2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary Clinton is Pro-War and Pro-Wall Street. Neither of these are Modern Liberal Values.
People of varying levels of credibility are all trying to convince you otherwise. Just because a person votes against a handful of crazy right-wing Republican bills doesn't make that person a liberal. When it comes to the big votes, she votes with them arm-in-arm. As Hillary herself might say, the things that divide Dems like Hillary from her Republican colleagues are much, much, less than the things that unite them.
dinkytron
(568 posts)SFnomad
(3,473 posts)Renew Deal
(81,869 posts)So let them continue
No quitting here. If Clinton gets into the White House, it's gonna be a loooooooong four years.
We're going to hold her accountable for every misstep, every deed/position/decision/stance/opinion she makes that is not truly progressive. Who gets to decide what's progressive and what's not? Common sense.
Fracking is not progressive.
Unjust war is not progressive.
Focusing more on the needs of the 1% and corporations is not progressive.
Accepting money from corporate donors, lobbyists, and the 1% is not progressive.
.....and on and on.
So, please do be careful for what you wish for, because a lot of people are seriously thinking of jumping off Capt. Debbie's ship.
It's just too damn crooked.
SFnomad
(3,473 posts)We're standing up for a foreign policy that wants to promote peace and stability. Your candidate has a history of starting wars.
Plus, all of the environmental standings your candidate takes on which promotes more fossil fuel extraction.
Ever heard of neoliberalism? You should check it out, and which side your candidate is on.
I really do feel like it's becoming the twilight zone.....
2banon
(7,321 posts)That's the problem. the blinders and ear plugs seems to be making Hillary supporters a bit disoriented and confused.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)nobody
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)SFnomad
(3,473 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)Happyhippychick
(8,379 posts)Jeffersons Ghost
(15,235 posts)Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Than Hillary it would make Sanders more pro war. On Wall Street, Sanders voted for the CFMA which payed a heavy part in the finanical crisis. All things similar I have to go with the most qualified candidate running, Hillary Clinton.
seekthetruth
(504 posts)Sanders.
No thirst for war, no global evangelizing of fracking, no lobbyist or corporate campaign contributions.
But, sadly, the media has done their part. And voters, who I disagree with, see the shiny altar of the first female president.
But, please, I hope you guys have your candidate. Just don't expect us progressives to not call bull when we see it.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)seekthetruth
(504 posts)You're calling Sanders a hawk. Good grief friend.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Look at Sanders record, the information is in the record.
seekthetruth
(504 posts)brooklynite
(94,700 posts)...before HE becomes a warmonger?
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)People use words differently I guess.
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)and I think it is shameful. Unhinged and shameful.
reddread
(6,896 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)nation and none other than President Carter said without equivocation that we are no longer a democracy, so there's that. Apparently we are about to double-down.