I agree one hundred percent, well 99.9 percent.
The facts are that from George Washington to Thomas Jefferson to Warren Harding
to FDR to Ike to JFK many of our Presidents for good or ill were
serialphilanderers. These are documented.
Now, I voted against Slick Willy twice personally, but that was based upon his
policies.
I, personally did find his behavior, especially in the White House repulsive
though. But, for Trump to dump on Hillary for Bill's crap is not excusable and
a total dodge.
The only thing I mildly disagree with is history is history and the facts are
that many Presidents were philanders.
Joe
----- Original Message -----
From: Alice Dampman Humel
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2016 8:00 AM
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Hillary's Big Dilemma
Let me say first off that both Hilarity and Slick Willie are indescribably
slimy, and Hillary is first and foremost an opportunist who will do or say
anything to further her own personal agenda. So, having said that, how many
other philandering presidents have there been that we know about? And how many
have there been that we don’t know about, because they lived in times when such
things were kept where they belong, private, not smeared all over the national
newspapers, radio, TV, whatever technology was available at the time? How many
of their wives dumped them? and, finally, who the hell cares?
I’m not mentioning any names…perhaps we can manage to keep from dragging
history into the mud, since we seem so bound and determined to bury the present
day in mud up to its eyeballs. What anyone does in whose bedroom is completely
irrelevant to his/her abilities as a president, prime minister, etc. It’s
distasteful, it’s disgraceful, it’s unfortunate, but it’s his/her spouse’s
problem, and how that spouse chooses to deal with it is none of anyone else’s
business.
And as for the polls and their predictions of who will win? I have one word
for that: Truman…wonder if anybody has one of those old newspaper front pages
still kicking around, you know, the ones with the big, bold headlines
proclaiming Dewey the new president?
On May 7, 2016, at 5:48 AM, joe harcz Comcast <joeharcz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It would be scary to see Bill going rogue.
I really don't want to go back to the 90s and all that personal crap. But
Trump went precisely there last night.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Miriam Vieni"
<miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2016 10:47 PM
Subject: [blind-democracy] Hillary's Big Dilemma
Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org)
Home > Hillary's Big Dilemma
________________________________________
Hillary's Big Dilemma
By Robert Kuttner [1] / The American Prospect [2]
May 5, 2016
Hillary Clinton and her advisers now face an excruciating dilemma for the
November election. Go left or go center?
Typically, a Democrat moves left to win the nomination and then moves
center
to capture swing voters in the general election. But this is no ordinary
election.
For starters, the Sanders campaign has been the source of energy and
excitement-not just the kids, but the white working class voters whom
Hillary will need to win back.
Polls suggest [3] that few Sanders backers will defect to Trump. That's
not
the problem.
The problem is how many will just disengage, stay home, refuse to work
hard
for the ticket, or even vote for the Green Party candidate, Jill Stein.
And what it would take for Clinton to win over disaffected blue-collar
voters who were once Democrats but who now are inclined to vote for a
pseudo-populist Republican?
Those concerns suggest that Hillary Clinton should move to the populist
left. However, most of the insider advice she is getting urges the
opposite-move to the center to persuade moderate Republicans disgusted by
Trump to vote for a Democrat this time. If she moves left, according to
this
advice, the moderate Republicans and traditional swing voters stay home.
One of the first signals she will send will be her choice of running mate.
For a while the moderate of choice seemed to be Housing and Urban
Development Secretary Julian Castro. But Clinton doesn't really need a
Hispanic running mate. Trump will take care of Hispanic turnout for the
Democrat.
Now the moderate of choice is Virginia Senator Tim Kaine. He's a popular,
well-liked, centrist Democrat from a swing state, who is also a Catholic
and
a former governor. Kaine would reassure moderates-but do nothing whatever
for Sanders supporters.
If she goes the other way, and names Sanders himself, or a progressive
like
Al Franken or Elizabeth Warren, that could mobilize some Sanders
voters-but
not win the hearts of those elusive moderate Republicans.
She might declare the platform process open to convention delegates and
let
them define the party program. That could well give Sanders supporters the
sense that they succeeded on pushing the Democrats to the left. The
trouble
is that hardly anyone reads platforms other than Republicans looking to
ridicule positions that sound extreme.
Clinton could also adopt more of Sanders's policy positions. She has
already
shifted to opposing Obama's pro-corporate trade deals and now (sort of)
supports [4] a $15 minimum wage.
She might come out more unequivocally for a $15 minimum, for more far
reaching student debt relief, and tougher regulation of Wall Street. But
those and similar policies would contradict the strategy of moving to the
center.
Face it: There is no good way of reassuring both Sanders supporters and
Republican moderates.
Let us count the things that could go wrong.But does that matter really?
Don't the polls make clear that Hillary wins in a landslide against Trump?
What could go wrong?
It's true that the polls show Clinton beating Trump nationally, and even
in
must-win states like Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, which have lots of
disaffected blue-collar voters. However, Trump has been underestimated
ever
since he declared, and imagine any of the following:
A major terrorist attack. Even though Clinton is hawkish on national
security, she is still female. And Trump would exploit all the latent
misogyny that signals the need for a tough man in charge during a crisis.
Some unexploded bomblet from the email mess or the still undisclosed Wall
Street speeches. We just don't know what's in there.
Bill goes rogue. We do know that Trump will keep baiting Hillary Clinton
for
being a faux-feminist and political opportunist because she stayed married
to her alley-cat husband. Hillary may well have enough self-discipline not
to take the bait. But Bill is capable of saying anything. Which would drag
everyone in the mud, a venue where Trump is a champion wrestler.
So the nail-biters in the Clinton camp are right to worry. Yes, she is
probably on track to win, but she needs every vote she can get, especially
if she expects to govern effectively-which will take a Democratic Senate
and
ideally a Democratic House.
Threading that needle, and attracting both Sanders voters and moderate
Republicans, will be no mean feat.
Robert Kuttner is co-editor of The American Prospect and a visiting
professor at Brandeis University's Heller School. His latest book is
Debtors' Prison: The Politics of Austerity Versus Possibility. [5]
Share on Facebook Share
Share on Twitter Tweet
Report typos and corrections to 'corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx'. [6]
[7]
________________________________________
Source URL: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/hillarys-big-dilemma
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/robert-kuttner
[2] http://www.prospect.org/
[3]
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/02/opinion/a-trump-sanders-coalition-nah.html
?_r=0
[4]
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/apr/15/bernie-s/does
-hillary-clinton-want-15-or-12-minimum-wage/
[5]
http://www.amazon.com/Debtors-Prison-Politics-Austerity-Possibility/dp/03079
59805
[6] mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=Typo on Hillary's Big
Dilemma
[7] http://www.alternet.org/
[8] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org)
Home > Hillary's Big Dilemma
Hillary's Big Dilemma
By Robert Kuttner [1] / The American Prospect [2]
May 5, 2016
Hillary Clinton and her advisers now face an excruciating dilemma for the
November election. Go left or go center?
Typically, a Democrat moves left to win the nomination and then moves
center
to capture swing voters in the general election. But this is no ordinary
election.
For starters, the Sanders campaign has been the source of energy and
excitement-not just the kids, but the white working class voters whom
Hillary will need to win back.
Polls suggest [3] that few Sanders backers will defect to Trump. That's
not
the problem.
The problem is how many will just disengage, stay home, refuse to work
hard
for the ticket, or even vote for the Green Party candidate, Jill Stein.
And what it would take for Clinton to win over disaffected blue-collar
voters who were once Democrats but who now are inclined to vote for a
pseudo-populist Republican?
Those concerns suggest that Hillary Clinton should move to the populist
left. However, most of the insider advice she is getting urges the
opposite-move to the center to persuade moderate Republicans disgusted by
Trump to vote for a Democrat this time. If she moves left, according to
this
advice, the moderate Republicans and traditional swing voters stay home.
One of the first signals she will send will be her choice of running mate.
For a while the moderate of choice seemed to be Housing and Urban
Development Secretary Julian Castro. But Clinton doesn't really need a
Hispanic running mate. Trump will take care of Hispanic turnout for the
Democrat.
Now the moderate of choice is Virginia Senator Tim Kaine. He's a popular,
well-liked, centrist Democrat from a swing state, who is also a Catholic
and
a former governor. Kaine would reassure moderates-but do nothing whatever
for Sanders supporters.
If she goes the other way, and names Sanders himself, or a progressive
like
Al Franken or Elizabeth Warren, that could mobilize some Sanders
voters-but
not win the hearts of those elusive moderate Republicans.
She might declare the platform process open to convention delegates and
let
them define the party program. That could well give Sanders supporters the
sense that they succeeded on pushing the Democrats to the left. The
trouble
is that hardly anyone reads platforms other than Republicans looking to
ridicule positions that sound extreme.
Clinton could also adopt more of Sanders's policy positions. She has
already
shifted to opposing Obama's pro-corporate trade deals and now (sort of)
supports [4] a $15 minimum wage.
She might come out more unequivocally for a $15 minimum, for more far
reaching student debt relief, and tougher regulation of Wall Street. But
those and similar policies would contradict the strategy of moving to the
center.
Face it: There is no good way of reassuring both Sanders supporters and
Republican moderates.
Let us count the things that could go wrong.But does that matter really?
Don't the polls make clear that Hillary wins in a landslide against Trump?
What could go wrong?
It's true that the polls show Clinton beating Trump nationally, and even
in
must-win states like Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, which have lots of
disaffected blue-collar voters. However, Trump has been underestimated
ever
since he declared, and imagine any of the following:
A major terrorist attack. Even though Clinton is hawkish on national
security, she is still female. And Trump would exploit all the latent
misogyny that signals the need for a tough man in charge during a crisis.
Some unexploded bomblet from the email mess or the still undisclosed Wall
Street speeches. We just don't know what's in there.
Bill goes rogue. We do know that Trump will keep baiting Hillary Clinton
for
being a faux-feminist and political opportunist because she stayed married
to her alley-cat husband. Hillary may well have enough self-discipline not
to take the bait. But Bill is capable of saying anything. Which would drag
everyone in the mud, a venue where Trump is a champion wrestler.
So the nail-biters in the Clinton camp are right to worry. Yes, she is
probably on track to win, but she needs every vote she can get, especially
if she expects to govern effectively-which will take a Democratic Senate
and
ideally a Democratic House.
Threading that needle, and attracting both Sanders voters and moderate
Republicans, will be no mean feat.
Robert Kuttner is co-editor of The American Prospect and a visiting
professor at Brandeis University's Heller School. His latest book is
Debtors' Prison: The Politics of Austerity Versus Possibility. [5]
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Report typos and corrections to 'corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx'. [6]
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.[7]
Source URL: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/hillarys-big-dilemma
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/robert-kuttner
[2] http://www.prospect.org/
[3]
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/02/opinion/a-trump-sanders-coalition-nah.html
?_r=0
[4]
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/apr/15/bernie-s/does
-hillary-clinton-want-15-or-12-minimum-wage/
[5]
http://www.amazon.com/Debtors-Prison-Politics-Austerity-Possibility/dp/03079
59805
[6] mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=Typo on Hillary's Big
Dilemma
[7] http://www.alternet.org/
[8] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
