2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIt doesn't bother me that Hillary is courting Republicans
Yeah, yeah. Tick fucking tock and all that.
It doesn't bother me that she is moving to the right for the general election
It doesn't bother me that she will almost certainly support the TPP and TTIP
It doesn't bother me that she no longer gives but the most fleeting mention of campaign reform
I don't care who she picks for VP or who she chooses for her cabinet
It does bother me that we'll see a beefed up more muscular foreign policy and more military interventions.
I am sure that she'll pick Justices who will preserve a woman's right to choose and will be socially liberal. I have no hopes that she'll choose justices who will support the people over corporate interests.
It's what I expect. And if she surprises me by, for example, not immediately bombing the shit out of Assad's forces, I'll be pleasantly surprised.
She is far better than Trump. That will just have to do. Faint praise that it is.
(btw, no this isn't bitterness about Bernie. I knew she'd be the nominee. These are opinions I formed about her over many years.)
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Ned_Devine
(3,146 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)I do think she'll be the President. I don't think most of her supporters will utter a peep of criticism no matter what she does.
AntiBank
(1,339 posts)I am voting for Clinton but will rage against any and all fucked up neolib, neocon-loved, bankster-friendly, warhawk, corporatist or right-wing things she tries to shove through after she is elected.
adigal
(7,581 posts)If I get banned, well, it's been a nice 12 years.
TDale313
(7,820 posts)It's what I expect too, and it still bothers the fuck out of me.
840high
(17,196 posts)to vote for her.
TwilightZone
(25,464 posts)Many judges support a liberal judicial interpretation of fundamental rights, but they also have corporate laws to consider. I'm curious how you're going to separate the ones that will "support the people over corporate interests" based on their existing body of work.
Do you have some examples of current judges that you feel would fit this requirement?
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)As for "tick-tock," they seem to delight in the idea that this place will turn boring and get half the traffic.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)Hopefully, she'll preserve most of the gains made in protecting the environment, endangered species, and open lands. At least she won't stack the federal land and environmental agencies with right-wing ideologues.
That'll have to do.
cali
(114,904 posts)but as you said, she won't stack the BLM or EPA with right wingnuts.
That'll have to do.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)and functioning regulatory agencies.
cali
(114,904 posts)fracking and her ties to big oil.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)(P.S. -- and if you don't order, someone will order for you.)
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)now that your switching over to Hillary, you might check out her positions on issues. For instance:
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 decade—and keep going.
Much, much more at:https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/climate/
cali
(114,904 posts)And frankly, I trust Bill McKibben on her environmental record more than you.
She not only supports fracking, she pushed it as SoS. One thing I never did during the primaries was use Bernie's site as evidence to support my opinion.
She's better than Trump.
No, I'm not switching to Hillary. I'm opposed to Trump or any republican in the White House.
I'm resigned to her. That's all.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)You "trust" other people's opinion rather than listen to and trust the candidate.
In Hillary's case, you can find a cottage industry of opinion demonizing and vilifying Hillary, an unending echo chamber of 'confirmation bias.'
I hold candidates accountable for what they say. Not what someone else said about them.
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)and a car in every garage.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)I'm not a Bernie supporter.
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)Not much on history I take it?
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)go right over your head?
I thought you were referencing pie-in-the-sky 'free stuff'?
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)Fairly common in some quarters.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)My shift is over.
See y'all tomorrow...maybe. 
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)Ghost Dog
(16,881 posts)Hillary will:
Overturn Citizens United.
End secret, unaccountable money in politics.
Establish a small-donor matching system to amplify the voices of everyday Americans.
“We have to end the flood of secret, unaccountable money that is distorting our elections, corrupting our political system, and drowning out the voices of too many everyday Americans. Our democracy should be about expanding the franchise, not charging an entrance fee.”
HILLARY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2015
Hillary is calling for aggressive campaign finance reform to end the stranglehold that wealthy interests have over our political system and restore a government of, by, and for the people—not just the wealthy and well-connected. Her proposals will curb the outsized influence of big money in American politics, shine a light on secret spending, and institute real reforms to raise the voices of regular voters.
Hillary will:
Overturn Citizens United. Hillary will appoint Supreme Court justices who value the right to vote over the right of billionaires to buy elections. She’ll push for a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United in order to restore the role of everyday voters in elections.
End secret, unaccountable money in politics. Hillary will push for legislation to require outside groups to publicly disclose significant political spending. And until Congress acts, she'll sign an executive order requiring federal government contractors to do the same. Hillary will also promote an SEC rule requiring publicly traded companies to disclose political spending to shareholders.
Amplify the voices of everyday Americans. Hillary will establish a small-donor matching system for presidential and congressional elections to incentivize small donors to participate in elections, and encourage candidates to spend more time engaging a representative cross-section of voters...
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/campaign-finance-reform/
"Curb" "Excess"... Hold her to it?
gordianot
(15,237 posts)Talk about unintended consequences, if the free flow of money was meant to make it easier to elect another Bush or establishment Republican like Kasich then it was a miserable failure. You are left with a barking mad ego maniacal narcissist; and socially liberal, Wall Street friendly, Neo Conservative who is not trusted by many voters. This is the anti charisma election with the hope that Supreme Court will not deteriorate, follow established law and protect us from the predators in the public sector and in Government. My motto; "I once had hope" and yes I will vote for Hillary Clinton.
Silver_Witch
(1,820 posts)"That’s why on day one, Hillary will set bold, national goals that will be achieved within ten years of her taking office. Ten years means nothing in the environmental situation we are in now. And additionally, her term will be long over 10 years from taking office.
Last, how will she make this all happen - does she have a magic wand that she will waive that will make the legislature support her moves on these issues.
Of course not...she can promise candy to all and it means nothing.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)Do we want a President Trump?
HELL NO !
I'm a "Bernie guy", but I'm voting for Clinton in November.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Those who think that she is chomping at the bit to bomb a hit list of Middle Eastern countries will, I expect, be pleasantly surprised.
cali
(114,904 posts)Not to mention anyone who has paid attention over the past 8 years- and longer.
John Poet
(2,510 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)
PufPuf23
(8,767 posts)
Overseas
(12,121 posts)I am hoping she has enough good will for our country that she'll keep her pledge to back out of the agreement. Corporations are already far too powerful.
But yes, I also share your war weariness and hope that she will pull back from all our wars. I hope she will see the drone program for what it is-- a way to create more terrorists, and scale it out of existence.
Ghost Dog
(16,881 posts)Only "National Security" is.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)"War and Peace" does make the list though, a few places after Fighting for Native Hawaiians.
Vinca
(50,261 posts)It seems we're back to the old lesser of two evils election.
cali
(114,904 posts)Our political system is corrupt and we live in an oligarchy. Those are , not opinion. (I know you know that)
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)
Tarc
(10,476 posts)War isn't going to be a first resort, nor will she or her administration falsify WMDs to garner support for a war. Obviously she won't be as non-interventionist as Bernie would've been, but there's not much support in the American electorate for that degree of hands-off, the way the world currently is.
cali
(114,904 posts)She's certainly more hawkish than Obama.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)Bill Clinton stopped the horrific Bosnian genocide, but couldn't do Rwanda.
Hillary helped avert outright massacre in Libya, and then had to watch Assad in Syria.
I guess hawks ain't what they used to be... 
Silver_Witch
(1,820 posts)Bet money on it. She is a hawk - whether right or wrong - she is indeed a hawk.
"“If I’m President, We Will Attack Iran… We would be Able to Totally Obliterate Them.”
This is her direct quote...she will attack if they make any move she considers threatening. Period simple truth.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)And go back into Iraq ... and invade Syria, and Libya, and Egypt.
His every statement was PROOF it was going to happen any second.
I heard it predicted right here on DU ... over and over and over. Never happened.
joshcryer
(62,269 posts)Obama had such high expectations that it was humanly impossible for him to live up to his own media created hype.
Clinton has such low expectations of her and has intentionally run a low key campaign that she can literally do nothing (not bombing the shut out if Assad's forces) and she gains.
Meanwhile they are both human and want what they think is right for the country.
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)It's solid red. Went for Obama in 2008 based on his promises for change then went back to red in 2012. So much for the change.
I can't help thinking that had he been less status quo and go along to get along the state might have turned purple, maybe he would have had some coattails in 2012.
Wasn't to be.
A democrat running on a liberal platform for head of education got more votes than the governor. Way more than the democrat running against him. And that guy is running again.
Ponder that a bit.
We'll see how she does this time. She is anti-charter, anti-voucher, which puts her in opposition to the democratic establishment here.
I'll vote for her. Maybe the poor guy who got gerrymandered out of his seat and turned around to run in a different race. He didn'tget much support out of the democratic establishment either.
Bernie kicked ass in the primary. Hillary mailed it in.
I think Bernie could have carried the state in the general. No chance of that happening with Hillary. Not even against Trump.
Lazy Daisy
(928 posts)When you are betrayed it's more painful coming from "family" than an outsider.
Hillary is supposed to be one of ours. When she betrays us, and she will, it's gonna hurt like hell
Because it will be things that could never pass if a Republican were in office.
The next 4 years are really gonna suck.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)Nominatingelecting a woman only to return to a more muscular <masculine> foreign policy is something I do resent, though.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)
hedda_foil
(16,372 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)them.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)But you're not able to see that for whatever reason
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)Unfortunately the way we've gone about that is plunging hard to the right and adopting their policies.
TwilightZone
(25,464 posts)When Sanders was doing it, it was the best thing ever, but when Hillary does it, it's the end of the world.
Bizarre.
Anyway, the idea is to win the presidency and as many down-ticket races as possible. That requires, as some Sanders supporters have been reminding us, more than just the Democratic base.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)But apparently it's what they all do. I see Trump courting Dem votes. The Libertarian runner is courting Republican votes. It's done all over, all the time. I'm more bothered by those that deny Bernie courted the Republican vote. As if the illusion of his Dem purity had to be maintained....whitewashing reality sucks.
KansDem
(28,498 posts)"More Of The Same"
'Nuff said...
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)litmus test and can handle the entire political spectrum as democrats...as I have stated before not every conservative idea is wrong and not every liberal idea is right.....the stakes in 2016 general election is way too important
cali
(114,904 posts)And Hillary has said straight out that she'll apply upholding Roe as a litmus test when it comes to picking SC Justices.
And no, the democratic party cannot "handle" the entire political spectrum- if by "handle", you mean accept or embrace.
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)our elected leaders mostly of the represents the views of their constituents and believe me when i say liberal democrats of california may have a hard time understanding conservative democrats of North Carolina but share several several common values...as to what any single conservative value and belief is not 100% wrong? I can't believe you yourself can't name one.....and just like can name many liberal beliefs that are not 100% right.....we are not an either/or country and neither should the democratic party be either
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)1. means testing all those receiving any kind of govt assistance
cali
(114,904 posts)what specifically are you referring to? And btw, that is ONE idea that you weakly claim isn't "100% wrong".
adigal
(7,581 posts)I'm tired of being told that if I don't vote for our guy/gal, abortions will be illegal. No, they won't, not in all states. And if the states that make it conservative support Republicans, then that's the way it rolls, I guess.
I'm also concerned about income inequality, the 9% interest my kids are paying on student loans, and the environment. Lots more out there that I am concerned about with Hillary than reproductive rights.
jack_krass
(1,009 posts)*intended as constructive criticism