Skip to main content

View Diary: Want the nomination in 2016? (187 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  She voted for the Iraq war. (9+ / 0-)

    And refuses to apologize for it.  To this day insists it was the right thing to do.

    In Roviet Union, money spends YOU!

    by Troubadour on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 11:37:11 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  And this means she can't help take back the House? (33+ / 0-)

      Kind of a non sequitur there.  Wasn't talking about whether she's a good or bad potential nominee.  Opinions among DKos will be very divided on that.

      She could, I repeat, be a real boost in some key 2014 races.  

    •  And if she gets 20 progressives elected to (15+ / 0-)

      Congress they'll vote Republican because of that?

      Non sequiter. You haz it.

      Economics is a social *science*. Can we base future economic decisions on math?

      by blue aardvark on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 12:00:25 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  You are not going to find an ideologically pure (29+ / 0-)

      100% agreeable, soul-washed saint to run for political office anywhere.  

      If there are any such people, they are meditating in a far off monastery on the side of a mountain.

      Name one Democratic (or Republican) president who was pure in thought and deed, every hour of their entire lives?

      Real people make mistakes, make choices, get some things wrong.  Insisting on historical and ideological purity is a fools game.  It doesn't exist, anywhere.

      The question is, who best can push forward at the present time?

      Not who is The Perfect?

      "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

      by YucatanMan on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 12:36:03 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  my favorite such example (20+ / 0-)

        Dodd, Harkin, Kohl, Lautenberg, Leahy, Levin, Mikulski, Murray, and Wellstone voted for DOMA.

      •  is there ever anything so foul (7+ / 0-)

        they stay written off permanently?

        I would argue that supporting an aggressive & unjustified war is that very thing.

        As the man says:

        War is essentially an evil thing. Its consequences are not confined to the belligerent states alone, but affect the whole world. To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.
        Senator Clinton aided and abetted the supreme international crime.

        Maybe you all can support that. I can't.

        An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

        by mightymouse on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 12:56:38 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I agree it was not a good thing to do. I don't (5+ / 0-)

          think it dooms her for all time.

          If she had been president and done it, then yes.  But there is an argument (good, bad or otherwise) that Clinton and others thought the president wouldn't actually use that authority to go to war.

          There's an argument that they thought he'd work it out via the UN inspectors and use the war authorization as a tool to get to the end without war.

          That would have been a short-sighted and stupid assumption.  But not a criminal failing.

          I reserve the most harsh condemnation for the Iraqi war for Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld.

          You and I very often agree on things.  I do think a strong principled stand is good and right.

          To be honest, I have more misgivings with Hilary Clinton being president over the Third Way / DLC / free trade stuff of her husband than her small part in the Iraqi war.

          A lot of other Representatives and Senators voted "yes" as well. Not that that excuses it.  

          "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

          by YucatanMan on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 01:14:17 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  If this is true (5+ / 0-)
            But there is an argument (good, bad or otherwise) that Clinton and others thought the president wouldn't actually use that authority to go to war.
            Then those people were idiots and don't deserve to get nominated.  Anyone with half a brain could see he was itching to use any excuse to go to war.

            The revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 01:44:10 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I agree with you. Bad judgement. Huge mistake (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              AoT

              to think that axxhole had any responsible feelings anywhere in his body.

              But then, most D's did not have the experience of seeing him closer up over the years in Texas.  

              There's a sort of "club" atmosphere "inside the Beltway" where the "villagers" are all "responsible."

              So, I guess I'm pretty much saying, yes, it was stupid. Idiotic to trust Cheney-Bush-Rumsfeld with that power.  We know that for sure now.  

              There were lots of people in the early 2000s who didn't think we'd jump into war without provocation, because we hadn't done something like that since the Spanish American wars.

              "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

              by YucatanMan on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 02:27:50 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  It's absurd though, there was no reason to get (5+ / 0-)

                the authorization of force unless it was going to be a war without provocation.  If we were provoked then we didn't need an authorization.  The act of asking for authorization of force was proof positive that there was going to be a war.

                The revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                by AoT on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 02:41:35 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Yes, the "use it as a threat" thing should have (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  AoT, MPociask

                  been completely disregarded.   Bush should have been told that the Congress would vote to go to war if and when there was cause to declare war.

                  I'm opposed to all the "authorizations of force."  Either we have reason to Declare War or we don't.   We never had it with Iraq and we never should have provided "authorization."

                  I completely agree with you.  The whole entire thing was a travesty.  There is a casual nature with which Congress has regarded war and the military for a long time.  The lines should be clear and bright, not this creeping warfare everywhere in the world.

                  "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                  by YucatanMan on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 02:48:23 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

          •  sure, Cheney-Bush-Rumsfeld get the most (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            YucatanMan, chuckvw, AoT, stevej

            But Hillary did a lot more than just vote for the damn thing (which was bad enough). She supported it for three years.

            She never became an outspoken opponent as I recall.

            An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

            by mightymouse on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 02:11:14 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  You're right. She likely was covering her (5+ / 0-)

              "don't be weak on Defense if you are a Democrat" flank.

              I think we pretty much agree on the past, you and I.

              What will happen in the future?  Personally, I'd love to see a very liberal Democrat trounce the Republicans in 2016 after taking control of the House in 2014.

              To do that, I will likely support the most powerful Democrat running for president who supports the poor and middle class.  If I start hearing any Third Way crap or see a build-up of DLC types, I would drop support of that person in a heartbeat.  I won't vote for a "non-crazy Republican."

              Only a Democrat.

              "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

              by YucatanMan on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 02:30:51 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I mean I won't support her nomination (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                AoT

                which means practically nothing, I know ....

                and my support in the general is also meaningless.

                if I'm still here and not totally disgusted by the whole thing, I'll do what I did this year, send some little $ to people I like in other races ... if the D nominee is Clinton or Cuomo.

                hopefully it's neither.

                Hillary is far too wedded to the DLC types I think. And beyond her politics ... look at how she ran her 2008 primary campaign - she hired the wrong people, they wasted money, squandered gettable votes in caucus states .... this does not speak well to her ability to manage a winning campaign.

                We need a nominee with ability to win.

                anyway, good to talk to you. yes, we agree on a lot.

                An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

                by mightymouse on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 03:00:03 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  If we can't do better than this cast (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  AoT, mightymouse, YucatanMan, FutureNow

                  of played out, corrupt "centrist" hacks in 2016, I'm out.

                  More importantly, perhaps, we are permanently, irredeemably, hopelessly screwed.

                  Who knows? Maybe someone will notice the gaping irradiating sinkholes in the fracking states... You know, the 1% eating the planet...



                  Those who do not move, do not notice their chains. Rosa Luxemburg

                  by chuckvw on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 03:22:39 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Chuck, the one thing I've noticed over the years (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    chuckvw

                    is that what happens in politics is always a surprise.

                    When Bush won the first time, who would have guessed that a Republican Senator would switch sides?  Or that Lieberman would support McCain? (ok, that's predictable).  

                    But there are big surprises from time to time.  And the equation changes.

                    I'm pleasantly surprised by Obama's hard-nosed (so far) negotiating tactics.  I hope he keeps his leftward slant more than just during the lame duck period before the new Congress is seated.  Frankly, imho, he gave away too much without a fight during the previous 4 years.

                    "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                    by YucatanMan on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 08:27:16 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                •  I definitely agree with everything you just wrote. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  mightymouse

                  I did the same thing this year too: supported good local Ds, plus Elizabeth Warren, Tammy Duckworth and a couple others.

                  I like what Obama is doing so far after the election, but had some real personal issues with his policies in the past. Who gets my vote for president doesn't matter -- yet -- because I live in a blue county in a very red state.  But demographics are changing that.  

                  I 'd love to have Ann Richards back.  She was a great governor and an authentic person.

                  "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                  by YucatanMan on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 08:23:58 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  She didn't call for us to pull out (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              stevej, mightymouse, YucatanMan

              until she was in the primaries.  It is, as far as I'm concerned, one of the main reasons she lost. She managed to switch to opposing the war in time for the primaries themselves but it was pretty clear it was pandering.

              The revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

              by AoT on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 03:47:37 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Not if they're Democrats, apparently (0+ / 0-)



          Those who do not move, do not notice their chains. Rosa Luxemburg

          by chuckvw on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 03:17:19 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  So, are you using that vote as a shield for your (0+ / 0-)

          basic misogyny?

          Like the man I heard say Geraldine Ferraro was a good candidate, but her voice was just too shrill?

          Just as the Rs can come up with many reasons to avoid saying they don't want a black man in the White House, other men can make excuses for not wanting a woman to have power.

          "I believe more women should carry guns. I believe armed women will make the world a better place. Women need to come to think of themselves not as victims but as dangerous." Anna Pigeon

          by glorificus on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:10:49 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  What bullshit (0+ / 0-)

            There are plenty of other policies to take issue with Clinton on, starting with her neoliberal international policy, and her pandering on the war.  But if you want to pretend that it's just because she's a woman then go right ahead.  I can come back and call you a racist if you don't support a black candidate in the 2016 primaries.  Won't that be great.

            The revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 12:56:40 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Why are you even bothering to reply to me? (0+ / 0-)

              You make excellent points about torture and other of many sins of Bush/Cheney, let the person I'm responding to explain himself.

              "I believe more women should carry guns. I believe armed women will make the world a better place. Women need to come to think of themselves not as victims but as dangerous." Anna Pigeon

              by glorificus on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 02:23:10 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Because the last thing we need (0+ / 0-)

                is a repeat of the complete crap that we went through in the primaries in 2008.  It's brutal and it is horrible for all of us and we need to stop it before it happens.  Based on your uid you weren't here then, but trust me when I tell you it was brutal and full of accusations of racism and misogyny.  And if it happens again it's not going to help anyone.  People have reasons to oppose Clinton, we can discuss those things on their on merits without throwing around baseless accusations.

                The revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                by AoT on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 02:33:36 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I saw enough crap in the primary before Obama (0+ / 0-)

                  was chosen. And really, you replying does not put the issue to rest for me because I was not addressing you.

                  And I don't consider them "baseless accusations."

                  "I believe more women should carry guns. I believe armed women will make the world a better place. Women need to come to think of themselves not as victims but as dangerous." Anna Pigeon

                  by glorificus on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 02:59:29 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Well then, other than opposing Clinton (0+ / 0-)

                    what was said that you based your accusation on?

                    Or is being very anti-war enough?

                    And really, you replying does not put the issue to rest for me because I was not addressing you.
                    And the original commenter saying "no, I'm not misogynist" would?

                    All in all, I can't believe we're arguing over the 2016 election already.  And yes, I take as much blame for that as anyone in these threads.

                    The revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                    by AoT on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 04:01:02 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I'm annoyed at you because I had a lot of respect (0+ / 0-)

                      for your actions during Occupy. And now you are wasting your time on my comment.

                      I expect better of you.

                      "I believe more women should carry guns. I believe armed women will make the world a better place. Women need to come to think of themselves not as victims but as dangerous." Anna Pigeon

                      by glorificus on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 04:15:58 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

      •  Good Lord! (11+ / 0-)

        Not asking for ideological purity! Is asking that the candidate didn't champion the most tragic foreign policy blunder in our lifetimes too much to ask of a presidential candidate???

        "Today is who you are" - my wife

        by I Lurked For Years on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 01:23:48 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  If you are talking about Hillary, then no you (5+ / 0-)

          can't hold her responsible for anything she's done in the past. That's what I was told anyway when I said that I wouldn't support her in the primaries.

          President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

          by askew on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 02:18:59 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  As you probably can see, I basically agree with (2+ / 0-)

          the disgust over the war.

          I would disagree that she "championed" the war.  She went along with it by voting for the authorization.  But she was far from a leading voice "championing" war in Iraq.  

          Bush/Cheney were headed that way as soon as they got into office.

          By the way, I am not a Hillary supporter from the original Obama run for President.  I supported Obama for president all along, from the day I met him as a US Senator at a Democratic rally in Texas. That was before he was even talking about running for president.

          I do think Hillary deserves a bit of a break. She was one of hundreds of Congressional votes in favor of the authorization.

          "Authorization" is one of the things that must change.  We should have straight up and down votes on Declaring War.  That is a power of Congress.  Not saying, "Well, the president can attack as he wishes," authorizations.

          If she had voted to Declare War on Iraq, I'd look at it more harshly.  I know.  It seems like a semantic game, but that's the way I see it.

          "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

          by YucatanMan on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 08:36:30 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  I'm not looking for a saint (9+ / 0-)

        But when Mrs. Clinton faced the most important test of courage, she failed. She wasn't alone.

        There were quite a few potential candidates who were done in by their willingness to play politics with the lives of US soldiers and the Iraqi people. Clinton, Kerry and others gambled that the invasion would end quickly and successfully, and that those who opposed the invasion would lose any chance of political advancement. They gambled with other peoples lives even though they had to know that the invasion was based on lies and distortions.

        Clinton  failed the test of character and paid the political price in 2008. She will pay again in 2016, should she decide to run. The chickens have come home to roost, but justice can never be served. The demise of the presidential ambitions of certain politicians cannot balance the loss of the hundreds of thousands of lives brought on by political cowardice.

        A proud member of the Professional Left since 1967.

        by slatsg on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 02:35:17 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Hear hear (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          slatsg, AoT, eglantine, Code Monkey, YucatanMan

          She blew the most important call of her life. (So did John Kerry).

          A lot of innocents are dead because of them.

          Fail.

          (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
          Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

          by Sparhawk on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 03:14:23 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Nonsense (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          glorificus

          If you think the Iraq War is going to play a key role in the 2016 presidential race, you could give Dick Morris competition in absurd political punditry.

          •  You deliberately misunderstand (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            slatsg, eglantine, Code Monkey

            all posts up until now have said should pay the price - you chose to substitute would for should.

          •  Dick Morris? Right. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Dave the Rave, FutureNow

            I suppose I could compare those who disagree with me to some war mongering pundit, but I choose not to go there.

            Hilary was a lock in 2008 too. She won't get the nomination in 2016. That's a safe bet. Her opportunity passed her by because she placed political expediency above the lives that were lost because of her vote.

            A proud member of the Professional Left since 1967.

            by slatsg on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 05:02:16 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I supported Obama in 2008 (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              YucatanMan, slatsg

              though I have always admired Hillary, I thought Obama was our strongest candidate in 2008. I supported him from the beginning. Want proof? Here.

              Hillary was never a lock in my eyes. I always thought Obama would win. I have pretty good political instincts.

              If Hillary runs, she wins the nomination in 2016. There will be no Obama-like candidate in the field this time.

              I get that her Iraq War vote is a disqualifying factor for you. There will be other primary voters like you. There just won't be nearly enough of you to stop her.

              •  Yes, regardless of everyone's opinions of her (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Meteor Blades, slatsg, kj in missouri

                past performance and the DLC connections and most everything else at this time it appears Hillary Clinton would be the strongest candidate in 2016. If nothing changes in the next few years, she'd likely be a lock.

                Meanwhile, let's see how this newly reelected president's term goes. We need to keep pushing him to the Left and working to be sure the old compromise-away stuff doesn't start up again.

                Forecasts about the future tend to be thwarted by fate and the forces of the universe.  There are plenty of surprises which will jump up between now and two or three years from now.

                No reason for us to fight amongst ourselves about something which may or may not happen, but it is nice to understand how everyone sees the situation.

                "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

                by YucatanMan on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 10:16:35 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  I definitely agree on the moral failure. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          slatsg

          I disagree that the Iraq War will be of much impact at all in 2016.  No one running in 2016 will want to re-fight that long past (by then) issue.

          "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

          by YucatanMan on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 08:37:49 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  On the bright side (0+ / 0-)

        at least you don't have ex-SED in your party, those people just can't retire fast enough - hanging around like warts on an ass waiting for a good state pension

    •  She has not apologized, but in 2006... (0+ / 0-)

      ...she said this:

      "Obviously, if we knew then what we know now, there wouldn’t have been a vote and I certainly wouldn’t have voted that way."

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 12:09:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site