African American
Related: About this forumIt boggles my mind that we black folk forgot about how racist the Clinton camp was in 2008!
I just came back to say this.
Stockholm Syndrome? No.
Bad memory and too quick to forgive? Yes.
Reminders:
In reference to MLK, Jr. - paraphrasing from Hillary: "It look LBJ to get it done, not pretty speeches"
YouTube of her own words:
Regarding "hard working white people" from Hillary:
The above includes Bill Clinton's disgusting remarks about Jesse Jackson's run for president. So disgusting that Jim Clyburn had to call him and tell him to STOP:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/25/clinton.clyburn/
More disgusting racist Hillary digs at Obama (invoking Bobby Kennedy's assassination) after she knew he had been receiving unprecedented death threats:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/24/us/politics/24clinton.html
(This incident led to the Kennedy family's endorsement of Obama!)
And don't forget the racist dog whistles from the Clinton camp: Geraldine Ferraro's assertion that Obama's race is the only deciding factor for why he is doing well--not his merit, not his talent, not his intelligence:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/hey_wait_a_minute/2008/03/playing_the_racist_card.html
Ed Rendell was also despicable:
http://www.post-gazette.com/local/2008/02/14/Rendell-offers-his-defense-on-Obama-race-remark/stories/200802140484
And Paul Begala and James Carville's behavior was absolutely HORRID!
----
Why don't the majority of blacks remember this racist crap from the Clinton camp? And more important, why are they forgiving them for their horrible behavior?
Note: I don't support ANY Democratic Party nominee at this point--not Bernie, not Hillary, not O'Malley, and certainly not Webb. None of them have shown me that they give a shit about black folks; they only want the black vote.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)The vast majority of "black folks" remain thoughtfully and rightly loyal to the Clintons and have voted their preference with hindsight and thought and reject the premise offered.
The Clintons have talked the talk and walked the walk!
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)So, yes, I said it: "WE BLACK FOLK"!!
- NAFTA
- Omnibus Crime Bill
- Initial welfare reform package that severely penalized parents with children
- Deregulation of telecommunication, which is having a disproportionately detrimental impact on owners of black television networks
I could go on and on, but these are just a few of the horrible Clinton policies.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)My answer is that the Clintons have done much good through a lifetime, and will do much more good than bad in the future as well, and that is good enough for solid support based on the overall evidence.
We black folk are smart and observant and not amnesic or selective.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I do, advise caution ... this:
Is dangerously close to ... well ... see my sigline ...
Personally, the best, and IMO, only, response to "the Clintons are bad" is to point out that HRC is NOT Bill Clinton and point to her voting record, while in Congress, and the work of her foundation.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)JustAnotherGen
(31,848 posts)Because this post will show how legitimate criticism and VETTING of a candidate should never be hidden.
Never.
But I love me some O'Malley L.S. Love him.
And I've not forgotten any of this about Clinton -
But I don't believe for ONE 100th of a second we should compromise to the point of rolling back voting rights, civil rights, women's rights, abortion rights, GLBT rights, etc. etc.
I think this time around - won't be seeing anything we saw in the 2008 campaign. It's not going to happen from that camp.
EDIT - PS I also gave you a rec because you stated what many of us think of Sanders.
JI7
(89,260 posts)More than the other way around.
JustAnotherGen
(31,848 posts)JustAnotherGen
(31,848 posts)If I were to post a similiar thread about him back here?
It would have been alerted on and hidden by the same people that rec'd this.
I have to say - I find the HRC people to be very open to criticism and it shows a level of security in their political beliefs that I respect.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)It's true of some Sanders supporters as well and the racism of the Clinton campaign is 2008 is a big reason that I don't support Clinton in 2016 at the moment.
JI7
(89,260 posts)For months or even more than a year. On this forum the only candidate called a racist was hillary Clinton.
But it didn't result in attacks against members who said so. And a bunch of lectures about what is best.
angel123
(79 posts)I just do not want to a republican win in 2016. Black Americans can hold onto anger and not see the forest for the trees. There is too much at stake. For one, the Supreme Court, there might be three opening in the next eight years. Do we want another Scalia, Roberts, or Alito. How do you propose we handle the Clintons. I do not believe that Sanders can win in the general election. The whole of the right wing is preparing to demonize the so called "communist". I am not willing to take that chance.
JI7
(89,260 posts)They have a lot of connections.
I will say that i don't know of any black person who paid attention in 2008 that doesn't know what happened .
Number23
(24,544 posts)And it's so good to see you again.
But like I told you before, if black folks never voted for candidates that did us wrong, we'd never vote for anybody.
I think many black folks remember how screwed up her campaign was in 2008 and are STILL supporting her in huge numbers. I don't think it's a question of forgiven or forgotten at all. I think if anything, it speaks to the quality of the other Dem candidates running against her.
Liberals want to forget their generally miserable record on anything to do with race.
White leftists too, for that matter, though all of the truly racially open (political) movements have been on the far left, so it's a little different.
Same goes for gender and identity equality issues.
Number23
(24,544 posts)odious 2008 campaign.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,236 posts)Tipperary
(6,930 posts)to shame with their crowd of clumsy clowns. What I hear from my black friends is that they think she has the best chance of winning for any number of reasons. It is not a commentary on the quality of other Dems. I actually like Bernie quite a lot, but I do not believe he has a snowball's chance in hell. Hillary, however, has been my first choice for a long, long time.
JI7
(89,260 posts)Tipperary
(6,930 posts)I am still not an Obama fan and I wish she had been our nominee back then. However, that is all water under the bridge now.
JI7
(89,260 posts)or both .
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)Despite not being a supporter of his, I was pleasantly surprised to find I was wrong about his chances of winning.
I still like her better. As I said, I do like Bernie too. There are several things Hillary has done that have disappointed me, but overall I think she is the better candidate. However, my mind is always open. I look forward to the upcoming debates. I am not one of those who cares who is the "winner" of the debates. I look to them to learn more about each candidate and hear what they have to say. I would be the first to admit I am still learning about Bernie and O'Malley. And as I said, I am very, very pleased (and proud) at the quality of our candidates.
randys1
(16,286 posts)over Hillary?
Just curious.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)I did not believe him when he said he would close Guantanamo. I did not believe that he would get us out of foreign entanglements. I was right both times.
I had no idea he would begin a campaign of killing people by drone. That is something I could never have even imagined.
JustAnotherGen
(31,848 posts)As will O'Malley.
JI7
(89,260 posts)JustAnotherGen
(31,848 posts)Because many of his supports are under the impression he will not use it at all.
JI7
(89,260 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)Obama has conducted himself rather brilliantly in all matters dealing with foreign affairs and has had a no win situation with the ME
I hate the use of drones, one area I am angry at Obama about, but I am CERTAIN Hillary would use them equally.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)I do not.
I do know what Obama has done. Furthermore, staying in Afghanistan is stupid and will hurt us in the long run.
randys1
(16,286 posts)drones, I dont need a direct line to know that she falls on the hawkish side of things.
I suspect she will be our next president, wanna place a side bet on where she will stand as to drones?
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)(if that occurs) before speculating on her use of drones.
Perhaps that question will come up in the debates. If so, I certainly will be paying attention.
JI7
(89,260 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)JI7
(89,260 posts)It's fine if you just like her more than Obama but most of your complaints about him world apply to her even more.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)As to "foreign interventions"...how many has it been that Obama has engaged in that he started, other than ISIS aerial campaign?
Maybe I forgot something.
And if the Iran nuclear deal is not saying something about Obama's foreign affairs abilities, then that speaks to how one measures foreign affair abilities....Obama has had multiple opportunities to start wars and has declined....amnesia is not my strong suit.
Kind of contradictory to the whole "Obama is a warhawk" meme?
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)Obama was a disappointment to me on many levels.
It is all water under the bridge now. He is the lamest of ducks.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Tipperary
(6,930 posts)Period. You can try and explain that away using any argument you want, but you will not convince me.
We disagree.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Tipperary
(6,930 posts)And on that, we can agree.
Number23
(24,544 posts)power and they have chosen not to repeatedly.
And there's not a country in this world that's not involved in "foreign entanglements."
Tarheel_Dem
(31,236 posts)is by far the most qualified as the first debate proved. As you were "not a fan of Obama", I am not a fan of BS. There are many reasons for that, and "quality" plays into my decision. A lot of aspirational talk, with no actual explanation of the mechanism to bring about the change he seeks. For someone who has been on Capitol Hill for decades, with little to show for it, I don't know where his coalition building begins. He has two (2) Democratic endorsements, and these are the people who have worked with him, and presumably know him best.
So, I take issue with your characterization of BS as a "quality Dem". Besides, AFAIK, he's still not a Dem to this day.
randys1
(16,286 posts)represents great leaps forward. (in economics I mean)
That is a simple statement of fact.
I will vote for whoever it is, and I also believe that Bernie if elected could and would accomplish very little until the House and Senate were taken over by not just Democrats but liberal Democrats and that could be AFTER he left office.
It isnt Bernie's fault that he couldnt possibly accomplish anything in certain areas while surrounded by "status quo" politicians.
I trust Hillary to do the right thing on social issues and NOT to fix the Wall Street problem.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,236 posts)continue & expand on the policies of Pres. Obama. There's only a couple of candidates I trust to do that.
randys1
(16,286 posts)But on so many other issues yes, I agree.
Look, George Carlin told the truth about politicians and I have no illusions that any of them can be trusted to do what actually needs to be done.
In the case of Bernie he cant because he has to have WAY more help in members of congress, and in the case of Hillary she has no intention of doing the extreme stuff needed to deal with Wall Street.
But both of them have every intention to continue many of the good social issues of the Obama presidency.
MADem
(135,425 posts)liberal kid--so Goodbye, Harper, after ten long years.
That said, the PEOPLE didn't elect him. They elected LEGISLATORS who are of a liberal bent, and that's how they get their guy.
Now they have the lawmakers AND the leadership to get things done.
Bernie would be a lame duck from day one--he won't have the lawmakers on his side. He'd be a one-termer who will talk a lot and only accomplish minimal things, mostly through exective orders (and there's not a helluva lot one can do with those--it's very constrained).
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)But I do think the others are as well. We certainly can disagree on our opinions of Sanders.
Hillary will get my vote. I have supported her for many, many years.
Number23
(24,544 posts)definitely commentary on the quality of his candidacy and his quality/feasibility as a candidate.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)vote for.
I like Obama plenty, but he was wrong on gay marriage, and i enthusiastically voted for him. it's not like i forgot or anything, i just prioritized other things.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)Well said.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)Stellar
(5,644 posts)I never did. I was pissed all through the 2008 election. But this year I'm a one issue voter and I'm still waiting for Clinton to get her ish together.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)they were only racist up until the primary.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)She gave the maximum personal contribution to Hillary in '08.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)from whites, one hundred percent.
Obama being Black is a very important feature as to why I voted for him.
Not the only one, but a very important one.
In a country where race is so important, is so visible and so part of almost every area of life, of course his being Black is very important.
If a Black non rightwing American didnt vote for him, I would be wanting to know why, I mean I would be god damn curious.