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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

FreakinDJ

(17,644 posts)
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 11:41 AM Nov 2015

The Hole in Hillary’s Flip-Flop Excuse

The Hole in Hillary’s Flip-Flop Excuse

She keeps saying new information makes her change her mind on policy. But what new information?

Hillary Clinton has a propensity to change her mind on big issues. She has reversed her positions on gay marriage, immigration, gun control, the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact, mass incarceration and the Iraq War, and some believe her recent stand on the Keystone XL pipeline constitutes a flip, too.

Everybody agrees that changing facts can justify a change in one’s view. But Clinton’s insistence that learning about “new” or “better” information propels her reassessments prompts this question: What was the new information?

To my knowledge, no new “information” about gay marriage emerged from the day she endorsed civil unions for same-sex couples to the day she demanded the right to same-sex marriage. The immigration, gun control and mass-incarceration issues have been similarly unrippled by shocking new findings. Likewise, the information required to make a stand against the Iraq War was not hidden. Other senators found it and took that position! Perhaps the anti-war information escaped Clinton’s notice—in which case, bad on her—or perhaps she viewed it and decided not to act on it—in which case, double-bad on her. And who among us had a better vantage from which to assemble an encyclopedic view on the Trans-Pacific Partnership than Clinton? She praised it endlessly while secretary of state, but pulled a moonshiner’s turn last week to skedaddle away from it.

If Clinton lived in Gobles, Michigan, had no library card and no Internet connection, we could accept her new-information excuse. But for the past 25 years, Clinton has had some of the best researchers at her disposal—a private staff, a campaign staff, the wizards at the State Department staff, a senatorial staff, the busy beavers from the Congressional Research Service and the White House staff. And, in fact, every indication and story we know about Hillary Clinton’s policy work belabors just how much she studies and learns. So if new or better information has been the impetus for her policy shifts, she must concede that she has a fat history of taking the wrong position in the early going and then requiring a re-do. The constant need for re-dos appears to indicate that she’d make a lousy surgeon and a bad 3 a.m. president.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/10/democratic-debate-hillary-clinton-flip-flop-213247#ixzz3qumxy6T2
71 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Hole in Hillary’s Flip-Flop Excuse (Original Post) FreakinDJ Nov 2015 OP
Yes - The Flip Flopper In Chief - Has - Flopper Flipped - One Too Many Times To Be Credible cantbeserious Nov 2015 #1
We knew what was going on with Bush and Iraq after 9/11. We knew what was behind the Iraq war drums Autumn Nov 2015 #2
The Iraq war vote was politically expedient for Hillary FreakinDJ Nov 2015 #5
That is the truth. She has that on her hands. Autumn Nov 2015 #11
War was for the profiteers, not the people. In 2011-12, Clinton and her team helped remove DhhD Nov 2015 #17
That is HUGE FreakinDJ Nov 2015 #36
Probably from this reporting by DeSmogblog. kristopher Nov 2015 #37
Great post dreamnightwind Nov 2015 #56
Adding several links to the destruction of PEMA. Clinton delivered Mexico to the TPP. DhhD Nov 2015 #58
She certainly wasn't representing the will of her constituents Scootaloo Nov 2015 #53
That was a lie, cooked up by her handlers to give the drones something to say Doctor_J Nov 2015 #3
Yes. But, when she makes a "Hard Choice" to flip she looks "presidential". According to some. Tierra_y_Libertad Nov 2015 #4
K N R Faux pas Nov 2015 #6
Weathervanes gotta spin in the wind. 99Forever Nov 2015 #7
With all "Trials and Tribulations" it makes one wonder what could possibly motivate FreakinDJ Nov 2015 #8
It's simply called being obsessed. 99Forever Nov 2015 #9
becoming the 1st female pres will be much more historic stupidicus Nov 2015 #13
B-I-N-G-O, stupidicus Iwillnevergiveup Nov 2015 #47
Nailed it MissDeeds Nov 2015 #24
I might overlook the ambitious 'do whatever you can to win' . nolabels Nov 2015 #63
Yep 840high Nov 2015 #27
Have to agree. nt. AikenYankee Nov 2015 #39
"Weathervanes gotta spin in the wind." BeanMusical Nov 2015 #40
That says it all, Paka Nov 2015 #46
But if Hillary changes her mind, it's for a good reason 99th_Monkey Nov 2015 #10
I think you are correct... Thespian2 Nov 2015 #45
Of course, you are correct. GoneFishin Nov 2015 #54
New information = new polling information Ms. Toad Nov 2015 #12
+1 daleanime Nov 2015 #18
+1 Is there a single issue that she wouldn't flip-flop on if the polls were saying that it would BeanMusical Nov 2015 #41
Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner. Scuba Nov 2015 #42
Got it. avaistheone1 Nov 2015 #48
Yup, agreed nt riderinthestorm Nov 2015 #14
On has to be prepared to ignore an awful lot Ferd Berfel Nov 2015 #15
People flip flop AlbertCat Nov 2015 #16
K&R nt Live and Learn Nov 2015 #19
Again, I ask: HOW can anyone TRUST her? AzDar Nov 2015 #20
Meme du jour, and for the rest of the campaign because that is all there is left for the right wing. Fred Sanders Nov 2015 #22
Reinforcing trust? Are you trying to start your own meme? Bubzer Nov 2015 #28
... AzDar Nov 2015 #35
I read the diary azureblue Nov 2015 #21
All of us do make mistakes and learn from them. A Simple Game Nov 2015 #32
It's your criticism that's specious Jim Lane Nov 2015 #34
What new information? Jack Rabbit Nov 2015 #23
Meh cosmicone Nov 2015 #25
Then why do you bother to reply? Bubzer Nov 2015 #29
Name recognition, people have been familiar with the name Clinton for a couple of decades nationally That Guy 888 Nov 2015 #31
People ? What people? humbled_opinion Nov 2015 #50
50-60% of the people with votes cosmicone Nov 2015 #67
Great argument. Dawgs Nov 2015 #64
K&R MissDeeds Nov 2015 #26
Why is the party trying to shove azmom Nov 2015 #30
Because she's the candidate of Big Money, and everyone in the DNC is on board with Big Money. reformist2 Nov 2015 #38
"a fat history of taking the wrong position in the early going and then requiring a re-do" cherokeeprogressive Nov 2015 #33
I just grabbed your flip flops smiley Nov 2015 #57
Don't Worry after she humbled_opinion Nov 2015 #43
The new information . . . Depaysement Nov 2015 #44
This message was self-deleted by its author Corruption Inc Nov 2015 #49
I would have a lot more respect for Clinton if she was more honest. PatrickforO Nov 2015 #51
K&R. JDPriestly Nov 2015 #52
Everyone should know everything available at all times treestar Nov 2015 #55
She has been running for president for literally years. kenfrequed Nov 2015 #59
why shouldn't people change their opinions as they find out more? treestar Nov 2015 #62
Wouldn't be better if we elected someone like Bernie, that has been correct from day one? Dawgs Nov 2015 #66
nobody is correct from day one except treestar Nov 2015 #68
Right... kenfrequed Nov 2015 #71
Bernie has ALWAYS been correct on civil rights, the Iraq war, TPP, and keystone. Dawgs Nov 2015 #65
oversimplification at its best treestar Nov 2015 #69
No problem. n/t Dawgs Nov 2015 #70
The word "Camp Weathervane" is very, very apt Dodo Nov 2015 #60
K&R TheFarS1de Nov 2015 #61

Autumn

(44,686 posts)
2. We knew what was going on with Bush and Iraq after 9/11. We knew what was behind the Iraq war drums
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 11:56 AM
Nov 2015

and the morphing by them of 9/11 and Iraq. We knew. If we knew and understood what their game was, a Senator who is privy to more information than we had to have known it also. The Iraq war vote was politically expedient for Hillary. The loss of life from that one action, theirs and ours is the stain that blots out and covers all else.

 

FreakinDJ

(17,644 posts)
5. The Iraq war vote was politically expedient for Hillary
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 11:59 AM
Nov 2015

Damm the innocents who lost their lives

Autumn

(44,686 posts)
11. That is the truth. She has that on her hands.
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:18 PM
Nov 2015

It was so horrifying to watch all that. Knowing what the Bush administration was doing and wondering why the leaders at that time were covering their eyes to the madness.

DhhD

(4,695 posts)
17. War was for the profiteers, not the people. In 2011-12, Clinton and her team helped remove
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 01:02 PM
Nov 2015

the control and reduce the salaries of the Mexican workers in their nationalized Oil Industry, in order to help in the turn over, to the Mexican 1%, foreign investors and foreign fossil energy companies. We did not hear about that step Right from the corporate media. That was done by Clinton using US State Department diplomacy instead of shock and awe warring. She is the fulcrum of the pitchfork. Sanders is the fulcrum of the voters and grassroots movers.

In my opinion she represents privatizers for profiteering, and can not flip-flop over to government regulation. Re-regulation means to be in keeping with the needs of Americans, not the needs of the wealthy, world corporate TPPers. The wealthy need Hillary Clinton only to keep the pitchforks from coming out. She has and will flip-flop on everything except keeping Wall Street in check. IMO, Clinton will take a step farther Right if she becomes President. During the last Debate, she said that she would take Obama's policies and plans a little deeper. IMO, the third way has already extended the New hand, and with Hillary, a visual public step to the Right, would be coming, and will be televised by corporate media. After the Nov 2004 elections, in a publicly televised speech, Bush said that the American people gave him a green light to do anything he pleased.

Adding on edit: Above, I wrote that Clinton can not flip from privatization to government re-regulation, That is why she cannot say that she has a policy to reinstate Glass-Steagall. IMO she must be lying about her now non-support of the TPP. She is putting off having Plans because you cannot serve two masters; the 1% and the People. Her fence riding is crumbling here on DU too.

Please see the links that I have added in a down thread reply. I waited one day before adding, because I wanted to see if the fence 1% would like to fence from this Reply. They seem to be missing. Lately they come in at the end of a long thread.

dreamnightwind

(4,775 posts)
56. Great post
Mon Nov 9, 2015, 07:20 AM
Nov 2015

I see the world as you do, at least what you discussed in your post.

I hadn't heard about the issue of the Mexican oil workers' salaries, if you post a follow-up or link I would like to read up on it.

DhhD

(4,695 posts)
58. Adding several links to the destruction of PEMA. Clinton delivered Mexico to the TPP.
Mon Nov 9, 2015, 08:46 AM
Nov 2015

Hope you can read several of these:

https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=AwrSbgcblEBWIpgAehKl87UF;_ylc=X1MDOTU4MTA0NjkEX3IDMgRmcgMEZ3ByaWQDVldVc3J3aVJTUEdyeVlWY3lHSXFFQQRuX3JzbHQDMARuX3N1Z2cDMTAEb3JpZ2luA3NlYXJjaC55YWhvby5jb20EcG9zAzEEcHFzdHIDSGlsbGFyeSBjbGludG9uIGFuBHBxc3RybAMxOARxc3RybAM3NARxdWVyeQNIaWxsYXJ5IENsaW50b24gYW5kIHRoZSBQcml2YXRpemF0aW9uIG9mIHRoZSBNZXhpY2FuIE5hdGlvbmFsIE9pbCBJbmR1c3RyeQR0X3N0bXADMTQ0NzA3MjgwNA--?p=Hillary+Clinton+and+the+Privatization+of+the+Mexican+National+Oil+Industry&fr=sfp&fr2=sa-gp-search&iscqry=

Here is one, from the search link above, with Abby Martin:

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Wikileaks-Hilary-Clinton-Pushed-Mexicos-Oil-Privatization-20150810-0011.html

snip
The country's hydrocarbons have been constitutionally managed by the state-owned company, Pemex since 1938, after the Mexican oil expropriation.

The website identifies three U.S. officials as being key in this process of pushing for an opening of Mexico’s energy sector: David Goldwyn, the first U.S. International Energy Coordinator who was named by Clinton in 200; Carlos Pascual, Goldwyn's successor and former U.S. ambassador to Mexico; as well as Neil Brown, a former top-level staffer for Senator Richard Lugar.

“Mexico officials remain extremely sensitive about any public — especially US — comments regarding energy reform and production,” reads a February 2010 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Mexico, prior to a visit to the country by Goldwyn. “We should retain the (U.S. government's) long-standing policy of not commenting publicly on these issues while quietly offering to provide assistance in areas of interest to the (Mexican government).”

This content was originally published by teleSUR at the following address:
"http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Wikileaks-Hilary-Clinton-Pushed-Mexicos-Oil-Privatization-20150810-0011.html". If you intend to use it, please cite the source and provide a link to the original article. www.teleSURtv.net/english

 

Doctor_J

(36,392 posts)
3. That was a lie, cooked up by her handlers to give the drones something to say
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 11:57 AM
Nov 2015

The minions swallowed it. Everyone else rolled their eyes and filed it under, "pandering example number 832"

99Forever

(14,524 posts)
7. Weathervanes gotta spin in the wind.
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:03 PM
Nov 2015

No real stances, no real morals, just an undying hunger for power.

My psychologist wife says there is a term for that kind of personality.

 

FreakinDJ

(17,644 posts)
8. With all "Trials and Tribulations" it makes one wonder what could possibly motivate
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:05 PM
Nov 2015

a person to seek more of that same abuse - and we all know its coming

 

stupidicus

(2,570 posts)
13. becoming the 1st female pres will be much more historic
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:37 PM
Nov 2015

than simply being the forgiving wife of a sex-addicted pres.

Iwillnevergiveup

(9,298 posts)
47. B-I-N-G-O, stupidicus
Mon Nov 9, 2015, 02:37 AM
Nov 2015

My politically astute pappy (RIP) said of Hillary years ago, "She's VERY ambitious."

 

MissDeeds

(7,499 posts)
24. Nailed it
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 02:16 PM
Nov 2015

It's all about winning at any cost. That's why she doesn't have a clear platform and why she is continually evolving. She's for whatever it takes to win.

nolabels

(13,133 posts)
63. I might overlook the ambitious 'do whatever you can to win' .
Mon Nov 9, 2015, 10:49 AM
Nov 2015

Its goes deeper than though, more of cynical position taken. It's one where the ideals are of that; nobody will notice, nobody of influence will care, nobody will be able to put two and two together to see why it's wrong, the few that it might hurt will not be able to reciprocate or respond to it, or then lastly if all else fails, one will acknowledge it and push it away like it's old news.

It all was a calculated set of moves to get the largest pool to draw from to help in the ascending up the ladder.


My biggest problem with mostly all of it is that it's not original, inventive or even offering up much of an alternative view. In other words, even a fool could guess the next move from the current trajectory. That not be a leader of any sort, that's just being a cog in a machine. It also doesn't inspire me much

BeanMusical

(4,389 posts)
40. "Weathervanes gotta spin in the wind."
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 10:18 PM
Nov 2015

Sounds like the tittle of a country song. Someone should compose it and give it to HRC as her campaign tune.

Paka

(2,760 posts)
46. That says it all,
Mon Nov 9, 2015, 12:19 AM
Nov 2015

"just an undying hunger for power." She will stop at nothing in her quest to be President.

 

99th_Monkey

(19,326 posts)
10. But if Hillary changes her mind, it's for a good reason
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:16 PM
Nov 2015

but it's not science, and it's not 'new information', it's political expediency, calculated
to erase -- as much as possible -- ANY difference between her and Sanders on issues
many Progressive voters care deeply about.

Thespian2

(2,741 posts)
45. I think you are correct...
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 11:23 PM
Nov 2015

I would add that I don't think the 1%er has changed her mind on any of these important issues...she simply SAYS she has "evolved"...Bullshit...

Ms. Toad

(33,896 posts)
12. New information = new polling information
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:36 PM
Nov 2015

(or other similar intel) that tells her the other side of the issue is better for her politically.

So - it is accurate to say she is changing her position based on new information. It is just not the kind of new information she is implying.

BeanMusical

(4,389 posts)
41. +1 Is there a single issue that she wouldn't flip-flop on if the polls were saying that it would
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 10:27 PM
Nov 2015

be good for her campaign?

Ferd Berfel

(3,687 posts)
15. On has to be prepared to ignore an awful lot
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:45 PM
Nov 2015

to support her.

Is she a Democrat, or, a disenfranchised republican?

 

AlbertCat

(17,505 posts)
16. People flip flop
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 12:55 PM
Nov 2015

like the article says....when there is new info or results don't pan out...

And everyone can do it.

But "serial evolving".... again and again... at convenient times....

And remember, the position changed FROM was also politically expedient at its time.

It's just too much.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
22. Meme du jour, and for the rest of the campaign because that is all there is left for the right wing.
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 02:00 PM
Nov 2015

As you say, it is about trust (or TRUST)....and always has been, which is why Clinton has been reinforcing that trust and winning the party polling.

Bubzer

(4,211 posts)
28. Reinforcing trust? Are you trying to start your own meme?
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 02:43 PM
Nov 2015

azureblue

(2,122 posts)
21. I read the diary
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 01:19 PM
Nov 2015

and the responses and the word "Specious" applies to all. Hyperbole and conjecture, along with much mind reading, too. And a lot of verbal whacking off. You want to support your candidate? Do so by comparing how he or she is more qualified to address issues that are critical to America and back them up with reasoning and facts.

To deconstruct:
"She keeps saying new information makes her change her mind on policy. But what new information?
Hillary Clinton has a propensity to change her mind on big issues. She has reversed her positions on gay marriage, immigration, gun control, the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact, mass incarceration and the Iraq War, and some believe her recent stand on the Keystone XL pipeline constitutes a flip, too"

Yep. Some of us learn from our mistakes, correct them and move forward. Maybe you don't. Besides, when you link to politico, you blow your creds right out of the water

A Simple Game

(9,214 posts)
32. All of us do make mistakes and learn from them.
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 03:35 PM
Nov 2015

But unlike Hillary, hundreds of thousands of people don't die when you and I make a mistake. Do you want the person making decisions about your life and the lives of your children and grandchildren to learn as they go? You set the bar pretty low for someone you wish to place in a position to do that over and over again. Basing decisions of that scale on politics is wrong and never justifiable.

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
34. It's your criticism that's specious
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 06:13 PM
Nov 2015

You write:

You want to support your candidate? Do so by comparing how he or she is more qualified to address issues that are critical to America and back them up with reasoning and facts.


That's exactly what the OP does. It gives examples of how Clinton has a history of taking wrong positions, even though the information leading to a better conclusion was available to her at the time. That's a reason to prefer candidates who do better at getting it right initially. The Presidency doesn't offer an unlimited scope for do-overs.

You also write, as to her flip-flops:

Yep. Some of us learn from our mistakes, correct them and move forward.


That's what she did as to Iraq. I give her some credit for, however belatedly, recognizing a mistake. On other issues, though, she has NOT admitted a past mistake. Instead, as the OP correctly states, she's tried to pass it off as new information. The TPP is a good example. She was an ardent cheerleader for it. Then, in the campaign, faced with an unexpectedly strong challenge from her left, she switched. She tried to pass off her change as being based on the new information of the final text, but she hadn't even seen the final text. Furthermore, AFAIK she's never explained what was supposedly different between the version she endorsed and the version she opposed.

She would have more credibility if she'd said, "When we were negotiating this in secret I thought it was a good idea. Over the last couple years, though, after I left government, some late-stage drafts have been leaked and have been analyzed by various NGOs, like the AFL-CIO, Sierra Club, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Medecins sans Frontieres. They've pointed out considerations I'd overlooked before, so I now think that the version I called the "gold standard" was actually a bad idea." That would've been better than her falsely stating that she had merely said she hoped it could be the gold standard, and falsely implying that her change of position was based on changes reflected in the final text.
 

cosmicone

(11,014 posts)
25. Meh
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 02:20 PM
Nov 2015

People have digested her positions and are still supporting her 2:1

All this is a waste of perfectly good electrons on the internet.

 

That Guy 888

(1,214 posts)
31. Name recognition, people have been familiar with the name Clinton for a couple of decades nationally
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 02:50 PM
Nov 2015

I doubt most people polled who said they would vote for Clinton could name her positions.

humbled_opinion

(4,423 posts)
50. People ? What people?
Mon Nov 9, 2015, 02:58 AM
Nov 2015

You live in an echo chamber because, If you think for a minute she will win the GE your nuttier than, well than Ben Carson....

 

cosmicone

(11,014 posts)
67. 50-60% of the people with votes
Mon Nov 9, 2015, 11:47 AM
Nov 2015

if you subscribe to the notion of scientific polls

Otherwise, you're welcome to believe Bernie is winning all 50 states

reformist2

(9,841 posts)
38. Because she's the candidate of Big Money, and everyone in the DNC is on board with Big Money.
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 07:36 PM
Nov 2015

In the end, politics is just a business. And national politics is Big Business, sadly.

humbled_opinion

(4,423 posts)
43. Don't Worry after she
Sun Nov 8, 2015, 10:49 PM
Nov 2015

wins the Primary she will change them all back again.... and believe me many here will cheer her for it...

Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)

PatrickforO

(14,479 posts)
51. I would have a lot more respect for Clinton if she was more honest.
Mon Nov 9, 2015, 03:12 AM
Nov 2015

She should just say, "You know, I really want to be president because I think I could be a very good one. But I've discovered the American people are waking up to issues that most of us have ignored in Washington up until now. So, I've changed a bunch of my positions because I see now that I was wrong. I promise that if you vote for me I will do my very best to represent the real interests of the American people."

I think it might make a difference. Or maybe not. Our political 'game' is based on fabrications, half-truths, secrecy and downright lies. Most cannot change or will not.

That's why I am supporting Bernie Sanders because with him you don't have to worry about that.

kenfrequed

(7,865 posts)
59. She has been running for president for literally years.
Mon Nov 9, 2015, 09:45 AM
Nov 2015

I think she had time to get her positions fight last April. Her TPP and XL flops were only changes she made running into the debate because she didn't want those questions on the table.

And it worked. Sanders and O'Malley actually had to bring it up in their answers to other questions during the debate. There wasn't much time spent on trade or the environment.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
62. why shouldn't people change their opinions as they find out more?
Mon Nov 9, 2015, 10:13 AM
Nov 2015

If everyone were so rigid, nothing would ever advance.

If everyone who opposed gay marriage in 1980 had to continue to still oppose it lest they flip flop, we would not have gay marriage now.

The TPP is complex and she did not flip flop, she said it was not as good as she wanted.

 

Dawgs

(14,755 posts)
66. Wouldn't be better if we elected someone like Bernie, that has been correct from day one?
Mon Nov 9, 2015, 11:41 AM
Nov 2015

We can't afford to have someone that makes decisions as President, only to say that new information shows they were wrong after they leave office.

I mean that's what you are arguing.

kenfrequed

(7,865 posts)
71. Right...
Mon Nov 9, 2015, 02:19 PM
Nov 2015

But that is just spin. The thing actually got IMPROVED in early October to cut the patent protections on medications to less time than the US was trying to negotiate. Basically, if you take her at her word, she must have therefore liked it BETTER when there were stronger protections for big pharmacuitical companies that would have made medications more expensive. Granted it is still bad, but it has always been bad, even when she was trumpeting it's "gold standard."

She merely put out her statement a few weeks before the debate because the unions were steaming mad at the TPP. Either she negotiated this pact and managed to know nothing about it, or this was an entirely cynical act.

 

Dawgs

(14,755 posts)
65. Bernie has ALWAYS been correct on civil rights, the Iraq war, TPP, and keystone.
Mon Nov 9, 2015, 11:39 AM
Nov 2015

Why has Hillary been wrong on all of those until just recently?

Come on.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»The Hole in Hillary’s Fli...