General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Hillary Throws Shade at Bernie: 'Fundamentally Wrong' About Democratic Party [View all]JCanete
(5,272 posts)up if only nobody had come along to point out to them how disaffected they were, is nonsense.
They were tonally entirely different on what was wrong with your system, and how to push for legislation. Incremental steps are unthreatening to the GOP to the point where they stand to lose nothing by voting against them because there is no drumbeat for something scarier, which a compromise might stave off, and it is uninspiring to the public with its wonkish "don't piss anybody off too much" approach that isn't selling any dream.
It really doesn't matter whether she has changed her views to match the needs of financial contributors or whether those contributors are there because THEY like her. If they like her, the question is WHY do they like her? Why are they putting so much money into her campaign? There doesn't have to be corruption on her end...there just has to be the fact that the money will help to propel your campaign if you are either advantageous to that money's interests, or less threatening to that money's interests than an alternative. The money don't mean nothing and anybody trying to make that case, give me a fucking break.
And in a system that IS actually broken, IS actually far too influenced by and beholden to big money, Clinton was not the one out there challenging anything about the system. She became, fairly or unfairly, the defender/apologist of it as a result. That's still on her for not being more savvy about the climate and for coming across as a triangulating politician for the last decade or more.