Vote for Hillary?

[KeithE]

is as bad as Bush Jr.

Although she now (post candidacy) says she is against the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) trade deals, she has usually been for trade deals, . All favor big multinational corporations and Hillary’s coziness with Wall Street makes me suspicious about her vetoing the upcoming TPP and TTIP as she should if they pass. Both are real disasters for costs of products, jobs, and the environment/ They also put countries at risk of being sued if corporations feel their profits are lessened due to a country’s actions.

In addition, for knowingly circumventing classified information laws. FBI says there were . Even if some were not classified at the time, anything possibly classified or sensitive should not be on a private server. This implies a take-the-easy-way attitude toward important work; that troubles me greatly. She might even improve on that score, but the laziness it showed could easily show up again in lack of study of important matters.

Better than Trump, no doubt, but that is not saying much.

Consider . She will surround herself with progressive experts to transform this country - we need it.

[Sandy]

I'll cast my ballot for Hillary. Hard to tell how many government leaders use private email servers. I think people are going to be waiting a good, long time beyond the end of Hillary's second term for some kind of indictment that is just not ever going to come.

Trump got close in the polls the week after he became the presumptive nominee. Then he made the remarks about Judge Curiel, and went off on a whole week of stupid. Now she's back up by 8-10 in most major national polls, and climbing while he free falls.

[KeithE]

[Sandy]

Both Rachel Maddow and Chris Hayes cited the NBC News poll that has her up 48-38. Same poll was 45-42 two weeks ago.

Perhaps Hillary does have "major flaws," though most of what gets thrown at her is purely political, and exaggerated for effect. The email "scandal" is one great example, the holy horror over Benghazi is another. The facts about Benghazi will probably never be known, due to the incompetent botching of more than a half dozen Republican initiated investigations. The only people who come out of that with anything are all the paid informants who told basically whatever story the investigators wanted to hear. And no Republican seems terribly concerned that Condaleeza Rice had a private email server which she used, and on which emails were sent with the same department codes that Clinton also used. Department rules and policies are not the same as laws, for one thing, and after the fact designations by individuals with clear political motivations are not crimes. As the process, which everyone including Sanders agreed to at the outset, has reached this conclusion, she is the candidate who can handily defeat Donald Trump, and that is enough for me to vote for her. The way things are shaping up, she'll have at least a sympathetic senate.

[William Thornton]

" Condaleeza Rice had a private email server"

Source? False claim.

[Tim Bonney]

[Tim Bonney]

[William Thornton]

Still no source?

[Tim Bonney]

[KeithE]

[Tim Bonney]

[KeithE]

[Tim Bonney]

I lived through her husband's previous Presidency. I remember the Clinton good times. And given that it is her or Trump, I don't see any need to read through more hatchet job stories about the Clintons. If any couple has been examined and re-examined more in political history I'd not know who they are.

[Shawn Koester]

I cannot in good conscience vote for either the neo-fascist Trump or the center right Clinton. Voting for the lesser of two evils makes the lesser evil (Clinton) less good, and makes the greater evil more evil. Clinton is driven by political expediency and power and Trump is driven by greed. She and her husband are responsible for awful trade deals that undermine worker and human rights, granting enormous power to corporate power while undermining national sovereignty. Hillary has called African Americans and African American youth as super-predators, she and her husband were responsible for welfare reform that kicked off the social safety net many vulnerable women, men and children, and she has created the culture of mass incarceration. In her time as Secretary of State she has committed a Reagan/CIA style takeover of Hounduras and when the refugees from Hounduras have sought protection she has insisted on having them return to the chaos. Her feminism is not meant for the empowerment of all women- her feminism is white and upwardly mobile not showing much care for women that are not upwardly mobile or white. With respect to LGBT rights she was not on board with LGBT rights until 2013. She is a militarist supported by the greatest of war criminals Henry Kissinger- she hasn't met a war or a missle system she hasn't liked. She is actually more a militarist hawk than Obama. She claims to be a candidate of the people in public (a populist) yet in private she takes the donations of her corporate overlords including Goldman Sachs and others that have destroyed the economy. She'll do anything to get elected including launching a Willie Horton style racist ad against Obama in 08, or do voter suppression or vote rigging. Much like other corporate Democrats she is a liberal on social issues but economically conservative. Finally, the Democrats are setting themselves up to failure by nominating Clinton because she is heavily hated, and she is facing not one but two criminal investigations- one for email, and one for mass corruption. If she is indicted, and I believe she will, the Democratic establishment will essentially pave the way for a President Trump. Trump by the way is a Clinton plant because Trump is acting so reactionary and crazy that by comparison Clinton looks saner. Trump and the Clintons have a very close connection especially in New York. My vote is for Jill Stein and my second choice would be Gary Johnson.

[KeithE]

I'm with you Shawn!

I only hope the media wakes up in time to do its duty. Right now only 13% of Americans have even heard of Jill Stein and over half that do (7%} say they will vote for her.

[Sandy]

Wow, Shawn, tell us how you really feel.

Perspective is everything. Of course, it wouldn't be difficult to take the subjective perspective out of your rant, and turn it completely around using, well, just the facts. It's your perspective. But that's all it is.

The FBI has worked for over a year, interviewed hundreds of state department employees, tracked down emails from both the server where they were sent, and the recipients, and has concluded that some department policy might have been violated. If laws were broken, they'd already have issued indictments. We've already seen that the Benghazi investigation was highly charged politically, and turned out to be nothing more than another attempted smear by Republicans on the Clintons. This FBI investigation will turn out to be the same thing. The real problem with corruption that boggles the mind is with the presumptive Republican nominee.

[Tim Bonney]

[KeithE]

Shawn’s fairly extensive text about 'why not Hillary' show me he has considered the matter in more detail than many mod/libs who reflexively vote Democratic (an this year it is an enhanced reflex since Donald Trump is the alternative). There is much in Hillafry's character that make me believe she shifts with the political winds, fails to to study matters in detail (at least her stances seldom seem to give facts/data behind them - a trait that few politicians have*), and often takes the easy path (e.g her email handling).

* Carter and to a lesser extent Obama seem to the most studious Presidents from my readings. Sanders also provides details of inequities and other problems in this country and he has solutions with money sources identified to address them.

I’ll start another post (before I leave on a 2 1/2 week trip with only expensive net access) about a book I’m reading that sheds much light about reflexive viewpoint espousing.

[Sandy]

[Sandy]

[William Thornton]

Server, bro...server.

[Sandy]

[Shawn Koester]

[Sandy]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/ftc-r ... le/2591767

Perhaps one of the disadvantages of having Hillary Clinton win the presidency will be the distractions created by hypocrisy that wants to push to investigate her for everything, but which never spoke up when Bush was in the White House. The Bush family banking and business ties to the Saudi regime was a bit more complicated than the contributions made by a couple of our Arab allies to the Clinton foundation, but that was him, this is her.

Like any candidate running, there are things she does that I agree with, and things I don't agree with. But I've learned not to buy any of the BS that comes from the right wing, brain dead radio loonies. She's withstood all of those attacks, and done well. And on the other hand, if even half of that load of crap was true, and she's pulled off getting away with it, then she sure has the skill to be the CEO.