If 2016 is Clinton vs Bush

[DonCoquixote]

Granted, there a a thousand things that can happen, especially in an age where Billionaires can spend all the gold they want, and blow an Iron wind into anyone's sails. However, let's take a look at both of these two. For all the talk of how they are of opposite sides, they come from the same cloth; the center-right that feels obligated to protect the rich. Both of them have a strong contempt for their bases, because the radicals and reactionaries know that the Politics they care about is really just a secondary by-product of supporting the rich. Neither of them like to criticize the rich; but it is not fear as much as the fact they really do not disgree with the rich. Outsourcing? Both Jeb and Hillary support it. Unions, neither of them like unions. Social spending, both speak as if social spending is somethign you do once you cut largesse from programs, though never, ever the milatary. Both of them refuse to criticize Israel, despite the fact that just because you think Bibi is self-destructive does not mean you cannot call the PLO out on it's folly. Both of them are products of an elite system that says "the buisness of America is buisness" and everything else is secondary. Both are intelligent, and think they are self-made, self-starters, despite the fact that neither of them would have had half the influence they have if their last name were Smith.

There is no real opposition here. Granted, if Hillary wins I will vote for her, if only because Sotomayor and Kagan proved how important it is to heal the Supreme Court. Granted, I would rather have Scalia in a jail cell, but that is not happening soon, and it will not happen under Bush. However, the fact that we are bringing in relics of a world that is not, people tryign to revive solutions and methods that frankly, did not work that great the first time, is a sad commentary on our nations, and democracy itself. It is especially sad that the one thing standing between either of these two and the White House, is not a change in values or methods, but that some billionaire may choose to push button a or b because they themselves suffer from Bush/Clinton faitgue as much as many of us do.

[TexasTowelie]

1. Is Jeb intelligent?

It doesn't to take much to be the brains in that family after all.

[MrScorpio]

2. If another Bush ends up nominated, I think that it's proof of pathological sickness...

[silvershadow]

6. Because corporations are inherently amoral, and being that

corporations are only one segment that are such- (it can be ascribed to all sorts of segments of our world)- then to the extent the Republicans push a corporate agenda, they themselves become actively amoral at best, and immoral in a lot of circumstances. How anyone, and I mean anyone, can be a Republican at this point is not only mind-boggling, but scary as well. They frighten me to my bone marrow at this point.

[Jackpine Radical]

26. The same could be said regarding electing another Clinton.

[hifiguy]

32. Indeed.

And that is the 800-lb gorilla in the room that many do not want to acknowledge.

[bobclark86]

3. Yeah, because...

Pushing for single-payer healthcare, cap-and-trade, immigration reform other than fences and guns, and gun control are totally right-wing... Did you miss the '90s, by any chance?

[DonCoquixote]

7. show me where Hillary had said she would do these things

seriously, dig up some blue links.

[VanillaRhapsody]

19. easy

http://www.ontheissues.org/hillary_clinton.htm

[bobclark86]

27. So... you DID entirely miss the 90s and 2000s then...

Go look at her voting record from her time in the Senate. Go look at what she pushed in the '90s -- when she was the most-active first lady since Eleanor Roosevelt (one of the main reasons Republicans hate her is because she actually DID things, unlike Laura Bush who just kind of sat there doing what women "should" do).

http://www.ontheissues.org/Profile_Hillary_Clinton.htm

Seriously, go look. There are hundreds of her positions posted with sources. Go look at gun control, health care, etc.

"We need to stand firm on behalf of sensible gun control legislation. We have to enact laws that will keep guns out of the hand of children and criminals and mentally unbalanced persons. Congress should have acted before our children started going back to school. I realize the NRA is a formidable political group; but I believe the American people are ready to come together as a nation and do whatever it takes to keep guns away from people who shouldn’t have them."
Source: www.hillary2000.org, “Gun Safety” Sep 9, 2000

"We have to do all of these things: We do have to go after racial profiling. I’ve supported legislation to try to tackle that. We have to go after mandatory minimums. You know, mandatory sentences for certain violent crimes may be appropriate, but it has been too widely used. And it is using now a discriminatory impact. We need diversion, like drug courts. Non-violent offenders should not be serving hard time in our prisons. They need to be diverted from our prison system."
Source: 2007 Democratic Primary Debate at Howard University Jun 28, 2007

"I have a comprehensive energy plan that does not rely on nuclear power. I have said we should not be siting any more coal-powered plants unless they can have the most modern, clean technology. I want big demonstration projects to figure out how we would capture and sequester carbon. This is going to take a massive effort. This should be our Apollo moon shot. There’s work for everybody to do--the states, communities and individuals. That’s what I want to summon the country to achieve."
Source: 2008 Democratic debate in Las Vegas Jan 15, 2008

"Later today, the president will veto a bill passed by Congress to support stem cell research. I co-chair the Alzheimer’s Caucus in the Senate. I’ve worked on helping to boost funding for research to look for cures and a way to prevent so many devastating diseases. And we know that stem cell research holds the key to our understanding more about what we can do. When I am president, I will lift the ban on stem cell research. This is just one example of how the president puts ideology before science."
Source: Take Back America 2007 Conference Jun 20, 2007

"This (abortion) decision, which is one of the most fundamental, difficult, and soul-searching decisions a woman and a family can make, is also one in which the government should have no role."
Source: The Case for Hillary Clinton, by Susan Estrich, p. 54 Oct 17, 2005

And one for the anti-Walmart crowd
FactCheck: Pushed Wal-Mart for women managers & environment
Obama attacked Clinton’s one-time membership on the board of directors of the world’s largest retailer, saying, “While I was watching those folks see their jobs shift overseas, you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board at Wal-Mart.”
It’s true that Clinton sat on the Wal-Mart board for six years while her husband was governor of Arkansas, where the chain has its corporate headquarters. She was paid about $18,000 a year for doing it. At the time, she worked at the Rose Law Firm, which had represented Wal-Mart in various matters.
But according to accounts from other board members, Clinton was a thorn in the side of the company’s founder, Sam Walton, on the matter of promoting women, few of whom were in the ranks of managers or executives at the time. She also strongly advocated for more environmentally sound corporate practices. She made limited progress in both areas. In 2005 she returned a $5,000 contribution from Wal-Mart, citing “serious differences” with its “current” practices.
Source: FactCheck.org on 2008 Congressional Black Caucus Dem. Debate Jan 21, 2008


But it's easier to crap on her for "com(ing) from the same cloth; the center-right," as a friggin' Bush family member I suppose, rather than actually learning something.

[DonCoquixote]

36. speeches

and all of them skirting around the TPP, the Keystone pipeline, and the mikd east. OK, your snappy retort:"they were nto issues back then."

So what the bloody hell is stopping her from speaking against them NOW!
NOW!
NOW!

not after some bunch of subhumans handlers tell her it is ok. You can hear them now:

"and oh yes, we can speak on that, we have the speech written for your approval, but please Hillary, wait until it is safe to speak out on all those people shot by cops, you know many of your voters feel safe when police can shoot the people that scare them."

[bobclark86]

40. So... you see dozens of positions she has different than Jeb Bush...

... and you then go off on a tirade about how she's sooo similar to Jeb Bush. My dead dog has more in common with Jeb Bush, and I'd still vote for Glowmer over Jeb Bush.

"OK, your snappy retort:"they were nto issues back then."

<BUZZER> Nope! Sorry! Thanks for playing.

You said she's nothing but Jeb Bush. I said she's liberal on many positions. You asked me to show proof. I did. You get your tirade on.

I'm done with you. (Ignore)

[DonCoquixote]

41. Funnt how I even said i would vote for her if she was the last choice

and yet you say "You said she's nopthing but Jeb Bush" I said she that she is way too similar, and that I woul' vote for her, but that does not stop her from being a bad choice that will do much more harm than good.

And really, when she says what she would actually DO about keystone, about war with Syria, about restoring the fairness doctrine, Glass-Steagall, about the TPP then you can offer proof, but as she has not offered proof to you, how can you offer it to me? Instead, all we get is a mock buzzer sound, which implies that someone cannot offer anything but seth-rogen style fake humor. It is what your reply can offer instead of actual facts, because, to be frank, Hillary has NOT offered you any to give to me.

Thenaks forplaying? Sorry, what you have offered is not worth the quarter.

[Thinkingabout]

42. What other candidates have answered or given positions on everything?

[DonCoquixote]

45. not on everythign

but on the tpp, glas steagall and keystone,Liz has opposed them. Clinton has supported them.

[delrem]

4. If that happens I predict that DU will be dead in the water.

It will be a Republican rout.

That's just my prediction, of course, and I'm nobody.

[DeSwiss]

5. ....

[Thinkingabout]

8. Have you looked at Hillary and Jeb on the issues?

Hillary is rated really left liberal and Jeb is rated right conservative but somewhat closer central.

[PADemD]

17. Pro TPP and GMO is left liberal?

[djean111]

28. Shhhhhh - just look at the blue linkies.......you are getting sleepy......just pledge...... n/t

[Thinkingabout]

37. Their stands are not based on a couple of issues. As far as the GMO are concerned if the bills are

enacted for labeling and the products are still purchased by consumers then they are using their freedom to purchase the products. If does not make others happy then they have the freedom to not purchase the product. There is an option for the anti-GMO believers, grow your own vegetables and provide the protein sources but stop trying to curtail my choices. BTW, I am a lifetime Democrat and grow my vegetables and raise my meat and dairy products.

[marmar]

46. "really left liberal"

:ROFL:

By whom? The Goldman Sachs and GE rating agencies?

[wildbilln864]

9. it will be quite a spectacle IMHO. n/t

[ucrdem]

10. Well . . . maybe from the distance of a thousand years and a galaxy far far away

both parties are cut from the same cloth, but we don't live in that galaxy or that millenium, and from the perspective of reality, they are not.

That's the nicest possible way I can say don't take the horseshit shoveled by wags like Chomsky seriously. Yeah it sounds very clever and it is, by half. Basically it's a get-out-of-jail free card for our worst criminals, Kissinger for example.

Which brings us to HRC and her friendship with Henry which I'm sure will be the subject of much heated badinage in coming months. Can't really defend it much less endorse it but my take is, it's nothing to be proud of, but on the other hand, she is a politician in her own right, and has an obligation to respect her constituents. That's about the best I can do this late but I think it looks worse that it really is. Clinton is not Nixon and if past is prologue she isn't Thatcher either. JMHO.

[ChosenUnWisely]

11. If 2016 is Clinton vs Bush America LOSES no matter which one wins.

America cannot afford another Clinton nor Bush.

America Needs Change REAL Change not the faux change we have been offered and the Bush/Clinton change is no change at all just more of the same.

[VanillaRhapsody]

13. thats total bunk

[ChosenUnWisely]

16. OK We are all entitled to our own opinion and choice in the voting booth

Good Day

[VanillaRhapsody]

18. and thank god cooler heads will prevail then

Some here on DU

[djean111]

29. Whoever you think the "cooler heads" are, here at DU, will have zero impact

on how others at DU vote. Zero.
Unless you are gonna go for a Hail Mary pass and ask people to mail you their mail-in ballots to fill out, of course. :-O

[AgingAmerican]

44. America cannot afford anymore politicians, period.

Because all of them will do things that we don't like, period. Just toss all of them under the bus.

We could definitely afford another BILL Clinton. Not so sure about Hillary though...

[merrily]

12. As soon as Jeb announced he was exploring, pundits began predicting very low turnout if it's

Bush v. Clinton in 2016.

Personally, I vote and urge everyone else to vote as well, but I agree that turnout will be low if it's Clinton v. Bush. And that is concerning, because, after 8 years of a Dem Pres, the right is likelier to turn out than the left, just as the left was likeliest to turn out in 2008 and the right was likeliest to turn out in 2000.

As far as Sotomayor and Kagan, we'll see what happens once Ginsburg is no longer on the court. As it is, Breyer and Kagan voted with Republicans in the part of the Obamacare case that struck down the option of the feds to withdraw Medicaid from states that refused to expand Medicaid according to the ACA (the much less publicized half of that case).

Some of the most liberal justices in the history of the Court, such as Warren and Stevens, were appointed by Republican Presidents, though I agree that is not likely to happen as the nation gets more divided. However as appointees get more Third Way, there is no guaranty that will always vote as traditional Democrats might prefer, either. I think it's just as important, if not more so, to figure out some way(s) to stop the general rightward movement of both of the two largest political Parties.

[VanillaRhapsody]

14. did everyone turn out to vote for Obama?

Did all Democrats vote then?

[rogerashton]

15. could be a five-party race.

Dems, Pubs, some sort of left candidate (Nader again? Probably not Bernie or Liz), libertarian, and "constitutionalist" tea party. Which sounds a bit like 1980 again. The only one likely to break out of the 1-2% range, as Anderson did and Perot did in 1992, seems to me to be the libertarian, but a libertarian candidate could take a lot of young people's votes from Dems. I think that gives us President Jeb.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

21. Young people are libertarian, really???

Can I see some surveys that suggest young people are in favor of eliminating the safety net?


Thank you in advance.


P.S. HRC will hand Bush#3 his ass just like Bill handed Bush Pere his...

[rogerashton]

22. Your confidence is inspiring, if not

easy to share. As for surveys, just my impression -- I hang around with young people a lot on my job -- but I didn't mean to assert any more than that. Want to get your undies untwisted?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. "Want to get your undies untwisted?"

You seem a bit dyspeptic this morning.


This might help:







hopefully...

[LWolf]

20. I prefer not to contemplate

nightmares until they become reality.

If that nightmare should become reality, I'll deal with it then.

For now, I'm going to look forward to voting for someone who is NOT Clinton in my primary. If it isn't all locked up by then. If so, I'll write in a better Democrat.

[L0oniX]

23. Clinton vs Bush = centrist left vs centrist right. The most boring election season evah.

Hey ...is there a #centrist group here yet?

[djean111]

30. Yeah, it used to be called the Democratic Party. Seems like that, anyway. n/t

[hedda_foil]

38. More like Corporatist Red vs. Corporatist Blue.

Left and right are meaningless in the shadow of the corporate world. And centrist is a category that never did mean anything other than corporatist, though they did a pretty impressive job convincing the electorate that it meant middle of the road.

[bigwillq]

24. I will be voting for someone else

if it's Bush vs. Clinton.

I live in CT. Recent trends suggest the DEM nominee will win my state, so I am free to explore other options.

I just cannot vote for Bush or Clinton.

[tularetom]

31. I don't share your optimism about the type of SCOTUS justices Clinton might appoint

They might not be the foaming at the mouth religious fanatical nut jobs that a real republican would select, but they damn well will be butt buddies with big contributors to the Clinton Global Initiative, corporate fat cats, and Wall Street thugs and not very empathetic with the economic plight of middle class Americans.

In a Clinton or Bush presidency, don't look for any champions of civil liberties to be appointed to the Supreme Court either.

[djean111]

33. I agree. I don't understand why anyone thinks Hillary will appoint anything but a

corporate friendly judge to SCOTUS.

A Clinton vs Bush election will be a very very bad joke, IMO. On us.

[DonCoquixote]

35. true, but

remember who people thought Kagan would rule against Gay marriage, because certain Duers thought she would prefer to stay in the closet. Yet when the time came, she voted the right way, as did Sotomayor. Sotomayor was a great appointment, and I do not say that just because she is the most powerful Puerto Rican ever in thei country, though it did mean a lot to me.

[hughee99]

34. Decision 2016: "One winner, 320 million losers".

I can just see the Daily Show running this as their slogan for 2016 election news.

[99Forever]

39. if that happens I'll be voting third party.

I do not vote for Republicans, even those with a phony D behind their name.

[roamer65]

43. ...get me sick bucket.

That would not be good for the country.

[daredtowork]

47. Then Marx will be right about history repeating itself 2nd time as farce. nt

[davidpdx]

48. I've almost resigned myself that it will be Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush

Bush is going to have more of a challenge in his primary with the number of Republicans who will run. I think as soon as Hillary announces the field will be cleared and she will be virtually unopposed. There will not be someone like Obama to come in and challenger her this time. She'll have the money and good portion of the delegates lined up prior to Iowa.