Hillary has a lot of negative history, what's wrong with bringing it up?

[whereisjustice]

She supported trade bills that have sent millions of jobs to slave labor in Mexico and Asia, causing devistation to the middle class and below.

Her wealth has been earned by trading facile, stroking speeches to Wall Street CEOs for political access and millions in cash.

Her State Dept. legacy with Syria, Libya, Yemen and Israel has left chaos, death and destruction in it's wake.

Her history as a Walmart director (one of the nations most exploitative companies) far overshadows any fancy speeches about equal pay.

Her views on same sex marriage changed as soon as her team of advisers revealed that it was no longer convenient to speak out against it.

She's been silent on contemporary civil rights abuses against minorities, silent on NSA overreach, silent on TPP. Silent on our failed no child left behind policies.

In fact, she's been silent on just about every necessary change needed to advance the quality of life for those in the middle class and below. Who is she really campaigning to represent?

We deserve a better presidential nominee than this.

Bernie Sanders is better than this.

And this is something all the cash on Wall Street cannot buy.

[NYC_SKP]

1. Where there are legitimate concerns with a candidate, it's our DUTY to bring them up.

It's our duty, even if those we try to reach don't want to hear it, to inform.

About all the leading candidate has to offer is that she is (for now) the leading candidate and people think it's more important to defeat the GOP than get a good president.

I say screw that, I'm afraid she won't be able to win AND I want a more progressive president.

I'm too old for this shit.

[840high]

2. Thank you.

[DesertFlower]

18. bernie will get my vote in the primary,

but i will always support the dem nominee.

[silvershadow]

39. I did, and was hidden by scads of members. So many that now my posts get crickets.

Disappointed, but that's life on the net I guess. Their loss.

[Paka]

40. That makes two of us.

[DanTex]

49. Exactly. Like Bernie Sanders, for example. Great guy, but impossible for him to win the GE.

A lot of people don't want to hear this, but unless we wake some of them up, we're risking another Republican in the White House.

[NYC_SKP]

56. That's a baseless concept. Obama didn't have a chance either.

And Hillary was inevitable then, too.

The one who can't win the GE is the one who used her office to sell favors, the one who is so witless as to run her own email server from a private resident.

An empty suit with trainloads of baggage can't win the GE.

She needs to step down.

[DanTex]

57. Of course Obama had a chance. At this time in 2007, he was maybe 10-20 points behind in the polls,

and was matching Hillary in fundraising. He was young and charismatic, already a rising star in the party, starting with his 2004 convention speech. And he had support from a lot of influential people in the party. Beyond that, the mood of the country was anti-Bush, which made him a better choice than Hillary, who was still reeling from her IWR vote.

And despite all that, he barely won the nomination. This time around, Hillary is a better candidate, and Bernie isn't even close to the political force that Obama was.

[NYC_SKP]

58. Hillary is already sinking, Bernie rising, and he's a stronger force than Obama.

I think you'll come to like him.

[DanTex]

62. I already like him. There's nothing to come to.

The one, and only, reason I am not supporting him in the primary, is that I don't think he has a chance in the GE. Issue by issue, I think his views are better than Hillary's. Just not by very much.

I don't have a problem with people supporting Bernie. I do have a problem with OPs like this one, because what they do is attack (unfairly) the person who is most likely going to be the Democratic nominee, and our only hope of avoiding a GOP White House.

There's a reason Bernie has pledged not to go negative. If only his supporters would realize this, and be more true to the man they support.

[Enthusiast]

88. Hillary is hardly a better candidate this time around. Hillary is a distinctly poor candidate.

If she wins the nomination she will lose the general election. Even though her opponent is also guaranteed to be substandard.

[Enthusiast]

87. People like you, continually repeating this nonsense is fueling that meme more than anything.

I believe it is your wish to harm Bernie's candidacy. Otherwise why would you even bring it up? Do you imagine we would all suddenly switch allegiance to Hillary based on your words of brilliance?

[grahamhgreen]

74. People seem to forget she failed to win last time. I don't know where they expect her to pick up

votes outside of our party....

[NYC_SKP]

75. I guess they think that everybody is similarly impressed by her whatever...

She's now been SOS, so, more experience.

But she fucked that up, and the service comes with more baggage, influence peddling.

She's a scary candidate with all of that.

SOS, getting lots of $ from Chevron, et al, who benefited from deals she brokered, all this sudden wealth.

I wouldn't touch that kind of candidate with a ten mile stick.

[Enthusiast]

86. Too old too.

[Thinkingabout]

3. Do you know how the state department works?

[Hekate]

32. My guess is: not a flipping clue. nt

[cali]

41. yes. and it's not just carrying out the resident's orders

How much influence and latitude an SoS has varies, but many if not most, formulate policy

[leveymg]

46. As a matter of fact, some of us do. Her legacy as SoS is nothing to brag about.

Millions of miles and more than a hundred countries visited in a whirlwind First Class tour, but as for substantive achievements in foreign affairs, world peace and diplomacy, there was Myanmar and precious little else.

As for the most critical part of her mission, the Middle East she left in a shambles. Her actual legacy is to spark a regional Sunni-Shi'ia war. There is, unfortunately, no denying that fact. The arch-establishment Walter Russell Mead observes about her legacy at State: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/was-hillary-clinton-a-good-secretary-of-state/2014/05/30/16daf9c0-e5d4-11e3-a86b-362fd5443d19_story.html

If Burma was a success of the Clinton approach, Egypt and Libya were sobering failures. Except in Tunisia, U.S. efforts to promote democracy after the Arab Spring were largely unsuccessful, with Egypt a particularly dramatic case. But the greatest problem for Clinton’s legacy is likely to be the miserable aftermath of the U.S.-backed overthrow of Gaddafi. Here, advocates of the Libya mission failed to take seriously one of the most important lessons of Iraq: When you overthrow a dictator in the Arab world, expect chaos and violence to follow. The mess in Libya — besides leading to the Benghazi attack that has entangled Clinton in congressional investigations and conspiracy theories — strengthened the voices in the administration opposing the more activist Syria policy Clinton promoted. It also deepened public resistance to more use of American military power abroad. This is not the legacy Clinton hoped to leave behind.

[Jackpine Radical]

77. Just think about that last sentence in the snippet:

The mess in Libya — besides leading to the Benghazi attack that has entangled Clinton in congressional investigations and conspiracy theories — strengthened the voices in the administration opposing the more activist Syria policy Clinton promoted. It also deepened public resistance to more use of American military power abroad. This is not the legacy Clinton hoped to leave behind.

So, her goal was to weaken public resistance to American militarism in the world.

Don't dat just warm the cockles of your heart?

[leveymg]

79. Some of her biggest successes were inadvertent, if you want to look at it that way.

See, I give her credit where it's due.

[Jackpine Radical]

80. She may very well inadvertent herself out of the nomination.

Inadvertently forgot to report Bill's LLC. Well, legally she didn't HAVE to. RMoney didn't HAVE to disclose his taxes either.

Inadvertently deleted emails from the system she inadvertently had installed at home.

Inadvertently mis-remembered being under fire in Bosnia.

She may end up inadvertently making a verb out of Inadvertent. Like, "Hillary inadvertented again."

[leveymg]

82. It's the inadvertent effects that occur after her nomination that really worry me.

[NYC_SKP]

59. Yes, you trade your influence for donations to the family foundations and high price speaking gigs.

You do all this while coloring mostly within the lines of what the POTUS sets down.

If Obama says work with Romania on energy, they you go out there and do it but also bring your Chevron friends in on the deal.

How the hell do you think they went from being penniless to being worth $130 million, with $30 million of that just last year?

Explain THAT crazy shit!

[Cheese Sandwich]

65. "The blessing of the LORD makes a person rich, and he adds no sorrow with it." - Proverbs 10:22

Hillary Clinton Revises Financial Status from ‘Dead Broke’ to ‘Obviously Blessed’

“Let me just clarify that I fully appreciate how hard life is for so many Americans today,” Clinton said in an interview with Good Morning America’s Robin Roberts. “Bill and I were obviously blessed. We worked hard for everything we got in our lives and we continue to work hard, and we’ve been blessed in the last 14 years.”

http://time.com/2851938/hillary-clinton-dead-broke-obviously-blessed/

It's obvious this is a blessing from god and "hard work" so why you're bringing up Chevron is beyond me.

[NYC_SKP]

66. Well, when you put it THAT way!

OMG I hadn't seen that article, that deserves it's own Original Post in GD!

[Cheese Sandwich]

68. May the force be with you

[Jackpine Radical]

81. Sadly, the Farce IS with us.

[hifiguy]

84. Wow.

That is a worthy statement if ever there was one.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. Then don't vote for her.../NT

[Maedhros]

16. Part of a campaign is convincing others that one candidate is better than another.[n/t]

[Hekate]

34. Which can be handily done by building up the candidate of your choice instead of doing oppo ....

....for the GOP. I'd really love to see that done here.

[DesertFlower]

19. i agree as far as the primary,

but if she is the nominee she should get every dem vote.

republicans scare the hell out of me.

[VanillaRhapsody]

43. But people are busy tearing her down

Thus ensuring that the not as politically savvy votes are suppressed.

[blue neen]

5. It makes it look like that's all you've got.

Let's hear the good things about the other candidates, the differences in the issues.

[Doctor_J]

69. you haven't seen good things about Sanders on du???

Contrasts between him and Clinton????

Sure...ok

[blue neen]

70. The OP's question was about Hillary and negativity.

It wasn't about Sanders and negativity.

I've seen good things about Sanders on DU. I want to see good things about all of the candidates without putting other candidates down too much.

[onehandle]

6. Thanks for the lies and exaggerations.

See you at the voting booth in November 2016.

[KMOD]

7. +1

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. Do you think...

Do you think trashing your opponents and calling his or her supporters stupid is an effective political strategy?

[KMOD]

9. was this for me, or the OP

[DemocratSinceBirth]

11. I was asking you what your opinion is of the OP's strategy?/NT

[KMOD]

15. No. I don't believe the OPs strategy is effective.

I think the OPs critiques are wrong, and erroneous. I believe the OP is trashing one candidate, unfairly and wrongly, and I have cannot tell you with certainty, but I believe the OPs motive is to drag down HRC. I believe that is the OPs only motive.

[rock]

47. +1

My turn.

[treestar]

53. Exactly how in the heck are they going to convince the

people they need to convince to vote for Bernie in the primaries by trashing unfairly the candidate they already support?

Most people are simply not that negative. Sitting around waiting for a reason to condemn somebody they already support! And falling for stupid criticisms.

[JI7]

12. it will get recs on this site

and i think that's what many want on this forum.

[Cha]

20. But, what's new?

[DesertFlower]

10. i think most of us know all that.

the republicans will bring it all up during the campaign.

i've never been a fan of hillary. i'll vote for bernie in the primary, but if she is the nominee she will get my vote.

[Flying Squirrel]

14. The Republicans won't bring it ALL up...

Just the things that they feel they can make stick in their voters' minds. Not the corporate coziness, because that would be attacking themselves as well.

I do feel that it's fine to bring up legitimate concerns about her in that regard, because we won't be hearing it from the Republicans - we aren't giving them any ammunition they can use.

[DesertFlower]

17. hillary is not perfect but

she's better than having a repub in the white house.

remember 2004. my own husband didn't like kerry so he didn't vote. i spoke to a lot of people after that election -- most independents and they didn't like kerry so they voted for bush.

chris matthews interviewed rand paul today. hillary is polling 4 points ahead of him -- and not that far ahead of other republicans. that worries me.

[Flying Squirrel]

24. It worries me too... we'll see

Obviously I agree that she's better than a Repub in the WH

[hootinholler]

63. Worries me too

It says that people don't see much of a difference between them. There's not much room for growth in her polling numbers either.

If the clown car ends up with a moderate R leading, she will not win, because she will not be able to differentiate her positions. The Truman observation is in play. Pataki (sp?) is someone to watch on that side.

[JaneyVee]

13. Why bring it up here when you can bring it up at Free Republic?

[delrem]

26. Maybe because at Free Republic those qualification might fit right in.

That's to be snarky. More realistically, however, HRC's Wall St. and MIC War Hawk pluses are in fact negatives for some progressive Dems -- and this is, after all, about a Dem primary, not a Republican primary. You know very well that the Republicans are pro-war, pro-wall st., and they focus on "BENGHAZI!!" and other non-issues which, to a progressive Dem, are non-issues.

For example, $25M in speaking fees for just last year is an issue that some progressive Dems don't want to be forgotten in the tsunami of a $2Billion campaign that wants to focus on anything but *that*. That, like you, wants to make the subject taboo. Nevertheless, to many not so enclosed in the $2Billion bubble, the topic is meaningful and important, and it WILL be discussed. It WILL factor in. If banned here, it and similar topics will be discussed elsewhere.

After the primary and if as most people expect Hillary Clinton wins, things will be different. I expect that a Republican can easily be found who'll run to Hillary's left on economic and military issues, though well to her right on social (equality) issues. At that point chaos and $$$ will overcome all. Who knows what will become of US politics then?

[davidpdx]

21. My opinion as long as it is policy related it is fair game

If it turns personal, then that is too much. Apparently some believe ANY criticism of Secretary Clinton makes you a Republican troll, a freeper, a "hater", a "basher", etc. etc.

[KMOD]

22. legitimate criticism would be fair game,

however there is none, in the OP's post.

[davidpdx]

28. I've seen plenty of posts where DUers that have a big "H" as their avatar

dismiss pretty much anything as attacks. I think people need to dial it back on both sides.

[KMOD]

29. I don't judge people by their avatars.

There are a lot of posters with Bernie avatars that I absolutely respect.

But BS attacks are BS attacks.

[davidpdx]

30. If BS attacks are BS attacks they should be called out on both sides

[delrem]

31. So you redefine the term 'legitimate' to suit yourself.

"She supported trade bills that have sent millions of jobs to slave labor in Mexico and Asia, causing devistation to the middle class and below. "
A fact, and a legitimate criticism for some -- an accolade to others, perhaps yourself.

"Her wealth has been earned by trading facile, stroking speeches to Wall Street CEOs for political access and millions in cash."
A fact, and a legitimate criticism for some -- an accolade to others, perhaps yourself.

"Her State Dept. legacy with Syria, Libya, Yemen and Israel has left chaos, death and destruction in it's wake."
A fact, and a legitimate criticism for some -- an accolade to others, perhaps yourself.

"Her history as a Walmart director (one of the nations most exploitative companies) far overshadows any fancy speeches about equal pay."
A fact, and a legitimate criticism for some -- an accolade to others, perhaps yourself.

"Her views on same sex marriage changed as soon as her team of advisers revealed that it was no longer convenient to speak out against it."
A fact, and a legitimate criticism for some -- an accolade to others, perhaps yourself.

"She's been silent on contemporary civil rights abuses against minorities, silent on NSA overreach, silent on TPP. Silent on our failed no child left behind policies."
A fact, and a legitimate criticism for some -- an accolade to others, perhaps yourself.

The rest is just opinion, and as you demonstrate, an opinion that you don't share.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

23. Voters are supposed to scrutinize the candidates they're asked to vote for.

If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. Harry S. Truman

[Cheese Sandwich]

25. We had better bring it up or she will cruise to the nomination.

So there's nothing wrong with it.

[KMOD]

27. It's been brought up.

And the polling is still exceptional.

[delrem]

33. You do have that. Opinion polls show HRC is well in the lead. nt

[stonecutter357]

35. I'm against a tax on retirement funds

[Spitfire of ATJ]

37. What if the "retirement fund" is millions from stock dividends?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

36. You should PRAISE Walmart!!!

They help the poor!!! Where else can a poor person buy a DVD player for $20???

[Unknown Beatle]

38. As soon as facts come out on HRC

and posted on DU, Clinton supporters will invariably attack it as lies and exaggerations. The truth is the truth and facts are facts but some don't want to hear it. Even Obama supporters don't want to hear the truth about his ties to Wall St. and his expansion on bush's war powers.

"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell

[Scuba]

42. K&R

[BainsBane]

44. She voted against the Central American Trade bill

On The Issues says that, unlike her husband, she opposed NAFTA. http://www.ontheissues.org/hillary_clinton.htm

[sendero]

45. In other words...

.... watch what she does and has done, not the utter bullshit she continually says.

[Katashi_itto]

48. K&R

[Thinkingabout]

50. Same old, same old, nothing new here, just another day, same talking

Points. Obliviously either RW information are nothing to give to build up their candidate. If I was going to post this one I would have a better idea of civics.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

51. I don't believe it's neither prudent nor effective to tear down your opponents...

I don't believe it's either prudent nor effective to tear down your opponents, especially when they are in your own party.

What I love about propositions like these is they actually get to be confirmed or rejected.


See ya in IA, NH, NV, and SC.

[treestar]

52. You'd do better trying to convince people to vote for Bernie

for positive reasons. Hillary supporters are still fellow Democrats. And far more numerous. For Bernie to win, you have to convince them, or the bulk of them.

[Andy823]

61. Exactly

But it looks like some here don't really care about convincing people to vote for Bernie, they would rather attack Clinton. It's kind of like some here have made attacking president Obama their job for years, along with attacking the democratic party, Clinton, and I am willing to bet any other candidate that jumps in the race. It's really not about getting Bernie elected, it's about something else.

[treestar]

64. You are correct I think

Same people who made attacking President Obama their job. And now attacking Hillary. Since he stepped in, Bernie has replaced Warren who did not as the figure to use as supposedly better. Without making attempt to get them any real support.

[99Forever]

54. Legitimate criticism is legitimate.

That it troubles some to hear it, is their problem, not the problem of the rest of us.

Keep standing up for truth.

[DanTex]

55. The problem is, you are mixing exaggerations with outright lies, and presenting a totally one-sided

portrayal of Hillary's history and her present political views.

For example, she has talked extensively about contemporary civil rights abuses, and about income inequality and minimum wage. Yes, she does give speeches for money (as do a lot of people including, for example, Paul Krugman and Jon Stewart), but the "quid pro quo" accusation is entirely baseless. She has changed some of her views since the 90s, along with almost everyone in the world including, say, Elizabeth Warren who actually was a Republican, but somehow when Hillary discards old, mistaken views in light of new evidence, this is a bad thing. And we all know that the Middle East was paradise on Earth before Hillary Clinton stepped in -- obviously, the only civil wars that have ever turned out badly are the ones that occurred while she was SoS.

And so on. The reality is, if you look at what she stands for and what Bernie stands for, by comparing their voting records, they are very similar. She's fought hard for things like healthcare, women's rights, etc. Compared to any Republican, the difference between Hillary and Bernie is rounding error.

[Exilednight]

71. It's not. Here's what KO had to say about Hillary

God knows, Senator, in this campaign, this nation has had to forgive you, early and often...

And despite your now traditional position of the offended victim, the nation has forgiven you.

We have forgiven you your insistence that there have been widespread calls for you to end your campaign, when such calls had been few.

We have forgiven you your misspeaking about Martin Luther King's relative importance to the Civil Rights movement.

We have forgiven you your misspeaking about your under-fire landing in Bosnia.

We have forgiven you insisting Michigan's vote wouldn't count and then claiming those who would not count it were Un-Democratic.

We have forgiven you pledging to not campaign in Florida and thus disenfranchise voters there, and then claim those who stuck to those rules were as wrong as those who defended slavery or denied women the vote.

We have forgiven you the photos of Osama Bin Laden in an anti-Obama ad...

We have forgiven you fawning over the fairness of Fox News while they were still calling you a murderer.

We have forgiven you accepting Richard Mellon Scaife's endorsement and then laughing as you described his "deathbed conversion."

We have forgiven you quoting the electoral predictions of Boss Karl Rove.

We have forgiven you the 3 A-M Phone Call commercial.

We have forgiven you President Clinton's disparaging comparison of the Obama candidacy to Jesse Jackson's.

We have forgiven you Geraldine Ferraro's national radio interview suggesting Obama would not still be in the race had he been a white man......

How much more do we have to forgive her?

[DanTex]

72. Yes, he said that about how she conducted the 2008 campaign, which has nothing to do with

the lies and misrepresentations in the OP.

[Exilednight]

73. But it has everything to do with her 2016 campaign.

[mercuryblues]

67. I find

that much of her "negative history" that is brought up is old debunked stuff or the source is from a right wing site.

So much so that when there are legitimate concerns I tend to say eh. IOW when so much outrageous crap is posted day after day real concerns get thrown into the same category. Being labeled as "not a real Dem" makes me think so highly of those who profess that they are just "concerned" about Clinton's politics.

[cantbeserious]

76. Hear - Hear - Well Said

eom

[gordianot]

78. Being what some would call an almost "professional liberal" I am aware of factual differences.

What I like about Sanders he is unequivocal on his stances. I focus on the end of the day and NOT having another Republican President.

[libdem4life]

83. I don't see this as "trashing"...could those who do kindly respond if they think it nonfactual?

Not howl and play victim...I'm still deciding, especially with O'Malley in the race, but if all this is true, it will come out toute suite in the General. If not, please correct it. I count 7 statements.

[L0oniX]

85. K & R