Could a President Clinton heal a divided nation?

[mystery-ak]

October 23, 2016, 06:00 am
Could a President Clinton heal a divided nation?

By Niall Stanage

If she wins the White House, Hillary Clinton will face the daunting task of healing the national divisions exposed by a vicious campaign season.

Whether Clinton could knit the nation back together is an open question. Her supporters say she will do what she can, but that the GOP will have to play its part. Opponents argue that she is uniquely ill equipped for the task.

The former secretary of State has been a polarizing figure for decades. She is the most unpopular nominee of modern times, with the sole exception of her Republican counterpart, Donald Trump. To many conservatives, she represents everything that is wrong with liberal politics.

Yet Clinton has sought to make overt appeals to Republican voters. Invited to deliver a closing statement at the third and final presidential debate last week, she said that she was “reaching out to all Americans — Democrats, Republicans, and independents — because we need everybody to help make our country what it should be.”

more
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/302307-could-president-hillary-heal-a-divided-nation

[skeeter]

Hell no, she's supported by the same group of bitter misfits and takers that Obama has been.

Hate is what compels them.

[skeeter]

If it's possible, I think she's even more of a hater. One thing Trump got right in that debate was that comment about there being tremendous hate in her heart.

Its a Progressive trait.

[aligncare]

...say the haters of all things Trump. 

[Oceander]

Nope.  Neither she nor Trump could - or would want to - heal the nation.  Both are disgusting vile creatures who will further divide and damage this country.

Or have the bleep already forgotten their mutual promise at the Al Smith dinner that they would work together after the election?  Go ask Cardinal Dolan, that is what they said to each other.

Stupid, stupid bleep.

[skeeter]

...say the haters of all things Trump. 

You just can't get enough abuse, apparently.

[Oceander]

You just can't get enough abuse, apparently.

Nah, then he just goes over to freerepublic - and probably democraticunderground - and trashes TBR over there.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Let me take the contrarian view here:


I don't view her as liberal as Obama. I watched some of the Dem debates, she was a lot more reasonable than Bernie Sanders (BS) was.


So... maybe? 


I think the emails scandal has left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths though.

[corbe]

   Only if she also builds a WALL along the Mason-Dixon Line and Makes the Stoners in Colorado pay for it.

 

[skeeter]

Let me take the contrarian view here:


I don't view her as liberal as Obama. I watched some of the Dem debates, she was a lot more reasonable than Bernie Sanders (BS) was.


So... maybe? 


I think the emails scandal has left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths though.

If she wins our only hope will be she's as two-faced as her husband was. If she's a bitter leftist ideologue, as I'm afraid she is, we'll be screwed.

[dfwgator]

 

[dfwgator]

Let me take the contrarian view here:


I don't view her as liberal as Obama. I watched some of the Dem debates, she was a lot more reasonable than Bernie Sanders (BS) was.

 

Why do you think they put Bernie up to running against her?

[Bunny Watson]

Let me take the contrarian view here:


I don't view her as liberal as Obama. I watched some of the Dem debates, she was a lot more reasonable than Bernie Sanders (BS) was.


So... maybe? 


I think the emails scandal has left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths though.

Allow me to quote Kevin Wiliamson on Hillary:

...there is one thing about you that gives me a little hope: You are a coward. You are so risk-averse politically and personally that you have a natural tendency toward what might be described as a kind of conservatism — not conservatism of the Buckley–Goldwater–Reagan variety, but a certain conservatism of disposition, at least in comparison to such sans-culottes specimens as Bernie Sanders. I expect, and hope, that you will give into that salubrious terror and proceed with extreme caution.

 Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441229/hillary-clinton-gun-control-advice-prosecute-straw-buyers

[Night Hides Not]

Allow me to quote Kevin Wiliamson on Hillary:

Great post, but I think Hillary's going to settle about three decades worth of scores. She didn't take kindly to the attacks on CGI, and she'll be as ruthless as Michael Corleone.

[Bunny Watson]

Great post, but I think Hillary's going to settle about three decades worth of scores. She didn't take kindly to the attacks on CGI, and she'll be as ruthless as Michael Corleone.

All my hopes are riding on retaining the House and the Senate. Granted, they're not high hopes, given the odds and the people we're talking about here, but when you get past the score-settling and move to policy, I agree with Williamson that she's a cowardly, political animal without a principled bone in her body. Look at how many people it takes to write a tweet for her campaign!

[Right_in_Virginia]

Great post, but I think Hillary's going to settle about three decades worth of scores. She didn't take kindly to the attacks on CGI, and she'll be as ruthless as Michael Corleone.

They'll be no division under Hillary's rule.  Every American voting against her will live in an America custom-designed to punish and neuter them (you can add Catholics and Evangelicals to the list).  She hates us all.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JiT-mUMXcMc

[txradioguy]

They'll be no division under Hillary's rule.  Every American voting against her will live in an America custom-designed to punish and neuter them (you can add Catholics and Evangelicals to the list).  She hates us all.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JiT-mUMXcMc

So yet again you prove that there is no difference between Hillary and Donald.

Both will seek retribution against anyone they feel wronged them. And will do so with tje encouragement and help of their most strident supporters.

[txradioguy]

...say the haters of all things Trump. 

That coming straight from a true haters mouth 

[GtHawk]

Why do you think they put Bernie up to running against her?

Same reason the GOP put Trump running against her?

[Right_in_Virginia]

So yet again you prove that there is no difference between Hillary and Donald.

Both will seek retribution against anyone they feel wronged them. And will do so with tje encouragement and help of their most strident supporters.

I respectfully suggest you stop listening to the voices in your head long enough to join the real world.   

[txradioguy]

I respectfully suggest you stop listening to the voices in your head long enough to join the real world.

How about you stop projecting?

[Doug Loss]

...say the haters of all things Trump. 

You really are a piece of work.  You Trumpenfaithful shriek about how those of us who haven't drunk the orange Kool-Aid only criticize your big man, never Hillary, and then when everyone is criticizing Hillary you have to try to drag the discussion back to your obsession.  No one takes anything you say seriously, you know.  We might have, but you poisoned that well long ago.

[LMAO]

Great post, but I think Hillary's going to settle about three decades worth of scores. She didn't take kindly to the attacks on CGI, and she'll be as ruthless as Michael Corleone.

 And she will reward those, at the expense of the rest of us, who stood behind her all these years

Our reward will be more debt and a continuation of a sluggishly growing economy

[EC]

Of course she's not going to heal a divided nation. Without division, the Dems don't have shit. Just look at "the first post racial president."

Can we have a spit emoji please?

[Night Hides Not]

And she will reward those, at the expense of the rest of us, who stood behind her all these years

Our reward will be more debt and a continuation of a sluggishly growing economy

It's more than just that, my friend. I was listening to the audiobook version of The Federalist Papers yesterday, and I nearly stopped walking to catch the full measure of Hamilton's powerful words:

We may indeed with propriety be said to have reached almost the last stage of national humiliation. There is scarcely anything that can wound the pride or degrade the character of an independent nation which we do not experience. Are there engagements to the performance of which we are held by every tie respectable among men? These are the subjects of constant and unblushing violation.

Do we owe debts to foreigners and to our own citizens contracted in a time of imminent peril for the preservation of our political existence? These remain without any proper or satisfactory provision for their discharge. Have we valuable territories and important posts in the possession of a foreign power which, by express stipulations, ought long since to have been surrendered? These are still retained, to the prejudice of our interests, not less than of our rights.

Are we in a condition to resent or to repel the aggression? We have neither troops, nor treasury, nor government.1 Are we even in a condition to remonstrate with dignity? The just imputations on our own faith, in respect to the same treaty, ought first to be removed. Are we entitled by nature and compact to a free participation in the navigation of the Mississippi? Spain excludes us from it. Is public credit an indispensable resource in time of public danger? We seem to have abandoned its cause as desperate and irretrievable.

Is commerce of importance to national wealth? Ours is at the lowest point of declension. Is respectability in the eyes of foreign powers a safeguard against foreign encroachments? The imbecility of our government even forbids them to treat with us. Our ambassadors abroad are the mere pageants of mimic sovereignty. Is a violent and unnatural decrease in the value of land a symptom of national distress? The price of improved land in most parts of the country is much lower than can be accounted for by the quantity of waste land at market, and can only be fully explained by that want of private and public confidence, which are so alarmingly prevalent among all ranks, and which have a direct tendency to depreciate property of every kind.

Is private credit the friend and patron of industry? That most useful kind which relates to borrowing and lending is reduced within the narrowest limits, and this still more from an opinion of insecurity than from the scarcity of money. To shorten an enumeration of particulars which can afford neither pleasure nor instruction, it may in general be demanded, what indication is there of national disorder, poverty, and insignificance that could befall a community so peculiarly blessed with natural advantages as we are, which does not form a part of the dark catalogue of our public misfortunes?

IMHO, not much has changed since December 1, 1787. Hamilton's words support my opinion.