General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: This message was self-deleted by its author [View all]Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)(And there are some, as I alluded to, that apply to him but not so much to her.)
To wit, I think both of them cut their political teeth so profoundly, first in Arkansas and then after the 94 midterms, vastly outnumbered on a conservative playing field--- on the necessity of triangulating, modulating, and at worst equivocating or taking questionable positions of nothing more than pure calculation or political expediency- that these things are hard baked into the Clinton political DNA.
And sometimes, that approach is a good call. A good plan. But other times we need leadership that is willing to take stands not necessarily backed up by focus groups, or poll-tested into the ground.
I think now is one of those times, but again, HRC has been in the race for about a week. There is lots of time for her to take decisive stands on all sorts of important issues, and I hope she will.
Lastly, the IWR is not a make or break issue for me, either... I do appreciate the fact that Hillary finally used the "m" word about it.