Five Reasons No Progressive Should Support Hillary Clinton

@edgarblythe,

I hope you're right. Just so long as it isn't Clinton/Warren/Sanders.

1 Reply

@bobsal u1553115,

News flash: Warren is not running.

2 Replies

@edgarblythe,

YET.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

I think most of the people bitching about Clinton running unopposed are republican propagandists.

1 Reply

@RABEL222,

Holding it against Clinton because she is the only one out there right now, with over a year til election day, is pretty silly.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

Holding it against Clinton because she is the only one out there right now, with over a year til election day, is pretty silly.

I hold it against D's.....this tells me that as bad as the R's are at least they are better than the D's.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

edgarblythe wrote:

Holding it against Clinton because she is the only one out there right now, with over a year til election day, is pretty silly.

I hold it against D's.....this tells me that as bad as the R's are at least they are better than the D's.

There's an interesting piece of fluff pretending to be logic, Hawk.

I'd love to hear you flesh that out so it makes sense.

0 Replies

Well there's also Martin O'Malley who did such a great job as Mayor of Baltimore and Governor of Maryland.

0 Replies

Clinton is likely not the best candidate the Dem's could field, but some of these attacks from the left look just like the attacks Jeb Bush gets from the right for not being conservative enough. Any review of Clinton's overall record shows she's decently progressive. Sure, you can cherry pick five reasons why she isn't liberal enough for your tastes, but you could probably do that with any candidate.

My issue with Clinton is that she seems like a politician with a small p, good with the back room maneuvering, making compromises around the edges, strong on tactics. There's nothing wrong with that. We need lots of those types to make things happen down in the trenches. What I'm looking for in a President is a that capital P. Someone who knows where they want the US to be in 10 or 20 years, someone with a vision, someone who has a strategy. Love Reagan or hate him, he saw that "shining city upon a hill" and acted like it ever day of his presidency. I don't think we've seen any candidates like that so far.

All that said, if it came down to Clinton vs Bush (or any of the current declared Republicans), I'd take Clinton in a heartbeat. Clinton's vision is essentially the status quo with some sparkles. The Republican vision is IMO a pretty dark and dismal place.

1 Reply

@engineer,

Quote:

My issue with Clinton is that she seems like a politician with a small p, good with the back room maneuvering, making compromises around the edges, strong on tactics. There's nothing wrong with that. We need lots of those types to make things happen down in the trenches.

If that were true she would have a long list of accomplishments. She does not. Clinton is good at stirring up drama and animosity, which works directly against getting things done. And it is very clear that she is a poor manager, which is going to suck for us if she were to get the POTUS chair.

Quote:

The Republican vision is IMO a pretty dark and dismal place.

If the R's are that bad then the thing to do is to copy what the Egyptian military did with the Muslim Brotherhood, let them take power for a short time to prove that they dont know what they are doing. The script that we need to keep the R's out of control at almost any cost might be completely wrong. And lets be honest, what we are doing is not working, so it is time to do something else, anything else. I am increasingly hoping that the R's run the table on the D's this time. Lets give them 2 years to prove themselves one way or the other.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

If the R's are that bad then the thing to do is to copy what the Egyptian military did with the Muslim Brotherhood, let them take power for a short time to prove that they dont know what they are doing.

Of course! Because that worked so well in 2000.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

hawkeye10 wrote:
If the R's are that bad then the thing to do is to copy what the Egyptian military did with the Muslim Brotherhood, let them take power for a short time to prove that they dont know what they are doing.

Of course! Because that worked so well in 2000.

The greatest disaster this nation could face, just now, would be to let the Republicans have free reign. Hundreds of thousands of troops fighting overseas, Social Security gutted, no minimum wage, no foodstamps, no money for infrastructure, no ACA, no restrictions on polluters -

2 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Super, then the debate will be over, like the Muslim Brotherhood is over in Egypt. Then we can move forward.

If you are right then I think we have a good plan.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

If the R's are that bad then the thing to do is to copy what the Egyptian military did with the Muslim Brotherhood, let them take power for a short time to prove that they dont know what they are doing.

I live in a state where that happened and the results have been pretty terrible, but the first thing they did was to gerrymander the voting districts and change voting rules so no one would be able to get them out of power.

1 Reply

@engineer,

Quote:

I live in a state where that happened and the results have been pretty terrible, but the first thing they did was to gerrymander the voting districts and change voting rules so no one would be able to get them out of power.

The next census is 2020, so now is the perfect time to try this since we will have time to remove R's from the House and 2/3 of the Senate before the lines are drawn the next time.....as well as from most of the state offices.

your objection does not hunt.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

There are lots of things you can do without a census. You can change voting hours and close polling places. You can redraw state voting lines without having to do a new census.

Other things you can do: You can gut environmental legislation and permit dumping and pollution. You can gut or destroy institutions that take decades to build. I'm watching it in real time in NC, but you have a first class example. Just look to Kansas. Kansas did exactly what you suggest. They put in a governor and state legislature that weren't just paying lip service to all those "conservative ideals", they really believed in them. The state has crashed straight to rock bottom. You can destroy something a lot faster than you can build it.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

And dont forget 3 or 4 republican Supreme Court justices to make it all constitutional.

2 Replies

@RABEL222,

The Supreme Court is to me one of the primary issues this time around. The next pres is sure to nominate some. I won't presume to guess how many.

0 Replies

@RABEL222,

The Supreme Court appointments alone mean that regardless of how I feel about Hillary Clinton, I will vote for her if she ends up coming out of the Convention.There's no Republican I can think of I'd vote for.

1 Reply

@bobsal u1553115,

No progressive shouldn't support Hillary Clinton simply because she can't.

She can't what?

She can't balance the budget.

1 Reply

Five Reasons No Progressive Should Support Hillary Clinton

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know