[ SECRET POST #3279 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3279 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 064 secrets from Secret Submission Post #469.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Nor does it stand for what the DNC claims it stands for.

[(Anonymous)]

What do you think it means?

What do you think the DNC claims it means?

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think it means anything more than being loyal to the Democratic party, whatever the Democratic party is claiming to be.

To quote from their own site:

"Democrats believe that we're greater together than we are on our own—that this country succeeds when everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same rules."

Someone taking tons of superPAC money claiming to want everyone to play by the same rules is sad, imo. Even if Hillary claims to oppose Citizens United, she has no problem abusing it for gain meanwhile. Fair shot? Fair share? Everyone plays by the same rules? lol

I used to be a Democrat, and still am officially registered as one because I haven't changed it yet, but realized it was silly to say I support a party whose ideals I agree with in theory but don't see much of in practice. We might agree on several issues, but I have no loyalty to the party

[(Anonymous)]

To be honest, I'd rather the Democrats do what they have to do to win, rather than stay pure at the cost of 1000 years of Republican darkness.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

My argument here is not about whether Dems or Repubs are better, it's that Dems aren't what they claim to be and what people think they are due to what they claim to be.

Between the two parties, I prefer the Dems. That's tangential to the point however.

[(Anonymous)]

Depends what they do with that win. If it is enact policies that are for all intents and purposes identical to the Republicans then we might as well have the Republicans instead of people who are supposed to be better but aren't. Better an honest bastard than a deceitful one.

[(Anonymous)]

If it is enact policies that are for all intents and purposes identical to the Republicans

it isn't, though, so that's kind of a useless hypothetical

[(Anonymous)]

Hilary is what Republicans were 20 years ago.

[(Anonymous)]

No Republican, not even Tricky Dick Nixon, is as dishonest and deceitful as Hillary 'I was named for Sir Edmund even though he wasn't famous yet' Clinton.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

It makes me sad that she's the closest to a female PotUS we've got so far. A female PotUS would be awesome. I don't want it to be her.

[meadowphoenix]

So the Iran-Contra affair just didn't happen, eh?

ETA: I mean, unless you think politifact is in her pocket, so is in fact more honest then the current crop of Republicans.

[(Anonymous)]

"my heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it's not" - ronald reagan

[(Anonymous)]

I think if someone says she's "like Republicans were 20 years ago" they have no sense of time or US history? It's more like, Republicans were like that back in the *fifties* maybe. Before the Federal Government intervened in the Civil Rights movement and Kennedy and Johnson were told that if they did that, they would "lose the South for a generation". And they did, and they did. And that's when the Republicans became the Party of Racists, Sexists, Homophobes, and Fundamentalists and the Democrats became the Party of People At Least Attempting Not to Be Those Things. When the US political parties became increasingly Flanderized.

Anyone who thinks Republicans twenty years ago were like Hilary Clinton is now must not have been not old enough, or even alive, twenty years ago. They did not live through the 1980s Christian Right movement, or experience what the Republicans did to the Clintons when Bill was in office.

[meadowphoenix]

ia, it's patently absurd to pretend that she's like the modern republicans. That said, I think what people mean is that she's a neo-con like most republicans and opportunistic as fuck like more republicans than democrats openly are. But except for war-hawking, you simply can't compare social or economic positions.

When the US political parties became increasingly Flanderized.

I don't know, I don't think anything can top the Federalists v. Anti-Federalist/Democratic Republicans. Nothing I've seen has come close to stauchness of those positions. Slavery was a hell of beast.

[(Anonymous)]

This is so obviously untrue that I can only read it as the result of a complete and total hatred for Hillary Clinton as a person. and if you despise Hillary Clinton personally, that's fine, but you're not really helping leftism by doing so. so please don't dress it up as an ideological thing, if that's the reason for your distaste.

[(Anonymous)]

Hillary was around 20 years ago. Plenty of Republicans who are around now were around 20 years ago. They hated each other at the time and they still do now.

Like, do you think 2015 Hillary has moved dramatically to the right of 1995 Hillary? Or what?

[(Anonymous)]

She's followed the the center of the Overton Window as it shifted, no doubt about it. The Republicans have shifted rapidly and drastically to the right, thanks to Satan's ball sack Dick Cheney, and in order to not seem like she is on the extreme left of American politics by not moving, she has shifted with it to remain center but the center is now radically right of the previous center.

[(Anonymous)]

On precisely what issues has she shifted? Where, specifically, are her political beliefs to the right of where they were in the 1990s?

You could probably argue that Obamacare is a more conservative plan for healthcare reform than she proposed in the 1990s - but I would argue that she wasn't really the one who proposed Obamacare, and I think it makes sense to defend it once it's been passed.

Outside of that - what?

I agree that the Republican Party has shifted to the right. That doesn't mean that Clinton has.

[(Anonymous)]

I remember people saying that word-for-word back before the 2000 election.

I assume you're too young to remember that, but let me be clear: you are catastrophically, horrifically wrong. You are wrong to the power of wrong. You are dangerously wrong and your ideas make the world actually worse in the grownup universe. Change your mind because you are wrong.

[(Anonymous)]

People think it means left-wing, progressive, liberal.

It's center-right at most, compared to the rest of the world.

[(Anonymous)]

"Center-right" is pretty strong medicine but, yes, it's a centrist liberal / social liberal party at best.

Which is why Clinton is a Democrat, and why Bernie Sanders was not for most of his career.

[(Anonymous)]

I understand that, but try telling that to people who think Democrat = progressive and liberal. Which is a whole damn lot of them.