Hillary is actually shamelessly pulling to the RIGHT to contrast with Bernie

[brentspeak]

The center-right has always been her true political orientation, anyway.

And what does that say about her, uh, "supporters".

[YOHABLO]

1. She's aiming to pick up disgruntled Republicans who are Republican Lite.

[Todays_Illusion]

4. I agree, the Republican Presidential candidates are all so revolting and unacceptable, she may

succeed. There is a lot of money helping her squash the Bernie Sanders supporters. I think if Hillary is elected she will have to have Republican voters. . . . and that is the plan.

[hedda_foil]

7. That's probably her aim, but the probability of picking up their votes is between none and nil.

The so called center isn't particularly interested in politics in the first place. I'd think they would rather skip voting again than register a vote for Hillary, whom they neither like nor trust.

The whole idea of a centrist voting bloc has always been iffy. As election cycles roll by, it's become very clear too me that those who created and sold the idea in the first place knew early on (perhaps from the start) that it didn't work. But it gave them the opportunity to badmouth the liberal base, and diss the unions. The culpability of the DLC/New Dem/Third Way strategists has become glaringly obvious.

[peacebird]

26. Yes..

She stands a good chance of depressing the progressive vote, and losing the masses of young voters turned on by Bernie, but next to no chance of getting Republican votes.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

21. Yeah,...like they haven't been raised on Clinton Hate from their media masters.

[bravenak]

2. What did the anti BLM movement say about HIS supporters? I can think of stuff.

[arcane1]

3. She campaigns in a triangle while Sanders campaigns in a circle.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

22. That's funny, I thought he used straight lines.

[bigwillq]

5. She's a moderate.

At least that's what she said. At least on one day, anyway. You never know with it. She can't be trusted.

[CoffeeCat]

6. If Hillary is a moderate...

...then I am Tinkerbell.

Robert Kagan, the neocon kingpin and PNAC signatory, adores Hillary and has various connections to her.

Reed and weep:

A (sympathetic) New York Times profile of neocon Robert Kagan has this on Clinton II:

"But Exhibit A for what Robert Kagan describes as his “mainstream” view of American force is his relationship with former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who remains the vessel into which many interventionists are pouring their hopes. Mr. Kagan pointed out that he had recently attended a dinner of foreign-policy experts at which Mrs. Clinton was the guest of honor, and that he had served on her bipartisan group of foreign-policy heavy hitters at the State Department, where his wife worked as her spokeswoman.
“I feel comfortable with her on foreign policy,” Mr. Kagan said, adding that the next step after Mr. Obama’s more realist approach “could theoretically be whatever Hillary brings to the table” if elected president. “If she pursues a policy which we think she will pursue,” he added, “it’s something that might have been called neocon, but clearly her supporters are not going to call it that; they are going to call it something else.”"

[AtomicKitten]

11. She's a neoliberal hawk.

[peacebird]

27. Yep, and she likes & respects Henry Kissinger.

[CoffeeCat]

33. I sometimes wonder if the elitists/corporatists...

...didn't run a bunch of yahoos this year, because Hillary is their guy.

They need to continue the "progress" they made during the Bush era. They got their foot in the Middle East with Iraq. Obama hasn't given them what they wanted. They know that Hillary will be at full-blown war with Syria, Iran or whatever country the neocons have their sights on.

She can't be our nominee.

[msongs]

8. oh my you forgot the evidence to support the claim. minor quibble tho nt

[dirtydickcheney]

9. And don't forget how Republican-Lite vs. a Real Republican does when pitted against each other.

The Republican - Lite always seems to lose vs. the Real Republican.

The sooner the Democratic Party begins to realize that running Corporatist (Republican Lite) Democrats is a surefire way to losses, the sooner they can start to become a majority again.

[MisterP]

14. whenever they lose an election they "know" that it was the people's response to the campaign

that was lacking, not the campaign itself--2010 '12 '14

their solution is to keep commoners out of the politics

[dirtydickcheney]

34. Yes, I truly believe that the agenda is to make sure the money keeps flowing in.

The elections are not as important as access to capital as I'm referencing the Al From book The New Democrats.

[Recursion]

10. Well, that might explain her greater success in a party that is 20% conservative and 35% moderate

http://www.gallup.com/poll/180452/liberals-record-trail-conservatives.aspx

Our coalition is just not a mirror image of the GOP coalition, viz:

Republicans self-identify as
5% liberal
25% moderate
70% conservative

Democrats self-identify as
45% liberal
35% moderate
20% conservative

Meanwhile, the nation as a whole self-identifies as
25% liberal
35% moderate
40% conservative

And that 24% is the highest "liberal" has ever scored since Gallup started asking this decades ago.

Furthermore, that might explain her greater success among African American Democrats, who self-identify as
40% liberal
38% moderate
22% conservative

(Though that's from the Household Survey, not Gallup)

[Fumesucker]

12. Self identification isn't really all that accurate

Particularly not after forty years of "liberal' being used as an epithet by the Republicans.

When it comes to policy choices Americans are much more liberal than their self-identification would otherwise indicate.

[Recursion]

13. And that would be terribly important if we legislated by referendum

And ideological self-identification is a very reliable indicator of what candidates a voter will support. People seem to be honest in a way that confuses a lot of activists: they support individual liberal issues much more than liberal candidates, and their ideological self-identification correctly predicts the candidates they vote for.

[Fumesucker]

15. One thing I do know for sure

Republicans will rise out of their graves and shamble to the polls to vote against Hillary, her actual crossover vote will be so close to zero you could use it to chill superconducting cable.

I'm going to wait and see, I haven't thought at any point that Sanders has a more than 25% chance and that's about where I stand right now.

I think we have forgotten how it felt now but an inexperienced black man whose name combines both Osama bin Laden sound alike and Saddam Hussein was an extremely long shot in 2008. At the time of his nomination I was extremely skeptical Obama could win the general, it was a pleasant but profound shock to me when he won.

[Bread and Circus]

16. And that's the sad thing about American politics and why a

Clinton Presidency is going to look a lot like a Republican Presidency.


Nader was right to an extent.

Sure there is some variance on certain things but in many many thingsyou get the same results.

Hence perpetual war, a shrinking middle class, and worse conditions for the poor.

[Recursion]

17. A container ship has a 20-mile turning radius

Wheel full port and wheel full starboard produce about six feet of lateral difference over the course of a minute at flank speed. Which someone on deck might well interpret as "no difference".

[Bread and Circus]

18. Your analogy is lost on me but if u wanna open your eyes

For a second a realize that nearly 16 of the past 24 years we have had aDemocratic President and during all 24 of those every trend I pointed out is true.

Obama promised us change but nothing fundamentally chnged. Clinton promised a rising tide but what we got was a bubble economy and long lasting policies that led to pain and misery for a great number of people.

There is not no difference between the party leadership. Bush and Cheney were worse. However, fundamental approaches to economics and foreign policy are the same.

I hitch this to this reality that people identify themselves as a lot more conservative than they really are when it comes to actual policy.

Then they vote more conservative candidates which undermines policies they would actually support.

If you don't think that is sad and unfortunate then we can't have a realistic conversation.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

23. I don't buy those numbers....

The country as a whole doesn't know what "conservative" and "liberal" actually is.

A lot of people think "liberal" is raising taxes to pay for more bike paths and turtle crossings while taking away their right to smoke.

Half of the country doesn't even vote. In the last election 80% of young people stayed home.

[McCamy Taylor]

19. "Actually shamelessly"? As opposed to "pretend shamelessly"?

A more elegant OP title would be "Hillary is pulling to the right to contrast with Bernie."

I guess it says Hillary's "uh, 'supporters'" appreciate the beauty of the English language and hate to see it mangled.

[Hekate]

20. Twaddle

[BlueMTexpat]

24. + a milion or so! eom

[leftofcool]

29. And another

[Vattel]

25. What, you don't like the new version?

Bragging about having voted to build a wall tween Mexico and the USA to keep the "illegal immigrants" out, using garbage analysis from the WSJ to trash single payer health care? She is evolving again, just in the opposite direction.

[peacebird]

28. Hillary version 911

The one where she channels Rudy Guilliani....

[DemocratSinceBirth]

30. Another gratuitous attack on Madame Secretary and her supporters...

Hillary is actually shamelessly pulling to the RIGHT to contrast with Bernie
The center-right has always been her true political orientation, anyway.

And what does that say about her, uh, "supporters

-brentspeak

I thought I would show the softer side of DemocratSinceBirth but:

<patiently waits for the Brigade to attack me. Their contempt is to me is what spinach was to Popeye.>

[Scuba]

31. No, no, she's the only real progressive in the race. Read it right here on DU.

[CharlotteVale]

32. Shameless is the right word. And if she were to win the nomination -

she'll try to out-right the Republican nominee.

Her supporters here won't care, but they should because there is no way she can win the GE by sounding like a Republican. I really think she must want to lose.