Welchers aren't allowed to have opinions

he cant

he spent years supporting and voting for wannabes like mccain and rmoney then he jumps ship to vote for democrats only to vote for another out-of-touch loser

You can keep repeating the same thing over and over, it doesn't make it true. I voted for Hillary because she was the policy wonk, she knew the issues, and she had solid, reasonable positions on things. You're as anti-Hillary as they come, so to hear you say that she doesn't actually believe what she says, or she wouldn't actually expend political capital to get any of those things done... well, why should anyone care what you say? It's about as useful as Sean Hannity telling us what his opinions on Hillary are. You'll never give her a fair or somewhat objective assessment.

Just to focus on one issue, CJ reform. Republicans on the judicial committee are working with Jared Kushner to push the president to work with them on criminal justice reform. That would've been one of the easier issues for Hillary to work with Republicans on.



Rent-free.

This post was edited by IceMage on Apr 21 2018 04:51pm

Because basically everyone in the country aside from you has been saying it. Even the neoliberals, and especially the progressives. Even the most friendly media that was in the tank for her was biting towards her insincerity, spineless pragmatism and waffling. She got crucified by SNL as 'the Hillary her team has constructed for this debate'. I could rattle off the issues she flip flopped on like free trade, healthcare, crime, interventionalism, etc. But the problem here is you're ascribing this critical lens to me, a biased anti-Clintonista by all accounts for sure, but its a view shared even by her former supporters and shills and colluding puppets. Nobody pretends Hillary ran on policy, nobody pretends she was sincere.

Look at criminal justice reform again. Hillary was a hardcore tough-on-crime lockemup dragon lady next to Bill in the 90s when it was popular. She championed the very same laws she was talking about repealing, the drug sentencing and three strikes. In the most charitable case, we're talking about Madalyn Murray O'Hair becoming an evangelic pastor. Even if that change of heart was genuine, a grain of salt due would be an understatement. Now even if the political pragmatism led her to CJ reform today, maybe tomorrow she'd be doing the calculation on risks of getting Willie Horton'd as a verb in 2020, or helping lower democrats with fears of being seen as weak. The only thing we could count on HRC to do- was to do the math and figure out if support was there, both voters and special interest. Even Trump would set druglords free if it would help him politically. So what does Hillarys policy platform amount to?

No Trumpshill, everyone in the country doesn't accept your perspective on Hillary Clinton. This discussion is just getting ridiculous at this point.

Are you telling me people don't have the exact same views on everything 20 years later? Mind=blown. In the 90s Trump was a Democrat, now he's governing as a conservative populist. Again, your anti-Hillary bias is obvious, you aren't able to accurately assess her.

Even the friendly media comedians who shilled for her were ridiculing her insincere pragmatism. Her polling numbers on trust were worse than Goebbels. For you to pretend that Hillary was regarded as sincere in 2016 would be like saying people have trust and confidence in Zuckerberg's handling of their privacy.

It was by far her greatest weakness on the campaign trail. People talked about it openly in countless op-eds. I'm not sure what kind of lockbox in a cave on mars someone could hide in the whole election season not to hear about Hillary's pandering. Her favorite ice cream flavor is whatever you like most. She carries hot sauce in her purse. She's against TPP after being for it. It went on and on. If this was my exclusive view as an antiClintonista, does that mean the SNL writers were redhats?

This post was edited by Goomshill on Apr 21 2018 06:25pm

He said Hillary wasn't a candidate who campaigned on policy.

You could have stopped there and concluded he isn't able/willing to make accurate assessments.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Apr 21 2018 06:35pm

plz vote for me black people

There's a difference between saying a candidate is malleable on some issues(like trade for instance), and claiming that a candidate stands for nothing, and has never really had any solid viewpoints or vision for the country. The latter is just a nonsensical right-wing talking point which some Bernie Bros decided to adopt as well.

The goalposts are always moving with the Trump cult, and I'm just bored enough to follow them. Hillary Clinton, like CNN, gets way too much shit on PaRD, so I'm happy to defend both.

This post was edited by IceMage on Apr 21 2018 06:38pm