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

Autumn

(48,966 posts)

11. I'm inclined to think that much of what's in it now has been in it

Reply to NanceGreggs (Reply #8)

Sat Jun 20, 2015, 08:44 PM

Jun 2015

for some time since many Democrats that have seen it have come out strong against it. IMO there certainly are some aspects of the trade bill that did exist when she was "pushing it". Quite a bit of it has been leaked, some of it very troubling, even while she was SOS Most journalism is rather shoddy anymore.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

38 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

45 times Secretary Clinton pushed the trade bill she now opposes [View all] Autumn Jun 2015 OP

Facts - A Terrible Thing To Waste - A Terrible Fate To Embrace cantbeserious Jun 2015 #1

Facts are so inconvenient. I thought # 8 was just so... Autumn Jun 2015 #2

And she can waterski! Lizzie Poppet Jun 2015 #3

BFD Gman Jun 2015 #4

Looks like 45 BFDs to me Autumn Jun 2015 #5

How I feel about it. madfloridian Jun 2015 #6

You nailed it with that OP. Autumn Jun 2015 #7

Kicking that one again. L0oniX Jun 2015 #26

One major problem. NanceGreggs Jun 2015 #8

Which sources do you consider acceptable? Not a huge Jake Tapper fan myself... madfloridian Jun 2015 #9

I don't take anything associated with CNN seriously. NanceGreggs Jun 2015 #10

Well I ask because I don't TV news enough to get a handle on things. madfloridian Jun 2015 #12

Good thinking - wise move. NanceGreggs Jun 2015 #13

I'm inclined to think that much of what's in it now has been in it Autumn Jun 2015 #11

The Democrats (and everyone else) who have seen it ... NanceGreggs Jun 2015 #18

I think that's a big ass problem. Autumn Jun 2015 #19

You're not making any sense. NanceGreggs Jun 2015 #20

Nice twist nance n/t Autumn Jun 2015 #21

How is that a "twist"? NanceGreggs Jun 2015 #23

Enjoy this. L0oniX Jun 2015 #27

Thanks for the link. NanceGreggs Jun 2015 #29

"pushing" the IDEA of such a trade agreement is what I believe it was however doing that... L0oniX Jun 2015 #34

Oh, I see. NanceGreggs Jun 2015 #35

You can trust rich people to make decisions in your best interest all you want. L0oniX Jun 2015 #36

Actually ... NanceGreggs Jun 2015 #37

She was hoping the final bill would be better than it turned out to be. I'm glad she revised pnwmom Jun 2015 #14

I just read an article in GD that says she has come out against 'fast-track' Autumn Jun 2015 #15

I'm sure the fence sitting will come to an end on this ...eventually. L0oniX Jun 2015 #24

Yeah I was just reading that. Excellent article. Autumn Jun 2015 #25

It's a moving target but it changed dramatically when TAA got voted down last Friday. ucrdem Jun 2015 #16

It is such a heart break to feel I cannot vote for her. glinda Jun 2015 #17

How can one trust her? Scuba Jun 2015 #22

When did she come out in opposition to it? [n/t] Maedhros Jun 2015 #28

I think she has said a bit here and there, she did come out against Autumn Jun 2015 #30

I don't think she came out against it Cheese Sandwich Jun 2015 #31

Well, first she said she'd have to read it and get back to ya.. X_Digger Jun 2015 #32

some things take more time than others to be "evolved" on Doctor_J Jun 2015 #33

Imported lemons. Enthusiast Jun 2015 #38