Quote (dro94 @ Apr 14 2016 04:03pm)
Clinton flip flops more than Romney, and that's saying something. She has very few deeply held beliefs, she will compromise any position if her donors or public opinion sways a certain way. She is running for president for her own narcissistic pride of being the first woman president, like Obama wanting to be the first black pres. Obama gets away with it more because he is a smoother operator, and frankly is a lot smarter than her.
They are all big government types, and follow Keynesian theory. For the 2nd election running I will be writing in Ron Paul in the general election.
I get that this is a popular view but that doesn't make it any less wrong, or nonsensical. It gets the electoral history of the last 2 decades completely wrong and that's why it's so damn funny.
It's interesting that you went on the way that you did, because you get those motivations even more wrong than the last guy who tried this did: she abandoned the thought of running for president in 2004 specifically because she didn't want to break her pledge to New Yorkers. Four years later she refused to adopt an updated position on Iraq, even though she had every justification for doing so. It was the second time she refused to compromise on a deeply-important position. This is why I always crack up when people try to create this Clinton caricature -- they either magically forget this crucial part of the story, or they're oblivious to the fact that it even happened.