By going on the attack. It's the only way. Go after her record, her credibility, her judgment, and her inability to connect with the average voter.
You mean the truth..and what's so bad with that?
By going on the attack. It's the only way. Go after her record, her credibility, her judgment, and her inability to connect with the average voter.
nothing. it's all fair game. Bernie needs to illustrate a clear contrast for the voters. He's not doing a good enough job with women voters. It wouldn't hurt to point out how Hillary's record is not as pro women as she claims it is.You mean the truth..and what's so bad with that?
So says the media..yet Hillary has had recently the biggest defection of women voters last I heard, 29%nothing. it's all fair game. Bernie needs to illustrate a clear contrast for the voters. He's not doing a good enough job with women voters. It wouldn't hurt to point out how Hillary's record is not as pro women as she claims it is.
Is that what took her so long to oppose the keystone pipeline? lolSo says the media..yet Hillary has had recently the biggest defection of women voters last I heard, 29%
Rand Paul was right the other night when he said Hillary is a NeoCon.
She is pro-platitude and has not one single new idea of substance only committing to anything after Bernie comes out with his plans because she is forced to.
so you are saying it is bad to be against gay marriage, and condemn hillary for taking so long to reverse on that issue, yet you are supporting the most anti-gay bigots out there in people like ben carson and donald trump?Is that what took her so long to oppose the keystone pipeline? lol
It took Hillary until 2013 to reverse her stance on gay marriage, and now she pretends to have supported it for a long time.
Hillary Clinton
@HillaryClinton
Proud to celebrate a historic victory for marriage equality—& the courage & determination of LGBT Americans who made it possible. -H
7:05 AM - 26 Jun 2015
"1 – If by “legislate the wealthy out of prosperity” you mean “Hey we have the lowest taxes that we’ve had in 60 years” than yes… Also, you CAN legislate the poor into prosperity through things like education credits, pell grants, job programs, and other things that are designed to give them a better opportunity to be successful. We USED to call that “upward mobility” back when we still believed in that as a country.
Which is why she's hemorrhaging supporters.. Someone else clearly contrasts her, has a better record at being a humanitarian and is an all around better candidate.My point is your dear Hillary has flip flopped on almost every single major issue. Including the war in Iraq, and the Trans -Pacific Partership. I could go on and on
Bravo!!!"1 – If by “legislate the wealthy out of prosperity” you mean “Hey we have the lowest taxes that we’ve had in 60 years” than yes… Also, you CAN legislate the poor into prosperity through things like education credits, pell grants, job programs, and other things that are designed to give them a better opportunity to be successful. We USED to call that “upward mobility” back when we still believed in that as a country.
2 – Do you mean like Social Security? Medicare? The misconception about most entitlement programs is that somehow, they are just the government standing outside the White House throwing dollar bills at people. That’s not really how it works. We ALL work and pay taxes that go towards things like that. If this is a veiled slam on Welfare, you obviously do not understand what welfare (now TANF) really is. If by some stroke of unintentional awesomness you stumbled into making a point about corporations getting massive subsidies and not paying any taxes, well then bravo.
3 – If the government comes and takes your guns, I hope they give them to me. I mean, that’s what the government does, right? Tell me, did the government “take” your roads away to give to somebody else? What about your military? Who did the government give them to? Teachers? Police? Firefighters? Where did the government take them from, and where are they now? Who did the government take the GI Bill from? How DARE they “give” the military the chance to get a quality education and TAKE that from the rest of us, right?
4 – I know my calculus. It says you + me = us. More importantly, it says that you don’t understand economics at all. I’m sure every time Apple splits their stock and people make millions of dollars they laugh about how they divided their wealth. Also as it pertains to building a stronger middle class: We have the largest income disparity EVER in this country right now. The rich are getting richer, and the working class has remained stagnant. Believe it or not when more people have money, and more people spend money, it actually creates a stronger economy. The scary part is, the people with money actually make MORE money when that happens. Need proof? See Clinton, Bill.
5 – Aaaah, the “takers vs. makers” argument. If America is now a nation of moochers, why is worker productivity at an all-time high? People are working harder and longer than ever before – the problem is those “makers” aka the “job creators” don’t seem to want to pay them more for that work. They don’t seem to want to hire more people, either. I know how attractive it must seem for a strong middle class family making around $50,000 a year to stop working and live on $160 a month in food stamps but that generally doesn’t happen. If by “take care of them” you mean “ensure that everyone has basic access to food, shelter, and medical care” I’m just going to call you a Communist because seriously, who believes in that nonsense? If you are counting the people who have been “makers” and have earned the right to be “takers” – You know, like our Veterans, military, people who have retired and who have paid into Social Security their whole lives, or people who are on Medicare, that’s a pretty solid argument. Since about 2% of the country is ACTUALLY on TANF, maybe you should see #1 and hope that you can get some of that free government money to go back to school and hone those math skills.
MURIKA!"
Why is changing your opinion based off of a decision or fact, or changing your stance when you're an elected official considered "Flip flopping?" I mean, what, did the entire world decide to flip flop when it gave up on the idea of the Earth being flat? Did Newton flip flop on the idea of gravity when he first hypothesized it? Did everyone flip flop when they saw the dangers of radiation? Do you consider the Civil Rights Act a flip flop on part of the US government? Or the 14th Amendment? Striking down the 1/5th compromise? Maybe pulling out of Vietnam was a flip-flop too at this rate.My point is your dear Hillary has flip flopped on almost every single major issue. Including the war in Iraq, and the Trans -Pacific Partership. I could go on and on
Well, of course. But when republicans do it, it's 'a carefully considered change of heart'. The spin makes me seasick.Why is changing your opinion based off of a decision or fact, or changing your stance when you're an elected official considered "Flip flopping?" I mean, what, did the entire world decide to flip flop when it gave up on the idea of the Earth being flat? Did Newton flip flop on the idea of gravity when he first hypothesized it? Did everyone flip flop when they saw the dangers of radiation?
On something that might be unclear, and new evidence comes to light, sure. But gay americans have been deserving of equal rights for decades, something Bernie already understood. That Clinton "decides to change her mind based on new information" right as it was politically expedient to do so points to populism rather than sincerity. Especially when that same pattern is repeated over and over on various issues. I just don't trust her to stick to the words coming out of her mouth now once elected.Why is changing your opinion based off of a decision or fact, or changing your stance when you're an elected official considered "Flip flopping?" I mean, what, did the entire world decide to flip flop when it gave up on the idea of the Earth being flat? Did Newton flip flop on the idea of gravity when he first hypothesized it? Did everyone flip flop when they saw the dangers of radiation?
shut up and go away, little person.I'm sure Bernie has binders full of womenz...
so you're following me around now? we must disagree on everything...Why is changing your opinion based off of a decision or fact, or changing your stance when you're an elected official considered "Flip flopping?" I mean, what, did the entire world decide to flip flop when it gave up on the idea of the Earth being flat? Did Newton flip flop on the idea of gravity when he first hypothesized it? Did everyone flip flop when they saw the dangers of radiation? Do you consider the Civil Rights Act a flip flop on part of the US government? Or the 14th Amendment? Striking down the 1/5th compromise? Maybe pulling out of Vietnam was a flip-flop too at this rate.
How vain can you be? I just see shit posting and decide to correct it. Unfortunately you do a lot of it here in politics.so you're following me around now? we must disagree on everything...
What facts about bay marriage have changed since Clinton suddenly changed her view?
you think you're correcting me, but all I see is you not answering a simple questionHow vain can you be? I just see shit posting and decide to correct it. Unfortunately you do a lot of it here in politics.
Kind of like how you never answered any one of my questions? Or kind of like how you decided to argue how Germany was slipping into a civil war and when I pointed out that the "German official" you quoted was from a small, fringe party, you kept touting that as the truth? Then I showed you a search in Der Spiegel, which is Germany's #1 news source of "Germany civil war" and there were no hits on a story about the nation of Germany slipping into a civil war? Then you posted up the protest in Yemen, pawning it off as something in Europe, back peddled saying "These are the type of people who are fleeing into Europe!" When that's also completely not the case, but you kept touting that line of "They're mostly male, jihadists, who are trying to pull Europe into a civil war!" or some other right wing "theory" on the refugee crisis.you say your correcting me, but all I see is you not answering a simple question
Neither one of those citations suggests she supports gay marriage. Only the rights of gays and lesbians in the military, and civil unions between same sex couples. which is not the Same thing as gay marriage. Nice try though. Also, that was a good attempt at trolling me into a middle east refugee conversation, but it's not going to work. We are discussing Hillary right now.Kind of like how you never answered any one of my questions? Or kind of like how you decided to argue how Germany was slipping into a civil war and when I pointed out that the "German official" you quoted was from a small, fringe party, you kept touting that as the truth? Then I showed you a search in Der Spiegel, which is Germany's #1 news source of "Germany civil war" and there were no hits on a story about the nation of Germany slipping into a civil war? Then you posted up the protest in Yemen, pawning it off as something in Europe, back peddled saying "These are the type of people who are fleeing into Europe!" When that's also completely not the case, but you kept touting that line of "They're mostly male, jihadists, who are trying to pull Europe into a civil war!" or some other right wing "theory" on the refugee crisis.
Actually look up Hillary's positions and quotes on Gay Marriage before you start spouting your party line about how she "flip flopped." I don't really like Hillary that much, but at least I can get informed about her.
https://partners.nytimes.com/library/politics/camp/120999sen-ny-dem.html
"Hillary Rodham Clinton told a group of gay contributors this week that the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, intended to make it easier for gay men and lesbians to serve in the military, had been a failure, her aides said Wednesday. Mrs. Clinton, a candidate for the United States Senate, said that if elected she would work to overturn the policy, one of the first put in place under President Clinton." - December 9, 1999
http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/hil-nixes-same-sex-marriage-article-1.864728
""Marriage has got historic, religious and moral content that goes back to the beginning of time, and I think a marriage is as a marriage has always been, between a man and a woman," the First Lady said in White Plains. "But I also believe that people in committed gay marriages, as they believe them to be, should be given rights under the law that recognize and respect their relationship." - Tuesday, January 11, 2000
I can go on and on, and yeah duh she's had a little bit of a back and forth over the issue, but at least now she's accepting of it unlike a lot of the Conservatards who think that somehow SCOTUS is "legislating from the bench," and want to overturn their decision/outright ban gay marriage.