Good post
The Amount of Hillary Hate Scares Me
- Thread starter LittleBoots
- Start date
- Status
I'm aware accidentally being sexist doesn't make you a bona fide sexist, and the patriarchal culture has a prevalent impact on us dudes despite our ignorance to it. Said as much in my posts a page back.
Just wanted to point out that if you're not allowed to label someone something based on their behavior, what other metric could you possibly use? Or are we just saying that we should avoid labels altogether in an attempt to make people feel secure and respected despite their harmful behavior or tendencies?
Preach! Self improvement is hard, but we should all make an attempt.
Fine. It's just hard for me to not reflexively lash out at people who are still working to do so.
Hypocritical I guess, in that I'm trying to improve myself by not being impulsive to criticize.excelsiorlef
Member
So you're solution is to not vote, hand over the Supreme Court but don't worry we'll just call a fucking Constitutional Convention?! And what get 2/3rds of everyone on board?
Jesus....
Call me whatever names you want, but to me Bernie seems authentic and Hillary does not. Hillary fans constantly tell me how similar her views are to his but that doesn't really matter because I think she's a lost cause, she's too entangled with "establishment" politics.
I also just don't get what people prefer about Hillary to Bernie. What does she do better than him? Doesn't her lack of consistency bug you? I'm not saying she should never change her mind, but the frequency with which she does so is alarming at the very least. It feels to me like she is not authentic. Doesn't that concern you? Wouldn't you prefer a candidate who has been consistently been on the same page of the argument regardless of who he's speaking to?
Another common thing I've heard is that there's a strategy to choosing a candidate who's more likely to be elected than one who's not even if they're not a better candidate, and that's why I should vote for Hillary over Bernie. I just don't buy into that at all. It seems like self-defeating logic.
Anyway, I wouldn't say I "hate" HIllary, but I certainly do not like her. Just because she says all of the correct things at least once or twice doesn't mean I'm convinced that's what she believes in.
I'll vote for Bernie first and foremost.
If Bernie doesn't win the Democratic party then I'll vote to keep Republicans out of the white house, so probably Hillary in that case.
I also just don't get what people prefer about Hillary to Bernie. What does she do better than him? Doesn't her lack of consistency bug you? I'm not saying she should never change her mind, but the frequency with which she does so is alarming at the very least. It feels to me like she is not authentic. Doesn't that concern you? Wouldn't you prefer a candidate who has been consistently been on the same page of the argument regardless of who he's speaking to?
Another common thing I've heard is that there's a strategy to choosing a candidate who's more likely to be elected than one who's not even if they're not a better candidate, and that's why I should vote for Hillary over Bernie. I just don't buy into that at all. It seems like self-defeating logic.
Anyway, I wouldn't say I "hate" HIllary, but I certainly do not like her. Just because she says all of the correct things at least once or twice doesn't mean I'm convinced that's what she believes in.
I'll vote for Bernie first and foremost.
If Bernie doesn't win the Democratic party then I'll vote to keep Republicans out of the white house, so probably Hillary in that case.
No my solution of to vote for Jill Stein and if the rest of the country decides they want Trump or Rubio to peace out back to Vancouver.
I don't live in a swing state and there is no reason four me to vote for Hilary or suffer another GOP presidency.
boiled goose
good with gravy
This is unfair really.
You can throw it back around. Hillary supporters are selfish. They are the "liberals" that can afford to endure the status quo.
The middle class and minorities are doing well? Hint: nope.
I mean.. i agree the gop would be worse and i will vote for Hillary over any gop candidate but your attack is complete crap. It's the typical dismissive attitude that exists here at gaf and disgustingly shielded with minorities.
You dont always have to compromise your values to get what you want... then again, that is basically Hillary 101
I think you are letting sour grapes from some vocal internet-based Bernie fans really taint your perception of reality. There's nothing wrong with wanting to get as many people as possible behind the Democratic nominee, but let's not pretend that it's worth being frightened of a few fair-weather progressives. No matter how many of them bait with "Oh well I've been talking to all my friends and nobody will vote for Hilary". Most people are more pragmatic than that.
no reason but the fact you'd move to Canada.
I mean, that's all we really ask, y'know?
boiled goose
good with gravy
Yup. Plenty of fear mongering all around. People will have to decide come the general.
JesseEwiak
Member
I just find it ironic that the same people who hate Hillary for supporting Goldwater as a teenager (and moving to Eugene McCarthy as an actual volunteer by 1968) fully back Elizabeth Warren, who was a Republican until the 90's.
TwoDurans
"Never said I wasn't a hypocrite."
That's not Hilary's fault, hell, it's not even Obama's fault. We have a deadlocked government. Any progressive changes the president tries to get through are blocked at every side, and the changes he's already made for the better are constantly under attack, like ACA.
Neither Bernie, nor Hilary, will be able to do much until 2018 when Senate seats are up for grab. In the meantime, Congress has proven they're at least willing to humor Hilary as opposed to Sanders who will likely never get any of his campaign platforms passed due to their extreme nature.
To imply that Hilary supporters are the wealthy who can endure more of the same is not only ignorant, but it's the problem with so many ill-informed people taking part of this election. No one likes the way things are. I'm personally disappointed in Obama for only delivering on a third of the things he said he would.
Both Hilary and Bernie supporters could do with a bit less animosity towards the other side, imho.
SolidSnakesMyStepDad
Member
Hahaha yea totally. I am just a nihilist. It's not that I don't agree with Hillary's policy or track record it is that I am a nihilist.
boiled goose
good with gravy
If you dont see a difference between warren and Hillary then you are truly lost.
Melkezadek
Member
I think there is misunderstanding here. This isn't about the primaries. This is about the GE should Hilary win.
Many people in here are not Hilary supporters, including myself. The selfishness being discussed is in not acknowledging the gravity of the choice between a Clinton presidency and a Trump one.
Mighty Chin
Banned
Edited for disbelief.
minor effort
Banned
People in this thread are getting a little too scared too early about this primary process sinking the general election chances.
Let's have some 2008 fun!!! I'll start.
2008 NeoGAF: If Hillary Clinton runs as Independent candidate, what will happen in November?
2008 NeoGAF: McCain Targets Frustrated Clinton Supporters
(NOTE: Please don't bump these threads. I'm just showing how peoples fears about the Democratic primary ruining the general election chances didn't pan out. This led to some unfounded speculation running wild like people imagining Clinton mounting a third-party run.)
Let's have some 2008 fun!!! I'll start.
2008 NeoGAF: If Hillary Clinton runs as Independent candidate, what will happen in November?
2008 NeoGAF: McCain Targets Frustrated Clinton Supporters
(NOTE: Please don't bump these threads. I'm just showing how peoples fears about the Democratic primary ruining the general election chances didn't pan out. This led to some unfounded speculation running wild like people imagining Clinton mounting a third-party run.)
This is, of course, my point. The more people deny the truth about what elections can be, the more we are doomed to suffer the effects of the evil of two lessers. If people want the system to change we need to start by dropping this language of denial.
JesseEwiak
Member
I agree. Elizabeth Warren likely voted for Reagan twice while Hillary voted for Carter and Mondale.
boiled goose
good with gravy
I know it was about the GE and of course I agree with you. I was just pointing out that the "selfish" argument is complete and utter BS.
What isn't Obama's fault?
Too big to prosecute. Too big too jail. Too big to fail. That happened under... who again?? Oh right! Obama. And had nothing to do with Congress. It was his DOJ's decision.
Look. Of course I don't blame Hillary and Obama personally for our fucked up politics. That would be silly. However, I definitely believe that they are not part of the solution. Like at all. They are both very cushy with business interests, particularly Wall Street. They both play the game. The problem is that the game is broken and they haven't tried to fix it. In fact, it has only gotten worse in the past 8 years.
My point still stands...
Warren is not perfect (I don't like her stance on Israel for example), but if you don't see a difference between them NOW, then I really don't know what to tell you. Warren talks about breaking up the big banks because they are bribing politicians. Hillary takes the bribes...
eBay Huckster
Member
I get the feeling the main disagreement on this front is whether they're likely to be winning or losing that tug-o-war after this year, and that relies more on intraparty movements than it does on one single presidential election.
(Yes, I'm implying we could have a more brazenly corporate DNC even with Sanders at the helm.)
I'm not gonna speak for anyone else, but for me personally, I prefer her trade policy (in that she's not kneejerk-opposed to trade deals), her Wall Street policy (which has actually been consistent since before the recession, with regards to all of its definite causes), and her higher education policy (which is likely to have less severe downsides than "free tuition without conditions").
And I think she does immigration better than him, given that she's never subscribed to "immigrants take native-born jobs" nonsense yet he has.
minor effort
Banned
That's a very good point also. And you know what? I believe Elizabeth Warren. I support her ideals. And I don't think of her as a "snake in the grass" for not having always been politically where she is now.
Exactly the point. The fucking vast canyon of difference between the positions of the two parties should make it obvious who, if you're democrat, should vote for. Again, this isn't a gray choice. It could not be clearer.
Hell, if you don't vote, just because your candidate of choice isn't elected, you're essentially taking the same attitude those obstructionists in congress have been taking all these years. "My way or the highway."
VendettaRed07
Member
I can see that; next time, I'll type it out instead of taking the lazy pronoun route.
---
My court question has been asked whenever the Bernie-or-Bust issue comes up, including multiple times in this thread.
The base question: How does turning-over SCOTUS to conservatives for 25+ years advance Bernie's long-term vision?
And here's the background to that question:
Let's say we hand-over the Presidency and thus SCOTUS to the GOP for the next 4 or 8 years, and they stack the bench so that it goes 5-4 or 6-3 with young conservative justices. And then, when the pendulum swings back leftward (in the two elected branches), we elect Bernie 2.0 in the 2020s. Along with Bernie comes an incredibly liberal Congress, ready to cut-into corporate influence, special interests, etc.
Then, Bernie 2.0 gets this new Congress to pass his/her agenda.
As soon as the his/her law is enacted, the GOP and its corporate buddies challenge that new law. It goes to SCOTUS and gets knocked down, courtesy of 2016's Republican judges. Repeat for anything remotely controversial that Bernie 2.0 enacts into law.
That's a sad reality of this era: anything remotely contentuous is challenged immediately in our judiciary. It's not good enough to gain control of the legislative process - we also need to see to it that laws survive the inevitable court fights that will arise.
I bring this concern up repeatedly, and the Bernie-or-Bust crowd tap dances to dodge it as though their lives depend on it.
This is a brick wall of logic.
Tesseract
Banned
Not the same situation, we're far more connected now than we were in 2008. I don't see too many supporters breaking lines, especially after all the shaming and damning. Votes are earned, so is trust.
Maybe Hillary will get there, dunno.
Fenderputty
Banned
Hey, I'm Christian, so I most certainly believe in that train of thought.
Fair enough man. As long as you're making an effort, I have no qualms. We're all trying to be better people.
You really shouldn't be that worried. Democrats have a huge advantage in presidential elections right now. Look at how everyone complains about dems not coming out for mid terms, when there were 1.5m more votes for house democratic candidates than republicans in 2012.
Unlike house districts though, republicans actually need to win the popular vote by a couple points to have a reasonable chance at the presidency due to the electoral college, so Hillary would have to do significantly worse than that.
Unlike house districts though, republicans actually need to win the popular vote by a couple points to have a reasonable chance at the presidency due to the electoral college, so Hillary would have to do significantly worse than that.
Stunning drive by, care to refute his points though?
Edit: Disregard, I misinterpreted, thank you Hawk2025
neurosisxeno
Member
I'm sure TPP will be the one trade deal that works out amazingly for Middle Class America, those other dozen were the issue, this one is clearly amazing. "I went to Wall St. and told them 'Cut it out!'" Yea, worked out great Hilldawg. Her plan of offering subsidized tuition to only low income people is less about equality than Bernie's plan of tuition free to state schools.
She was in favor of deporting children to "send a message". Bernie hit her for it and she didn't even really have a response.
TwoDurans
"Never said I wasn't a hypocrite."
Obama initiated the Volcker Rule, which put the harshest regulation onto Wall Street since Clinton repealed Glass Steagle. But his bill was murdered in committee by... wait for it... the GOP in Congress. Most people don't know that and never bothered to research it or look it up. I've seen this argument time and time again from Sanders supporters when they say that Hilary would be more of the same. Maybe she will be, but Obama at least tried.
I mean, no one has even bothered to address the giant elephant in the room that has now been repeated multiple times, including the first post of this very page.
I kind of agree, I wouldn't be surprised if there is no "breaking lines".
I assume the poster means the logic is sound and well-built.
JesseEwiak
Member
Again, I've pointed this out before. The vast majority of what the banks did was either legal _or_ so oblique that it'd be nearly impossible to prosecute. Would you rather Obama have spent precious political capital in 2009 on the stimulus package so the Great Recession doesn't completely collapse the American economy or on possibly bringing bankers up for charges they'll likely skate off for anyway?
If you want to slam Dodd-Frank for not being strong enough, we can talk about that policy wise, but this fantasy that the CEO's of Citibank, US Bank, and the like would've been in federal prison even if a ticket of Bernie Sanders and Ralph Nader were installed as dictators were just that - fantasies.
It's odd that a mid level analyst sending $1000 to Hillary because they support her plan about autism is now a "bribe." Remember, CORPORATIONS CAN'T DONATE DIRECTLY TO CANDIDATES!
minor effort
Banned
By the time McCain selected Palin as his running mate, a lot of the concerns of the PUMA crowd faded away as the prospect of the alternative to Obama became all the more frightening.
I think a few months of post-primary campaigning and a few debates between Clinton and Trump will go a long way to healing that rift.
boiled goose
good with gravy
I actually preferred Hillary to Obama in 08. Obama was all about bringing people together. His goal was a legacy of reconciliation. That back fired of course. He got destroyed by the Republicans in his first term. Came to the table asking for half of loaf. Got left with the crumbs.
I like that Hillary is ruthless. That she is a cut throat politician. That she will crush republicans, not play patty cakes.
I actually think she should campaign more on this persona, but it's not a very "likeable" persona and she already is perceived negatively. It might be partially sexism which is unfair.
This time around there are a few issues this cycle in which she has better stances than Bernie IMO. Education and guns. I actually agree on more issues with Hillary than Bernie.
The problem is that I agree with Bernie more on the two most important issues. Money in politics and foreign policy. Hillary's worst issue is money in politics and that is the single most important issue for me this time around. Bernie didn't start there (income inequality), but now it's the central message of his campaign.
JesseEwiak
Member
Both Hillary and Bernie have promised to appoint Supreme Court Justices to overturn Citizen's United. It's just that Hillary refuses to not bring knives to a gun fight by not using SuperPAC's.
And Bernie's foreign policy has basically been, "hey, I didn't vote for the Iraq War, so I automatically know stuff!"
Thanks, I misinterpreted, loooong day.
Looking back through history, I think Obergefell and ACA are the norm moreso than what we've had in the last 16 or so years. Add in the overcompensation for the Gore/Bush ruling on the liberal side (since we probably lost an election due to SCOTUS), and it feels way more important to us. But looking at the vast majority of cases, when the mandate from the electorate is clear, they don't often overrule it (unless you're talking stuff like flat out stifling of free speech, or internment, etc). Which is the way it should be, I think.
BearFlexington
Member
I don't support Hillary and I don't support Trump. If the general election ends up being these two, what do I do? Do I pick the lesser of two evils, when the real solution is the abolishment of the two-party system? Or do I stay home in silent protest? I really don't know.
Your decision.
What does your silent protest say, if the demographics of the voters that do show up is further to the right then it would have been if you had voted?
Most of the Hilary hate I've seen has been based on her visibility. Bernie is new and shiny to a lot of people, so they (incorrectly) assume that he's free from all of the typical politician BS. People thought it somewhat when it was Obama and Hilary. There's something romantic about someone with little prior political experience coming in and bringing a lot of change, despite the impossibility of such an act.
It is pretty scary though, but I don't think it's specifically about Hilary, but more about what they see her standing for and a trend in politics.
It is pretty scary though, but I don't think it's specifically about Hilary, but more about what they see her standing for and a trend in politics.
Tesseract
Banned
That Hillary failed
JesseEwiak
Member
Duvergur's Law is a thing. FPTP means a two party system. Or a multiple party system that helps one of the two major parties.
As much as I would like the abolishment of the two-party system, that's not gonna happen no matter how many times you choose not to vote.
On the other hand, when the lesser of two evils will at least do some of the things you were hoping Bernie would do and the greater would unravel things that Bernie supports and make a future Bernie-ish president unable to pass laws that the Supreme Court will uphold, it really shouldn't be a hard choice.
ACTUALLY, if you REALLY want to abolish the two-party system, turning out to vote and helping to massively blunt the Trump wave could very well lead to the collapse of the Republican Party, which could lead to new parties forming.
Picking the lesser of two evils is the realistic thing to do. You just described voting in a nutshell. For the vast majority of people, there is no such thing as a perfect candidate.
But don't stay home. Know why? Because silent protests in elections don't amount to shit.
boiled goose
good with gravy
The truth is that Obama played patty cakes with republicans. It was either incompetence or he partially agreed with them. How many times has Obama said that the big banks are running government?
Also, it was not just the financial crisis, it was also stuff like all the shady shit HSBC did. Additionally, the whole bailout was not very progressive at all. It was socializing the losses and privatizing the gains. It was a slap on the hand.
Ok. So we have a BIG disagreement regarding your last statement. So you don't think that corporations donating to PACS, putting out ads, independent expenditures, etc. is a problem? The revolving door. Nice cushy jobs after "service".
You don't believe this is a problem? If you don't we have to take a few steps back because we have a fundamental disagreement.
The Supreme court even agreed that judges cannot receive campaign donations because they could be influenced. It takes quite a big mental leap to believe that legislators will not be influenced... In fact, the supreme court believes it influences politicians. They just think it is ok because money=speech and corporations = people according to them.
Yes so that's fair. You can support Hillary for fighting fire with fire. Again, my ruthless point above.
On FP. Sure, Bernie has actually not communicated his views well at all IMO on debates. His statements online are a bit better, but tbh I dont think Bernie will be trans formative on the current state of FP. That said.. voting for the Iraq War to me is a devastating vote. Voting for an invasion on dubious information and against the UN to me was a monumental problem. To me it just seems like Hillary voted what was convenient, not what was correct. So many lives lost potentially over politics and other nefarious interests.
Again, I dont agree with all of Bernie's principles. But as sure as heck can't say he isnt principled. I can't say the same about Hillary unfortunately.
I'm not going to 'sit back' or 'let' anyone do anything. There is a great deal of work to be done for social and political change which I aspire to that has nothing to do with voting. In fact, elections serve to redirect people's energy away from truly effective organizing and towards reinforcing the legitimacy of State power (and by extension, an oppressive class system.)
Furthermore, I live in a red state that is absolutely guaranteed to have all it's electoral power go towards the Republican Party. My vote does not and cannot matter. If you want to blame somebody for any wrongdoing the Republicans might do, blame the Republicans. Don't blame the victims of an inherently broken system. Don't blame the people for their own oppression. I refuse to participate in an apparatus of capitalist oppression whose actions are ultimately beyond the control of the people and any vote we might cast.
Do you not understand the very basics of this argument?
Politicians appeal to the distribution of voters they perceive. Not showing up shifts the distribution further away from your position.
Her failure or success has fuck-all to do with that point, regardless of this one-note, two-to-three liner posts that you've been making for the better part of 20 pages in this thread.
- Status