Support NeoGAF

[Arrogant Bastard]

This is great

Trump is now doing politics and Hillary is making money

Wut?

Hillary is making money...it is fundraising for progressive causes.

 

[TestOfTide]

Do you think denying them a seat at the democratic table may have lead to this? Politics is about winning votes, that requires action.

Except the DNC took 80% of Bernie's platform last year.

But hey continue proving everyone's point about the far-left being counter productive.

And Jill Stein can fuck off and die after she scammed people out of 9 million dollars for a phony recount.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Probably because she waited this long. Some people think she probably doing this if she writing some book or shit. She should had been fighting since earliest November. Then again she might had other problems I dont know.

They'd be yelling even more if she came out in November.

 

[kamineko]

Sorry for my lack of clarity, I believe that a progressive judiciary and improvements to healthcare for vulnerable Americans is a significant improvement over a shit sandwich, even if that is a bizarrely contentious position ITT and elsewhere.

I'll be more diligent with my /s tags in the future

If it came off as bait, I apologize. That wasn't my intent

 

[tuxfool]

Sorry for my lack of clarity, I believe that a progressive judiciary and improvements to healthcare for vulnerable Americans is a significant improvement over a shit sandwich, even if that is a bizarrely contentious position ITT and elsewhere.

I'll be more diligent with my /s tags in the future

If it came off as bait, I apologize. That wasn't my intent

Eh, it fit nicely with all the other trash in this thread. Don't feel bad.

 

[Adam_Vania]

cool she should have done this last year instead of spending $1.2 billion on Trump-centric fearmongering TV ads.

 

[excelsiorlef]

This is great

Trump is now doing politics and Hillary is making money

?

This isn't a profit venture.... she's raising money and giving money.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

Again, it's not necessarily stupid if you think her getting involved will lead to problems with image and brand.

Everyone yelling about how the other side is stupid is probably part of how we got into this mess to begin with.

What do you mean yelling about 'the other side'? I'm positive I'm talking about those who also occupy the side I lean towards.

 

[DeathoftheEndless]

I voted for Hillary. I wasn't her biggest supporter. I have my critiques of her campaign and her career at large. I consider myself to the left of her. But I'm still surprised at the outright viciousness her doing anything can evoke.

Its not surprising at all. The "far left" are trying to use Clinton's loss as a stepping-stone to take over the party.

 

[Cocaloch]

Bernie Sanders had unprecedented input , for someone who lost the primary, into drafting the Party Platform at the Convention

Alright. People in this thread are also saying everyone to the left of Clinton needs to shut up and fall in line. There needs to be compromise on both sides. That is after all how politics works.

What do you mean yelling about 'the other side'? I'm positive I'm talking about those who also occupy the side I lean towards.

I'm talking about the left-liberal wing of the democratic party vs. the leftist wing.

Please: do tell how this supposedly happened.

Hillary's campaign bent over for Bernie's to get his support and that still wasn't good enough for Stein voters, Bernie or busters and etc.

I disagree that they bent over backwards to do anything. They made some concessions to the leftists and probably got votes that would have gone to stein had they not. Which is to say if they made no concessions I think they would have gotten less votes, at least from their left. This is how a big tent works. The more centrist wing gets the power, but the less centrist interests get influence.

 

[dakilla13]

Jesus look at this thread. The Bernie movement must have been one of the worst things to happen to politics outside of Trump / the alt-right. I seriously regret donating to that divider.

 

[Father_Brain]

Please: do tell how this supposedly happened.

Hillary's campaign bent over for Bernie's to get his support and that still wasn't good enough for Stein voters, Bernie or busters and etc.

Well, then either Hillary didn't concede enough, or didn't do a good enough job of communicating the concessions she made... or it wasn't actually Stein voters' or Bernie-Or-Busters' fault.

You can't have it both ways. Leftists can't simultaneously be powerful enough to defeat Democrats by withholding their votes and an irrelevant fringe that the party should ignore.

Jesus look at this thread. The Bernie movement must have been one of the worst things to happen to politics outside of Trump / the alt-right. I seriously regret donating to that divider.

He's flawed, but he's only a "divider" within narrow online and media/institutional/donor circles. He's overwhelmingly popular with the party rank and file.

 

[Fast Forward]

Yeah. This is weird.

Trump's a fucking mess, this woman would've been a lot better.

Again, virtually virtually nobody is debating that Trump is worse, save for Trump supporters.

Hell, I voted for Hillary myself, and I would even vote for her again today over Trump, because I was afraid of what a Trump presidency could mean.

But... Hillary did not win. She did not win for a reason. And not just because of Russia, either.

Reason many of us are mad, like myself, because Trump IS worse. Much worse. And even worse, many on the left, including Hillary, are learning all the wrong lessons from this election.

 

[2Smashed4U]

Alright. People in this thread are also saying everyone to the left of Clinton needs to shut up and fall in line. There needs to be compromise on both sides. That is after all how politics works.

I myself am to the left of Clinton. I was all in for Bernie, donated heavily towards him etc.

But that doesn't mean Hillary is a problem to me either.

 

[Arrogant Bastard]

Alright. People in this thread are also saying everyone to the left of Clinton needs to shut up and fall in line. There needs to be compromise on both sides. That is after all how politics works.

Where do you see that as a general commentary on this thread. I'm serious.

They are saying they really don't get the massive raging hate boner for her and that if we really want to resist Trump it is going to cost a massive amount of money and organization. She is damned great at raising money, let her do that, especially since this isn't going to be top/down and will go to grassroots progressive activities.

 

[TestOfTide]

Well, then either Hillary didn't concede enough, or didn't do a good enough job of communicating the concessions she made... or it wasn't actually Stein voters' or Bernie-Or-Busters' fault.

You can't have it both ways. Leftists can't simultaneously be powerful enough to defeat Democrats by withholding their votes and an irrelevant fringe that the party should ignore.

OR maybe the far left was too goddamn focused on looking for every reason to hate Hillary rather than actually working with their closest allies.

Alright. People in this thread are also saying everyone to the left of Clinton needs to shut up and fall in line. There needs to be compromise on both sides. That is after all how politics works.



I'm talking about the left-liberal wing of the democratic party vs. the leftist wing.

Are you KIDDING me? The democrats have made NUMEROUS concessions to Bernie both before and after the election.

And again. ALL THAT HILLARY PLANS TO DO IS RAISE FUNDS BEHIND THE SCENES. How can you not want Hillary doing what she does best? Do you NOT want a 50 state strategy that is properly funded?

 

[GoldenEye 007]

Well, then either Hillary didn't concede enough, or didn't do a good enough job of communicating the concessions she made... or it wasn't actually Stein voters' or Bernie-Or-Busters' fault.

You can't have it both ways. Leftists can't simultaneously be powerful enough to defeat Democrats by withholding their votes and an irrelevant fringe that the party should ignore.

Well I'm glad some of those people are so privileged to continually ask for unicorn Democratic candidates and sit at home as the GOP runs wild.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Alright. People in this thread are also saying everyone to the left of Clinton needs to shut up and fall in line. There needs to be compromise on both sides. That is after all how politics works.



I'm talking about the left-liberal wing of the democratic party vs. the leftist wing.

If you tell her to fuck off

And we say yeah that's dumb...


That's not demanding fealty that's just saying you're being an idiot on this subject matter. If your instinct is to rage at this story you should probably check yourself.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

I'm talking about the left-liberal wing of the democratic party vs. the leftist wing.

I don't give a flying f' if they're left-liberal or democratic party or leftist wing. Hell, I don't even have a clue where I reside in those. That doesn't change how asinine they're being as an individual.

 

[Necrovex]

Happy to see Hillary joining the resistance movement. I was afraid she would disappear completely from the scene. She's exceptionally skilled at fundraising, so I'm happy to read her skills will be well-utilized for the the local races.

 

[tuxfool]

Again, virtually virtually nobody is debating that Trump is worse, save for Trump supporters.

Hell, I voted for Hillary myself, and I would even vote for her again today over Trump, because I was afraid of what a Trump presidency could mean.

But... Hillary did not win. She did not win for a reason. And not just because of Russia, either.

Reason many of us are mad, like myself, because Trump IS worse. Much worse. And even worse, many on the left, including Hillary, are learning all the wrong lessons from this election.

And yet, all you're whining about here is in the past.

What bearing does this have at all with raising money for others to use?

What bad lessons are being learnt?

 

[Cymbal Head]

I'm fine with her being involved, as long as she has no say in how campaigns are conducted. I think she has conclusively proven that she has no skill as a retail politician.

 

[MIMIC]

It's extremely idiotic to not want someone who is demonstrably good at raising money involved in opposing Trump. Like... really really really stupid.

Please stop with this money narrative. Hillary outspent Trump a zillion to one and lost. Money is clearly not the issue. Her name is. She can raise all the money she wants, but if she's going to do so by also plastering herself all over the TV, she's going to do more harm than good.

She wants to help? The background is right there.

 

[M0nochromatic]

Why would the BLM endorse someone who didn't have their back?

We seem to be talking about two different things. The thread title and the contents of the original post claim that Hillary Clinton wants to support "the resistance" and grassroots movements. My post was about me being skeptical that she would get be getting behind anything actually controversial, and would simply fund raise for the democrats seeking office. Which I said was fine, if a bit boring.

You then posted a link about Black Lives Matter activists endorsing her during the 2016 presidential election (which ended a couple of months ago, by the way), and it didn't really have anything to do with what I posted.

So could you restate what your problem is?

 

[Gestahl]

Actually winning elections and passing legislation in the existing political climate is corporatist shill corruption.

Nah, neoliberal centrists are actually really bad at winning elections or passing meaningful legislation that isn't immediately overturned by Republican administrations.

 

[Calm Mind]

Bernie Sanders is a helluva drug.

 

[Arrogant Bastard]

If you tell her to fuck off

And we say yeah that's dumb...


That's not demanding fealty that's just saying you're being an idiot on this subject matter. If your instinct is to rage at this story you should probably check yourself.

Bingo.

 

[Cocaloch]

I myself am to the left of Clinton. I was all in for Bernie, donated heavily towards him etc.

But that doesn't mean Hillary is a problem to me either.

She's not a problem to me either.

 

[EatinOlives]

Again, virtually virtually nobody is debating that Trump is worse, save for Trump supporters.

Hell, I voted for Hillary myself, and I would even vote for her again today over Trump, because I was afraid of what a Trump presidency could mean.

But... Hillary did not win. She did not win for a reason. And not just because of Russia, either.

Reason many of us are mad, like myself, because Trump IS worse. Much worse. And even worse, many on the left, including Hillary, are learning all the wrong lessons from this election.

Please tell me how pledging to raise money without looking for the spotlight is "learning all the wrong lessons". What "lesson" is she supposed to be learning, if not that?

We seem to be talking about two different things. The thread title and the contents of the original post claim that Hillary Clinton wants to support "the resistance" and grassroots movements. My post was about me being skeptical that she would get be getting behind anything actually controversial, and would simply fund raise for the democrats seeking office. Which I said was fine, if a bit boring.

You then posted a link about Black Lives Matter activists endorsing her during the 2016 presidential election (which ended a couple of months ago, by the way), and it didn't really have anything to do with what I posted.

So could you restate what your problem is?

How about you answer my question first, why would the Black Lives Matter movement endorse a candidate if they didn't genuinely think she had their back? They didn't have to endorse anyone.

 

[boiled goose]

Focusing on grassroots is good. She is still popular in some circles (not nationwide).

I'm a big critic of Hillary, but rallying the people and not going to donor fundraisers or lining her pockets is how she should be using her profile.

As for being the face of dnc? Well... that would be a mistake. She's less popular than Trump at the moment.

Unity is important. Unite behind most popular politicians.

 

[2Smashed4U]

Well, then either Hillary didn't concede enough, or didn't do a good enough job of communicating the concessions she made... or it wasn't actually Stein voters' or Bernie-Or-Busters' fault.

You can't have it both ways. Leftists can't simultaneously be powerful enough to defeat Democrats by withholding their votes and an irrelevant fringe that the party should ignore.

They weren't ignored! She went on and on about the things she adopted from Bernies playbook and how she wanted to bring everyone together! But instead, the far leftists went "PFFFT YEAH RIGHT YOURE FULL OF SHIT" and doubled down on the hate.

She could have promised immediate free universal healthcare, college educations, the whole nine yards and it *still* wouldn't have been good enough for some people.

 

[Black_Sun]

Oh there absolutely is. It's called Jill stein fans and Bernie-or-Bust.

It's the people who claim to be progressive but then go and attack "identity politics" in the same fashion as the alt-right.

It's the people who claim to be progressive then actively discourage progressives from voting for Jon Ossof.



So 2.4 million NATIONALLY in about 3-4 months? That's next to nothing.

Bernie or Busters aren't far left. They're just stubborn voters.

The far left are socialists, commies and anarchists. Those guys aren't a large presence in the country which sucks because we could use a bit more socialist policies to temper America's rampant capitalism.

 

[Cocaloch]

Where do you see that as a general commentary on this thread. I'm serious.

They are saying they really don't get the massive raging hate boner for her and that if we really want to resist Trump it is going to cost a massive amount of money and organization. She is damned great at raising money, let her do that, especially since this isn't going to be top/down and will go to grassroots progressive activities.

I'm saying what you think doesn't matter, and what you demand in politics is never going to happen in America, so I don't give a fuck.

If you're going to shoot my foot off over purity test bullshit, you are as much my enemy as the people on the right are.

.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

Please stop with this money narrative. Hillary outspent Trump a zillion to one and lost. Money is clearly not the issue. Her name is. She can raise all the money she wants, but if she's going to do so by also plastering herself all over the TV, she's going to do more harm than good.

She wants to help? The background is right there.

So I guess Bernie bragging about all that money they managed to raise had no meaning?

 

[tuxfool]

Focusing on grassroots is good. She is still popular in some circles (not nationwide).

I'm a big critic of Hillary, but rallying the people and not going to donor fundraisers or lining her pockets is how she should be using her profile.

As for being the face of dnc? Well... that would be a mistake. She's less popular than Trump at the moment.

Unity is important. Unite behind most popular politicians.

Good thing she doesn't inspire nonsense hot takes from privileged dumbasses, for merely doing what you suggested.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Focusing on grassroots is good. She is still popular in some circles (not nationwide).

I'm a big critic of Hillary, but rallying the people and not going to donor fundraisers or lining her pockets is how she should be using her profile.

As for being the face of dnc? Well... that would be a mistake. She's less popular than Trump at the moment.

Unity is important. Unite behind most popular politicians.

Why even bring this up, that's not happening...

 

[2Smashed4U]

Nah, neoliberal centrists are actually really bad at winning elections or passing meaningful legislation that isn't immediately overturned by Republican administrations.

"Neoliberal centrist"

Drink.

 

[213372bu]

No, I saw it. The very fact you even made such a connection is what I'm shaking my head at, as if everything she does it possibly a secret power ploy.

All I'm saying is the last thing that needs to happen is a genuine push for Chelsea in 2020. The Clintons have lots of political influential and Chelsea's increased presence as of late has been concerning a lot of people who want a genuine shot at Trump out.

The idea that there is shock and surprise that the daughter of an influential political family has a possibility to run for president, especially one who has been gaining more spotlight through increased media/social media presence is kinda dumb.

All I'm saying is I hope that her efforts to fund the DNC, lead the #resistance etc. will not be done in an effort to give Chelsea a shot in 2020. Because if that is the case, not "will probably be the case", then Trump has a better shot at a second term if running against her.

 

[boiled goose]

They weren't ignored! She went on and on about the things she adopted from Bernies playbook and how she wanted to bring everyone together! But instead, the far leftists went "PFFFT YEAH RIGHT YOURE FULL OF SHIT" and doubled down on the hate.

She could have promised immediate free universal healthcare, college educations, the whole nine yards and it *still* wouldn't have been good enough for some people.

Bernie primary voters voted for Hillary higher than Hillary voters did for Obama.

The narrative you are painting is fictional.

 

[Arrogant Bastard]

.

General commentary, why don't you just send that one poster a PM.

 

[HStallion]

He's flawed, but he's only a "divider" within narrow online and media/institutional/donor circles. He's overwhelmingly popular with the party rank and file.

Well the white ones at least. A lot of minority Democrats aren't exactly huge fans of him lately.

 

[TestOfTide]

Please stop with this money narrative. Hillary outspent Trump a zillion to one and lost. Money is clearly not the issue. Her name is. She can raise all the money she wants, but if she's going to do so by also plastering herself all over the TV, she's going to do more harm than good.

She wants to help? The background is right there.

Money is absolutely the issue here. National campaigns can get away with less funding, but local and state level campaigns NEED THAT MONEY.

Do you want a well funded 50 state strategy or not?

 

[Sirpopopop]

He's flawed, but he's only a "divider" within narrow online and media/institutional/donor circles. He's overwhelmingly popular with the party rank and file.

He only lost because of DEMOCRATIC RIGGING OF THE DNC!

AM I RIGHT?

Because if he was overwhelmingly popular with the party rank and file he would have fucking won the primary.

 

[JZA]

I would appreciate this more if she provided more support behind the scenes, and then we found out posthumously. This approach seems self-serving.

 

[excelsiorlef]

All I'm saying is the last thing that needs to happen is a genuine push for Chelsea in 2020. The Clintons have lots of political influential and Chelsea's increased presence as of late has been concerning a lot of people who want a genuine shot at Trump out.

The idea that there is shock and surprise that the daughter of an influential political family has a possibility to run for president, especially one who has been gaining more spotlight through increased media/social media presence is kinda dumb.

All I'm saying is I hope that her efforts to fund the DNC, lead the #resistance etc. will not be done in an effort to give Chelsea a shot in 2020. Because if that is the case, not "will probably be the case", then Trump has a better shot at a second term if running against her.

There is zero indication of any of this... There is zero reason to believe it is happening.

 

[Cocaloch]

Are you KIDDING me? The democrats have made NUMEROUS concessions to Bernie both before and after the election.

And again. ALL THAT HILLARY PLANS TO DO IS RAISE FUNDS BEHIND THE SCENES. How can you not want Hillary doing what she does best? Do you NOT want a 50 state strategy that is properly funded?

Have you read my other posts in this thread. I'm explaining what other people think. I'm not against Hilary here, but I'm also not going to act like everyone that disagrees with me is an idiot.

General commentary, why don't you just send that one poster a PM.

Because this is a more general attitude that I'm interested in addressing.

 

[EatinOlives]

She wants to help? The background is right there.

That's exactly what she's doing. Why are you complaining?

 

[Psychoward]

I'm fine with her being involved, as long as she has no say in how campaigns are conducted. I think she has conclusively proven that she has no skill as a retail politician.

Politicians don't usually control that anyway, that's done by managers who ya know, have that as their job.

 

[old manatee]

People need to chill the fuck out about Clinton at this point. As far as I can tell she's just writing​ a book and doing some fundraising and apparently even that's too much.

 

[iammeiam]

Please stop with this money narrative. Hillary outspent Trump a zillion to one and lost. Money is clearly not the issue. Her name is. She can raise all the money she wants, but if she's going to do so by also plastering herself all over the TV, she's going to do more harm than good.

She wants to help? The background is right there.

Clinton isn't in this story at all. her guy didn't comment. We're in a thread where Howard Dean gave an interview and talked about her involvement; unless she mind-controlled him into doing it, she can't be any more background in this instance. Whether or not she should be allowed to talk to the press ever again for committing the cardinal sin of losing to Trump doesn't really play in to some of the reactions here, since there's no way she could have been less at the forefront of this particular discussion.

It escalates things because the topic at hand is, as best as I can tell, completely irrelevant to the knee-jerk backlash any time her name pops up. It's hard to credit people with reasonable nuanced opinions when they're losing their minds over her essentially still existing.