Hillary's speech yesterday was spot on. How do I know?

[DCBob]

RW talk shows I listen to during my long commute in the morning are not challenging anything she said about Trump because they know she is absolutely correct. That speech is the beginning of taking the Trump down!

Well done Madam Secretary!!

[Logical]

1. And some nutty people here are hating it also. Nt

[DCBob]

2. Yeah, that is unfortunate.

Are you now a Hillary supporter??

[Baobab]

40. The "Two Irrelevants"

Tweedledum and Tweedledee - They need one another.

[Logical]

44. Lets say i am a "never trump" supporter, and that means hillary!

[DCBob]

45. Great!

[beachbum bob]

3. only 2 groups that were critical

trump and his followers

and

sanders and his followers...


pretty telling as the rest of world and media all hailed the speech a watershed moment for hillary establishing her dominance over trump

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. "only 2 groups that were critical"

[Maru Kitteh]

39. Mastercard?

Sorry. Couldn't help myself.

[Jester Messiah]

5. So... the right, and the left?

Well that narrows it down.

[beachbum bob]

6. actually the extreme left

[Jester Messiah]

8. "Extreme"

That's what anyone who actually walks the walk gets called by those who merely talk the talk.

[grossproffit]

22. Where are you walking?

[Jester Messiah]

41. Not into the booth to vote for Hillary. n/t

[LanternWaste]

36. I too engage in self-validating allegations

I too engage in self-validating and unsupported allegations written as poorly-designed bumper-stickers designed to puff up my sense of self-esteem and deny progressiveness to anyone who opinions different than me.

See... we did it again!

[DCBob]

7. Indeed.. telling.

I think some of the Berners though have started to come around.

[geek tragedy]

33. a lot of Sanders supporters were supportive. these are the ones who haven't lost perspective

and know who the real enemy is.

[auntpurl]

9. It was an absolute trouncing.

And I have no doubt she is keeping her powder dry on MANY other approaches to take that motherfucker down.

I enjoyed every minute of it.

[Aerows]

12. I wish I had

the ability to look at things while benefitting from living in the UK, while having the certainty that I didn't have to live in the US.

[auntpurl]

13. Ok. Move to the UK, then.

[grossproffit]

23. +1 Problem solved.

[HumanityExperiment]

10. ...how do you know... indeed

They didn't 'challenge' because she's taking positions they embrace, HRC is a hawk, and so are they

Here are some excerpts from her speech yesterday:

"And if America doesn’t lead, we leave a vacuum – and that will either cause chaos, or other countries will rush in to fill the void. Then they’ll be the ones making the decisions about your lives and jobs and safety – and trust me, the choices they make will not be to our benefit.
That is not an outcome we can live with."

She will continue the current wars and promote the US 'policing' the rest of the world...



"Third, we need to embrace all the tools of American power, especially diplomacy and development, to be on the frontlines solving problems before they threaten us at home." ... "Now we must enforce that deal vigorously. And as I’ve said many times before, our approach must be “distrust and verify.” The world must understand that the United States will act decisively if necessary, including with military action, to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. In particular, Israel’s security is non-negotiable. They’re our closest ally in the region, and we have a moral obligation to defend them."

When did the US need to become more imperialistic? when did this become a progressive / liberal position?



"Fifth, we need a real plan for confronting terrorists. As we saw six months ago in San Bernardino, the threat is real and urgent. Over the past year, I’ve laid out my plans for defeating ISIS.
We need to take out their strongholds in Iraq and Syria by intensifying the air campaign and stepping up our support for Arab and Kurdish forces on the ground."

Now she's throwing Obama under the bus? 'we need a real plan for confronting terrorists'? Obama doesn't have a real plan being acted upon currently?



"And one more thing. A President has a sacred responsibility to send our troops into battle only if we absolutely must, and only with a clear and well-thought-out strategy. Our troops give their all. They deserve a commander-in-chief who knows that."

Where does Libya fall into the category of 'well thought out'?

[DCBob]

14. Do you support President Obama's view of foreign policy and terrorism?

If so, Hillary's is pretty much the same.

If not, then you are on the fringe of Democratic party.

[HumanityExperiment]

18. So you embrace her war hawk positions?

I'm critical of any president that embraces war hawk positions

I'm not on the 'fringe', you do understand why RW didn't attack her speech, my point stands, unless you're making claim DEM is now RW in policy set... is that the point of your original post?

[DCBob]

31. You didnt answer my question..

Her hawkishness is my biggest issue with her but she is our best candidate to fight and defeat the GOP. Her views are very similar to Obama's which I and the vast majority of Democrats agree with.

If you dont then you are on the "fringe".

[HumanityExperiment]

34. ..not when she embraces war hawk positions...

I did answer

I'm not fringe

'Her hawkishness is my biggest issue with her but' says it all... you're unwilling to push back on a candidate you support

Have a day!

[DCBob]

43. We as her supporters can push back on whatever we want..

but in a more productive positive way.. not bashing and trashing her like you Berners are doing.

[Baobab]

46. So, fight the GOP by becoming just like them?

nt

[DCBob]

47. What an absurd comment.

[Aerows]

11. I guess it depends on where your moral compass points

Mine doesn't point in the same direction hers does, or anybody that supports her.

I'd rather be lost in the wilderness than have that particular north to follow.

[DCBob]

15. Do you support President Obama's view of foreign policy?

If so, Hillary's is pretty much the same.

If not, then you are on the fringe of Democratic party.

[hellofromreddit]

25. There are some important differences

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/9/hillary-clinton-threatens-war-enforce-iran-deal/?page=all

[Aerows]

30. You can attempt to warp reality

I don't have an obligation to accept out and out falsehoods.

I have loyalty to my party, but there are places where they break.

Hillary has eclipsed them.

[Jitter65]

16. And you also know by the way Bernie and his supporters responded! nt

[DCBob]

17. Indeed. They cant stand it when she's right.

[hlthe2b]

19. what ARE they saying in re: the speech?

[auntpurl]

20. Don't know about RW radio, but here's some press reaction

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512113881

Hugely positive!

[hlthe2b]

21. thanks for that....

[DCBob]

32. Of course they did criticize her regarding her accomplishments as SOS.

But I didnt hear a word defending Trump.

[hellofromreddit]

24. Twisting the nipples of a bunch of already-angry republicans is not an accomplishment.

She could have given any speech at all and those guys would howl all day long.

[auntpurl]

26. That speech was not aimed at Trump's rabid minions

It was aimed at sensible Americans who need to know what Trump is capable of, yes including Republicans. There are a lot of Republicans who will not vote for Trump (including some on RW radio) and there's no sense not picking up their votes, is there?

[hellofromreddit]

27. I was responding to OP's argument. Yours is a different one.

I agree on who the speech was not aimed at.

I'd also add that there's no sense in not picking up Bernie voters, but the DNC and Hillary Campaign don't seem interested at all, so I suspect the real purpose of her speech is also not to pick up republican crossovers. It's likely meant to push down Trump voter excitement and turnout while energizing her own supporters. That would explain why the speech seemed to be 75% knocks at Trump and 25% vague nice stuff about America.

[auntpurl]

28. "No sense in not picking up Bernie voters"

The difference is that the strong majority of Bernie voters will vote for Hillary anyway, as the polls show. The few that remain on the far left will have no more statistical significance than the PUMAs did in 2008.

Now getting Republicans to vote for our candidate by pointing out the idiocy of their candidate - that is worth spending time on.

[hellofromreddit]

29. Will crossover republicans count for more than that? BoB folks are mostly new democrats.

You say most Bernie people will support Hillary anyway, well, most republicans will support Trump anyway too. Beyond that, most voters get into a funk of "I won't vote" before they go so far as to crossover. Couple it with almost 30 years of republicans being taught to viscerally hate the name Clinton, it's not likely that many republicans will cross over and vote for Hillary.

I seriously doubt even Hillary can out negative campaign Trump enough to make up that difference.

[LoverOfLiberty]

35. I think at this point

we have accepted that a certain number of Sanders supporters will never vote for Clinton. In fact, I think they are more likely to vote for Trump.

No sense trying to go after them.

[DCBob]

42. The angry howling Repubs are a lost cause..

But there are a ton of moderate Rs and independents who are wavering and this speech could bring them in.

[Maru Kitteh]

37. Yup, noticed the same on the "comedy channel" aka FAUX last night

Lots of "emails! Benghazi! tone! FBI! canned speech!"

She was just simply amazing. PHRC. It's happening.

[BootinUp]

38. She eviscerated him. It will haunt him the rest of the campaign. nt