Hillary Clinton: You 'cannot be civil' with Republicans, Democrats need to be 'tougher'

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

WASHINGTON – Hillary Clinton says the time for civility is over.

After the bitter and partisan fight over the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the former secretary of State and 2016 Democratic presidential candidate declared that President Donald Trump has undermined the integrity of the nation's highest court and that it's time for Democrats to be "tougher" with their opponents, in an interview with CNN published Tuesday

"You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about," Clinton told CNN's Christiane Amanpour. "That's why I believe, if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and or the Senate, that's when civility can start again."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news.../09/hillary-clinton-cnn-interview/1578636002/

I feel like Hillary Clinton is coming to the party late here. At some point she and other DLC democrats like John Kerry could have really went off on their opponents and the swift boaters etc. But they've always held back in some way. Maybe rarely said something worthwhile and then triangulated out of it.

In any case, I disagree with Hillary Clinton. I think she's half-right. There are about half of Republicans who only want to win, who will be nothing but insulting and political to do so. Those are the ones who require you to get back in their face and say something sarcastic or snarky. The other half, though, is honest and has values that can be argued about. They deserve rational argument and a discussion of your values. Some of these people are in office, too.

So I think this applies to both politicians and normal people.

What are your thoughts on what she is saying?

 

[ZiprHead]

I don't think the Republicans would hesitate for a minute to impeach someone like Kavanaugh if he was a Dem.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

I feel like Hillary Clinton is coming to the party late here.

Her “deplorables” comment and everything she said in the debates argues differently.

At some point she and other DLC democrats like John Kerry could have really went off on their opponents and the swift boaters etc. But they've always held back in some way. Maybe rarely said something worthwhile and then triangulated out of it.

See above.

In any case, I disagree with Hillary Clinton. I think she's half-right. There are about half of Republicans who only want to win, who will be nothing but insulting and political to do so. Those are the ones who require you to get back in their face and say something sarcastic or snarky. The other half, though, is honest and has values that can be argued about. They deserve rational argument and a discussion of your values. Some of these people are in office, too.

I’m sorry, but after what we’ve seen in their reaction to Trump’s occupation (going on two years now), I don’t see how you’re coming to those conclusions. There may be a handful—around 20%—but I don’t see where you’re getting half.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Ah yes, the reasonable Republican. I heard that one was spotted riding a unicorn yesterday to go have lunch with a hooker with a heart of gold.

 

[Politesse]

I don't think the state will long survive the abandonment of civil discourse. That doesn't mean this viewpoint is unreasonable, but it must be understood that if everyone holds it, there is no country to be fighting over, or won't be shortly.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I don't think the state will long survive the abandonment of civil discourse. That doesn't mean this viewpoint is unreasonable, but it must be understood that if everyone holds it, there is no country to be fighting over, or won't be shortly.

While that's certainly true, the Dems can't just sit around waiting for the Republicans to decide to stop flinging feces at them and sit down to have rationale discourse. If you keep bringing flowers to a knife fight, you're just going to end up bleeding on the ground while the other guy pisses on your flowers. At some point, you need to pull out your own fucking knife.

 

[Jarhyn]

I don't think the state will long survive the abandonment of civil discourse. That doesn't mean this viewpoint is unreasonable, but it must be understood that if everyone holds it, there is no country to be fighting over, or won't be shortly.

While that's certainly true, the Dems can't just sit around waiting for the Republicans to decide to stop flinging feces at them and sit down to have rationale discourse. If you keep bringing flowers to a knife fight, you're just going to end up bleeding on the ground while the other guy pisses on your flowers. At some point, you need to pull out your own fucking knife.

Or sword. Or gun. When civil discourse is refused, civil war is inevitable. Which is to say, there most certainly will be a country worth fighting for. But, well, it will be fought over with actual literal fighting. It just sucks having to actually live through such an era where that happens. And what does it look like when a first world country has a civil war in the age of modern warfare?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Or sword. Or gun. When civil discourse is refused, civil war is inevitable.

Well, let's face it. An American civil war would involve less shooting guns and more people sitting around sending snarky tweets back and forth. Fighting a war requires a level of energy and commitment which I can't see the US population pulling off.

 

[laughing dog]

HRC is confusing "civility" with the opposite of ruthlessness.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

I don't think the state will long survive the abandonment of civil discourse.

Republicans have eschewed "civil discourse" ever since the Clinton era, certainly, if not earlier. They're just better at being bullies.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I think we are getting down to the only possible solution is boarding Trump supporters onto the SS Thanos which is bound for Mars.

 

[Treedbear]

I don't think the state will long survive the abandonment of civil discourse. That doesn't mean this viewpoint is unreasonable, but it must be understood that if everyone holds it, there is no country to be fighting over, or won't be shortly.

While that's certainly true, the Dems can't just sit around waiting for the Republicans to decide to stop flinging feces at them and sit down to have rationale discourse. If you keep bringing flowers to a knife fight, you're just going to end up bleeding on the ground while the other guy pisses on your flowers. At some point, you need to pull out your own fucking knife.

I think the Dem style needs to be more like Kung Fu than knife fighting. They need to stand firmly on progressive liberal democratic principles. That means they need intelligent strategy in order to counter the insanity that is Trump. Something Hillary probably isn't capable of learning and Bill is not up to anymore. Neither are known for being principled and are merely lightning rods for Republican as well as Dem and Inde derision. They should go far far away. That doesn't mean to become wet rags. Defending the party's principles when they are under attack means intelligently, directly, plainly so everyone can understand, and repeatedly explaining what is wrong and hypocritical about Trump logic. Sooner or later the people will notice. (Or not. )

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I don't think the state will long survive the abandonment of civil discourse. That doesn't mean this viewpoint is unreasonable, but it must be understood that if everyone holds it, there is no country to be fighting over, or won't be shortly.

While that's certainly true, the Dems can't just sit around waiting for the Republicans to decide to stop flinging feces at them and sit down to have rationale discourse. If you keep bringing flowers to a knife fight, you're just going to end up bleeding on the ground while the other guy pisses on your flowers. At some point, you need to pull out your own fucking knife.

I think the Dem style needs to be more like Kung Fu than knife fighting. They need to stand firmly on progressive liberal democratic principles. That means they need intelligent strategy in order to counter the insanity that is Trump. Something Hillary probably isn't capable of learning and Bill is not up to anymore. Neither are known for being principled and are merely lightning rods for Republican as well as Dem and Inde derision. They should go far far away. That doesn't mean to become wet rags. Defending the party's principles when they are under attack means intelligently, directly, plainly so everyone can understand, and repeatedly explaining what is wrong and hypocritical about Trump logic. Sooner or later the people will notice. (Or not. )

You have a higher opinion of the American voter than I do.

 

[starwater]

I think the Dem style needs to be more like Kung Fu than knife fighting. They need to stand firmly on progressive liberal democratic principles. That means they need intelligent strategy in order to counter the insanity that is Trump. Something Hillary probably isn't capable of learning and Bill is not up to anymore. Neither are known for being principled and are merely lightning rods for Republican as well as Dem and Inde derision. They should go far far away. That doesn't mean to become wet rags. Defending the party's principles when they are under attack means intelligently, directly, plainly so everyone can understand, and repeatedly explaining what is wrong and hypocritical about Trump logic. Sooner or later the people will notice. (Or not. )

You have a higher opinion of the American voter than I do.

Agreed, even if you splain it to them a thousand times and a thousand different ways, they may agree to something and then turn around and not agree. As Bill Maher says: "I don't know it for a fact, I just know it's true." I hope I'm wrong and at least some will see the hyprocrisy and lies of the current occupant of the White House.

 

[Treedbear]

...
You have a higher opinion of the American voter than I do.

Or else the quality of our politicians.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Neither are known for being principled and are merely lightning rods for Republican as well as Dem and Inde derision. They should go far far away.

Um, Bill Clinton was one of our all-time greatest Presidents and Hillary Clinton won the general election by millions of votes (something on the order of twenty million when you factor in all of the votes that were denied through various election fraud tactics, overconfidence in her polls/assumptions of victory causing apathy in key "blue" states and numerous other non-partisan related reasons).

Trump, otoh, is only President because they cheated, not because there was any kind of ideological shift and only in the tiniest of tiny slivers of percentiles (less than 1% vote differential) that only mattered due to a long castrated "failsafe" system that ironically failed to keep us safe due to its castration.

Iow, he didn't win on any merits or because the country--as a whole--had some sort of giant ideological sea change. We are the majority, not them.

Defending the party's principles when they are under attack means intelligently, directly, plainly so everyone can understand, and repeatedly explaining what is wrong and hypocritical about Trump logic.

WE all already do know what is wrong with his logic. That isn't the problem.

And, actually, there is no problem, because the once in a lifetime conflation of impossible tiny slivers of this and that-- that just barely conspired to put Trump in the WH--no longer exist and can't possibly do the same again.

He lost before. There is no reason to assume he can pull off the exact same kind of miracle to just barely squeak by on a less than 1% haircut again, particularly in light of everything that's been revealed since the occupation began.

He hasn't been growing in popularity. Just the opposite in fact. He has consistently ranked at around 40% or lower overall approval for going on two years now.

 

[untermensche]

What the left needs to do is abandon the corporate controlled Democratic party and form a left wing party.

A party with the rights of working people as the central focus.

A party that wants to control corporate power, not dance to it's tune.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

What the left needs to do is abandon the corporate controlled Democratic party and form a left wing party.

A party with the rights of working people as the central focus.

A party that wants to control corporate power, not dance to it's tune.

Yes, because nothing will stop the right wing better than diluting the left wing vote amongst multiple candidates.

The right wing in Canada had that idea and it led to more than a decade of vote splitting getting the left wing party consistently elected before they finally realized how ineffective their strategy was in a first past the post electoral system and they rejoined their parties again and gained control of the government.

 

[untermensche]

What the left needs to do is abandon the corporate controlled Democratic party and form a left wing party.

A party with the rights of working people as the central focus.

A party that wants to control corporate power, not dance to it's tune.

Yes, because nothing will stop the right wing better than diluting the left wing vote amongst multiple candidates.

The right wing in Canada had that idea and it led to more than a decade of vote splitting getting the left wing party consistently elected before they finally realized how ineffective their strategy was in a first past the post electoral system and they rejoined their parties again and gained control of the government.

The Democratic Party now represents corporate interests.

It does not represent working people.

Corporations have two parties.

Working people none.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

What the left needs to do is abandon the corporate controlled Democratic party and form a left wing party.

A party with the rights of working people as the central focus.

A party that wants to control corporate power, not dance to it's tune.

Yes, because nothing will stop the right wing better than diluting the left wing vote amongst multiple candidates.

The right wing in Canada had that idea and it led to more than a decade of vote splitting getting the left wing party consistently elected before they finally realized how ineffective their strategy was in a first past the post electoral system and they rejoined their parties again and gained control of the government.

The Democratic Party now represents corporate interests.

It does not represent working people.

Corporations have two parties.

Working people none.

Ya, but the good news is that I don't care about you Americans at all, so it's not my problem.