Will Hillary stop evolving now?

[MannyGoldstein]

Hillary's evolved from an economic royalist to Hugo Chavez in a matter of months. Personally, I'm sure that she'll continue to believe all of that crap that you Liberals fixate on after the coronation, but what do you Proles think?

Regards,

TWM

33 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
	Will remain in Hugo Chavez mode after her coronation.
	0 (0%)
	Will keep going Left, evolving into Trotsky and beyond!
	0 (0%)
	Back to bankers uber alles in a matter of months, if not milliseconds.
	31 (94%)
	Not Good Enough, Manny!!!
	2 (6%)
	1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[Kalidurga]

1. You forgot the

she will stay to the left until she gets into office then she will evolve back into a thirdwayer.

[MannyGoldstein]

2. The third choice was broken

Now it's fixed, and basically says what you suggested.

[Kalidurga]

4. Good I am going to change my vote.

[Eric J in MN]

11. During the general election campaign,

...she'd be talking about how much she likes Free Trade and the Death Penalty and Entitlement Reform.

If she's the nominee, it won't take until she gets into office to swing right.

[senz]

20. And the TPP.

It is, after all, the "gold standard" of trade agreements.

[Warren Stupidity]

3. Hard right as soon as the coast is clear.

[cantbeserious]

5. Devolution - HRC Is A Pawn Of the Oligarchs, Corporations And Banks That Pay For Her Campaign

eom

[Chan790]

6. I don't believe she really evolved at all.

It's easy to lie just to get elected and say progressive things you have no intention of doing when you have no means to do them currently.

That is what I believe Hillary is doing. I know she's a stealth Republican, I won't believe otherwise until she proves she is not and I have no obligation to provide her an opportunity to do so.

[senz]

7. Wow, my one vote is 25%.

This is the most important I have felt in my entire life!

[JonLeibowitz]

23. How important does 3% feel? Feels lonely I bet :P

[senz]

24. lol - feels normal

[KMOD]

8. No.

She's going to evolve into the President of the United States soon.

[senz]

9. Ah yes, that's all that counts.

If she wins, who cares what she does while she's in office? Just as long as she's there. Sitting in the Oval Office. Having her picture taken. Smiling, smiling. Looking good. That's what matters.

Imagine it ... [img][/img]

After all, it's essentially a prize. An award. An honor. Bestowed upon the most wonderful person for their sheer wonderfulness.

Because it's her turn. And she's earned it.

By golly, she has earned it.

[KMOD]

17. Have some eggnog

and enjoy the holiday season.

[Betty Karlson]

29. That sarcasm, sir / madam,

was awesome.

[senz]

32. Wow

Thank you.

[bigwillq]

37. .....

[riversedge]

52. and have some cheeezecurds with your eggnog...

[senz]

56. Aww...

[Buzz cook]

60. Once again

This is about the people, it doesn't matter who the president is if the people are not involved. Look how easily the tea party and the media turned over the will of the majority. That's because the people as a whole and specifically the left were not engaged.

A vocal minority defeated a silent majority.

So once again, will you sit on your hands or will you stand on your hind legs and fight?

[Scootaloo]

10. Always a magikarp, never a gyrados n/t

[historylovr]

38. Sadly, I got that.

[senz]

39. I had to look it up.

Scootaloo constantly surprises me. From everything I've seen, she is multi-faceted and brilliant. Hope she doesn't mind my saying so.

[Scootaloo]

47. It's "he" just so's you know

[senz]

48. Okay, thanks!

It's kinda hard to to tell online.

[brooklynite]

12. Pretty lazy satire...

Hillary Clinton was and is a mainstream Democrat. That's probably not good enough for you, and you don't need to vote for her (we've got plenty of other Democrats supporting her.

Oops! My apologies...since this was in GD: P rather than in the safe Bernie Group, I didn't realize this whole thread was meant for anti-Hillary people to vent to each other.

[MannyGoldstein]

13. Hillary Clinton is to the right of most Americans

Let alone most Democrats.

[Eric J in MN]

14. Is Bill Clinton also a mainstream Democrat?

He made it harder for abused prisoners to sue.

De-regulated Wall St.

Signed NAFTA.

[senz]

18. Signed the Telecom Act that solidified the media monopoly.

Not too democratic.

[kenfrequed]

15. Some of her supporters are already laying the groundwork

I have seen several "Third Way" banners and some of the lingo used is reverting back to accusing progressives of "wanting ponies" and what not.

That said, Hillary will continue to use vague language until super-Tuesday. After that we will see.

[senz]

21. Yes, I've noticed that.

One actually informed me that this country was founded on capitalistic principles. I thought only Fox News-swilling rightwingers held such notions.

[Fawke Em]

28. I used to train ponies.

I don't need one.

I bet few here could do what I used to do, so , that said... Hillary can't train ponies. Bernie probably could. They'd respect him.

[MisterP]

16. I'm guessing another swerve left in January

[Dragonfli]

19. She will also evolve from hawkish Statesperson to Bush doctrine pre-emptive war President.

If elected.

She will start off with just the free trade and entitlement reform triangulation if she gets to the general election, but if elected POTUS.

She will drop all qualifiers and get her ground war on, full on the ground. A great deal of hardware, private contractor cash and "mysteriously lost" cash can be generated upwards that way, Bush proved it with her help with the illegal Iraq war.

There is more to be made than simply bank fraud money, privatization money and free trade money on this planet.
She will be just as effective as the idiot son was, more so most probably as she is no idiot and is quite ambitious.

[Buzz cook]

22. Not the right poll

What will Bernie supporters do if Clinton is elected?

1)Sit on their hands and try to stifle dissent as they did for most of Obama's two turns?

2)Throw shit from the sidelines without organizing opposition to the right, as they did during Bill Clinton's administration?

3)Pretend that the further right the current administration is the better a chance for a leftist in the next general election, so sit on their hands again?

4)Actually organize and fight to move Clinton to the left and beat back the right?


One of the reasons I support Clinton is I think 4 is slightly more possible. Though I am becoming less and less sure of this after reading so many nihilistic philippics by Bernie supporters.

And one of the reasons I don't support Sanders is because of the likelihood that his supporters will sit on their hands because "daddy" will take care of things and any complaints about his administration will be dismissed as either sore loserism or a failure to understand eleventy level chess.

[senz]

25. I don't think anyone as deeply entrenched

in the 1% as Hillary is can be "moved to the left." I think that's naive. If she is elected president, she may try to mollify the American people, or at least keep them in the dark as much as possible in hopes of gaining a second term, but her substantive efforts will be decided by the oligarchs whose interests she serves and who are financing her current campaign for president.

[Fawke Em]

30. I call BS on No. 1.

I was an Obama supporter because Hillary has never been worth my vote.

[Buzz cook]

50. Really?

My point wasn't about Obama, it was about his supporters. While you might think its BS, there were people that spouted the chess metaphor while Obama went fiscal conservative and accused others of being everything from sore loosers to freeper troll if they pointed out that Obama was not living up to his promise.

Sorry you missed that.

[Betty Karlson]

31. So you admit that president Clinton would mean:

four, if not eight, years of genuine progressives desperately trying to prevent her from moving back to the right, often with no result, years of frustration and disappointment, more 2010 / 2014 like midterm election results? Years of no progress on racial justice, no police reform, no Wall Street curbing, no move against the death penalty, more wars, more deficits for more bombs, more "free trade agreeements" that send jobs overseas, more privacy invasions, more tax cuts for the very rich, more falling wages, more excuses about "at least we are not as bad as the GOP"?

If that is the truth, then the genuine progressives have every reason to prevent her nomination in the first place.

[senz]

41. Another truth within your comment

is the simple reality that Hillary has no vision, no ideology, no promise or possibility that excites the American people. All she has is the well-developed illusion of being "ready" for the job, an appearance of competence/experience for having held one elected position and one appointed position. She did not distinguish herself in either of them, not as senator, nor as SOS. Compare her SOS performance to John Kerry's.

She is neither inspiring nor riveting; it's almost like she's the fall-back candidate. She got the requisite jobs. She and Bill made a fortune giving speeches (giving speeches?) to wealthy enterprises and using her SOS post to make quid pro quo deals with weapons manufacturers and questionable foreign governments. She made important contacts, got sponsors, got the DNC (and DWS) all lined up. She immersed herself in the world of the rich and powerful. She, a close relative of an ex-president, gained great power. She rewards loyalty and punishes disloyalty, and over time the establishment learned to treat her with kid gloves. She gets respect.

So here she is, flush with money, connections, and power. Her supporters are saying she's got it all wrapped up, has already won. They brag that most Democrats know her (and her husband) as prominent Democrats and so don't mind voting for her. And they are remarkably smug, almost taunting, about it.

But nothing in Hillary Clinton moves and excites the American people. No vision, no promise, no "there" there.

When you think about it, this is a very interesting moment.

[Betty Karlson]

45. I don't know that that truth was contained within my comment.

But whether you explicated it, or added it: thanks for your response.

[senz]

46. Well, I did take it and run with it

and after a mile or two, I probably should have stopped and apologized. Sometimes the act of writing clarifies things for me, and then it sort of expands beyond the original thought. So, sorry to have run off (or run on) there.

However, when you wrote,

...years of frustration and disappointment, more 2010 / 2014 like midterm election results

I could see it happening, how inevitable it would be, and then it hit me how little she inspires people. The fact that she's a woman gets some excited, but that by itself is not leadership. A leader with vision, a leader with a clear purpose, would not leave progressives frustrated, disappointed, and unmotivated.

So that's what I meant. Thank you for triggering those thoughts.

[Buzz cook]

51. It is the same moment as 2000

It is Nader and Gore again.

Its only an interesting moment if you hadn't already lived through it.

[senz]

55. I did live through it and remember it very clearly.

Here's what you need to know:

Nader ran as a 3rd party candidate. That meant he took votes from Gore in the GE. That made him a spoiler.

Bernie is running as a Democrat because he does not want to be a spoiler. If he loses the primary (heaven forbid), he will no longer be in the race. He did this because he does not want to contribute to a Republican win. Bernie is a man of integrity.

Please do not assume that Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee. The primaries have not been held yet, and there are many Democrats, like myself, who want Bernie as our nominee.

[Buzz cook]

58. You miss the point

Nader supporters attitude to Gore was the same as Sanders supporters is to Clinton.

The platitudes about Gore being the same as Bush are being directed at Clinton who is now a servant to the 1%. The claims of purity for Nader are now being directed at Sanders.
And the same "tools of or fools for the elite" rhetoric that was directed at supporters of Gore is now directed at supporters of Clinton.

You may notice that none of my posts on this thread are directed at either Sanders or Clinton. They are directed at Sanders supporters and the attitude expressed in the OP.

So my question remains, If Clinton is elected will the supposed left sit on their hands as is their habit; or will they get organized and active as they have the ability to be?

Your inability to get the difference between supporters of a candidate and the individual themselves is very disappointing.

[senz]

61. No, you miss the point.

Bernie states over and over again that he is here to start "a political revolution."

Do I have to spell out to you what that means? It means Bernie is telling the people what's actually going on and encouraging them to want to overthrow a corrupt system. He's waking them up and getting them ready.

If you can't see AND HONOR that, then I seriously doubt you are anything but a Clinton supporter who is trying to find a new and novel way to shoe horn it into the White House.

No thanks.

[Buzz cook]

62. Now you'e simply changing the subject

I like Bernie, I don't think he's the best choice for president though. But my opinion of Bernie Sanders is not what I'm speaking to in this thread.

It is you and people like you that is my concern and everything you post shows that you are driven by personality rather than issues.

I find that sad.

[Buzz cook]

49. No.

I mean change comes from the people and the people will be more actively involved in politics if Hillary is elected than if Sanders is.

I disagree that Clinton is as horrible as you seem to think. And I'd like to point out that 2010 and 2014 were examples of the right being able to motivate its base while the left never tried.

[Betty Karlson]

57. Which is happening right now: Clinton has written off the millennials. eom

[Buzz cook]

59. How so?

nt

[olddots]

26. I went with the Chavez answer

because somebody had to

[still_one]

27. Yawn. Another cynical Hillary dissing thread that hopes to create pile ons. The number of

these threads far exceeds the number of times the republicans have tried to repeal the ACA, and accomplish just as much

[Bobbie Jo]

42. Perfect analogy. nt

[Thinkingabout]

33. No she will not stop evolving, her feet are not stuck in cememt.

The world does not stay the same and there is not any reason to close one's mind to changing facts, this is an asset.

[Scuba]

34. If she wins the nomination, she'll rapidly evolve into Mitt Romney, only more hawkish.

[madokie]

35. You're shitt'n me

look up evolve and right there is a picture of Hillary

[Vattel]

36. It depends on her environment.

Those traits that confer a political advantage will be selected (according to Darwin's theory of political selection).

[JoePhilly]

40. The 2016 Outrage-o-matic it's the stores ...

... just in time for Christmas.

[NCTraveler]

43. I hope not.

She still has a lot of room to move to the left on guns. She has a lot of room to move to the left on other social and economic issues. Unlike many Sanders supporters, I don't think we have a unicorn running.

Just as Sanders is changing his tune on guns, immigration, deregulation, war, etc.. All of them can be better and all are moving in the direction I like.

[MineralMan]

44. Evolve or go extinct.

Everything changes. Evolution is necessary for politicians, too, even while in office.

[zappaman]

53. What's wrong with evolving? Didn't you vote for Reagan?

If you can...

[Maedhros]

54. She'll twirl, twirl, TWIRL TOWARD FREEDOM! [n/t]