Reply #57: Thanks for asking! [View All]

[Exiled in America]

The word "reservations" is key. Reservations implies that I have concerns, yet my mind is not made up.

My concerns stem from the fact that I was never a fan of the Clintonian "New Democratic" centrist approach to politics of Bill Clinton. How much do his politics equate to Hillary's politics? I don't know. But under Clinton quite a lot of things happened which I viscerally opposed. Some good things happened too, but not enough in my mind to leave me feeling supportive of his legacy. In my mind Clinton represented a pro-corporation democrat. They sometimes get called corporatist around here. Centrism in the form of corporatism is something that I fervently oppose.

Now, it has been pointed out numerous times that Hillary is "ranked" like the greatest liberal Senator to ever live by all these anonymous "ranking" places. I have reservations about that as well. For one thing, its not that hard to have a good "ranking" when Republicans control congress, and virtually every bill that comes to the floor clearly sucks. For another thing, I have no doubt that Sen. Clinton is strongly liberal when it comes to social issues. My concern comes when it comes down to issues of a more economic nature, or international relations nature.

I can't seen another Presidency in the model of William Jefferson Clinton as a good thing, and I'm worried that her Presidency would be much similar to his. People keep talking about the great economy of the 90s. The 90s were a time where the minority percentage of the population invested in Wall Street - a minority overwhelmingly dominated by the very rich - saw great economic prosperity. Meanwhile, wages for the other super majority of Americans fell. It was truly a decade where the rich got really rich, and the poor got poorer. That's unacceptable to me. I will never be a fan of a period in our history where things are so polarized.

PLEASE NOTE - I do not know if President Clinton is to blame for this disparity in the 90s; he very well may not be. Politics is complicated, and anyone who acts like it isn't is lying. But it leaves me with concerns. I did not consider the 90s to be a "glorious" decade.

I always felt that Clinton tried so hard to "triangulate" that he regularly made too many compromises that simply cannot be made if we are truly concerned about the ideals of justice and social and economic fairness. Hillary Clinton seems to me to be cut from a very similar mold - social liberal on many fronts, but economically corporatist (i.e. centrist by my definition, or sometimes I'd even go as far as to say conservative.) I have a hard time supporting that.

Another major obstacle to me are positions on globalization and international trade. Clinton was a strong proponent of what is inaccurately simply called globalization, but what should really be called corporate hegemony. I do not share the Friedman-esque vision of globalization. I strongly oppose the current structure of globalization, though I believe other more inclusive and fair models are possible. I don't believe in free trade - I believe in fair trade. As far as I understand Hillary Clinton, she is a very much a neo-liberalist in her views on international economics and globalization. I strongly disagree.

These are just a few of my reservations, and are a few of the reasons why my mind is not made up. There are a lot more, but I don't believe I could bother anyone to read that much. But now you know.