…so let me throw out an olive branch
While some people here think that movements can (and should) arise devoid of leadership, that leadership somehow cheapens a movement, Hillary Clinton doesn’t seem to think so. Mrs. Clinton sounds like she wants to be the leader of the Democratic Party IN ADDITION to being President.
MADDOW: How will you change the Democratic party?
CLINTON: …If you look at the first two years of my husband’s administration, you look at the first two years of President Obama’s administration and then what happened? They pushed through a lot of changes. They pushed through regulation on guns, they pushed through the Affordable Care Act. They pushed through a lot. The deficit reduction plan, the Dodd-Frank regulations.
What happened? Democrats didn’t show up in the midterm elections. So here’s how I want to change the Democratic party: I want to be absolutely clear that when we have a Democratic president we have to support that Democratic president and we have to show up in midterm. And we have to elect governors and state legislatures and county officials because that’s how you have the kind of broad based political campaign and the momentum you need to get change at all levels.
Right now majority of states are run by Republican governors and we see what they’re doing. On choice, on voting rights, on LGBT rights. It makes a difference so my job will be to make sure that the Democratic party is producing results through our elected officials, electing more Democrats and then convincing our supporters to turn out and vote in midterm elections.
MADDOW: What’s the Democratic party doing wrong now that that’s not happening?
CLINTON: I think that we are a party that is very focused on presidential elections. That is just the way it seems to have historically (INAUDIBLE) …
MADDOW: You think that can be changed?
CLINTON: I do absolutely think it can be changed. I want to have the kind of emphasis on reaching out to voters and concerned citizens and elected officials that doesn’t just happen every four years, that happens every month of every year. And that is — if you take a lesson from what the Republicans have done. They’re in trouble right now but they never quit working on electing Republicans, on creating the kind of base that they need to put people into office and we need to be doing exactly the same thing.
Jason330, not only is your headline correct, but so it the text of the post. Mid-term elections are key.
I’d say there’s plenty of “hate and vitriol” on both sides.
I’ve been “warned”, told my response what the shittiest ever, that’ I’ve gone full Republican, that a comment has been silly, and that I’d vote for Trump. So for today, Pandora, you are wrong.
^like.
It’s because we arent taking our beating like good soldiers.
Right… and you didn’t participate at all.
From this interview, it appears clear that Hillary wants to hold two jobs … but she can’t hold both.
I’d prefer to see Bernie as president and Hilliary as chair of the DNC.
However, if Hillary must be president, then I’d be happy to see VP Joe become the DNC chair.
Criticizing Hillary is not hatred or vitroil.
“From this interview, it appears clear that Hillary wants to hold two jobs … but she can’t hold both.”
The hell she can’t.
Of course not, but do you really think that’s what you were doing? That Bernie supporters merely offered constructive criticism? You guys were merely pointing out policy differences? Is that really how you see it?
I’d love to continue this discussion, but I have to go out and volunteer for a candidate for a few hours.
Yeah, she’s a uniter. A true leader.
Can someone point me to what it is exactly her platform is? And where she plans on leading us exactly?
It’s fine to put the onus on state and local Dems, but to make good on her word Hillary also needs a strategy to take, keep. and hold Congress for the 2020 census. I’m thinking that will require something more than incremental gains for workers.
@donviti: This seems like a good start in your search for a platform https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/
Bernie’s, in case you were going to do some compare/contrast: https://berniesanders.com/issues/
Let me clear, Hillary’s supporters do not react positively to Bernie’s supporters using 1990’s and 2010’s Republican smears against her. You want us to be nice and sweet, fine, criticize her from the left, which you have done. But leave the Republican shit in the trash where it belongs. And by Republican shit, I am talking about Juanita Broderick and her allegations of rape, her emails, Benghazi, Vince Foster, Monica Lewinsky, etc.
If you talk like a Republican, I will treat you like one. And you cannot then complain. Stop whining. If you throw a punch, don’t expect me to be nice to you. Don’t expect us to be eager to give you concessions on the platform. You all are playing this all wrong.
But having said all that, thank you Jason for the olive branch. Both Hillary and Bernie should want to be both the President and the leader of the Democratic Party in order to grow and build up the party so that we win and keep not only Congress, but in every state house we can. Indeed, if roles were reversed and Sanders were actually winning this race, I would want him to give exactly the same answer Hillary gave. And I fully expect, and want, Bernie to continue a campaign to recruit progressive candidates into the party, both in this cycle and in the next several elections.
Because guess what? I am a Progressive. No matter what you all say, I am a progressive. I favor progressive policies. And I will not let you Bernie supporters to declare me to be anything but a progressive. You were not put in charge of who is and who is not a progressive. You just favor one candidate and I favor another. That’s it. The reason you are mad is that your candidate is not winning while mine is.
The reason I support Hillary is because I am a pragmatic progressive and believe she has the best chance to win and enact progressive legislation. Bernie has not convinced me that he can do anything if he was elected to enact progressive policies. His revolution, which is always his answer on how he will enact his broad goals, has not materialized. If it had, he would be winning this race. Indeed, he would have already won it.
So I want to all of us to come together to do several things once this primary is over with: 1) reform the primary process to eliminate caucuses, superdelegates and closed primaries (to be replaced by hybrid open where Dems and Indys can vote); 2) fashion a compromise platform that will consider some of Bernie’s ideas (one area of compromise is putting the public option into Obamacare, which will eventually be the vehicle for a Medicare for all buy in); 3) recruit credible progressive candidates to win at all levels of government and 4) to elect Hillary Clinton as President of the United States.
“If you talk like a Republican, I will treat you like one. And you cannot then complain. Stop whining.”
“I am a Progressive. No matter what you all say, I am a progressive. I favor progressive policies. And I will not let you Bernie supporters to declare me to be anything but a progressive. You were not put in charge of who is and who is not a progressive.”
Contradictions abound.
Once she is elected, will you still defend her against all criticism? I can understand a reluctance to criticize before her victory, but will you be defending her as a pragmatist every time she compromises something away? That’s where I see these fault lines extending. Because once she wins in November, then we might be warned that criticism hurts her chances for re-election. If that happens, your journey to the Inside will be complete.
I also wonder where you will stand if she acts on the hawkish stances she has taken so far, especially regarding Israel. Not very liberal, or progressive, or whatever. More like a Republican. Do we have your permission to take her to task when she acts like one, or does that only apply to commenters?
local dems have onus on them.
“I can understand a reluctance to criticize before her victory, but will you be defending her as a pragmatist every time she compromises something away? I can understand a reluctance to criticize before her victory, but will you be defending her as a pragmatist every time she compromises something away? ”
We were ok with criticizing Obama after he was elected. At least the fair criticism. Why wouldn’t that be okay for Clinton? Fair criticism is welcome and needed.
@c “We were ok with criticizing Obama after he was elected. At least the fair criticism. Why wouldn’t that be okay for Clinton? Fair criticism is welcome and needed.”
I think the notion is that Hillary’s dealt hand won’t be as difficult as Obama’s was (e.g. less blatant racism), and so she should not need to compromise as much as he had to. I’m not sure this is fair.
I hope she has a better congress and a better Supreme Court to deal with, but who really knows.
I think people are kind of missing the point about what Clinton is doing in this quotation (or maybe everybody’s just happy to keep firing).
What she’s saying is a version of exactly what the pro-Clinton folks have been criticizing Bernie for all along. She’s saying, Elect me because I’m an organization Democrat, and I will be the political leader who will do the dirty work of getting the national Dems organized to compete with the national GOPers in the states” [With a heavy implication of Hey, nothing in Bernie’s career would lead you to believe he’s up to that job.]
Whether you believe that she will use that stronger organization to support progressive causes or big banks thereafter, you have to admit that if she does pay attention to that level of politics she will make inroads.
With this statement, if she follows through, she makes Bernie Sanders into Mike Castle–all my election and no bench. I am not a Clinton fan, but this is a correctly aimed shot and deserves to be recognized as such.
She will draw out sexism as Obama drew out racism. The difference is that blacks are a literal minority, and so have limited political power. Women are the majority of both the population and the voters. If they show their support for her, the country could make a lot of progress on women’s equality.
@pandora Far more women than African-Americans suffer from Stockholm Syndrome. Just sayin’.
I think the notion is that Hillary’s dealt hand won’t be as difficult as Obama’s was (e.g. less blatant racism), and so she should not need to compromise as much as he had to. I’m not sure this is fair.
Fair or not, it’s just wrong. I decided to vote for Obama because I didn’t think the country could stand more Clinton Derangement Syndrome Drama. It didn’t matter — the GOP is not going to be prepared to treat *any* Democratic President as a legitimate leader. So she’ll have plenty of issues too, and as long as there is a Congress that doesn’t lean progressive, there *will* be compromise.
Mrs. Clinton sounds like she wants to be the leader of the Democratic Party IN ADDITION to being President.
Seriously? If she is President of the United States, she *is* the defacto leader of the D party. Just like Obama is now and Bill Clinton was when he was President. Obama choose the much-derided Debbie Wasserman Schultz as DNC Chair. Bill Clinton had multiple chairs, including Ed Rendell and Chris Dodd. Both are justly criticized for not prioritizing party building or nurturing Dem politics broadly across the county. The question for Clinton is what she is going to do to stop the DNCs lassiez faire attitude to the rest of the party.
Did anyone read he article recently that suggested that Hillary did not poll well against Kasich? The article went on to speculate (I am an optimist) that cooler heads might prevail at the Republican convention and choose Kasich viewing neither Trump nor Cruz as possible winners. The article went on to point out that the Democratic convention comes one week after the Republican and if Kasich comes out as their candidate, Democrats would have a harder choice to make. Thoughts?
@mm “The article went on to point out that the Democratic convention comes one week after the Republican and if Kasich comes out as their candidate, Democrats would have a harder choice to make. Thoughts?”
The Democrats already made their choice.
As for Kasich’s polling numbers, no one has gone after his negatives, and the man has HUGE negatives. When people have learned more about what he has done, especially on women’s issues, his polling numbers will plummet. The only question is “how far?”.
Frankly, I’d love to see Hillary go up against Kasich… I think that may be the easiest win of the three still slugging it out on the GOP side.
voting for a woman does make you progressive when the woman is a hawkish centrist with significant ties to Wall St.
Unless of course the woman is running against a black guy. In the affinity politics of white liberal guilt, black trumps woman.
hillary rides identity politics to victory.