"Hillary is playing progressives for fools: Why you shouldn’t believe her populist talk on trade"

[Autumn]

Cross posted at the request of another DUer. Special thanks to RiverLover

"Hillary is playing progressives for fools: Why you shouldn’t believe her populist talk on trade"

Hillary is playing progressives for fools: Why you shouldn’t believe her populist talk on trade
SALON
4/21/15

Hillary Clinton is allegedly still making up her mind about TPP. Does anyone really believe this?

*** ...The goal is greater prosperity and security for American families, not trade for trade’s sake. She will be watching closely to see what is being done to crack down on currency manipulation, improve labor rights, protect the environment and health, promote transparency, and open new opportunities for our small businesses to export overseas. As she warned in her book, “Hard Choices,” we shouldn’t be giving special rights to corporations at the expense of workers and consumers,” Clinton’s spokesperson continued.***

Uh-huh. So, here’s a question: If Clinton does eventually come out against TPP, why would anyone in their right mind believe that? If candidate Clinton says that as president, she would either withdraw from or renegotiate TPP, how naive would you possibly have to be to believe that she would follow through with that?

You know all that stuff about labor and environmental protections that Clinton says she’s going to keep a close eye on? In 2012, she referred to TPP as the “gold standard” there.

In November 2012, the then-secretary of state declared that “we need to keep upping our game both bilaterally and with partners across the region through agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP. … This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field. And when negotiated, this agreement will cover 40 percent of the world’s total trade and build in strong protections for workers and the environment.”

Read more~
http://www.salon.com/2015/04/21/hillary_is_playing_progressives_for_fools_why_you_shouldnt_believe_her_populist_talk_on_trade/

[darkangel218]

1. Too bad Elizabeth Warren is not running, she would have been amazing!

And we really needed her this year.

[L0oniX]

2. "build in strong protections for workers and the environment" LMFAO

I have a bridge for sale plus a limited time special offer discount for Hillary supporters.

[Autumn]

3. Yeah, That's a big roll on the floor.

[MisterP]

32. they already believe she tried to make a "liberal IWR": a lefty TPP isn't beyond the capacity

of their cognitive dissonance

[Evergreen Emerald]

4. Such sarcasm and anger leveled

at Clinton supporters.

[Autumn]

6. Do you have any comments on the Salon article?

[Evergreen Emerald]

8. Yes

Clinton cannot win. If she says something that you disagree with she is evil and her supporters are fools. If she says something you agree with she is an evil liar and her supporters are fools.

Conversely; anything O'Malley or Warren or Sanders say gives them God-like status--no matter what their prior views or votes or statements on the topics were.

The double standard is palpable.

I don't agree with Clinton 100%. Indeed there is no candidate that I agree with 100%.

[Autumn]

11. You know what? I have never seen anyone post that Hillary is evil or an evil liar

anything like that should be alerted on. I don't think her supporters are fools, some of them are not very nice but that come's with the primary season. I like Hillary a lot, I just won't support her ion the primary this time around. More of the same is not going to cut it, we need change big time. The middle class is holding on by a thread, the rich get richer the banks and Wall Street get more power and the poor and elderly are drowning. Yeah there are some of us who are going to go with anyone who talks economic equality. We may not get it, we didn't with Obama but Hillary's choice in advisers so far show us just which side shes going to take.

[Evergreen Emerald]

12. Really? Then you are not looking

They are constant.

[Autumn]

15. There are some posters that I just ignore. They aren't worth my time.

[Phlem]

22. Yep.

Tried to get some specifics from a Hillary supporter about the TPP the other day.

Nothing. 20 minutes of arguing about something else completely unrelated to politics before I figured out there was nothing there. Something about a post that I said Ha!, or was it Ha ha, or was it Ha, ha, ha. She was talking about my "Ha, ha's". OMFG

[Evergreen Emerald]

39. There you go again.

One in four workers in our state would benefit from a deal that allows US to sell their goods the same way the other countries sell their goods. A global trade deal would really assist WA workers---depending on the details.

I hear lots of arguing and dismay about the trade deal. But, I have yet to see anyone that actually knows what it is.

So, when I hear you continuing to attack Clinton and her supporters because she may or may not agree that a trade deal is a good idea, I don't feel like answering you again.

1. I don't know what is in the trade deal
2. A trade deal would benefit WA workers and businesses
3. I am for a trade deal that protects our workers and allows us to increase our markets.
4. You act as if you know exactly what is in the trade deal--and are shouting angrily from the roof tops. And I would venture to guess you do not even know enough about it to continue to act as if you are so smart and those who support Clinton are soo "OMFG" stupid.

OMFG yourself.

[Phlem]

40. "You act as if you know exactly what is in the trade deal"

as do you!?

I know what happened to me after NAFTA and no other trade deal since has balanced the negative effects of NAFTA's "Feel good Christmas affect" on the US job market. Been there done that.

1. I don't know what is in the trade deal

Did you know what was in Nafta?

2. A trade deal would benefit WA workers and businesses

Links please

3. I am for a trade deal that protects our workers and allows us to increase our markets.

When has this ever happened.? Americans hardly buy American made cars and all of our manufacturing is gone.

4. You act as if you know exactly what is in the trade deal--and are shouting angrily from the roof tops. And I would venture to guess you do not even know enough about it to continue to act as if you are so smart and those who support Clinton are soo "OMFG" stupid.

OMFG is right.

[Evergreen Emerald]

42. what?

It does not appear that you understood my post.

[Phlem]

43. What!?

It appears that I completely understand your post. It's like no one has ever disagreed with you before.

[blm]

5. Why do these posts assume people are being 'fooled'? Most here acknowledge

that HRC is center-left. I voted for Obama knowing full well he was closer to the center than a lefty like me would be - he was our nominee, and no one who matched my positions ideologically was running against McCain and Romney. The furthest left we ever had was Kerry.

Who, exactly, is being 'fooled' as these posts claim?

Perhaps people post like that as a form of self-glorification? Makes them feel smarter than all those 'other' Dems?

[Autumn]

7. If you are comfortable with the way things are and the direction this country is going

that's wonderful. Some of us aren't.

[blm]

10. You're not comfortable answering a simple question? Who is being 'fooled'?

.

[Autumn]

14. I don't need to answer that question. It's a warning to progressives not to be

fooled by Hillary's progressive rhetoric. Most of us already realize that actions speak louder than words.

[blm]

16. And Dems who question YOUR claim do NOT realize

that actions speak louder than words? LOL - Oh yeah - those Dems are 'fooled'. So good of you to 'warn' progressives they are being fooled, since they might be distracted by the constant stream of drool they can't seem to control.

[Autumn]

17. I made no such claim. If you don't want to discuss the article then don't bother.

This is a group for supporters of Liz Warren.

[blm]

19. I can support Warren and still not push the BS that progressive Dems are

being 'fooled' by Hillary. Especially here at DU.

[Autumn]

26. You know the purpose of this discussion board is to post articles and thing like that

to discuss. Novel concept is it?

[blm]

28. And so I asked, Who is being fooled?

The concept that progressives are 'being fooled' by Clinton is utter horsepoo. Especially here at DU.

[Autumn]

30. Why don't you write the author of the piece straighten them right up over their choice of words.

Or petition Skinner to set up a booth somewhere and people can submit article to you for approval before they post? You can correct the words and contents and shit like that. That way nothing will be posted that offends you.

[Phlem]

24. And this one is about being fooled, or the word "fooled"

[blm]

29. No one thinks that, either.

Perhaps you can point out the foolish progressives who do, though.

[Autumn]

31. I don't need to, you can look for them. Now I'm done with your trolling of this group.

[Capt. Obvious]

35. AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

On Tue Apr 21, 2015, 02:07 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

I don't need to, you can look for them. Now I'm done with your trolling of this group.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1265&pid=3708

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

I have never trolled and resent the charge.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Apr 21, 2015, 02:13 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Perhaps you don't know the definition of trolling then.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Must have hit a nerve. Most people just shrug a BS claim off.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If the person is not a troll and has never trolled before, then s/he should just ignore this and move on.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Autumn]

37. People have been blocked from groups for a lot less

Thanks for the results

[hobbit709]

36. someone got upset.

On Tue Apr 21, 2015, 02:07 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

I don't need to, you can look for them. Now I'm done with your trolling of this group.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1265&pid=3708

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

I have never trolled and resent the charge.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Apr 21, 2015, 02:13 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Perhaps you don't know the definition of trolling then.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Must have hit a nerve. Most people just shrug a BS claim off.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If the person is not a troll and has never trolled before, then s/he should just ignore this and move on.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[Autumn]

38. He/she posted in GD wanting to open another group to support Elizabeth Warren

Thanks for the results

[RiverLover]

9. I think the poll numbers is what the author is referring to. LOTS of Dems being fooled.

You're taking it too personally.

[blm]

13. No - I'm being realistic. I am not one who cares what people think of me personally.

I AM curious why so many posts being left here assume Dem voters are being 'fooled' into supporting a Dem candidate.

I didn't support Howard Dean in 2003 because his overall record was that of a centrist - there were further left candidates capable of a serious national campaign and I chose Kerry. However, if Dean was the only Dem in the race at the time capable of a national campaign, he would have had my full support. I wouldn't have been 'fooled' into supporting him. In fact, I watched Dean evolve into a more progressive Democratic leader by the end of that campaign BECAUSE of his supporters.

[RiverLover]

18. So you're a not a fool

Neither am I, so when I read the article & all the great info condensed into one piece, I didn't take it personally because I already knew all it said. But it is an effective article for getting the info out to the MANY Democrats who are busy with their lives that have no idea...

So I'm grateful to the author. If you go to Salon & click his name, you'll see he writes many informative articles. Just trying to educate & inform!

Jim Newell

[blm]

20. All that instead of a simple answer.

You are misreading people if you think the problem is that they are taking it personally.

[RiverLover]

21. Fine.

Whatever you say, blm.

[Phlem]

41. ahem... and apparently we're not being realistic.

[Phlem]

23. Center Left?

[Autumn]

27. Do keep in mind this is a protected group for supporters of Elizabeth Warren.

Yeah I laugh too because so far I see center and a touch to the right.

[Phlem]

33. No worries Autumn.

She's my fave.

Hillary on the other hand,

[Autumn]

34. Yeah I should know that. I was busy with another poster who was trolling in here and responded

to you without reading the name Hate it when that happens