This is exactly why I am not jumpng on the Hillary Clinton Bandwagon

[Lunabell]

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/obama-says-elizabeth-warren-wrong-tpp-trade-agreement-clinton-fails-say-yes-or-no

Where does she stand? The TPP will only benefit the rich. Not the poor working or middle class.

[mike_c]

1. I firmly believe that the TPP will HARM workers and middle class Americans...

...and challenge President Obama to prove me wrong. If there is nothing to hide, show us the treaty. Secret treaties are usually kept secret from the people they impact for a reason.

[FarPoint]

2. I decided to jump onto the bandwagon..

Hillary is the only Democrat who can handle the neocons.

TPP stand to be revealed at a future date.

[cali]

3. bullshit

She's gone along with them

[jeff47]

4. So you think she is against a treaty she negotiated? (nt)

[Baitball Blogger]

5. When has Hillary ever handled the neocons?

Or, when has she turned down campaign money from notorious individuals or companies?

Truthfully, the neo-liberal era is more than just dated. It is a failed concept which is known to rely on unconstitutional methods; and those methods are poisoning our communities and accelerating the loss of trust in our government.

The best you can say about neo-liberalism is that it at least tries to take on the pretense of an altruistic purpose.

[FarPoint]

7. Well, they have never taken her down...

Notedly over 20+ years of trying. So...that's how I measure her tenacity.

[Maedhros]

8. ...or her complicity. [n/t]

[Baitball Blogger]

11. You may have stumbled upon the Democratic disconnect

Instead of staying true to Constitutional process, Thirdwayers contort their mission statements in order to sell their unholy alliances with Republicans. They can call it whatever they like, but being on board with Republicans means accepting Republican objectives. This has been going on since the nineties so nobody should be surprised to see that we're imploding as a nation, because that's the ultimate consequences of Republican policies. They create private wealth for a small number of people versus providing a stable economy and financial well-being for all Americans.

You would think that as Americans we would be immune to marketing ploys. "Thirdway" is a market ploy just as "consensus-building" is a market ploy. So, you see, the only people who would say that the neocons have never taken her down are those who can't see through the rhetoric.

Those of us who can see it would view her vote on the Iraq war as a huge success for the neocons.

[FarPoint]

12. I recognize the rhetoric.

The game at hand really doesn't involve public principles... That actually lies with who we elect in Congress if we truly desire progressive change....

The Presidency has many perks but limited power. Hillary knows how to navigate the obstructionist. The Presidential Election is equal to a Game if Thrones. Strategy is the game at hand...

[Baitball Blogger]

14. You know FarPoint, I have to disagree with you when it comes to

the executive office's ability to influence public policy.

As someone who has keenly followed minority issues over a period of decades, I would say that this renaissance of racial awareness we're experiencing today was largely influenced by having a sympathetic, black president in the oval office. I don't think that the two points are just coincidences. I mean, for years and years minorities have been trying to break through to bring awareness to the incredible double standards that exist in our country, but those issues only grew legs in the last two years.

So, if Hillary appears to be friendly to neocons or corporate interests, that alone could tip the scales in their favor.

[FarPoint]

15. My opinion is of a recent change regarding the Presidency..

The GOP had been obnoxious and down right abusive to President Obama...which diminished the role. That relentless harassment gave me new insight.

[Baitball Blogger]

17. And they were obnoxious and down right abusive to President Clinton too.

The things we need to remember about the two Democratic presidents is that Bill Clinton was the first president to find his presidency challenged by Republicans who were willing to part with conventional wisdom to take him down. Unfortunately, he gave them something to work with and I seriously believe that we all paid for it with his triangulation strategy.

The triangulation strategy was a rope a dope. And we were the dopes. My theory is that it was used to con his Democratic base, because the result was an erosion of the Democratic platform at the same time that he pushed Republican policies.

I mean, think about it. If he wasn't worried about being forced out, would there be any reason for him to give up on traditional Democratic objectives?

I figured that he believed that by giving them what they wanted, it would buy him support with members of the Senate. So we had an incredibly popular Democratic president, selling Republican policies and I can't say that we're the better for it. What a weird decade.

Obama is fairing better with the Republican attacks because American demographics are changing and because he really doesn't have any private peccadillos that the Republicans can exploit. I do believe that Republicans will pay dearly for setting themselves apart and exposing their racist agenda.

[davidpdx]

21. Well put

[Baitball Blogger]

23. Love your signature.

I took my Elizabeth Warren banner down because it seemed like yet another hope that wouldn't get fulfilled.

[libdem4life]

18. That includes LGBT, too. He spoke an entire segment in favor.

[Doctor_J]

16. Handle the neocons??

You mean by agreeing with them on everything?

[Enthusiast]

22. Well, it makes them easier to handle.

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[Lunabell]

6. I will support Hillary Clinton if she is the nominee.

IF she is the nominee. I hope Bernie Sanders will run as a Democrat. He is watching out for us. Hillary? Not so much.

[bigwillq]

9. I will never be on the Hillary bandwagon.

But, good luck to her. If she wins, she wins. I'll be fine with it.

[busterbrown]

10. Does that mean you’re gonna sit out the election?

[bigwillq]

13. Nope.

I will be voting, as I always do.

[blkmusclmachine]

19. s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/v2_article_large/public/2015/03/04/2015-03-04t1928

[Joe Worker]

20. About Hillary

I like her better than Bill but lets be honest with what went down when he was in office. Repeal Of Glass Stegal, NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO, Fair Trade and Modernization Act etc.

Middle class workers have seen their income, jobs, retirement, and homes disappear under the policies enacted under his terms.

I prefer a candidate that does not make promises to large corporations through campaign contributions. The Clinton library is secretive and well funded by the Royal Saudi Family and other foreign governments. She has already more or less made promises to Wall Street that were well reported on. (members of Council On Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission etc.

The Clinton's are well known to promote a "global vision" I don't believe this is what most people want from a leader to represent our middle class that has been left behind for decades going back to Reagan.

Warren is much more in touch with the middle class.

[Bluenorthwest]

24. In actual reality, CAFTA was done under George W Bush not Bill Clinton. In the US Senate, Hillary

Clinton voted no on CAFTA.

As a Union member with a long term interest in trade issues, I note that many on DU who affect great passions about trade issues do not in fact really know much about the history of even the agreements and politicians they bring up.

CAFTA, George W Bush. Hillary Clinton a No vote. Lincoln Chaffee, another candidate with hat in the ring, voted a big Yes, because he is a big free trade advocate.
Ron Wyden was a yes vote on CAFTA. Facts matter.