Of events, and a period of time, Hillary Clinton's change in attitude comes only when it is politically expedient.

When did she first come out against the XL Pipeline? Why right before a major election, when it was pretty much writing on the wall that the republicans would have the upper hand in Congress, and they could continue her State Department's original push for it.

When did she come out against the TPP? When it pretty much was known that it is going to get passed anyway!

While your change in attitude was an honest one, many of us suspect Ms Clinton of being political expedient and totally unhindered by such notions as honesty or doing what is right.

Going all the way back to when she worked as Sam Walton's personal attorney at the very same point in time in the 1980's when WalMarts were forcing many mom and pop businesses to shut down.

has been condemned here. Apparently, my erstwhile membership in the GOP, even though I officially left it behind in the early 1980s, is sufficient to accuse me of being perpetually guilty of the most horrible offenses possible. For me it was similar to when I got my first pair of glasses, it literally changed everything; but that transition means nothing to those who persist in condemning what was rather than lending a measure of credibility to what is. It makes as much sense as saying "You were once five years old, therefore you are always five years old."

"Respect not suspect" is what countless sophisticated cheaters tell their spouses and lovers. "I am going to talk a different talk and walk a different walk. Don't focus on the past, dearie, I am yours now."

How many times have we women heard that one?

Of course, it is a most natural stance for Ms Clinton, who put up with decades of such abuse from her own spouse. Yet for whatever reason, she was (and is) still considered a "feminist" despite her spouse's behavior intimidating interns barely out of their teens.

Ambition over principal.

I wish that I did not perceive HRC in that manner but my perception has grown over the years unfortunately.

That's why not a single one has been elected yet.



ANYONE who aspires to be President of the US is, by definition, ambitious. And anyone who takes office will HAVE to compromise. That's our system of government was set up -- with three co-equal branches of government.

If Bernie wins the election, his most fervent followers will end up accusing him of betraying the cause, just as many of them accuse Obama.

I do not do fervent too well regards to politicians.

HRC has a good shot at POTUS and I may vote for HRC but would rather not be in that position.

running for President of the US.

On Social Issues usually is not due to a quid pro quo (unless getting to retain or gain voters one election day is to be considered such a quid.)

There are few Big Money backroom deals that come about due to a change in an individual's social issue positions.

No one says, "Your daughter or son or sister-in-law will garner a top spot at my health insurance company in exchange for you suddenly being pro-LGBT." But that happens all the time with matters relating to Big Energy. And also, Big Banking, Big Military, Health Insurance and Pharma.

Then there a some people who were/are already evolved.

right before a debate. That is flipflopping.

Change of position based on political calculation is another.

The first is genuine. The 2nd is insincere, temporary, and can't be trusted.

Especially the trust and TEMPORARY part!

with political calculation, rural Vermont style.

and now interestingly, their biggest gripes are against 95% of Democrats.
Is that flip flopping or their same old same old- because it actually looks pretty consistent to me.

It's another thing to repeatedly change your position, once you are supposedly firmly established as a Democrat for many years, on an issue-by-issue basis in order to accommodate whatever seems the most politically expedient at the time.

obviously bigoted, selfish and cruel they were. I do think you had to live under a proverbial rock to be an adult who missed all that.

by neoliberal corporatism masquerading as progressive policies for the people in 2015. We've seen the policies these politicians push for too long to claim ignorance. If we had no better choice I could respect it, but we do and I don't.

It because of totally black and white thinking like that that so few people bother to vote in the midterms. Thanks guys!

and that neither side represents them, which is largely true, since both sides are giving lip service to the people at election time, and room service to their large corporate donors all of the time.

By the way, I vote in the midterms, so find a new line. If we can get our party back from the third way, you'll see people climbing over each other to vote for Dems.

And both these posters and the Dems the love have sketchy records, or are not actually Dems.
Freepers love that kinda self defeating shit, I do not.

subject for someone else to decide.

Jim Webb....and the list goes on. There are even libertarians who claim to have changed their mind, and now support socialism. So, changing one's mind seems to okay for some, but a cynical plot for others.

Often attributed to John Maynard Keynes, though it is debated if it was an actual quote.


Every thinking person should do this. - there is no flip flopping in the world of rationality.