The Hopelessness of Unaudacity

Confronted with an optimistic opponent who promises substantial changes in American foreign and domestic policy in the form of Bernie Sanders, establishment candidate Hillary Clinton has been reduced to promising incremental improvements, and defending past gains. She argues her approach is more pragmatic. But will voters be satisfied with more of the same?

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on RedditDigg thisShare on StumbleUponEmail this to someone

11 thoughts on “The Hopelessness of Unaudacity

  1. FIRST!

    So, Trolecenter? Is this supposed to be a new comment? You’ve made the same one before. It doesn’t add anything to the discussion, it’s even less than a ‘me too’

  2. Ted, I’m glad to see your cartoons showing up on Sputnik. I also appreciate the fact that you appear on RT frequently. It’s good to know that not all Americans are Russophobes.

    • Oh, by the way Trole – I’ve got you sussed. Note the very first post at the bottom of the column.

      The odd looking phrase at the very bottom is in ROT13. (the cypherpunk equivalent of a Fool’s Mate)

      It contains a secret message, just for you.

    • Of course – that’s what conservatism is all about, “more of the same.” (by definition, duh?)

      More riches for the rich. More middle class sliding into poverty. More Republican sheep lining up to get fleeced. More fools voting for the wealthy career politician who says he hates the very institution which made him wealthy in the first place.

      Just because it’s never worked in the past doesn’t mean you can’t keep hoping for change. (Sucker.)

  3. I’m all in favour of people who hope and pray «ferociously» – were it not for my old fashioned notions about the sanctity of marriage, which I’m certain Ms Clinton shares, I’d hit on her…. 😉

    Henri

  4. Bipartisanship has become a discredited code word for doing what the Rapepublicans want so the DLC had to come up a new code word: Pragmatic.

    • “So what are conservatives to call it when, for example, Republicans roll over on budgets to Dems?”

      Call it caving in to to their base, the “Haves and the Have Mores” as Bush put it.

      The Republicans resisted Obama’s banker bail out, but knew even if it meant letting the criminals run away with the money they stole, they had to go along with Obama to get their cut of the loot.

  5. I’ll go along with ‘tough and pragmatic’ – not so much on ‘getting things done’ as ‘pragmatically changing her story to fit the need’

    (bbcf, Grq fnvq “Fnaqref” – phr Gebyrpragre)

Leave a Reply