2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: THIS is who they want to put in the Whitehouse? Really?!? [View all]bhikkhu
(10,732 posts)Hillary has a very long history in working for and supporting healthcare reform. I think she knows more about the issue than anyone else running, and cares about it deeply. "Single payer" isn't one simple thing that just gets done or not, and advocating a different way forward is not equivalent to opposing universal healthcare.
The Dodd-Frank bill that Obama saw through is an improvement on Glass-Steagall. Bringing back an old outmoded bill would be a step backward, while allowing for the full implementation of Dodd-Frank would be a step forward, and more effective regulations could be better built upon it.
Every democrat supports a big increase in the minimum wage, but everyone differs on details. My state just passed the largest raise in minimum wage in the country, scaling it to the costs of living for different areas. Its a very smart and well-crafted approach, but one could say, looking at the statements strictly, "Sanders opposes this".
I'm not concerned with a candidate's position on death penalty, as it is primarily a state issue. The list of federal death penalty cases is extremely short.
Syria is a mess I don't think anyone has a good solution for. Obama has had many foreign policy successes, but Syria, objectively, has been a miserable failure. I don't have any special powers myself to know what will work in the future, so don't really have any standing to judge another's positions.
I'm not in favor of boycotting or sanctioning Israel.
I believe the current "hands-off" federal approach toward marijuana laws is the best approach. My state legalized last year, though local governments (including mine) have been allowed to opt out. Perceptions evolve, and it takes time; what people think is important, and treating that as important forces people to think about it, which is how perceptions evolve.
Hillary has a large-scale plan for debt-free college attendance, Its different from "free" college, but a good approach toward the same goal.
The welfare reform thing was ages ago. Imagining how history might be different if some past event had been done differently is more the job of novelists. A candidate's stand on issues moving forward is much more pertinent.
Technically, now she opposes fracking. My own position would be somewhere in between; once the technology is there being in favor or not is a non-issue, but effective regulation is the primary job of government.
I'm kind of worn out on the Patriot Act thing, the Bush era was awhile ago. I don't think its use under Obama has been a problem, and I'm not concerned it would be a problem under another Democratic president.
Hillary was heavily lobbied by veteran's groups to support the flag burning ban. I don't support it myself, but I can respect their perspective, and if I were personally heavily lobbied I can imagine changing my mind. In any case, its pretty much a dead issue now, and of little importance. The Big-enders vs Small-enders war comes to mind.
So...that's how I can support Clinton, in spite of all those "facts". I am voting for Sanders in the primary, but not against Hillary. I suppose some of this kind of debate is inevitable in a heated contest, but the rhetorical tactics here just remind me too much of the other side (you know, that other political party).