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: Five Reasons No Progressive Should Support Hillary Clinton [View all]Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)33. Kicked and recommended!
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
205 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
If you read the post I responded to, you'd see that this poster claimed no progressive
pnwmom
Feb 2015
#81
When has she said that she, and all the Congressional women, hopes he will run?
pnwmom
Feb 2015
#153
As is Sanders running out of time....as a long-time Democrat I'm increasingly getting annoyed.....
George II
Feb 2015
#158
And yet, Elizabeth Warren has publicly attacked Clinton's Corporate friends, Goldman Sachs
sabrina 1
Feb 2015
#82
Elizabeth Warren is a US Democratic Senator, who sits in a Democratic Caucus and depends
merrily
Feb 2015
#105
Yes, it is, for the reasons stated in my prior post. Also, as I have posted many
merrily
Feb 2015
#107
Then why don't you read through the very long list of bills at the site I linked to,
pnwmom
Feb 2015
#109
Why are you changing the subject? Besides, the US Senate is a conservative body and most Dems
merrily
Feb 2015
#113
I'm not changing the subject, you are. The topic was whether any progressive supports Hillary
pnwmom
Feb 2015
#115
No, the subject that starts this subtread was your post about Warren's endorsement of Hillary.
merrily
Feb 2015
#116
And THAT post was in response to the claim that no progressives supported Hillary. n/t
pnwmom
Feb 2015
#118
Which is totally irrelevant to your changing the subject of the subthread from Warren's
merrily
Feb 2015
#139
Elizabeth Warren was quoted as saying she supports Hillary Clinton RUNNING for president...
cascadiance
Feb 2015
#137
No, read the quote again. She said "no" to the question "are you going to run?"
pnwmom
Feb 2015
#145
So, the 17 million Democrats who voted for her last time didn't "really" support her...
brooklynite
Feb 2015
#19
It's hard to take, for some, that these facts are indisputable at this time.
demosincebirth
Feb 2015
#97
That females are over 50% of the population might have had a touch to do with that in a Dem primary,
merrily
Feb 2015
#114
Interesting point you make about the primary. I had no idea. But I'm still not sure what you mean.
ancianita
Feb 2015
#174
She offers plenty progressive. She is a liberal, supported by millions of other liberals --
NYC Liberal
Feb 2015
#48
Those who support expanding H-1B Visas, the TPP, and was on the Walmart board is NOT liberal...
cascadiance
Feb 2015
#149
They are not "My arguments", though I am indeed very concerned about some of Hillary's
newthinking
Feb 2015
#6
One of the reasons we don't know who is running is that, since 2012, we've been hearing that, if HRC
merrily
Feb 2015
#112
A Democrat who chooses not to run because of Hillary, is not qualified to be President.
Agnosticsherbet
Feb 2015
#171
Then provide an alternate definition to "no Democrat will run against her in the primary."
Agnosticsherbet
Feb 2015
#176
I don't know where to begin since you missed the point of the post so entirely.
merrily
Feb 2015
#178
So you are blaming a media narrative for intimidating Democratic Challangers?
Agnosticsherbet
Feb 2015
#181
No. I don't think any candidates have been intimidated by Hillary or by media.
merrily
Feb 2015
#182
In January, before Obama was reelected, they were opining about the Democrats
Agnosticsherbet
Feb 2015
#184
The only thing I can say is that never in my life have I seen a lead up to a primary remotely like
merrily
Feb 2015
#192
You don't believe the Party has leaders who are more powerful vis a vis the Party than, say you and
merrily
Feb 2015
#199
"PTB" is just something that saves me a lot of typing. It simply refers to the people who have power
merrily
Feb 2015
#203
Courage? Thinking of a paddycake/profile raising pseudo run isn't courage it is playing the game
TheKentuckian
Feb 2015
#194
No one here wants a Republican alternative. But how far are we going to let the
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#28
I think we are. Some think the slide into tyranny is ok if it's slow. It's too much work to fight
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#98
NO! No More Corporate lackeys, be they a member of the Bush Dynasty Or the Clinton Dynasty
Dragonfli
Feb 2015
#101
Yes the Oligarchs have enough money to do it. Doesn't mean I won't fight it all the way.
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#12
LOL! We heard this inevitability meme before. HRC *might* be the dem nom, or she might not
peacebird
Feb 2015
#46
I accept that you are a true believer. I believe she will energize many to come out to vote
peacebird
Feb 2015
#104
"I believe she will discourage many more from turning up to vote, mostly progressives or young."
DemocratSinceBirth
Feb 2015
#123
No, it discusses 5 important considerations from a progressive point of view.
newthinking
Feb 2015
#42
Helping children see a doctor is moral, ethical, right, and progressive.
Agnosticsherbet
Feb 2015
#23
The problem is that if Wall Street has their way we will all end up in soup lines.
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#99
Say Hello to President Bush, little Johnny. We preferred a three-fer to a two-fer and proud we are.
libdem4life
Feb 2015
#18
We've heard a lot of reasons not to nominate HRC but the only reason I've seen for nominating her
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#29
It's what sets us apart from the two-bit dictatorships that only offer their citizens one choice.
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#156
I'm a progressive,yet I would vote for Hillary if she is the Democratic candidate.
DrewFlorida
Feb 2015
#34
Here's the thing: electing Hillary will ensure continuance of the Bush-Obama policy
Maedhros
Feb 2015
#163
No, that is reality. You declare yourself automatic and NOTHING need be done to secure your vote.
TheKentuckian
Feb 2015
#196
THEY DON'T CARE. Nominees to SCOTUS aren't as important as their personal ethics, damn it!
BlueCaliDem
Feb 2015
#77
Bill Clinton appointed Ginsburg. Hillary is stands are mostly liberal on the issues
still_one
Feb 2015
#185
Then she is your best hope. Me? I think we can do better than a Reagan clone
Dragonfli
Feb 2015
#102
As a liberal.. if Hillary runs as our nominee.. she will get my full support..
Peacetrain
Feb 2015
#55
"Because there's not a dime's worth of difference between Al Gore and George Bush"
greenman3610
Feb 2015
#73
The country shifted to the right when Nader helped Florida get tossed to SCOTUS.
pnwmom
Feb 2015
#111
#6 becuase after she loses, even when all the progs knuckle down and pull the lever,
MisterP
Feb 2015
#95
Simple--the same way you come to the conclusion that progressives supported Saddam--
eridani
Feb 2015
#155
So, perhaps you are saying that those who don't support Clinton aren't progressive then...
cascadiance
Feb 2015
#189
And here you see the vulnerability of candidates with experience. You can pick and choose
McCamy Taylor
Feb 2015
#119
There are far too few to waste any as Hillary's hood ornament/empty appeal to liberals
TheKentuckian
Feb 2015
#202
In the general election Progressives should support Clinton for one reason, if nothing else.
Beacool
Feb 2015
#150
Hillary. Wal Mart Board member (1986-1992) and former "Goldwater Girl."
blkmusclmachine
Feb 2015
#162
Ive only ever seen it written as member of WalMart's board of directors, no Foundation mentioned.
merrily
Feb 2015
#175
So should we set out the election in 2016??? OR are you saying we should vote for Bush or Walker?
hollowdweller
Feb 2015
#195