General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDems want Hillary Clinton to leave spotlight
BY AMIE PARNES - 06/04/17 10:30 AM EDT
Democrats say theyd like Hillary Clinton to take a cue from former President Obama and step out of the spotlight.
They say her string of remarks explaining her stunning loss in November coupled with the public remarks blaming the Democratic National Committee for the defeat which many took as also critical of Obama are hurting the party and making the 2016 candidate look bitter.
The Hill interviewed more a dozen Democrats about Clintons remarks, including many staunch Clinton supporters and former aides.
They said they understood the need for Clinton to explain what happened in the election, and many also empathized with Clintons anger over former FBI Director James Comeys handling of a probe into her private email server.
FULL story: http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/336172-dems-want-hillary-clinton-to-leave-spotlight
DURHAM D
(32,610 posts)Wounded Bear
(58,662 posts)Bullshit! If nothing else, she'll be a terrific fundraiser.
Didn't read the whole article, but I refuse to take advice from Repubs, especially when it doesn't make any sense.
trueblue2007
(17,223 posts)sheshe2
(83,785 posts)brer cat
(24,572 posts)That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)Volaris
(10,271 posts)Botany
(70,513 posts)And yes she was right when she said that the information that the Russian stole from
her, the DNC, and county BOEs/Dem Parties would not have been able to be weaponized
without Republican help.
trueblue2007
(17,223 posts)democratisphere
(17,235 posts)dalton99a
(81,513 posts)Demsrule86
(68,582 posts)SaschaHM
(2,897 posts)I'd like for these Dems to come into the spotlight so the 66 million that voted for HRC will know who not to support.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Anything to trash Hillary.
JHan
(10,173 posts)Even after dragging the DNC
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)a kennedy
(29,672 posts)if I even read the topic suggested. the Hill, ugh.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)a kennedy
(29,672 posts)faith in.
kimbutgar
(21,155 posts)I'd like her to speak out more and criticize chump more. Whoever this Dem is, they're probably a rethug saying they are a Democrat.
global1
(25,251 posts)yes Trump is out there being a very visible target - but our real target for the 2018 Midterms is not Trump. He will have two more years of his term after 2018.
It is the Repugs that are running - all over the country for seats in the House and the Senate. Those are the people that we and she should be targeting and criticizing. The Dems in general have to run a campaign in 2018 against those Repugs. It is only after we defeat those Repugs and take back the House and Senate - that we can effectively deal with Trump and cut him off at the knees.
It is imperative that we take back the House and Senate in 2018.
We can't make the same mistake and run the 2018 campaign against Trump like we did in 2016. That is what got the Repugs the triple win of the presidency, House and Senate and put us in this ineffectual position we're in today.
Beartracks
(12,814 posts)True. So true.
Dems everywhere need to tie every local and state Republican candidate with Trump and his regime's policies -- and the RESULTS of those policies. Explain it all and tie it like a noose around their necks.
==================
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Of course.
Only those who didn't vote for her, or even voted against her, know who they are. But they owe it to their planet, their nation, their people, their families, and their descendants who will inherit what they leave them to immediately become far wiser than they were last November. Slow learners should pick up their pace, please.
Princess Turandot
(4,787 posts)OMG!
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)bresue
(1,007 posts)And since she has come back on the stage and been more vocal...I see a new self-power in Dems rise.
She has in no way hurt the party for advocating for a better economy, equal pay, lgbt rights, and ect.
She truly empowers me with her speeches...and after I have listened to her...I think yes, I can make a change even if it is little or small, in a way, I can make a difference. And I will never be disloyal, for she was fighting for me back in 90s for health insurance for all children!
trueblue2007
(17,223 posts)They have to document. for every 12 Dems ..... I could find 150 who love Hillary.
StevieM
(10,500 posts)She was simply discussing her experience during the race. But she did not say, or even imply, that they cost her the race. If anything, she was bragging about how good a job she did at building it up.
Her point was actually the exact opposite. She was saying that none of these factors were decisive. What turned the race upside down was Hurricane Comey.
onecaliberal
(32,861 posts)AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)HRC, the individual, was hardly ever mentioned which was helpful to gathering support to go after Trump and his people.
The Code Conference interview put the focus on HRC and how she is handling the loss of the election which I think hinders gathering support for going after Trump.
Also, I too am genuinely puzzled and disheartened by her statement that she inherited nothing from the Democratic Party and that none of her decisions cost her the election.
Of course HRC has a right to say what she wants, but there could be unintended and unfortunate consequences as I described above.
delisen
(6,044 posts)"Code Conference."
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)Notice the link:
https://events.recode.net/events/code-conference-2017/
Here is a transcript:
https://www.recode.net/2017/5/31/15722218/hillary-clinton-code-conference-transcript-donald-trump-2016-russia-walt-mossberg-kara-swisher
About inheriting nothing from the Democratic Party:
Let me just do a comparison for you. I set up my campaign and we have our own data operation. I get the nomination. So Im now the nominee of the Democratic Party. I inherit nothing from the Democratic Party.
Mossberg: What do you mean nothing?
I mean it was bankrupt, it was on the verge of insolvency, its data was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong. I had to inject money into it ...
Mossberg: This is the DNC youre talking about.
About her decisions not costing her the election:
Yes, right. Well I hope we get into this because look, I take responsibility for every decision I made, but thats not why I lost. So I think its important that we learn the real lessons from this last campaign because the forces that we are up against are not just interested in influencing our elections and our politics, theyre going after our economy and theyre going after our unity as a nation. So yes, back in 98 look, I have been watching this and have been, obviously, the target for a number of years. And what is hard for people to really although now after the election theres greater understanding is that there are forces in our country put the Russians to one side who have been fighting rear-guard actions for as long as Ive been alive, because my life coincided with the Civil Rights movement, with the Womens Rights movement, with anti-war protesting, with the impeachment ... you know, the driving out of office because he was about to be impeached president ...
Are transcripts provided by the conference considered to be fake news by you?
bigtree
(85,998 posts)...the woman who won more votes than anyone in history, except BO in 2008.
This is shameful and embarrassing for these neanderthals.
dmr
(28,347 posts)Nor do we throw one another under the bus.
Whatever, or whomever is spouting this idea needs to have their motives examined.
Last week I enjoyed watching and listening to Hillary speak. Last night I DVR'd C-span of her speaking about her upcoming books. I'm looking forward to watching it.
I tell you what, there are people/factions who negatively pounce on that woman no matter what she says or does. So when I see a headline that the Dems want her to go away, I see it for what it is: one of those negative pounces.
delisen
(6,044 posts)I haven't heard any bitterness from Clinton. I heard analysis. I heard honesty. I heard resolve.
Clinton stayed out of the spotlight almost too long. We need leaders willing to tell the truth and not hide information from citizens so that only a small group with narrow analyses and self-interest determine the future of the party and the country.
The attempts to silence Clinton are a testimony to her power and the fear she continues to engender among the small thinkers in the US and the would be world dictator abroad.
Too many professional democrats maybe want to stand in the shadows and take potshots at the giants so they don't have to face facts about massive changes coming up.
We don't need trump-lite and we don't need to be singing the blues for the Democratic Party of yore or a mythic "working class" idealized by men in suits who are ready to make money off people they don't even mingle with on a daily basis.
People who who haven't been able to stop Scott Walker from taking over Wisconsin want to silence a strong national and international voice for justice?
Let the whisperers come out of the shadows and make their case. Clinton can take it and so can we.
In the meantime those of us who understand the enormity of what we are facing will be forging ahead.
YCHDT
(962 posts)Pathwalker
(6,598 posts)who don't want her to go away. So, that dozen can just suck on that!
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)this is more than I can say for lots of others who are trying to tell us who to support. Sounds like Russian propaganda.
Beaverhausen
(24,470 posts)She had the election stolen from her and she has a right to speak about it.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)This OP is from a bitter Bernie supporter and JPR regular.
Pfft.
delisen
(6,044 posts)ala the Mitch McConnell attempt to shut Elizabeth Warren up.
Watching "some Dems" morph into McConnell would be discouraging if it were not so ridiculously laughable.
Mike Nelson
(9,958 posts)...alert the media. She's Hillary Clinton. Her appearances will be covered. She's going to be in the spotlight until she dies. Get on to other business if that's disturbing.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)"The Hill interviewed more than a dozen Democrats".
Thank you for bringing this here. Ignorance at this level requires some hidden form of brilliance.
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)samnsara
(17,622 posts)BeyondGeography
(39,374 posts)From the article: "Advisers to Obama have said he wants to give a new generation of leaders room to grow."
We can litigate the election without Hillary. And Obama is right; new stars need to shine.
seaglass
(8,171 posts)BeyondGeography
(39,374 posts)No matter what HRC or Bernie has to say about that, it's too easy to cast it off as sour grapes. That's why defeated candidates traditionally hold their tongues.
seaglass
(8,171 posts)want anyone to shut up about it, it is not trivia. Anyone who holds their tongue about it because of the way they might be perceived is a coward.
BeyondGeography
(39,374 posts)With HRC, otoh, you could argue she does more harm than good by weighing in.
seaglass
(8,171 posts)not like she is a no-nothing pundit with little knowledge and lots of opinion. I think it's fair that she has the opportunity to do a post-mortem on her campaign as everyone else seems to freely express their opinions, some making money off their "insights" or using it for their own political gain.
The people who never supported Hillary will continue to dismiss her and her right to speak out. They can kindly fuck off.
BeyondGeography
(39,374 posts)That doesn't make them particularly useful at the moment.
Hekate
(90,708 posts)Are they all obsolete and passé?
Or is it just Hillary, a woman and a Clinton, two groups for whom there has always been a robust double standard?
BeyondGeography
(39,374 posts)Dean has been a mostly effective surrogate, Kerry kept his seat in the Senate and was Obama's other SoS, now that's over. And Obama will play a supporting role as ex-President. They're all elder or not-so-elder statespeople at this point, including Hillary.
Hekate
(90,708 posts)I just now finished watching her interview with Cheryl Strayed on Book TV. Like her previous interviews and speeches, it was intelligent, rational, analytical, warm, and completely without self-pity.
Hillary is far more worried about the future of American democracy with Trump-Bannon-Putin in charge than she is concerned with nursing her personal feelings. Because of that concern, she will continue to speak about the assault on our democracy and how it took place and is still happening.
But because this is Hillary Clinton we're talking about, there are people more interested in questioning her motives and telling her to stfu, than in heeding what she has to say. For some reason or other this gets on my last nerve.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Her org is getting the dollars I earmarked for the DNC, until they brought Sanders on board.
skylucy
(3,739 posts)mhw
(678 posts)QC
(26,371 posts)The Minnesota senators remarks come a day after Clinton told a tech conference she was unfairly targeted during the 2016 campaign, arguing the media paid more attention to her own personal scandals than reports of Russian interference in the election.
I love Hillary. I think she is very prepared to be president of the United States and I think she has a right to analyze what happened, but we do have to move on, Franken said. We have to move on by proving we are the party that cares about a lot of the people who voted for Donald Trump.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/franken-clinton-move-election-loss-211441232.html
seaglass
(8,171 posts)and appreciates her speaking out. Say it loud Hillary.
StevieM
(10,500 posts)That book is a total disgrace. Completely dishonest journalism.
spanone
(135,843 posts)Response to spanone (Reply #45)
JTFrog This message was self-deleted by its author.
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)Some Democrats might feel that way, of course, but it's unlikely that most do. She did, after all, win the popular vote for President by about 3 million votes. I doubt those voters have changed their minds since the election.
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)Nope...
bresue
(1,007 posts)The DNC will all love her again.
peggysue2
(10,829 posts)Of reading this meme--how Hillary Clinton should sit down and shut up. As her history would suggest, she's no quitter or shrinking violet. HRC has a voice and a platform after decades of public service, policy implementation and international experience. She recognizes the clear and present danger before us and the rippling effect of last year's election interference. Who better to speak to that but Clinton herself?
Kudos to HRC and her willingness to speak out. And persist, despite the criticism and howls. From Democrats, no less. Shame on them.
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)peggysue2
(10,829 posts):0)
Response to peggysue2 (Reply #50)
Post removed
vlyons
(10,252 posts)I appreciate her remarks. Her critique of the loss is helpful, not hurtful. We should and can do better, but we need to learn from past mistakes.
JHan
(10,173 posts)In that interview she gave she raised systemic and strategic issues dems should be obsessed with:
1) getting our data operations in order to counter the propaganda of Cambridge analytica - weaponizing our own AI. Where's the talk about that?
2) specifically targeting and talking about voter suppression till we're blue in the face
3) making gerrymandering a national crisis issue - it is killing democracy
4) grassroots activism to bring more of the Dem base into the fold of political power .
5) talking about citizens United and how it has facilitated the flow of dark money into conservative activism
It doesn't matter if we have the best message in the world if we can't counter the above effectively,
Yet, What is the hot take by numpties ? That Clinton should "go away".
Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)
Post removed
still_one
(92,216 posts)-all book which journalists have been using to justify their inept coverage of Hillary during the campaign.
Just another attempt by Parnes to sell her bullshit.
As for the article itself. Which "Dems" are those Amie? The article says more than 12. Maybe it is 12.5 Dems. They didn't ask me. If it was more than 100, I am sure they would have said "more than 100", and I am damn sure it wasn't even 50, and maybe not even 20, because there is no doubt in my mind the Hill or Amie Parnes would NOT have been shy about that. In fact are very precise when they say more than a dozen. It isn't DOZENS, but DOZEN. I think this is just another feeble attempt by our illustrious media to take another swipe at Hillary. They didn't get enough of it during her campaign, or for that matter during the nineties and before. Only thing that surprises me about this is the Hill and Ms. Parnes didn't add something about Vince Foster.
After all the abuse Hillary has had to put up with from the right, the left, and the media throughout the years, they want the "little woman to be quiet, and know her place".
They use the example of President Obama, "to step out of the spotlight", except obviously they have a selective attention span, because President Obama is NOT stepping out of the limelight.
George II
(67,782 posts)...there were about 30 million Democrats in the Country. Plus, the article only named two of that "more than a dozen".
Remember, the author of that article is also the author of the Clinton hit-book "Shattered".
It's not your headline, but that headline is patently false. "Dems" do NOT want Hillary Clinton to leave the spotlight, and she should dow whatever she wants.
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)...and won the GE. She did.
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)musette_sf
(10,202 posts)trueblue2007
(17,223 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)I bet this bullshit narrative goes over better at JPR type sites.
Just sayin....
TheFrenchRazor
(2,116 posts)rigging.
mhw
(678 posts)The OP link is from a Hillary hater who just made a bundle of cash writing a RW approved hit piece on HRC.
And Here It Is posted on DU.
Sen. Walter Sobchak
(8,692 posts)I'm not personally interested in anything she has to say, but I don't think she is harming anyone at the moment.
But if she is still at it as the midterms and primary season are upon us, I won't be impressed. Her ability to suck all the air out of the room prevented a better candidate from emerging in 2016. I would be similarly unamused if Bernie is still at it then.
brer cat
(24,572 posts)unless you just want to sow dissent?
Omaha Steve
(99,655 posts)Many people read The Hill.
The responses have done a great job of showing this was a hit piece. And those replies will come up in searches. Many uninformed individuals will get to hear the DU side of the story!!!!!
OS
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)And what is this suppose to mean??? Please explain your comment.
Quote...OS
>The responses have done a great job of showing this was a hit piece. And those replies will come up in searches. Many uninformed individuals will get to hear the DU side of the story!!!!! <
Omaha Steve
(99,655 posts)Replies like the article author has had an agenda against Hillary for some time.
Like I said many people read The Hill. The Hill has a story that just left DU trending now: https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029158174
Wouldn't you rather see people getting the DU info than at Free Republic a couple spots down in the search?
OS
Search results
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)You posted a hit piece so...what? That it could be seen as a hit piece? Funny your OP didn't mention that.
Sheesh.
Omaha Steve
(99,655 posts)And not get all the informative replies?
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)Stop it. Please for the love of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, stop. Good grief.
herding cats
(19,565 posts)Yeah, you do.
For example; I posted an article by John Schindler once and made the point to qualify he writes for the Observer which is owned by Jared Kushner. It's just proper etiquette if you're trying to start a discussion and not trying to rile people who think differently than you do.
Omaha Steve
(99,655 posts)You didn't?
herding cats
(19,565 posts)I used to like you a lot, but you've changed.
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)You posted with no comment and now say you did it to prove That the Hill OP was a hit piece and wanted for all the internet to see that it was ...because, DU comments or something?
It is 7pm my time you posted this at 11:45 AM and only now you come explain your post?
Sorry. Nope.
Omaha Steve
(99,655 posts)During dinner.
OS
George II
(67,782 posts)sheshe2
(83,785 posts)Omaha Steve
(99,655 posts)I don't think on the same chessboard anymore. I'm bound to make mistakes at this point.
Hekate
(90,708 posts)...this time, but am glad to see how very many DUers are fighting back on behalf of Hillary. So it's all good, sorta.
Bettie
(16,110 posts)We need her voice and the voices of each and every prominent Dem to keep hammering at what is happening.
Obama made a choice to be quiet, doesn't mean she has to make the same one.
ismnotwasm
(41,986 posts)JHan
(10,173 posts)I have a hunch Amie is doing her very best to defend the narrative of her book - any discussion of "other factors" unwelcome and uncomfortable.... Which is fine but I'm seeing it for what it is lol.
mhw
(678 posts)Cha ching.. $$$$$$$$
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)Blue light special....only $16.78 for a hardcover!
ismnotwasm
(41,986 posts)And the stories on there are the real deal. Real life, real progressives, and real change agents. We are about doing, and sharing stories and we are strong. Fuck the petty minded who have to squeeze the last buck out of Hillary disarragment syndrome.
I'm currently thinking about starting a 12 step program for it--step one "admitted we were wrong, period.
JHan
(10,173 posts)sheshe2
(83,785 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Tatiana
(14,167 posts)I fully support her desire to speak out at this time regarding the political climate and the outrage we should all share regarding the traitorous actions of the current occupants of the WH. She had a birds' eye view regarding what happened. The information she shares is valuable to help us develop defenses (and offenses) for subsequent elections.
LisaM
(27,813 posts)This is utter bullshit, and by the way, Obama needs to be out rousing the troops, too. This is not about decorum or politics. The sane voices need to speak out.
Blaukraut
(5,693 posts)What is it with the incessant need to create division between various Dem camps?
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)Would love that answer myself.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)she is sucking the oxygen out of the room for the future 2020 nominee. Right now, that's not crucial, but it could be after the midterms.
Also, a key to Trump's being able to cow the GOP House is his support among his voters. When he has Hillary as a live target, he wins with them, no matter what else is in the news. If she managed to make her speeches more about the future and less about him, she'd do us all a favor.
delisen
(6,044 posts)Hunker down democrats who need to cut off oxygen from other democrats in order to become candidates are not worth anything to begin with.
Trump-lite candidates and hair shirt wearing Dems who need a safe space in order to run aren't going to get us anywhere. If they want to be useful they can do some party building behind the scenes
Clinton is doing us a favor by by speaking out.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)She's not our "lead Dem", that person needs to emerge from those who have a possibility of winning the next nomination. Unless you want a rematch of the last election...
Every second of media attention focused on her is one less second that the 2020 nominee has to get to that position, and then win the general election. Jimmy Carter taught us over four decades ago that the race to be President is not a sprint, it's a marathon. And I see coverage of Hillary as a hurdle for the good people who will vie to be our standard bearer a mere three years from now.
populistdriven
(5,644 posts)It is eye opening to look at her historical ratings from 1992 to 2015
http://www.people-press.org/2015/05/19/hillary-clinton-approval-timeline/
and then compare them to 2015 to 2016
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/16/upshot/signs-of-hillary-clintons-troubles-in-charts.html
the russian e-warfare campaign pushed them far below anything she has ever recovered from
it would take something phenomenal but its possible. the biggest problem is the trump-russia investigation doesn't help (or hurt) her but it sucks away so much media attention and anything she does will inevitably get painted in reference to that and distract from new, worthy & positive things she does
Hekate
(90,708 posts)She doesn't give a damn about her "ratings" but she IS concerned about the future of American democracy. If you listen to what she says instead of what the tv bobbleheada say about what she says, you would know that.
populistdriven
(5,644 posts)avoid media attention for the time being.
Because it would be a distraction and with little to gain for her or anyone else other than the GOP.
I'd love to see her run again but want to see her reinvent her message which won't happen unless there is a year or so of quiescent politically-related media coverage of her.
Hekate
(90,708 posts)Every. Other. Losing. Presidential. Candidate. Known. To. Man. Speaks. Out. Incessently.
What's different about this one? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Oh, I've got it! Hillary is a woman!!! Special rules apply!
populistdriven
(5,644 posts)actively working & speaking again on the progressive Clinton Foundation stuff.
If she veers back into politics too soon, well I already stated my opinion about that.
murielm99
(30,743 posts)Hillary has class. She was the best candidate ever to run for President.
I don't know any Democrats who want her to stay out of the spotlight. This is a smear and should not be on this website!
Response to murielm99 (Reply #107)
Name removed Message auto-removed
musette_sf
(10,202 posts)Hekate
(90,708 posts)People who endorse the special Clinton Rules want Hillary to STFU. Think about that. She won the effing vote by historically large margins, but some people want her to siddown, shuddup, and go the hell away.
Well, I for one, have her back. She's worked her butt off for me and the rest of us her entire life, and the least I can do is have her back when she's been beaten bloody by GOP thugs.
JHan
(10,173 posts)Hekate
(90,708 posts)He finds her thought-provoking. I just find her provoking.
Jakes Progress
(11,122 posts)More RT work being done on DU.
Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)They are likely same Hillary haters that hated her before election. I call bullshit
DFW
(54,403 posts)According to Republican sources, that is close to a majority..............
betsuni
(25,537 posts)oasis
(49,388 posts)ImWithHer.
sharedvalues
(6,916 posts)Without Hillary we don't get that article.
JHan
(10,173 posts)cambridge analytica isn't going away.
Lunabell
(6,082 posts)But we need new blood. New energy and not the same old corporate drivel.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)Please go back to JPR.
Lunabell
(6,082 posts)I have been a Democrat for over 30 years. My voice matters.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)My response was in proportion to your post. Referring to someone like Hillary Clinton as "corporate drivel" is extremely disrespectful, IMO.
Lunabell
(6,082 posts)telling me to go to JPR is like telling someone to leave the country if they don't like it. You were rude and condescending. After the primary, I fully and totally supported HRC because of many reasons and never once said a word against her.
But she and the DNC do not represent a truly progressive platform. We are living in a corporate oligarchy and if you don't see it you and others like you in the Democratic party will lose time and time again if you don't recognize this and deal with it.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)Not sure why that offends you so much. Were you never a member there?
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)I'm not a butt hurt alert troll.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)The Clintons had a nice run, I'll give em that... but it's now time to learn from past mistakes and shine the spotlight on up and coming progressives to continue the movement that others have started. That's not a negative reflection on Bill and Hillary... it's just practical reality.
Omaha Steve
(99,655 posts)Think we forgot about that?
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)At least I do not recall what you are referring to?
JHan
(10,173 posts)Thanks for the "neoliberal" "corporatist" and the other stupid memes:
betsuni
(25,537 posts)YCHDT
(962 posts)Lunabell
(6,082 posts)Last edited Mon Jun 5, 2017, 09:00 PM - Edit history (1)
She does of course represent people in a social sense, but in an economic sense, she does not. We had to push her for a $15 minimum wage and she opposes single payer. In my opinion that isn't very progressive on economic issues.
JHan
(10,173 posts)I cannot believe people calling themselves Democrats are spewing this nonsense.
Which party wants to lower the corporate tax rate? which party wants to get rid of regulations - not even regulatory reform, but DEregulation?
Ideally the minimum wage should be between $20-25 dollars, adjusted for inflation. By your sterling logic anyone arguing for less represents "corporate America" because $15 doesn't cut it.
No one seriously argues that wages should not* increase, the difference is the rate at which wages increase via legislative fiat.
She had details on how to tackle wall street as well.
You're parroting a lie.
No lies.
carry on smartly.
Lunabell
(6,082 posts)Do you not have Google?
JHan
(10,173 posts)But you obviously don't know how to use it. HRC opposed single payer and $15 minimum wage.
JHan
(10,173 posts)And your spin is antagonistic. She argued for $12. As I said before ( in case you missed it) both 12$ and 15$ are not enough - it should be at 20-25$, using a two dollar difference as a bludgeoning point to further the nonsensical "corporatist" meme is absurd and misses the point. Her policies also factored in tax increases on the rich, she did not want to lower the corporate rate, and provided solid policies to ease the financial burden on families. Your argument is disingenuous.
The reason why wages are so low isn't because of the "DNC" , or Hillary Clinton. The DNC does not represent the party that resisted raising the minimum wage - the DNC does not represent the party that filibustered Obama's bills aimed at raising wages. The DNC does not represent the party that voted to repeal Obamacare 50 times, the DNC does not represent a party which refuses to raise taxes on the wealthy, the DNC does not represent the party that solely represents the interests of extractive industries and wants massive deregulation across the financial sector. The DNC does not represent the party that wants to slash the social safety net, the DNC does not represent the party that refuses to give aid to students for education or even give students preferred rates on their loans or help young famillies by granting them guaranteed paid family/medical leave.
You cannot be serious.
Lunabell
(6,082 posts)But, HRC is synonymous with DNC.
JHan
(10,173 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)It's what you're peddling here.
YCHDT
(962 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)Indeed, the progressive message will put Democrats back into power in this country... the movement has just begun to take hold. I have to believe we will learn from past mistakes and make appropriate adjustments going forward.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Gothmog
(145,291 posts)Orsino
(37,428 posts)I get why some Dems want to try it...but to dump our second-most successful candidate would be to accept the "loser" label applied by President Von Clownstick.
If we aren't going to run Clinton again, we'd damned sure better be learning from her.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)Hillary's campaign. She has an agenda.
LexVegas
(6,067 posts)There, fixed it for ya.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Glad to see duers aren't biting. HA Goodman worthy.
Op needs to take this tripe back to his home on JPR.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)Freethinker65
(10,023 posts)Motley13
(3,867 posts)Obama is following protocol, not criticize the new, (can't say it, you know 45)
Foamfollower
(1,097 posts)Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)
Post removed
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)herding cats
(19,565 posts)I'm also sick and tired of people acting like this is some sort of sporting event where they have to cheer their side on and make scores in the name of "winning" the game. It's not and we're all equally fucked and fucked over now. The sooner we figure this out the better, but people seem to think the "Resistance" means resisting reality and being divisive jerks.
As far as I'm concerned anyone who can't pull their heads out of their collective asses and see that we're ALL in a serious world of shit, and then work together to get out of it, is as bad as the Republicans covering for Trump because of their own personal agendas.
Not so BREAKING NEWS: We're all going to have to comprise and unite before this is over. If we're lucky we make it out of this with a minimal amount of civil rights savaged and human life lost due to Trump and his GOP cheerleaders, and only one SCOTUS replaced by the GOP. <---- Which will only happen if we can focus on our true enemy here! 2018 is a vital year for us, and frankly if I used articles like this as a metric as to how it's going to turnout for us, I'd just give up and move out of this country right now. Luckily I see this crap as the attempt to keep us divided and bickering amongst ourselves that it is.
mvd
(65,174 posts)tried to look at things from all sides. This article seems selective, generalizing because of a few. I am a Sanders guy, but I do not want her voice silenced. She should be the President and was exactly right about Trump. Her voice is appreciated.
herding cats
(19,565 posts)Personally, I wish everyone would put all this divisive crap to bed and move on to what we're currently up against.
I've never seen such blatant hate being legitimized as what we're seeing right now from the RW. It's dangerous and terrifying.
sfwriter
(3,032 posts)If she's doing that, she gets the spotlight by default. She doesn't get one for losing to Donald Trump.
Also, being an epic fundraiser buys her enough goodwill to silence those calling for her silence.
She is great at working hard for causes she believes in.
Jakes Progress
(11,122 posts)chillfactor
(7,576 posts)good god...leave the lady alone.
mountain grammy
(26,623 posts)She gets coverage. Democrats need coverage, especially women Democrats. Women need coverage. We need to be hearing all voices speaking out and speaking up. We're in danger here.
cstanleytech
(26,293 posts)I believe she should be up in front helping whoever we pick to run against Trump in the next election and to be a reminder to everyone that was stupid enough to vote for Trump over what we could have had as president had they had any common sense and then maybe they wont make the same stupid decision and will show some common sense in voting for a change.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)So transparent.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)From December to February the left was all: "WHY IS HILLARY HIDING? WHAT'S SHE RUNNING FROM? WHY ISN'T SHE OUT FRONT AND CENTER TRYING TO LEAD THE PARTY? WHY IS SHE ASHAMED TO BE SEEN AFTER LOSING? WHY ISN'T SHE AT THE FOREFRONT OF THE RESISTANCE MOVEMENT? WHY HASN'T SHE APOLOGIZED FOR BEING THE WORST NOMINEE EVER AND RUNNING THE WORST CAMPAIGN EVER? WHY IS SHE SO SILENT ON THE GROWING LIST OF TRUMP SCANDALS, etc???!"
And since April it's all been: WHY WON'T HILLARY GO AWAY? THE PARTY CAN'T MOVE ON WITH ESTABLISHMENT LOSERS LIKE HER HOGGING THE SPOTLIGHT! HILLARY ONLY CARES ABOUT GROOMING CHELSEA FOR 2020! I HATE CHELSEA CLINTON EVEN WORSE THAN CHELSEA THE SOCCER TEAM! AND SHE'S SO CORRUPT! DID YOU KNOW SHE WAS CORRUPT? WHY IS HILLARY MEDDLING WITH THE DNC? WHY DOES HILLARY REFUSE TO DENY CHELSEA IS RUNNING IN 2020? WHY CAN'T THE CLINTON FAMILY STEP ASIDE AND LET SOMEONE ELSE HAVE A GO?? WHY DOES HILLARY REFUSE TO DENOUNCE SLAVERY?