Wednesday, April 27, 2016

It's time to stop beating up on Hillary Clinton and instead help her beat Trump (or Cruz)

Win McNamee/Getty Images
It's been quite a race so far for the Democratic Party nomination south of the border.   And a bit of deja vu.

Hillary Clinton again has been challenged by a surprisingly popular left-wing senator promising massive change.

The U.S. embraced change in 2008 and chose Obama.  I myself switched from Clinton to Obama, even though such support had little meaning as I'm Canadian and didn't vote.   With Obama elected president (as Clinton would also have been against McCain/Palin), I'd say the U.S. ended up getting pretty much the same kind of government that Clinton would've provided.  On some major issues like Guantanamo, drone attacks in the Arab world, Wall Street, Obama's been no real change at all.  Although Obama has a great liberal legacy with health care and hundreds of other initiatives.  His crucial place in history is cemented as the first man of colour to win the U.S. presidency.  He's going to be very popular in retirement.  

I think Hillary's the better candidate this year.  I just can't picture Bernie Sanders running the White House. 

I like that Bernie Sanders has managed to get his very progressive causes (like universal health care, free university tuition, getting the odious amount of money out of U.S. politics) onto the political agenda.  I can see why his message is so appealing.  I was tempted to support him in this race, for maybe about a minute.  Then I realized that Hillary is still the better candidate and shares many of the same policies.  Sanders has pushed Clinton to the left and now looks likely to get many of these great ideas added to the Democratic Party's platform.  That's a great thing! 

But the Democratic party seems split between idealists and pragmatists.  Hillary will want to bolster her populist appeal to disgruntled Caucasian voters and stop them from gravitating toward Trump in the fall.  If Hillary's smart, and she is, she'll have to consider making Sanders her running mate to unite the party and help ensure his followers come out to vote for her.  If not Sanders, someone else who will be sure to have great appeal with Sanders' supporters, like Elizabeth Warren perhaps, or someone with equal credibility with progressives.    

But Clinton's VP choice will depend entirely on how the Republican convention goes first.  I did hope that John Kasich would come on stronger but he keeps losing to Trump in the GOP primaries.  Thus it does look like Donald Trump will win the Republican nomination.  This is horrifying.  We'll see if Cruz can miraculously snatch the nod on the convention room floor.  We'll know better after the Indiana primary coming up soon if that's even possible.    

If Clinton is going to be the Democratic nominee (and after winning 4 out of 5 primaries Tuesday night, it looks pretty much certain now that she will be), it's probably a good idea for progressives backing Sanders and others to lay off the personal attacks on her.  Those attacks have become more repetitive, even when information has refuted the claims.   I think history shows that Clinton's a decent person working hard and is motivated here to help people and make a difference in people's lives.  She's come a long way and I think she's ready for it.  I like her better than Bernie Sanders.  She's pragmatic.  I also think the symbolic importance of a woman winning the White House is something to celebrate the world over.  

To Bernie supporters, I say: "Hillary might not be your first choice, but against Trump, she's the best choice!  Please come over when you're ready."  

5 comments:

Ron Waller said...

Hail to the bribe-taker in chief! (Otherwise known as: see no evil; hear no evil; speak no evil.)

Secular Talk: The Most Preposterous Argument For Hillary Clinton Yet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-TCsrec3w4

The Young Turks: Hillary Clinton Bribed $2.9 Million For Twelve Wall St. Speeches
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XQ8DqLOeBA

The Young Turks: Bernie Fought Panama Papers Tax Havens While Hillary Lobbied For Them
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Op3oFDprLEk

Secular Talk: Establishment Democrats: Ignore Hillary's Wall Street Connections
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92xgY-c0Dvs

Secular Talk: What Rachel Maddow Didn't Ask Hillary Clinton
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaZJAM2cmkc

Q: What is the only reasonable fiscal basis for Kathleen Wynne privatizing Hydro One?

Matt Guerin said...

Nothing like a baseless smear filled with old, recycled innuendo to attack someone when you have no actual evidence or basis for your assumptions.

Ron Waller said...

Did you check out what these guys have to say? They are not crackpots. They have done the research and are making conclusions based on facts. There's a mountain of evidence that ties the Clintons to designer legislation in exchange for speaking fees: $140-million worth so far.

Do you believe Brian Mulroney was innocent of taking a $300k bribe? The only difference between Mulroney and the Clintons is that the former were paid in speaking fees instead of being paid directly.

This post-modern corruption of sophisticatedly-arranged bribe taking is a very serious threat to civilization. If looting barbarian plutocrats cause another global financial meltdown because they, once again, pay off bribe-taking politicians to let down the city gates it could trigger fascist revolutions and world war.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing."

Ron Waller said...

See no evil. Hear no evil. Speak no evil.

Matt Guerin said...

There's no evidence. Just selective use of innuendo to smear an otherwise decent candidate. The Republicans' reasons for doing so were obvious. Your reasons - well they're destructive, not sure what else you're really achieving though with the big lies.