|
call to action posted:Can we just cut out all the bullshit and say what we want to say, which is that "if you're against military adventurism or economics that favor the investor class, you're a sexist and probably a racist" You have to be white too.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 20:06 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 04:34 |
|
She is kind of the epitome of neoliberal ideology. I don't like her as the whole coronation thing but TBH, that's more of a lovely DNC thing. Democrats who vehemently defending the DNC just makes me more annoyed about it because there is no discussion. I don't blame her but her tone deaf appointing that former DNC head to her campaign was just retarded. Also, she keeps linking herself to her husband who was more conservative than the Reagan in some ways. We can pick apart her husband's policy's pretty easily looking back. Since he likes to say she was just as responsible. "You get 2 Clintons instead of 1" was something he said about being elected. The Crime bill, the welfare cutting, the proxy wars, glass steagall repeal, I'm sure there is more. The older I get, the more I realize that Bill Clinton kinda sucked as president and hosed the middle and lower classes. She doesn't seem to care about the patriot act and the whole kill people with drones who are Americans because "WE AT WAR!" "Not Trump" is not going to work because I've been around long enough to see this used at every election. Please explain why she is going to be better than what candidate Obama promised.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 20:50 |
|
sean10mm posted:The former will be debatable simply because she's a politician, but she's been actively working on left-of-center causes since like 1968 or some poo poo. Her actual behavior for the most part shows that she cares more about these issues than just about any motherfucker alive. Sorry, I phrased that poorly. I'm sure that she cares in a general sense about "making things better for Americans." What I meant is that her recent shift towards more leftist policy* is likely more due to broader electoral support than her actually having a personal passion to, for example, increase the minimum wage to $15/hr. It's basically the same reason you'd assume that someone who has always advocated for more leftist policy is likely to be more personally invested in those goals than someone who only recently shifted towards those views. There is definitely nothing wrong with the latter - in fact, it's a good thing. But at the end of the day the former is still preferable, if only because you can more comfortably believe that person will continue to hold views you agree with in the future. *I'm mostly using Bill Clinton's presidency as a starting point here, since it's kind of irrelevant if she were more left-leaning before that and then shifted towards more third-way/centrist views during her husband's presidency.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 21:32 |
|
Ytlaya posted:*I'm mostly using Bill Clinton's presidency as a starting point here, since it's kind of irrelevant if she were more left-leaning before that and then shifted towards more third-way/centrist views during her husband's presidency. I mean even leaving the whole "Let's judge a woman by the actions of her husband" aside, Hillary's stated goals were far to the left of Bill's administration. The whole Hillarycare debacle is proof of that.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 21:36 |
|
call to action posted:Can we just cut out all the bullshit and say what we want to say, which is that "if you're against military adventurism or economics that favor the investor class, you're a sexist and probably a racist" Lol
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 21:51 |
|
computer parts posted:I mean even leaving the whole "Let's judge a woman by the actions of her husband" aside, Hillary's stated goals were far to the left of Bill's administration. The whole Hillarycare debacle is proof of that. Also her voting record being something crazy like 93% the same as Sanders.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:00 |
|
I think anti-establishment is a big part of it. When you're in the public eye for that long, you're like moldy cheese. People have this idea that our government needs to change 100%, when in reality, it would be better for everyone if a revolution didn't happen, and rather that a brilliant policy-expert made key bi-partisan policy adjustments. It's deeply unsexy. Hilary's brand also sucks. People doubting the film studies argument a few pages back are doubting the importance of mythological figures in our collective subconscious. I.E.-- her brand, the role she plays in our grand royal drama. We are definitely not rational beings. Most people don't hate Hilary for her policy-- they don't even know what her policy is, the waters have been so muddied. Even Trump's brand is on paper better than Hilary's-- a toughlove businessman patriarch with a gung-ho heart. Of course, he's basically my senile, depraved, horny grandfather that I can endure being around for exactly one hour. But Hilary's brand is that things are pretty good and we should stay the course. At best, a good bureaucrat. Even if that's what we definitely need for this bloated empire, there are no boners for the ole H-Dawg.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:07 |
|
call to action posted:Can we just cut out all the bullshit and say what we want to say, which is that "if you're against military adventurism or economics that favor the investor class, you're a sexist and probably a racist" call to action knows whats up
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:13 |
|
Well there's literally no legitimate criticism of her, so if you don't agree with her, you're a sexist, right? I'm trying to understand here. Either that or you're brainwashed by the media that, apparently, only targets and has only targeted one politician since her birth.
call to action fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Oct 3, 2016 |
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:16 |
|
Darko posted:How old were you in the 90s? There was a ridiculous amount of paranoia about youths/gangs/etc. then before we had the time to observe and realize that generation grew up better than the one before it. Nobody likes what she said, but it was an understandable mistake at that place in time for someone who tries to be so populist. You give someone a bit of a benefit of the doubt once they show that they recognize their mistakes/issues instead of constantly focusing on stuff from 20 years ago. No it was racist. It's not an understandable "mistake", it was her actual thoughts. That the nice innocent whites have to be protected, you know, from those people. This makes her sudden pandering to black issues extremely suspect.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:19 |
|
HorseLord posted:No it was racist. It's not an understandable "mistake", it was her actual thoughts. That the nice innocent whites have to be protected, you know, from those people. This makes her sudden pandering to black issues extremely suspect. I would think if anyone would be "Suddenly Pandering" it'd be Bernie Sanders, who signed the exact same crime bill and notably didn't care about anyone outside of Vermont* until a year ago. *especially regarding nuclear waste dumps in Texas
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:21 |
|
call to action posted:Well there's literally no legitimate criticism of her, so if you don't agree with her, you're a sexist, right? I'm trying to understand here. Either that or you're brainwashed by the media that, apparently, only targets and has only targeted one politician since her birth. I'm a lot more comfortable with "it's her or Trump, so I'm voting for her" than I am with "Hillary is literally perfect in every way", especially when it comes out of the mouth of people who would (did) vehemently oppose aspects of her political career like voting for the Iraq war, or the shaming of Bill's victims.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:22 |
|
call to action posted:Well there's literally no legitimate criticism of her, so if you don't agree with her, you're a sexist, right? I'm trying to understand here. Either that or you're brainwashed by the media that, apparently, only targets and has only targeted one politician since her birth. No, just since your birth.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:24 |
|
computer parts posted:I would think if anyone would be "Suddenly Pandering" it'd be Bernie Sanders, who signed the exact same crime bill and notably didn't care about anyone outside of Vermont* until a year ago. Nice whattaboutism. I don't like Bernie Sanders so I dunno why you'd bring him up to deflect criticism of noted war criminal and racist fake meme liker Hillary Clinton.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:31 |
|
HorseLord posted:Nice whattaboutism. I don't like Bernie Sanders so I dunno why you'd bring him up to deflect criticism of noted war criminal and racist fake meme liker Hillary Clinton. bernie sanders is also a racist. he is more racist than hillary clinton. pretty much anyone older than 30 is racist
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:35 |
|
sean10mm posted:Also her voting record being something crazy like 93% the same as Sanders. Voting record is only a fraction of the story. A great deal of political capital is spent(or deliberately not spent) on agendas that never make it to the floor. This includes things they speak on, fund drive for, or do back room deals in pursuit of. D.Ork Bimboolean fucked around with this message at 22:51 on Oct 3, 2016 |
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:36 |
|
boner confessor posted:bernie sanders is also a racist. he is more racist than hillary clinton. pretty much anyone older than 30 is racist Okay. But this is the Hillary Clinton thread, about Hillary Clinton, and why people don't like her. If you'd like to look in Bernie Sanders threads you'll find I've shat on him in those already
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:36 |
|
HorseLord posted:Okay. But this is the Hillary Clinton thread, about Hillary Clinton, and why people don't like her. yeah, and one reason people don't like her is because of thirty years of poorly sourced smears that are easy mantras for the gullible, like pointing out she said superpredator one time like pretty much all politicians did in the 1990's crime wave
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:37 |
|
this is basically the same as getting upset she won't say 'radical islamic terrorism'
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:39 |
|
boner confessor posted:yeah, and one reason people don't like her is because of thirty years of poorly sourced smears that are easy mantras for the gullible, like pointing out she said superpredator one time like pretty much all politicians did in the 1990's crime wave Poorly sourced smears like a thing that she herself said in front of TV cameras? I dunno that seems like it's not a smear because A) it's true and B) it has the best source, direct video footage of her doing it.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:39 |
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0uCrA7ePno she never said this. it's just a smear. there's no source!!!!
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:40 |
|
saying the word superpredator isn't actually a sign of racism though, unless you admit that basically everyone is racist which is a really bad and dumb way to define racism on a practical level. because if you remember the early 90's everyone was freaking out about it, for example, one bernard sanders
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:41 |
|
She didn't say black, she just talked about gangs Pictured, a typical early 90s gang from those high crime areas "everyone" (white people) was freaking out about : All just a big coincidence. I'm sure with all the hood movies and the war on drugs and gangsta rap the public consciousness totally didn't think gang=black then at all, after all there was those huge famous white street gangs in LA and new york like... oh wait nevermind. HorseLord fucked around with this message at 22:46 on Oct 3, 2016 |
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:44 |
|
so, as this kid is demonstrating, people are pretty easy to whip up with allegations of hillary's bad behavior based on the flimsiest of pretexts because the right wing has been insinuating clinton is evil since longer than many posters itt have been alive there are still people irl mad that she talked about video games being bad once, fifteen years ago
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:46 |
|
You love a racist who speaks in dog whistles and participates in coups. Sorry.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:47 |
|
HorseLord posted:You love a racist who speaks in dog whistles and participates in coups. Sorry. Yesss bring on the Honduras talk.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 22:55 |
|
Lovable center left Hillary, editing new printings of her autobiography to remove the part where she talked about the need to set up a new government in honduras as quickly as possible to make sure the president the military overthrew couldn't get back into power. It's pretty funny how publicly she still insists what happened was legal and democratic but internal us govt reports are quite unambiguous, it was a big time illegal coup and she knows this. There's also the hatian minimum wage thing. Real Hillary slay queen feminism is using diplomatic pressure to make sure the women of your colonies don't earn too much money i guess.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 23:07 |
|
Like I said, there is literally no criticism of Hillary Clinton that won't get you "you're brainwashed" or "you're sexist". See, try it.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 23:07 |
|
Someone's gender or race does not make them automatically a good or bad person. Same is true for politicians, I'm British and we had Margaret Thatcher and now Theresa May. We also had strong Queens back in the day, anyway, my issues with Hilary are pretty much exclusively down to her deep involvement in the perpetuation of the American military empire, destabilisation of the middle east and illegal drone wars.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 23:15 |
|
Hillary is a political robot devoid of any sort of charisma. It's particularly jarring when viewed against her husband or Obama. Fortunately her opponent is Donald loving Trump so I'm With Her
|
# ? Oct 3, 2016 23:29 |
|
instead of being with the horrible lady you could be with the sturggle to reform america into a democracy instead
|
# ? Oct 4, 2016 00:00 |
|
HorseLord posted:instead of being with the horrible lady you could be with the sturggle to reform america into a democracy instead ok cool which candidate is that
|
# ? Oct 4, 2016 00:02 |
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:ok cool which candidate is that If he says Jill Stein this is the worst version of The Aristocrats joke I've ever seen.
|
# ? Oct 4, 2016 00:03 |
|
sean10mm posted:If he says Jill Stein this is the worst version of The Aristocrats joke I've ever seen. Like, legit, it occurred to me the other day that even if I actually considered third party candidates viable, Clinton would still get my vote. Forget Trump, she is also a way better candidate than Johnson or Stein.
|
# ? Oct 4, 2016 00:12 |
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:ok cool which candidate is that Too bad Stalin isn't running.
|
# ? Oct 4, 2016 00:16 |
|
boner confessor posted:bernie sanders is also a racist. he is more racist than hillary clinton. pretty much anyone older than 30 is racist
|
# ? Oct 4, 2016 00:25 |
|
rudatron posted:You're a moron. 'Anyone older than 30', give me a break. Either you're buying into 'if you live in a racist society you are racist' claptrap (which, weirdly, is only ever used to rationalize facile & unjustifiable allegations of racism), in which case that includes everyone, or you're using the normal person definition of racism, in which case Sanders isn't racist either. You can't have it both ways. oh poo poo we triggered him I have seen where this goes, abandon ship
|
# ? Oct 4, 2016 00:26 |
|
People hate Hillary for three reasons: 1) She's 2) She's absolutely the most qualified and well-connected candidate who has had deep policy involvement for decades and has tacked slightly to the left of the American center for fifty-ish years, and in the 21st century the only candidates anyone seems to like are inexperienced "outsiders" whose positions are a wild departure from the political mainstream 3) Because they don't know anything about her except for unsourced, third-hand, out-of-context smears that have been circulating since before they were born, and don't care to learn anything about her and her record except for what her opponents say
|
# ? Oct 4, 2016 00:29 |
|
She does seem like a massive bastard. I mean, that's to be expected of a presidential candidate but she doesn't hide it super well like most of them do.
|
# ? Oct 4, 2016 00:38 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 04:34 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:People hate Hillary for three reasons: have you ever considered that "most qualified and well-connected" in the contest of american imperial politics is actually terrifying rather than appealing and also that you're hella dumb if you wanna go all earplugs and say the haiti stuff or the honduras stuff, or the contents of her own speeches are just "smears"
|
# ? Oct 4, 2016 00:47 |