The Right Baits the Left to Turn Against Hillary Clinton

[Gallium]

I still have not seen any reason for why the left should have anything to do with Hillary.

I still haven't seen any reason why the left has a problem with Hillary, besides gripes with her husband and a single vote she made over a decade ago.

I feel that her economic policies aren't lefty enough, her ehh stance on TPP makes me nervous (as someone who believes that the trade deal is going to be very bad for American workers), she's answered very few questions from reporters (which I know isn't something necessary for the presidency, but it makes me feel that she's not willing to give clear answers to the media -- even if they're out to get her), she's too pro-Israel for my liking (I realize Sanders is as well), iirc she said a few years ago that she feels that national security is more important than human rights (my memory of that is a bit fuzzy), and her support of the death penalty is a bit troubling to me (but I realize that the majority of elected Democrats do support it).

However, I love how she's gone to the left on issues such as immigration and the environment, and her views on eliminating poverty and women's rights are close to my views (except I'd go farther to attempt to eliminate poverty).

^This. And I don't hold the Iraq vote against her. Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld duped all of us.

I don't think she was entirely duped. I think it was politically craven (although I also think she was haunted by the Clinton administration's inaction on Rwanda). Every Democratic presidential hopeful - Biden, Kerry, Edwards - voted for it. My beef is that the left has only ever seen it as singularly disqualifying for her.

[WVdemocrat]

I still have not seen any reason for why the left should have anything to do with Hillary.

I still haven't seen any reason why the left has a problem with Hillary, besides gripes with her husband and a single vote she made over a decade ago.

I feel that her economic policies aren't lefty enough, her ehh stance on TPP makes me nervous (as someone who believes that the trade deal is going to be very bad for American workers), she's answered very few questions from reporters (which I know isn't something necessary for the presidency, but it makes me feel that she's not willing to give clear answers to the media -- even if they're out to get her), she's too pro-Israel for my liking (I realize Sanders is as well), iirc she said a few years ago that she feels that national security is more important than human rights (my memory of that is a bit fuzzy), and her support of the death penalty is a bit troubling to me (but I realize that the majority of elected Democrats do support it).

However, I love how she's gone to the left on issues such as immigration and the environment, and her views on eliminating poverty and women's rights are close to my views (except I'd go farther to attempt to eliminate poverty).

^This. And I don't hold the Iraq vote against her. Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld duped all of us.

I don't think she was entirely duped. I think it was politically craven (although I also think she was haunted by the Clinton administration's inaction on Rwanda). Every Democratic presidential hopeful - Biden, Kerry, Edwards - voted for it. My beef is that the left has only ever seen it as singularly disqualifying for her.

That's true as well.

Thing is, you had Bush going around saying "you're either with us or you're with the terrorists," that sort of made it hard to oppose it. And I also think she wanted to show she could be strong on these issues, partially because of Rwanda and similar cases and because of the lingering sexist idea that nobody would take a woman seriously as a leader.

Yeah, it's definitely not a disqualifier for me. But I don't believe she would have voted for that if she didn't believe Saddam had WMDs, even if it was politically craven.

[free my dawg]

But if she becomes the only thing standing between, say, Scott Walker replacing the Notorious RBG with a looneytune like Janice Rodgers Brown, then, well, you can bet I'll be on board.

That post gave me conservatism.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I still have not seen any reason for why the left should have anything to do with Hillary.

I still haven't seen any reason why the left has a problem with Hillary, besides gripes with her husband and a single vote she made over a decade ago.

I feel that her economic policies aren't lefty enough, her ehh stance on TPP makes me nervous (as someone who believes that the trade deal is going to be very bad for American workers), she's answered very few questions from reporters (which I know isn't something necessary for the presidency, but it makes me feel that she's not willing to give clear answers to the media -- even if they're out to get her), she's too pro-Israel for my liking (I realize Sanders is as well), iirc she said a few years ago that she feels that national security is more important than human rights (my memory of that is a bit fuzzy), and her support of the death penalty is a bit troubling to me (but I realize that the majority of elected Democrats do support it).

However, I love how she's gone to the left on issues such as immigration and the environment, and her views on eliminating poverty and women's rights are close to my views (except I'd go farther to attempt to eliminate poverty).

^This. And I don't hold the Iraq vote against her. Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld duped all of us.

I don't think she was entirely duped. I think it was politically craven (although I also think she was haunted by the Clinton administration's inaction on Rwanda). Every Democratic presidential hopeful - Biden, Kerry, Edwards - voted for it. My beef is that the left has only ever seen it as singularly disqualifying for her.

That's true as well.

Thing is, you had Bush going around saying "you're either with us or you're with the terrorists," that sort of made it hard to oppose it. And I also think she wanted to show she could be strong on these issues, partially because of Rwanda and similar cases and because of the lingering sexist idea that nobody would take a woman seriously as a leader.

Yeah, it's definitely not a disqualifier for me. But I don't believe she would have voted for that if she didn't believe Saddam had WMDs, even if it was politically craven.

Kerry probably voted for it to help himself politically, but I think Hillary is more of a hawk. Anyways, anyone who listened to the Chair of the Senate Intelligence commitee,  Bob Graham had to say ("blood on your hands"), would have realized that the intelligence was all bunk and voting for war was retarded.

[Türkisblau]

Turkisblau, did you leave the Democrats?

;-; Why Turkisblau, Why?

Has he become a True Leftist?

wait, why am I being called a true leftist?

[NeverAgain]

Turkisblau, did you leave the Democrats?

;-; Why Turkisblau, Why?

Has he become a True Leftist?

wait, why am I being called a true leftist?

Nah, you be a fascist commie liberal conservative intent on destroying murica.

[IceSpear]

Oh, this is so funny in retrospect. Just a little over a year later.

Looks like they had more success than they ever could've dreamed of. The "left" loves to make themselves into useful idiots for the right. It's their thing.