General Discussion

Omaha Steve

(99,678 posts) Tue Mar 10, 2015, 07:16 PM Mar 2015

The Nation: But Is Hillary Ready for Us?

(AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)

http://www.thenation.com/blog/200897/hillary-ready-us?

William Greider

The “Ready for Hilary” campaign has launched a not-very-subtle courtship of discontented Democrats, those leftish liberal activists who yearn for anybody but another Clinton. The not-yet candidate herself spoke to their concerns indirectly when she recently addressed the Silicon Valley Conference for Women. Clinton sketched out progressive goals for family-centered labor-market reforms. They were like love bombs for bleeding-heart liberals.

Meanwhile, the Center for American Progress, the shadow think tank that speaks for Clinton-Obama politics, issued a more substantive agenda in a 161-page report from its self-appointed “Commission on Inclusive Prosperity.” The co-chair was Lawrence Summers, former Treasury secretary under Bill Clinton and senior adviser to Obama. He performed an intellectual conversion equivalent to a double somersault in gymnastics. The new ideas were actually old ideas that progressive advocates have championed for decades to no avail. They were ignored or rejected by Summers himself and the two Democratic presidents he served.

Never mind, the message is: Hillary gets it. She’s ready to confront the inequality thing. She will bring fresh ideas to the campaign on how to reverse the deterioration of middle-class American life. Her list includes everything from parental leave to care for newborn infants to equal pay for women and paid vacations for all working people. The CAP agenda, among many sound ideas, opts for stronger labor unions, worker ownership of corporations, faster growth and full employment, a reformed global trading system that for American working people will become a “race to the top” instead of the bottom. What’s not to like?

But the Clinton seduction encountered a rocky start. In some progressive quarters, the shape-changing rhetoric inspired anger and abiding skepticism instead of applause. Many liberal advocates were reminded why they didn’t want Hillary in first place. Some saw a leopard changing spots into tiger stripes. Still, many policy activists were pleased that their agitation for Elizabeth Warren or other potential candidates was causing serious heartburn in establishment circles. The dissidents intend to do more.

FULL story at link.

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Nation: But Is Hillary Ready for Us? (Original Post) Omaha Steve Mar 2015 OP

I did see a STARTLING poll last night on Rachel, that in head to head with Walker NoJusticeNoPeace Mar 2015 #1

she ticked a lot of working folks off...her words are out there antigop Mar 2015 #2

"but she's a liberal NOW": it's the same procedure as how they're selling TPP--they now admit that MisterP Mar 2015 #3

Changing Hillary's rhetoric was never the goal. Scuba Mar 2015 #4

Great article. RiverLover Mar 2015 #5

Yes, it sure is. mmonk Mar 2015 #6

fool me once, shame on you...fool me twice...nt antigop Mar 2015 #7

Kick! nt RiverLover Mar 2015 #8

How about a Universal Basic Income? Trillo Mar 2015 #9

Huge yes to that. lovemydog Mar 2015 #10

NoJusticeNoPeace

(5,018 posts)

1. I did see a STARTLING poll last night on Rachel, that in head to head with Walker

Reply to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Tue Mar 10, 2015, 07:27 PM

Mar 2015

it is Hillary 48% and The person who hates working people with a passion at 44%

Dear god we are a stupid country

antigop

(12,778 posts)

2. she ticked a lot of working folks off...her words are out there

Reply to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Tue Mar 10, 2015, 09:52 PM

Mar 2015

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/07/AR2007090702780.html

When Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton flew to New Delhi to meet with Indian business leaders in 2005, she offered a blunt assessment of the loss of American jobs across the Pacific. "There is no way to legislate against reality," she declared. "Outsourcing will continue. . . . We are not against all outsourcing; we are not in favor of putting up fences."

So which outsourcing IS she against? And who is "we"? The DLC/Third Way/Corporate Dems?

MisterP

(23,730 posts)

3. "but she's a liberal NOW": it's the same procedure as how they're selling TPP--they now admit that

Reply to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Tue Mar 10, 2015, 11:03 PM

Mar 2015

NAFTA was a disaster, but only to "show" that they've mended their ways and that the TPP really IS different from NAFTA

someone I know called the neolibs "most all of Bush's policies, BUT without believing that gays cause hurricanes": now that last part is indeed important and not diminishable by anything--but that first part is where the danger lies

Scuba

(53,475 posts)

4. Changing Hillary's rhetoric was never the goal.

Reply to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 07:23 AM

Mar 2015

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)

5. Great article.

Reply to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 07:41 AM

Mar 2015

From OP link~

But these are not normal times. The preliminary skirmishes are more meaningful this time because they reflect the profound crisis of identity that burdens the Democratic Party. What does the party really believe? Whose interests will the nominee truly fight for? Democrats lost their old soul long ago, as critics like myself repeatedly charged.

The 2016 election could become the decisive moment that either transforms the party with an aggressively liberal economic agenda or clings to the past and the “corporate-friendly” straddle devised a generation ago by Bill Clinton’s New Democrats.

...The gut question is: Can we believe the warm and fuzzy reassurances from the Clinton camp? In politics, after all, it is possible for leopards to change their spots into stripes, and they are often congratulated when they do. On the other hand, it is also true some leopards will change back again after they win the election. I suspect we voters will be arguing this question of credibility right up to the 2016 election.

I am impressed that some well-informed and much-admired economists on the left, like Larry Mishel of the Economic Policy Institute and Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, are congratulating Larry Summers for changing his views. I hope they are right. So why am I not convinced?

Reading the CAP report on “inclusive prosperity,” I began to realize I had heard many of these new ideas long before. Then it hit me. Bill Clinton ran for president on some of the very same stuff back in 1992. ...

http://www.thenation.com/blog/200897/hillary-ready-us?

If the party stays "corporate-friendly", I'm checkin' out of politics. Done. I'll have liberal/progressive ideology, but no party.