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
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Hillary's Vision?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eugene-robinson-hillary-clinton-needs-to-tell-americans-her-vision/2014/09/15/b1f39ee4-3d09-11e4-b0ea-8141703bbf6f_story.htmlHillary Clinton, tell us your vision
By Eugene Robinson Opinion writer September 15, 2014
Her memoir of the years she spent as secretary of state, “Hard Choices,” offers little guidance. My view is that Clinton did an excellent job as America’s chief diplomat, but if she has an overarching philosophy of foreign relations, she left it out of the book. We know that President Obama believes in multilateralism and the sparing use of U.S. military force. We know that some critics believe we should be more interventionist and others believe we should be more isolationist. “Hard Choices” doesn’t really tell us which way Clinton leans, though her record suggests a slight nod toward the hawkish side.
In the book, Clinton rejects the idea of choosing between the “hard power” of military might and the “soft power” of diplomacy, sanctions and foreign aid. Instead, she advocates “smart power,” which seems to mean “all of the above.” When I hear officials talking about “smart” this or “smart” that, I hear a buzzword that is often meant to obscure policy choices rather than illuminate them.
Clinton’s message on domestic affairs is also unclear. At the Iowa event, she sounded what is sure to be a major theme for both Democrats and Republicans in the coming campaign: the need to ease the plight of the beleaguered middle class.
“Today, you know so well, American families are working harder than ever, but maintaining a middle-class life feels like pushing a boulder uphill every single day,” she said, adding that “we can build a growing economy of shared prosperity.”
If this indicates she is beginning to formulate a populist appeal, she will find that territory already staked out by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) — a non-candidate who nevertheless had sign-carrying supporters in the Iowa crowd. Warren’s blistering critique of structural economic inequality is popular with liberal Democrats, some of whom see Clinton as too cozy with Wall Street.
...
Centrist pragmatism as a campaign theme? In U.S. politics today, the middle is a dangerous place to be."
By Eugene Robinson Opinion writer September 15, 2014
Her memoir of the years she spent as secretary of state, “Hard Choices,” offers little guidance. My view is that Clinton did an excellent job as America’s chief diplomat, but if she has an overarching philosophy of foreign relations, she left it out of the book. We know that President Obama believes in multilateralism and the sparing use of U.S. military force. We know that some critics believe we should be more interventionist and others believe we should be more isolationist. “Hard Choices” doesn’t really tell us which way Clinton leans, though her record suggests a slight nod toward the hawkish side.
In the book, Clinton rejects the idea of choosing between the “hard power” of military might and the “soft power” of diplomacy, sanctions and foreign aid. Instead, she advocates “smart power,” which seems to mean “all of the above.” When I hear officials talking about “smart” this or “smart” that, I hear a buzzword that is often meant to obscure policy choices rather than illuminate them.
Clinton’s message on domestic affairs is also unclear. At the Iowa event, she sounded what is sure to be a major theme for both Democrats and Republicans in the coming campaign: the need to ease the plight of the beleaguered middle class.
“Today, you know so well, American families are working harder than ever, but maintaining a middle-class life feels like pushing a boulder uphill every single day,” she said, adding that “we can build a growing economy of shared prosperity.”
If this indicates she is beginning to formulate a populist appeal, she will find that territory already staked out by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) — a non-candidate who nevertheless had sign-carrying supporters in the Iowa crowd. Warren’s blistering critique of structural economic inequality is popular with liberal Democrats, some of whom see Clinton as too cozy with Wall Street.
...
Centrist pragmatism as a campaign theme? In U.S. politics today, the middle is a dangerous place to be."
I've gone to Hillary's site and read about her vision, and then seen a variety of topics on certain issues I gather she places an interest in with scant details on implementation.
But Eugene's Robinson article still remains unanswered to me? What exactly is her vision beyond slogans and repeating what others have already ascribed?
It seems threefold and that is to (a) continue that the way President Obama began (b) to protect the US and any US ally from any perceived threat even if that means via military regime change. (c) to be pragmatic and realistic in any decision making process.
I see she has some interest in some social issues such as women's rights and medical issues like more research into Alzheimers.
But I see no great vision like FDR had that lead to Social Security or JFK which lead to the space exploration or via LBJ civil rights legislation or medicare and medicaid. Titans among Democrats.
It is this lack of a real game changing vision that leads Eugene Robinson to say "Central pragmatism as a campaign theme?"
Is this it?
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
