Five Reasons No Progressive Should Support Hillary Clinton

You seem to be contradicting your own statement. You complain that the Presidency shouldn't be handed out based on some back room deal and then tell us that the GOP candidate will win. I didn't realize the GOP was handing out their nomination based on a back room deal but maybe I am wrong and the Koch brothers have as much power as some claim.

That is how I feel also, Revelette.

But Olivier has a point here. NEVER underestimate an opponent.

I make it a habit never to underestimate an opponent in debate or discussion...and I hope everyone who feels strongly about a progressive agenda is sure not to underestimate what the R's can and will do to take the White House.

I think if Hillary is the D candidate she will win...but any bravado I exhibit here in A2K about her candidacy...is strongly tempered when discussing the issue in my non-cyber life.

The worst thing that could happen to America...and by extension, the rest of the world...is for an American conservative to win in 2016.

Well, I am kinda worried about the competition, about Hillary flunking her chances by way of hubris and lack of preparation, and about what she will do if she gets elected... But apparently it's just me.

No election is a given, no matter who the candidates are. The 1960 Kennedy/Nixon election almost went the other way, it was that close. Same with Bush/Gore. So we have to pick the candidate that we believe has the best chance to win and go for it. Unless and until somebody generates some genuine excitement, I am sticking with Clinton.

Vote for one of the republican clowns and get three more republican business lackys in the Supreme Court and than start bitching about them taking away your liberties in favor of the rich and big business.

It is not just you but I just can't see Hillary loosing to anyone who has shown up for the presidential race so far. Rubio has basically betrayed the Hispanics with his caving on immigration issues, Jeb Bush keeps changing his mind however the wind blows, the rest are laughable. Once Rubio gets the primary he might swing back again on immigration issues, but Hillary will just have to keep hammering home how he will have to keep his anti immigration stance in order to win another four years. I have no doubt Hillary can stand up to the competition.

Its not the opposition that worries me. Its the center of the road idiots in the U S who voted for idiot republican presidents because they were brainwashed by media who were bought by business and the 1% who love their republican lackeys.

A partisan United States Supreme Court appointed George W Bush the first time and there were masses demonstrating against this action, carrying signs on his Inauguration Day, saying GWB stole the election!

The second time America was at war in Iraq and there were many US military being killed. America, in a time of war, like most other countries, rally around their leader who was GWB at the time. There was tension among Americans and they went with what they had. I have never voted Republican, war or no war. But a majority of Americans did vote for Bush. I recall after Bush won in the second election, one particular British Paper (cannot remember the name) had as its headline "59% of Americans voted for George W Bush a second term." Many Americans were humiliated by the Bush administration which in reality was led by the NEOCONS and Dick Cheney.

On a related note: Condoleezza Rice's position, IMO, was merely symbolic only! George W Bush was so appalling ignorant that he asked Brazilian president Fernando Cardoso if "Brazil has blacks."

"It was Condoleezza Rice, national security advisor, who helped her boss out of the embarrassing situation. During a conversation between the two presidents, George W. Bush, 55, (USA) and Fernando Henrique Cardoso, 71, (Brazil), Bush bewildered his colleague with the question "Do you have blacks, too?"

Rice, noticing how astonished the Brazilian president was, saved the day by telling Bush "Mr. President, Brazil probably has more blacks than the USA. Some say it's the Country with the most blacks outside Africa." Later, the Brazilian president Cardoso said: regarding Latin America, Bush was still in his 'learning phase' ".

GWB was either the dumbest president we've ever had or second dumbest. (Some vote for Reagan...some for GWB.) Either way...we don't need more of that type.

And we do not need more of the kinds of justices Republicans bring to the court.

I had hoped Hillary would not run...I do not want to see her have to endure the crap these cretins will throw at her.

But since it is almost certain she WILL run...I back her all the way.

One last thought on GWB. He has made an excellent former president...keeping his opinions to himself. I respect him for that.

Apparently you haven't read my many posts if you are instructing me about that.

Say what you will regarding Hillary's faults, but she is an intellectual thinker. The clown car of Republicans could not fight their way out of a paper bag. It's not that the GOP is stupid but in their effort to adhere to the belligerent demands of the Tea Party, which is at odds with mainstream America, they stumble badly. When appealing to the American masses, they come across as two-faced hypocrites, mouthing platitudes. These Republican candidates try so desperately to be the one who will get the nomination that they outdo each other in everything that is moral and decent, shredding civil and equal rights, throwing human empathy under the bus while apearing case-hardened.

With the current crop of GOP candidates, I have no worries as Hillary can hold her own! If an unknown Democrat, similar to a Barack Obama, comes along, they could give Hillary a run for her money. It would have to be a Democrat who transcends all ethnic minority groups with a message very much akin to Elizabeth Warren who articulates the deep-seated hopes of forgotten Americans.

I like Elizabeth Warren, but her poll numbers are low and not that many people are truly familiar with her; she says the U.S. political system is “rigged’’ in favor of wealthy corporations at the expense of everyday families, an argument I agree with and also that has made her a darling of the left. One wonders how she would do regarding the rest of the problems that plague America? It's not enough to be one-dimensional. I do not believe Warren could ever raise her poll numbers to equal Clintons, in my personal opinion. Former US senator Jim Webb of Virginia seems one who might give Clinton a strong run and is more well-rounded with respect to US politics. Webb is rather new, not a Washington insider, even tho he was formerly a US senator from Virginia.

I like Elizabeth Warren...she would be a disaster for the D's.

The country is not ready to move that far left...something Hillary, like Bill before her, realizes.

The R's know how to shoot themselves in the foot. The D's ought not to learn that particular trick.

I, too, believed Reagan wasn't the brightest bulb too bright on the tree, but later blamed it on his early onset of Alzheimers which might have began in his late 50s. RR was an actor who acted his way through much of his administration by charming so many with his easy smile and handsome cowboy good looks.

I, too, gag at the prospect Republicans might possibly be in a position to select more partisan ultra-conservative justices to the US supreme court.

I agree it remains painful to see the mean-spirited GOP gang up on Hillary, never seemingly to ever let go of their vindictive malignity. It's also painful the way they go at Obama. At least his term will be over soon and no longer the direct target of racism because of who he is.

As for GWB not openly criticising President Obama, well, W's fault were so glaringly transparent he simply didn't have a leg to stand on; his administration broke Iraq and now all hell is loose in that part of the world and to try and blame Obama, well one could say the former two-term US president's arrogance would only be compounded by his total ignorance to continually attack his successor who is left trying to clean up his mess!

Recently he did come out with a rare criticism of Obama but not in the same vein as Darth Vader aka scheming Dick Cheney who constantly sticks his own foot in his mouth and would probably die of frustration if he could not characterize Obama as the worse president in American history.

Frankly, I would back the devil himself if that maneuver would keep the Republicans from gaining the White House.

In my opinion, Reagan was making bad decisions long before the alzheimer's had time to kick in.

In fact is is all but impossible to see when the Alzheimers kicked in.

He started making terrible statements and decisions before he became California governor.

And yet they did it again two years ago and gave the Senate to the Tea Party.

I realize that, I knew it when it wrote it, however, congress does not pick supreme court justices, nor are they the commander in chief which figures a lot in deciding to sit out an election. Democrats often don't vote in mid terms, it is shameful but it has been true. We shouldn't have let the senate go, it really our own fault.

We as voters do have to do our part by participating and caring about our country and who sits in the oval office and if we once again just sit it out, we doubly deserve what we get. It is shame the rest of the world will have to pay for it along with us.

Hillary Clinton Super PAC Struggles to Raise Money

The super PAC supporting Hillary Clinton’s presidential bid is struggling to raise money and now expects to collect only about $15 million through the end of June, people familiar with the matter said Wednesday.

The group, Priorities USA Action, is shaking up its senior staff in hopes of jump-starting a fundraising operation that, five weeks after Mrs. Clinton entered the presidential race, has garnered only about $5 million in “hard commitments,” two people familiar with events say.

As a super PAC, Priorities is permitted to collect donations of unlimited size, and is the main fundraising vehicle backing Mrs. Clinton outside her campaign. It intends to buy TV and Internet ads aimed at propelling her candidacy and to defend her against potential rivals in either party.

Even if it meets its $15 million short-term expectation, the pro-Clinton group will raise far less than PACs backing some potential Republican rivals. Super PACs backing Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) say they have raised more than $31 million, and all-but-announced candidate Jeb Bush, while not giving a fundraising tally, has said his team has broken all prior GOP fundraising records.

Those candidates, however, are more likely to need the financial support for what has already become a crowded GOP primary field, whereas Mrs. Clinton so far hasn’t drawn a substantial primary challenger.

(snip)

People close to Priorities mention several reasons for the disappointing fundraising results to date. They said fundraising began in earnest only after Mrs. Clinton announced her candidacy on April 12. Advisers to the group said it was hard to get substantial commitments before then, because donors weren’t certain she would enter the race.

Another handicap has been a perceived ambivalence from Mrs. Clinton about the role of super PACs in American politics, said some people close to the group. When she entered the race, Mrs. Clinton said one of her main goals as president would be doing away with what she called “unaccountable” money in the political system. She has said she wants Supreme Court justices who would overturn the high court’s 2010 ruling in the Citizens United case, which gave rise to super PACs raising money in unlimited sums.

More..

http://www.wsj.com/articles/money-woes-for-clinton-super-pac-1432168562

The problem is that most people talk about the constitution but dont read it. Article 1 Section 1 tells you who is responsible for the laws that are passed and the state of the country but its easier to blame 1 man than subject 535 men to inspection as to what kind of job they are doing. If citizens knew what most of their legislators were doing they would replace them rather than returning incompetent men to congress year after year. Its easier than having to check on your legislator and gives lazy citizens them an excuse to blame one man for all our troubles.