2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumLet's quit the bullshit how Hillary is a progressive. She is NOT.
Last edited Fri Feb 5, 2016, 03:24 PM - Edit history (1)
Hillary isn't a progressive.
You want a list?
I shall provide it.
Iraq
TPP
KXL
Voting for a border fence
Saying child migrants should be sent home
Having a melt down as SOS over gender changes of same sex couple
Wall Street donations
Speaking fees
Taking money from weapons deals
Honduras
Comments about nuking Iran
Calling herself a moderate
NAFTA
DOMA
DADT
Opposing gay marriage in New York State
Brownbeck Amendments
Glass-Steagall
No living wage
No free college
No universal health care (ACA coverage gap....ACA will never provide UHC)
Pro arctic drilling
pro fracking
Bankruptcy bill
Libya
Yemen
Syria
Egypt
David Brock
United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act
United States-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act
Free trade - Oman agreement
Voted FOR Gitmo. --- Hillary voted against the Byrd ammendment and against a large majority of democrats to reduce Guatanamo funding by $36,000,000. She joined the republican majority against the majority of democrats in supporting Guantanamo.
Pro death penalty
Pro cluster bombing
on and on..........................
In fact, in three seperate bills, Hillary broke with democrats to vote in favor of the use of this chemical in US fuel.
Hillary broke with Democrats against ensuring the workers at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site would not receive life insurance, health and life insurance benefits when their environmental work was terminated by the republican majority.
Hillary broke ranks with the democrats and voted with the majority of republicans to eliminate the requirement of reusable fuel in US gasoline in 2004.
Hillary voted with republicans for oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
To authorize the State of Virginia to petition for authorization to conduct natural gas exploration and drilling activities in the coastal zone of the State.
Hillary didn't vote
You want more? Ok let's go here.
Hillary outright defended Bill's welfare reform which hurt millions of poor people. Flat out. If that's progressive, FDR had a sex change and now is Margaret Thatcher.
During the debate, Clinton touted her years at the Children's Defense Fund. Here's the truth she didn't talk about
http://www.salon.com/2015/10/15/the_worst_thing_hillary_clinton_has_ever_done/
The only reason and I mean THE ONLY REASON people and special interests donate to campaigns is because they represent them. It doesn't take a mental heavyweight to figure this out. It also don't take a genius to figure out that Hillary's biggest donors are comprised of a few choice areas;
Wall Street
Big Banks
Private prison industry
Big Pharma.
Big military
It is what it is but one thing is for sure, she is NO progressive.
EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)farleftlib
(2,125 posts)Not only is she not progressive, she is a compromised candidate.
The bankruptcy bill also comes to mind. Sorry if I missed on your list. K&R.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)...this is awesome. Good summary.
I was thinking last night, Sanders is a lot of what he was in the 60s - similar causes and positions.
Then I thought of what Hillary was doing in the mid-late 60s: Goldwater Girl, President of Young Republicans at college, interning for Republicans in Washington, etc. I started to wonder about whether she was like Sanders "similar causes and positions" because she's kind of like a 60s Republican today.
But then I thought of all her flip flops and snapped out of it!
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)bad once they learn why he voted no.
Allowing people to sue a gun manufacturer for building a gun to do what guns do is kind of silly. You can't sue Ford because your car runs.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)One he voted correctly on too.... what with the junk inserted into it.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)Odin2005
(53,521 posts)Some of us on the Left don't like establishment authoritarians using tragedies to take away people's rights.
amborin
(16,631 posts)FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)Involvement with The Family
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Otherwise people on mobile devices would have to scroll until tomorrow lol
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)When she says shit like that she just further ingrains in people's minds how much of a chameleon she is and that she's just a flat-out liar.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)when I repeatedly was moved to yell "LIAR!" at her image on my TV screen?
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)Or maybe they don't see.
RedCappedBandit
(5,514 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)Mbrow
(1,090 posts)Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)Last edited Fri Feb 5, 2016, 03:55 PM - Edit history (1)
Let's also not kid ourselves that Bill Clinton or Obama are Progressives.
in_cog_ni_to
(41,600 posts)PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE
WillyT
(72,631 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)don't change her progressive record and platform. I mean, two of the first three on it are things she's against. You could have at least tried to hide the false information somewhere further down.
She was the 11th most liberal member of the Senate during her tenure there. If you want to winnow down the word "progressive" so that only Marx and Trotsky qualify, suit yourself. But in the real world, she's a progressive.
Bubzer
(4,211 posts)Adjusting to be right on the issue doesn't fix the problem that she was wrong on them to begin with. Wrong 45 times with regards to the TPP.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)trade in principle, but outside of that tiny fringe, whether a trade deal is good or not depends on what is in the deal.
Bubzer
(4,211 posts)I'm learning very quickly you tend to speak as though you think your opinion alone equates to iron clad proof.
You're quickly approaching the status where if you told me the sky were blue, I'd look outside to see if it were true.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Didn't think so.
You never have any links that back up your fantasies and falsehoods.
Bubzer
(4,211 posts)That I've noticed DanTex as one, I think, speaks to the level he's reached. I'd say he and Lewbely3 likely have traded notes, but given the utter lack of support links, they probably didn't.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)and I discovered that the disease has progressed to a late stage of complete (expletive deleted).
So I'm rebuilding my ignore list.
Bubzer
(4,211 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)Still no link...
Oh, poor baby.
You know, if you clap real hard, Tinkerbell will come back to life for you,
but you still won't have a link to you "claims".
Cheers!
UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)been driven to the right, IMO, number 11 ain't what it used to be......
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Like I said, in the real world, Hillary is progressive.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)The smell of desperation! The commie meme!
plus
"She was the 11th most liberal member of the Senate during her tenure there."
Are you sure she wasn't the 10th and a half?
farleftlib
(2,125 posts)Your big comeback is "Oh yes she is!" Wow. So impressive.
Logical
(22,457 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)and you conclude that I'm the one being irrational? Hmm...
polly7
(20,582 posts)just before announcing her run? What was she speaking to them on?
DanTex
(20,709 posts)about 5% of her earnings came from banks. Why? I would assume for money, and also she probably enjoys it. The same reasons that thousands of other recognizable leaders in different fields give paid speeches.
polly7
(20,582 posts)I'm sure she does enjoy the hundreds of thousands of dollars per speech. The question is, why was she taking so much money from backers of the KeystoneXL?
DanTex
(20,709 posts)In total, the two gave 729 speeches from February 2001 until May, receiving an average payday of $210,795 for each address. The two also reported at least $7.7 million for at least 39 speeches to big banks, including Goldman Sachs and UBS, with Hillary Clinton, the Democratic 2016 front-runner, collecting at least $1.8 million for at least eight speeches to big banks.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/hillary-clinton-bill-clinton-paid-speeches/
Jointly, $7.7 million from banks out of a total of $153M, or about 5%. Hillary alone made $1.8M from banks, they don't say what part of the total $153M came from her speeches and not Bill's, but I'd imagine the proportions were about the same.
polly7
(20,582 posts)Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce and TD Bank were both primary sponsors of paid Clinton speeches in 2014 and early 2015, although only the former appears on the financial disclosure form she filed May 15. According to that document, CIBC paid Clinton $150,000 for a speech she gave in Whistler, British Columbia, on Jan. 22, 2015.
Clinton reported that another five speeches she gave across Canada were paid for by tinePublic Inc., a promotional company known for hosting speeches by world leaders and celebrities. Another speech was reported as paid for by the think tank Canada 2020, while yet another speech was reportedly funded by the Vancouver Board of Trade. But a review of invitations, press releases and media reports for those seven other speeches reveals that they, too, were either sponsored by or directly involved the two banks.
Both banks have financial ties to TransCanada, the company behind the Keystone XL pipeline, and have advocated for a massive increase in pipeline capacity, including construction of Keystone. Further, Gordon Giffin, a CIBC board member and onetime U.S. ambassador to Canada, is a former lobbyist for TransCanada and was a contributions bundler for Clintons 2008 presidential campaign.
CIBC and TD Bank both have large energy portfolios and have pushed for the U.S. government to approve final construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, which would link the Canadian oil sands in Alberta through the middle of the United States to Texas and the Gulf of Mexico.
Since the Keystone pipeline is being built across national boundaries by a foreign company, TransCanada, it requires approval from the U.S. State Department. While serving as secretary of state, Clinton said that she was inclined to approve the pipeline. Since then, she has been mum on the issue, even as environmentalists -- with their major grassroots and money sway in the Democratic Party -- have made stopping the pipeline a priority.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/31/hillary-clinton-speeches-keystone_n_7463108.html
Logical
(22,457 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)pengu
(462 posts)LexVegas
(6,063 posts)Dawgs
(14,755 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)Under that frame of mind, Ben Carson, if elected would be a progressive.
BOOM.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)Hekate
(90,686 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)We'll wait.
Hekate
(90,686 posts)If you don't get it by now, there's nothing I can do to help you.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)turbinetree
(24,701 posts)Feel the Bern
Honk------------------for a political revolution Bernie 2016
It is about getting a Progressive President, U.S. Supreme Court, Congress, and State and Local Legislatures
Democracy begins with you---------------------tag your it---------------------Sanders to Thom Hartmann
Democracy is not a spectator sport, get involved
MuseRider
(34,109 posts)Thank you.
fbc
(1,668 posts)zappaman
(20,606 posts)Juicy_Bellows
(2,427 posts)progressive, I was saying right, right, right, right, well Wellstone we disagree on but he's dead.
Thanks for the post!
KICK.
DrDan
(20,411 posts)Compare the positions of both candidates with respect to the specific issues you care about. Then make your decision.
Get over it. There is nothing to be gained by this continued attention to a manufactured issue.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)We're sick of Hillary saying anything to woo voters. It's becoming stupid and insane.
She says she'll fight against Wall Street last night while her surrogates are seated next to who?
Give us a break.
This is just more if her being a weathervane and pandering.
DrDan
(20,411 posts)of course it is a manufactured issue - and a meaningless one.
Look at specific issues and see how each candidate stands.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Every single issue Hillary has wavered on. Every one.
Sand castle integrity but Bernie is the storm.
Again, this.
DrDan
(20,411 posts)this crucial point resolved
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Nice you give her a pass on her flip flopping though, America isn't
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Javaman
(62,530 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)AzDar
(14,023 posts)dbackjon
(6,578 posts)So I guess he isn't a Progressive either.
navarth
(5,927 posts)dbackjon
(6,578 posts)Has link and direct quote from Sanders:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/113746912
navarth
(5,927 posts)is a broad brush. I read the article; it's weak tea if you want to use it to paint Bernie with the homophobe brush.
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)The quote is the quote. He opposed Gay Marriage in Vermont. He opposed a Supreme Court Decision mandating it nationwide then as well.
But it is ok to use the same standard to paint Hillary with a homophobe brush?
navarth
(5,927 posts)in this thread and the other.
There's plenty of good things said about Bernie re: this issue in that Time magazine article.
Was he too slow? Perhaps. But nowhere near as slow as Hillary. Want to call them even on gay marriage? Fine. There are numerous other reasons Bernie is the better candidate.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Not right now, not after what we went through,
and
" the whole issue of marriage is a state issue"
Neither of these are opposition. Qualifying "right now" is not out and out opposition. And actually, it being a state issue made it become a federal issue.
(I don't see how marriage is a state issue myself, but traditionally, it has been)
Like the Brady thing.... it seems he's more concerned with his constituents than anything else.
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)"Not right now" Same fucking bullshit we heard from ALL the Democrats. Bernie is painted as different, but he is NOT.
"It's a STATE's Issue - if Bernie had his way, I wouldn't be able to get married in two weeks.
CIVIL RIGHTS are NEVER a state's issue.
That is what the Republicans argue to deny civil rights.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Don't know his history, do you?
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)I am thankful for his support, but let's not make it to be more than what it is, and how it is much different than Clinton's
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/bernie-sanders-was-full-gay-equality-40-years-ago
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/sep/29/chuck-todd/nbcs-chuck-todd-bernie-sanders-there-same-sex-marr/
Sounds like he was thinking about his gay contents to me.
But there is this article from Slate:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/10/05/bernie_sanders_on_marriage_equality_he_s_no_longtime_champion.html
So basically, his support wasn't focused enough.... or good enough...or something. It's kinda like all the "Did you hear what Sanders didn't say!" we used to get about racial issues.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Let me remind you
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)Pull your head out of your ass and see reality.
lonnnnnng time ago, go watch the fucking videos and learn history
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)kristopher
(29,798 posts)pinebox, you need to forward this to the Bernie Campaign right now. And when we start sharing valentines, mine will be one that shows up by your name.
Duval
(4,280 posts)who is voting for Hillary, but has NO idea! She said "Well, Bill did so much for the country". I disputed that (NAFTA, etc.). In fact, this her silly argument when it comes time to vote.
treestar
(82,383 posts)She's still the best choice for President.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)How about if I label her "Not the best choice for president."
She's not even the safest choice for "nominee".
SleeplessinSoCal
(9,120 posts)especially in a time that gun control is in question. Armed for the revolution I gather.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)First off it's Democratic Socialist.
Second off, let me try and describe to you what that means with this;
So no, Bernie isn't a socialist, he isn't working to bring back the KGB and no you don't have start building a bunker in your backyard.
I'm curious though since you're so big on the 'socialist" name tag, which of these do you hate?
Let's look at life in countries where Bernie ideal is a big thing shall we? You know, the best countries in the world to live in.
That's some pretty scary stuff right there. I mean the thought that someone working in fast food could actually, well you know, LIVE! The horror!
Now about your gun issue.
Perhaps you can explain this to us?
And yes that is a Hillary campaign ad mailer from when she ran against Obama.
Oops!
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)being a Neo-Liberal Capitalist.
Oh, and have I mentioned, Bernie is NOT, I repeat NOT a Socialist. He's a Democratic Socialist.
Watch these videos then tell me the same thing:
SleeplessinSoCal
(9,120 posts)The debate is whether or not we fix our tax code to properly distribute wealth. In the past that was enough to make for a great economy, unleash potential for entrepreneurship for continuing innovation, a path to wealth, and have a functioning Capitalist system. FDR saved it once before. It can be saved again without losing our national identity.
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)That has been my belief all along, and here's my logic.
Capitalism implies that there is infinite profit to be made, from infinite resources. On a planet with finite resources, many of which we are running short on, this cannot be true. There must be a point in time where we share what resources there are, so they can do the greatest good for the most people. This is not possible under a free market capitalist system. It is nearly impossible in a regulated capitalist system. Under capitalism, people just get too greedy.
Juicy_Bellows
(2,427 posts)RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)I agree.
farleftlib
(2,125 posts)The all-powerful poop defense, beats all other arguments hands down. Especially when done it all caps.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Response to pinebox (Original post)
Don Draper This message was self-deleted by its author.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)And there were only 9 non-progressive Senators who were more progressive than she was.
I'm still undecided...if she gets the coveted Dick Cheney progressive endorsement then I'm onboard.
Response to pinebox (Original post)
stopbush This message was self-deleted by its author.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Touche.
Reality check time.
Tell us how Hillary is growing the Dem party please? She isn't.
Meanwhile THIS.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)* Sanders has supported gay rights since 40 years ago. Clinton and Republicans have not.
* Sanders wants to end the prohibition of marijuana. Clinton & The Republicans do not.
* Sanders wants to end the death penalty. Clinton and Th Republicans do not.
* Sanders wants to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour. Clinton and the Republicans do not.
* Sanders wants to break up the biggest banks. Clinton and The Republicans do not.
* Sanders voted against the Wall Street bailout. Clinton and the Republicans (and too many "Democrats) did not.
* Sanders introduced legislation to overturn Citizens United. Clinton and The Republicans did not.
* Sanders refuses to accept money from super PACs. Clinton and the Republicans do not.
* Sanders supports a single-payer healthcare system. Clinton and The Republicans do not.
* Sanders refrains from waging personal attacks for political gains. Clinton and The Republicans do not.
* Sanders considers climate change our nation's biggest threat. Clinton and The Republicans do not.
* Sanders opposed the Keystone XL Pipeline since day one. Clinton and the Republicans do not.
* Sanders voted against the Patriot Act. Clinton and the Republicans did not.
* Sanders voted against the war in Iraq. Clinton and The Republicans did not.
* Sanders wants to Raise (or eliminate) the CAP on FICA deductions. Clinton and the Republicans do not.
* Sanders opposes unrestricted "Free Trade". Clinton and the Republican do not.
Hillary sure seems to agree with Republicans a lot.
I don't,
that is why I am a Democrat, and voting for a Democrat....Bernie!
Yeager29
(26 posts)Nor is she Obama or Biden, no matter how much she tries. What she is...is a lying DINO. A repub in sheep's clothing. A hypocrite. You can't trust a word out of her mouth. OP is spot on.
Metric System
(6,048 posts)rjsquirrel
(4,762 posts)Nyah nyah
Broward
(1,976 posts)Metric System
(6,048 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)Who are log cabin Republicans?
Republicans for Choice SuperPAC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republicans_for_Choice---
Susan Collins of Maine
Mark Kirk of Illinois
Lisa Murkowski of Alaska
House[edit]
Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania
Rodney P. Frelinghuysen of New Jersey
Robert Dold Of Illinois
Greg Walden of Oregon
Union-Backed Super PAC Supports Republicans http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/union-backed-super-pac-supports-rep/
Here Are 3 Gun Control Proposals That Republicans Actually Support http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2015/08/pew-gun-study
I win!
Now what?
CharlotteVale
(2,717 posts)Metric System
(6,048 posts)supporters don't get to decide who's a progressive or not.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)and sorry she is no progressive, see list above
then this http://www.ifyoulikehillary.com
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)Last edited Sat Feb 6, 2016, 11:58 AM - Edit history (1)
Does she want to be president or Flo?"
pinebox
(5,761 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)MSM misinformed voters everywhere and, of course, DU's own Hill supporters.
Excellent OP, pinebox.
kydo
(2,679 posts)She is also a liberal. She was even a liberal when it was a four letter word and when we changed that term to progressive, you know because progressive is a nicer term for liberal as the nutter just refer to liberals as libatards or what ever the insult is. Progressive sounded better and didn't conjure up hippies and dirty feet when spoken in public. Now it is taking a while for the wing-heads to come up with an insulting word for progressive, maybe there are two many letters and they would have to think really hard to do it.
But HRC is a progressive.
Gene Debs
(582 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)* Sanders has supported gay rights since 40 years ago. Clinton and Republicans have not.
* Sanders wants to end the prohibition of marijuana. Clinton & The Republicans do not.
* Sanders wants to end the death penalty. Clinton and Th Republicans do not.
* Sanders wants to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour. Clinton and the Republicans do not.
* Sanders wants to break up the biggest banks. Clinton and The Republicans do not.
* Sanders voted against the Wall Street bailout. Clinton and the Republicans (and too many "Democrats) did not.
* Sanders introduced legislation to overturn Citizens United. Clinton and The Republicans did not.
* Sanders refuses to accept money from super PACs. Clinton and the Republicans do not.
* Sanders supports a single-payer healthcare system. Clinton and The Republicans do not.
* Sanders refrains from waging personal attacks for political gains. Clinton and The Republicans do not.
* Sanders considers climate change our nation's biggest threat. Clinton and The Republicans do not.
* Sanders opposed the Keystone XL Pipeline since day one. Clinton and the Republicans do not.
* Sanders voted against the Patriot Act. Clinton and the Republicans did not.
* Sanders voted against the war in Iraq. Clinton and The Republicans did not.
* Sanders wants to Raise (or eliminate) the CAP on FICA deductions. Clinton and the Republicans do not.
* Sanders opposes unrestricted "Free Trade". Clinton and the Republican do not.
Hillary sure seems to agree with Republicans a lot on major issues.
That is NOT "Progressive by anyone's definition.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
pinebox
(5,761 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)basselope
(2,565 posts)She simply uses the word progress.
We had "progress" under bush.. not GOOD progress, but progress.
She isn't a progressive, she is a center right politician, just like her husband, just like Obama.
sammythecat
(3,568 posts)Thanks for doing this, I couldn't have done it. I hope a lot of people read this and learn. This country really needs to change direction in the worst way and Hillary Clinton has no interest in that. She'll keep us on the same shit road we've been on for the last 35 years.
-none
(1,884 posts)Now we need to change direction in the best way.
A good start is to support Bernie Sanders.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
still_one
(92,190 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)And yet you can't prove me wrong. Go figure.
Say hi to your Walmart candidate.
still_one
(92,190 posts)Last edited Sun Feb 7, 2016, 01:11 AM - Edit history (1)
I suspect if Hillary wins the nomination, you won't be spending much time here spreading your bullshit around here
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Sorry I'm more of a Dem than you, wait, no i'm not
still_one
(92,190 posts)LuvLoogie
(7,003 posts)Response to pinebox (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed