Corrupt and a weak candidate.
Member Fishtroller published a comment calling HRC corrupt and a weak candidate. Boy did Fishtroller have it right.
Corrupt. Anyone can make a really bad decision. One or two in a lifetime. It happens to the best. But 30 years of scandal after scandal after scandal? From Whitewater and futures trading in the 1980s to the private email server to bypass FOIA and the Hillary Victory Fund money laundering and all the garbage in between. (Fair play, some of it was RWNM misinformation, but ALL of it? Nah.)
What this uninterrupted parade of controversy and scandal tells me is this: the Clintons don't ask "Is it fair and ethical? Is it good policy? Will it be good for the public?"; their only inquires are "Can we get away with it?" "Will it be good for our mega-donors?" Corrupt in heart and soul, if not in law.
Weak Candidate She is a terrible candidate. Her speeches are wooden and stilted. She doesn't generate enthusiasm. She has the Clinton "brand", a brand as recognizable as Nike or IBM and she STILL can't out-campaign a 73 year old Independent socialist democrat who hails from one of the smallest states in the Union, who had almost 0% name recognition on the day he filed for POTUS.
She's shrill. There, I said it. But despite the bull shit at TOP, it's not a sexist smear to say Hillary is shrill. Elizabeth Warren is a woman, she isn't shrill. Ross Perot is a man, but he IS shrill. She is short tempered. ("Why don't YOU run for something?" "I'm sick and tired of the Sanders campaign on this issue..."). She's not quick on her feet. When sycophants constantly tell you that you're the greatest, sometimes you believe it. And if there are 2 choices, the Clinton campaign will make the wrong one. In 2008, I thought that it was Mark Penn who fucked up her campaign and probably not her. Mr. Penn was a lousy campaign manager but I still owe him an apology. I dread thinking of what her G.E. campaign will look like if she gets the nomination.
Comments
It's so true...
She is unlikeable and shrill. It bothers me that we can no longer use a term even when its fits. Have women been unfairly slighted for being ambitious and outspoken? Of course. Have they been called shrill when they weren't? Many times. But that doesn't mean its inaccurate in every case.
I'm a woman, so I have a soft spot in my heart for seeing a woman president. And I think almost any other woman, barring Sarah Palin and Carly Fiorino, would be a breath of fresh air in the presidency. The thing that really bothers me is that for a woman to be considered for the presidency, she apparently has to lose or to have never had those attributes that women are stereotypically known for - compassion, intuition, compromise, caring for others. Don't get me wrong, of course both men and women possess these characteristics, but it seems like a woman must cleanse herself of any attribute that might be considered stereotypically womanly and thus weak, to be considered for the job. So, in that case, what's the point of electing a woman president? We need a different KIND of president, not just a different gendered president.
I want to see a woman as president, but I want it to be a woman who hasn't spent her life trying to be harder and colder than what she thinks men are like. Gender alone is not enough.
What we need to see in the presidency are those attributes that are generally considered womanly - community, compassion, concern for all people, idealism, so in that sense Bernie Sanders is the more stereotypically female candidate.
This is why stereotypes and identity politics are so problematic. No one ever really fits any stereotype, and yet stereotypes aren't totally false either. They are just distractions and distortions from the true set of characteristics of any individual person. And we need to be judging people on who they actually are, good or bad, and not who we imagine or want them to be or what we think they represent.
I am rec'ing this but
I disagree with this point that I emphasized below.
I do not think she is trying to be harder and colder. I believe that is her real persona, no matter the reason. Maybe it is the sense of entitlement that I see with her, but she honestly does not seem to have any compassion for those whom she (as Sec. of State) and her husband (policies he promoted during his Presidency and she openly supported) have done so much harm to. She honestly does not care, even when called out for it. It is sociopathic how she is able to justify to herself and the public every harmful thing she has ever done. I believe that she and Bill were made for each other in that they are completely self serving and selfish people who only care about money and power, in that order.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
She's a megalomaniac.
Just like tRump.
Hey wait a minute...there's one guy holding out both puppets
" In the beginning, the universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry, and is generally considered to have been a bad move. -- Douglas Adams, The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy "
the puppet master
Pull the strings and watch 'em dance. Fun clip. Guess they were sock puppets?
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
To hell with Shrill!
I'm going with "Just plain wrong on most issues." I don't care if her voice sounds like nails on a chalkboard, if you're right, you're right and if you're wrong you're wrong. The lack of nice clothes, good hair and a sonorous voice never held Bernie back, after all...
I want my two dollars!
You're right of course.
If she was a good candidate, it wouldn't matter at all what she sounded like.
I guess its just something concrete to grab onto amongst all her amorphous bad qualities. But you're absolutely right, its completely irrelevant whether she is shrill or has a lovely sonorous voice.
I stand corrected.
She comes across as "Vote me
She comes across as "Vote me in, I am of one of the royal bloodlines! it is my turn! My time to rule!" so as far as I am concerned Feth her, feth Bill and feth the rest of the self entitled greedy fucktards ruling this nation who cannot see that they are running us to a dead world. I know there is a shift of consciousness going on, but it has not gained the powerful momentum it needs to fix things as fast as it needs to. As long as the wealthy and their pals stay in power and hold all the money/resources, then based on past and current patterns, you will see the end of things sooner than later. Politeness does not work on them, they have only ever given things to calm down the angry mobs.
The zombie virus that allows her to win so much is based in Greed (I don't want to be taxed), and fear(Anything but Trump).
So we have the Neo-Liberal Plague killing us and our biosphere. Then maybe one day, a more enlightened species will rise again on Earth, but since Humanity keeps voting for the sociopaths and psychos we have and always have? Bugger all the new name is Homo-sapiens-stupidicus
So long, and thanks for all the fish