How Many Americans Understand Hillary?

A note of personal disgust to Hillary Clinton's remarks concerning NAFTA in the Boston Globe:

"With NAFTA, Bill and Hillary Clinton really stuck it to rural America, Mudcat told me, though in slightly more graphic terms. So when Clinton visited the Globe this week I asked her about that charge...Clinton, however, wasn't about to get into a hissing match with a Mudcat. 'I understand politics, so I understand making charges, but I don't think the evidence is there to support that,' she concluded." Scott Lehigh's column, Boston Globe, October 12, 2007

Is there anybody out there who would dare question that Hillary Clinton understands politics? I certainly do not. I have never, never heard, nor will I ever, ever say that the Clintons don't understand politics. Everybody on the planet knows they are the standard of measure in the practice of politics. So you just read her comment in the October 12 edition of The Boston Globe, "I don't think the evidence is there to support that." To highlight Hillary's impeccable understanding of politics, let's move back four days to her statement in USA Today for the supporting evidence (from the horse's mouth) on NAFTA's devastation to rural and blue-collar America.

"I think we do need to take a deep breath and figure out how we can make it (NAFTA) work for the greatest number of people," she told USA Today. Clinton said NAFTA's benefits have gone to the wealthy and cost jobs for working people. Susan Page, USA Today, October 8, 2007

First, it is callous and offensive to the many Americans who have been "sucking wind" due to Clinton trade policies for Hillary to tell them "to take a deep breath." Secondly, Hillary, you want more "supporting evidence" other than your own statement? Top-tier economists, many who were tricked on these ill-thought, ill-negotiated, ill-enforced, and erroneously presented to Congress trade treaties, are now taking a second look themselves. Former Clinton official and Berkeley economist Brad DeLong, Clinton Treasury secretary Larry Summers, Nobel laureate Paul Samuelson, and a former vice chair of the Fed, Princeton's Alan Blinder, have all voiced strong concerns. Blinder has gone so far as to argue that off shoring and outsourcing of American jobs could ship away as many as 40 million jobs in the next two decades.

The reason Hillary is distancing herself from the trade treaties, rather than continuing to talk about ridiculous "unintended consequences," is because she "understands politics" like nobody else. In the early primary states, Iowa and South Carolina have lost twice as many jobs to NAFTA than they gained, and in New Hampshire, they have lost two-and-a-half times more jobs than they gained. The bottom line is that the Clintons did a number on small-town rural America and blue-collared workers everywhere. To get in tight with the big boys, they brokered a deal to trade local economies, jobs, and benefits (code word: healthcare) for Wall Street dividends. I think the greatest verifier to the validity of that last statement is on the cover of Fortune back in July. The headline over a posed shot of Hillary says "BUSINESS LOVES HILLARY! WHO KNEW IT?" I'll tell you who knows it. Many, many rural and blue-collared Americans know it. That cover is a perfect illustration as to why Hillary can not win the general election and why the collateral damage to the down ticket of her toxic coat-tails could cost us Congress. The question is not whether Hillary "understands politics," but instead, how many of us understand Hillary.

Comments

[xrayman]

In the long run, isolationism is a losing issue. I'm sure y'all and Pat Buchanan will be happy comparing notes. That's right, Pat doesn't want free trade either.

[cuddletuffy]

Mudcat didn't argue for isolationism. These free trade agreements are rigged to benefit only financiers. Neither strict economic isolation nor predatory trading practices disguised as, "free trade" benefit enough people in the long run. Don't be so quick to label a critic of NAFTA an isolationist or throw them in a barrel with Pat Buchanan.

We need a serious and informed discussion about these complex issues. Enough time has passed to show that NAFTA and similar trade practices have failed most everybody but wall street and a few other crooks in suits. It is time to figure why and how they have failed and address solutions. It is best if the communities themselves participate in the debate and ultimately directly in the investment and commerce themselves.

Name calling isn't going to further a logical and reasoned debate and beneficial outcome.

[hoopoe]

well said, cuddletuffy! we don't necessarily need to jettison 'free trade' in principle, but we do need to evaluate its costs and benefits, calmly and rationally, and find ways to incorporate positive changes and effective protections into reforming NAFTA and drafting viable future policies. this is problem that hysteria between advocates of isolationism and free-market fundamentalism won't solve.

[wangmo]

Hasn't anyone been paying attention to the great work Bill Clinton's Foundation has been doing all over the world for the last seven plus years to help impoverished and sick people get little sustainable agriculture businesses going, or product target little village businesses started to empower the people sufficiently financially, sustainably, to get a school up, get some basic needs met, stop the AIDS epidemic, and a hundred other solutions his tireless works have accomplished? This is hardly the Big Business Corporatist at work here, people. This is help the Little Guy GET UP TO SPEED, GET A LEG UP, SURVIVE, AND THRIVE. I love the Clintons. I'm amazed after all they've been through, ruthlessly attacked for years, that they are still 100 percent dedicated public servants, a fact for which we should all be not only amazed but proud and grateful. The power they had they earned every speck of the hard way. No silver spoon here. They are unique individuals and a spectacular couple that should make all Americans proud.

[coolkraft]

love how she waffles and never directly answers anything..­talks about experience­...what a joke...she was married to a president.­..period..­..she was a senator ...period.­..she lies, she is polarizing, she is not credible, she is so like a neocon...s­he reminds me of Bush...

[TankerRat]

You have just describe the standard politician coolkraft. Well done, well done indeed

[lafrance]

Mudcat, the average voter usually doesn't have time to read blogs and inform themselves. They depend on the braindead on the on air news to tell them the 'truth'.
they are not being told about Hillary's real love of outsourcing and free trade, or her many different stands and her evasiveness and staging and ducking on the trail.
I wish your message was heard by the masses of people being kept in the dark by the on air press that keeps a daily cheerleading about her going while hiding her misdeeds and troubling ideas and thinking. and the constant flip flops.
Until this can be done, the major amount of voters are never going to know about this. they will go to the voting booth believing she really cares about the working people and the middle class. And never be told until it's too late about the true Hillary.

[joe6671]

All bloggers who criticize Hillary with the pourpose of derailing her ascendancy to the presidency , are doing themselves and others harm. I am saying this not because Hillary is perfect and cannot be criticized , but the loss of the WH to a Republican or another Democrat would be wrenching to the country. Just remember the damage Nader did by running in 2000 refusing to accept the simple evident piece of logic , that he cannot win but only spoil . So it is a responsible duty to be realistic and avoid cavalierish mistakes. Foreign policy was Bills weakness too; I'd advice Hillary to have a coterie of the best brains about her in deciding foreign policy matters. But as to internal politics she is as good as anyone else , if not better. And I think she deserves out trust.

[scooperss]

With that kind of logic, it's no wonder more people don't vote. You seem to want to take away a voter's right of choice. There's a reason we have primaries. It's for people to vote for their OWN person choice. And mine isn't now or ever Hillary.

[cuddletuffy]

oh for god's sake. how is it nader's fault? gore won the popular vote. what institution voids the popular vote? the electoral college!

keep blaming nader. keep blaming someone or something else for the problem. keep telling the fascist machine that they don't have to implement any meaningful policy changes to get your vote.

meanwhile the thinking and reasoning citizens, who aren't afraid to lose a battle to win a war, or fix broken systems instead of fighting losing battles, well i don't know. head for the nearest exit???

[MagisterLudi]

Let's get beyond the nonsensical verbage.
Nader cost Gore the Presidency in Florida. Period, no argument is possible here.

We should gather around Hillary and help elect her.
Certainly, Hillary is no a socialist and never will be. But to sacrifice Democratic White House on the altar of some abstract ideas of progress is stupid.
In 2000 the vote for Nader was a vote for Bush.
In addition Nader self-destructed as a politician and dragged down the Green movement along with his political corpse.

Don't make

[roneckley16823]

Hillary is fantastic at deciding foreign and domestic policy matters. After all, the Clinton's and the Bush's have been running their own kingdom here in this "democratic" country for the last 28 years and know their subjects well. Whose turn is it next - Jena's or Jeb's? Why the expense of all this money voting. What the hell is wrong with the Democratic Party. Where is this change they keep promising us. God help our children. They have been sold out while the USA attempts to conquer the world. We no longer have a two party system; we have a two family system.

[Precisionist]

What is it about America that consistently brings out the stupid and gullible come election time? We have been burned repeatedly by voting for the guy you want to "have beer with" or the guy who "feels your pain". Its past time to elect someone who is not bought and paid for by the power brokers who control the money and media in this country.

If you want endless wars, corporate profiteering, erosion of civil liberties, and the list goes on... go ahead and vote for Hillary. She is a neocon. She worships at the alter of AIPAC (one of the most influential lobbies in America). It is a shame that we cannot seem to vote for the people who REALLY care for the country. People such as Kucinich, Ron Paul, Richardson, or others, who at least are not already bought and paid for.

Pelosi has taken impeachment off the table. Just like that. No regard for the will of the people. I suspect it is because she was pressured to do so by the same masters that package Hillary for us. My personal opinion is that impeachment inquiries would likely expose the truth that they (including Hillary) were ALL complicit in the lies sold to us for the Iraq war. She and Bill had already been planning for the same when he was in power.

By the way, why does no one talk about Hillary's ability to turn 1000 dollars into a hundred thousand dollars supposedly because she was such a genius playing commodities in Arkansas? The truth is that she was probably accepting unholy money then and she is accepting it now -- only in much larger sums. Just look to her pact with Rupert Murdoch.

Someone please explain to me why she should be the Democratic nominee? What the hell has this woman ever done besides pander to special interests to the exclusion of mainstream America?

Enough is enough... the thought of Americans voting yet again based on perceived charms and pedigree, rather than substance, makes me want to go get a barf bag.

[Kendo Nagasaki]

These days marketing men are paid more than software engineers.

Yet Tom Friedman would have you believbe the US needs more engineers. To do what ? Repair the stuff we import from China ?

[frost]

.

Hillary big money whore Clinton will continue to send our jobs to child and slave labor countries where jobs pay 50 cents a day, with no assurance that those corporations aren't looking for even cheaper labor elsewhere.­...

and stupid Americans will continue to vote these big money whores into office..
.

[rixhex56]

Hillary is not my first choice, either. However, it seems to me that people need to be reminded frequently which Party controlled congress during most of the Clinton presidency. I'm not giving Clinton a free pass here; just saying that there were many things happening behind the scenes to which Clinton most likely was not complicit.

Regardless of the mistakes he DID make related to Iraq, Clinton was never idiotic enough to do what the Bushzis have done. Drawing up plans to invade and having the intelligence to see that it was a bad idea is a far cry from being stupid enough to do it anyway.

And there simply is no denying that what he handed off to Bush in 2001 was a universe-apart toward the better from what the 2008 winner will inherit. There is always that bigger picture that must be considered.

That being said, if enough Americans are stupid enough to put another Repuglican in the W.H. in '08, then they deserve what they get, and the rest of us might have to consider what that means for us.

[Boadicea]

I offered a comment that was refused, but I'm going to try again, because I think it's important to point out the facts, since no one else has.

1. The author of this blog post was or is a senior advisor for John Edwards according to his bio here. That matters, and HuffPo should not be afraid to allow that info into the comments section.

2. The issue of international trade is much more complicated than either Hillary or Edwards is willing to admit.

3. Edwards is taking advantage of what has obviously been a serious gap in our safety net.

4. But Hillary is right that the US manufacturing sector in general has benefitted from free trade. Look it up. The majority of job losses in manufacturing are new technology related and not due to free trade agreements at all.

Each side thinks they are 100% right, but neither side is. We need a much better safety net to navigate the transitional waters, and until we have that, we should revisit the treaties.

Frankly, although I hate her foreign policy, I think Hillary would run rings around Edwards in any discussion of trade. She probably knows more about trade than anyone else in the country. If anyone can fix that part of the economy, it's Hillary. I trust her 100% on trade; unfortunately, I trust her 0% on foreign policy.

[GreedyOldPsychopaths]

Bodacious

First, Edwards has forgotten more about trade issues than you ever knew. Second, my entire career has spanned the military-industrial complex and manufacturing. I've traveled all over the world and investigated manufacturing capability from the EU to China. You don't have a "F"-ing clue as to what you are talking about ala trade, free or otherwise.

Free trade is a misnomer. There is no such thing. In the current situation, we are paying for a major trade imbalance with our standard of living and technology to benefit a very small portion of the population called the investor class. Many here refer to this as corporatacracy.

The danger of this situation is that the "adjustment period" that you referred to in your original "Mudcat" post is one where the dollar will continue to decline in value as Americans continue to consume beyond their means. Where this ends is subject to much conjecture, but the consensus opinion is not good.

Edwards, unlike Hillary or Obama recognizes and acknowledges the displacement and struggle "free trade" has caused many average Americans. Eventually, left unchecked, this unfettered gluttony of greed will grow to destroy our economy and our way of life, including the investor class.

Edwards would wipe the floor with Hillary and Obama combined in any discussion concerning trade or the economy, period. That's why he, not Obama, is winning the endorsement of unions. Your continuous anti-Edwards commentary and callous labeling of one million plus SEIU members as "fools" shows your true colors, Obama Gal.

Dave "Mudcat" Saunders has served as a senior advisor to Mark Warner, Bob Graham, John Edwards and Jim Webb. Not a bad resume. What's your beef, Bodacious, omission of Obominable?

[Kendo Nagasaki]

Then perhaps Hillary should stick to trading for a living. Maybe cattle futures.

[alswegen]

OK, Dave...her­e's the deal..you introduced and endorsed our Senator, Jim Webb, and we have the smartest, most honest,most ballsy, truth tellingest Senator in the entire US of A. A man who can and will stand eye to eye George F Bush...til the shrub blinks.
You deserve to pick the president. If it's Ron Paul or Kucinich, or WTF, I'm ready to go to work.
You make me proud to be a Progressive Virginian.
Post again soon.

[middleoftheroad]

Bush-Clint­on-Bush-Cl­inton...Am I dreaming? 27 years is enough. I'm crossing over this year to support Obama. He is the only person who has a shot to bring this country together. People want a change and expect to get it from Hillary? Are you kidding?
myspace.com/republicans4obama

[May2002]

I really started to concern that many people here or at other websites support or defend Hillary are paid employees.

The reason I am worrying is because Hillary's approach of winning at any cost--by saying anything and doing anything necessary to win. So, it is legitimate suspicion for me to think that with her unlimited funds and naked ambition, her camps would hire people to go to many websites to support and defend her. To create an impression of inevitability.

I cannot but think Hillary is indeed corrupt. For her, the only thing matters is to win.

[MagisterLudi]

Ma2002,
Amazing comment from someone who exclusively posts anti-Clinton attacks.
And the relationship of your comment on NAFTA is...?
I support Clinton and I assure I don't get paid for it. I wish I was though :-)

[JosephDC]

So Hillary would do this, but no other candidate would?

And the people who elected her to the Senate twice and those who support her in this election -- the hundreds of thousands that have donated money and signed up to volunteer -- she hired all of them too?

Oh that's right, they're all just part of the collective, absorbed and their free will surgically removed.

And may all the people that believe and post such bits of genious please be the small minority that I suspect, so they can't actually play much of a role in electing the next President.­..

[Semper]

Losing your job is not the end of the world. Looking at your standard of living drop is not the end of the world. After all most of our standard of living was built on the denial of opportunities of others. The pendulum is swinging from prosperity to poverty. Get over it. When you go to the poles, vote your conscienscious, but vote your intellect. Hillery is not the right candidate for President, and if you settle for the lesser of two evils you deserve to suffer. Stop pointing your fingers at everyone else. You probably voted for a Republican, because you wanted someone who looked Presidential, was a real man and was very decisive, and not wishy washy. Yep, you did'nt fight for Gore and you are paying for it. Now you want to vote for Hillary whos ambitions has always been to be President. OK, I have no problem with that, but I have a problem with the way shes going there. The woman has no INTEGRITY, or honor. Its time you take the most difficult step of your live and vote with intelligence.

[Kendo Nagasaki]

Losing your job is not important ?

Are you mad ?

You lose your healthcare, your house and pension.

Are you a trust fund kid ?

[ChristinDemocrat]

There is more that controls this nation then alot of evil people hiding in dark places. There is God who founded this nation. They tread on him as well. I don't know what I can do but I do know in whom I believe and whom I serve. I know that I know God is real. He is real. I know God can bring us back and put the the evil ones behind it all in jail. I am asking for God's help and you to give Hilary your vote so we can at least begin to solve the problem now that it is identified.

[siegfried]

there are no gods

[Kendo Nagasaki]

There is no God "out there"

It is a mental construct to give you hope in an uncertain world. Politicians play on this.

[ChristinDemocrat]

When the Democrats were in office we rebuilt this country and we had a 400 billion dollar surplus we bulit this country from end to end tree top tall that is the test. They got all our creditbility because they got the NSA and CIA to do what ever they want. What do we have one chance, Her name is Hilary. I'm behind her unless your a paid for Propagandist like Ann the freak Coulter. You better get behind her to. She is all we got. She is our salvation at this jucture who you gonna trust George 9/11 Iraq buster? Wake up don't be a fool.

[CyberCitizen]

The Clintons backed NAFTA. After that, you heard a big and steady sucking sound of jobs going overseas. For years Hillary was a board member of Wal-Mart, the biggest importer of them all. Big corporations give her money because they earned big profits from outsourcing. But the people on Mainstreet have watched their salaries stand still or shrink. Despite being a woman and a minority, I am supporting John Edwards. Hillary Clinton is a corporatist--she's their girl.

If Hillary is so smart, why did she vote for the Kyl-Lieberman amendment. That is like waving a red cape before bulls like Bush and Cheney to charge into Iran.

[wangmo]

WRONG. Too bad you didn't hear her speech October 12th, the BARN PARTY RALLY, CANTERBURY, NEW HAMPSHIRE and hear her actual words as to WHY she supports the amendment, not at ALL what you're saying. This Barn Party Rally speech was awesome. Anyone who heard it had to have been honestly very impressed and relieved about a lot of things. It was on C-Span 2, the Book TV channel. Most people don’t
ever watch that channel. The really fascinating thing was to later watch the news coverage of the speech on MSNBC--which was every syllable from the talking heads utter B.S. that made what she actually said a totally twisted mangled spin that didn't resemble the truth of her actual words AT ALL!!! You are simply spewing opinion of what her position is and means as if you're mainlining MSM Hillary-hate spin. She truly hasn’t had an honest shake.

There needs to be a NEW CHANNEL where there are NO talking heads, only Intro people showing the real actual tape clips of the speeches instead of these spinmeister liars totally twisting what the person actually says. This was a very very clear case of seeing the real Hillary give an extremely intelligent friendly fully present talk and Q&A, unscripted so you see the vast knowledge and intellect and spirit at work spontaneously, then listen to what the scumbag liar Neocon pundits do with it. It was an utterly despicable twisting of what she ACTUALLY said.

[deleweye]

If she's "all we got", we're already dead.

[hugs4u]

With Hillary you get 4 more years of gw bush policies.

[BoJaker]

So you spam this post with: "Hillary is all we got, so get behind her"...
As far as I can tell we still have a primary election to decide our nominee. I know the Clinton camp would LIKE to get rid of that at this point, but the rest of us have a say for the time being.

[RogerHWerner]

I'm afraid you're caught up in party loyalty. Not all Democrats are New Deal progressives just as not all Republicans are Neocons. Just because we elect a Democrat to the White House doesn't mean that things will change. Which Democrat is elected matters a great deal. I have no idea of your politics. Personally, I'm a progressive at the far left end. I believe in the theories of Keynes and I oppose everything Milton Friedman and the Chicago School of Economics stands for because those theories have proven unsustainable and unworkable. A big part of me wants to support Hillary because I'd like to see a female president but when I at her record and that of her husband, I find it difficult to offer more than nominal support. I'll vote for her but hold my nose...aga­in. Why? It's simple: Hillary stands for status quo.

Hillary appears liberal but only when compared to Bush, who was so far right he left the planet and hovers in space with the spirit of Friedman. She is not liberal and she is certainly not progressive. Bill Clinton talked the language of a progressive while much of what the man did was monetaristic. I doubt Hillary would continue with Bush's efforts to make government a hollow shell by further out sourcing; we would likely see a break in that process begun under Reagan. But the country wants more that Bush lite. My read of the political tea leaves is that voters feel we have moved to far right and want a hard shift left and sadly, Hillary isn't going to do that. Whether this would doom her in a general election is unclear but I know voting for Clinton is a vote against progressivism because she would not significantly alter the current political and economic environment. Changing politics won't be enough and that's all that Clinton offers, and, it's why she is supported by multinational corporations who know economic power trumps political power. What we need is someone to firmly repudiate Friedman's economic theories and reintroduce Keynes and that won't happen with Hillary.

[Kendo Nagasaki]

Why would you not support Barack Obama ?

Because he is male ? Or too black ?

[GreedyOldPsychopaths]

"What we need is someone to firmly repudiate Friedman's economic theories and reintroduce Keynes and that won't happen with Hillary."

If you like Keynes, modernize to J.K. Galbraith. Galbraith is the antithesis of M. Freidman. I'm certain with your background you were already familiar with Galbraith, but others might not. I personally recommend reading Galbraith's "The Affluent Society" and "The New Industrial State".

BTW, great post.

[wangmo]

No, Roger, she is taking a status quo position, she HAS TO DO THAT, unfortunately, to get elected.

[ChristinDemocrat]

There are people out there with every asset of the of the United States at there disposal who mean to run this nation and they are not elected. They have for the last 7 years and someone wants to talk about Hilary. The common no goods that inhabit the republican party want your taxes for capital and your children for the next Corportate acquisition period. The Democratic Party is all we have and we have to support them when we do we support us.

[deleweye]

Same wonderful folks who bought Dubya bought Billary years ago - that's from personal experience since I was there.