Hillary Clinton is not President
There was a moment in Obama’s second term when I realized it was going to be tough for me to vote for Hillary Clinton. It seems so long ago when the stories about the extent of the NSA’s domestic spying capability broke but I remember being disappointed despite myself (look, I used to blog). I remember thinking to myself, if Obama won’t or can’t stop this - or worse, wants to do more - how can I possibly vote for someone who is more wedded to the security state (and more hawkish for that matter) as Clinton has always been.

I actually think I’m probably somewhere between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton on the political spectrum. It took me a while to even consider who I was voting for because I just assumed Clinton would be the nominee and eventually president. And that was the problem. We just assumed. It’s not that Clinton didn’t work for it. No matter what you think of her you can’t dispute she’s put in the work. No, it’s that we as progressives/liberals/leftists didn’t work for it. Clinton was the easy choice. She was given to us even if she wasn’t exactly what we wanted and we accepted it.

As a progressive/liberal/leftist if Clinton won would everything be ok? It would not. She‘s not a great progressive/liberal/left candidate even though she would have furthered many of the causes. She was certainly qualified for office having been a senator, secretary of state, and a part of policy discussion for decades.

Regardless of what Donald Trump stands for - and make no doubt about it, he stands for the worst America has to offer - the truth is Hillary Clinton was a flawed candidate. I’m not talking about the ridiculously overblown email scandal. I’m talking about where she stood on so many issues.

Clinton refused to do the one thing that has been proven to win presidential elections of late - mobilize the base. I can’t remember which debate it was, but I remember a point where she could have absolutely hammered the Republican party on an issue. Instead she continually narrowed her focus to Trump. She truly believed she could win over voters who had been conditioned to hate her for 25 years and who had spent the last 8 years giving Barack Obama nothing.

And this is a microcosm of the Democrats over the last two decades. Here’s a conversation I had with a friend after my last post. He was pushing back against racism being a major factor in Trump’s victory.
Anyway. You say "democrats have lost working class whites" and that's such a weird thing that I hear everyone saying. What about working class blacks and latinos? Isn't the differentiating factor the whiteness?

But to your point - and the point of my next post - she is totally the establishment. She absolutely would have been a qualified president. She, despite being a bog standard centrist corporate democrat, would have still be able to push liberal/left/progressive/whatthehelldowecallitnow ideas. But who did she court down the stretch of the campaign? Did she try to use the strategy that won the last 3 elections (mobilizing your base)? No. She tried to get votes from sensible Republicans. Did she seriously forget the last 25 years of those people trying to destroy her.

The thing that pisses me off about all this white working class butthurt about not being loved anymore is they did it to themselves to a certain extent. What would help the "working class"? Unions, campaign finance laws, infrastructure projects, more protectionist trade deals. Who supports those? All those awful leftists they've been voting against. But what's more infuriating is as those policies that help the working class took a hit the Democrats were just like, well I guess we should cozy up to big money. And then all the sudden people figured it out and Democrats were left looking like the Wall Street Party because, yes, they did abandon all those causes.
Being a centrist is often vastly overrated by mainstream pundits but it also isn’t the worst thing in the world. And it is somewhat admirable that throughout her career Clinton has worked on both sides of the aisle. But it also means she and a large part of the Democratic party - from party leaders to elected officials down to rank and file voters - were willing to ignore a whole segment of the political spectrum and ignore ideas that were not just appealing to millions of voters but that would actually help them.

You can’t just accept the anointed candidate. Like I said in my last post, you have to work for it.
[Click for Comment Policy]
New addition to comment policy: first time comments (denoted by your email address) go into moderation so I can get a grip on my yummy spam problem.
* indicates a required field.
I would never ever display your email address.
* Name:    
* Email: