Reply #28: Clinton was also imfamous for triangulating to the right on damn near

[ThomCat]

everything.

He gave us welfare "reform" that was a republican's wet dream, enacting permanent limits on how long anyone could be on public assistance, and permanently kicking millions of people off of public assistance. This, more than anything, was responsible for creating a large permanent underclass of extreme poverty, especially among single mothers. Does anyone really think voters didn't respond to this?

Of course, the very poor tend not to vote, so it's not like a lot of people really notice or care. Poor people have always been considered expendable.

Remember, it was also Clinton who decided that Corporate money was so important, and so plentiful, that the Democratic party had to pursue it and take it away from the Republicans. The Democratic part had to start giving corporate lobbyists what they wanted, even if it meant turning their backs on unions. Because unions could be counted on to vote solidly democratic no matter what, even if the party betrayed them. After all, what were they going to do, go over to the Republicans? And ever since then, the party has pursued more and more corporate money, and backed more and more pro-corporate policies, and been less and less favorable to unions. Unions have been decimated. They are down to only 7.5% representation in the industries where they even have representation, and even democrats supported changes that have made it harder for unions that unionize. We have Clinton to thank for this change. Does anyone think that voters didn't respond to this?