She went after him on issues, and snuck in little jabs about being a real Democrat. He not only went after her but the entire party. He was much more divisive than her.
The election could've stayed about emails. She might have still lost, but at least it was because of that. He and his team had to bring in speeches, donations, "establishment', Clinton Foundation, etc. He was desperate.
She's tough on foreign policy. I am too. But I consider myself liberal. Y'all little SJWs need to get with the program. We need a strong military and foreign policy. If we don't move more to the right on that issue, we could face issues in the future.
We constantly drone bomb countless innocents in a variety of Middle Eastern nations while our military budget is bigger than any other nation by leagues. We invaded Iraq on false pretenses and we're militarily involved in more countries with Obama leaving than when he entered. How on God's soon to be not green earth can we possibly go more to the right besides full out unprovoked nuclear war?
probably because she said she would definitely bomb Iran
Hillary really is a Republican in disguise
If being a Republican just means not being a pansy on foreign policy, then a large chunk of the Democratic base are Republicans.
The issue I have with people that attack foreign policy decisions because they don't come off as nice is that you all fail to acknowledge that you think the answers are simple. Hillary Clinton warned Obama that leaving Iraq was a terrible idea and now experts believe had Obama listened to Hillary, ISIS would have been subverted entirely. Sometimes the answers are difficult and just opting out to what seems the "most nice" is not the wisest decision. That doesn't make her a Republican.
In fact, Hillary was a lot more hawkish than Bernie in terms of foreign policy. But, anytime a debate between the two began to shift towards foreign policy, Hillary simply eviscerated him. She knew the material, the context, and everything at such a level of depth that Bernie couldn't compete. That judgment is important and sometimes it leads you to make decisions others might not understand.
In life, the answers aren't simple. Don't assume they are in terms of foreign policy.
Also, please point to me a Republican that is really close to Hillary's views on most issues since she's basically a Republican according to you.
Before the Iraq war, we'd bombed Iraq many times, sanctioned them economically and attempted regime change. All were decisions supported by both Hillary and Bernie.
The Bush admin was just moronic. No democrat should be blamed for the way the war turned out to be.
Though, I'm not a big fan of how Obama likes his troops at home. Like, sorry, but Libya should have been very militarized following 17 Feb
Same as Iraq.
Regarding the wisdom of airstrikes, compared with Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., both of whom were strongly opposed, Mrs. Clinton was surely more supportive. But according to eyewitness accounts, her support was careful, measured and directly linked to the diplomatic need to support close allies who were fighting side by side with American troops in Afghanistan at the time.
After all, President Obama is no pushover. In 2013, he decided not to implement his “red line” threat to use force if Syria used chemical weapons again, overruling his secretaries of state and defense. On an earlier occasion, he overruled his entire national security team’s proposal to arm and train the Syrian opposition. For better or worse, American intervention in Libya was Mr. Obama’s decision, not Mrs. Clinton’s. It is called the Obama administration for a reason.
Second, as to why Libya deteriorated so dramatically after Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s fall, Mrs. Clinton worked as hard as anyone to stabilize the country. But in doing so, she was operating pursuant to restrictions imposed by the president, who established strict limits on the United States’ military role. The president has come to regret limiting the American contribution to certain air assets and other unique capabilities needed at the outset of the air campaign. In an interview with Thomas L. Friedman, he said the lesson he learned in Libya is “the need to come in full force if you’re going to do this”and that “there has to be a much more aggressive effort to rebuild societies.”
Not sure what you're talking about as if Obama, Sarkozy, and Corbyn didn't decide to go after Gaddafi (As if Hillary had the power to persuade 2 presidents and a prime minister)
Second, following unrest, it was absolutely necessary to militarize both Iraq and Libya (Something Hillary supported and he didn't and guess what? It's what didn't happen) to keep them safe. And when we didn't do that, it proved to be disastrous in Iraq's case which led to ISIS as we know it today.
Let's not be revisionists and act like Obama was Hillary's puppet.
You probably misread my comment. 17 Feb is the wave of celebraters after Gaddafi's death when Libya needed a safety net but we simply took our men out of there instead of sending more.
"In Wayne County, which is 39 percent black and includes voters from the city of Detroit, Clinton won 66 percent of the vote -- less than the 80 percent Obama won over Romney and the result was more than 10,000 fewer votes for the top of the Democratic ticket there.
That enthusiasm gap also showed itself in Genesee County, anchored by the city of Flint, which is 56 percent black.
Clinton's margin of victory was 52-42 percent -- a 19,000 vote advantage, but not close to Obama's performance in 2012 against Republican Mitt Romney -- a 63-35 percent win and 57,000-vote cushion." SOURCE
How are they gonna keep saying they think the election was hacked and do nothing about it? Is the recount still going on?
It might be because the hack isn't something tangible, they probably aren't able to put a number on the damage.. I think it's evident that US officials like Comey also caused damage with the irresponsible stuff he pulled.
Sadly, without numbers, or evident cheating, there probably isn't anything anyone can do.
@LBlackout Disagree 100% on Libya.
Maybe its karma Hilldawg lost. What she did to Gaddaffi was disgusting.
You're both right. Hillary was wrong to act against Gaddafi, BUT if she did want to take him out, she should have been prepared to hold the post for much longer (or advised Obama on such).
How are they gonna keep saying they think the election was hacked and do nothing about it? Is the recount still going on?
Michigan's halted, but they're appealing. Wisconsin got recounted, but the other half of the issue is that Jill wanted it to be hand counted and she applied for that. Pennsylvania never started statewide, only a few precincts They're asking the court to force a statewide one in PA. So there are still lawsuits pending.
I think they finished all 3 original recounts though. There will only be more counting if states themselves or courts ask for more counting.
You're both right. Hillary was wrong to act against Gaddafi, BUT if she did want to take him out, she should have been prepared to hold the post for much longer (or advised Obama on such).
Exactly. I wish she had never gotten greedy and tried to run for president for a second time. Kerry was so weak on Iran, North Korea, Libya, Russia, Syria etc
You don't go soft on Libya when you could have turned it into Kosovo 2.0 with actual military involvement.
Whether you think Gaddafi was good or bad, the Libyans deserved actual assistance in rebuilding a democratic government and after the Benghazi attacks we just gave up
I don't think it would have helped Hillaryb to distance herself from Obama. The main reason she lost working class whites was because of their 'economic grievances' all of which they blame trade deals like NAFTA for. She would've had to relitigate the NAFTA argument and essentially throw Bill under the bus.
Ultimately, folks considered her a part of the establishment so there was no real way to distance herself for Obama or Bill because she was significant to both administrations.
I don't think it would have helped Hillaryb to distance herself from Obama. The main reason she lost working class whites was because of their 'economic grievances' all of which they blame trade deals like NAFTA for. She would've had to relitigate the NAFTA argument and essentially throw Bill under the bus.
Ultimately, folks considered her a part of the establishment so there was no real way to distance herself for Obama or Bill because she was significant to both administrations.
I don't think NAFTA played much of a role as it created as many jobs as it lost. After all, she had the white working class in 2008 and that was when America was losing 800,000 jobs a month.
