2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary-phobes: Could Clinton Do Anything Right in Your Eyes?
Fair question. She keeps getting criticized for stuff that men get a free pass upon--like our MIA pal Will Pitt's acceptance of Kerry's Iraq war resolution vote and his disdain for Clinton's.
Surely there is something she has done right. Somewhere. Sometime. Come on. Prove that you are not really Hillary-phobes.
oh08dem
(339 posts)revbones
(3,660 posts)Sorry, saw that and had to put it out there.
okaawhatever
(9,461 posts)and I think rape/incest.
revbones
(3,660 posts)Was it here when she said she didn't support any restrictions:
Or here when she said there could be:
Orsino
(37,428 posts)This may be her best issue. I wish she and all our candidates would call out the anti-choices as anti-woman more.
mhatrw
(10,786 posts)I give her kudos for that!
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)minus free trade and most other actual policies.
dchill
(38,474 posts)=bullshit.
oh08dem
(339 posts)Off topic, kinda, but why is okay for the Clintons to be lumped together when the argument is advantageous, but when its not the person that lumped them together is called sexist?
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)artislife
(9,497 posts)The only reason the lobbyists who run her very campaign and the robber barons she is completely beholden to still back her after her "populist conversion" is that they know she is lying about supporting anything that helps that bottom 99% or hurts the top 1%.
But other than accelerating oligarchy and ensuring perpetual warfare, she's totally progressive! I mean, she even just decided that gays should be allowed to be married and that huge corporations should not be allowed to massively profit off of imprisoning black people!
dchill
(38,474 posts)are forever in her debt, I'm positive.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)No more Turd Way bullshit politics!
Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!
dchill
(38,474 posts)Disqualify herself for taking money from any special interest group. Drop out for having knowingly lied about her true positions. Admit that she has flip flopped on big issues to overshadow her opponents without any ethical considerations. Completely explain the pro-trade agreement emails on her server, and why she used her position as SOS to become a lobbyist for said trade agreements. I could go on, but I'm sure you're already glazing over what I've already laid out. The pro-Hillary force is strong in this thread.
dchill
(38,474 posts)I know rationalization and justification takes time.
Kittycat
(10,493 posts)Since when has that ever been an acceptable meme here at DU?
Don't look to us for justifying your disregard of lost lives to make your candidate somehow more acceptable than the alternative. Right now you still have a choice. Search your own soul for answers, and quit playing the sexism card. You diminish all women when you do this.
Our differences are philosophical. Campaign finance to a grossly obscene extent. Trade differences (I'm very concerned about TPP passing). Her penchant for war and causing further disruption in already delicate regions. The constant lies she's caught telling. Forget the transcripts, I'm not an ignorant fool, I know she'll stand with them over us. And tomorrow she fundraises with her friends at pharma, another issue that hits me at home. Especially since I hit the deductible on my high deductible health plan on Feb 4th.
So please stop with these rediculous testing questions. You have your candidate, and I have mine. You made your choice, and you own it - be proud of it. The good, whatever that is, and all the garbage that comes with it. But do not drag women that have struggled, and continue to struggle against men in to this fight, in comparison to a millionaire that has used her position to promise God knows what to these lobbyists on the backs of our future.
dchill
(38,474 posts)ThePhilosopher04
(1,732 posts)would be a nice start. ALL OF IT.
revbones
(3,660 posts)Or apologize and explain her promising unions that she would fight the Colombia Free Trade agreement now that her emails show she actively lobbied for it after making those promises.
She could explain the timeline that shows donations to the Clinton Foundation coincide with arms deals she pushed through.
She could apologize for her misleading statements about Bernie's healthcare plans - when she said he wanted to dismantle Obamacare and start over.
She could explain that she cherry-picked votes of his on omnibus bills to deflect her own lobbying on the Crime Bill.
She could truthfully explain that donations come with expectations and influence politicians.
All of those would be doing right in my book.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)Goldman gets more attention because it got the special "3 speeches for the price of 3" deal, but what about all those other banks that were apparently crawling over each other for the privilege of paying her $225K on up to listen to her talk for an hour?
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Like when she was unfashionably late to support equal marriage rights? She did the right thing, but only after standing in the way of justice for way too long. And then only because it dawned on her that bigotry might well sink her chances of being elected.
We can't afford to wait for her to exhaust all wrong options on every issue. There aren't enough polls and focus groups in the world to guide her through the presidency she so covets. That is what disqualifies her from the presidency. She is a follower, not a leader, and I don't trust the people she first turns to for advice.
revbones
(3,660 posts)Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)revbones
(3,660 posts)Return the private prison money, apologize for her role in mass incarceration and work toward eliminating private prisons.
She could support marijuana legalization.
She could stop saying that Bernie is "going negative" but her team is only "vetting the candidate"
She could distance herself from David Brock, self-admitted liar and ex-Republican hatchet-man who trashed Anita Hill helping get Clarence Thomas on the bench and had spun many right-wing smears against the Clintons before switching to team-Clinton.
She could back away from her war-mongering stances that resulted in Iraq and may result in other wars.
She could find the 30,000+ emails that got deleted when she handed over her emails.
There are a lot of things she could do that I would think was something she did right!
dchill
(38,474 posts)since the 18 minute erasure from the Nixon tapes. Deleted stuff is never accidental or complimentary.
Dems to Win
(2,161 posts)I'm disgusted by the Clintons' $200 million cash haul, trading on their public service, selling the aura of the White House to anyone with enough cash in hand. ($20 million of it Hillary's cashing in on her pubic service as SOS) I simply don't want the Clintons to return to the White House. Too greedy, too sleazy, too corrupt.
Hillary did make a great speech in Bejing in 1995. 'Womens Rights are Human Rights' will always be associated with her name.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Somewhere between the IWR vote, "marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman" and sponsoring legislation criminalizing flag burning, she lost a lot of my respect.
Still, in 2004 I saw her speak on stage at the march for womens lives in DC. She made a cogent case for reproductive freedom. Unfortunately a year or so later she was in the times talking about seeking "middle ground" with anti-choicers.
Once the right-blowing winds of the post 911 bush years abated, she improved. But "i did the right thing when the polling said it was okay" is not my idea of a leadership profile in courage.
What could she do that would be right? Support a $15 minimum wage. As Sanders has done. Call the drug war a failure, as Sanders has done.
Come out for descheduling cannabis, as Sanders has done. To her credit she has acknowledged verbally that the states that have legalized marijuana should be left alone with that decision (a position which gets characterized as "STATES RIGHTS ZOMG" when it comes from Sanders) but of course that still leaves people like sick medical marijuana users at the mercy of federal law and whoever happens to be interpreting and enforcing it.
She has done some things right, and when she has, Ive given her props.
area51
(11,908 posts)Can only speak for myself, but I'd doubt people who're voting for Sanders, or a write-in, are in fear of Clinton; it's more likely to be out of a dislike of her policies or actions. Perhaps you'd get more/varied answers if you rephrased it toward those who dislike Hillary as opposed to calling them afraid of her.
k8conant
(3,030 posts)I'm not afraid of her...I just don't want her to be President.
SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)Making America the worlds clean energy superpower and meeting the climate challenge.
Hillary will:
Create good-paying jobs by making the United States the clean energy superpower of the 21st century.
Set national goals to have 500 million solar panels installed; generate enough renewable energy to power every home in America; cut energy waste in homes, schools, and hospitals by a third; and reduce American oil consumption by a third.
Lead the world in the fight against climate change by bringing greenhouse gas emissions to 30 percent below what they were in 2005 within the next decadeand keep going.
Thats why on day one, Hillary will set bold, national goals that will be achieved within ten years of her taking office:
Generate enough renewable energy to power every home in America, with half a billion solar panels installed by the end of Hillarys first term.
Cut energy waste in American homes, schools, hospitals and offices by a third and make American manufacturing the cleanest and most efficient in the world.
Reduce American oil consumption by a third through cleaner fuels and more efficient cars, boilers, ships and trucks.
SamKnause
(13,101 posts)The damage and destruction caused by the Bush family
and the Clinton family in this country and around the globe
is incalculable.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)dchill
(38,474 posts)in my eyes. Still wouldn't be a viable candidate, though.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Then she could start fighting for real progressive change and supporting all the veterans and their families she let down with her IWR vote, the homeless and poverty stricken people she helped cause and work to release the people she helped imprison. She should probably ask forgiveness from the Iraqis and Libyans too.
I have a forgiving nature.
greymouse
(872 posts)You are exactly right. If Hillary did a 180 and actually worked for the things she claims to care about, I would be impressed as heck. Then maybe twenty years more of doing that stuff, so it was convincing, I'd vote for her. OF course, she'd be 88, but whatever.
dchill
(38,474 posts)You talkin' to me?
You talkin' to me?
840high
(17,196 posts)right now - STOP LYING.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)Hmm it wouldn't have to do with Kerry having a war record vs. shrub hiding out in a national guard unit that was designed to keep Texas VIP's out of Vietnam. It had to be sexism Oh, I'm sorry, other than
Hillary Clinton is smarter than me. Hillary Clinton is more knowledgeable than me. That I've observed (from a distance, through our media). While that's my minimum standard for President, what you do with it counts. I knew that there were no weapons of mass destruction(according to weapon inspectors) I knew shrub both wanted to be "a wartime president" and felt that his father had "wasted" his wartime president status by ending his war too soon. My guess is that she expected the Iraq War to end like Daddy Bush's did, and she didn't want to have to run having voted against a "popular" war.
I don't vote for people eager for war. If John "bomb.bomb Iran" switched parties I wouldn't vote for him either.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)That does not negate the extremely wrong things she has done.
Binkie The Clown
(7,911 posts)eridani
(51,907 posts)EdwardBernays
(3,343 posts)is that I don't trust that she believes what she says and will maintain her position...
I also don't think she'd hold a position against her own financial interests. And many of her positions are directly tied to a paycheck.
So.
Cavallo
(348 posts)The woman called the TPP the gold standard.
She's running for JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup and Goldman Sachs, among so many others.
She can't possibly be the people's candidate.
I don't understand the support for her here. I mean I really don't understand it.
mikehiggins
(5,614 posts)being afraid of Hillary. I have seen lots of people call her a liar. I've seen lots of posts listing lots of the things she's done over the years that raise my hackles. I've seen posts from people who claim to hate her with as much passion as the GOPukes do (I can't believe that one: lots of GOPukes really, really hate Hillary far more than any sane person can).
I, myself, do not trust her and in particular her insistence that Doctor Henry Kissinger is a legitimate source for diplomatic advice. If she wants to vacation with him that's fine but looking to him for any input as to how this nation should operate in the future literally should disqualify her in my view.
I refer to K as Cheney's Sith Master and I'm only partially joking.
So no, I'm not afraid of Hillary but I'm hoping that Sanders will remove any need for me to hold my nose and vote for her.
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)...she just doesn't choose too very often while campaigning. It's unfortunate and revealing of someone's character.
PonyUp
(1,680 posts)VulgarPoet
(2,872 posts)* For profit prisons
* "Interventions" in the Middle East
* Accepting stupid amounts of money from Wall Street (selling out)
* Her role in the coup in Honduras
* Monsanto
* Fracking
* H1B visas
* Leaving Net Neutrality and Open Internet the fuck alone
* Her stance on TTP.
That's just a small sampling of things that could redeem her in my eyes. Unfortunately, since I wasn't born yesterday, I'm not naïve enough to believe any of that will happen.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)As far as I know, there have to be at least 25 million eligible women that I would vote for as president before I vote for a crony of Wall St.
LexVegas
(6,060 posts)mmonk
(52,589 posts)is nothing and we're this or that and run on non issues.
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)She could withdraw from the race.
tazkcmo
(7,300 posts)Anybody that doesn't support her for any reason at all? Regime changes in Libya and Honduras aren't good reasons to not support and candidate or just Sec Clinton? Lying on national TV about dodging sniper fire isn't a good reason to oppose a candidate or just Sec Clinton? Welfare Reform isn't a good reason to not support a candidate or just Sec Clinton? Private email server, questionable quid pro quo with a Foundation and weapons sales, constantly moving stances on issues are not good reasons to not support a candidate or just Sec Clinton?
What has she done right? Not enough to excuse any of the above.
peace13
(11,076 posts)She does one thing and says another. Says one thing and then walks back the one thing. The one thing she could do that would make me respect her is resign.
LAS14
(13,783 posts)I didn't read all responses, but skimming tells me the answer is "no." Ergo, we're heading down a scary road of demagoguery. I DON'T think that Sanders is a demagogue, but I think (to his distress), too many of his supporters for comfort and ALL of Trump's want a demagogue.
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)there is absolutely no comparison. The difference is a stark as night and day.
shawn703
(2,702 posts)The sanction against Iran which brought them to the table, she deserves a lot of credit for that. I also like the work she does to try to expand women's rights around the world.
I think she'd make a good UN ambassador in a Sanders administration.
LuvLoogie
(6,998 posts)without opposition, after having walked a gauntlet of shame.
Do I need a sarcasm thingy?
Armstead
(47,803 posts)But I don't think she should be anywhere near the White House
forjusticethunders
(1,151 posts)Apologize for her full throated support for the crime bill, apologize (and I mean acknowledge the racist implications of the word, the dogwhistle politics it appeals to AND the conceptual framing that word represents which led directly to the deaths of young black males like Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown)
Give back, or donate to charity, all fees accrued from giving speeches to major Wall Street banks, release the transcripts and take responsibility for any overly supplicative words about the FIRE sector that nearly destroyed the world economy.
Acknowledge that SuperPACs and other dark money has a corrosive effect on our democracy, even if she has to make the argument that she HAS to take the money to beat the GOP (I don't think she needs to, though, the people that the old ways of campaigning work on already lean GOP anyway)
Pledge to fight for 15/hr minimum wage, LINKED TO INFLATION.
Renounce all support for "trade deals". at least ones without an ironclad guarantee that any wealth created from free trade is not simply accumulated by the wealthy.
That'd be the minimum for me to actually feel decent about voting for her.
djean111
(14,255 posts)and increased H-1B visas and cluster bombs and corporate/Wall Street ascendancy over people. To name just a few things.
Those things I listed are a minefield I won't be crossing over. There is nothing she can "say" she would do that cancels them out, or makes her palatable to me in any way.
Edited to add - that is so pathetic that you are still trying to make objections to Hillary about gender. You should stop - you are not doing the actual feminists any good at all. Quite the contrary. I am a woman, and gender could not erase or excuse even one thing on my list of things I dislike about what Hillary stands for.
Svafa
(594 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)Since we're now in "campaign rhetoric" time, no she can't do anything to fix it. Because I'm assuming she's saying whatever is expedient for this election with no intention of follow-through.
And before you shout "sexist!!!", I feel the same about plenty of male neoliberals.
She'd need to have actions that match her rhetoric, and maintain that over a significant period of time. She's not currently in a position where she could do that.
John Poet
(2,510 posts)I could support that.
She could oppose the death penalty in all cases. I could support that.
She could support legalized marijuana, which a majority of the nation now does. I guess maybe she's waiting for a super-majority?