The Democratic National Convention OT |2016|: The One With the Policy
- Thread starter eBay Huckster
- Start date
- Status
It was just a play. He wanted the votes of all the delegates to be recorded, as he always said he wanted. But he also wanted a final show of unity for her to be cheered as the nominee. So, technically, she won by delegates. Visually, she won by acclamation (not acclimation
)Bernie did well. These last few days I saw the candidate that people love and he showed he can work with people for a common goal.
I would say this is more likely.
aspiegamer
Member
Yeah... no. It was almost entirely a story about him pursuing her, and everything she did while in what would otherwise already have been a comfortable situation in life where 99% of people would have settled down. He stubbornly kept after her despite rejection and embarrassment because, well, Bill Reasons™.
The few Republican shout outs were a "hah, look, that party that screams about her used to like a lot of the stuff she's still pushing for." Would like to know if those were in the script or not, since it sounds like the sort of thing Bill would randomly remember as he went along. Edit: Sorry, I misinterpreted this part. But point stands.
Maddow is entirely and reasonably allowed to hate Bill. That's fine! But this speech ... not really an angle to attack. Hell, it even humanized Bill, too in a "look, I started as a loser and she was better than me" way.
Yeah I was a bit surprised at Maddow's and the other guy's (whom I did not recognize then) take on Bill's speech.
According to them the story of their first time meeting was awkward, and the whole speech was too much about himself.
Well, obviously it was about relating Bill's history of relation with his family (loved the bits about Chelsea), focusing on Hilary as a Change Maker, a Woman, a Mother and "his best friend" but it was obviously all viewed through him. The only one that should speak on behalf of Hilary is Hilary herself, and that's for Thursday.
I swear it was like they were stuck in the Lewinski scandal mindset.
Was Maddow a Bernie fan, or does she just really not like Bill?
O'Donell was spot on, as usual.
I think he probably could have cut down on the courtship but it was genuine. That was real. That's Bill Clinton. And you can't say the payoff wasn't worth it, which even Maddow admitted. I don't think she's an idiot, I just don't agree. That's ok.
I love how during the speeches it's a pure love fest and then over night we are arguing about emails.
I love how during the speeches it's a pure love fest and then over night we are arguing about emails.
Bill was off script for a very long time, but that's also a very genuine part of him. One of his former strategists said that it was a talk unlike any he had previously given, and that the speech both humanized Hillary and showed her commitment to making the world a better place. And I think that much is undeniable.
Bill is, in many ways, still the same boy from Arkansas.
Loved the Bill speech. The guy is a national treasure.
I respect the passion of Bernie or Bust supporters but the continued temper tantrum is really growing old. As has been said many, many times in this thread, if you love Bernie and supported him but won't vote for Hillary come November, you may feel as if you are making a principled stand for what you believe in -- good for you. But you are directly undermining yourself and the very policy changes that Bernie was and still is pushing for. With Hillary, she will push for the majority of policy changes that you want. Without her, you will get significantly less -- if any -- of those changes. With Trump in office, you will even lose on benefits that progressives have spent so much blood, sweat, and tears fighting for. If you're holding out for perfection in politics, you will lose everything.
I respect the passion of Bernie or Bust supporters but the continued temper tantrum is really growing old. As has been said many, many times in this thread, if you love Bernie and supported him but won't vote for Hillary come November, you may feel as if you are making a principled stand for what you believe in -- good for you. But you are directly undermining yourself and the very policy changes that Bernie was and still is pushing for. With Hillary, she will push for the majority of policy changes that you want. Without her, you will get significantly less -- if any -- of those changes. With Trump in office, you will even lose on benefits that progressives have spent so much blood, sweat, and tears fighting for. If you're holding out for perfection in politics, you will lose everything.
Tal Shiar Agent
Banned
Trump tweets last night spurred me to create this.
SymbiantXenos
Member
BoB gets Trump.
Simple as that.
Simple as that.
I definitely agree.
One of the greatest tricks the Republicans have ever made was to sabotage the entire government and convince the world that it was the Democrats' fault. I'd be impressed if their intentions weren't so terrifying.
Ding ding.
That was the best speech about Hillary so far, because it gave is a view into who she actually is.
How many kids do you know, if they went to a prestigious law school, would turn down an opportunity to work at a gigantic law firm and be set for life? She did... To work with disadvantaged kids, no less.
Unless Crooked Hillary was planning to be President at 18! So devious.
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
lol Biden on Morning Joe
Poltergust
Member
I just saw this on Facebook:
I'm confused. Did this walkout actually happen? I haven't heard anything about this.
a good life tip is to ignore images like that
Nope. A hundred or so people left out of an auditorium with several thousand - it was totally invisible. The photo linked is not in any way relevant - if it is even if the convention, it's a photo of early afternoon before most people arrived!
Roland_Gunner
Member
Roughly 150 Sanders delegates walked out to protest Clinton winning the nomination. So closer to 5% than 50.
shinra-bansho
Member
People have constantly told you what she stands for but you keep ignoring them or changing tact, you not convincing me that your not a troll
gutter_trash
Banned
god, then sometimes people wonder where super Liberal lose touch with average people.
Madow's comments were off base IMO.
This was Bill's story and from a spousal perspective. Bill is now the First Spouse
Madow doesn't get it
Spiritreaver
Member
I certainly recall an empty convention recently.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hgScLYu4qI
It's like some people forgot people walked out of the RNC as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hgScLYu4qI
It's like some people forgot people walked out of the RNC as well.
They are called rhetorical questions. Context should make it clear I was asserting that she had no principled positions not requesting to know what they were.
Honestly, I wish this mentality would disappear.
People are naturally conservative and there is some innate instinct that respects stubbornness. That sticking to your guns is, on some level, admirable even when all the evidence is against you. But we have plenty of innate instincts that we should ignore because we know they are problematic, and this is one of them.
People who choose a side of an issue and then stick to it are lucky if they are later vindicated, but that's usually not likely. People often make the wrong decision using rationales that are basically inescapable. I grew up in a homophobic environment. How was I supposed to realize that there was nothing wrong with being gay when the entire narrative was that it was, and you were punished for even questioning it. Hating gay people was just a thing you did, and since I was straight and all my friends were straight as far as I knew, I really had no reason to question it. I could have figured it out a long time before I eventually did using pure reason, but no one exists in some kind of existential bubble of logic and reason and we're all affected by the culture and situations we live in. And I'm lucky I developed the skills to question these values and think independently. Some people, sad to say, don't do that, and I'd say that's more of the reason we are so divisive than anything.
The fact is that as people live their lives, it's really better to be able to adapt than not. Sometimes you get lucky and you're on the right side of history when you look back on things in hindsight, but most of the time, people need to change their views in order to become better people. Hillary Clinton being against gay marriage at one point isn't nearly as strong a point against her as her changing her view to be for gay marriage is a point for her.
So, no, it doesn't speak to her poor judgement. It's a sign of good judgement to be able to question and adapt your beliefs into something better.
You could argue that perhaps she's only changing them to appeal to the public, but then you still have a president that is going to advocate progressive values. If she is a shill, then she's a shill for the right side. But the truth is we can't know whats inside her head and there's no reason to assume the worst. I'd be willing to bet that she holds the progressive principles genuinely, because she atleast holds them for years at a time, and when you pretend to hold those positions for that long, then it's not really shilling, it's a genuine change. And that should be applaudable.
Polioliolio
Member
People saying it was supposed to humanize Hillary.. You mean clarify her past and set the facts straight about her history?
The main function was to show how passionate she is as a politician, the plain facts of what she's accomplished, all wrapped up as told by someone who loves her. Media just wants to focus on Bill and marriage, but every American should be forced to hear this speech before they vote, at least to offset the crooked Hillary shit. You know it's bad when even your friends and family think Hillary is shady and possibly should be imprisoned.
It's not actually that hard, much of what Bill described is literally in the "early life" sections of her Wikipedia page. Almost every line on that page is sourced lol. But nobody looks at the basics when researching Hillary Clinton.
Something can both set the facts straight and humanize someone at the same time. Hell, I'd argue a great speech should really do both.
This post is applaudable as well. Great great post. I agree 100%
I have argued this to people very often... having convictions is great, but not when you cling to them even when faced with evidence proving you are actually wrong.
The situation you are in and facts presented to you should allow you to change your position on something without being called weak, spineless ,shill or flip flopper.
Also , for politicians I believe that it is beneficial for them to not take hardline stances but slowly adopt ideas and beliefs publicly allowing them to create goodwill and rise to a level where they can make changes that matter as opposed to taking a hardline stance and getting blocked form getting there.
smokeandmirrors
Banned
Joe Biden is right around the corner from me right now and I wanna meet him 
@Veelk
I have changed my mind about some pretty big things in life. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. However, I find the frequency with which HRC, as a supposed progressive, has found herself on the wrong side of issues somewhat unsettling. I don't think she has genuine underpinning values that would have led her to not support segregationist Goldwater, or support gay marriage early on, or reject bank deregulation or be against the Iraq war, or think it unwise to call people "super predators". She has come around later on some issues after other people have borne the weight of appearing "radical" and paved the way for her. However, I'm not sure that makes a great argument for her as a leader.
Anyway, despite ocassionally being heated I haven't minded this overall discussion. I'll be gone for several hours soon and this thread will likely have moved on by the time I return. So there won't be any further replies from me after the next few minutes.
I have changed my mind about some pretty big things in life. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. However, I find the frequency with which HRC, as a supposed progressive, has found herself on the wrong side of issues somewhat unsettling. I don't think she has genuine underpinning values that would have led her to not support segregationist Goldwater, or support gay marriage early on, or reject bank deregulation or be against the Iraq war, or think it unwise to call people "super predators". She has come around later on some issues after other people have borne the weight of appearing "radical" and paved the way for her. However, I'm not sure that makes a great argument for her as a leader.
Anyway, despite ocassionally being heated I haven't minded this overall discussion. I'll be gone for several hours soon and this thread will likely have moved on by the time I return. So there won't be any further replies from me after the next few minutes.
balladofwindfishes
Member
What about all the times Hillary has been on the right side?
i hate social media with a passion
AnotherDayAnotherDollar
Banned
Well, yeah, Bernie Sanders is a much better candidate than Hillary Clinton IMO, but I don't have the choice to vote for him in the general. He has endorsed Clinton himself.
The choices now are between Trump and Clinton, and even though I like Stein when she says I shouldn't vote out of fear and we should have a fair voting ranked system, so that you can vote for who you want and have more options in the general, that's not the current system we have.
Reality though is that today, in 2016, 3rd party candidates (Stein and Johnson) cannot and are not going to win. The only choices are Democrats or Republicans (Clinton or Trump). One of those two are going to win, and a Trump presidency, while hilarious at first, is starting to scare me.
Nazgul_Hunter
Member
Alright, here's some more rhetorical questions for you:
Why is she the only one being held accountable for these "flip-flops"?
The super-predator, tough on crime law bill stuff was passed by a bunch of people who are still around.
The popular opinion on gay rights has changed immensely in the last 5 years. In a way, the entire country has flip flopped on it, yet Hillary is vilified for doing the same.
The war in Iraq was bad judgment aided by misleading information from the Bush admin. Tons of Dems flip-flopped on it too.
Minimum wage: she's actually been consistent that she thinks a $12 min federal is a good start, and that states and municipalities can make it higher if they need to. Guess what NY State is doing? Exactly that.
Here's something else that just hit me, especially with all these cultural flip flops... growing up in the 90s, the values and politics and mentality of the 70s seemed so long ago and so antiquated.
I don't know if it's the internet helping us keep better records, or just a natural progression of growing up, but we're almost as far from the 90s as the 90s were from the 70s now. Society has changed just as much and I don't think it's helpful to vilify politicians who have adapted to the times. Particularly when there's an entire party obsessed with not just not adapting to the times, but roll back even further.
As for her principles; I think Bill was pretty clear what her guiding mission is in life: that children are the future and any pragmatic government effort that gives children opportunities, resources and education as early as possible is a worthy pursuit.
I think the Goldwater criticism is weak. She was raised by a very conservative father. Within a few years after leaving home, she had completely abandoned Goldwater philosophy. I was a libertarian when I was 18 too. You learn what the real world is like and you change. If we are all to be held to our political beliefs at 18, I don't think anyone would pass that purity test.
That does not really argue against my claim about her "underlying values" though. I'm not holding that Goldwater support, in isolation, against her but viewing it as part of a pattern. As you said, her background is conservative and perhaps she's in a protracted state of evolution.
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
Her inspiration for getting into law/politics was Margaret Chase Smith, a conservative,the first woman to be placed in nomination. That and her conservative family was a big early influence.
balladofwindfishes
Member
The thought that Obama could be speaking at DNCs for the better part of the next 30 years is just such a nice thing to think about.
No, that is exactly what it does. Those were not good things to be on the side on, but to argue those is to argue that things like racism and fear of hte other and ingrained hatred and faulty thinking are just easy things to overcome. That is not true. If it were the case, we would not be having this conversation because the Republican Party would have died many years ago and we'd be living in a utopia of rationality. We obviously aren't.
I'm willing to go as far as to say it is inhumane to have this expectation of politicians. At the end of the day, politicians are people and thus susceptible through no fault of their own to the prejudices we all inherent. We must punish wrongful thinking, but to punish wrongful thinking and not reward changing it will not result in anything productive.
The point is a reminder in civics and that the legislature matters, especially for many of the points that were originally listed. Crazy, I know.
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
A lot of that last part as impromptu, Bill still has that magic.
Her time as Secretary of State demonstrated well the point you're making. It was a muddled period marked more by its incoherence than its successes. It would perhaps be possible to pin the blame on Obama if not for the fact that Kerry has done so much better. She's a hard worker no doubt, but I'm not convinced she's a good leader. And after 'we came, we saw, he died', I'm not sure she's a good person either.
My dad used to listen to Rush Limbaugh (now Duck Dynasty) and told me all about how liberals want to murder babies and how bad the gays were. I held some pretty abhorent opinions until I was about 16-17 regarding social issues. Where I grew up would be considered a hotbed of Reagan democrats. Mostly white, mostly very poor, very blue collar, very culturally conservative. I mean, my best friend growing up is now a stalwart liberal and until 2006 or so he held the opinion that muslims were the greatest problem in the world and we shouldn't trust them. Then he met muslim people once he got out in the world and did a complete 180. This is what progressives should want. Changing peoples minds with facts and open minds.
Hell, my latent misogyny didn't really clear up until probably just after college. Not to say I was ever an outward sexist, but I definitely had pretty typical male opinions about the value of women in college.
People change, and hopefully they change for the better. We shouldn't hold someones journey on things against them. When you are in the public eye the way she has been for 25 years a lot of that journey has been documented publicly. Holding prior positions against someone is fair, but if their words and actions align with a change of heart than that is what it is.
- Status