MAMEWorld Forums - Welcome to the War Room - Re: 14 trillion on wars and Starbucks retard neoliberal doesn't know how we'll pay for healthcare

>Hillary went full on neolib. It's sad to look back on some good things she tried in the
>past, like trying for universal healthcare in the 90s. I watched some documentary on her a
>few weeks ago. Pushback from that in the 90s should have convinced her that she was not a
>good messenger for change/ideas but it didn't and then she slowly became more and more
>corrupted, which I guess is a natural progress in a system that has legalized bribery and
>politicians tend to be a certain type.

>She got so neolib that she was literally yelling about how universal healthcare could never
>happen at her rallies. So neolib that she risked losing the election by choosing a right
>winger for VP, when she could have locked a win just by letting Sanders be VP but she's so
>neolib'd out she can't even throw progressives a goddamn bone.

Besides adhering to the corporate Democratic/Neoliberal playbook, her other mistake(s) included of trying to play it way too safe such as her past track records as NY senator of voting for Iraq invasion in 2003 and then supporting the Defense of Marriage act (one man one woman mentality) and also being against medicinal marijuana usage (saying more time needed for studies). Bernie Sanders was always out in front of the issues and was always on the correct side whereas Clinton either voted against the population or would eventually agree well after 90% of the general US population had already agreed with Sanders. The way how Clinton's votes were as a Senate member representing NY could be used against her and that is where the Russian operatives were able to take advantage of manipulating the thoughts of "don't vote for Clinton" or "Clinton is just like a GOP candidate".

And voters fell for that which former FBI Agent Clinton Watts, testified last year before congress, explained Russians are far ahead of US operations of knowing how to manipulate thoughts via social media platforms.

Clinton was the least favorable of the remaining candidates, but I wish voters could have paid attention to the televised debates and noticed how the sob was acting irrational. Clinton was correct and saying he "doesn't have mentality to be in charge of handling nuclear weapons". After watching first debate, even though I didn't care for Clinton, easily convinced me to cast my vote for her.

The problem with Sanders is Sanders had supported other less favorable candidates that were vying for political offices last year. For some off reason Sanders supported a non-winnable candidate to run for a seat in Nebraska in 2017 (that lost as expected) and ignored helping a candidate in Georgia that had a better possible chance of winning a seat in Georgia (former house GOP Price's seat iirc). For some reason Sanders only helped the Nebraska candidate when I believe if Sanders had campaigned for the candidate for Georgia seat things might have been different.

I'd like to believe there might be a better field of candidates for 2020 presidential election, but have to not overlook what happens this year.

Edited by gregf (06/09/18 09:00 PM)