Bernie Sanders
Related: About this forumSalon: This is why people don’t trust Hillary Clinton
Every step of the way, her breaking of the rules and handling of the email flap reeks of one thing: deceptionIts not often I agree with David Brooks, but he asked an intelligent question in his column this week: Why is Hillary Clinton so disliked? Shes nearly as disliked as Donald Trump, whose unlikability is arguably the most explicable fact in the universe. But Clintons unpopularity is more complicated. Shes an accomplished and tireless public servant who has worked very hard to be liked by the people she serves. So whats the problem?
Brooks comes close to an answer: At least in her public persona, Clinton gives off an exclusively professional vibe: industrious, calculated, goal-oriented, distrustful. Its hard from the outside to have a sense of her as a person; she is a role. This is true enough, but Id emphasize calculated and distrustful. She appears machine-like because shes so afraid to let the mask slip, to expose herself to any risks whatsoever. Theres a certain wisdom in that, but taken too far it becomes an albatross.
The private email server is a direct result of Clinton trying too hard to protect herself. To the uncommitted voter, it looks less like cautiousness and more like deception. And it feeds the narrative that will plague Clinton for the rest of the election: Shes untrustworthy and inauthentic.
http://www.salon.com/2016/05/28/this_is_why_people_dont_trust_hillary_clinton_email_scandal_is_a_reminder_that_her_guardedness_is_ultimately_self_defeating/
n2doc
(47,953 posts)saltpoint
(50,986 posts)a staff of yes-persons. It's clear she does not sanction dissent.
This has not served her well. Over a long period. Including right now.
Teamster Jeff
(1,598 posts)That is as an accurate description of Hillary as I have seen. Without taking political risks she will help nobody but herself and the elite that run the show.
Just about the opposite of Bernie Sanders who has pretty much stuck to a core set of values and lived with consequences.
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)She and Bill skate on the edge of legality over and over to enrich themselves and gain power.
Other than her die-hard supporters, people see her as corrupt and dishonest. She's earned that perception and it has nothing to do with a vast right wing conspiracy.
elias7
(4,009 posts)I don't believe that they intentionally skate on the edge of legality, nor do they try to enrich themselves and gain power. I think the point is that they give that impression. With the email server, I agree that Clinton was trying to protect herself because of the many hats she wears, but when questions arose, she didn't know how to communicate her intent and didn't want to seem vulnerable and shortsighted. It came off poorly.
saltpoint
(50,986 posts)inadvertence, the Clintons are on that blurred edge, again, and again, and again.
"That depends on what your definition of 'is' is." For example.
Hillary Clinton says what she did with the private serve "was allowed." It was not. She knew how to communicate intent but doing so would have blown the scam. She willfully lied.
The public opinion polls showing a very significant distrust of Hillary Clinton is a clear and present fact. She's given voters good reason to distrust her.
I was pointing out that she is not acting with criminal intent, but rather agreed with the article that she acts deceptively, even dishonestly, when confronted with being on that blurred edge, making things worse for herself.
saltpoint
(50,986 posts)it's even better -- it's genuinely useful to the Democratic Party --
-- if anybody's listening.
The phones seem off the hook at Debbie Wasserman Schultz's office. Wonder what's goin' on? Because there's a White House race this cycle, but a hell of a lot of down-ballot Democrats' fates are in the balance as well.
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)We disagree on the Clinton's morality and goals. They are deceptive because they do have things to hide not because they are innocents who just can't articulate their reasons.
As to the emails, Clinton was trying to hide many things, one of which was the workings of the Clinton Foundation.
Yes, we disagree on intent.
EdwardBernays
(3,343 posts)To protect yourself and it's habitual it kinda doesn't matter why.
The OIG report clearly shows she's been chronically dishonest and that that endangered national security.
The fact that the Clintonites have gone so far as to attack the OIG instead of choosing to be honest underscores the depth of the problem.
And even if you disagree what I'm saying is what the media is now saying and what undecided voters are seeing. She's on the edge of a total and utter self-made collapse and all that can save her is honesty and transparency... I wouldnt assume that she's going to suddenly be either.
elias7
(4,009 posts)She digs her own holes with deception and dishonesty. My only point in replying to the above post initially is that I don't see in her a person with criminal intent, rather a person with shortsightedness and unwillingness to be vulnerable when actions are questioned.
MissDeeds
(7,499 posts)Baobab
(4,667 posts)that will forever change the way the world sees them, and result in prosecutions completely different thn the ones we have seen so far.
They will be forced to confront the effect of their calculated actions. The price.
The Democratic Party would be wise to anticipate that and distance itself from her, or it will likely go down with them. And when it does, lots of good people and good things will be brought down and that will be a disaster for this country.
But failing to stopping the worst parts of their 20 year old agenda still demand the undoing of it and the exposure of them.
People who think their agenda is helping the poor in the developing world should consider the fact that its mostly children of well to do families in poor countries who are being helped. People who can afford to work for such low wages they are basically internships.
We have to reboot the ship of policy and rebalance our priorities The country and world does not want their corporations first state.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Baobab
(4,667 posts)The reality distortion field is increasingly expensive to maintain.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)The long-suffering chief of staff for first woman president, Selina Meyer, discussing with his staff how to frame Selina's most recent, of many, opportunistic, focus-group-driven, 180 degree policy changes. "She changes her mind more often than a pedophile at Disneyworld."
VEEP is the top comedy program/series on television today. It skewers, while accurately portraying the fobiles, egocentricities, corruption, venality and greed of politicians of both sexes, both parties.
Emmy Awards 2015
Won
Primetime Emmy Outstanding Lead Actress in a Comedy Series
Julia Louis-Dreyfus
For playing "President Selina Meyer".
Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Comedy Series
Tony Hale
For playing "Gary Walsh".
Outstanding Writing for a Comedy Series
Simon Blackwell
Tony Roche
Armando Iannucci
Outstanding Casting for a Comedy Series
Allison Jones (casting director)
Pat Moran (casting director)
Meredith Tucker (casting director)
Home Box Office (HBO)
Outstanding Comedy Series
Armando Iannucci (executive producer)
Christopher Godsick (executive producer)
Frank Rich (executive producer)
Chris Addison (executive producer)
Simon Blackwell (executive producer)
Tony Roche (executive producer)
Julia Louis-Dreyfus (executive producer)
Stephanie Laing (executive producer)
Bill Hill (produced by)
Kevin Cecil (supervising producer)
Roger Drew (supervising producer)
Sean Gray (supervising producer)
Ian Martin (supervising producer)
Georgia Pritchett (supervising producer)
Andy Riley (supervising producer)
Will Smith (supervising producer)
Primetime Emmy Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Comedy Series
Anna Chlumsky
For playing "Amy Brookheimer".
Outstanding Directing for a Comedy Series
Armando Iannucci
For episode "Testimony"
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1759761/awards