And it's fascinating that a woman is employing such paternalistic shit.

to be kept in the dark and fed bullshit. This is disgusting.

Go, Bernie, GO!

to say no. She is such a sad sack. Either come out or not. As for her minions ... same as ever. Ms Having it both ways is going to be nothing to nobody because she has no interest in the rest of us. She doesn't want to disappoint her owners, the 1%.

Thanks, Cali.

Oh dear ...can't have that. Gee ...if Bill had not been POTUS where would she be now?

and it points to a dearth of honesty and a wealth of obfuscation. No matter how many times I read her comments made yesterday on TPA/TPP, I'm struck by the intentional gobbledygook. It's as if HRC and her proxies have no respect for the people they expect to vote for them.

Only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air....

You better watch out!
There may be dogs about!

I come from a long and honourable line of Trevors.

I am sure her BFF Blankfein is calculating the optimal date as we type.

she can. I don't hear depth, compassion, communication skills, or integrity. In short, she seems to be a run of the mill American
politico.

namely Richard M. Nixon. She has the same combination of burning ambition for power, and no core principles whatsoever save for a generalized and free-floating hawkishness. She will say whatever is required to attain the presidency, solely for the sake of obtaining the office. May Princess Celestia, the FSM and the IPU save us from that ever happening.

History doesn't repeat itself but it does rhyme. - Mark Twain

oh, and of course your main point is spot on.

Finney finally admits that she isn't going to answer the question.
http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2015/06/14/hillary-clinton-campaign-senior-spokesperson-breaks-down-policy-rollout-rep/

Because I've found that the more the powers that be downplay the importance of something that occupies so much of their time (think estate tax, capital gains tax, bank regulation, stock market regulation), it's probably a good idea to pay attention: Somebody's figured a new way to transfer more cash from your pocket into their pocket.

I sure understand that much about it.

should offer us stupid voters an explanation of what it is about and why either she does or does not support it.

After all she is running for the highest office in the land and I'm sure that a person with Presidential aspirations should have a good grasp on such things. And a person that wishes to be President should also have the ability to communicate in a manner that the people that would be voting for them would be able to understand as well.

I sense some slight of hand here going on by Hillary's advisors. Are they trying to make fools of us?

<snip>

The Clinton campaign is right that few voters probably understand what’s going on in Congress right now. That does not make it unimportant, and relying on that lack of knowledge to avoid answering a question is a dodge. Here’s one person who absolutely understands what fast-track authority is and why it matters: former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. She understands better than most humans on the planet that without TPA, it’s less likely that a final TPP agreement will be reached. Should the president have fast-track authority to help negotiate trade deals? is not some silly question that only sillyheads in Washington should think is important. It is the most important political question of the moment, since it is the precise matter of legislation dominating Congress right now, and its outcome will have a dramatic effect on the U.S. and global economy. TPA is a BFD, to use one more terrifyingly obscure acronym.

<snip>

It was one of the things that got him elected in 1992 and it's been his greatest strength ever since. I'm surprised that just a bit of that never wore off on Hillary.

"Hillary is smarter than you, trust her."

Maybe that's why she thinks 2016 will be different than 2008 and believes she has a chance of winning.

If we're too dense to understand then why have they kept the entire enterprise secret, eh? Yeah, they're blowing smoke.

millions of people, spent billions of dollars and created a negative opinion about America that will last a century or more.
Ms. Clinton voted yes. History proved her wrong. But, rank and file Americans knew better but were powerless to stop it.

but atleast we get to see it !

by the people for the people ..not by the one percent for the one percent .

Risky business.

or just call it shoveling the bullshit.

She imagines Sanders and O'Malley won't call her on it? Very foolish strategy.

just a small rivulet. But, unless she is able head it off quickly, that small rivulet could transform into a massive gusher of negative public opinion, spinning out of control quicker than most could imagine. It could cost her the nomination or the Presidency.

but we are smart enough to know she supports it.

undecided...I can only presume she feels it is a safe bet to proceed as she has. I see that as
a gamble because of how the vote ended up going down last week. More people are paying
attention than her team may realize.

Have you heard what Axelrod said about Bernie?

On Monday's broadcast of MSNBC's Hardball, former Obama adviser and current MSNBC contributor David Axelrod said Democrats will have a "fling" with Bernie Sanders but at the end of teh day will settle for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as the nominee.

"I think she'll be the nominee of the party," Axelrod said to host Chris Matthews. "I think people have will have a fling with Bernie. Bernie is like a great fun date because you know he's not going to be around town too long and I think you're going to see people flirt with that. But at the end of the day, I think she's going be the nominee."

Later in the segment, Axelrod said when Clinton was chief of the State Department she "owned" the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

"She said it was going to be the gold standard for trade agreements, so this is very, very freighted for her," Axelrod said.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/06/15/axelrod_people_will_have_a_fling_with_bernie_sanders_but_hillary_will_be_nominee_at_end_of_the_day.html

to be manipulated. And they are just the "elite" to do the manipulating.

Well, since Mr. Benenson is obviously a superior intellect in every way, I'm sure he knows the meaning of this acronym: KMA.

And this arrogant fool is one of her strategists? I don't think that's a good sign.

understand- and I'm not alone. Take your lying condescension and shove it.

This campaign, that so many are praising, reminds me strongly of 2008.

The Empress and her courtiers have no clothes. I intend to keep pointing that out.

Thanks, Secretary Clinton. Exhibiting presidential calibre by rising to the level of your average reddit commenter.

conducted focus groups to find the most insulting way to put it.

Ouch.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/15/politics/45-times-secretary-clinton-pushed-the-trade-bill-she-now-opposes/index.html

CONFUSING?.......Well then, why the hell are we trying to pass the damn thing if she thinks its confusing?

There I was thinking I'd been following the issue. Luckily the Clinton campaign is there to tell me that Im just a dumb little derpy derp.
Derp. Will someone be along to pat me on the head shortly?

Everyday here there is confirmation from posters like you that many DU Hillary supporters aren't interested in most issues and shun complexities. They're the people that are happy with a pat on the head and being told this is too complicated for you. Perhaps it is. They're the people that think that liberalism is constituted solely of social issues. It is not. They're the people that are personality driven or even gender driven rather than issue driven.

And I've been predicting for years here that if she's the nominee, Hillary will lose us the election- even against shit repukes like Jeb.

Take a look in the mirror.I said nothing about anyone in my post.
Not a bash, not a thing.
My mention of Hillary 2016 is my opiniin. If you don't want Hillary supporter comments to your threads then maybe post in the bernie forum.

GD is an open forum.
At least that is what the Anti Hillary people keep saying.

I am simply addressing my opinion to a thread in an open forum.
You don't have to like it nor agree.
The only name I mentioned was Hillary, & in a positive way.
I believe the whole TPP subject is confusing to many, not because of Hillary Clinton but because of the secrecy it has demanded.
When our own legislatures can only read it in private & with no note taking nor copies to reference, then why is this so surprising when the truth is told, that most Americans are indeed confused.
Because to most Americans, IT IS very confusing.

And I believe that is who they were addressing. Not those who are intentionally searching for the truth of TPP.

I don't know about anyone else here but is there anyone on DU who hasn't found the TPP subject confusing ?

I don't find their statement insulting. More like the damn truth about how the general American population sees it.
It has been confusing all along.

It is the question as to WHY THE SECRECY that is insulting & that pisses me off.

Truth is, it indeed is confusing. H9w can anyone turn that fact into a diss against someone who simply states the true fact of the entire TPP.

They spoke the truth of the TPP as to the Average American.
Has it not been confusing?

My opinion.
Thanks

that and your rah rah Hillary will be President claim.

and yes, you're being targeted. As for an issue- any issue- being complicated, I refer you to Eric Blair aka George Orwell.

She has no say in the outcome of that fight.
And yes TPP has been confusing all along.
They were stating the truth.

The insult is simply an opinion.
And so is mine.
Enjoy your day.

Her job is to get the nomination to insure that TPTB have a winner no matter who gets the votes.
The GOP has been in the tank for a long time and the only threat comes from the left...secure that and it makes little difference to them who is POTUS.

And yes they will exploit gender or any other issue like that to get her the nomination...because if they do, the election is over in their mind...and they can sit back and enjoy the show.

advantage,imo.

I had a family meeting on Saturday and none of them
understood how important the TPP would be. Even when
I started to explain, they would brush it off.

Only two items woke them up:
The secrecy for even congressional members,
and the fact that the non political and admired
group of doctors without borders spoke up
against this treaty.

So, I agree that a lot of voters don't really
know or care about this issue. That in itself shows
that the administration has done a good job to
make it look insignificant. Naturally HRC would
like to keep it that way, because it serves her well.

To paraphrase Orwell, a good communicator makes complex ideas understandable in straightforward language

I've always considered Democrats to be the sharper tacks in the box.

and she is our all-knowing adult Champion

You'll find the red queen this time.
Really.
Trust Me.

That`s why Bernie Sanders is my go-to guy whenever I`m looking to learn something. He speaks in everyday language and actually does it without the help of focus groups or image makers.

is not respected by the Hillary crowd. There is only one candidate that respects us and the media says he hasn't a chance to win....ummmm, I wonder why they're saying that? I will NEVER trust her with my financial(SSI + pension) and social future. NEVER.

or maybe it will, with the undereducated? Illiterate? Deliberately uninformed?

When it is pointed out that polls show that a majority of Democrats support the TPP, the response is often that the folks being polled don't understand what TPP is so how can they express an informed opinion.

I think it is fair to say that TPP is a fairly complicated agreement and that most opinions of it are based more on a generalized view of past trade agreements rather than on the specifics of this one. The polls show that support for and opposition to TPP show the same partisan pattern as for trade agreements in general.

explain it, not to tell voters "it's too complicated and not that important"

I refer you to the great Eric Blair aka George Orwell. And if you don't know what he said about conveying complex ideas in straightforward language, look it up.

Btw, Bernie does this. Hillary goes on nonsensically and in obscure language about making lemonade out of lemons.

All she wants is what's best for her America. Perhaps if we weren't so easily confused then we would understand that.

That's rich.

It's like she's playing passive aggressively to the base, to labor to the whole electorate,
pretending to be inconsequential to the outcome of the TPP fight when 1) TPP is all over the
news and under heated consideration by Congress and 2) she's a freaking CANDIDATE For
POTUS for Christs sake, not a pretty picture ImHo

All of which is why I posted this just yesterday:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026835856

and yet plays the on the fence calculation game. Can't even speak for herself but gets surrogates to do it. I guess that way she can blame them if they should say something that later on is exposed as a mistake. I'll never trust her.

there seems to much truth in that statement.! But the Negative attacks continue,,,,and it makes Bernie look back to have such followers.....

Again, It is the duty and obligation of politicians to explain complex issues in straightforward language- to paraphrase Orwell. It is repugnant when they are dismissive of voters' concerns and tell them that an issue is too complicated for them to understand or is just some "inside Washington silliness.".

keep up the negative attacks,,,,,, its seems to be working! Even Bernie requested yall stop it..
You do know it not what you say its how you say it.....!

I may have to take up this percieved "threat" by another DUer, with Admin.
Just sayin.

people like you, but you can't see it. Even when its pointed out! They want people to vote for Clinton & issues are just too complicated for us little people & so we should vote for the created image of her candidacy and trust her to understand what we cannot & do the right thing.(ha!) There was no "targeting" of you by a DUer. Its your candidate who is doing the targeting & is literally counting on people like you.

This is not about Bernie Sanders. This is about the TPA & the TPP. Perhaps you are one of those that Hillary has observed as being unable to comprehend the complexities of a trade deal that could alter the global playing field to such a degree that you will not recognize the America you think you were born in.

Regardless of who is running for President, you better damn well pay attention to what they support and believe in, because it will effect everything in your life, and especially when it comes to trade.

But do go on with your silly cheerleading self...it would be a bit amusing if it wasn't so serious to those who care about the future of their countrymen, their children and their children's children.

Just an observation.
Orwell.

I believe it can be done. I believe that it should be done.

...but I took it as the actual bill was evolving, and it's hard to take a stand on something that isn't yet set in stone. I know that sounds like a cop out, but the fact is, it's being dealt with, and there is a lot of pushing and pulling, twisting and political gamesmanship going on.

I don't like the idea of ANY trade pact, especially if we aren't allowed to see the proposal itself. These damned lobbyists and bill writers are trying to sneak their garbage in and pull sneakies the whole way through. There is some truth to what Clinton's spokespersons have been saying.

But she does need to take a loud, clear stand that protects American workers and OUR economy. I also understand that President Obama wants to have control over the rule writing, or as he says, China or some other entity will take that control. I don't like a lot of the techniques that are being used with this whole subject. It seems secretive and deceptive. We've already had experience with NAFTA and several other trade bills that have screwed the American workers and the middle class in this country.

It's almost like "wishing for the 50's" all over again, but I think tariffs are GOOD, and I think protectionism is good as well....to a degree. I remember buying a pair of shoes in Italy and having to pay a duty on them when I mailed them home, because of tariffs we had protecting our shoe industry. That was back in the 60's, and those are long gone. Today, corporations can take the industries, the factories, and everything to Vietnam, China, and elsewhere, and have the products made for a fraction of the cost with NO restrictions from labor laws or environmental standards. It's disgraceful! And those products get dumped into this country as though they were made here. It's insane!

If you think it's so hard and I don't understand it, explain it. Or at least let me read it. And if it's too long and full of obfuscation and legalese, there's some red flags right there.

I've got a whole bunch of books I'd like to ram up your smart asses.
.
.
.

Cali calls for civility and this is your answer?
Hard to take it serious.

At least to me.

It might not be all that important to YOU, but it is extremely important to those of us who will be adversely affected by this.