Hillary vs Bernie

[Malthus]

My outsider's impression is that the negative view of Hillary is all based on innuendo and deliberate malice, and gets its legs because she isn't an easy or natural public speaker, coming off as stiff, insincere and uncomfortable ... which is not to say she isn't horrible to deal with: I have no idea, never having dealt with her, but the sheer volume of excrement flung in her direction makes it practically impossible to get a grip on what she is "really" like.

[derspiess]

I heard she is fun.

[Eddie Teach]

In this case, all the "heinous trash" needed to support Raz's broad conspiracy was the exclamation "Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy!"

[derspiess]

  I don't do trigger warnings.

[Barrister]

My outsider's impression is that the negative view of Hillary is all based on innuendo and deliberate malice, and gets its legs because she isn't an easy or natural public speaker, coming off as stiff, insincere and uncomfortable ... which is not to say she isn't horrible to deal with: I have no idea, never having dealt with her, but the sheer volume of excrement flung in her direction makes it practically impossible to get a grip on what she is "really" like.

I think there are some legitimate negative views on Hillary.  Namely that she (and Bill) are squarely in the hip pocket of the big banks and other rich corporate sponsors.  That she (and Bill) received millions and millions of dollars in speaking fees, and to the Clinton Foundation.

[Razgovory]

In this case, all the "heinous trash" needed to support Raz's broad conspiracy was the exclamation "Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy!"

Question:  Do you believe there people in the 1990's who paid money to tarnish the Clinton name?

[Malthus]

My outsider's impression is that the negative view of Hillary is all based on innuendo and deliberate malice, and gets its legs because she isn't an easy or natural public speaker, coming off as stiff, insincere and uncomfortable ... which is not to say she isn't horrible to deal with: I have no idea, never having dealt with her, but the sheer volume of excrement flung in her direction makes it practically impossible to get a grip on what she is "really" like.

I think there are some legitimate negative views on Hillary.  Namely that she (and Bill) are squarely in the hip pocket of the big banks and other rich corporate sponsors.  That she (and Bill) received millions and millions of dollars in speaking fees, and to the Clinton Foundation.

Isn't getting millions from rich corporate sponsors par for the course to an extent for 'establishment' political types in the US, in both parties?  How many haven't done so?

[MadImmortalMan]

Derspiess then.

Yep.  In fact I broke the Vince Foster story.

The real truth is that Republicans are simply not that good at subterfuge. They couldn't pull off any House of Cards style stuff without outing themselves as a comical Bond villain.

[Eddie Teach]

Question:  Do you believe there people in the 1990's who paid money to tarnish the Clinton name?

That sounds likely. Do you believe there were people who have paid money to tarnish the Bush name, the Reagan name, the McCain name, the Romney name, etc? I just kind of assume giant political figures have enemies.

We part ways when you say that most Republicans wanted them to make up lies about the Clintons. As far as Republicans were concerned, the truth was bad enough.

[DGuller]

I mean, personally I have the impression that that reputation is primarily the result of a decades long smear campaign by political opponents and media discomfort with powerful women. It's just an impression though, so I'm curious about the specifics that led you to that conclusion.

Can't point to anything specific now, but my view centered around the inside stories from the failed 2008 campaign.  The picture drawn rather consistently was of her being an ineffective manager who is rather unpleasant to deal with personally, and that this mismanagement style played into the failure of campaign to recognize fatal flaws in their strategy.  Basically, Hillary was the boss you don't dare deliver bad news to, you just don't.

Interesting.

I just came across this the other day, written by a former speech writer of Obama's who was not a Hillary fan. It paints a rather different picture of Hillary, though it's obviously coming from a particular point of view:

I hear you're still not Ready for Hillary.

I get it. I didn't start off as her biggest fan either. During the 2008 campaign, I wrote plenty of less-than-complimentary words about Hillary Clinton in my role as Barack Obama's speechwriter. Then, a few weeks after the election, I had a well-documented run-in with a piece of cardboard that bore a striking resemblance to the incoming Secretary of State.

It was one of the stupider, more disrespectful mistakes I've made, and one that could have cost me a job if Hillary hadn't accepted my apology, which she did with grace and humor. As a result, I had the chance to serve in the Obama administration with someone who was far different than the caricature I had helped perpetuate.

The most famous woman in the world would walk through the White House with no entourage, casually chatting up junior staffers along the way. She was by far the most prepared, impressive person at every Cabinet meeting. She worked harder and logged more miles than anyone in the administration, including the president. And she'd spend large amounts of time and energy on things that offered no discernible benefit to her political future—saving elephants from ivory poachers, listening to the plight of female coffee farmers in Timor-Leste, defending LGBT rights in places like Uganda.

Most of all—and you hear this all the time from people who've worked for her—Hillary Clinton is uncommonly warm and thoughtful. She surprises with birthday cakes. She calls when a grandparent passes away. She once rearranged her entire campaign schedule so a staffer could attend her daughter's preschool graduation. Her husband charms by talking to you; Hillary does it by listening to you—not in a head-nodding, politician way; in a real person way.
This same story has repeated itself throughout Clinton's career: those who initially view her as distrustful and divisive from afar find her genuine and cooperative in person. It was the case with voters in New York, Republicans in the Senate, Obama people in the White House, and heads of state all over the world. There's a reason being America's chief diplomat was the specific job Obama asked Hillary to do—she has the perfect personality for it.

The rest of the article is here: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/26/why-electing-hillary-in-16-is-more-important-than-electing-obama-in-08.html

I'm willing to be proved wrong on this one.  Given the amount of vile misinformation out there, it's easy to consume second-hand shit even if you try not to.

[Razgovory]

Question:  Do you believe there people in the 1990's who paid money to tarnish the Clinton name?

That sounds likely. Do you believe there were people who have paid money to tarnish the Bush name, the Reagan name, the McCain name, the Romney name, etc? I just kind of assume giant political figures have enemies.

We part ways when you say that most Republicans wanted them to make up lies about the Clintons. As far as Republicans were concerned, the truth was bad enough.

For most Republicans the lies were the truth.  They really believed in "trooper gate", or "travel gate" or all the rest of the phony scandals.  Most of this had it origin in one guy, Richard Mellon Scaife, who spent a lot of money "investigating" the Clinton's and from where you got all these "scandals".

[garbon]

Free Bernie tatoos in Vermont!

[Admiral Yi]

Would you care to enlighten me on the truth about troopergate and travelgate Raz?

[Jacob]

We part ways when you say that most Republicans wanted them to make up lies about the Clintons. As far as Republicans were concerned, the truth was bad enough.

Which truth are you talking about?

So far in this thread we've got BB's "she and Bill are in the pockets of Wall Street and the big corporations". What else is there?

[Eddie Teach]

Bill cheated on his wife, committed perjury, possibly suborned perjury, and worst of all, he was a liveral.

I was never interested in Whitewater, so no idea what the truth is there.