Hillary will never be President...

[dutch508]

 

Star Member Ken Burch (46,893 posts) https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029365398

HRC would have been a great president...but she's never going to run again.

And nothing is going to happen that will lead to the invalidation of the 2016 election results and HRC being sworn in after all.

And we can't win in 2018 or 2020 simply by saying "we only lost in 2016 because of the Russians and Comey".

So what is the POINT of saying we can't openly discuss what we should do differently in the future?

Of acknowledging we will need to do at least some things differently in the future?

So long as the discussion is respectful(and the trolls kept at bay), what is the harm?

I agree that no person should be vilified or disrespected...but ideas, strategies and tactics are not people.

And change should not be the enemy if we are the party of change.

you'd have to face reality to move forward... and you are unwilling to do that.

Star Member MineralMan (96,651 posts)
2. In that case, why did you bring her up?

For pete's sake, let's look forward, rather than back, can't we?

Star Member Ken Burch (46,893 posts)
11. I only brought her up because any suggestion that the party change anything

is automatically taken as a personal attack on her.

There was no way to do that without referencing her name. If there had been, I would have done so.

I haven't said anything negative or even critical about her as a person or as a candidate since the election, or for that matter since I endorsed her shortly before the convention.

Are you willing to accept that suggesting we do some things differently in '18 and in '20 is NOT a personal attack on her, or an insult or disrespect to anybody else?

Star Member loyalsister (11,424 posts)
4. I think recognizing places problems with our long standing focus is also reasonable

I know people dislike the word neoliberalism, but it is real and there are some elements mentioned in this article that suggest potential improvements.

The focus of full employment and highly educated populace sound good on the surface as a way of achieving a good quality of life, but it doesn't work out as hoped. We are seeing actual damage from placing such a high priority on higher education with a severe student loan crisis. While the GOP is traditionally considered elitist because of it's focus on wealth, Democrats often come across as intellectual elitists. It's a big problem, and it is why people who have accepted their low income circumstances are attracted to "plain spoken" candidates. Being talked down to is perceived as an immediate personal insult to some people.

One thing the GOP has been getting right for a long time is promoting trade schools.

Poverty is not going away. Capitalism will ensure that. So, why not work on making poverty tolerable?

“Neoliberalism” isn’t an empty epithet. It’s a real, powerful set of ideas.

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/7/18/15992226/neoliberalism-chait-austerity-democratic-party-sanders-clinton

the LEFT has always tried to be the party of the people. You mean you are starting to realize that they are not?

Star Member pnwmom (84,174 posts)
21. There wasn't anything wrong with her campaign. She would have lost due to Russian hacking and voter suppression no matter what sort of campaign she ran.

And we will lose again in 2020 if the Russians again hack into the election -- with even more help from the GOP.

http://time.com/4865982/secret-plan-stop-vladimir-putin-election-plot/?utm_campaign=time&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&xid=time_socialflow_twitter

 

Star Member pnwmom (84,174 posts)
26. More than that. We should be fighting for secure election systems and against gerrymandering and voter suppression -- in all our states.

Don't forget voter fraud...

geek tragedy (68,185 posts)
9. donors and DNC establishment would also play a role in the unlikely event she'd think about running again, as in they'd say "phuck no."

She'll remain influential inside the party of course, but the same group of people that helped clear the field for her in 2016 would clear her off the field in 2020.

BainsBane This message was self-deleted by its author.

 

Star Member BainsBane (42,223 posts)
19. Meanwhile

We see demands to replace Democratic primaries with caucuses, to ensure the franchise is further restricted.

"We" can actually do a lot. We can ensure low-income voters have IDs and are registered. Many of us who volunteer have registered thousands of voters. That is what grass roots organizing can accomplish. It does, however, require actually wanting the poor, elderly, disabled, and people of color to vote.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

You know what you can do?

You can realize the American people like the idea that if they are expected to obey the law so should criminal immigrants and the cities that house them.

You should accept the fact people will enjoy not having the government treat them like child molesters because they want to build a house or start a business.

You can recognize the fact that nobody wants your stupid environmentalism or your incessant racist agitation.

And most importantly of all you can finally admit the world would be better without you and nobody loves you and you deserve every ounce of misery in your lives that you've created because you're horrible people...assuming you're even people.

[SVPete]

I'm guessing this thread is KB's timid quasi-response to this DU thread:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029364776

SHRED (17,929 posts)

WTF is wrong with Schumer bashing Hillary like this?
...

And, given the fantasy commonly accepted and believed among Ds, "pnwmom"'s retort is quite correct:

Star Member pnwmom (84,174 posts)
21. There wasn't anything wrong with her campaign. She would have lost due to Russian hacking and voter suppression no matter what sort of campaign she ran.

Until Ds admit that the Russian Hacked the Election narrative was and is a cynical political fabrication without foundation and that Hilliary lost because of what she is and the ineptitude of her campaign, the Ds' fabricated narrative will hobble the Ds' ability to move forward and create a party message that is more from, "I hate Trump!" and "I am not Trump!"

[USA4ME]

Democrats often come across as intellectual elitists. It's a big problem, ... Being talked down to is perceived as an immediate personal insult to some people.

Some people!?! How about ALL people. As soon as someone would say to me "voting against their own self interest", I'm going to immediately tune them out. And the last thing the left should ever view themselves as being are "intellectual". It doesn't take long for the average person listening to a lib to figure out they're listening to an idiot.

.

[franksolich]

And the last thing the left should ever view themselves as being are "intellectual". It doesn't take long for the average person listening to a lib to figure out they're listening to an idiot.

^^^yeah, that.

 

[Old n Grumpy]

And the last thing the left should ever view themselves as being are "intellectual". It doesn't take long for the average person listening to a lib to figure out they're listening to an idiot.

Having a degree in social justice, lezbonics or AA studies does not make you an intellectual.