I've argued this before. She has lately taken to saying she's not a 'natural politician.' But one meme that I definitely don't agree with is the one that says she is more dishonest than most politicians. Or that she will say anything to get elected.
But if she will say anything to be elected then why not just say she's for the $15 minimum wage or also wants 'free tuition' and 'single payer Medicare?' I'd argue it's her honesty.
I've noted in the past that like with her husband before her, she's always done better with black voters than white voters. Despite Bill's Sister Souljah moment, welfare reform, etc, Tony Morrison would go on to call him the first black President. That was at the height of impeachment furor.
Similarly, the talk about how untrustworthy Hillary is comes mostly from white voters. Among black voters she's seen as the most trustworthy one. Part of this is the fact that Charles Blow has discussed-black voters are more pragmatic as they have a better idea of the yawning gap between what politicians promise and what they do when in office.
Michael Cohen gets it right here:
"I could write about her trustworthiness gap and the fact that so many voters seem to think she’s not honest. But the truth of the matter is, she’s probably the most honest politician running this year."
Bernie Sanders makes big promises, doesn’t get caught up in the details of what he’s proposing, and presents every policy issue in terms of black and white, good guys vs. bad guys. Donald Trump offers no nuance, no complexity and no caveats. He lies all the time and it doesn’t matter. This is not to suggest that Trump and Sanders are two sides of the same coin: The differences between them are legion."
"But compared to Clinton, they are very different politicians. She speaks in nuance. She is, ironically, rigorously honest in how she talks about policy issues. She shades and diverts when answering questions she doesn’t want to answer. If anything, she often seems to go out of her way not to say something that is untrue; not to over-promise on something she can’t deliver. She appears to abide by the seemingly outdated notion that lies in politics actually matter."
"Even her supporters are nicer. If you dare to suggest on social media that Bernie Sanders isn’t the greatest thing since sliced bread, his supporters literally fall over themselves to denounce you in such harsh terms that you’d think you had punched their dog. When you say something critical of Clinton, her supporters are painfully earnest. Sure, there are a few jerks, but, more often than not, Clinton fans try patiently to explain why you’re analysis is wrong."
http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/03/23/clinton-boring-but-good-way/LQ5mEbgrVTILFUueQu2PDK/story.html
Yes, respect the Hillarybots.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/03/on-unsung-hillary-voter.html
But if she will say anything to be elected then why not just say she's for the $15 minimum wage or also wants 'free tuition' and 'single payer Medicare?' I'd argue it's her honesty.
I've noted in the past that like with her husband before her, she's always done better with black voters than white voters. Despite Bill's Sister Souljah moment, welfare reform, etc, Tony Morrison would go on to call him the first black President. That was at the height of impeachment furor.
Similarly, the talk about how untrustworthy Hillary is comes mostly from white voters. Among black voters she's seen as the most trustworthy one. Part of this is the fact that Charles Blow has discussed-black voters are more pragmatic as they have a better idea of the yawning gap between what politicians promise and what they do when in office.
Michael Cohen gets it right here:
"I could write about her trustworthiness gap and the fact that so many voters seem to think she’s not honest. But the truth of the matter is, she’s probably the most honest politician running this year."
Bernie Sanders makes big promises, doesn’t get caught up in the details of what he’s proposing, and presents every policy issue in terms of black and white, good guys vs. bad guys. Donald Trump offers no nuance, no complexity and no caveats. He lies all the time and it doesn’t matter. This is not to suggest that Trump and Sanders are two sides of the same coin: The differences between them are legion."
"But compared to Clinton, they are very different politicians. She speaks in nuance. She is, ironically, rigorously honest in how she talks about policy issues. She shades and diverts when answering questions she doesn’t want to answer. If anything, she often seems to go out of her way not to say something that is untrue; not to over-promise on something she can’t deliver. She appears to abide by the seemingly outdated notion that lies in politics actually matter."
"Even her supporters are nicer. If you dare to suggest on social media that Bernie Sanders isn’t the greatest thing since sliced bread, his supporters literally fall over themselves to denounce you in such harsh terms that you’d think you had punched their dog. When you say something critical of Clinton, her supporters are painfully earnest. Sure, there are a few jerks, but, more often than not, Clinton fans try patiently to explain why you’re analysis is wrong."
http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/03/23/clinton-boring-but-good-way/LQ5mEbgrVTILFUueQu2PDK/story.html
Yes, respect the Hillarybots.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/03/on-unsung-hillary-voter.html
What the Bernie folks do is the minute you disagree with him or criticize him in anyway or even hold him to the normal standards of reality it's because you're a bad guy who works for Wall St. even if nothing could be further from the truth.
But I agree. It's like Ezra Klein argued in a post a little white ago. There is real audaciousness in running as a pragmatist. It's actually a lot more honest too.
No comments:
Post a Comment