General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumssilvershadow
(10,336 posts)vying for seats this cycle. Some of them are bound to be successful, which is why I suspect i've been reading about the possibility of taking the house back.
Not sure but I think Hillary has negative coattails.
Mira
(22,380 posts)if it isn't a successful Presidency, will be that he stirred up the conscience of many and will have begun the eventual inevitable revolution that sets us on a path to rebuild this country in all the ways it is broken. Hopefully it will start with more Democrats everywhere.
Hillary Clinton will never do any of that. Under the veneer of minor nods to what is needed, she is forging ahead to keep trying to win the nomination for what she thinks is rightfully hers.
Shoring up the pragmatic status quo is all a vote for her could do, or for those she rode in on.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)but then you go way too far. Rhetoric isn't reality.
Revolution is not inevitable. Thank goodness. We may have earned the contempt of the world in a number of ways, but the blessed stability of our society is yearned for hopelessly by billions, many millions of whom will die for lack of it.
Every two and four years without fail we get another chance to peacefully and entirely legally change what we don't like. Indeed, it is our duty, though one we normally fail to meet. When our negligence does finally end up biting big holes in our indolent butts, though, we do finally hoist ourselves up and vote for real change. This is one of those times. If we get our act together, we may actually make big, big change.
As for Hillary, your rhetoric bears no relation to reality. She's no angel, as imperfect in her way as you are in yours, but good grief. Why not read a couple of books about her that are recommended by respectable scholars? You have an interest in her that has consumed a fair amount of attention, so why not develop it so you can comment knowledgeably?
Mira
(22,380 posts)for exposing to me that I need more information in order to be at the table and converse "knowledgeably".
I'm off to read.
After "Living History" I had no appetite for reading more of Mrs. Clinton's memoirs, but "Hard Choices"is in abeyance.
As for making "actually big big change, and this being one of those blessed times we do it by getting our act together in supporting Mrs. Clinton" then I maintain that I am not the only one who has to study up to comment from a base of knowledge.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)believing, much less spreading, smears and even outright lies in the Information Age, but what excuse is there if that one's gone?
Mira
(22,380 posts)Surely you are not talking about either one of us!
George II
(67,782 posts)...."insurgent" candidates has Sanders raised campaign funds for?
How many days has Sanders spent in Washington doing HIS job in the Senate this year?
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)..... at least there's no Repug Lite involved with Sanders. That's the most important thing. And he has dominated and changed the narrative.... taken that 25 year activity away from the GOP. Hillary adopting his positions after he has brought them to the fore proves that he is leading in ideas. Pretending he is doing nothing for liberals, and Hillary is, is disingenuous, as well as regurgitating the narrative you've been told to like sheep. It is just more of the same ol' same 'ol idealess unimaginative mediocre dreck we've been getting from the Third Way for too long a while.
George II
(67,782 posts)By the way, it's been asked countless times over the last several months, what SPECIFICALLY has Sanders actually accomplished "for liberals"? That question has never been answered.
Even this response is doing exactly what you're complaining about regarding Clinton supporters, your words, "t is just more of the same ol' same 'ol idealess unimaginative mediocre dreck we've been getting from" Sanders and his campaign.
Haven't you watched any of his stump speeches (plural, but actually unimaginatively singular)
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)I have, but compared to Hillary speeches (the one's we're allowed to hear) for the past 30 years.... she has no ideas, no imagination, no excitement..... the most untrustworthy...
George II
(67,782 posts)...."we started out at 3% in the polls", "corrupt campaign finance system", "rigged economy", "send me $27".
turbinetree
(24,703 posts)on how hedge fund deals being made behind closed doors are promises to protect the professional elites to think there inequality is going to be protected by Clinton, because of the scams that she helped reinforced when she was in office.
While on the Clinton side.........................we get, how she wants to get the government out of higher education and hand it over to for profit Charter Organizations, like her husband and Obama did,, because the world of Clinton says that government should not make a profit, but Hedge Funds in Charter schools should make it instead-------------rob peter to pay paul and then blame paul that your funds we took from you is all your fault----------------------nice double speak
In a other thread on my paste was considered drivel on hedge funds, well it shows what a Clinton has done and will do to these firms........................................she like to make the babble sound like something might be done---------------------hold your breath.........................
Yeah, Bernie is really trying to get "true progressives", and not DLC and Third Way supporters to see what is happening---------------But he can't -----------------I guess the Media machine being run by David Brock and others had a good start on hiding what they have done since 1992 for starters------------attacking the New Deal programs.........................and that is a fact..........................
http://prospect.org/article/what-good-are-hedge-funds
George II
(67,782 posts)turbinetree
(24,703 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)....Wall Street. Why is that?
kjones
(1,053 posts)People who fit in the left-Sanders box (and there are far lefties who don't for sure) seem stuck
in the opinion that everything to the right of them is republican, ready to screw up the country,
etc. That's such a...strange opinion. It completely neglects "movement." Just because someone
is left or right of you doesn't mean they are X. Which way are they trying to move the country?
Now, I'm sure a lot of Bernie people are thoroughly convinced that Hillary want's to turn us into
Nazi Germany, but to anyone who is not completely off the deep end, it's pretty clear she wants
to more the country to the left...which is not exactly what you'd think a republican would want.
Pretending Hillary is a republican just because Bernie is fractionally more extreme than her is,
frankly, bullshit. It is the same as a republican, or even moderate dem, calling anyone left of
themselves a commie.
I don't even care who people support, but at least don't use ^that kind of reasoning. Sorry,
"reasoning."
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)I've been thinking too, I don't think thats "clear" at all.
It looks like to me she want a country that is basically the same, with some bandaids.
Sanders has changed the conversation. Hillary still sounds 20th century.
kjones
(1,053 posts)He butters it up differently, uses populist catchphrases, and in a few
select areas, wants to go (marginally) farther...but what has he actually
changed or added to the conversation? If anything, he's diminished
conversation down to a smaller collection of issues...such that he has
to be prodded regularly just to even get him to acknowledge issues
outside his wheelhouse. He's certainly not advanced the conversation
in terms of solutions...just about everything he says is vague, and
he fumbles or avoids questions about specifics. So primarily, he's just
contributed complaints and displeasure about things...to which I say
"no shit!," it's stuff people have been complaining about for years.
(Particularly noting that Bernie's rhetoric is recycled 20th century...)
If there's any kind of movement involved, Bernie isn't the cause.
Bernie didn't create a wave, he just rode one.
For the record, that's fine too...because after all, politicians should
be following the populaces lead, not the other way around.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Oh please.
Well it may sound all 20th century to you, that's because for the 1st time since Reagan he's talking about something other than going to war to solve our problems. He's talking about how "government IS the problem" is NOT the problem.... money is. For the 1st time since Gingrich, he's reminding us that "liberal" in it's early 20th century heyday form is not a projorative.... or a pipe dream.
Try to keep up.
mdbl
(4,973 posts)I have to wonder how much Hillary will shift the country to the left. Bill already did a bang-up job shifting it to the right. Hillary did a bang-up job sucking up to the big money interests during her political career. Don't insult those who have been watching this all go down the toilet for the last 40 years by using this Nazi crap. No one I know even made that comparison. It insults anyone who possesses an intellect.
Oh yeah, I forgot the other one...calling people stupid. You guys love to do that.
mdbl
(4,973 posts)nuff said!
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)it tends to beat the alternative.
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking of new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." George W. Bush, accidentally telling the truth.
mwooldri
(10,303 posts)Repeal HB2. Then do nothing more. Cant do much more damage then.
2naSalit
(86,646 posts)demand our money back for every day they weren't doing their jobs from way back seven + years ago. Talk about takers!
ErikJ
(6,335 posts)In the building across the street. Congress has become a telemarketing organization for big money.
Petrushka
(3,709 posts)Highest paid telemarketers on the planet!
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Munches popcorn.