As Americans endure one of the most unpleasant and depressing election seasons in a long time, it might be productive to consider how we ended up with a Presidential race between a buffoon and a woman people love to hate.
Pundits have had a field day speculating on why Donald Trump won the GOP primaries. They have faulted the party, identified nativism as the heart of his appeal, and accused the media of allowing him to manipulate–and dominate–the news cycles. All of which is accurate, as far as it goes, but it doesn’t go far enough.
If more Americans understood how government works, and what skills public office requires, the willingness to believe that anyone who had run a business could just as easily manage the affairs of the nation would disappear.
I have remarked before on the evidently widespread belief that Americans go to the polls every four years to elect a monarch, who can then wave a magic wand and effect policy change. For people who do not understand checks and balances, or federalism, or the policy process, voting for someone as unfit for office as Donald Trump may seem reasonable; for the rest of us, it’s madness.
What about the pervasive suspicion of, and distaste for, Hillary Clinton? How much of that criticism is fair, and how much isn’t?
Michael Arnovitz has probably provided the most in-depth analysis of that criticism. Both the essay linked to and the previous one referenced in it are well worth reading in their entireties, but a couple of his observations about “Hillary hatred” are particularly relevant here:
I am sure that [my] last statement about policy sent a bunch of people lunging for their keyboards in order to explain to me that Hillary Clinton’s policies are exactly what they DON’T like about her. But it is very clear to me that this is not the case. The vast majority of messages and comments about HRC that I see consist almost solely of either personal attacks, false claims, childish conspiracy theories, assumptions of guilt by association or complaints about legislation passed by her husband decades ago. Almost none of the comments I see (or have received) even bother to address her current policy positions, and most of the small few that do either willfully misrepresent them, assume as a given that they are terrible or dismiss them altogether as mere political expediency.
Arnovitz notes the extent to which criticisms of Clinton are founded on the same lack of understanding of how government actually works that gave us Trump:
Factions with strict ideological agendas love to pretend as if all policy issues, problems and solutions are simple and self-evident. But this is absurd. In truth, our world is now connected by an incredibly complex web of political, legal and economic relationships; a Gordian knot of competing agendas that can quickly take “simple” solutions to very unhappy places. Responsible politicians know this, and the law of unintended consequences patiently waits for those foolish enough to think otherwise. Which is why seasoned leaders like Hillary Clinton often favor nuanced and incrementalist approaches. These approaches are not particularly inspiring, to be sure. They also leave politicians like Clinton open to charges of avoiding necessary change or maintaining “failed” systems. But on the plus side they don’t set the world on fire. …
Finally, Arnovitz considers the years of GOP demonization of Clinton.
And finally, for those progressives who insist that there is no difference between Hillary Clinton and Republicans. You know who does see a difference? Republicans. And in fact they seem to think there’s a pretty big fucking difference. Which may have something to do with why they have spent tens of millions of dollars and unknown thousands of man-hours over a multi-decade period on a single unrelenting enterprise: convincing anyone who would listen that one of the most qualified public servants in America is actually a lying, corrupt she-devil. And clearly, for at least for some of us, it was money well spent.
People are free to dismiss Arnovitz (or the fascinating article by Ezra Klein in Vox, exploring the gap between how Clinton is seen by those who know her and the public persona that triggers negative reactions), but we all need to consider what years of living with unremitting politically-motivated attacks signify to talented young people (especially women) who might consider a career in public service. Because it isn’t just Hillary Clinton, although she certainly is a high profile example.
Why enter public life, if every mistake you make, every human flaw you exhibit–and we all have them– is going to be relentlessly politicized and exaggerated?
Why “pay your dues” studying policy, or serving in a variety of public-sector positions, if voters see no difference between celebrity and competence?
Before we march to the polls to cast our votes, perhaps we should learn what the job requires, and which criticisms are relevant and which aren’t.
I’m going to vote for HRC. I will vote for HRC as the alternative to ‘cheeto jesus’ or any of the other clowns that were in the GOP clown bus had they won the nomination, as all of them are a lot worse on policy than HRC.
That said, it will be holding my nose when I cast my vote. Not because of the right wing machine attacking her, or painting her as something she is not. No it will be because of her policy positions. She is and has been a neoliberal, DLC dim as near as I can tell from her early days of moving away from Goldwater in her youth. She and the modern democratic party have abandoned the working people in favor of the technocrats of the Ivy league and silicon valley. HRC and her wing of the party pander to labor, minorities and the poor, but do little for them. If you question this, I suggest reading “Listen, Liberal: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People?”
As bubba said about the poor many years ago, where else can they go. Well once upon a time they could go to the FDR democrats. HRC does not represent that wing of the party though.
What she will be better on is the environment, minus fracking, and judicial selections. So I will hold my nose and vote for the sane technocrat versus the alternative cheating liar who is also a bigot, xenophobe and extreme narcissist. At the end of the day that is a no brainer regardless of HRC’s incrementalism, neoliberal positions on trade and taxes, hawkish military stances and lack of concern regarding protecting the average joe from trade agreements that are in reality investment protection plans or from Wall Street banksters and their fraud.
It wasn’t perfect before 1980, but it really was a heck of a lot better. Two things (imho) changed politics in a dangerous way at that time.
1. When one famous politician used the words “I’m from the government and I’m here to help you.” in a cynical way.
2. When the nation, with the expansion of cable ‘news’ (and later satellite TV) allowed the suspension of the equal time and the fairness doctrine rules governing political reporting. That was a self-inflicted injury that may yet prove to have been the mortal wound to the body politic.
“I have remarked before on the evidently widespread belief that Americans go to the polls every four years to elect a monarch, who can then wave a magic wand and effect policy change. ”
This copied and pasted quote reflects what I have said about those who fully supported Barack Obama, especially in 2008, but were then disappointed when he didn’t wave that magic wand and produce positive results on each and every one of his campaign issues to their satisfaction. I believe they actually thought if the American voters could elect a biracial man (always referred to as Black) to the presidency; those expected results would miraculously come to pass. I didn’t expect those miracles or perfection so I still support President Obama 100% while disagreeing with him on some issues and actions. Instead; it drove Republicans to the polls in 2009 and elected a Republican Congress who stopped him in his tracks and at almost every turn. We learned a vital lesson but have seemingly ignored it – the President of the United States is NOT all-powerful. The Republican Congress, with John Boehner as it’s public head, took control of our government bringing us to where we are today.
To me, Hillary Clinton comes across as a typically rich woman who cannot relate to the middle-class and low income majority of Americans and those of us who MUST depend on the Social Security we have already paid for and Medicare which we pay for monthly out of those Social Security checks. Add to that the fact that Bill Clinton signed the bill (yes, decades ago but it still rules) repealing the Glass-Steagall Act which George W. took full advantage of in 2008 before leaving office to give away BILLIONS of our tax dollars to big business, big banks and Wall Street and maintained the tax loopholes for the 1%. I do not blame her personally but…and it is a big but…she has stated she will put Bill in charge of the U.S. economy. This is (or will be if she is elected) OUR future in the hands of the man who repealed the one bit of protection remaining to control big banks and the national economy and caused the financial crisis in 2008. Remember; the Clintons have protected their wealth and hope to continue to do so.
One of the issues agreed to between Bernie and Hillary before he endorsed her is to “create a 21st Century Glass-Steagall Act. Other issues in the agreement are part and parcel to the basic Democratic platform; common sense to admit the issues are problems and do need reform. I wonder about enacting major criminal justice reform bucking heads with state laws…which obviously need to be reformed or we wouldn’t be seeing the current criminal problems nationwide.
I won’t bother to comment on Trump and Pence; they are issues we have been following in the media and on this blog. We have made our views, our hopes and our fears known and, in some cases, vehemently argued them to the verge of hostility.
We are at a crisis point in this country; if Trump is elected we could most likely be facing the same same issues we are seeing today in Turkey and in France. We are dealing with that level of hatred and violence on a smaller scale here with no end in sight. Make no mistake; this is a distinct possibility, it must be averted and can only be done by refusing to allow Trump and Pence to take the White House and by removing as many Republicans from Congress and state level positions as are on the ballots for the November election.
Robert,
Thanks for the terrific synopsis. HRC has my vote for sure. My next step is to prepare for the worst….like being on the “Titanic.” Do we stay with a sinking ship or do we jump overboard and trust our look in unknown waters? Personally, I’m for the latter. At least there is a chance for survival.
All this is why I changed my mind daily for months, between Bernie and Hillary.
To be a little more specific. Hillary Clinton represents a vote for keeping the “Titanic” afloat. That’s all. She can’t stop it from sinking. The socio/political system in the U.S. is totally corrupted at the DEEPEST LEVEL. Like with the Titanic, the fracture isn’t visible unless you go deep into the hull of the ship of state.
For specifics as to the damage at the SURFACE LEVEL, I refer you to http://www.Democracide.info. It is the website for “Democracide” which my long-time companion and I self-published over twenty years ago.
The path of the Republican party in the demonization of opposition is discouraging, I agree. However, with the inclusion of Pence and the ‘Moral’ purity he brings, I have to admit the circle of exclusion is now complete.
For those of us who know Pence we understand that God, (note: not Jesus) God has told him to join the ticket.
The Crusade has begun.
We now only wait for this ticket to provide the ‘mark’ those demonized must wear.
Still I hear Dylan and I will not go easy:
And what’ll you do now, my blue-eyed son?
And what’ll you do now, my darling young one?
I’m a-goin’ back out ‘fore the rain starts a-fallin’
I’ll walk to the depths of the deepest black forest
Where the people are many and their hands are all empty
Where the pellets of poison are flooding their waters
Where the home in the valley meets the damp dirty prison
And the executioner’s face is always well hidden
Where hunger is ugly, where souls are forgotten
Where black is the color, where none is the number
And I’ll tell it and think it and speak it and breathe it
And reflect it from the mountain so all souls can see it
Then I’ll stand on the ocean until I start sinkin’
But I’ll know my song well before I start singin’
And it’s a hard, it’s a hard, it’s a hard, it’s a hard
It’s a hard rain’s a-gonna fall
If Clinton wins, Liberals will bully the dissenters into submission and absence of accountability will run rampant. Our system of checks and balances will not operate as it was intended, and – although I think she is the most capable between both of them – she will escape accountability as we have recently seen. And that is very dangerous.
If Trump wins, Conservatives will be scrutinized on their every decision, and the Liberal violent masses – the leather-sofa self-appointed intellectually-fascist elites, plus the blacklivesmatter violent militants, will put our democracy at risk, like in many Latin American countries. Capable of governing a country? I doubt it. But at least, he will not be let off-the-hook easily. The three branches are more likely to work as they were designed.
Good luck to us.
I will not accuse Ms. Clinton of lying. I will not accuse her of selling influence, first as First Lady in Arkansas right up through Secretary of State. I will not accuse her of violating SEC laws or obstruction of justice in White Water. I take her at her word that emails on her private server were not marked with any level of confidentially. My question is this: The one email that I actually saw on the TV screen was so heavily redacted that you could not read two consecutive words of text in the entire document. How does the most prepared person to be president read hundreds of documents like this one example and not once think, “you know, ibthinkbthos should be classified!”? Or maybe there shouldn’t be ANY state secrets?…No that cannot be right because she refused to allow notes from her health care task force to be public
Our “Ship of State” is facing a POLITICAL TSUNAMI OF HATRED. Its ONLY recourse is to change course. Captain Obama is the only one who can do that. I tried to warn him of this specific danger in the June 30, 2008, issue of “The Nation” magazine five months before he was elected President.
Immediately, Frank Rich a columnist for The New York Times BRANDED me as “anti-white” for doing so. Does his response need any explaining? It shouldn’t.
Does anyone really believe that Martina is Jewish? She/he sounds very much like the Gopper to me. Am I, along with Betty, the only one who feels that way? I doubt it.
Time has run out.
Marv:
dialogue: [verb] take part on a conversation or discussion, to resolve a problem.
ad-hominem: [adverb & adjective](of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
They are diametrically opposed.
Just a thought.
Have a great day!
I for one will happily cast my vote for Hillary. My hope is that as I age into dementia I will be able to reflect on voting for the first woman President in our long history.
Martina,
“Just a thought”
How about this thought, why don’t you take your message somewhere else? Don’t you have anywhere else to go? Seriously, I really think you’re hurting your cause. All you’re doing is motivating us to be more alert to the IMMEDIATE DANGERS we’re facing. I know for sure that you have done that for me.
Anyway, thanks a mill!
My first thought regarding Martina’s diatribes was “Gopper returns”…in drag? Did we ever learn if Gopper was male or female? Well; freedom of speech is all encompassing regarding gender and/or religion.
JoAnn,
“My first thought regarding Martina’s diatribes was Gopper returns….in drag?
I admit . You were quicker than I was on that one.
I believe strongly that someone who has the time or who can take it research exactly what the criticisms of Hilary are about, how true they are, how serious they are,what political implication and how they jibe/balance with criticism of Trump. Especially, what is behind the truth of people not trusting Hilary? Has she exhibited lack of trustworthiness and if so, how? It needs to be discussed (and hoprfully dismissed) after the facts are in.
One thing that disturbs me about her is Hilary’s being so locked into the astablishment, which makes her de facto a corporatist. Even she doesn’t deny this or apparently want to.
the testosterone level does seem high
jb, “the testosterone level does seem high”
How about helping us out by being a little clearer? I’ll be going on 80 next month. I’m sure you’re not talking about me. Right?
jb,
“Speaking truth to Power” doesn’t necessarily have to do with testosterone levels. From my experience, women can usually do it better than me. Like JoAnn for example.
“If more Americans understood how government works, and what skills public office requires, the willingness to believe that anyone who had run a business could just as easily manage the affairs of the nation would disappear.” This is perfect…. how government works is the key. “Winning” an election does not mean you get your way on everything. It is a simple fact but many do not believe or understand that. We are electing people to negotiate on our behalf. The evaluation of elected officials (and the potential ones) should be on what they have accomplished in their careers and our best guesses on how they will do going forward. With this standard in mind, hard-lined partisans are the least equipped to be successful as our public servants. I would only add this to the discussion and it is something that has bothered me from the beginning of this election cycle: just because you (we) like what we hear from a candidate, it does not mean they are NOT hard-lined partisans – we must have the intellectual honesty to admit this and move away from these candidates… always.
Ken Glass, I can’t be certain what redacted document you are referring to , but it seems likely to be this: http://www.dailynewsbin.com/news/republican-leader-admits-he-altered-documents-to-frame-hillary-clinton-on-benghazi/22856/
The point is, the document as publicly released, was redacted after the fact BY THE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE, to make it look like there was sensitive information there. If you are drawing conclusions based on the amount of redaction in this document, then you have been intentionally misled by the republicans on the Benghazi committee.
I have taken my Bernie yard sign down as well as the other Bernie signs I had on my car. I am not voting for Hillary or Trump.
Eugene Debs said: The Republican and Democratic parties, or, to be more exact, the Republican-Democratic party, represent the capitalist class in the class struggle. They are the political wings of the capitalist system and such differences as arise between them relate to spoils and not to principles.
We certainly have a Republicrat Party here in Marion County Indiana. Both parties march in lock step when the Colts or Pacers need a few million dollars here or there. The Democratic Party in Indiana is pathetic. John Gregg and Evan Bayh lead the state ticket and Hillary Clinton on the National Ticket (Bill will be her economic advisor). Goldman Sachs and George Soros did not write all those checks because they want real reforms, so, too Big to Fail and Too Big to Jail will remain operative. Back to the Future.
Hillary the champion of woman??? The Clinton Foundation has taken millions of dollars from the Gulf Oil States, these states, with their insulated monarchies are models of human rights suppression and suppression of woman’s rights.
Paul Ryan has stated he believes he can get much more of his agenda through if Trump is elected. I have my suspicions that he too might be taken in by what Don the con is telling him. I also have an intense fear that Trump would manage to get us into a nuclear war if elected. Or, at the very least ignight religious and/ or race wars. I also strongly suspect we will get four more years of the polar congress doing nothing more than attempting to make their opposite party look bad if Clinton is elected. I’ll choose survival of the human race.
No, Mary I saw redacted emails she did not recognize as requiring to be classified. According to all reports, there were many (I don’t recall the number) that were classified after she read and/or transmitted them. If she can read hundreds of documents that are later classified without realizing (or caring) that there was secret information in them, she is not competent to uphold and defend the Constitution.
Louie; yesterday you were wanted additional choices to our two-party system. There was a post on Facebook a few minutes ago for those determined to vote for Bernie. They call themselves a “voter co-op”, their logo is a blue bird with a shock of white hair and they had a total of 3,789 votes for Bernie. Might be Bernie.com; not sure I can find it again. So; with you not voting for anyone, that is a total of 3,790 votes Trump will not be getting. Good news; on a bad news day.
One of the great things about this column is that most of the time there is a good answer to negative comments. One of the best today is Mary Strinka’s answer to Ken Glass. 🙂
testosterone! what the hell is that anyway?
TLentych! You are right about running a business having little if anything to do with leading this country. But right along with that, holding titles serves as no better teacher. Secretary Clinton’s only claim to fame as Secretary of State is how many miles she logged in the air.
Irvin, not the facts matter to you, but the state department, run by John Kerry redacted 200 emails.
Justice Ginsburg was right in her description of Trump.
Ken,
“Secretary Clinton’s only claim to fame as Secretary of State is how many miles she logged in the air.”
Are your really serious? I agree that running a business has little if anything to do with leading a country. But, being Secretary of State has PLENTY to do with leading a country. And now you’re going to say how she screwed everything up. How was anyone going to do anything successful after that idiot George Bush decided to invade Iraq?
Ken, so what? I was only speaking to Mary’s answer to you regard ing your original redacting complaint. 🙂
It’s nice to have some place to go where the MAJORITY is still in touch with REALITY.
Ken seriously, Hillz claim to fame is that she wasn’t a war criminal. There’s a reason that Kissinger doesn’t fly through Europe when he’s traveling.
I would argue that Condoleeza Rice falls into the same class. We’ve all met academics who are careerist, but if you look at her published articles before & after her appointment, it’s almost funny.
Welcome back Martina! I enjoy your presence here. Diversity is good.
To me, once it boiled down to Cheeto Trump and his trained monkey Pence vs Hillary and ? it surprise me that anyone would consider GOP anything. Isn’t it perfectly clear that my party completely failed to shake off entertainment based brainwashing and has become completely dependant on the most easily brainwashed to just survive?
Seems so to me. If Hillary vs Trumpence is not a no brainer nothing is.
Now, how will she do? The middle of the road goes down both Main St and Wall St. Balance is the key. At the moment we don’t have it. It was stolen by the Koch Bros over the last few decades.
So will she find a way to restore it? IMO yes with a Democratic Congress starring such folks as Bernie and Warren and Schumer.
Without a Congress and Supreme Court as Obama faced, probably not. If they prevented him from progress they will certainly stop her.
In my book though these times require us to be single issue voters. Climate change overwhelms other risks and it’s a tough one.
Personally I wish that the voters in’51 hadn’t deprived us of our best choice, third term Obama. What were they thinking and why did they think that they could choose back then better than we now with all of the facts at hand?
I’m a huge fan of gray but this one is high contrast black and white.
Ken’s initial claim: ” The one email that I actually saw on the TV screen ”
Ken’s reply to mine: ” I saw redacted emails she did not recognize as requiring to be classified ”
So how many “redacted” emails did you actually see? And how much of the redaction was actually related to classified content?
As far as documents which are retroactively classified, even Colin Powell agrees that this process is useless and politically tainted. http://www.politicususa.com/2016/02/04/colin-powell-blows-up-republican-email-scandal-by-agreeing-with-hillary-clinton.html
“Reflections On A Toxic Election” is the topic today so Hillary’s E-mails, redacted and otherwise are of interest, as well they should be. That battle has been raging for many months after the opening shot regarding her use of a “single server” which was government approved for her use and used by other government officials.
As those arguments shifted back and forth with conflicting reports; along with the ugly Benghazi accusations, conflicts and denials, Trump and his minions gathered steam and amassed followers. Instead of Hillary’s failings, which we are aware of and seem to admit are many, we need to be keeping a closer eye on Trump. And now Trump and Pence. I know many of you on the blog do live in Indiana but for those who don’t you need to be fully aware of his toxicity, hidden behind his benign appearance. While Trump’s loud-mouthed, in-your-face, kick-ass, blatant racism, bigotry, anti-Semitism, xenophobia, anti-women, anti-LGBTQs is out in the open; Pence is quietly gaining GOP power and passing laws to deprive many on Trump’s list of their civil and human rights. Take my word as a Hoosier (whatever the hell that word means); Pence is just as dangerous as Trump, he is the face on the other side of that coin. While Trump has been promising change if elected, Pence was elected and has been enacting change, only in the state of Indiana at this time but…look where it has taken him.
I will be voting for Hillary because she is the better candidate by far, and if there was any doubt, the addition of Pence sealed my electoral choice. I can scarcely think of anyone worse than Pence as a running mate, and when added to a know-nothing such as Trump, I come up with a minus sum. The arguments I am reading in Sheila’s blog have little to do with who is the better candidate, and that’s too bad, because that is the issue we are called upon to decide when we walk into that voting booth. Does Hillary have warts and moles after 40 or so years of exposure? Of course, and don’t we all? That is not the issue. The issue is who would better represent a positive vision for this country and its people, and that is not a Trump-Pence set of executives.
Oh, that clears it all up. The state department denying any knowledge of private servers doesn’t matter. Documents labeled top secret are just a scam. Hillary didn’t get much accomplished because Bush screwed up so bad. A new concept for me seeing apologists make excuse after excuse for Hillary Clinton ineptitude.
Marv – But, being Secretary of State has PLENTY to do with leading a country. And now you’re going to say how she screwed everything up. How was anyone going to do anything successful after that idiot George Bush decided to invade Iraq?
==========================================================
Perhaps you forget, but Hillary voted as a Senator to put the guns in the hands of Bush the Younger and Cheney. A youthful indiscretion or how about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgcd1ghag5Y
Louie,
Marv-“Perhaps you forget, but Hillary voted as a Senator to put the guns in the hands of Bush the younger and Cheney.”
I agree with everything you say about Hillary Clinton. I haven’t forgotten about her vote. I don’t blame you for not voting for either candidate. However, I feel Trump/Pence are two dangerous to let loose on our country. With those two in office, there will be NO CHECK WHATSOEVER on the “Movement of Hatred” that they are leading. Because of the foregoing, I will make sure I vote for Hillary Clinton. I believe this mess might be bigger than you think.
One of the things that saddens me is that this election reinforces how disfunctional our process has become. We are, apparently, big time suckers for negative campaigning. We have the political equivalent of PeeWee Herman and his sidekick Jimmy Swaggart running against as qualified by experience a statewoman as there is and what do we base our decision on? Three decades of Republican flatulance.
How low can we go?
Ken, you’re just making things up now. Show me exactly where anyone has claimed that “Documents labeled top secret are just a scam.”
Ptte,
“How low can we go?”
A lot lower. Just watch and see.
Marv, I know that you lean towards a conspiracy explanation and that definitely needs to be carefully researched.
I personally lean towards the slippery slope theory. We laughed at Archie Bunker, wondered about Rush Limbaugh, were concerned about Lee Atwater, Karl Rove, and Grover Norquist, got concerned when Rupert and Roger took over the brain washing machine and finally worried when the Kochs started fast fuelling the whole mess with fossil fuel funding to complete their takeover.
We’re losing the good knight out to save the kingdom but without a functional Congress or Supreme Court there’s only so much the Executive could do.
Will we ride Trumpence the rest of the way down or can we give Hillary the traction that she needs to keep going uphill?
It’s really up to the Congressional and Governor votes.
Electing Trumpence will ruin America. Them not believing in science will wreck our only home. There is no planet “B”.
The problem with Hillary, beyond the balderdash, is partly her own fault, much of which should be forgiven. Evidently, on a one-to-one basis, she comes across as a warm and genuine person. In front of crowds, she stiffens up. Stage fright? Hey, she is human. I can forgive her that shortcoming.
However, some of her problems aren’t in that category, Even as the Republicans have tried to pick at every detail of her life, she seems to go to the opposite extreme and acts as if everything is off limits. I don’t think she did anything “wrong” in having her own mail server, I just see that as evidence of her desire for total control, at the expense of government transparency.
She was warned that her Wall Street speeches would look bad if she wanted to run for President some day. She didn’t seem to care and doesn’t seem to feel any shame or understand that it just looks bad. Yes, Obama took money from Wall Street — and nobody went to jail or was held responsible for the economic chaos they caused. A few, tax-deductible, fines levied on banks that were quickly made up for increased fees isn’t much of a punishment nor a deterrence.
Her proclamation that she “believes in capitalism” puts me off as well. What does that mean? Many who say that follow through by privatizing as many government services as possible, because government services by their very nature are “socialized”. Is that what she meant, or was that just “socialist” bashing?
She is also a bit hawkish for me.
Still, I will vote for Hillary. As much as I think there are real reasons to distrust and/or dislike her, I don’t believe that she is evil. On “women’s issues” and children, I know she will be great. While I believes she may lack (or have underdeveloped) “moral imagination”, she did finally come around on marriage equality.
I won’t vote for her (or against her) because she doesn’t have a Y-chromosome. If that were the criteria, I would have to wait for a short bearded Jewish man with a PhD (how tall is Paul Krugman?). No, I will vote for her because in our system we basically have a binary choice — and she will likely improve the judiciary with her appointments, if the Republicans don’t stop her.
Louie – I am still waiting for a candidate I can get truly excited about voting for. Obama was close, but Hillary isn’t. Still, one of the wise views of the Democrat Socialists is their realization that change will come about by influencing one of the two major parties instead of attempting to win an election as a third party. I remember angry people NOT voting for Humphrey; we got Nixon instead. I’d prefer to NOT have a President Trump.
Pete,
“Marv, I know that you lean towards a conspiracy explanation and that definitely needs to be carefully researched”
What you label my conspiracy explanation was explained for two or three hours in front of a special session of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission convened in Jacksonville back in 1992. It hasn’t disappeared. As a matter of fact, every day since, it has become firmer and firmer. Do you believe it needs more careful research? You just don’t want to believe it.
However, you are right about being on a slippery slope and combined with what you call my conspiracy theory, you’re about to witness an avalanche or better yet as I have explained it…..a political tsunami.