It doesn't matter to the PTB if Hillary Clinton wins or loses.

[Ron Green]

Last edited Fri Feb 5, 2016, 04:18 PM - Edit history (1)

If she wins, we have essentially the same world, with slightly better SC appointments and plenty of military action.

If she loses, most likely to Marco Rubio, we have the same world, with slightly worse SC appointments. Still a big-business-friendly economy.

The real owners of this country don't much care which is the outcome; they will continue to prosper, not really minding if the social "wedge issues" go one way or the other.

OH, by the way - this refers to the General Election. The Democratic Primary is a whole different story.

[brooklynite]

1. Just like there was no difference between Obama and McCain or Romney?

[Ron Green]

3. We don't know, do we? Ask Geithner or Summers how it would have played out otherwise.

[Ferd Berfel]

24. agree. This is why the DNC and Murdoch are floating

Kerry, Bloomberg, ............anybody but Bernie if Hillary falls any flatter.

and why Bernie scares the hell out of them.

[R B Garr]

9. Exactly! And Gore!

No difference, my ass.

[cali]

2. Yes, it matters. You are very cavalier about reproductive rights

[Jackie Wilson Said]

6. Bravo, well said!

[Jackie Wilson Said]

4. The most inaccurate and ill informed comment I have read on the internet in a very long time

or from a liberal, I should say.

Republicans and so on make completely inaccurate and divorced from reality comments all the time, but I assume you are a liberal.

The real owners as you say do care about suppressing the rights of many, trust me on this.

[DesertFlower]

7. i agree. nt

[Ron Green]

12. I believe they court the religious crazies only to swell the vote in their favor; I don't think they

are interested in overturning Roe v. Wade, for example, or rolling back marriage equality, except that cultivating those activists who do will bring them Republican votes.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

20. You are wrong, I am pretty sure. Even if the "owners" favor reproductive rights, for instance,

if destroying said rights with the SC would insure their continued power and dominance, then you bet your life that is what they will do.

[Ron Green]

22. I mostly believe, and fervently hope, that

the "social issues" of equality and reproductive rights have their own cultural power now, and that Dominionists and other wackos will increasingly flap in the wind as economic issues gain the attention of more policy makers.

[Mosby]

5. -1

You might want to read the DU terms of service.

[Ron Green]

14. I changed my headline a bit.

I'm not advocating for a Republican on this site, nor will I ever.

Unless that Republican demonstrably shows he or she can help build a better world.

[NowSam]

8. It matters that Bernie wins.

He is the only one who is truly championing the cause of the people. If it is Hill vs Rubio it is same old story as it has been since Reagan... or earlier.

[MADem]

10. What a nasty analysis! So "not true," too.

HRC will change the paradigm if she is elected. To anyone who thinks it isn't a big deal if a woman is elected POTUS, check your privilege. It will CHANGE this country for the better--it will signal to young girls coming up that they do have a place at the table.

Youngsters are coming up and going into university who find nothing remarkable in a black POTUS. Ten years ago, though, there were a LOT of people who were saying "Never gonna happen."

It's more than SC candidates. It's the agenda that Clinton has. Most people don't realize she's far more liberal than her husband, but all they have to do is really LOOK at how she finessed a complete failure (owing to GOP intransigence) with the health care reform into SCHIP for kids and see how she can turn trash into treasure. And she's relentless--she doesn't have quit in her.

But hey, haters gonna hate.

[Ron Green]

13. In the case of HRC, an admittedly powerful symbol of the first woman US President is outweighed by

the actual FACT of a clever and dissembling candidate whose ambition for office overwhelms the real need for empathy and sacrifice on behalf of people who've been left out of the American experience for so long.

Do young girls need this sort of steely ruthlessness as their model? Or do we all need to seek a more connected and sharing sort of world?

[MADem]

15. Oh, so "steely ruthlessness" is not an asset in a woman?

It always is in a man--Putin doesn't get props for snuggling with puppies and kittens.

Gee, stop showing your hand so readily!

[Ron Green]

17. If we're going to move away from Empire and toward a real earth community, you know, something

our grandchildren can survive - no, steely ruthlessness is not an evolutionary plus.

[MADem]

21. But Tax Raising is SWELL in a man, eh?

[Ron Green]

28. You don't like your taxes?

[MADem]

29. I don't like flushing money down the toilet. I don't think anyone on a fixed income does.

It's all very well for the people who don't have to watch their expenditures to blather on about how they wouldn't mind more taxes, OR for people who don't PAY any taxes because they fall below income guidelines to magnanimously volunteer that OTHER people pay more taxes, but if you've got a lot of family who are counting on you, and every dime is dedicated to taking care of your own, you don't want to be told to "just kick in a little more" of money that you don't have for a pipe dream that will never pass Congress.

[Ron Green]

31. That's why I support a Presidential candidate who's more likely to

advocate that my taxes be used to strengthen communities rather than to make war.

[MADem]

32. He could "advocate" that everyone deserves an adorable puppy, with free vet bills for life!

That doesn't mean it would ever happen.

I'd rather have a POTUS who "advocates" things that have a chance at becoming law, and who has enough clout on the Hill to make a legislative agenda happen. The "They're being mean to me" tactic only works in campaigns--not while governing.

[Ron Green]

34. If you're comfortable in the 20th Century, go for it.

I'm willing to work for something better.

[MADem]

35. I'm comfortable in today's REAL world, not in Let's Have a Revolution Pipe-Dreamland. nt

[Ron Green]

37. Well, there's the difference. No mind-changing will occur, and I'm sure that's the case

in almost 100% of Internet transactions.

[loyalsister]

18. I preferred the "not some Tammy Wynette" HRC

Then she turned out to be the role model we absolutely do not want for women who are victimized in relationships.

[Ron Green]

19. I always hope the arc of feminism will be not to

make women more like men, but to make men more like women.

[MADem]

33. What a weird thing to say.

I wouldn't presume to understand OR pass judgment on their private lives like you're doing. Who says she's a "victim?" Looks to me like she's in the catbird seat in terms of that relationship. She's the one with the presence on the world stage nowadays; she's the one with entree into the salons of power; her husband is an aging charmer who doesn't mind acting as a cheerleader, staying on the porch and eating his veggieburgers.

You take the good, you take the bad...that's the deal most people make when they get married (and those are "The Facts of Life" too....LOL!).

[loyalsister]

36. It's real world perspective

I think my sister, and probably quite a few other women are putting up with philandering and abuse because they watched their mothers do it.

HRC is not a role model just because she is sitting in the cat bird seat. Their marriage is their business. I'm just saying that she's not a great role model when it comes to marital relationships.

[MADem]

38. Well, she didn't 'put up with it.' She took care of him, by all accounts.

Now he's got to "put up" with her goals for this next chapter of her life. She's driving the bus--he's a passenger. He can help with the sing-along, but he's not in charge of the itinerary anymore--she is.

If, as you are now saying "Their marriage is their business" why are you denigrating her for taking care of "her business?"

She's a fine role model. People go through rough patches. Only immature, histrionic, overly dramatic people throw away all the good when they encounter a patch of bad. Some people think vows and pledges are cheap, a joke. Others take them seriously and work through the differences.

HRC and Bill are in a really good place, from all reports. They look happy as hell, they're enjoying their grandchild, looking forward to another, and they seem to be beyond drama. And for reasons that are inexplicable to me, I think that pisses some people off. Some people would PREFER than HRC play the victim, get all finger waggy and angry and toss old Bill out on his ear...and then if she did that, they'd make fun of her for THAT too!

[loyalsister]

39. I'm saying I liked her better when I thought she had some guts

and believed it was important to be a good role model.

I wish my mom had been a little more "immature, histrionic, overly dramatic people throw away all the good when they encounter a patch of bad" and not put up with the public humiliation inposed by my father.
If my sister would have seen that a woman can leave a marriage and live a satisfying life, she might be more willing to do it. As it stands, she does not see that as a possible reality and she and her children are suffering physical abuse.

[MADem]

41. I think it takes more "guts" to not listen to a bunch of screaming scolds saying "Dump your spouse."

Why in the world you're imposing your personal family tragedies on her is a mystery to me.

Your mother's issues are her own--and not knowing her, I wouldn't even begin to PRESUME to put her down for the choices SHE made, either. To do so, in my mind, would be abusive towards her.

If your mother--or your sister--need Hillary Clinton's example to make their decisions, I would suggest that you get them a television. There are plenty of women out there who have dropped their husbands, boyfriends, etc. And plenty who stick, too, for their own reasons. But they are THEIR reasons and you don't have the right or the authority to put them down for them.

You can dislike Clinton all you want, but trying to "blame" her for a sticking with a relationship you admit you know next to nothing about is just a shitty reason. It's every bit as stupid as voting against Sanders because he dumped his first wife, didn't marry the mother of his child and failed in THAT relationship, too, and then engaged in an affair with a married woman who finally broke her Catholic vows, upset her children by dumping her spouse, got a divorce, and married him.

See? You think that kind of thing is "fair game?" I don't. Some people's biz-niz is their OWN biz-niz. And what's good for the gander is good for that goose, too.

[loyalsister]

44. You understand what a role model is, right?

You realize that in our culture, people are inclined to emulate the behaviors of people they respectcare for? I'm saying Hillary Clinton has turned out to be a woman whose behavior is exactly not what I hope to see my nieces emulate, and at one time I had the opposite opinion.

[MADem]

46. Well, that was a condescending comment, now, wasn't it!!!

A role model is not someone who "Does what you want."

A role model is someone who perseveres in the face of adversity, who doesn't quit, who has a record of accomplishment over a lifetime of public service that is enviable, and who has the smarts, grit, and resolve to accomplish what she sets out to achieve.

Your odd focus on Clinton's private life is curious to me. You criticize her for her private life, yet you don't have a thing to say about Sanders' rather disordered private life which, if one wanted to make a thing of it, could be considered less-than-optimal...to be KIND about it.

So--you'd want your sons or nephews to dump their first wife, father a child out of wedlock, and then take up with a married woman whose religion doesn't sanction divorce? That's a "role model" to you?

Or is it only the WOMAN who gets subjected to this kind of scrutiny from you?

[DanTex]

11. Tell that to people who will lose healthcare when Obamacare is repealed.

Women who won't have access to reproductive health.

Seniors who's SS would get cut.

Etc.

If you think it doesn't matter, you are living an enormously privileged life.

[ieoeja]

16. On edit: "If the PTB think it doesn't matter, the PTB are living an enormously privileged life." n/t

[Ron Green]

23. Kicking, because

the more I think about it, the truer it is.

[OhZone]

25. Crazy.

Slightly worse Supreme Court justices mean the end of legal abortion, the end of Obamacare, the end of LGBT rights, more gerrymandering and voter suppression, etc etc.

It's ***** VITAL ****** to get Democrat in office of you want to maintain your rights and continue to move back to prosperity.

ALSO Team Clinton had no major wars in the 90s. The GOP loves wars.

[Ron Green]

27. The money guys can live with legal abortion or not,

as they certainly can with Obamacare or not. And they'll get their requisite war in a Clinton administration, I'm guessing.

What they can't live with is bottom-up change in the political economy.

[MADem]

42. They don't have to worry about that.

Sanders doesn't have coattails.

Many people hate "Congress," but they like THEIR representatives just fine. There won't be any "revolution" in the make up of Congress. If we can flip a few seats we'll be doing well.

[Ron Green]

45. My hope is that a Bernie Sanders campaign in the General Election will force the hands of many reps

who've been playing in the shadows with ALEC (at the state level) and K Street (in Congress.) The narrative that Big Money has controlled the game for too long is a message whose time has come.

I may be wrong. The U.S. may not be ready for this, but I believe it's our best chance in my lifetime.

Speaking of coattails, Secy. Clinton, if she is the nominee, will have very little influence down the ticket. So many people are so tired of her and her "message" that this year doesn't hold the promise she'll sweep lots of others along. (Although much of this depends on the Republican nominee - while Trump or Cruz will push the big Panic Button, Rubio - the likely choice - means we continue on our tepid way.)

[MADem]

50. It won't force any hands. They'll turn on him, snarling, like DU does to any Democrat who gets

elected. I'd place book on it.

They'll wait four years, and after nothing gets done, someone will step up and primary his ass. We'll probably lose to the Republican, and then spent four to eight years in the wilderness, and then win in 24 or 28, depending on how much unity we can create.

Sanders is a divider, not a uniter. That's just the truth--nothing against him, personally...but all you have to do is observe some of the comments of many of his "supporters" to get a grasp of how divisive a candidate he is.

I've never heard Democrats talk the way some of those people talk. "Vitriolic" doesn't begin to describe it. These aren't 'one offs' either--this is The Standard Tone:


http://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/the-bernie-bros#.quLXlzvjJJ


http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-35422316


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/02/i-like-bernie-sanders-his-supporters-not-so-much-berniebro

[Ron Green]

52. I read all three stories, and I don't see anything more than

reports of what any movement this big and this active is bound to contain: anonymous people on the Internet being jerks.

Secy. Clinton's campaign, on the other hand, would never be expected to host rowdy or over-the-top posters; she's not calling for a political economy to be upended, but rather seeks to carry on the corporate-friendly policies of the past 35 years.

Look, you seem to be a smart person, and maybe you're right about this and I'm wrong. If so, we are truly screwed and the hopes and dreams of millions of thoughtful people, a few pixie dusters, and some asshole "bros" will be crushed by the powers that be and their minions. I don't think it's fair to the bigger group just because you're offended by the smaller one.

[MADem]

51. Clinton's got more coattails than Sanders does--and more reach.

Do you think that all of her Super Delegates are with her just for fun? They know who has helped them get elected and re-elected.

One hand washes the other, both wash the face.

[leveymg]

26. They won't be happy with Bernie, at all. Let's make the bastards crap in their pants!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

30. Yep. Politics as usual.

[Beacool]

40. Yeah, Gore was the same as Bush and ditto for Kerry.

What an asinine analysis!!!!

[SidDithers]

43. Fuck Ralph Nader...nt

Sid

[hifiguy]

47. That's why Blankfein said he'd be perfectly happy with either

HRH or Jebthro. Their criminal gravy train will roll on unhindered under her or ANY Repig.

[Ron Green]

48. I'm not sure what would happen with Trump or especially

Cruz. The former has flapped about some populist ideas, and the latter - well, I don't know what kind of hillbilly caliphate he's got in mind, but I'm sure Wall Street squirms at the idea.

[hifiguy]

49. TPTB will take tRump over Cruz any day.

Cruz might torch the planet to bring baby jebus back and that would very bad for real estate values.