Changing distrust to trust, my journey with Hillary
Last night I caught some of a panel conversation on PBS's News Hour on the upcoming presidential election and the thoughts of the six individuals selected to participate.
It did not look good for our candidate.
As a person who did not trust or like Hillary Clinton as recently as a few months back, I can tell you what it took for my thoughts (and feelings) to change. All I needed was to hear her speak. Not just once, and not briefly, but at length and frequently.
I have become a solid fan and advocate for her. I do trust her now, very much. I know we are living in a country with a compromised system where money matters more than votes sometimes. I don't blame her for that context. Her promise to work to overturn Citizen's United was a breakthrough point for me.
I know that her family's work, and her own, at the Clinton Foundation was designed and executed with the intention of alleviating suffering and making the world a better place.
I know she will work her heart out for us, and I'm ready to do the same for her. I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt when one exists. I'm not going to read the tens
Of thousands of emails and am very sure she navigated her time at the Secretary of State in a pono (righteous) manner.
Just thought since changing someone's mind is a rare enough event for us pa'a kiki hard heads, it merited mention, for what it's worth. Imua. (Onward)
= new reply since forum marked as read
Your story was a nice antidote. 
I pray that panel was not necessarily a representative sample, and also that our fellow voters can travel in your path.
ever been fair to Hillary? Why should this panel be any different? 
For all its touting that they do in-depth stories, most of the political news has been covered as brief headlines or very superficial stories at the top of the show - no better than the networks.
. . .and that whoever chose that panel -well-let's just say that they could have done better, to say the least. As I watched them, I thought, "Where did they find these people?"
"P" and focus more on the $ in recent years. Its election reporting has been very disappointing for the most part.
Here is an article from earlier this year that discusses that: Why Are Public Broadcasters Parroting Conservative Talking Points? https://www.thenation.com/article/why-are-public-broadcasters-parroting-conservative-talking-points/
From the link:
PBS’s other moderator, Gwen Ifill, continued in the same silly vein. Her first question, to Hillary, complained that she too has “proposed fairly expansive ideas about government.” She recalled Bill Clinton’s announcement that “the era of big government is over” as if it had been Hillary, not Bill, who’d said it. Ifill went on: “When asked your feelings about the federal government this week, 61 percent of New Hampshire Democrats told exit pollsters that they are angry or at least dissatisfied. Given what you and Senator Sanders are proposing—an expanding government in almost every area of our lives—is it fair for Americans who fear government to fear you?” Note the rhetorical, right-wing sleight-of-hand here: How does the percentage of New Hampshire Democrats who are “angry or at least dissatisfied” with the government translate into a complaint about the size of government, much less an undefined “fear” of Hillary? Is it not at least equally possible that Americans are “angry” or “dissatisfied” at Congress’s refusal to address a tax code that benefits the superwealthy or to rein in the predatory practices of the big banks?
Over and over, the so-called liberals at PBS paid tribute to right-wing talking points. Asking about the issue of money in politics, Woodruff put Clinton on the defensive over the fact that she has received about $10 million “from just two wealthy financiers.” Might it have been worth mentioning here, to give viewers some context, that the vast majority of the 358 families who have donated more than $100,000 to a candidate are supporting Republicans? What of Adelson’s $150 million, or the $889 million the Koch brothers plan to raise and spend? Not a nickel of that money is going to Hillary or any other Democrat.
Foreign-policy questions were similarly skewed. Not a single one, for instance, addressed the threat of climate change. Instead, sounding like a Reagan-era Republican, Woodruff demanded of Sanders: “When it comes to dealing with Russia…how hard are you prepared to be? Are you prepared to institute further economic sanctions? Would you be prepared to move militarily if Russia moves on Eastern Europe?”
And yes!!
glad to have you.
Absolutely. From your brain to millions of others. If only. 
Unless perhaps, it's after Election Day. 
Welcome!
I hope that we have NO Americans who are eedjits like those in the UK who voted FOR Brexit - or who didn't vote at all - and then wanted to vote AGAINST only AFTER they saw the results and had the realization sink in that they had a REALLY, REALLY good deal with the EU where they participated in the common market and all other bennies, but not in the Eurozone and not in Schengen. No other EU member had those perks. Now, whatever happens, the UK will NEVER have what it once had and what it did not realize that it had ... until it was too late.
We have an excellent Presidential candidate in Hillary Clinton. The choice could not be MORE stark in this election.
