Hillary Clinton's flip-flop on the TPP makes no sense

[deadlinetony]

After months of hinting she might oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Hillary Clinton made it official this week. And her explanation for why she's coming out against the deal now — after years of supporting it — makes no sense.

During her time as secretary of state, from 2009 to 2013, Clinton was a strong supporter of the TPP. CNN has a fun article documenting 45 times Secretary Clinton spoke out in favor of the deal, which was then in the early stages of negotiation. She even said in 2012 that "this TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements."

Now she sees things differently. In the interview with PBS's Judy Woodruff where she came out against the treaty, she cited two specific objections: It doesn't have language dealing with currency manipulation, and it has provisions that favor big drug companies over patients.

These are totally plausible arguments for opposing the TPP. But they make no sense as reasons for Clinton to change her mind about the treaty.

http://www.vox.com/2015/10/7/9474151/hillary-clinton-tpp-flip-flop
---

Still not buying her "opposition" to TPP.

[oasis]

1. Wouldn't Obama's Secretary of State be obliged to support his policies?

[deadlinetony]

5. Not only was she supporting it

She went on a tour promoting fracking. "Most traveled Secretary of State" is an achievement she was proud of. How much of it was for her donors and how much of it was for the U.S. Government?

[oasis]

9. Everything Hill did as SOS was under the GOP microscope. Travel

at government expense included. Check with Newsmax or Drudge if you really want your question answered.

[cpompilo]

2. She said, "What I know about it as of today..." and

1. The 1st debate is pending

and,

2. The full text has not yet been released. Her equivocation has left her room to change her position later.

[deadlinetony]

4. Thus, the word "triangulation"

Not surprising, IMHO.

[cpompilo]

8. Exactly.

[Ford_Prefect]

3. I find the timing a bit suspect. It is very hard to believe after all she did to promote TPP,

and yes she did it on the job, that NOW she realizes its not such a good deal. I'm sorry but just she had to know more about the deal back when she was so vigorously promoting it.

I'm not saying she has no regrets about it, but this announcement is awfully damn timely. It has the look and feel of yet more of the "evolving" strategy. I'm not buying it.

[Maedhros]

6. Hillary will say just about anything if she thinks it will hoodwink voters

into casting their ballots for her.

[840high]

11. You are spot on -

[Katashi_itto]

12. Agree

[Broward]

7. I wouldn't believe a word she says.

[kenn3d]

10. ...howling at the moon.

When I read the transcript in the PBS online article (emphasis is mine):

Speaking with Judy Woodruff Wednesday, the Democratic presidential candidate said that as of today, given what she knows of the deal, it does not meet her bar for creating jobs, raising wages for Americans and advancing national security.

Speaking at Cornell College in Mount Vernon, Iowa, as part of a two-day swing through the leadoff caucus state, Clinton said that she’s worried “about currency manipulation not being part of the agreement” and that “pharmaceutical companies may have gotten more benefits and patients fewer.”

“As of today, I am not in favor of what I have learned about it,” Clinton said, later adding, “I don’t believe it’s going to meet the high bar I have set.”
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/hillary-clinton-says-she-does-not-support-trans-pacific-partnership/

... it just seems like hedging. There is really no definitive statement that she does or ever will formally disapprove the TPP.

And when I watch the video and listen to her actually saying these words... it all comes out sounding like argle bargle smargle blargle.

I fear that a significant percentage of the audience will never know or care what her real position is or will be, and she will have successfully triangulated yet another block of voters into supporting her, without committing to anything. She can still easily go either way on TPP and defend every word she spoke here without breaking a sweat.

Sadder still, anything and everything we say in these threads about what she's said, will only be howling at the moon.

[Freddie Stubbs]

13. You don't have to buy it

She is simply providing cover to labor union leaders to endorse her campaign. Her support or opposition really doesn't matter as this will be voted on by Congress long before the next President takes office.

[kenfrequed]

14. She is against it coming up during the debate.

She is "concerned" about it and she said "As of today, I am not in favor of what I have learned about it. I don’t believe it’s going to meet the high bar I have set."

She is not in favor of what she had learned about it.

That is quibbling you could drive a truck through. She can claim later that she learned something else.

I am sorry but a trade deal negotiated in secret, by and for industries, is just not going to ever be a good deal for the citizens of this country.

She doesn't want to get cornered in the debate on this issue. It is the same reason she shifted on the pipeline and the language on both is equally ambiguous if you look at it carefully.

[SidDithers]

15. ...

Sid