The Hillary Clinton thread

Watching the Hillary docu's it's sad the number that has been done on her by the right wing press to keep her out of office, also the discrimination she has had to put up with because of her gender, her husband's womanising done her no favours.
Then when she was set to be President being the highly intelligent experienced candidate up against a buffoon, she wins the 3 TV debates against the buffoon as expected and still loses due to the right wing press, female jealousy (which lots of women are known for) and the Russians interfering in the election to get Trump elected as Trump is their weak poodle and they were well scared of Hillary.
Given America's position in the World it's a pity that such an intelligent leader didn't get the top job, she had tried to get universal health care for all Americans in the past but the powers that be went all out to stop it, I wonder if her political dna is influenced by her strong Welsh roots.

Hillary was said to be ahead of her time, the tip of the spear, change she was was advocating was too much of a change at the time she was proposing it which was a pity for her on a personal level but she gets the ball rolling making it easier for others in the future.

Hillary Clinton is intelligent, usually competent and rational and she genuinely pushes a number of progressive causes - but she is also a representative of the corporate elite, a warmonger and more than averagely corrupt for a career politician. Had she been elected in 2016 the USA would have maintained most of the Obama course (for good and bad) and would have remained the primary imperialist power in the world at the heart of all the alliances and agencies that support that. She is well to the right in the Democratic Party.

I agree that symbolically a Clinton presidency would have changed perceptions about gender roles - as Obama's victory did about racial glass ceilings. That would have been a major positive.

There seems to be a new batch of books and documentaries (maybe some re-releases) coming out that are giving Hillary Clinton a PR polish - maybe to emphasise the difference in ability and character with Trump. I would have Clinton or Biden any day over Trump and his white supremacist gang of crooks - but both of them are deeply flawed and dangerous (just not as dangerous as Trump). Don't buy into the spin.

Seems like the voting public either strongly like or strongly dislike Hillary .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

Hillary Clinton is intelligent, usually competent and rational and she genuinely pushes a number of progressive causes - but she is also a representative of the corporate elite, a warmonger and more than averagely corrupt for a career politician. Had she been elected in 2016 the USA would have maintained most of the Obama course (for good and bad) and would have remained the primary imperialist power in the world at the heart of all the alliances and agencies that support that. She is well to the right in the Democratic Party.

I agree that symbolically a Clinton presidency would have changed perceptions about gender roles - as Obama's victory did about racial glass ceilings. That would have been a major positive.

There seems to be a new batch of books and documentaries (maybe some re-releases) coming out that are giving Hillary Clinton a PR polish - maybe to emphasise the difference in ability and character with Trump. I would have Clinton or Biden any day over Trump and his white supremacist gang of crooks - but both of them are deeply flawed and dangerous (just not as dangerous as Trump). Don't buy into the spin.

---

Strongly to the left of the Democratic party on economic policy I would say but an imperialist war hawk like you say.
For America at home she would have been good (unless she got involved in foreign wars), very strong and capable on policy, education, health, business and social policies but for the rest of the World bad imo as she would take sides on the foreign stage and no doubt sided with other imperialists and American puppets.

As regards a couple of your other observations jon, I do think of her as a career politician myself because she seems to have always been in politics but she was a lawyer at one point, on the corruption allegations that have dogged her they have been unfounded which is ironic in the current circumstances, right wing opponents and right wing press have accused her of this and that in the past but nothing criminal proven, yet after years of this the minute the other side get accusations levelled against them they go into a tail spin and the thing is there was nothing proven against Hillary yet the latest stories the other way round there was Russian involvement in helping Trump get in, so there is a case to answer there, ironic in it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

Hillary Clinton is intelligent, usually competent and rational and she genuinely pushes a number of progressive causes - but she is also a representative of the corporate elite, a warmonger and more than averagely corrupt for a career politician. Had she been elected in 2016 the USA would have maintained most of the Obama course (for good and bad) and would have remained the primary imperialist power in the world at the heart of all the alliances and agencies that support that. She is well to the right in the Democratic Party.

I agree that symbolically a Clinton presidency would have changed perceptions about gender roles - as Obama's victory did about racial glass ceilings. That would have been a major positive.

There seems to be a new batch of books and documentaries (maybe some re-releases) coming out that are giving Hillary Clinton a PR polish - maybe to emphasise the difference in ability and character with Trump. I would have Clinton or Biden any day over Trump and his white supremacist gang of crooks - but both of them are deeply flawed and dangerous (just not as dangerous as Trump). Don't buy into the spin.

---

Do agree , don't like these Dynasties either, how could one be objective ?

On checking Hillary's voting record and subsequent political ranking by various different groups she comes out very left wing, occupying a similar place to Bernie Sanders the self proclaimed socialist who is often called a communist yet her ranking is out there with him, there are not many ranked further left than her, she was ranked more left wing than Obama even, but of course when it comes to foreign policy she has a right wing expansionist attitude.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trampie09

On checking Hillary's voting record and subsequent political ranking by various different groups she comes out very left wing, occupying a similar place to Bernie Sanders the self proclaimed socialist who is often called a communist yet her ranking is out there with him, there are not many ranked further left than her, she was ranked more left wing than Obama even, but of course when it comes to foreign policy she has a right wing expansionist attitude.

---

We will have to agree to disagree on that.

I accept that she has championed a number of progressive causes - LGBT rights etc - but I don't think she is anywhere near Bernie Saunders. And even Bernie has bent to the corporations, the lobbies and the PACs holding the electoral purse-strings more than he likes to admit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

We will have to agree to disagree on that.

I accept that she has championed a number of progressive causes - LGBT rights etc - but I don't think she is anywhere near Bernie Saunders. And even Bernie has bent to the corporations, the lobbies and the PACs holding the electoral purse-strings more than he likes to admit.

---

I've got the rankings from various different sources that position her well to the left, they rank senators on how left or right they are (based on voting record for one) and come out with league tables.
I mention it because I was somewhat surprised myself but that seems to be where various different ranking people put her (strange why she doesn't get called a commie by opponents but that might be because she is very anti communist and verbally attacks Russia and China).

Unless of course Jon the Yankee understanding of what is left and what is right is different to our own understanding this side of the pond.
And comparing her to Bernie out on the left was comments I read analysing some of the rankings, not my own take.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trampie09

Unless of course Jon the Yankee understanding of what is left and what is right is different to our own understanding this side of the pond.
And comparing her to Bernie out on the left was comments I read analysing some of the rankings, not my own take.

---

It used to be the case that popular ideas of left and right were different in the USA from Europe (and most other places). When I was a youngster I understood the Democrats to be the equivalent of One-Nation Tories and the Republicans to be the same as Tories from Thatcher to modern day UKIP. They both relied on big donors. They both bent to the pressure of lobbyists. They were both supporters of American big business and did what they could to guarantee profits (often through massive exploitation of workers - including children - and poorer countries' natural resources, lobsided trade deals, manipulation through the IMF and World Bank and creation of new markets for arms manufacturers). Both backed tyrants if the tyrants backed the USA.

The difference was that the Democrats had more structural connections to organised labour and progressive movements (even if the leadership of the AFL-CIO was often crooked most of the affiliated locals were not).

I think American politics has polarised more in recent decades and more differences have opened up between the main parties. There hasn't been anyone like Bernie Saunders in the Democrat tent for a few generations, and the emergence of social media and more single issue campaigns has changed the map and the access to ideas and information. I don't think the consensus has broken down between the R and D camps in Washington - but out in the country it looks as if it has.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

It used to be the case that popular ideas of left and right were different in the USA from Europe (and most other places). When I was a youngster I understood the Democrats to be the equivalent of One-Nation Tories and the Republicans to be the same as Tories from Thatcher to modern day UKIP. They both relied on big donors. They both bent to the pressure of lobbyists. They were both supporters of American big business and did what they could to guarantee profits (often through massive exploitation of workers - including children - and poorer countries' natural resources, lobsided trade deals, manipulation through the IMF and World Bank and creation of new markets for arms manufacturers). Both backed tyrants if the tyrants backed the USA.

The difference was that the Democrats had more structural connections to organised labour and progressive movements (even if the leadership of the AFL-CIO was often crooked most of the affiliated locals were not).

I think American politics has polarised more in recent decades and more differences have opened up between the main parties. There hasn't been anyone like Bernie Saunders in the Democrat tent for a few generations, and the emergence of social media and more single issue campaigns has changed the map and the access to ideas and information. I don't think the consensus has broken down between the R and D camps in Washington - but out in the country it looks as if it has.

---

Snap, that is my take and my historical understanding as well Jon.

What you get from Democrats and Republicans is that America is great theme , both will to go to war , bomb , apply regime change and operate internal diversion politics . Real left wing has no chance, old Hilary is a smug politician and can turn quite nasty , she said old Bernie “He was in Congress for years. He had one senator support him. Nobody likes him, nobody wants to work with him, he got nothing done," Clinton says. :

"He was a career politician. It’s all just baloney and I feel so bad that people got sucked into it.” When asked if her assessment of the presidential candidate still holds as we enter the 2020 caucuses, she said it does.*

Bernie the American Corbyn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trampie09

Bernie the American Corbyn.

---

I don't think so ,there is no socialism in the USA .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

I don't think so ,there is no socialism in the USA .

---

There is no socialism in the UK.

I am sure that when the Comet Ping Pong Benghazi Podesta Bleached Hard drive Uranium One Clinton Foundation Collusion Delusion investigation pronounces it's bombshell then the recent reappraisal of Hilary's political talents will get the hammering they deserve.

Anyone know where we are with this as we have been promised the day of reckoning is coming for over four years now!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cyril evans awaydays

I am sure that when the Comet Ping Pong Benghazi Podesta Bleached Hard drive Uranium One Clinton Foundation Collusion Delusion investigation pronounces it's bombshell then the recent reappraisal of Hilary's political talents will get the hammering they deserve.

Anyone know where we are with this as we have been promised the day of reckoning is coming for over four years now!

---

Wheels of justice turn slowly,

Hillary has lots of Welsh roots come to think of it the recent ex Aussie prime minister was the same, Welsh women traditionally rule the roost so it's no surprise really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trampie09

There is no socialism in the UK.

---

Really wow ,thanks for that .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trampie09

Hillary has lots of Welsh roots come to think of it the recent ex Aussie prime minister was the same, Welsh women traditionally rule the roost so it's no surprise really.

---

Did she go to a Welsh Hairdresser to get them done ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

Did she go to a Welsh Hairdresser to get them done ?

---

She uses Hair Dai.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taunton Blue Genie

She uses Hair Dai.

---

😀

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EeOITYoWsAABCzg?format=jpg

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/EpsteinFiles?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Ep steinFiles</a> are out but questions still remain...<br><br>Why did <a href="https://twitter.com/ABC?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ABC</a> News execs spike <a href="https://twitter.com/arobach?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@arobach</a> explosive interview with Virginia Roberts? Who were THEY protecting? Prince Andrew? President Bill Clinton? <br><br>&quot;She had pictures, she had everything&quot;<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/EpsteinCoverup?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw"># EpsteinCoverup</a> <a href="https://t.co/SERPkKTy61">pic.twitter.com/SERPkKTy61</a></p>&mdash; James O&#39;Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) <a href="https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1289203558957502468?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 31, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

It was interesting to hear Bill and Hilary enjoyed Epstein and Maxwells company on so many occasions , Ms Maxwell is clearly seen in a photo at Chelsea Clinton's wedding , please let us not be fooled that anyone didn't know or see his Lolita moments, especially those who enjoyed those many Lolita express trips .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

It was interesting to hear Bill and Hilary enjoyed Epstein and Maxwells company on so many occasions , Ms Maxwell is clearly seen in a photo at Chelsea Clinton's wedding , please let us not be fooled that anyone didn't know or see his Lolita moments, especially those who enjoyed those many Lolita express trips .

---

There appears to be a lot of smoke around Clinton and Epstein/Maxwell. A fire may not be too far away. If he's guilty, he should spend the rest of his life in prison.

Interesting that you and Gluey seem to be intent on showing/believing that Clinton is involved with the sexual abuse scandal but have completely ignored the fact that Trump was very close friends with Epstein, has been filmed and photographed with them on several occasions and has also had accusations laid at his door of sexual abuse of minors (at least one is being dealt with in the courts, I believe).

Why is that?

It doesn't sit right at all with me. It doesn't matter which side of the political spectrum someone sits, if they abuse children, they need to be punished to the full extent of the law.

What's also interesting that when it was Prince Andrew that was being accused of the same thing as Clinton, you sought to blame the groomed child (and her parents) instead of him...

You keep accusing people of being "moral (insert any number of nouns)" yet you appear to have none yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

Interesting that you and Gluey seem to be intent on showing/believing that Clinton is involved with the sexual abuse scandal but have completely ignored the fact that Trump was very close friends with Epstein, has been filmed and photographed with them on several occasions and has also had accusations laid at his door of sexual abuse of minors (at least one is being dealt with in the courts, I believe).

Why is that?

It doesn't sit right at all with me. It doesn't matter which side of the political spectrum someone sits, if they abuse children, they need to be punished to the full extent of the law.

---

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EeQ9-N7XoAIkkak?format=png

There is a pic of Trump,Knauss, Epstein and Maxwell all posing for a photo doing the rounds, apparently Fox news (accidentally) edited the Donald out of their version of the pic when they circulated it, lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

There appears to be a lot of smoke around Clinton and Epstein/Maxwell. A fire may not be too far away. If he's guilty, he should spend the rest of his life in prison.

Interesting that you and Gluey seem to be intent on showing/believing that Clinton is involved with the sexual abuse scandal but have completely ignored the fact that Trump was very close friends with Epstein, has been filmed and photographed with them on several occasions and has also had accusations laid at his door of sexual abuse of minors (at least one is being dealt with in the courts, I believe).

Why is that?

It doesn't sit right at all with me. It doesn't matter which side of the political spectrum someone sits, if they abuse children, they need to be punished to the full extent of the law.

What's also interesting that when it was Prince Andrew that was being accused of the same thing as Clinton, you sought to blame the groomed child (and her parents) instead of him...

You keep accusing people of being "moral (insert any number of nouns)" yet you appear to have none yourself.

---

I know I do pride myself on my nouns , up the purists, I did suggest the poor victims have a choice as do the parents on what they see and allow .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

I know I do pride myself on my nouns , up the purists, I did suggest the poor victims have a choice as do the parents on what they see and allow .

---

I sincerely hope that you have never had kids or have ever been allowed to be around kids.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

I know I do pride myself on my nouns , up the purists, I did suggest the poor victims have a choice as do the parents on what they see and allow .

---

Victims have a choice?

Maybe you should pride yourself on what nouns actually mean. Start with the word 'victim'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

I know I do pride myself on my nouns , up the purists, I did suggest the poor victims have a choice as do the parents on what they see and allow .

---

Victims often don't have a choice and parents aren't always able to control what children see particularly the older children get.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

I sincerely hope that you have never had kids or have ever been allowed to be around kids.

---

I have children two were girls all grown up now and healthy and well meaning , they and thier parents made and helped each other make the right decisions, some very severe pitfalls as life has been tough with not much money about , but we stuck at it and ll did the right thing .

Thanks for asking

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trampie09

Victims often don't have a choice and parents aren't always able to control what children see particularly the older children get.

---

I do get that, but let's be fair some of the (older ) teenager girls do sometimes use thier looks to progress life in the wrong way , and they are aware at that age about right and wrong, those much younger of course are a different matter and that us very sad .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

I do get that, but let's be fair some of the (older ) teenager girls do sometimes use thier looks to progress life in the wrong way , and they are aware at that age about right and wrong, those much younger of course are a different matter and that us very sad .

---

Yeah those teenage girls in their make up and short skirts, all grown up aren't they, sometimes look older than they really are, can't always know for sure but don't ask don't tell, the little minxes, no doesn't always mean no and they're old enough to say if they really mean no

Isn't that right, lifeonmars?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

Yeah those teenage girls in their make up and short skirts, all grown up aren't they, sometimes look older than they really are, can't always know for sure but don't ask don't tell, the little minxes, no doesn't always mean no and they're old enough to say if they really mean no

Isn't that right, lifeonmars?

---

He's genuinely disgusting.