Clinton scared, fearful, shaking in her boots, abandoning positions, jumping ship!

[HassleCat]

OK, that was pure click bait, but she did change her position on TPP, and some pundits believe it's out of concern about Bernie Sanders. Here is an article by Chris Cillizza in the Washington Post. http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/hillary-clinton%e2%80%99s-opposition-to-tpp-is-a-sign-of-just-how-worried-she-is-about-bernie-sanders/ar-AAfdlg0?li=AAa0dzB&ocid=iehp.

According to the article, Hillary Clinton has flip-flopped on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) because she is worried about Bernie Sanders sneaking up on her left. They offer a quote to demonstrate how strongly Clinton supported TPP: "TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field." Clinton said in 2012. "And when negotiated, this agreement will cover 40 percent of the world's total trade and build in strong protections for workers and the environment.&quot CNN listed 45 times that Clinton spoke in support of TPP.)

Here’s why Clinton is changing some positions, according to Cillizza: “It's not hard to see that Clinton, concerned with the surprisingly strong challenge by Sanders from her ideological left, is working to put out that fire by allowing zero distance between her and the Vermonter on these two high-profile issues.”

Cillizza finds it interesting that Clinton feels the need to adjust her positions on certain issues, because she still enjoys strong support among Democratic liberals, according to the polls, and there is little evidence that Democratic voters would abandon her over TPP or the Keystone XL pipeline. The article concludes with this: “That's a concession, whether the Clinton folks admit it or not, that they are more than a little concerned about Sanders. Fact.”

[upaloopa]

1. Cazilla is making his career out of bashing

Hillary. That's his 51st anti Hillary piece so far IIRC

[still_one]

3. Well since the analysts have been wrong about most everything in this campaign, they can spew

whatever they want without accountability.

[wyldwolf]

4. you didn't form your headline correctly. Let me help.

Clinton scared, fearful, shaking in her boots, abandoning positions, jumping ship!

becomes

Clinton SCARED, fearful, SHAKING in her boots, ABANDONING positions, JUMPING ship!

Now THAT is a DU headline.

[HassleCat]

6. I'm still new at this (eom)

[HassleCat]

5. Attack or analysis?

I did not spot anything in the article to indicate it was an attack on Clinton. I'm not familiar with Cillizza, but it is the Washington Post, so I expect it would be uncomplimentary toward Clinton, since the WaPo seems to dislike her. When a prominent politician reverses on a significant issue, we would like to know why. This explanation may be wrong, and concern about Sanders is probably not the only reason, certainly not the reason Clinton will offer, but it's a plausible explanation. As Cillizza points out, it would not seem to undermine her support either way, so maybe that suggests she was NOT motivated by concern about Sanders.

[frylock]

7. Anything short of fawning praise is to be considered as bashing..

including posting Hillary's own words and actions.