General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: IF Hillary declares as a candidate for President of the United States, I will [View all]Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)For me, both Hillary Clinton and Jim Webb are too conservative to be favored for the nomination. The difference between them is that Clinton's lead in the polls, among Democrats asked whom they favor for their party's nomination, is the largest or among the largest ever in an open race.
I take heart that these early polls reflect mainly name recognition. Nevertheless, those of us who would like to see a more progressive nominee can't just sit back and hope that the mere passage of time will make a difference. We have to be more proactive. That involves discussing alternative candidates. It also involves discussing the reasons to oppose Clinton, in the hope of winning more people to the view that she's too conservative.
Is this "do(ing) the Republicans' job for them"? Most of what I see on DU that's negative about Clinton is that she supported the Iraq War and is generally too hawkish on foreign policy; that she's a corporatist who's too cozy with Wall Street, who won't take serious action to reign in the financial oligarchs (e.g., reinstating Glass-Steagall); and that, although she hasn't publicly taken a position on the TPP and the Keystone pipeline, there are strong reasons to believe she supports both. Such comments are doing the Republicans' work only if you believe that the Republican candidate will make those criticisms. I suppose that attack will come in the big acceptance speech at the Republican convention, the speech in which the nominee also calls on workers to seize control of the instruments of production.
It's true that, in addition to posts about these ideological differences, DUers have discussed things like the email controversy. Is it your view that we must pass over such subjects in complete silence? It's unrealistic to expect that breaking political news won't be discussed on a political message board. It's also unrealistic to think that if DU ignores it then it won't be a problem for Clinton. Regardless of what is or isn't said on DU, we know that Republicans will bring it up in the general election if Clinton is the nominee. This is an example of why people make it a point to say that we want a contest, not a coronation. If it turns out, with the email thing or with something else, that there is a there there, in the sense that significant numbers of voters turn against Clinton because of it, better we should find that out in the primaries and caucuses, as opposed to the general election.