25
   

Five Reasons No Progressive Should Support Hillary Clinton

 
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2015 01:02 pm
@hawkeye10,
Look at the instruction on the Blog page, Sept 2008.

Personally, I find 900 the important number re pixels. At least on my computer, anything higher in width turns out larger than the page.
To find the blog, look at the bottom of the page at the right in the dark blue strip.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2015 01:04 pm
Bernie Sanders has the D white voter problem pretty well pegged:

Quote:
On what the Democrats should learn from their midterm election defeat

To see where the Democratic Party is, I think, it's important to understand where America is. And where America is, is that today we are seeing the collapse, the continued collapse, of the American middle class. You have working-class families who have given up the dream of sending their kids to college. My family never had any money. My father came ... from Poland without a nickel in his pocket. He was able to send two of his kids to college. That dream is now not a reality for a whole lot of folks in this country.

And then people look out and they say, "Gee, the wealthiest people are doing phenomenally well." And where are the Democrats? Do people see the Democratic Party standing up to Wall Street? Any of these guys going to jail? Not really. The average person is working longer hours, lower wages, and they do not see any political party standing up and fighting for their rights. What they see is a Republican Party becoming extremely right wing, controlled by folks like the Koch brothers. But they do not see a party representing the working class of this country.

On why he says Democrats are losing white voters

Well, I am focusing on the fact that whether you're white or black or Hispanic or Asian, if you are in the working class, you are struggling to keep your heads above water. You're worried about your kids. What should the Democratic Party be talking about, Steve? What they should be talking about is a massive federal jobs program. There was once a time when our nation's infrastructure — roads, bridges, water systems, rail — were the envy of the world. Today that's no longer the case.

I would say if you go out on the street and you talk to people and say, "Which is the party of the American working class?" People would look to you like you were a little bit crazy, they wouldn't know what you were talking about, and they certainly wouldn't identify the Democrats.

On African-American support for Democrats

Well, here's what you got. What you got is an African-American president, and the African-American community is very, very proud that this country has overcome racism and voted for him for president. And that's kind of natural. You've got a situation where the Republican Party has been strongly anti-immigration, and you've got a Hispanic community which is looking to the Democrats for help.

But that's not important. You should not be basing your politics based on your color. What you should be basing your politics on is, how is your family doing? ... In the last election, in state after state, you had an abysmally low vote for the Democrats among white, working-class people. And I think the reason for that is that the Democrats have not made it clear that they are prepared to stand with the working-class people of this country, take on the big money interests. I think the key issue that we have to focus on, and I know people are uncomfortable about talking about it, is the role of the billionaire class in American society.


http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2014/11/19/365024592/sen-bernie-sanders-on-how-democrats-lost-white-voters

D's are not interesting in the problems of working people as evidenced by what they have been saying a doing for a long while, and their politics are deeply about race, because they can get off of selling their minority victim stories. The D's are essentially racist in favor of anyone who is not white, when all most whites want is a fair shake and to have the elites stop blaming Americas decline on white. The R's are biased in favor of the haves in the society, the people who compete successfully which has its appeal if one believes in hard work and meritocracies, and they dont give a **** about skin color, which after the abuse the D's hand out to whites is refreshing.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2015 01:09 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:

We know you think your opinion is fact.

Percentage of voters is not evidence of a major shift in number of voters moving toward the GOP since 75% of 100 is less than 50% of 200. Participation rate in off elections in no way can be used to show how all those that didn't show up will vote when they do show up in a Presidential election.


You are full of ****

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2012/11/white-nonwhite.jpg

And the D problem with whites goes back a long ways, blaming it on racist backlash to having a Part black D in the POTUS chair shows a disturbing lack of connection to reality, which is a very severe problem with the Left these days.
parados
 
  6  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2015 02:19 pm
@hawkeye10,
It's you that is full of ****. You don't understand the first thing about statistics and what you can tell from your graphs. Based on your argument using those graphs Obama clearly lost in 2012. Oh, wait.. he not only didn't lose he won rather handily.

By 2040, the majority of Americans will be non white. At that point it's clear the majority of Democratic voters can be non white and a Democrat will still win easily. But it will happen long before than that the majority of democratic voters can be non white and a Democrat will still win.

In 2016, white non Hispanics will make up only 65% of the US population. If every group votes at the same rate and minorities vote 80% democratic, the Democrats will win with only 37% of the white non Hispanic vote. Whites will make up only 52% of the Democratic vote.

By 2030, the Democrats will need about 20% of the white non Hispanic vote. Minorities will make up 56% of the Democratic voters.

hawkeye10
 
  -3  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2015 04:13 pm
@parados,
Quote:
By 2030, the Democrats will need about 20% of the white non Hispanic vote

You are delusional, you dont know who the non whites will be voting for at that point, you only know what they have done to date.

Quote:
In 2016, white non Hispanics will make up only 65% of the US population. If every group votes at the same rate and minorities vote 80% democratic, the Democrats will win with only 37% of the white non Hispanic vote.
It does not matter what percent of the population is non white, what matters is what percent of the votes come from non whites, which an supposedly intelligent person like yourself knows.

http://www.pewhispanic.org/files/2009/04/2009-electorate-10.png
bobsal u1553115
 
  0  
Reply Thu 23 Apr, 2015 06:35 am
Clinton Charities Will Refile Tax Returns, Audit for Other Errors
Source: New York Times

NEW YORK — Hillary Clinton's family's charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns after a Reuters review found errors in how they reported donations from governments, and said they may audit other Clinton Foundation returns in case of other errors.

...

The charities' errors generally take the form of under-reporting or over-reporting, by millions of dollars, donations from foreign governments, or in other instances omitting to break out government donations entirely when reporting revenue, the charities confirmed to Reuters.

...

For three years in a row beginning in 2010, the Clinton Foundation reported to the IRS that it received zero in funds from foreign and U.S. governments, a dramatic fall-off from the tens of millions of dollars in foreign government contributions reported in preceding years.

Those entries were errors, according to the foundation: several foreign governments continued to give tens of millions of dollars toward the foundation's work on climate change and economic development through this three-year period. Those governments were identified on the foundation's annually updated donor list, along with broad indications of how much each had cumulatively given since they began donating.



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2015/04/23/us/politics/23reuters-usa-election-clinton-taxes-exclusive.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Apr, 2015 06:42 am
@joefromchicago,
Parse it any way you want.

1. I told you you my union card said "AFL/CIO" on it and I proved it did.
2. In Ohio if you join a union shop, you will either join the union after a three month period or you will not keep your employment. That is what makes it a de facto closed shop state.

Get over it.

bobsal u1553115
 
  0  
Reply Thu 23 Apr, 2015 06:45 am
@Thomas,
Pretty much. Hillary seems to me to have pulled on the cloak of "populism" just as easily as she she pulled on the cloak of "just not as crazy".
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Thu 23 Apr, 2015 06:55 am
Any "progressive" doing anything to hurt ANY candidate who might eventually run against whatever the Republican Party eventually sends into the ring...

...should have his/her head examined.

Next November...either the Dem or the Republican candidate will be elected to the Oval Office.

If it is the Republican...that person will be a pawn of the far right...and the appointments that person makes WILL meet the approval of the barons of the far right.

The reasons given for what some "progressives" are doing here sound great. The damage they can cause will be like mountains to the mole hills they actually are.
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  3  
Reply Thu 23 Apr, 2015 06:56 am
@bobsal u1553115,
I just read an article about Chafee on yahoo I found interesting. I would have to look more into his social domestic issues, but he seems to have been against most of his fellow republicans when he was a senator.

Quote:
Unlike Webb, who ran as an antiwar candidate at a time when Democrats had already turned on Iraq, Chafee was one of only seven Republicans who voted against authorizing the Iraq invasion that Clinton supported. “It just wasn’t evident that Saddam was a threat,” he says, bothered still. “It was all talk. And now we live with the ramifications.”

In fact, despite enormous pressure, Chafee opposed virtually the entire Bush agenda in the Senate, including tax cuts for the wealthy. He is an ardent environmentalist (his father, Sen. John Chafee, was a hero of the movement), and he endorsed Obama twice.


source
parados
 
  4  
Reply Thu 23 Apr, 2015 06:58 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:

You are delusional, you dont know who the non whites will be voting for at that point, you only know what they have done to date.

Says the guy that predicted who the whites will be voting for at that point. Drunk
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Thu 23 Apr, 2015 07:10 am
@revelette2,
Chaffee always seemed a genuine good person. His father was a great Senator, also.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Thu 23 Apr, 2015 07:11 am
This is exactly why I am not jumpng on the Hillary Clinton Bandwagon
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/obama-says-elizabeth-warren-wrong-tpp-trade-agreement-clinton-fails-say-yes-or-no

Where does she stand? The TPP will only benefit the rich. Not the poor working or middle class.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Apr, 2015 07:18 am
The FIRST DUTY of any politician who thinks he/she can make a positive contribution to the nation...

...IS TO GET ELECTED.

One does not help one's election chances by alienating ANYONE.

Lie.

Cheat.

Steal.

If a stand is unpopular (whether with the electorate or with potential contributores)...avoid taking it.

Whatever...but get elected.

bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Thu 23 Apr, 2015 07:37 am
@Frank Apisa,
Pretty darn cynical. Embrace the dark side and then pull away?
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Apr, 2015 08:14 am
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:

Parse it any way you want.

1. I told you you my union card said "AFL/CIO" on it and I proved it did.
2. In Ohio if you join a union shop, you will either join the union after a three month period or you will not keep your employment. That is what makes it a de facto closed shop state.

Get over it.

Nice bit of backtracking, but you do realize that your previous posts are still on this site, right? As a reminder, here's what you wrote:

earlier in this thread, bobsal u1553115 wrote:
I was forced to join unions that were against my interests. The Teamsters and the Steel Workers(USW) and the Auto Workers(UAW). And a very good one, the AFL of CIO.

You weren't forced to join the AFL-CIO, because nobody joins the AFL-CIO. And Ohio isn't a closed-shop state because closed-shop laws have been invalid since the passage of the Taft-Hartley Act. Ohio, in short, isn't a closed-shop state de facto, de jure, or in any other sense. Now, if you're describing your experiences prior to 1947, I'll concede that you might have been forced to join a union as a condition of employment, but if you're describing events that happened post-1947, then what you're describing is a fable, a mere invention of your imagination.

Face it, you're wrong, and your repeated attempts to dig yourself out of the hole that you've created for yourself only serve to embarrass you further.

Get over it.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Thu 23 Apr, 2015 10:35 am
@bobsal u1553115,
I repeat:

FIRST...GET ELECTED!
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Thu 23 Apr, 2015 03:19 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:

I repeat:

FIRST...GET ELECTED!



That is pretty useless these days. The only way to get much of anything done is to get elected with a mandate, and then know how to use power to get things done.

We elected Obama the first time with a mandate to make Washington work again for the people, but he suffers from both lack of will and lack of effort. Some how he ended up taking "make Washington work again" as "be our version of Putin", which is not at all the instructions we sent him off with. The courts will work to remove his legacy by invalidating much of what he has done, the next R president will do the rest.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Thu 23 Apr, 2015 03:34 pm
@hawkeye10,
I'll say this, at this point if the D's dont bust their asses to get someone else they need a brain transplant. Hillary is going down because we have never liked her, for political incompetence and for corruption. There is no way she is ever going to be President.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Thu 23 Apr, 2015 03:36 pm
@hawkeye10,
Dream on!
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 12/02/2021 at 09:20:36