Hillary Clinton: Classic or Dud?

Hilary might be competent, but was there any kind of vision? She seemed to offer few things to vote for.

Besides not being Donald Trump.

i think unfortunately w/most elections since TV came about is the one who comes off as more of a stiff, no matter how qualified, is never going to come out on top against the more charismatic candidate. even if the candidate is a racist, really dumb, incurious, unstable, foggy-brained moron. in this case though i think the latter qualities were, as mentioned before, positives for lots of horrible people.

how are you jokers still doing this

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/

trolled by a Britishes

xp

Its a quiet Friday night in blighty.

I was responding to Treeship's "it's such a shame that Republicans weaponized economic anger against minorities" nonsense initially, then xyzzzzz pulled a Miley Cyrus and came in like a wrecking ball

Seriously I don't mean to troll and I agree with most of DJP's points to all my simpleminded criticism. I was just responding to a couple of things treeship said don't shoot me down blah.

xps = wrecking ball? sheesh sorry ok maybe because its been on my twitter all week. Coverage of this book has been high here.

'competent' at being an imperial steward doesn't get ppl jogging to the polls

nor does blatantly copying your intraparty rival's talking points about inequality w/ audible roteness

none of this excuses the stupidity of people believing Yam's hucksterism, but once in awhile raw bullshit carries the day

ISILderp's Bane is resisting sexism, racism, and classism in tandem, not separately

shit I left my qualmsley decoder ring at home

classism :)

taken, taken so easily. to pass into class reality. transformer transferring energy :)

did you mean to write vlad the trumpaler

Yemen and Haiti would like a word

― a serious and fascinating fartist (Simon H.), 15. september 2017 21:26 (twenty-eight minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

You can do that trick with literally every Secretary of State since WW2. You can almost do it by spinning a globe with your eyes closed.

― El Tomboto, 15. september 2017 21:28 (twenty-six minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

In this case I think Simon did. Yemen civil war began in 2015.

https://theintercept.com/2016/02/22/saudi-christmas-present/

i think unfortunately w/most elections since TV came about is the one who comes off as more of a stiff, no matter how qualified, is never going to come out on top against the more charismatic candidate. even if the candidate is a racist, really dumb, incurious, unstable, foggy-brained moron. in this case though i think the latter qualities were, as mentioned before, positives for lots of horrible people.

― nomar, Friday, September 15, 2017 3:33 PM (thirty-four minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I'm still kicking myself for not remembering this back in November, it's practically iron-clad at this point.

x-post: Dear God, you actually think that way.

That states' actors should be held accountable for where they send arms and what they're used for?

selling weapons to allies is unacceptable

stellar analysis of the underlying issues there

The US spent 2011 getting the Saudi supported Ali Abdullah Saleh to resign following his violent response to the Arab Spring. It was, well, fairly competent. You think Saudi Arabia wouldn't have had weapons to kill Yemenites if it hadn't been for Clinton? They've been allies for decades.

going after Hillary Clinton about her Sec State tenure is pretty much 100% unadulterated sexism and/or personality-based bullshit. Even a cursory look at the other people who've held that position and how they've been assessed / "held accountable" makes that clear.

is that a better analysis of the "underlying issues" actually at work here, buddy?

the underlying issue is that it's largely irrelevant who the Sec of State was - the US sells arms to the Saudis, regardless of who holds the office

Simon, come on, we all know you don't have a clue what the underlying issues are.

going after Hillary Clinton about her Sec State tenure is pretty much 100% unadulterated sexism and/or personality-based bullshit. Even a cursory look at the other people who've held that position and how they've been assessed / "held accountable" makes that clear.

― El Tomboto, Friday, September 15, 2017 4:24 PM (one minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

is that a better analysis of the "underlying issues" actually at work here, buddy?

― El Tomboto, Friday, September 15, 2017 4:25 PM (thirty-nine seconds ago)

this is utter nonsense. go write for buzzfeed or something

the underlying issue is that it's largely irrelevant who the Sec of State was - the US sells arms to the Saudis, regardless of who holds the office

yes. I'm not singling out Clinton for special denigration here, she's just the one who ran.

but it's cool that you went straight for sexism

i'm glad no one's gone after Kissinger about his tenure

no, please, dudes, tell me who your favorite secretary of state was and why

thanks Morbs for helping make my point

lol imagine having a favorite US secretary of state

and imagine fighting to preserve this horrific state of affairs (or a slightly less horrific version of it)

probably Cordell Hull tbh

xp

Simon you specifically reacted to Clinton being called 'competent' so how the fuck can your attack be that she did what clearly is part of the job? And why did you mention Yemen if the attack was that she was bad on Saudi Arabia in general? You just don't know shit about the world outside of the US, it seems to me, unless the Intercept uncovers a bad email about it.

And now I remember why I stopped reading this thread.

Sorry everyone.

Silly me, thinking making moves that get a fuckton of people killed a couple of fairly predictable moves down the line should be a dent in one's claims to "competence." We shouldn't settle for just following the usual marching orders and not publicly shitting yourself while doing it.

international relations, a thing that exists, much to the chagrin of progressives who are vehemently against it in all forms

there's like a whole field of study on this stuff it's amazing - people even go to school for it

international relations, a thing that can only be expressed in massive arms deals

good answer shakey

i would argue that the resume of a former secretary of state matters a hell of a lot when that person is running for president. criticism of her record is necessarily going to be amplified, as are the refutations of the criticism. than to suggest that (and i know you were exaggerating for effect) any perceived focus on her signifies sexism is to take a fundamentally unserious position. we can have a discussion about the role sexism plays in our assessment of HRC compared to her predecessors (because it certainly is present), but to reflexively dismiss any criticism as gendered without any evidence is some lazy bullshit and you're better than that

Tombot, sell me an MX missile.

Cordell Hull was sidelined and mocked and was an anti-Semite.

Can I just say JQ Adams was my favorite and fuck the rest

international relations, a thing that exists, much to the chagrin of progressives who are vehemently against it in all forms

― El Tomboto, Friday, September 15, 2017 4:35 PM (seven minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

What fucking website is this?

clinton's tenure as secretary of state probably wasn't much worse than many of her predecessors', certainly not bush's people. she still has blood on her hands and will burn in hell if such a place exists, along with the rest of the members of that club

there is a wealth of fantastic reporting in the mainstream press about clinton's sins, errors, and misjudgments as secretary. to call all of that bullshit based on the (tbf, true) fact that she has to put up with a lot of sexism is not a legitimate response

Alfred, that is an acceptable answer especially since you live in florida

the LGM-118 peacekeeper is no longer in stock however