Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

PoliticalMalcontent

(449 posts)
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 04:13 AM Mar 2016

What are some compelling reasons to vote for Clinton?

Last edited Wed Mar 23, 2016, 08:49 AM - Edit history (3)

Hey guys and gals,

I've got a question which is probably pretty stupid to ask on DU, but it comes from a place of honesty. Those who have seen my posts in the past have noticed I've been a bit tough on Clinton for various reasons. I don't trust her and think she's taking the democratic party in the wrong direction. So... Why should I personally vote for Clinton if I feel she doesn't have my interests at heart?

This is your chance to pitch an argument to sway folks (liberals) like me.

Edit: best I've seen so far is controlling the Supreme Court. Thanks for that contribution.

Edit on the Cons side of the list: She is attracted to power more than most. We're thinking about handing her the presidency, a position of absolute power. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, or so they say. As we've seen she sees herself above the law (playing loose with classified info on a private network). Additionally, she's also done plenty of shmoozing with the rich, including Trump.

Sometimes this all feels like an elaborate sham.

44 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
What are some compelling reasons to vote for Clinton? (Original Post) PoliticalMalcontent Mar 2016 OP
She called for more surveillance in light of Belgian attacks? AKA Less freedom? longship Mar 2016 #1
Hadn't heard that. PoliticalMalcontent Mar 2016 #2
I'm sure there is a reason why encrypted iphones were responsible Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #5
Don't get me started about strong encryption. longship Mar 2016 #8
agree 100%. And so do the mathematicians and tech experts. Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #11
Well, drug policy has little to do with it. longship Mar 2016 #13
Crypto functions are pretty simple longship Mar 2016 #14
Wish I could Rec this post. mahina Mar 2016 #28
Now? Or in the GE? pat_k Mar 2016 #3
Hi, Mal. Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, Romney Hortensis Mar 2016 #4
Thanks for the honest reply, Hortensis. PoliticalMalcontent Mar 2016 #10
Well, you should might check her official, documented Hortensis Mar 2016 #25
Is trading efficient energy for undrinkable water worth it though? PoliticalMalcontent Mar 2016 #31
None of those profits are coming my way, Hortensis Mar 2016 #32
Excellent food for thought. PoliticalMalcontent Mar 2016 #34
If she wins the nomination.... fun n serious Mar 2016 #38
Ahh the old lesser of two evils approach n/t SheenaR Mar 2016 #24
Because her rich benefactors are nicer and more liberal TowneshipRebellion Mar 2016 #6
Hillary stood strong for a long time Sky Masterson Mar 2016 #7
Post removed Post removed Mar 2016 #9
I think of it more of "voting against Trump." joshcryer Mar 2016 #12
The way I see it Trump will do more harm to the Republican party. PoliticalMalcontent Mar 2016 #15
she isn't Hitler greymouse Mar 2016 #16
Well, if you're a woman, you'll be sent to a special place in Hell if Karmadillo Mar 2016 #17
No worries. I'll be in charge in six months. Lizzie Poppet Mar 2016 #19
money, fear and hate reddread Mar 2016 #18
Are you part of the top 0.1%? BernieforPres2016 Mar 2016 #20
In the GE, only reason I could see is the lesser of two evils argument EndElectoral Mar 2016 #21
She's not a Republican Lone_Wolf Mar 2016 #22
If you want o be convinced on Hillary Nonhlanhla Mar 2016 #23
Thank you for the response. PoliticalMalcontent Mar 2016 #30
zilch NowSam Mar 2016 #26
$hillary and kissinger will save us SoLeftIAmRight Mar 2016 #27
if you're in a Central American camarilla of businessmen that haven't liked representative democracy MisterP Mar 2016 #29
She's good for business, so maybe our 401K's will benefit. JustABozoOnThisBus Mar 2016 #33
Not GOP. PufPuf23 Mar 2016 #35
#1 She is a woman #2 Influential, knows a lot of the big players. Agony Mar 2016 #36
Thanks. PoliticalMalcontent Mar 2016 #39
I do not want to play poker with you... Agony Mar 2016 #42
I'm really trying here, Agony. PoliticalMalcontent Mar 2016 #44
My compelling reasons are all about Hillary vs. Trump, not Hillary vs. Bernie gollygee Mar 2016 #37
I can't think if any, compelling or othwerwise. ThePhilosopher04 Mar 2016 #40
This is a trick question, I mean, EVERYone knows she's just awesomely awesome, and she's gonna win pdsimdars Mar 2016 #41
Ted Cruz and Donald Trump. MineralMan Mar 2016 #43

longship

(40,416 posts)
8. Don't get me started about strong encryption.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 05:41 AM
Mar 2016

I thought we fought this battle years ago.

For those who haven't read the memo, when one puts a back door in strong encryption it is no longer strong encryption. One can kiss security bye-bye. Not only can the fucking FBI get in, but hackers, terrorists, other governments, etc. can get in. I am sure that the big banks, whose transactions depend on strong security will support the back doors... Or maybe not.

I thought we fought this battle during the first Clinton presidency, when strong encryption was actually illegal in the USA.

No more Clintons!!

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
11. agree 100%. And so do the mathematicians and tech experts.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:49 AM
Mar 2016

There are a bajillion and one reasons- good, legitimate ones- why businesses and private individuals want strong encryption to protect their data- and on the other hand you have law enforcement peeved that they dont have the "special necessary tools" they claim they 'need to fight terror'- and which invariably, like the patriot act, will end up getting used primarialy for mundane shit like arresting drug users.

longship

(40,416 posts)
13. Well, drug policy has little to do with it.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:57 AM
Mar 2016

When there is a back door, there is no security. None.

People just haven't figured that out yet, the blinkered idiots.


longship

(40,416 posts)
14. Crypto functions are pretty simple
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 07:20 AM
Mar 2016

The RSA trapdoor algorithm fits easily on a T-shirt. I have one around here some place with it on it. The thing is, some mathematical expressions are one-way. Like factoring a number. If the number is big enough, finding its prime factors becomes really, really difficult. That means so fucking difficult that there's no computer on Earth that can solve the problem in any reasonable amount of time, usually measured in centuries. And knowing the equations doesn't help one in solving the cypher.

One merely has to use a big enough number.

But these equations are pretty damned simple. It's just number theory. So hiding a back door just isn't possible. It would stick out like a sore thumb. Any evil person would see it, and exploit it.

The blinkered idiocy of people like the FBI who want an easy way out don't realize that it gives everybody an easy way out.

pat_k

(9,313 posts)
3. Now? Or in the GE?
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 05:00 AM
Mar 2016

If you want to see the kind of change Sanders is talking about (however "feasible" you may think it is), there is no compelling reason to vote for Clinton in a primary/caucus. There are compelling reasons to vote for Sanders in a primary/caucus, regardless of cumulative delegate numbers (e.g., http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511507143 )

The general election is a different matter. Here are my compelling reasons for voting for the nominee, whether it's Sanders or Clinton (and for working to turnout others to do the same):

1. I do not want to see more seats on the Supreme Court lost to the sort of people Trump/Cruz/Kasich would nominate. Such loses would have incredibly damaging consequences for decades to come, well beyond a president's four or eight years in office.

2. If those who are working to get Sanders to the White House continue to work to win back Congress and organize to advocate the sort of legislation he supports, we may actually succeed in getting some decent legislation through. I want the person in the White House that is more likely to sign such legislation into law. That is not Trump/Cruz/Kasich. The fact is, Sanders' agenda is not happening without some incredible support from "out here," so whether it's Sanders or Clinton in the White House, we have our work cut out for us.

For me, it's all about doing the best we can do for this broken nation. Right now, that's supporting Sanders. When we have a nominee, it means supporting that nominee.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
4. Hi, Mal. Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, Romney
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 05:08 AM
Mar 2016

and whoever might pop up at the convention come to mind. Also Charles Koch, representing not only the over 700 billionaires and megamillionaires working directly with him to overset democracy, continuing the transfer of wealth and power to them, but also many others of their ilk.

As for Hillary herself, https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/. More information can be found by googling issues you are particularly interested in. She has more detailed versions for pros who use them as kickoffs for examination. And, of course, their evaluations are out there.

10. Thanks for the honest reply, Hortensis.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 05:53 AM
Mar 2016

I agree that a Republican presidency is a lousy proposition fir various reasons and that the Koch brothers need to go away. I'm not sure Clinton is that interested in getting money out if politics though.

I'd look at Clinton's website to see where she stands, but I've heard her enough in debates and town halls to know she'll say whatever is politically convenient at any given time. That lack of conviction rubs me the wrong way.

She supports frakking and war, both of which I believe a good Democratic candidate should do their best to avoid.

I'll keep an open mind, but I'm not even sure she'd net us dems seats in Congress due to low favorability ratings.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
25. Well, you should might check her official, documented
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:07 AM
Mar 2016

positions anyway. If only to tell if she veers from them.

Fracking is creating grave problems -- so surprising!, yet it is eliminating major reasons for war and shifting world power away from the extremely troubled Middle East. We need another president who will use the breathing space it gives us to secure lasting energy independence via sustainable, renewable sources.

31. Is trading efficient energy for undrinkable water worth it though?
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 04:33 PM
Mar 2016

The energy aspect that Clinton and energy firms push happens to be extremely profitable to certain folks with deep coffers already, but I fear there's a great environmental cost that gets overlooked by those who aren't impacted.

I know admittedly little about fracking, but there are stories out there about contaminated water supplies and increased Earthquake activity (due to new faults being created?). Oklahoma has supposedly seen a hhhhuuuge increase in Earthquakes, which is interesting and a bit scary. We as humans are capable of really fucking up the environment in the name of the all mighty dollar.

While energy may help stave off war, lack of drinkable water is one of the things that starts war. That's why global warming is a big deal, but that's a story for another time.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
32. None of those profits are coming my way,
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 05:37 PM
Mar 2016

so they're not my concern. The power went off the other day, though, on a lovely, balmy Florida day, and it was such an inconvenience. Only imagine if we'd really needed it? Here's my view.

Yes, energy is absolutely at the top of our list of needs. From energy come food and water. We take it for granted, but for 10,000 years world population barely, barely grew, and those little leaps with things like the agricultural revolution, which allowed those who lived to reproduce themselves to rise slightly in number. Then came the Industrial Revolution, which was built on coal and steam. Cities were able to grow because they had the additional energy needed to be able to grow. World production and world population graphs can be laid over each other and those almost vertical growth spikes seen to be virtually identical. Thanks to new sources and uses of energy.

Take a significant portion of that energy away, and average lifespans would plummet, hundreds of millions would die in poor countries, wars would break out everywhere, and the rest of us would be learning very bitter lessons. The planet is running out of petroleum fast, and literally criminal levels of stupidity and irresponsibility, mostly conservative, almost brought us to that point.

Those new technologies (very much including fracking) are what has saved us from major wars over the remaining supplies and personally learning what it is to live in far, far less energy-luxurious ways. Fracking's baaad and unsustainable, but without it it is quite possible that most of us would already be learning what it is to bike, bus and carpool to work (those of us who had jobs because severe depression would be an inevitable result also) and perhaps to have the lights turned off for us an hour or two after dark.

Fracking has bought us time, which Obama is trying to make the most of, and the knuckle-draggers on the right are determined to squander.

 

fun n serious

(4,451 posts)
38. If she wins the nomination....
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:35 PM
Mar 2016

Bernie is in a position to DEMAND some of your issues get addressed. That is how I think it will happen for you to think about Hillary. IF she is the nominee she will have to offer Bernie a pretty important place where he/she know many of his issues wikl have to be addressed. IMO.

 
6. Because her rich benefactors are nicer and more liberal
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 05:23 AM
Mar 2016

than the opposition's rich benefactors. Since this is the best you're going to get, you might as well get with the program and vote for the candidate the party has chosen.
_________________________________

I don't personally agree with this line of thinking but many people believe in the least worst option. They aren't bad people but they have simply given up on real change.

Response to PoliticalMalcontent (Original post)

15. The way I see it Trump will do more harm to the Republican party.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 08:26 AM
Mar 2016

My feeling is that Clinton is a symptom or cause of something wrong in the Democratic party. It feels wrong to reward such a thing especially if I won't be happy with the final result.

I have a feeling there would be a lot of blowback on a Clinton presidency from independents.

greymouse

(872 posts)
16. she isn't Hitler
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 08:28 AM
Mar 2016

That's about the best I can come up with.

We have no idea who she'd appoint to the Supreme Court. She is so far to the right that it could be someone totally unacceptable to traditional Democrats.

Karmadillo

(9,253 posts)
17. Well, if you're a woman, you'll be sent to a special place in Hell if
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 09:09 AM
Mar 2016

you don't vote for her. That's pretty compelling.

[link:|

BernieforPres2016

(3,017 posts)
20. Are you part of the top 0.1%?
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 09:43 AM
Mar 2016

Have you contributed to Hillary's campaign and the Clinton Foundation in anticipation of getting a good return on your investments?

Those are the only reasons I can come up with why anybody would vote for her.

Nonhlanhla

(2,074 posts)
23. If you want o be convinced on Hillary
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:04 AM
Mar 2016

then GD-P is not the place to go to. Try her website or her supporters groups. At least it will give you the other side of the picture, and then perhaps you can end up somewhere in the middle.

One critical questions about your OP: on what do you base your assertion that she is attracted to power more than most? Is it because she is a woman and women are not supposed to be attracted to power? I'm not accusing you of sexism, but there is actually historical precedent fora skewed evaluation of women when it comes to power. So be mindful of it.

30. Thank you for the response.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 04:20 PM
Mar 2016

You're right. The, 'attracted to power more than most' may be baseless and without merit. It does take a certain type of person to want to run for president, though. The Donald Trump's, Mitt Romney's, etc of the world don't get there by being satisfied by small potatoes.

We know she enjoys rubbing elbows and networking with those in power. That's a big part of the reason that she has done so well with Superdelegates. Additionally, there's tons of photos of her out there with former presidents and Trumps just living it up.

Perhaps I have assessed the situation wrong, and she's only playing the part, but a lot of it seems cold and calculating; particularly since she has had presidential ambitions for so long.

I'm sorry if you took that as sexist initially.

MisterP

(23,730 posts)
29. if you're in a Central American camarilla of businessmen that haven't liked representative democracy
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 01:41 PM
Mar 2016

since the late 70s or have business interests in war

Agony

(2,605 posts)
36. #1 She is a woman #2 Influential, knows a lot of the big players.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:29 PM
Mar 2016

maybe that second one isn't all that compelling… she knows HK pretty well.

39. Thanks.
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:37 PM
Mar 2016

Gender doesn't really influence my vote so much as policy. Knowing the big time players is something I know she does well with, and I'll keep that in mind.

gollygee

(22,336 posts)
37. My compelling reasons are all about Hillary vs. Trump, not Hillary vs. Bernie
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:33 PM
Mar 2016

But the SCOTUS is #1.

She is much more likely than trump to be on our side on issues like:

1. Immigration
2. Police brutality
3. Prisons (though I do know the history)
4. Education
5. Anything to help the poor and working poor. For instance, Trump thinks there should be time limits on food stamps, and that teen moms should rely on charity rather than be elgible for public assistance.
6. He is a raging misogynist
7. He is a raging racist

I voted for Bernie in the primary and I'm glad he at least got Michigan. But in the general election I will be the biggest anti-Trump voter out there.

 

pdsimdars

(6,007 posts)
41. This is a trick question, I mean, EVERYone knows she's just awesomely awesome, and she's gonna win
Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:44 PM
Mar 2016

And you may as well vote for the winner, right . . . . and she's awesome besides (did I already say that?)

Whatever!

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»What are some compelling ...