Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: A plea for civility and respect for other DU members. [View all]RiverLover
(7,830 posts)39. April '14: "Hillary Clinton and the Future Failure of Progressive Hope and Change"
Why a run by the undeclared frontrunner demands upending the corporate wing of the Democratic Party
by John Atcheson
Common Dreams
..........And yes, gender equality is a critical issue, but dont hold your breath looking for progress from Hillary. Shes likely to do as much for women, as Barack Obama has done for African Americans which is to say damn little, other than a better brand of rhetoric.
So before we proceed with her coronation, maybe its time to think back to the 2004 campaign, and the early days of Barack Obamas candidacy and Presidency.
Remember hope and change? At the time, few thought to ask what exactly we were hoping for and what exactly we were changing to.
And of course, what we got was a great slogan, better speeches, very little change and even less hope.
Heres what Obama promised:
Shutting down Gitmo;
Ending warrantless wiretapping;
Ending foreign wars;
An end to trickle down economics;
Greater regulation of Wall Street and the financial sector;
A public option for health care;
Protecting social security, Medicaid and Medicare;
Serious action on climate change;
Greater equality in opportunity and more broadly shared prosperity
Heres what we got: An administration that set up Goldman Sachs south in the Treasury, doubled down on domestic spying; expanded a drone policy that creates between 40 to 60 new terrorists for every one it kills; health care reform that is better than the status quo, but which rewards corporate insurers as much or more than it does citizens; international trade agreements that favor corporate interests, while eviscerating domestic wages, scuttling environmental performance, and crippling US industrial infrastructure. Its so bad, theyre trying to negotiate it in secret
The list goes on and on, and so do the betrayals.
Apologists for the DLC branch of the Democratic Party will say Obama had no choice he was constrained by Congress. But he practiced a brand of preemptive capitulation that meant we always ended up carrying corporate water, and satisfying military imperialists while ignoring or discounting citizens civil rights and welfare.
So now enter Hillary Clinton and the deluded Democrats who jones for her Presidency. Maybe its time to ask what, specifically, we will get; what we can hope for, and whether it will usher in changes Americans overwhelmingly want (more about this, in a bit).
And heres the answer If we nominate Hillary Clinton we will get another DLC Democrat who mouths progressive values during the campaign, then shifts to the right when (and if) elected. In short, citizens get no real choice.
The problem with this isnt simply that its morally bankrupt; economically bad for 95% of Americans; bad for the economy in general; bad for the environment; bad for US competitiveness; and devastating for our childrens future climate its ultimately bad politics, too.
Heres the deal the dirty little secret that plutocrats and corporatists in both Parties dont want us to know: The vast majority of Americans favor progressive policies. Consider:
90% of the citizens support legislation requiring background checks for gun purchase, but Congress cant pass one.
74% of Americans want to end subsidies to big oil but theres no chance of it happening;
The majority of citizens favored allowing tax cuts for those earning over $250,000 to expire, but the best we could do is compromise on $400,000
70% of Americans consider climate change to be a high priority issue, yet Congress has taken no action;
Some 80% of Americans favor shoring up Social Security even if it means higher taxes and a similar number support retaining Medicare as is, but weve twice offered cuts to both programs as part of a grand bargain;
Or take this gem more than 80% of Americans want to clamp down on Wall Street but the best we could get was weak-sister legislation that is being completely eviscerated as it is translated into regulations.
This list could be extended across a broad range of issues. The fact is, the peoples interests arent being represented in Washington and they wont be if Hillary Clinton is elected. Her record is clear. Shes an ardent proponent of trade agreements; shes consistently supported the interests of Wall Street over Main Street; shes been hawkish on foreign policy; weak on civil protections; hawkish on the deficit (until very recently) and mum on many other issues that demand a progressive advocate.
Yes, shes beginning to veer to the left in preparation for the primaries, but havent we had enough of this?
Wouldnt it be interesting to see a candidate who actually represented the peoples interests tackle the usual corporatists who win the Democratic nominations? Not to mention the sycophantic Republicans who so obviously dance to the tunes of the likes of Addelson, the Koch Brothers and Wall Street?
The fact is we can wage and win a war for a progressive candidate, and we have potential candidates who speak for the people. Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, the Progressive Congressional Caucus each offers common sense and popular alternatives to the corrosive forces of corporatism that is eroding our Democracy.
Corporate money can trump everything but the vote. In the age of the Internet, we can take over this Party. We can raise our own money and turn out our own candidates. We can bypass the bought and paid for media and reach people directly with a message they are dying to hear.
Doubt that? Think back to 2011, when income inequality was a non-issue, ignored by the media and candidates alike. Between September 2011 and October 2011, the Occupy movement erupted, making income inequality one of the main issues in the 2012 election.
We must occupy the Democratic Party. Yes, as constructed, its little more than Republican lite answerable to corporate overlords. But we can change that. We can insist on candidates who represent the people.
Take a look at those polling numbers again if we used the tools of the Internet to raise money and advocate popular progressives, we just might be able to beat back the plutocrats. Its at least worth a try.
So lets go for it. Lets occupy the Democratic Party.
(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. )
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/04/17/hillary-clinton-and-future-failure-progressive-hope-and-change
by John Atcheson
Common Dreams
..........And yes, gender equality is a critical issue, but dont hold your breath looking for progress from Hillary. Shes likely to do as much for women, as Barack Obama has done for African Americans which is to say damn little, other than a better brand of rhetoric.
So before we proceed with her coronation, maybe its time to think back to the 2004 campaign, and the early days of Barack Obamas candidacy and Presidency.
Remember hope and change? At the time, few thought to ask what exactly we were hoping for and what exactly we were changing to.
And of course, what we got was a great slogan, better speeches, very little change and even less hope.
Heres what Obama promised:
Shutting down Gitmo;
Ending warrantless wiretapping;
Ending foreign wars;
An end to trickle down economics;
Greater regulation of Wall Street and the financial sector;
A public option for health care;
Protecting social security, Medicaid and Medicare;
Serious action on climate change;
Greater equality in opportunity and more broadly shared prosperity
Heres what we got: An administration that set up Goldman Sachs south in the Treasury, doubled down on domestic spying; expanded a drone policy that creates between 40 to 60 new terrorists for every one it kills; health care reform that is better than the status quo, but which rewards corporate insurers as much or more than it does citizens; international trade agreements that favor corporate interests, while eviscerating domestic wages, scuttling environmental performance, and crippling US industrial infrastructure. Its so bad, theyre trying to negotiate it in secret
The list goes on and on, and so do the betrayals.
Apologists for the DLC branch of the Democratic Party will say Obama had no choice he was constrained by Congress. But he practiced a brand of preemptive capitulation that meant we always ended up carrying corporate water, and satisfying military imperialists while ignoring or discounting citizens civil rights and welfare.
So now enter Hillary Clinton and the deluded Democrats who jones for her Presidency. Maybe its time to ask what, specifically, we will get; what we can hope for, and whether it will usher in changes Americans overwhelmingly want (more about this, in a bit).
And heres the answer If we nominate Hillary Clinton we will get another DLC Democrat who mouths progressive values during the campaign, then shifts to the right when (and if) elected. In short, citizens get no real choice.
The problem with this isnt simply that its morally bankrupt; economically bad for 95% of Americans; bad for the economy in general; bad for the environment; bad for US competitiveness; and devastating for our childrens future climate its ultimately bad politics, too.
Heres the deal the dirty little secret that plutocrats and corporatists in both Parties dont want us to know: The vast majority of Americans favor progressive policies. Consider:
90% of the citizens support legislation requiring background checks for gun purchase, but Congress cant pass one.
74% of Americans want to end subsidies to big oil but theres no chance of it happening;
The majority of citizens favored allowing tax cuts for those earning over $250,000 to expire, but the best we could do is compromise on $400,000
70% of Americans consider climate change to be a high priority issue, yet Congress has taken no action;
Some 80% of Americans favor shoring up Social Security even if it means higher taxes and a similar number support retaining Medicare as is, but weve twice offered cuts to both programs as part of a grand bargain;
Or take this gem more than 80% of Americans want to clamp down on Wall Street but the best we could get was weak-sister legislation that is being completely eviscerated as it is translated into regulations.
This list could be extended across a broad range of issues. The fact is, the peoples interests arent being represented in Washington and they wont be if Hillary Clinton is elected. Her record is clear. Shes an ardent proponent of trade agreements; shes consistently supported the interests of Wall Street over Main Street; shes been hawkish on foreign policy; weak on civil protections; hawkish on the deficit (until very recently) and mum on many other issues that demand a progressive advocate.
Yes, shes beginning to veer to the left in preparation for the primaries, but havent we had enough of this?
Wouldnt it be interesting to see a candidate who actually represented the peoples interests tackle the usual corporatists who win the Democratic nominations? Not to mention the sycophantic Republicans who so obviously dance to the tunes of the likes of Addelson, the Koch Brothers and Wall Street?
The fact is we can wage and win a war for a progressive candidate, and we have potential candidates who speak for the people. Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, the Progressive Congressional Caucus each offers common sense and popular alternatives to the corrosive forces of corporatism that is eroding our Democracy.
Corporate money can trump everything but the vote. In the age of the Internet, we can take over this Party. We can raise our own money and turn out our own candidates. We can bypass the bought and paid for media and reach people directly with a message they are dying to hear.
Doubt that? Think back to 2011, when income inequality was a non-issue, ignored by the media and candidates alike. Between September 2011 and October 2011, the Occupy movement erupted, making income inequality one of the main issues in the 2012 election.
We must occupy the Democratic Party. Yes, as constructed, its little more than Republican lite answerable to corporate overlords. But we can change that. We can insist on candidates who represent the people.
Take a look at those polling numbers again if we used the tools of the Internet to raise money and advocate popular progressives, we just might be able to beat back the plutocrats. Its at least worth a try.
So lets go for it. Lets occupy the Democratic Party.
(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. )
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/04/17/hillary-clinton-and-future-failure-progressive-hope-and-change
(Bold for emphasis is my own)
^^^^^^ This is pretty much what it is all about for me personally, and I suspect many others here. And it helps explain why we are so against this likely "Democratic" front runner.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
112 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Listen to Bernie not us, it's not a popularity contest, and We're not the issues .
orpupilofnature57
Oct 2015
#56
You missed some of the best OPs, the ones that call Bernie and his supporters White Supremicists,
sabrina 1
Oct 2015
#4
We need to speak frankly. Will we nominate someone to the right of Obama or to the left.
aikoaiko
Oct 2015
#7
And here you always try to sound so reasonable yet you refuse to answer a simple question,
cui bono
Oct 2015
#101
By identifying the group that has been targeted I will be compounding the
DemocratSinceBirth
Oct 2015
#102
That person was getting hides and timeouts before the primary race started. Nt
stevenleser
Oct 2015
#43
It does change the facts actually. Since 85% of DUers support Bernie the vast majority
stevenleser
Oct 2015
#105
So you didn't go to the link I provided then. It's a clear cut case once you see the evidence.
cui bono
Oct 2015
#106
So much wrong in your post. Especially the reason HRC supporters created that hate filled site.
cui bono
Oct 2015
#100
I'm all for civility, but the stakes are too high in this primary season to cause me to value
JDPriestly
Oct 2015
#14
Fine, I totally understand that. Congratulations on your choice of candidate.
BlueCheese
Oct 2015
#22
So here's the thing. If the results of a poster's work harms the candidate they are claiming to tout
Bluenorthwest
Oct 2015
#66
Hillary is going to prevent us from getting single payer healthcare and affordable college
Zorra
Oct 2015
#17
Do you think this kind of questioning of Clinton supporters will help convince them?
BlueCheese
Oct 2015
#29
Great OP. Sadly, only "Clinton is a Poo Head" will get rated up at the current DU.
McCamy Taylor
Oct 2015
#18
April '14: "Hillary Clinton and the Future Failure of Progressive Hope and Change"
RiverLover
Oct 2015
#39
Le Taz Hot nailed it. Ignore, hide thread and hide forum are your friends and effective. Use them.
merrily
Oct 2015
#50
Do you think personally insulting me (which your reply does) makes me like your candidate more?
BlueCheese
Oct 2015
#78