General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Let's be honest....nothing progressive can happen under HRC as president. [View all]TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)special compared to many other Democrats on either but good for her she is solid here and generally on civil rights/access. Nothing special for a Democrat but good and solid.
Get past that and you've got a corporate friendly, Turd Way interventionist.
I don't even see her as very socially liberal she supports Hyde to the best of my knowledge, she only reluctantly supports medical marijuana and is still a drug warrior otherwise, she was slow to come around on marriage equity, she favors the death penalty best I can recall.
Socially moderate is what she is. She isn't on the leading edge of anything on the social justice front.
We know where she is economically - corporate friendly, free trading, regulation reluctant to opposed, capital focused to obsessed. Capitalist true believer but unlike her friends across the aisle doesn't come with so much belief in magic beans so grasps that some taxes will have to be collected and that large numbers of desperate starving people risks being disruptive and dangerous to morale.
One can serve only one master, hers is capital.
We know she is a hawk. I'm sure you will try to argue the point and good luck.
The civil liberties orientation is unclear but isn't overly encouraging when comparing to others with her military and corporate predilections. She did vote against the telecom immunity bill when Obama went in favor after saying he wouldn't but my feeling at the time was it was a safe bet to score political points because she knew it was going to pass but maybe there is some hope here.
I'm sure many will be okay with her on gun control, isn't a personal selling point as I don't go in for curtailing civil liberties only expansion ideologically.
The
Environment? Too tied to the corporations to be strong here, mixed is the best it can be.
Education? I tend to think she would not have gone on the attack against the teacher's unions like Obama/Duncan who just continue and expand on Bush's garbage yet have no faith whatsoever she will change the course set because the reason I don't think she would have done it was pure calculation, she wasn't going to rock the boat with a major constituency like that with another election in front of her in a field with so many women. Bad for branding.
I don't know where she is on funding NASA, the sciences, and R&D doesn't seem like a focus or a negative.