Many people here are aware I am a Bernie supporter and a Hillary basher, though my views are not unfounded; actually, I am not a knee-jerk type of person at all. I do my homework, examine situations from different angles and perspective, then make a knowledgeable opinion on what matters. This is why I don't understand Hillary and her supporters. I know the woman is not stupid, though I can say that she and her cronies are quite good at making it seem like she is. Forget the email scandal or Benghazi because there is material for days on those situations, but what about TPP? What about the Keystone Pipeline? And why does Hillary conform to whatever her constituents want to hear? I am a personal fan of economist Robert Reich, who actually served in Bill Clinton's administration. If you watch his Netflix documentary "Inequality for All" -- which is eye-opening and quite entertaining, albeit sad for most folks who get screwed by the American notion of capitalism -- or follow him on Facebook or Twitter, he is a man for the people and not some government tard. Yet, when he praised Hillary on TPP I couldn't help but find such admiration as sickening because it's just another instance Hillary has flip-flopped on something. Case in point: Hillary has changed her views on the Trans-Pacific Partnership a whopping 45 times (see link below). That is insane, even if you want to wait to make a so-called 'educated decision.' If you say you want to do that, fine, but don't change your mind 45 times. Her decision-making has already been satirized by The New Yorker as well, in which the pub states that Hillary will adopt all of Bernie Sanders' positions "by noon" -- alluding that Bernie has said everything first, with more conviction and more elegance. He also seems more passionate about it. Look what Hillary once said about TPP, on Nov. 17, 2012: "And with Singapore and a growing list of other countries on both sides of the Pacific, we are making progress toward finalizing a far-reaching new trade agreement called the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The so-called TPP will lower barriers, raise standards, and drive long-term growth across the region. It will cover 40 percent of the world's total trade and establish strong protections for workers and the environment. Better jobs with higher wages and safer working conditions, including for women, migrant workers and others too often in the past excluded from the formal economy will help build Asia's middle class and rebalance the global economy. Canada and Mexico have already joined the original TPP partners. We continue to consult with Japan. And we are offering to assist with capacity building, so that every country in ASEAN can eventually join. We welcome the interest of any nation willing to meet 21st century standards as embodied in the TPP, including China." I don't think she really understands the bill, or maybe she does and doesn't care. This is information Americans should know, but most are apathetic or too disenfranchised. Not many people will sit down and read a 6,000-word story about a trade agreement, which I understand, reluctantly. But let's all educate ourselves and be privy to the fact that the projected next president of the "greatest country in history" is someone who reforms her own position to better meet the needs of the electorate. When will the madness end? 45 times Hillary changed her mind on TPP -- http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/15/politics/45-times-se... Hillary steals Bernie's positions -- http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/hil...
The Clinton's are like a mealy mouthed little cockroach that the waterfall of justice just can't seem to wash down the fucking drain!
I wish my PM would change his mind, or at least publicize the details of the TPP for the sake of transparency and discussion.
It's a tough balancing act. I wouldn't mind the tpp so much if they didn't include ridiculous patent protections. I think that's one of its biggest causes for concern. The problem is pretty much every trade deal is negotiated in secret because you lose a lot of leveraging power if you release the full details from what I've read. I'm no expert on trade deals but I've heard that this is how international deals are generally negotiated.
WikiLeaks revealed the Intellectual Property Rights Chapter associated with TPP. This is a long ass document. https://wikileaks.org/tpp-ip3/WikiLeaks-TPP-IP-Cha...
I can see this becoming the next "money in politics". Everyone always knew money was in politics, but it was generally hush hush to talk about that or the evil monarch/dictator/Stazi/CIA/whatever is going to get you. Now it is heatedly debated in every political forum and outlet. People are aware that Citizens United is horseshit and want to see it gone. Same thing with the political game. Everyone knows each candidate is not really "just the person". They are the figure head of a campaign team. A campaign manager, and most importantly, new and ever changing campaign strategies. Just like politicians are starting to get called out more and more on their affiliation with their big donors, I can see them start being called out on demonstrating mere campaign technique. As it stands right now, in each debate, when a candidate is asked a question, they seem to be perfectly allowed to completely dodge the question. Each debate features literally dozens of instances of it. Every once in a while a questioner will insist the candidate answers more directly and even then they don't always get the answer. i can see them starting to press them far more on that. The really weird thing is how the flip flop is sometimes completely called out and sometimes not or barely. The republicans killed Kerry with the "He's a flip flopper" rhetoric. It was the biggest slander they launched at him during the whole ordeal and handily won the election. Fast forward to Mitt Romney flip-flopping on national television on the issue of abortion within a week's time, and it's kind of a side story. Point is, they have donors because they then return the favor to the donor. We rightfully are against that now and in the public sphere. Perhaps it's time we also started demanding human beings and not figureheads of a campaign strategy, ready to change course and mind whenever it seems personally favorable.
Salon ripped Hillary a new one on TPP, which is pretty shocking considering Salon usually doesn't bash liberals http://www.salon.com/2015/10/08/memo_to_progressiv...
is Hillary even considered an actual contender still? she seems so fake, so full of shit, has no clue what its like for us common people, shes fucked everything up shes done, has no accomplishments except for playing the game right so many beter alternatives out there to her, but if shes the one that is in line for the presidency idk wtf
Salon will rip anything that even remotely doesn't align with their agenda. I still prefer them to a Breitbart but you have to read their shit critically and never take anything they say at face value. A lot of their pieces are the GOP is stupid because x y and z. They are the king of straw manning politicians.
A lot of people still like her and she's still polling very well in southern states and states with more minority voters. Sanders is really only taking over in states that are predominately white, but is having issues in states with minority voters. I think something like only 20-30 percent of black voters have ever even heard of Bernie sanders. I agree I'm not a fan of Hillary but I do like some of the proposals such as a fee on large banks for risky behavior. I'd rather take Hillary over any of the war mongering idiots on the republican side maybe with the exception of Rand Paul, not to say that Hilary isn't a hawk herself. But compared to the republicans who literally can't stop talking about bombing the ME she looks like a pacifist.
It looks like the fix is in, if Hillary was going to be charged with mishandling documents like everyone else would be if they had done what she did Biden would have joined the fun by now. I think someone in the justice dept has told Biden Hillary's too big to fail.
I wonder what do you hope to accomplish by imposing a fee on banks? for any kind of behavior? imho the banks provide a service, although the shittiest ive encountered. don't get me wrong, I hate banks and I will do anything possible to use them as little I can. I don't use credit cards and I pay with cash all the time government regulations cost money with all the fees and permits. if you give a business another cost for doing business it only ends up becoming more expensive for the end user, the customer the banks will only pass those new fees along to the customers, who in turn end up having LESS cash, and the government gains more all the talk about bombing the middle east is all hot air and people pandering to the people. all of politics is an an illusion