TPA (fast track) A lose-lose choice for Hillary Clinton

[cali]

The big threat to Hillary Clinton’s campaign isn’t coming from a competitor. It’s coming from an issue. And it’s coming now, long before the first primary. Will she be for or against giving President Barack Obama fast-track authority to negotiate trade deals?

<snip>

Obama’s problem is with Democrats. They are horrified by the Trans-Pacific Partnership. They see it as a job killer, like the North American Free Trade Agreement passed in 1993 under President Bill Clinton. A powerful coalition of labor unions, progressives, environmentalists and Latino organizations opposes the new trade agreement. That’s the Democratic Party base.

See Hillary Clinton’s problem? If she supports fast track, it will inflame liberals who will hound her over it all through the primaries. It may even propel a challenge from her left. If she opposes fast track, she will enrage the Obama administration and get blamed if he suffers an embarrassing defeat. She will also tick off Wall Street and risk losing their campaign contributions.

<snip>

If Hillary Clinton comes out for fast track, it might get just enough Democratic support to pass. If she opposes fast track, it’s probably doomed. The fate of the measure very likely rests in her hands.

<snip>

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/04/20/the-looming-threat-to-hillary-clintons-2016-campaign/

[cali]

1. kick

[KMOD]

2. HRC is a very powerful woman, but

If Hillary Clinton comes out for fast track, it might get just enough Democratic support to pass. If she opposes fast track, it’s probably doomed. The fate of the measure very likely rests in her hands.

This almost seems like the writer thinks she queen or something. I'm pretty sure the fate of the fast track lies with the House and the Senate, but whatever.

[cali]

4. I'm damned sure she's the most influential member of the democratic party

other than the president- and I'm not convinced she isn't more influential at this point.

[sendero]

3. What an incredible...

.. opportunity for HRC. Now that Sanders is running and her rhetoric has shifted markedly progressive, she can prove it is not all just talk by opposing the TPP. Couldn't be more cut and dried.

[Buns_of_Fire]

5. I imagine if I were her, I'd just say as little as possible about it

and hope it's resolved before any serious campaigning or debates.

I don't LIKE that approach, not one bit, but I can understand why she (and her advisers) might choose to handle it that way.

[cali]

6. as the article details, there's really no way to do that

"resolution" won't end it as an issue.

I think she probably will go with the obfuscating. hell she already is. I think that's political calculation that is nothing short of political cowardice.

[Buns_of_Fire]

7. I think she's skilled enough to talk her way around it without really taking a position.

So long as the statement doesn't outright say "I support..." or "I don't support...", of course. And by the end of the day, both pro- and con- sides will probably claim that she agrees with them, when in reality she didn't really say much of anything -- and since she's been all over the map on this stuff, they'll probably both be right.

I don't think TeamHRC is going to let her go out there with a definitive "yes" or "no". Either one is going to tick off a group of people that she doesn't want to tick off.

[cali]

10. except she already has the reputation of being a slippery politician

who isn't honest or straightforward and that would reinforce it, and give her a lot of bad press.

[aspirant]

8. Has Bill Clinton

weighed in on this or is this team Clinton speaking with one voice?

[stevenleser]

9. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6617467

[cali]

11. .....

HDF at work.

[stevenleser]

12. Close, HDS. nt