How Did Hillary Clinton Become So Hated?

[ill]

Everything you said holds true for Trump.

What point are you making?

That’s precisely my point. They’re both the same and run in the same circles. The only ones losing are us, the average citizen. Clinton’s did a bunch of shady crony bullshyt during/after office and many of you defended them and those actions. Now Trumps doing the same things putting his friends in powerful and lucrative positions that are gonna pay him dividends after his presidency and theres moral outrage everywhere. This might surprise you but I applaud that. Trump is openly showing the country what a swamp high politics is. He’s part of the swamp but so are the Clintons. They use the office of presidency to further their family wealth and they do it at extraordinary levels. I hope with the high levels of anger and hatred towards Trump, that we get some reform in high politics to stop these backroom deals that typically work against public interest.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Let’s speak on her money issue.

She ran her campaign like she’s for the people all the while she’s doing private fundraisers giving favors for investment bankers.

Her family left office dead broke and within a couple years surpassed $200mill in net worth. How’d that happen?

Well, it happened because she and her family represent elitism and cronyism. There’s no way they made that much money without it. Everything that Trump is doing out in the open, she did behind closed doors. She’s not alone. All Presidents do it but to your average citizen it further solidified that it’s a good old boys club in high politics.

She represents career politics so how in the world can a politician who’s supposed to make 100-400k per year suddenly so flush with cash?

For those looking for a red/blue wedge on this issue, there is none. They all do it. Hill did it in secret and we can say with some “class”. Trump is brash and doing it out in the open. The “win” here is that the public is openly talking about it and hopefully Trump doing all this in the open and with the level of hatred for him, hopefully we can reform some aspects of being a career politician/crook.

Bruh. The family of the former president, will get paid

I dont know what world you live in where thats not happening.

Gore did it.

Bushes did it.

etc.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

I want someone good at their job. And being an effective politician means being able to seem genuine.
Would you say losing to Obama and then Trump in elections you were favored in shows competence?

The worst democrat is better than any republican

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

She's a nerd and not a great orator nor a people person.

She fails where worse politicians have succeeded because she just didn't have the charm.

which is sad

Hillary was a legit wonk. She knew her stuff down pat. Scarily.

And that intimidated people because she sucked at telling jokes and didn't speak to their worst impulses.

She was in all intents of the word, an adult.

 

[AnonymityX1000]

The worst democrat is better than any republican

Generally speaking I agree. But I asked about competence, does she show a lack of it losing to a political novice?

 

[Tommy Fits]

Three reasons

Because she's a woman. There are a lot of valid reasons to dislike Hillary but a lot of the reasons male politicians do and I don't receive anywhere the same level of hate

Fox News

Purity politics

 

[ill]

Bruh. The family of the former president, will get paid

I dont know what world you live in where thats not happening.

Gore did it.

Bushes did it.

etc.

I’m saying getting paid an astronical amount for being in that office is wrong, regardless of who it is, and that all sides do it.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Generally speaking I agree. But I asked about competence, does she show a lack of it losing to a political novice?

This is a flawed assumption.

It assumes people aren't racist, aren't bigoted, and aren't stupid.

All of those types of people get to vote and if they outnumber you, whats that say about the electorate?

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

I’m saying getting paid an astronical amount for being in that office is wrong, regardless of who it is, and that all sides do it.

How is that wrong?

What the hell?

She didn't get a $200m lump sum. Doing speeches, writing books, etc. That adds up. Thats like saying Obama should do speeches for minimum wage...based on...what?

 

[AnonymityX1000]

which is sad

Hillary was a legit wonk. She knew her stuff down pat. Scarily.

And that intimidated people because she sucked at telling jokes and didn't speak to their worst impulses.

She was in all intents of the word, an adult.

Her bad persona also has to do with changing her message according to audience. What does she truly believe? I don't know, she just seems to take positions she thinks are advantageous.

 

[Baka's Weird Case]

the main issue was that she was the boogeyman for the republicans. her and tex kennedy were sort of the go-to political villains for the republicans because of her role in the clinton white house. newt gingrich was this for democrats for a long time as well.

the problem is these people who are "boogeymen" or faces of their parties normally arent super popular with independents and undecided voters. these people take in the criticism of these polarizing figures and look at them as representing the worst elements of their party.

in general this is why perceived outsiders do best in national elections (obama, george w, bill clinton and reagan were all designated as such in their runs).

 

[Take It In Blood]

super predators

 

[AnonymityX1000]

This is a flawed assumption.

It assumes people aren't racist, aren't bigoted, and aren't stupid.

All of those types of people get to vote and if they outnumber you, whats that say about the electorate?

If you want to talk about sexism that's fine and I definitely think was a factor. But racism?! She's fukkin' white!
Obama navigated all of the bigotry she couldn't so it is really a null and void excuse.

 

[Pressure]

which is sad

Hillary was a legit wonk. She knew her stuff down pat. Scarily.

And that intimidated people because she sucked at telling jokes and didn't speak to their worst impulses.

She was in all intents of the word, an adult.

For example, Hillary says she wants people who are making less than 150k or something like that to graduate debt free from college.

The conversation instead is about her hot sauce in the purse Beyonce joke.

Despite most of the the people criticizing her for pandering for the black vote would have been helped directly by the policy proposal.

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

BERNIE VOTED FOR THE BILL THAT HILLARY WAS MERELY THE FIRST LADY FOR.

This has always irked me. The sanctimonious Bernie supporter waxing on about "super-predators" while ignoring that Bernie voted in favor of the damn bill (and used that vote when up for re-election while running as a tough on crime candidate). What was even more hilarious were the people clamoring for Biden who helped craft the bill and still stands by it; but she shoulders the blame (that's not to say what she said wasn't fukked up, it was).

To answer the thread Q: A GOP machine attacking you non-stop for 30+ years. And an overwhelming majority of Americans being extremely susceptible to those attacks.

Hell, citizens united came to be because a conservative group wanted more freedom to attack her.

The conservative lawyer who brought you Citizens United is back for Round II

IN JANUARY 2008, James Bopp got laughed out of court—literally. The white-haired lawyer from Terre Haute, Indiana, was appearing before a federal three-judge panel in Washington, DC, to argue that his client, a small conservative nonprofit named Citizens United, should be able to air Hillary: The Movie on on-demand TV during the Democratic presidential primaries. Citizens United had produced the film to show that Hillary Clinton was a “European socialist” and ruthless political schemer—a cross between Machiavelli and Lady Macbeth who “looks good in a pantsuit,” as Ann Coulter put it in the movie. Also featured was Kathleen Willey, who accused Bill Clinton of hugging and kissing her in the White House—and who suggested in the film that Clinton had helped hatch a plot to assassinate her cat.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) told Citizens United that it couldn’t air or advertise the film during primary season, because it amounted to a 90-minute campaign ad that didn’t identify who’d paid for it. In court, Bopp argued that the movie wasn’t so different from what you’d see on 60 Minutes, and its creators deserved First Amendment protections.

At that point, US District Court Judge Royce Lamberth laughed out loud. “You can’t compare this to 60 Minutes,” he said. “Did you read this transcript?”

No one was laughing two years later, when the Supreme Court reversed Lamberth’s ruling and adopted many of Bopp’s arguments—a decision that wiped out 100 years of precedent in campaign-finance law. Building on a key 1976 decision that campaign spending was a form of speech and therefore protected by the First Amendment, the justices in Citizens United v. FEC extended that protection to corporations.