2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary Clinton Is Stumped on Question of Keystone Pipeline
NASHUA, N.H. Hillary Rodham Clinton has an aggressive set of proposals to combat climate-change and a pipeline problem.
The day after Mrs. Clinton put forth a detailed plan that would go further than the any president in using the government to protect the environment and produce solar and wind energy, she found herself once again stumped on the question of whether or not she would support the Keystone XL Pipeline project, which would bring Canadian oil to Texas.
A voter at a Nashua town hall, Bruce Blodgett, a software engineer in Amherst, asked Mrs. Clinton to give a yes or no answer to whether she would support the pipeline, which liberals and environmentalists abhor. Mrs. Clinton demurred.
This is President Obamas decision and Im not going to second-guess him, she said. If its undecided when I become president, I will answer your question.
The response left a silence in the un-air-conditioned gymnasium of the Amherst Street Elementary School, where 450 people wiped sweat and sipped bottles of lukewarm water to get a chance to ask Mrs. Clinton a question. At her last town hall event in New Hampshire, climate change protesters heckled Mrs. Clinton about her stance on the environment.
By the time the national news media had its chance to ask Mrs. Clinton about Keystone, the Democratic candidate seemed exasperated.
I will not do it, she said when a CNN reporter pressed her on the pipeline. I am sorry if people want me to.
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/07/28/hillary-clinton-is-stumped-on-question-of-keystone-pipeline/?_r=0
tblue
(16,350 posts)Anybody know what she meant by that?
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)She is holding firm to "no comment".
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)she always was a 1% anyway.
Response to Warren Stupidity (Original post)
Post removed
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Because using doubtful logic and carefully chosen clips of quotes, and amnesia, to bring down a former Secretary of State and Senator and First Lady may marginally assist your own fav candidate?
Many more twists of logic and fields of strawmen planted to follow, I am sure.
Faux pas
(14,706 posts)listening to her since 1992, plenty of time for me to form MY OWN OPINION, thank you very much. Opinions are like a**holes you know.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)artislife
(9,497 posts)Don't use her facts against her!!
Don't use her quotes!!
Don't use her votes!!
She is running on rarified air, she's an angel. You believe in angels, don't you. Vote for her! On faith!
If you don't, you must believe in:
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Don't ask questions, just trust her, you know she'll always do the Right thing.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)msongs
(67,496 posts)RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)As for me, I just know in my heart that President-elect Clinton will do the right thing for America.
"Hillary Clinton is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life."
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)"Yes, I do support the pipeline. Even under the worst case scenario with respect to a disaster, it wouldn't equate to one days damage of emission from our military. You don't see that so you don't think about it. Until we wean ourselves off fossil fuels, why not park it in our own backyard as a daily reminder of our dependence."
That would lead to two or three days of non-stop stories, then it would be done for the most part. She is keeping the story alive.
Raine1967
(11,589 posts)I was not pleased with her non answer I had hopes that she might changed her mind on this.
You are right, she is keeping the story alive and I don't know if that is a good thing.
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)I do think by trying to play both sides is hurting her credibility even among potential supporters. And chances are the people who are strongly against Keystone XL are very unlikely to be Hillary supporters anyway. So I think she has a lot more to gain then she does to lose by just coming clean.
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)Answer yea or nay and take your lumps. She's so paranoid about being trapped she won't take a firm stand on anything and it reinforces the vicious cycle that she is intrustworthy. I have no idea what her core values are...besides politics for politics' sake.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)For example, she interrupted the explosion over the Iran letter to remind everyone about her email server.
I don't get why she doesn't do this...
John Poet
(2,510 posts)need to just sit down, shut up, and support Hillary!
(I've decided to help out the Hillary posters, on a part-time basis...)
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)i think she needs some extra help these days
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)March along Zombie style to the voting booth!
George II
(67,782 posts)A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)An OP by Cheese Sandwich http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017282158
Doesn't matter to me at all, I don't like a decisive President anyway, how about you?
George II
(67,782 posts)....DEMOCRATS don't criticize sitting DEMOCRATIC Presidents.
She showed no signs of being indecisive. But, if you don't like the answer of course she's "indecisive" or whatever insult you can fling her way.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)Gee, I guess that means you haven't read this story.
Hillary Clinton criticizes President Obamas foreign policy in interview with the Atlantic
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-criticizes-president-obamas-foreign-policy-in-interview-with-the-atlantic/2014/08/11/46d30564-2170-11e4-8593-da634b334390_story.html
Try a Google search, there's a lot more about Hillary not criticizing a sitting Democratic President.
How about; ....DEMOCRATS don't criticize sitting DEMOCRATIC Presidents when it's convenient? There! That seems more truthful now doesn't it?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Someone hasn't learned a damn thing about journalism and it isn't the NYT.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)That ain't gonna cut it.
The majority of Americans have had enough of singing and dancing from politicians.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)BooScout
(10,406 posts)And so does their biased reporting against Hillary. Amy Chozick is a hack....she should have stayed at Conde Nast.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Are you honestly trying to deny reality to the point where you claim this did not happen?
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)This isn't some evil NYT conspiracy to make your candidate look bad, she's doing that all on her own.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)There you go. Does her quote read differently on MSN?
Red Oak
(697 posts)It is a hard choice to remain silent on such a key issue as the Keystone pipeline. It takes practice to be able to make such hard choices. Years of practice are required, like not stating an up or down position on TPP (follow Pelosi...).
I'll grant her this, after so many hard choices and so many years of practice, she has fully mastered politician speak.
BlueEye
(449 posts)Which is unlikely to be had unless she can throw in some "freebies" for the GOP and quite a few Democrats actually. Keystone XL might be a useful bargaining chip to get a major clean energy initiative passed.
In the long-run, oil will inevitably phase out, but the benefits of a comprehensive clean energy initiative will be felt for much longer. That may mean compromising in the short-run to accept a carbon breakeven.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)In between a truth and a lie is NOT an "opinion".
Nor is it a "half truth".
Vinca
(50,326 posts)This is what makes people look elsewhere for a candidate.
A very foolish tactic.
If she supports it she should say so and why.
mckara
(1,708 posts)The current paradigm is broken. Hillary and the Republicans are one and the same trying to extend the casino for the top 1% for another presidential cycle. Enough! Or you're part of the problem with our government being dysfunctional, too.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)On what the meaning of "is" is.
Dustlawyer
(10,499 posts)We have a right for her to let us know clearly where she stands, especially when she is now running (supposedly) on the environment. She is running to be POTUS, we need to know this crap. Her non-answer leads me to believe she would sign off on it, but she is caught in a damned if I do, damned if I don't situation.
This is why I will not vote for her in the Primaries. She sold out long ago and now represents Donors, not the 99%!!!
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)She expects to not answer any questions at all throughout the campaign.
What a terrible candidate.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)?token=tbcmvfWveSXBAimnwG%2FqZR1S6ss%3D
saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)bankruptcy in the making. The Saudis, or Iranians will drive the Koch brothers and their fracking catastrophe into bankruptcy.
A woman can dream?
mmonk
(52,589 posts)Such a hard question.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)"If its undecided when I become president, I will answer your question.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)azmom
(5,208 posts)We need to tweet that out.
hedgehog
(36,286 posts)John Poet
(2,510 posts)Of course it was secret, no one knew what it was.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)which i expect imminently, this will be the black box moment.
azmom
(5,208 posts)You were terrible on Keystone. Even before the State Department began its review of the project, you said you were inclined to approve it. Thats been your last public word on the project, but your team performed an intellectually corrupt review of the plans, your campaign bundlers landed rich lobbying contracts, and your former advisers took jobs with Transcanada.It was and is a huge mess and Im sure you hate the whole topic because at the start you couldnt have known that it would become the iconic environmental issue of our era. Since pipelines until Keystone were routinely approved, it probably seemed like just a chance to please the Canadians. Had you known it would become a hornets nest, you would doubtless have proceeded more carefully and in fairness it wasnt until the process was underway that climate scientists raised their most forceful concerns. Still, ugh.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)... because I KNEW we'd be hearing weasel words instead of a straight answer.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023022353
azmom
(5,208 posts)Thread. " this should be posted next week and weekly thereafter"
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Agony
(2,605 posts)just NO! it's simple FFS.
of course if you listen to Lloyd Blankfein instead of James Hanson you might be confused...
If that's your position. So you lose some people but at least they'll respect you.
Agony
(2,605 posts)You are correct, there is an element of respect to this issue. However, she would still be wrong and exhibiting poor leadership.
kenn3d
(486 posts)This thread contains many valid objections to the KXL pipeline, and lots of righteous angst in the forum about HRC's undeniable paralysis in taking any firm position on this (and many other important issues).
I agree with most of what's been posted above and personally find little worthy defense for her performance on the stump, either here or anywhere online. But what irks me most about this particular incident is her closing statement on the matter as she so quickly diverted to the next question:
"If it's undecided when I become president, I will answer your question," Clinton said during the New Hampshire town hall.
Sure it is unbelievable that she actually refuses to answer such critical questions until after she is elected. But somehow even more outrageous is her very presumption... I really think she needs to start thinking "if" rather than "when".
It's becoming ever more obvious that we may have a better choice, and she'd do well to stop presuming her inevitable inauguration.
philosslayer
(3,076 posts)Get over it.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)is blowing in the wind.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Not good enough America. Come up with some easier questions.