2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhy is Hillary going to Flint? They need things done now, and she's not in office.
So, why is time wasted here, when people have been poisoned?
I'm just wondering why those in office, and can APPROPRIATE funds are not invited??????
I find this strange, and smells like politicking still, with those city limits. What a shame.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)And attempt to co-opt that tragedy into votes for herself.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)pandr32
(11,579 posts)And you have little knowledge about how Hillary Clinton has tried to help others for decades. Clean water has been a cause of many for the Clinton Foundation, which has been operating all along without "being in office."
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)pandr32
(11,579 posts)...that the book "Clinton Cash" is responsible for. It was written by the same conservative nut case that claimed Disney was turning America gay, and his "Government Accountability Institute" (sounds heavy duty, huh?!!!) is funded by the Koch brothers.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)They're really gonna try to sell some shit this time
treestar
(82,383 posts)rather than Hillary get any credit for anything! It is reaching stages of absurdity not thought possible!
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)on lawmakers to defeat the tpp. she has not acknowledged that she has lobbied even ONE lawmaker to vote against ratifying tpp. if she wants us to believe her statement that she doesn't like it, she needs to put some actions behind those words.
bernie has called for gov. to resign. glad both dems are trying to help flint.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)I don't care much about TPP, so I'm glad she's not expending effort on that front.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)And this issue has been around for months and months. Bernie is a full time senator, and he has time to fight tpp and campaign and speak out about flint.
of course, it could be that it is not an important issue to her.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)but if it opposing it doesn't rank very high on her agenda, from my perspective that's fine and even a good thing.
But, yeah, a lot of the left disagrees with me on this. I think both sides of the trade debate make too much out of the effects of these agreements.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)which is why even people like trump oppose it. its another way the corporate interests will control governments and us. mainstream repubs, are of course, fine with it.
as the campaign moves on, i think you will see it take a more prominent place in the discussion.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)I haven't seen the actual text, I don't even know how much is public or has been leaked. So all I know is what others have said about it, and based on that, my opinion is "meh."
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)i haven't seen it all, but what i have seen is quite appalling. i think it depends on how much one sees large companies to have increasing amounts of legal power regarding trade, and consumers and even sovereign governments to have less power and information.
if you ever look at it, i would be interested in your thougnts.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)generic drug provisions, and some of the other big objections, but mostly my opinion is driven by a more general belief that the effects of trade agreements are overstated, both by proponents and detractors.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)There was a study showing that something like 800K jobs were lost to NAFTA. OK. Then I'll see a study that says that some huge number of jobs were created by NAFTA. It's really hard to determine whether those losses and gains were caused by NAFTA, or how much NAFTA is actually responsible for.
What's more, the economy was at or near full employment for many years after NAFTA was passed. And the employment level is more of a function of monetary policy than of specific trade agreements. Lowering interest rates will increase it, at the risk of inflation, and vice versa, trade agreement or not.
There's the argument that with NAFTA, we exchanged well-paying blue collar manufacturing jobs for McJobs in the service sector. That's plausible, but then again the deterioration of manufacturing started before that and would have continued even without it. We definitely have a problem with inequality, and creating better-paying jobs for middle and working-class people, but in my mind the argument that trade agreements are a major part of that isn't entirely convincing.
Maybe I'm wrong. I've read Stiglitz and Reich and other people like that who have a decidedly more negative view towards them than I do. Maybe I should read them again.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)so i read the thoughts of others like you have, and because my own economy chops are quite lacking, i rely at least partially on the assessments of others. reich is someone i trust a lot on these issues, always have. i have also looked at some of the language of the tpp. my own conclusion is that whatever net negative previous trade agreements have had or may have had on our jobs, the tpp is orders of magnitude more intense, and carries significant limitations for legal remedies of trade or consumer concerns. like you, i need to study further, but i am confident that in my case anyway, further study will only increase my distrust and concern.
i hope it is discussed more on the campaign. i suspect it will be an issue in the ge, unless repubs make the ge all about isis, which they will try to do.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Trump and Cruz are against TPP, but Rubio voted for TPA.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)and i still think he has a good chance, but wonderboy rubio is starting to worry me. but thats a whole nuther subject......
treestar
(82,383 posts)the TPP would be of no importance whatsoever and she'd be considered heartless for not going out to Flint.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)tpp has been on the discussion table for quite a while now and will continue to be. nothing stopping her from working the phones and reaching out. if she has so many congresspeople as endorsements, she should be leveraging that support big time to influence their vote on tpp. i am sure any one of them would take a call from her.
her refusal to even try is quite telling as to her real feelings about tpp.
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)credit for anything.
So if she doesnt go, why didnt she?
etc
basselope
(2,565 posts)The problem is WELL KNOWN and her presence doesn't put any political pressure on anyone.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)basselope
(2,565 posts)Politics as usual.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Hillary's efforts there are useful. You know, because she's the, uhh, mayor of Flint.
And, yes, she endorsed Hillary. As have hundreds, probably thousands of elected Dems from all parts of the country and at all levels of government. They understand that she gets things done.
basselope
(2,565 posts)However, the establishment is also pretty lousy at "getting things done", which is why there is still a crisis in Flint.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)still_one
(92,136 posts)they won't see it
it is damn if Hillary does something or damn if she doesn't
Sounds a lot like the way some behaved toward President Obama, including rants which called President Obama every name one the book, including "POS, f* U", and other expletives that some thought was so great
TheBlackAdder
(28,183 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)This is one of the most serious public health crises rising from failed government in living memory. There's opportunity that ranges from looking presidential all the way down to looking like she cares about minority kids abused by a state controlled by privateering run amok.
All of which are valid, btw, considering it's the middle of a primary campaign
I suspect the good she can do with her influence mostly lays on two paths... one calling for action from a democratic administration and democrats in Congress. The other is shaming Snyder and his privateers
I'd bet we see both.
elias49
(4,259 posts)Like the Geico ads: it's what she does.
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)ejbr
(5,856 posts)It is a worthy and excellent cause with fringe benefits. Although this one I find more difficult to criticize as I think anyone running for office would do this to demonstrate their priorities.
RKP5637
(67,104 posts)is a photo op, but it's always that way with things like this.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)if she pushes a partisan angle against reckless application of free-market ideology.
metroins
(2,550 posts)I would rather have more people go than less.
No reason to chide Hillary going and giving more attention.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Where is Bernie?
TheBlackAdder
(28,183 posts).
She's all of a sudden worried about the people of Flint, MI when she was pushing fracking domestically and worldwide.
Her positions on KXL are another issue, as the next president will be able to reverse Obama's stay.
Fracking and Big Oil destroyed people and household in multitudes as of yet determined!
#hypocrisy
.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)TheBlackAdder
(28,183 posts)2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)so I am happy that she is doing it.
MineralMan
(146,286 posts)cover her protest against inaction. That's why.
She's not in office, but she has the stage right now. My question is why all candidates are not going to Flint.
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)It was stated here clearly by her supporters that she had this crisis resolved within a few hours of the debate it was mentioned in? Which is it?
And setting the stage? how many Acts will this little play have? Will the good people of Flint just have to wait for a resolution to their plight until January next year?
Is that what you are saying? Because it sure sounds like it.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)It's a free country. Hillary can go where she wants to go.
kath
(10,565 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)says more about your perspective than about her. It's absurd to take the position she never does anything good. it's like you've bought the right wing spin on her.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Is an argument that simply can't be made.
amborin
(16,631 posts)to target women and attest to how she really cares for the less fortunate
SMC22307
(8,090 posts)procon
(15,805 posts)Politicians have always used moments of crisis to not only demonstrate their bonavides as concerned public servants, but to stand in solidarity with the victims. Whether it's visiting a town with poisoned water or one with high poverty and unemployment rates, when political leaders assert their not inconsiderable gravitas on behalf of the afflicted, the attendant media attention raises public awareness and the notoriety often forces the politicos who actually do have the power to affect appropriate solutions into action.
Certainly, in this case the blame is heaped on Republicans, so it should not come as a surprize that those unworthies would not make themselves available for a public flogging at the hands of a Democratic leader or face the angry constituents they have failed. As noted, because Clinton is not in office, she has no power or authority to compel state of federal agencies to attend to the people of Flint, but she can use the strength of her well known brand to attract the media which keeps the plight of the residents in the public eye.
The real complaint here is not a lament to the wretched suffering of the residents of Flint, but only a swipe at (all?) the politicians who have always visited disaster areas to commiserate with the downtrodden. Such events are worthwhile, not just because they serve to polish the public image of politicians , but the resulting additional media coverage focuses attention on areas of their concern and highlights their related political policies which may impact or interest many other citizens.
blm
(113,043 posts).
NCjack
(10,279 posts)will be installed before any corrective actions begin.
onecaliberal
(32,826 posts)Rose Siding
(32,623 posts)onecaliberal
(32,826 posts)Children will be affected forever. A photo op isn't what they need. Resources that Clinton foundation had would be helpful.
Rose Siding
(32,623 posts)He drew attention to the issue, had photos taken. Good on him.
Good on her for the same reasons. And at this point, you have no idea if the foundation will be involved. If they acted publicly on it now, some would bellow about that.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)The suffering of those people
Empowerer
(3,900 posts)So, just stop. You guys are looking ridiculous.
Or, better yet, keep it up. You guys are looking ridiculous.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)But it would be better if she would sink some of her 250K per speech in speaking fees or the Clinton foundations hundreds of millions into replacing pipes, faucets or even delivering big juggs of water to families.
Empowerer
(3,900 posts)education, disparities, etc. in the U.S. and around the world.
How much of YOUR money or time have YOU donated to helping the people in Flint?
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Water issue?
Yep, the Clinton foundation does good work and the Clinton's have gotten very rich from it also.
Empowerer
(3,900 posts)Because, you DO know, don't you, that there are thousands and thousands and thousands of causes in the world and no charity can possibly respond to every one of them. So I'm not sure why you think the Clinton Foundation is supposed to step in and address this one.
Back to my question - have YOU donated any money or time to this issue? If not, since you think it's so important, maybe you should stop arguing with anonymous people on DU for awhile and go do something for Flint.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)One person that has links to a billion dollar foundation and has made hundreds of millions in speaking fees is the one publicizing this issue. She can do something today with those hundreds of millions of dollars. But she would just rather do a photo op.
treestar
(82,383 posts)This is spinning a good thing as bad. How Rovian.
Empowerer
(3,900 posts)Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)Call on Snyder to resign if you want to do something Clinton.
Then we'll see how much influence you have to get things done.
Empowerer
(3,900 posts)You guys have NO idea how you sound when you make these ridiculous posts and then swarm in to cosign.
You know we can read, right?
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)I said she was going to pander to POC, I didn't give an opinion as to whether or not I thought POC will buy it.
I did notice you ignored my larger point though. I guess it was more important to comment on your perceived slight than on the larger point I was making which was: If HRC has any real power to get something done, make Snyder resign immediately.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)two completely different things
Number23
(24,544 posts)She enjoys broad and DEEP minority support.
So of course her drawing attention on this issue is just her "pandering" to the people who already support her. Wonder what the excuse is for the presidential candidates who AREN'T going to Flint? That they are pandering to white people?
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)It will probably work too.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)I would guess that sometimes being 'establishment' has it's advantages.
She knows a lot of people. She might be able to use her 'power' to get some shit done.
One would think that's a good thing not a shame.
blm
(113,043 posts)Interesting.
FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)An observation is no less valid because someone else makes the same observation.
blm
(113,043 posts)My senses are usually quite dependable. I'll continue to choose my battles, whether FlatB approves or not.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)because the mayor invited her.
TheBlackAdder
(28,183 posts)Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Is a good thing for her, not so much for the water or the earthquakes here in Oklahoma though.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)Empowerer
(3,900 posts)Mike Nelson
(9,951 posts)...and her past statements have helped focus media attention. Could be the city officials favor her - maybe they did not invite others? Her political adversaries will say the visit is Hillary shamelessly using a tragedy to advance her own political goal. My advice is to keep that as a whisper response - Bernie should say something supporting Flint and refrain from knocking Hillary's visit...
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)And MSNBC has brought that attention. Hillary showed up after the fact.
Empowerer
(3,900 posts)Give it a rest with the Hillary hates people and Bernie loves us all already.
BOTH candidates are compassionate, committed public servants. Period.
So, please just go somewhere with that "my candidate's heart is bigger than your candidate's" crap.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Talk about it
Empowerer
(3,900 posts)Or did he, too, "show up after the fact?" If it's the latter, why are you worried about Hillary's timing?
And why are you criticizing her for going there now, when Sanders hasn't gone. In fact, isn't he in NY getting ready for his SNL gig? THAT should really help the people of Flint . . .
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Publicizing it? I think he can do more by helping the Democrats in the US Senate do something about it as that is his job.
Empowerer
(3,900 posts)And why, as a U.S. Senator, did Bernie have to wait until Rachel Maddow reported it on her television show. Shouldn't he have been more on top of this than the average person or reporter?
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)In a Senate bill.
Empowerer
(3,900 posts)Democrats fought like hell to get that bill on the floor, but Sanders didn't come back to Washington to help them.
But he's in good company - Cruz and Rubio didn't show up to vote, either.
Apparently, they were all busy with something more important...
S. 2012 - An original bill to provide for the modernization of the energy policy of the United States, and for other purposes.
Question: On the Cloture Motion
ROLL CALL VOTE
Not Voting - 3
Cruz (R-TX)
Rubio (R-FL)
Sanders (I-VT)
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=114&session=2&vote=00017
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)So he has done just as much as she has, talk about it
Empowerer
(3,900 posts)Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Mike Nelson
(9,951 posts)...I agree with that continuum.
book_worm
(15,951 posts)away.
intheozone
(1,102 posts)supporters in this whole discussion is what is completely turning me off on Bernie as a candidate. His supporters' attitudes and demeanor and getting closer and closer to those of Trump supporters all the time. I find it hard to believe his supporters are true democrats.
Blue_Adept
(6,399 posts)Empowerer
(3,900 posts)I suspect that a lot of these people are operatives sent her by the Republicans.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)oasis
(49,376 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)So odd that there's all these old DU accounts with very, very few posts for the time they've been here that are all suddenly posting a lot. And all pro-Clinton, anti-Sanders-supporters. Must be a massive coincidence.
Btw, how, specifically, does a photo op actually replace the water pipes?
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Amazing how they are only active during vacation time.
intheozone
(1,102 posts)doesn't mean I am not here and keeping up with what is happening. Maybe it's just the new level of discourse that is moving me to enter posts. And, I know who is responsible for the new level of discourse and that it's not helpful to our party.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Lots of <1k posters who've been on the site for 8-14 years, and all of them are making anti-Sanders-supporters posts.
So, again, how does Clinton's photo op replace the water pipes?
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)Every single website on the internet whether about politics or gardening has people that like to be mean and nasty. It is a form of entertainment for them. It says nothing about Bernie supporters as a whole.
kath
(10,565 posts)SMC22307
(8,090 posts)What I find hard to believe are those crocodile tears.
Dem2
(8,168 posts)But I have to agree with you. Why are they making it so difficult for people who have less fervor in their arguments to be allowed to be part of the Bernie club?
It's so disappointing. I hope they rethink this strategy as Bernie is pretty much not an underdog any longer and leaders don't act this way.
jillan
(39,451 posts)an environmental activist, like Erin Brockovich - who has been involved and exposing what is going on in Flint for over a year (she is also exposing all the other Flints that are occurring at this very moment).
And she isn't bringing more attention to what is happening there because it is already a huge story.
Other than a photo op, what is she hoping to accomplish? Serious question.
Larkspur
(12,804 posts)Hillary going to Flint is politicking pure and simple.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)It used to be they had to visit the South Bronx:
http://www.nytimes.com/1992/04/02/us/the-1992-campaign-voters-many-in-the-bronx-say-candidates-aren-t-in-touch.html