Slashdot Mirror
Hillary Clinton Declares 2016 Democratic Presidential Bid
An anonymous reader writes In a move that surprised no one, Hillary Clinton has officially announced she is entering the 2016 race for the White House. According to the Times: "Ending two years of speculation and coy denials, Hillary Rodham Clinton announced on Sunday that she would seek the presidency for a second time, immediately establishing herself as the likely 2016 Democratic nominee. 'I'm running for president,' she said with a smile near the end of a two-minute video released just after 3 p.m. 'Everyday Americans need a champion. And I want to be that champion,' Mrs. Clinton said. 'So I'm hitting the road to earn your vote — because it's your time. And I hope you'll join me on this journey.'"
Please don't vote for Hillary just because she is a woman. We can't continue the oligarchy that is the US government leadership.
After almost 7 years of implications that I'm racist when I disagree with the surveillance and foreign policies of the current administration, I can look forward to now being called a sexist instead!
Free at last!
Hillary does have presidential ambitions, yes. There is a good chance that 8 years older, less attractive, bruised by most recent fuckups such as BenGhazi, Email and her recently exposed Bosnia sniper fire falsification, will lose to younger W. Warren.
From Republican side Rand Paul, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz will be rolled out. There is a chance that Rand Paul and Ted Cruz will be on one ticket.
I wish there was a third choice...
Whatever one party comes out with, the other party has to approximately match. Think of it as weight class in sports. That keeps it at least mildly competitive. Hillary has a lot of baggage so the Republicans now must choose someone in the same weight class, which means a candidate as detestable as Hillary. Then the public can complain about how bad the candidates are but at least there candidate is not as bad as the other.
Personally I'm hoping that we see Bush III vs Clinton II, only so the public can see how silly and corrupt the whole thing is.
Vote third party or don't bother.
Much though I enjoy the multi-hundred-comment threads where we all scream at each other about politics, why is this here?
How is this 'news for nerds'? I mean, even the summary has given up on trying to even mention technology/nerdy stuff.
Just realized I have some good tech new for ya instead.
First 4 episodes of Game of Thrones current season (5) have been leaked. You can find them at your favorite torrent sites, or on usenet.
Be seeing you...
In America you need a huge amount of money to run for president. It's essentially impossible unless you're a billionaire or have mega campaign donations. On the republican side, only the far-right whackjobs get the campaign donations, and on the democrat side, only the corporate whores get them. Hence the results we see.
A fool and his hard drive are soon parted.
Nerds care about politics too...
I'm Liberal. I want clean government, an end to shitty subsidies, no corruption, representatives that actually represent me, equality and justice for all... All the usual.
I can't stand Hillary. I actually turned myself into a Democrat (You can easily switch parties in Oregon. There's a website. it takes just a few moments.) so I could vote AGAINST Hillary in the primary. I think she's a giant tool, and a bit of a war monger. I think she'll be the same bank and war friendly President that we got out of Clinton, Bush, Bush, Obama, and Obama. She's not a progressive. She doesn't care about the little guy. She's a career politician.
If Warren won't run, I'll vote for Bernie Sanders, the only Independant in Congress.
To end this, I would say to you all that our country is having some problems and it's OUR fault. Large swaths of the US citizenry are political morons who vote for hot button issues (And really, when did the R's ever get rid of abortion? When did the D's ever really help the poor? They just SAY that shit, they don't mean it.) or for the "character" of a candidate. Voter turnout is really low, making it possible for candidates to play to the base instead of playing to the swing voter.... Don't blame Washington. Blame yourself. And don't give me that "I don't vote so it's not my fault" B.S. You give them your taxes and then don't hold them responsible for what they do with them. Those people make me sick....
He's *already* become a generic right-wing kook. He occasionally spouts something sensible, like his recent comments on the War on Drugs, but overall is just another Republican. Even his dad disagreed with him recently; Ron said the Republicans who signed onto something against the peace deal with Iran were "afraid that peace would break out"; Rand was one of the Republican signers, along with the typical wackos like Cruz.
"He has lost all personal integrity."
You already said he was a Republican.
same as the old boss
We Americans will get the government we deserve, once again. I'm too jaded to be disappointed.
there are 3 kinds of people:
* those who can count
* those who can't
He declared last week, and wasn't on the front page. Why not? I'm guessing it's because Paul is a favorite object of man-love here on slashdot while Hillary is a favorite punching bag. You don't get many readers in to a celebration, but you get plenty of them for a pseudo lynching.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
That's never going to happen; our voting system makes it impossible for third parties to get elected, due to the first-past-the-post voting system plus the Electoral College.
What we need to do is hold a new Constitutional Convention of the states, and toss out the Constitution. We need a new Constitution where we basically adopt the government that Germany or France has: a parliamentary republic. Presidential republics are rare, and for good reason: they don't work. There's too much infighting in government between the branches, and nothing gets done. We see this every time there's a federal government shutdown because Congress and the White House are bickering. This never happens in a parliamentary system; at the worst case, parliament gets dissolved, new elections are held, a new PM is selected, and business continues as usual within a few weeks.
And while we're at it, we need to adopt a preferential voting system like the European countries have, so we can have a bunch of different parties, all sharing power in parliament.
If Saddam was still in power, ISIS wouldn't have been a threat to them. We weakened Iraq.
It's not merely that subtle. The USG actively funded and trained the groups that became ISIL. Now that Iran is funding their opposition, the USG can fund both sides of the conflict and be both allies and cold-war opponents with several of the participants.
Did somebody mention "stop meddling"?
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Unless you live in a swing state, your vote pretty much doesn't count.
There's so little chance that your vote will count that it's pretty much not worth being informed on the issues. This causes an obviously bad cycle, which is easily exploited by concentrated interests.
If somebody was selling a product with a code-base that operated on rules this good, they'd scrap it for a rewrite. At least in a market that offers anything but a monopoly product.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Or another Bush. We founded this nation to get ourselves out from the rule of royal families. Of all the people that the Democrats could come up with they put her forward.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
She already lost multiple times. Her last campaign irresponsibly ran millions of dollars into a deficit, which is precisely how people fear Democrats will run the country. She's incredibly fake all the time despite actual, legitimate political experience. Then there's the secret private illegal e-mail server that she lied about and then possibly erased. She has a 0% chance of winning.
If it ends up being Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush,
Who would move the US more to the right: Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush?
My current thinking is that Hillary would.
How about all them deleted emails?
Yawn.
I am pretty liberal and I can hardly imagine voting Republican again for a while, but even I cannot understand why the email thing isn't a bigger deal. I guess that is because I am not a lawyer. From what I can tell, deleting potential evidence that you even think might be subpoenaed later is a crime. A pretty serious one. And the Republicans have been threatening to subpoena for those records since the scandal started.
This doesn't seem like some little transgression to me. I think the Benghazi nonsense is just that, nonsense. But the email deletions literally seem like a jail-able offense to me. And honestly I think they should be. As far as I can tell the only reason she isn't in more trouble is because Eric Holder is a very political attorney general.
I would love for someone to convince me this isn't a big deal, and considering the media doesn't cover this more I am probably just wrong about how bad it is. I thought the email scandal was ridiculous when it was just about using her private server, but the second she admitted to deleting the emails things just became far less trivial.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
All you say is true, but you should interweave into that that Clinton's penchant for free trade deals with unequal economies meant the decimation of good paying manufacturing jobs in America in exchange for low pay service jobs. Free trade between comparable economies is totally fine because they are competing on a level playing field -- free trade where the workers think 50 cents/day wage is awesome is a recipe for disaster for most people, and massive profit for a very select few.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
I'm somewhat skeptical of the whole corrupt system, all the way through, but all the muck brought up on Clintonia is NOTHING, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING compared to the death, destruction, global disruption actions of the war criminals Dubyah and Dick
Please have respect for people with different abilities, especially children.
No, the President, submits a budget proposal. The House can enact that budget, parts of it, or toss it out the window entirely. The only real say the president gets on the budget is a chance to veto it after both the House and the Senate have had their say on the process.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
they bring up Benghazi, a non story (1)
there are some minor scandals, like travelgate (2)
there are some deranged fantasy arguments like vince foster suicide (3)
that all you got ?
maybe she has some small skeletons, but you compare her to the crazys (T Cruz , R Paul) the right wing guys who want us all to be underpaid slaves (S Walker) the retread of the past (J Bush)...HIllary stands head and shoulders over these midgets
1) the republicans in congress *created their own committee* which they *ran* ....zilch
and the committee investigated and found
2) ok, innuendo aside, someone fired a few timeservers in the whitehouse. Bush started a war for no reason that killed 4,000 americans, cost well north of a trillion, and destabilized the mideast...
3) If you think this is an issue, I have a special white jacket for you
Yes, I forgot to mention that part. NAFTA was a very bad deal for lower-income, lower-skill workers, because it meant moving a lot of their jobs to Mexico. This is the problem with Democratic voters: they buy into the party's free-trade dogma, and then tout the stock market performance as proof that the economy is great for everyone, while ignoring the fact that stock market performance doesn't mean squat to some guy with a high school education who has a low-skilled job.
You know that this period of the US will read about in history books as such an obvious time of corruption. The occurrence of dynasties is not a good sign of a healthy democratic republic. Save the last two terms, there has been a Bush or a Clinton as President since 1989. Counting VP, they've occupied those two offices since 1981. If you start to count Secretary of State and such, these two families have held top offices continuously for nearly 35 years. And the next race may well be a Bush vs a Clinton, again.
Of the more than 100 million eligible citizens in the US, is the best candidate for President another Bush or Clinton? Really???
If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
Unlike Benghazi, nobody was killed because of the Watergate scandal.
Hillary's email scandal is much worse than Nixon's Watergate cover-up.
Whereas Nixon was forced to resign in disgrace, Democrats are swooning over a candidate who make Nixon look like a boy scout.
Nothing came of all the Benghazi investigations, and most of the others. Innocent until proven guilty. And the laws about email at the time were vague. Yes, what she did is a bad practice, but many other politicians made the same error in judgement.
Table-ized A.I.
Why would anyone vote for the democrat or republican candidates? You can't possibly believe that either candidate has any concept of what your life or concerns are like. These candidates are funded by private industry and will act on values they are directed to act on, after they are elected. Their campaign platforms mean nothing. Just like Obama, just like Bush, just like Clinton, on and on. The data is no longer hidden. Step 1. Pander to the public for votes. Step 2. Ignore the public after that with periodic press releases telling the vocal majority, what they want to hear. Step 3. The media supports these half-truths. Step 4. Repeat. This corruption is ingrained all the way to the state level in most of the US of A (Maryland is not too bad, iirc). The federal government, alone, is attacking freedoms DAILY in a myriad of ways. You think Net Neutrality was won? Hah. You think either party is interested in progressive taxation? Hah. What about that section 702 of the Patriot Act? How many cycles before these issues are quietly readdressed? At some point, you need to decide if you have a responsibility to protect your own self-interests. Even if this means something as appalling as choosing a different box.
Often wrong but never in doubt.
I am Jack9.
Everyone knows me.
but never could figure out what her qualifications were. Sure, she was the president's wife, but did she participate in decision making?
It seems to me that the press has elevated the status of the first lady to co-president. I don't buy it. Being married to a president doesn't make you presidential material any more than being married to an engineer makes you an engineer.
If there was something wrong with my car I wouldn't call the mechanic's wife/husband, I'd call the mechanic.
Fuck tech news, post everything that could generate clicks!"
Oh piss off. Slashdot has always been "news for nerds, stuff that matters". I'm pretty sure that the US presidential race is "stuff that matters". Politics has always been on slashdot. If you don't like it, demand your subscription money back.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Hillary is now the official front runner for the Democrats. She will raise a ton of money do doubt. But she was also the front runner back in 2008 until this obscure Senator named Obama came out of nowhere...and the rest is history.
For many Democrats, Clinton is too centrist. Certainly to the right of Obama. They see her as being just a little to cozy with business types. She has a lot of well documented baggage - past and present. Democrats are torn between supporting someone they believe can win (Clinton) and a less flawed candidate with a lesser chance of winning.
Her resignation from the Clinton Foundation is quite timely. I'm sure that we are going to hear about questionable donations from foreign heads of state to her foundation and allegations of pay-for-play. It all ties in with the secretive email server and the subsequent disappearance of thousands of email messages that were not only never turned over they were willfully destroyed.
I think that some in the Democratic party fear there is a smoking gun and that if someone manages to get to the bottom of it their chances of retaining control of the White House drop to nearly zero. It would not surprise me to suddenly see Elizabeth Warren emerge as a candidate, despite her repeated denials that she is running.
Having said all of that I don't think that Jeb Bush is the answer. We need someone new and fresh ideas.