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

TheDormouse

(1,168 posts)
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 01:58 AM Apr 2016

NYT: Hillary Clinton at times seems tone-deaf to public anger

Democrats would be foolish to gloat about this G.O.P. mess. The Democratic Party has also been caught by surprise by the anger of middle-class voters it thought it could rely on, even while failing to move meaningful legislation on college affordability, gun control, the minimum wage and better care for veterans. The Democratic leadership is also too often captive to its own elites. Though they practically invented the ideal of campaign finance reform, Democratic politicians, including Hillary Clinton, now at times seem tone-deaf to public anger while they take vast amounts of money from industries with business before the federal government. The Democratic Party has long considered itself the institutional champion of the poor, unemployed and indebted. Now, for many young voters who flock to Bernie Sanders, that is a falsehood.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/27/opinion/donald-trumps-success-carries-lessons-for-democrats-too.html
13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
NYT: Hillary Clinton at times seems tone-deaf to public anger (Original Post) TheDormouse Apr 2016 OP
That's what many have been saying. Rahm Emanuel called us "f'ing politically incorrect word". People highprincipleswork Apr 2016 #1
Her Rainbow Oligarchy... NewImproved Deal Apr 2016 #5
Ouch! TheDormouse Apr 2016 #11
Hillary promulgates the erroneous beliefs of Reagan and credits him for doing things he did not do, Bluenorthwest Apr 2016 #10
Even this falls so far short of what it should say . . . snot Apr 2016 #2
I guess that's why she's losing so badly everywhere Hekate Apr 2016 #3
In the end we all lose. 840high Apr 2016 #7
Lip service. NYTimes - the rich protect themselves first. Then give us lip service. snowy owl Apr 2016 #4
No shit Sherlock. pat_k Apr 2016 #6
At times? frylock Apr 2016 #8
My exact response. nt vintx Apr 2016 #9
Recognizing but not dwelling on anger is what is needed to keep a level head. nt Jitter65 Apr 2016 #12
Wait the NYT? Gwhittey Apr 2016 #13
 

highprincipleswork

(3,111 posts)
1. That's what many have been saying. Rahm Emanuel called us "f'ing politically incorrect word". People
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 02:06 AM
Apr 2016

who consider themselves Economic Progressives really want the Democratic Party to not only stand for social justice but economic justice as well.

What's the problem with this? Isn't this what we all believe in?

If Hillary can build on the sentiments of her speech tonight, highlighting the pioneering of people like FDR and RFK in establishing the principles of the modern Democratic Party, then she can help us move away from the policies and erroneous beliefs of Ronald Reagan into a new Progressive Era.

Bernie has already warmed this up, and shown how popular Progressive/Populist programs and policies can be, across a wide political spectrum of Democrats, Independents, and even Republicans.

If Hillary can unite her existing base with this base, and with all the people attracted to both, then we will have a political juggernaut on our side. And then we could all quite griping and fighting and calling each other names.

But if she triangulates and veers back to the Right to attract a few mythical "center" or "Republican" votes, there will be continued wailing and gnashing of teeth, and the results won't be pretty, whatever they may be.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
10. Hillary promulgates the erroneous beliefs of Reagan and credits him for doing things he did not do,
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 02:35 PM
Apr 2016

things for which he is hated for not doing. She's already been pandering to the right wing voters with all that Reagan praise.
I don't care for this routine of using anti Reagan rhetoric to support a candidate who polishes Reagan's reputation at the expense of truth and human decency.

"It may be hard for your viewers to remember how difficult it was for people to talk about HIV/AIDS back in the 1980s and because of both president and Mrs. Reagan — in particular Mrs. Reagan — we started a national conversation, when before nobody would talk about it, nobody wanted to do anything about it, and that too is something I really appreciate with her very effective low-key advocacy. It penetrated the public conscience and people began to say, hey, we have to do something about this too."---- Hillary Clinton, last month, inexplicably.

 

Gwhittey

(1,377 posts)
13. Wait the NYT?
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 06:58 PM
Apr 2016

Is that one of the RW smear sites this week? Not sure if it is or not. The NY Daily News in NY was the holy bible of papers but now they have run 3-4 negative stories on Hillary so they are not on the RW rag list.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»NYT: Hillary Clinton at ...