I read a wide variety of news sources and dismiss the currently popular idea that the media all have some kind of "agenda." I decide for myself what value they have, and by reading multiple sources, even those I know I will likely disagree with. Just a thought.
Still disagree. Democrats need to focus on economic and educational policies more than civil rights. Clinton got smeared, she made some mistakes, but ultimately she ran a safe/vanilla campaign. That safe/vanilla campaign made her stick out as "establishment", but from my perspective she looked like she stood for nothing. That's coming from a guy who has no qualms about Clinton as president, either of 'em. I bet she would have won if she at least stood for getting the ball rolling on major changes to health care and education. How about we at least have universal catastrophic insurance, essentially like basic mandatory liability for your vehicle. That's a great start towards universal health insurance. Next how about we invest in after school programs in lower income areas where issues at home or lack of supervision can often lead to negative behavior. Hopefully we can offer after school programs for all public schools because many parents across incomes both work. Lastly, how about turning more of our under performing malls (due to a shift in retail) into trade schools and communities colleges. We need programs that offer tangible, marketable skills and experience just not for our youth but everyone who has slipped behind the times of this new world. You are confusing my initial post to abandoning civil rights when I just want to prioritize healthcare, skills, and after school programs for the next 4 years. People want results, people want change. I believe those things address some key aspects of inequality more effectively than what you are proposing. While, my ideas may or not be the great depending on who you ask but at least if she produced some incremental, but large policies aimed at strengthening the floor that holds up our society would have gotten more appeal. Healthcare was a no brainer. At least she would stood for something more than status quo, which was an unpopular stance.
Read a couple of posts from me earlier than this one. I think economic issues should be front and center in 2018 and 2020. I just think that civil rights is also an important issue, one of many. I also disagree that Hillary "stood for nothing." By saying that, you are playing into the GOP playbook. Denigrate and demonize the opposition. Hillary stands for plenty. She's been a lifelong supporter of women's rights, going back to college. She had a campaign platform that addressed a host of issues. People like you, I am assuming, probably didn't read it.
Yeah reading multiple sources is the only way to do it . I just don't want to spend the time . I feel that the benefit of putting in the effort is marginal and I'm almost as well off just by ignoring everything . I don't think agenda is the right word , becuase that implies a conciouss effort . I think self interest driving style and substance is a more accurate description .
Yawn I voted for Clinton and chastised Bernie Bros for not getting in line as republicans vote more as a block, although that's changing. To clarify when I said "stood for nothing" as I meant perception wise to the general electorate. Ultimately she lost because of her campaign platform during an election cycle where she had to come out swinging. I assume people like you are too emotional to see the big picture.
Says the person who just assumes I fell for a republican trap... Too emotional for this game... wise up if you want to actual see democrats take back government.
Trying to drop some knowledge kin folk. I am a Hillary fan as I see her as pragmatic and measured. But she lost because she didn't adapt to the changing winds this election cycle. Not a fan of Bernie because he's too much of a big idea guy so hopefully Dems can find a balance.
