Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Larsen
I'll be voting for Hilary in our primary. (I've been a registered democrat for many decades.) She has great experience with foreign affairs, which is something the Bernie is lacking in.
|
FTFY
Simply having done something for a while doesn't mean you're any good at it. Communicating her foreign affairs stuff over non-secure personal email servers? The whole Benghazi kerfuffel? If she's so great with foreign affairs then she should have stayed as secretary of state.
Anyway, the whole direction of this thread seems to be focusing on the inability to enact the sweeping changes Bernie is campaigning upon.
Who cares if they can get done right away, or at all? The question is this - do you believe that's the direction we should move in? Hillary sure as hell isn't going to move towards those things.
Besides, she's got million$ of favor$ to pay back to the current political and financial establishment. What will the repayment of those favors cost our country? What rationalization is used for these items when deciding she's the best choice? Shrug your shoulders and say "That's just how it is"?
I'm genuinely interested in an answer to this.
I for one don't want it to be that way anymore, and there's only one candidate who is advocating quite explicitly and sincerely against it.
Hell I don't care if a single one of Bernie's ideas got implemented. I just want to see the conversation be had on a national stage, for at least 4 years. Campaign finance reform, single payer healthcare, more support for our veterans, and less support for middle eastern wars.