Hillary Clinton

[RavenSky]

So she is to penalized for being successful? I thought that was the GOP's wet dream! So, please tell me how you think they made money without 'any sort of integrity'? And is that true for all people who become wealthy beyond your expectations? I'm sorry, but I'm not going to hate or fear someone "just" based on the fact they made money. Show me wrongdoing (like they did with Maddoff) and I will judge then.

Where do you think they made their fortunes..... playing craps in Las Vegas? They both were and still are in a career of government pure and simple. Nobody is disputing the $millions they have received in speaking fees and thats corruption pure and simple. And yes it might even be legal....that does not make it right or moral.

Could you please direct me to you posts wherein you are questioning the morality of George W. Bush or Pappa Bush or Jeb Bush or Barbara Bush or John McCain or Sarah Palin or any of the thousands of other politicians, past and present, who make money from speaking fees?

 

[Rhea]

Are you getting paid 6 figures an hour to speak?

I'm not quite as interesting as Hillary Clinton.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Can someone please tell me exactly what it is that Hillary Clinton has done that makes some people hate her so much?

The superpredators thing
Her stances on Iraq and Afghanistan
Her hawkish positions on dealing with Iran and Syria
Her support for NAFTA and CAFTA and the TPA
Her support for the IMF and complicity in the economic ruination of Haiti
Her assosciation with some similar policies by her husband
Being an all around warmongering neoliberal only slightly less liberal than her Republican counterparts.

As far as obtaining the super delegates (which, yes, irritates me as they shouldn't come into play until necessary) but I cannot fault her for using everything at her disposal to win an election.

She is essentially bribing her way to the nomination and is not even being shy about it... add that to the list, assuming you believe it.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Or she's getting to the nomination by campaigning well and having several million more people vote for her than for Sanders. It's one or the other.

 

[Ford]

Or she's getting to the nomination by campaigning well and having several million more people vote for her than for Sanders. It's one or the other.

Well now that's just crazy talk.

 

[Harry Bosch]

The superpredators thing
Her stances on Iraq and Afghanistan
Her hawkish positions on dealing with Iran and Syria
Her support for NAFTA and CAFTA and the TPA
Her support for the IMF and complicity in the economic ruination of Haiti
Her assosciation with some similar policies by her husband
Being an all around warmongering neoliberal only slightly less liberal than her Republican counterparts.

As far as obtaining the super delegates (which, yes, irritates me as they shouldn't come into play until necessary) but I cannot fault her for using everything at her disposal to win an election.

She is essentially bribing her way to the nomination and is not even being shy about it... add that to the list, assuming you believe it.

I wish that Hillary were less hawkish. However, the superdelegate thing is silly. More people have voted for her than Bernie. Period. And she's been running for president for 10 years. Of course she has the support of the establishment! If Bernie wants to cut into that, he needs to start getting more votes. Just like what Obama did, the super delegates can and do switch their votes. Bill Clinton was the best US president since FDR in my opinion. How is she bribing her way to the nomination. She's a politican - just like everyone else who is running.

- - - Updated - - -

Where do you think they made their fortunes..... playing craps in Las Vegas? They both were and still are in a career of government pure and simple. Nobody is disputing the $millions they have received in speaking fees and thats corruption pure and simple. And yes it might even be legal....that does not make it right or moral.

Could you please direct me to you posts wherein you are questioning the morality of George W. Bush or Pappa Bush or Jeb Bush or Barbara Bush or John McCain or Sarah Palin or any of the thousands of other politicians, past and present, who make money from speaking fees?

Agreed. I've never understood why she takes so much heat for getting paid for speeches. Every politician since Lincoln has done this!

 

[barbos]

It's not that she is getting paid for speeches. It's how much she is paid.

 

[Harry Bosch]

It's not that she is getting paid for speeches. It's how much she is paid.

Who cares? If someone gives her a million bucks for 10 minutes, who cares?

 

[barbos]

It's not that she is getting paid for speeches. It's how much she is paid.

Who cares? If someone gives her a million bucks for 10 minutes, who cares?

You do realize that these speaking fees are noting but bribes? She is not that interesting.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Who cares? If someone gives her a million bucks for 10 minutes, who cares?

You do realize that these speaking fees are noting but bribes? She is not that interesting.

Totally disagree. She's a great speaker. I attended a speech that she gave to a large group of manufacturers in Seattle. My company paid the fee. But it was a great speech. Uplifting. Probably half the room was business conservatives (fiscally conservative, socially liberal); and she had several standing room only applauses.

 

[Elixir]

I don't like her because she is a boilerplate white male establishment politician in a female body, with an annoying voice and mannerisms that cause me cognitive dissonance, and whose words hold all the signs of political expediency.

OTOH, if she becomes President and selects SCOTUS members who repeal Citizens United, she'll be my new bestie, even as I thank Bernie for holding her to the right path.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

Are you getting paid 6 figures an hour to speak?

I'm not quite as interesting as Hillary Clinton.

If you were, you'd be corrupt!

 

[Colonel Sanders]

How much is the job of President of the US supposed to pay? Yes I know that it is our highest government job...but it is still a government job. Let us even be generous and say that without Washington connections, the Clintons should or would be living like professional doctors. That would be very far removed from their present status of wealth which more resembles that of a Columbian drug lord. One has to ask the question how this came about. And maybe this is all within the law but does this show any sort of integrity on their part?

So she is to penalized for being successful? I thought that was the GOP's wet dream! So, please tell me how you think they made money without 'any sort of integrity'? And is that true for all people who become wealthy beyond your expectations? I'm sorry, but I'm not going to hate or fear someone "just" based on the fact they made money. Show me wrongdoing (like they did with Maddoff) and I will judge then.

This is another of those thunderous hypocrisies that we have to endure from the right.

Trump is a hero for no other reason than he's filthy rich. Hey, he's a businessman who's made money--who can doubt his qualifications?

Or even if one doesn't like Trump, and their position is that no rich person should get to be President, well, that's not worth taking seriously. There are good, honest people who are also wealthy. This says nothing of my position on the income gap and wage inequality--those are huge problems--but to disqualify someone based on their wealth is absurd.

I suppose what, we're supposed to find only people who make less than X amount of money per year to run?

 

[Harry Bosch]

So she is to penalized for being successful? I thought that was the GOP's wet dream! So, please tell me how you think they made money without 'any sort of integrity'? And is that true for all people who become wealthy beyond your expectations? I'm sorry, but I'm not going to hate or fear someone "just" based on the fact they made money. Show me wrongdoing (like they did with Maddoff) and I will judge then.

This is another of those thunderous hypocrisies that we have to endure from the right.

Trump is a hero for no other reason than he's filthy rich. Hey, he's a businessman who's made money--who can doubt his qualifications?

Or even if one doesn't like Trump, and their position is that no rich person should get to be President, well, that's not worth taking seriously. There are good, honest people who are also wealthy. This says nothing of my position on the income gap and wage inequality--those are huge problems--but to disqualify someone based on their wealth is absurd.

I suppose what, we're supposed to find only people who make less than X amount of money per year to run?

Well, you're missing the fact that Trump earned his fortune on his own blood sweat tears. He did it all on his own. (As long as you discount his inheritance, family connections, public infrastructure, grants, and etc!!)

 

[Elixir]

He did it all on his own. (As long as you discount his inheritance, family connections, public infrastructure, grants, and etc!!)

Right... given seven or eight figures worth of seed money, a lot of people would be making it "all on their own". Some of them might even do it without predatory business practices.

 

[Elixir]

I'm not quite as interesting as Hillary Clinton.

...or your friends aren't as rich as hers?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Agreed. I've never understood why she takes so much heat for getting paid for speeches. Every politician since Lincoln has done this!

She's not taking heat for getting paid for speeches. She's taking heat for WHO she is getting paid by. Alot of the speaking fees she received are from people that many voters -- Democrats in particular -- feel are responsible for the economic recession in 2008 and have and subsequently acquired massive political influence after the Citizen's United case. In essence, there are alot of people who feel that the massive financial institutions are part of the problem rather than part of the solution, and their paying Hillary Clinton hundreds of thousands of dollars to give them encouraging peptalks looks ALOT like political corruption.

 

[Elixir]

Agreed. I've never understood why she takes so much heat for getting paid for speeches. Every politician since Lincoln has done this!

She's not taking heat for getting paid for speeches. She's taking heat for WHO she is getting paid by. Alot of the speaking fees she received are from people that many voters -- Democrats in particular -- feel are responsible for the economic recession in 2008 and have and subsequently acquired massive political influence after the Citizen's United case. In essence, there are alot of people who feel that the massive financial institutions are part of the problem rather than part of the solution, and their paying Hillary Clinton hundreds of thousands of dollars to give them encouraging peptalks looks ALOT like political corruption.

I think Hillary can say with a very straight face that nobody can point to anything she has ever done that can be proven to be reciprocity. The influence of money is so insidious in politics that even those under its influence are largely unaware it, subconsciously conflating the interests of their constituents with those of their donor/clients. That's why I would support Bernie; despite the goals upon which he and Hillary ostensibly agree, I believe Bernie would more energetically pursue those goals. It do trust Hillary - to be exactly who and what she is. And I give her credit for representing herself as such, to anyone who listens carefully. Her ethics, practices etc. are all geared to be responsive to the political environment du jour. She has managed to fend off Bernie so far, largely by series of tiny territorial grabs. The tactic is effective; first she sounds out Bernie's position on something by declaring "X will never work" and declaring "I have a better way". When she gets the feedback that a lot of people aren'/t sure it won't work, and she knows it is going to resonate, she changes to "But that IS my plan, and I have been trying to do X since blah blah, and if I am President, THEN I'll get it done". She is very effective at blurring the lines between her "position" and those of her opponent - wherever he seems popular.

If Hillary and teh Donald are nominated, I will not be surprised if she claims that doubling the budget of USBP and building a Wall (probably just a littler one - 'one that can actually be built') was in fact HER idea all along. But of course it would be a very friendly wall that would please everyone, especially Mexicans and Blacks, because it would only keep out thugs and rapists.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

She's not taking heat for getting paid for speeches. She's taking heat for WHO she is getting paid by. Alot of the speaking fees she received are from people that many voters -- Democrats in particular -- feel are responsible for the economic recession in 2008 and have and subsequently acquired massive political influence after the Citizen's United case. In essence, there are alot of people who feel that the massive financial institutions are part of the problem rather than part of the solution, and their paying Hillary Clinton hundreds of thousands of dollars to give them encouraging peptalks looks ALOT like political corruption.

I think Hillary can say with a very straight face that nobody can point to anything she has ever done that can be proven to be reciprocity. The influence of money is so insidious in politics that even those under its influence are largely unaware it, subconsciously conflating the interests of their constituents with those of their donor/clients. That's why I would support Bernie; despite the goals upon which he and Hillary ostensibly agree, I believe Bernie would more energetically pursue those goals. It do trust Hillary - to be exactly who and what she is. And I give her credit for representing herself as such, to anyone who listens carefully. Her ethics, practices etc. are all geared to be responsive to the political environment du jour. She has managed to fend off Bernie so far, largely by series of tiny territorial grabs. The tactic is effective; first she sounds out Bernie's position on something by declaring "X will never work" and declaring "I have a better way". When she gets the feedback that a lot of people aren'/t sure it won't work, and she knows it is going to resonate, she changes to "But that IS my plan, and I have been trying to do X since blah blah, and if I am President, THEN I'll get it done". She is very effective at blurring the lines between her "position" and those of her opponent - wherever he seems popular.

If Hillary and teh Donald are nominated, I will not be surprised if she claims that doubling the budget of USBP and building a Wall (probably just a littler one - 'one that can actually be built') was in fact HER idea all along. But of course it would be a very friendly wall that would please everyone, especially Mexicans and Blacks, because it would only keep out thugs and rapists.

You seem to be describing someone with a lot of experience who knows how to move and work within the system.

Or maybe Todd, the oddly old, but mentally slow grocery bagger at the Stater Brothers near my house is more qualified. He's never taken money from special interests and I've never heard him switch positions on anything. Go Todd. OTOH, Todd may be corrupted by Big Plastic because he usually forgets to ask me which material I would like to use so that I less laboriously carry my groceries from the cart to the trunk and into my house. And now that I think about it, Todd has never recommended that I buy some of the cloth bags so that I quit wasting natural resources.

How could I have been so foolish? Todd is obviously in the pocket of Big Pollution.

Down with Todd.

 

[Tristan Scott]

Perhaps instead of doing the usual echo chamber, you should find an actual Republican that hates her and ask that Republican. Most of these answers, "because she's a woman", are probably somewhat different from what Republicans would say, but instead reflect the general opinion of Republicans on this forum.

I have. Several say that there is just something about her they don't like. Some say she comes across as "not genuine", some say she seems snarky. I agree that her biggest problem is being a woman, being a strong woman in America means you are a bitch. Hopefully having a woman president will change that, at least for some.