From the New Yorker:
More at the link for anyone interested in the context and backstory.
New Yorker said:
More at the link for anyone interested in the context and backstory.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Hillary Clinton Thanks Ronald Reagan for AIDS Actions
- Thread starter ApharmdX
- Start date
- Status
And_Gignac
Member
YAAAAAS QUEEEEEEN!
Opportunistic and self-serving, as usual. She really has no values other than
pragmatism!!!
Opportunistic and self-serving, as usual. She really has no values other than
"whatever pleases the audience".
Dangansona
Member
Ah, back to the "if you don't like Hillary you must be sexist" well.
timetokill
Banned
Yes you are. You said people's concerns were a whole bunch of FUD and part of the GOP playbook.
You can't get much more dismissive than that.
And that kind of dismissal is something I see a lot from Hillary supporters, and it betrays a total taking for granted of LGBT voters. You might as well laugh in their face and say, "well who else ya gonna vote for?" while telling them to get back in line.
damn, this is cissplaining in its purest form. Christ.
That might as well be Hillary's slogan at this point. :/
The suggestion that she's anything but liberal is fucking ridiculous. She pulled Obama to the left on several issues during the 2008 primary. Bernie drawing a circle around himself and redefining Liberal, Progressive and Establishment based on who does or does not intersect with his own ideological boundaries has to be one of the most annoying things about this election.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Hillary is also taking the union voters for granted and they are peeling away so bad it looks like the paint on an old dinghy which is rusting away on an abandoned pier.
The Democrats have taken a lot of voting blocs for granted for a long time now, and just as the Republicans are finding that nobody is interested in the latest establishment crony like Jeb and Roboto, there are a lot of progressives out there who are wondering (correctly) what the Democrats have done for them lately. In the case of the unions, left them all for dead the past 3 decades. No wonder they aren't happy.
Clinton liberal is still right of centre. Last real lefty pres is carter.
Pedantic i know.
Jack Remington
Banned
Our center sucks in the US. That's basically the reason for a lot of this disconnect.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Why are people surprised at this? Nancy Reagan just died, politician is asked about her and tries to capitalize on it, grasping at whatever they can.
KuwabaraTheMan
Banned
I wouldn't even consider Carter a real lefty, but he was the last President who wasn't completely right wing.
timetokill
Banned
Because it shows a shocking misunderstanding of an entire presidency, and betrays a lack of concern or understanding of the issues facing LGBT voters and people with AIDS. And this from the presumptive Democratic nominee.
Aizo
Banned
GoldenEye 007
Member
Hillary is a goddamn idiot. The hell was she thinking. Does she want to lose this?
Yeah, if carter got a second term he would of built on LBJ's legacy, even nixon wanted universal income. Reagan destroyed the real left as an electoral force same with Thatcher.
Hence Blair and Clinton being huge neo liberals but with a smile instead of a grimace.
We need a FDR and a Clement Atlee to reset the centre ground otherwise we're just messing around the fringes of right wing bs.
In addition to that...
From an ideological standpoint, that's a little disingenuous. American politics are so centrist that more radical candidates on the left or even the right rarely get the opportunity to vote in full accordance to their views.
KuwabaraTheMan
Banned
Yeah, this is why the whole "Clinton and Sanders voted together 93% of the time" line is so worthless.
Most of the issues where they would differ on are the sorts of things that are never even going to receive a vote in the Senate.
Leithkorias
Member
Took the words out of my mouth. How this can be chalked up to misspeaking, and be an accepted excuse to anybody, is hard to understand.
Psychoward
Banned
The most puzzling thing about this is that not only was she not forced to compliment Reagan, but even if someone had a gun to her head I'm sure she could think of things he didn't objectively fuck up.
Mighty Chin
Banned
Regardless of this little faux pas I'd rather have someone make a mistake and apologize for it than having people get beat up at a rally and have the Candidate encourage it.
Little Green Yoda
Member
She's thinking she has the nomination in the bag and is gunning for GE votes? She's too smart and experienced as a politician to misspeak like this.
Psychoward
Banned
No shit. Very few people are arguing she's worse than Trump here.
To me, it sounds like she honestly misspoke (because the idea that she would intentionally say this and hit some of her own voting base is insane), but it is also kind of a big deal that she was ignorant enough to misspeak about something like this.
I hope she takes this opportunity to learn from her ignorance about a fairly important subject.
For what it matters, I say this as a bisexual Canadian man.
I hope she takes this opportunity to learn from her ignorance about a fairly important subject.
For what it matters, I say this as a bisexual Canadian man.
This is the link I was speaking of earlier but couldn't post due to being on mobile. This is in regards to Hillary's inability to even acknowledge trans existence til late last year.
As far as this whole "remember who the enemy" thing that was brought up earlier I just wanted to echo and add on some thoughts. It really feels whenever I see a Hillary supporter make such arguments that they care less about the minority they are talking to or how they feel and rather that they, as another poster put it, want me to fall in line. To vote for their "Queen". It feels as though Hillary supporters have been exploiting the two-party system and how it harms minorities and those who support minorities, like Bernie, to their advantage. I don't like to say such things but it feels like they just want the Democratic party to break apart if you don't support their specific candidate first and foremost. Especially given how increasingly vitriolic they've been to anyone, particularly any minority, who supports Bernie.
I don't think a statement such as the one Hillary made should be easily brushed off but at this point, if she ends up with the nom., we unfortunately have to settle for her over whatever else is offered. Too much, particularly the SC, is at stake. That others would use this fact to try to guilt me into voting when I already said I'd vote for whoever the Democrat nom. is just continues to make me not like Hillary supporters all that much. Basically, I'm generally okay with settling for Hillary (as much as I don't trust her on the issues, particularly trans ones and her foreign policy and her economic standings and feel she's only going to settle for the status quo at best, she's better than any Republican... : / ), less so with how I've and others have been treated by those who support her. Her supporters who lack all kinds of basic civility or willingness to listen are the ones I am particularly upset with here, regardless of my views on Hillary. I feel like I am being told "wait your turn" (and that's the best case scenario, in other cases it feels/is sometimes outright stated that I need to shut up about my views on the issues) for being able to express my voice. Which is doubly frustrating since the LGBT movement itself, started by transwomen of color who fought for all within the spectrum, was co-opted and trans voices were actively silenced.
As far as this whole "remember who the enemy" thing that was brought up earlier I just wanted to echo and add on some thoughts. It really feels whenever I see a Hillary supporter make such arguments that they care less about the minority they are talking to or how they feel and rather that they, as another poster put it, want me to fall in line. To vote for their "Queen". It feels as though Hillary supporters have been exploiting the two-party system and how it harms minorities and those who support minorities, like Bernie, to their advantage. I don't like to say such things but it feels like they just want the Democratic party to break apart if you don't support their specific candidate first and foremost. Especially given how increasingly vitriolic they've been to anyone, particularly any minority, who supports Bernie.
I don't think a statement such as the one Hillary made should be easily brushed off but at this point, if she ends up with the nom., we unfortunately have to settle for her over whatever else is offered. Too much, particularly the SC, is at stake. That others would use this fact to try to guilt me into voting when I already said I'd vote for whoever the Democrat nom. is just continues to make me not like Hillary supporters all that much. Basically, I'm generally okay with settling for Hillary (as much as I don't trust her on the issues, particularly trans ones and her foreign policy and her economic standings and feel she's only going to settle for the status quo at best, she's better than any Republican... : / ), less so with how I've and others have been treated by those who support her. Her supporters who lack all kinds of basic civility or willingness to listen are the ones I am particularly upset with here, regardless of my views on Hillary. I feel like I am being told "wait your turn" (and that's the best case scenario, in other cases it feels/is sometimes outright stated that I need to shut up about my views on the issues) for being able to express my voice. Which is doubly frustrating since the LGBT movement itself, started by transwomen of color who fought for all within the spectrum, was co-opted and trans voices were actively silenced.
GoldenEye 007
Member
2008 should have told her nothing is done until it's done. If she hasn't learned from that, she doesn't ever deserve to be the democratic nominee.
soul creator
Member
I think one other interesting angle on this is that you can easily argue that it speaks to Hillary's tendency to think of things from the "insider"
perspective, and not from an activist/everyday person perspective. If you think about it, her whole selling point for why one should vote for her is that she knows the system, and that's why she can make the needed changes. She rarely seems to talk about activists and the role of organizing, beyond the very basic "everyone please vote for me, and I'll take care of things once I'm elected"
It's somewhat reminiscent of her remarks about LBJ vs. MLK back in 2008 vs. Obama, where she effectively said "MLK's inspiration was great, but it took LBJ to actually pass a civil rights law and get things done". From that perspective, her comments on Reagan today start to make some degree of sense (note: I don't agree with her comments at all, I'm just psychoanalyzing Hillary right now, lol)
So the Reagan administration talking about AIDS was, in her mind, "very effective, low-key" and "started a national conversation". Because he was the first president to talk about it. But the activists and actual people outside of DC who were working tirelessly to raise awareness are afterthoughts, relatively speaking. It seems to fit perfectly with her general view of how political change is made. For her, it seems that a president speaking out on something and maybe throwing out some funding >>>> activists on the ground dealing with something that was literally life and death.
establishment!
It's somewhat reminiscent of her remarks about LBJ vs. MLK back in 2008 vs. Obama, where she effectively said "MLK's inspiration was great, but it took LBJ to actually pass a civil rights law and get things done". From that perspective, her comments on Reagan today start to make some degree of sense (note: I don't agree with her comments at all, I'm just psychoanalyzing Hillary right now, lol)
So the Reagan administration talking about AIDS was, in her mind, "very effective, low-key" and "started a national conversation". Because he was the first president to talk about it. But the activists and actual people outside of DC who were working tirelessly to raise awareness are afterthoughts, relatively speaking. It seems to fit perfectly with her general view of how political change is made. For her, it seems that a president speaking out on something and maybe throwing out some funding >>>> activists on the ground dealing with something that was literally life and death.
Lmao. Misspoke? No, that was a long, deliberate statement that was in direct opposition of reality. Fuck blaming it on a staffer. The only way she could've thought that wasn't an absurd thing to say would be if she slept through the 80's.
I wonder what sort of glowing praise Obama will have for GWB if George dies first?
I wonder what sort of glowing praise Obama will have for GWB if George dies first?
BreezyLimbo
Banned
"He kept us safe"
After that first attack, he didn't let any others go through.
GWB's work in Africa was pretty great, wasn't it?
She just wants to sweep it under the rug and not take responsibility for her ridiculous statements. At least that's how blaming a staffer reads to me. Still at this point we have to settle with her if she gets the nom.. : /
Frozenprince
Banned
As a gay man that's up there in terms of "top ten most offensive things I'v heard"
Because it was just a bunch of deviant faggots.
Nobody cared how many gay people died, it's only when the epidemic finally started to spread out of the gay community and into the general public that the administration got off their asses to finally do anything. They spread stigma of the disease, they didn't tamp it off at the head, they didn't advocate enough, they treated it as a joke and thousands of people died or lived long, painful lives.
As fucked up as it is, it was the 80's, nobody gave a shit when it was just killing gay people en masse. I mean hell even today it's treated as fucking nothing because of advances in HIV treatment when it still kills over a million people a year. 40 MILLION people are HIV positive globally, 40 million, the infection rate has stabilized at 0.8% of the global population. This isn't some insignificant thing to be forgotten, it's still a real, very large problem that people have just managed to forget because people live longer with it now because of advances in treatments.
The GOP has gotten better since the Reagan days, hard as that is to believe, they're no longer as beholden to the evangelical vote to sustain themselves. But they're still sick fucking people, because it's mostly the same people.
Edit: "This is no big deal" The fuck it isn't. HIV/AIDS is fucking terrifying, by giving credence, even by fucking mistake, to the people that allowed it to become the epidemic it did, is disgusting and shameful and she should be ashamed of herself.
Because it was just a bunch of deviant faggots.
Nobody cared how many gay people died, it's only when the epidemic finally started to spread out of the gay community and into the general public that the administration got off their asses to finally do anything. They spread stigma of the disease, they didn't tamp it off at the head, they didn't advocate enough, they treated it as a joke and thousands of people died or lived long, painful lives.
As fucked up as it is, it was the 80's, nobody gave a shit when it was just killing gay people en masse. I mean hell even today it's treated as fucking nothing because of advances in HIV treatment when it still kills over a million people a year. 40 MILLION people are HIV positive globally, 40 million, the infection rate has stabilized at 0.8% of the global population. This isn't some insignificant thing to be forgotten, it's still a real, very large problem that people have just managed to forget because people live longer with it now because of advances in treatments.
The GOP has gotten better since the Reagan days, hard as that is to believe, they're no longer as beholden to the evangelical vote to sustain themselves. But they're still sick fucking people, because it's mostly the same people.
Edit: "This is no big deal" The fuck it isn't. HIV/AIDS is fucking terrifying, by giving credence, even by fucking mistake, to the people that allowed it to become the epidemic it did, is disgusting and shameful and she should be ashamed of herself.
Wow, that's a great point.
I agree with much of what you have stated here but I wanted to add that it wasn't just gay cis-men affected. Trans-lives were affected by the AIDS epidemic too. But that suffering was silenced during the whole thing. Trans-women and transwomen of color in particular are quite affected by HIV even recently.
Frozenprince
Banned
I was speaking from it from a POV that I identify with mostly, but you're also right, the Trans community was also hit particularly hard, most suffering was silenced, I'm not trying to say "one was hit worse than the other". Our entire community was being killed and the government watched it happen and laughed at us.
And because people who got blood transfusions finally started getting infected, along with women and heterosexual men, things finally moved the littlest tinest bit in terms of general awareness and treatment. But lets not act that until that happened, the maligned and abused minority wasn't completely and totally ignored while they died.
ZombiePlatypus
Member
What a fucking mockery.
Frozenprince
Banned
Not accusing you of that either, this issue in particular really just pisses me off to no end, because it's an issue I'v dealt with and will have to deal with for the rest of my life. Even today, in 20-fucking-16, the main thing people conflagrate with homosexuality, is promiscuity, drug abuse, and AIDS.
OrangeGrayBlue
Member
She's projecting accomplishments onto past presidents that she hopes are one day projected onto her.
airmangataosenai
Member
This campaign is making this forum difficult to read at times, next week ending the race can't come soon enough.
Bel Marduk
Banned
If only there were an alternative to Hillary Clinton
She hasn't won the Democratic primary yet
She hasn't won the Democratic primary yet
timetokill
Banned
Difficult to read? What do you mean?
The forum is predominantly Hillary and Bernie supporters. The rhetoric is ratcheted so high that both candidates' supporters are looking for that gotcha article that proves that the other candidate is the worst. This election is the first time that I'm really going into a primary fairly objectively. I'm for Sanders, but I'll be perfectly happy with Hillary too. So I really get a good look at the constant attempts at oneupmanship that's going on. It's already gotten pretty ugly. I'll be happy when primary season is over and we can settle down and support the candidate in the general.
co-sign
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked