That Huff Post article is from July. She hasn't been talking about middle-class problems in any of the recent debates.
0
Options
Kat
There's a lot to be said for nowhere. Posts: 4,772
edited February 2016
I would love nothing better than for the nation's politics to swing way left but it's important to think about what the general election will be like. I visualize new Democrat Bernie being pasted with hammers and sickles and labeled a Communist because people will be told to be afraid even more than they are now and they won't bother to look it up. Our elected officials are mostly in the center because the extremes do not win. That's just the way it usually shakes out. It's important to me that the next president be Democratic and leftist because it's definite they will nominate for the Supreme Court, unless the existing court can live forever. The stakes are high.
The only way Sanders has a chance with a two-party system, is to join one of the two parties. I am an independent, not a Democrat. But it's quite obvious that you cannot win in United States for POTUS if you're not in one of the two parties.
0
Options
Kat
There's a lot to be said for nowhere. Posts: 4,772
The only way Sanders has a chance with a two-party system, is to join one of the two parties. I am an independent, not a Democrat. But it's quite obvious that you cannot win in United States for POTUS if you're not in one of the two parties.
You don't see this as a problem of integrity? I am wondering, because Hillary is constantly getting tagged on her integrity. Also her "likeability"
Perhaps his revolution against the "establishment" should include a revolution against the 2-party system.
IF YOU WANT A PLATE OF MY BEEF SWELLINGTON, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY THE COVERCHARGE.
Is everyone going to vote in like-minded candidates for the Congress? To my mind, that would make a difference.
There are a whole lot of seat up for grabs!! The Congress though is so heavily gerrymandered dems are going to struggle until it move back to the center.
The only way Sanders has a chance with a two-party system, is to join one of the two parties. I am an independent, not a Democrat. But it's quite obvious that you cannot win in United States for POTUS if you're not in one of the two parties.
You don't see this as a problem of integrity? I am wondering, because Hillary is constantly getting tagged on her integrity. Also her "likeability"
Perhaps his revolution against the "establishment" should include a revolution against the 2-party system.
Yes, I see it as a problem with integrity. The system in place has zero signs of integrity with all the corps and big banks holding the puppet strings. We've all seen how the status quo refuses entry of a 3rd party into it's corrupt system. Do we continue to enter as a 3rd party while expecting different results - repeating a Ralph Nadar approach? No! We change from within, and that means getting in by playing the game. Otherwise, it will not happen.
Hillary integrity? The flip flopper moderate one day, the next a progressive? Funny as Hell. And Sanders' campaign is a revolution against a two-party system. Do you know of another democratic socialist trying to become president?
I would love nothing better than for the nation's politics to swing way left but it's important to think about what the general election will be like. I visualize new Democrat Bernie being pasted with hammers and sickles and labeled a Communist because people will be told to be afraid even more than they are now and they won't bother to look it up. Our elected officials are mostly in the center because the extremes do not win. That's just the way it usually shakes out. It's important to me that the next president be Democratic and leftist because it's definite they will nominate for the Supreme Court, unless the existing court can live forever. The stakes are high.
We see and visualize what we want, don't we. You see what Status quo sees. You probably watch and read mainstream media, which plays the public like a fiddle. The media and Hillary supporters say that Sanders is unelectable. The media doesn't cover Sanders until lately, that's only because they have to. There is so much support that the media can't deny him anymore. He is raised a Record amount of money from personal donations and tied Iowa as an underdog.
There is no need to have fear of Sanders. That's what the media is trying to cause. How about reading up on him and his causes rather than being afraid of what the lying media might portray him as? Or thinking critically?
Hey Kat, just to let you know, if Sanders doesn't win the nom I'll vote for Hillary. But I'm not so sure she will. And unless her donors buy the election, something they are desperate to do seeing that the real human support is on the side of Sanders. Real support. Because he's the only candidate who's really looking out for the people of this country, not the corporations paying him off.
That Democratic politicos feel the need to "shame" women into voting for their anointed and chosen candidate shows how underserved we in the American electorate have been by their party this time around. I know I keep saying that but the reason why is because I'm still so shocked by it.
That Democratic politicos feel the need to "shame" women into voting for their anointed and chosen candidate shows how underserved we in the American electorate have been by their party this time around. I know I keep saying that but the reason why is because I'm still so shocked by it.
I was shocked by Steinham, but by the time Albright said what she did? Just tells me how desperate Hillary camp is getting.
The only way Sanders has a chance with a two-party system, is to join one of the two parties. I am an independent, not a Democrat. But it's quite obvious that you cannot win in United States for POTUS if you're not in one of the two parties.
You don't see this as a problem of integrity? I am wondering, because Hillary is constantly getting tagged on her integrity. Also her "likeability"
Perhaps his revolution against the "establishment" should include a revolution against the 2-party system.
Yes, I see it as a problem with integrity. The system in place has zero signs of integrity with all the corps and big banks holding the puppet strings. We've all seen how the status quo refuses entry of a 3rd party into it's corrupt system. Do we continue to enter as a 3rd party while expecting different results - repeating a Ralph Nadar approach? No! We change from within, and that means getting in by playing the game. Otherwise, it will not happen.
Hillary integrity? The flip flopper moderate one day, the next a progressive? Funny as Hell. And Sanders' campaign is a revolution against a two-party system. Do you know of another democratic socialist trying to become president?
And actually succeeding??
a revolution from within that began back in 1981? Establishment, Grassroots, and Big Banks seem to be the soundbites from the Bernie campaign. What of his stance on gun control, on Black Lives Matter movement, on LGBTQ issues, and on Gender inequality?
I am actually glad that Bernie is in the presidential race, he is assisting in opening up the media coverage to actual issues in general, rather than hairstyles and red herrings. As I said before, I only wish that he had elected to do so as the independent he has always been.
"flip flopper" is usually a term used to marginalize a candidate's changing position. Most of what is being viewed as her flipping on issues is a result of Hillary's changing within the changes of her own party. I think that based on her stance on issues she has shown herself to be progressive on social issues.
IF YOU WANT A PLATE OF MY BEEF SWELLINGTON, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY THE COVERCHARGE.
At a certain point, isn't it time to stop fruitlessly criticizing the spoon feeders of persuasive opinions (since people only concerning themselves with their own success is a trend as old as the human race), and start holding a population of people accountable for the negative byproducts of not questioning enough (or at all)? Thought control via appeal to emotion, promises of personal or financial growth, etc. are not new ideas. A widespread recognition of these occurrences and refusal to allow them to sway opinions - that's still more or less unpracticed. Or maybe I have to lay off the wacky tobacky.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
At a certain point, isn't it time to stop fruitlessly criticizing the spoon feeders of persuasive opinions (since people only concerning themselves with their own success is a trend as old as the human race), and start holding a population of people accountable for the negative byproducts of not questioning enough (or at all)? Thought control via appeal to emotion, promises of personal or financial growth, etc. are not new ideas. A widespread recognition of these occurrences and refusal to allow them to sway opinions - that's still more or less unpracticed. Or maybe I have to lay off the wacky tobacky.
Now THAT would be a revolution. (btw, pass it over)
Cal,your letting your white guilt crowd your judgement.Sheesh,did you really read what I said. As Gambsy pointed out I was not stating a personal position,I was commenting on the similarities between the shaming women for Hillary and the Black communities pimping Obama in the last 2 elections. You validated what Dan-O said by commenting in the negative.It just goes to show you,that even commenting on differences in race,sex and gender in today's overly sensitive PC climate and people think you wear a white hood.crazy shit.
This is no different than during the last 2 elections when some Black leaders,celebrities and sport stars came out and said "all black people should vote for Obama".Shaming them if not. Forget issues and politics.Votes should be based on who represents your interests the best.Hiw bad would it sound if I said I'm only voting for a White Male,because he's white.Stupidity.
Come on. Really? Blacks voting for Obama due to his race certainly played a part and good for that but he was by FAR the best choice.
RR you seem to be leaning more and more towards the racists poor white male having it do bad due to blacks position. What gives? Appeasing the racist Chicago cop? Fk.
The point is that people voted for him because he was black, not because he was obviously the best choice by far. That is the problem with it, and with this issue now.
The only way Sanders has a chance with a two-party system, is to join one of the two parties. I am an independent, not a Democrat. But it's quite obvious that you cannot win in United States for POTUS if you're not in one of the two parties.
You don't see this as a problem of integrity? I am wondering, because Hillary is constantly getting tagged on her integrity. Also her "likeability"
Perhaps his revolution against the "establishment" should include a revolution against the 2-party system.
Yes, I see it as a problem with integrity. The system in place has zero signs of integrity with all the corps and big banks holding the puppet strings. We've all seen how the status quo refuses entry of a 3rd party into it's corrupt system. Do we continue to enter as a 3rd party while expecting different results - repeating a Ralph Nadar approach? No! We change from within, and that means getting in by playing the game. Otherwise, it will not happen.
Hillary integrity? The flip flopper moderate one day, the next a progressive? Funny as Hell. And Sanders' campaign is a revolution against a two-party system. Do you know of another democratic socialist trying to become president?
And actually succeeding??
a revolution from within that began back in 1981? Establishment, Grassroots, and Big Banks seem to be the soundbites from the Bernie campaign. What of his stance on gun control, on Black Lives Matter movement, on LGBTQ issues, and on Gender inequality?
I am actually glad that Bernie is in the presidential race, he is assisting in opening up the media coverage to actual issues in general, rather than hairstyles and red herrings. As I said before, I only wish that he had elected to do so as the independent he has always been.
"flip flopper" is usually a term used to marginalize a candidate's changing position. Most of what is being viewed as her flipping on issues is a result of Hillary's changing within the changes of her own party. I think that based on her stance on issues she has shown herself to be progressive on social issues.
Feel free* to look up he positions on gun control, BLM, LGBTQ and gender inequality. Report back!
Don't you see? There is no way he would have gotten this far as an independent.
So you don't think that politicians flip flop on issues to appease to whatever audience, monetary backer, voters? Politicians are pros at saying what you want to hear in order to get YOUR vote.
Kat,, how do you feel about Hillary's camp using shame to gain other women voters? Does it not bother you?
0
Options
Kat
There's a lot to be said for nowhere. Posts: 4,772
edited February 2016
That's free speech for sure if it wasn't photoshopped. Rubio's campaign has protesters showing up in robot costumes. It sure is an interesting election season. I remember when there was some dignity to the process though. I'm getting soooo old lol. ------------------------------ And Free, it didn't happen in 2008, donors buying the election over someone else who was favored and had real support so I think no worries there. Also, as for where I'm reading...well, right here so I think I'm pretty well-informed. You all bring a lot of info for consideration.
Post edited by Kat on
Falling down,...not staying down
0
Options
Kat
There's a lot to be said for nowhere. Posts: 4,772
Kat,, how do you feel about Hillary's camp using shame to gain other women voters? Does it not bother you?
At this point, after a lifetime of hoping for gender equality and doing as much as I could for progress in that area, I care more about seeing a woman president before I die. That will be for ALL women. Now finally, there's a woman who is qualified and can stand toe-to-toe with world leaders. Young women didn't have to experience what came before them, the fights and struggles and now some forces try to push women backwards, can you believe? The women working for Hillary, many of whom have been working a lifetime for gender equality, did not intend to personally insult young women. I've heard that young women expect to have a woman president in their lifetime. Maybe it won't happen because of those aforementioned forces. Right now we have a woman running for office who is experienced...and she has my vote. Have a beautiful evening.
The only way Sanders has a chance with a two-party system, is to join one of the two parties. I am an independent, not a Democrat. But it's quite obvious that you cannot win in United States for POTUS if you're not in one of the two parties.
You don't see this as a problem of integrity? I am wondering, because Hillary is constantly getting tagged on her integrity. Also her "likeability"
Perhaps his revolution against the "establishment" should include a revolution against the 2-party system.
Yes, I see it as a problem with integrity. The system in place has zero signs of integrity with all the corps and big banks holding the puppet strings. We've all seen how the status quo refuses entry of a 3rd party into it's corrupt system. Do we continue to enter as a 3rd party while expecting different results - repeating a Ralph Nadar approach? No! We change from within, and that means getting in by playing the game. Otherwise, it will not happen.
Hillary integrity? The flip flopper moderate one day, the next a progressive? Funny as Hell. And Sanders' campaign is a revolution against a two-party system. Do you know of another democratic socialist trying to become president?
And actually succeeding??
a revolution from within that began back in 1981? Establishment, Grassroots, and Big Banks seem to be the soundbites from the Bernie campaign. What of his stance on gun control, on Black Lives Matter movement, on LGBTQ issues, and on Gender inequality?
I am actually glad that Bernie is in the presidential race, he is assisting in opening up the media coverage to actual issues in general, rather than hairstyles and red herrings. As I said before, I only wish that he had elected to do so as the independent he has always been.
"flip flopper" is usually a term used to marginalize a candidate's changing position. Most of what is being viewed as her flipping on issues is a result of Hillary's changing within the changes of her own party. I think that based on her stance on issues she has shown herself to be progressive on social issues.
Feel free* to look up he positions on gun control, BLM, LGBTQ and gender inequality. Report back!
Don't you see? There is no way he would have gotten this far as an independent.
So you don't think that politicians flip flop on issues to appease to whatever audience, monetary backer, voters? Politicians are pros at saying what you want to hear in order to get YOUR vote.
I think we are making similar points about two separate Candidates. Bernie's position has also evolved on those social issues, just as Hillary's position has evolved on the banks/corp issues.
Essentially, I am amazed when Hillary is being called on the carpet for being a politician, but alternate candidates are lauded for the same behavior. It's almost like there is some sort of bias of some kind...
Back to the topic - Hillary's campaign is not shaming women for not supporting her candidacy. Her supporters may be doing so, however. I think she is a savvy enough politician to "say what we want to hear" to know that shame doesn't work. And she is a pretty polarizing politician already, without adding this "shaming" accusation into the mix.
IF YOU WANT A PLATE OF MY BEEF SWELLINGTON, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY THE COVERCHARGE.
Cal,your letting your white guilt crowd your judgement.Sheesh,did you really read what I said. As Gambsy pointed out I was not stating a personal position,I was commenting on the similarities between the shaming women for Hillary and the Black communities pimping Obama in the last 2 elections. You validated what Dan-O said by commenting in the negative.It just goes to show you,that even commenting on differences in race,sex and gender in today's overly sensitive PC climate and people think you wear a white hood.crazy shit.
It's turned in to a pattern in your replies on race and your support of racist comments by your buddy. And did he come through to reinforce his position. It's a dark side RR.
Comments
Perhaps his revolution against the "establishment" should include a revolution against the 2-party system.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Hillary integrity? The flip flopper moderate one day, the next a progressive? Funny as Hell. And Sanders' campaign is a revolution against a two-party system. Do you know of another democratic socialist trying to become president?
And actually succeeding??
There is no need to have fear of Sanders. That's what the media is trying to cause. How about reading up on him and his causes rather than being afraid of what the lying media might portray him as? Or thinking critically?
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
I am actually glad that Bernie is in the presidential race, he is assisting in opening up the media coverage to actual issues in general, rather than hairstyles and red herrings. As I said before, I only wish that he had elected to do so as the independent he has always been.
"flip flopper" is usually a term used to marginalize a candidate's changing position. Most of what is being viewed as her flipping on issues is a result of Hillary's changing within the changes of her own party. I think that based on her stance on issues she has shown herself to be progressive on social issues.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
LIVEFOOTSTEPS.ORG/USER/?USR=435
As Gambsy pointed out I was not stating a personal position,I was commenting on the similarities between the shaming women for Hillary and the Black communities pimping Obama in the last 2 elections.
You validated what Dan-O said by commenting in the negative.It just goes to show you,that even commenting on differences in race,sex and gender in today's overly sensitive PC climate and people think you wear a white hood.crazy shit.
Don't you see? There is no way he would have gotten this far as an independent.
So you don't think that politicians flip flop on issues to appease to whatever audience, monetary backer, voters? Politicians are pros at saying what you want to hear in order to get YOUR vote.
Settle For Hillary, HA
WOOT
Kat,, how do you feel about Hillary's camp using shame to gain other women voters? Does it not bother you?
------------------------------
And Free, it didn't happen in 2008, donors buying the election over someone else who was favored and had real support so I think no worries there. Also, as for where I'm reading...well, right here so I think I'm pretty well-informed. You all bring a lot of info for consideration.
Essentially, I am amazed when Hillary is being called on the carpet for being a politician, but alternate candidates are lauded for the same behavior. It's almost like there is some sort of bias of some kind...
Back to the topic - Hillary's campaign is not shaming women for not supporting her candidacy. Her supporters may be doing so, however. I think she is a savvy enough politician to "say what we want to hear" to know that shame doesn't work. And she is a pretty polarizing politician already, without adding this "shaming" accusation into the mix.