She *needs* the election to be about Romulox Aug 2014 #20
IMO she is a politician and will do/say what is necessary, remember "Landing under fire?" HereSince1628 Aug 2014 #21
She wants a Republican Senate as well as House, mmonk Aug 2014 #22
I wonder how many people commenting on her "breaking from Obama DURHAM D Aug 2014 #23
True, but there are ways to do that that do not reduce to karynnj Aug 2014 #44
$$$Campaign Donations From Certain Sources$$$ Ikonoklast Aug 2014 #25
I don't think it will matter all that much in a primary, for two reasons Unvanguard Aug 2014 #27
If so, why no wait until after November 2014? karynnj Aug 2014 #45
I don't think it will have much impact on the midterms. Unvanguard Aug 2014 #67
Once the dust settles in Iraq--as if-- randr Aug 2014 #29
Whatever the case, and I think you summed it up well BeyondGeography Aug 2014 #32
As SOS it was her responsibility to do Obama's agenda on foreign policy. Thinkingabout Aug 2014 #39
It's both #1 AND #2 ... sabrina 1 Aug 2014 #40
How about the President has told her Boom Sound 416 Aug 2014 #42
The President has, if anything, favored her over Joe Biden and everyone else karynnj Aug 2014 #46
I would really like to hear Michelle's thoughts on Hillary JaydenD Aug 2014 #64
She's more hawkish and PAProgressive28 Aug 2014 #48
she wanted to "obliterate Iran" magical thyme Aug 2014 #49
"Since she left office"? Obama had to walk back her statements on more than one occasion. ieoeja Aug 2014 #50
+1 n/t MBS Aug 2014 #56
The Honduras coup - the world, including Obama, denounced it JaydenD Aug 2014 #62
I agree, and would add one more thing MBS Aug 2014 #54
She's just showing her Faux pas Aug 2014 #58
Hillary believes she doesn't have a 'likability problem' any more? Dems to Win Aug 2014 #66
This interview does move her "likability" in the wrong direction karynnj Aug 2014 #68
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»My take on Hillary Clinto...»Reply #54