Her pick of "no bankster left behind" "TPP is awesomesauce" Kaine has left many displeased. They won't be able to see the fake message of the Democratic party having any interest whatsoever in the needs and desires of ordinary people.
Are they worried about those people? No. They're worried about beating Trump.
>"Let's be really clear: It should be disqualifying for any potential Democratic vice presidential candidate to be part of a lobbyist-driven effort to help banks dodge consumer protection standards and regulations designed to prevent banks from destroying our economy," Charles Chamberlain, executive director of Democracy for America.
>"Our presidential ticket cannot beat the billionaire bigot by simply being not Donald Trump. To win in November, our ticket needs to have an unquestionably strong record in the fight against income inequality, one of the defining issues of the 2016 election."
99% of leftists have no idea what TPP is or why it's bad
The only outrage came from her picking a white goy
Oliver Powell
Tim Kaine
are we not talking about Sup Forums got a leak on his nomination?
Adrian Adams
>The advocates are warning that a centrist like Kaine would send the wrong message to the liberals constituting the Democrats' base — many of whom had supported Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in the primary — and dampen turnout at the polls in November.
>"Hillary Clinton's vice presidential pick will be seen by many as a proxy for how she will govern." Stephanie Taylor, head of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), said Thursday in a statement.
>"The wrong pick could deflate energy among potential donors and volunteers, hurting Democratic efforts to win the White House."
>Taylor said the litmus test for a vice presidential pick should be twofold: First, the candidate should support efforts to rein in Wall Street banks; and second, the pick should oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a sweeping global trade deal championed by President Obama.
>Kaine fails on both counts. He backed fast-track authority to help Obama move the TPP quickly. And just this week, he endorsed a letter calling on the administration to roll back certain consumer protection requirements governing some banks.
>Choosing someone with those views, Taylor warned, would create "a giant opening for [Donald] Trump and other Republicans to outflank Democrats on economic populism issues and win important swing votes."
>"Clinton should also push the White House to take TPP off the table in a lame duck Congress, so this issue doesn't divide Democrats during this important campaign," she added.
Notice how it's only for the campaign that it would be off the table.
Easton Thomas
>99% of leftists have no idea what TPP is or why it's bad
hardly
Robert Collins
kek
Nathan Reed
...
Dylan Wood
>Clinton has long been accused of being too cozy with Wall Street, and Sanders hammered her over the enormous speaking fees she accepted from large banks prior to the campaign. And as secretary of State, she had signaled support for the TPP, though she shifted gears amid the primary and now says she opposes the deal.
She did more than support it. She said it was a "gold standard" bill for her.
Before she was against it.
Which was before she was for it again.
Jose Edwards
cognitive bias detected
Nolan Jones
The Democrats fucked themselves over. People do not want another Dubya, this is EXACTLY how Obama managed to beat her in 2007. She only beat Sanders this time around because niggers hate jews.
Not entirely wrong, but the people that matter know what the TPP is and why it's bad. These people, hardcore liberals, are normally the DNC's mouthpiece. Without them, they party has to lean hard on Unions. However, Unions are at their lowest point ever (especially in swing states). Hilary shut all the doors and locked them herself.
Hudson Bennett
>99% of leftists have no idea what TPP is or why it's bad Fuck off. Check the Senate votes. Bernie and Warren are vehemently against TPP
Carson Wood
rank hyperbole detected
Isaac Myers
it's hilarious that they rail against the "racist" republicans one second, then rail against hill's boring white guy then next.
Julian Foster
>Without them, they party has to lean hard on Unions. However, Unions are at their lowest point ever (especially in swing states)
Unions?
Don't make me laugh.
Obama took a huge dump on them when they tried to oppose his party's corporate toady in favor of a pro-union candidate.
Obama and his people openly mocked them for wasting their money. They have nothing but contempt for organized labor.
Nicholas Miller
it just goes to show how absolutely, totally fucked she'll be in November. All she had to do was either pick a socialist or pick a nigger
Gavin Bailey
It's because they want to beat Trump, regardless of the exposure of their real agenda.
That's why it's important, according to that one spokesperson, to take TPP off the table just for the election — not for all time.
Easton Edwards
No shit sherlock, that was my point. The Unions are at their lowest point ever so Hilary cannot rely on their support, because it simply is not there anymore. Detroit is bankrupt and GM moved all their jobs to mexico.
Hillary has been pretty vocal about not swinging the way her voters want her to. I can't believe she is still doing as well as she is. I can't imagine what the debates will be like.
Brayden Morgan
>No shit sherlock, that was my point. The Unions are at their lowest point ever
Well it was not clearly stated at all. Unions are at their lowest point ever in multiple respects, such as membership and political clout — regardless of how Obama treated them.
Just because you have an idea in your mind doesn't mean it is clearly expressed to others, Holmes.
Logan Collins
SHI IS OXICILIN ZOMBY
Parker Parker
>I can't imagine what the debates will be like.
Hillary: Why do you hate women?
Trump: I don't.
Hillary: Why are you so racist?
Trump: I'm not.
Hillary: Why are you so xenophobic?
Trump: I'm not.
Hillary: Why are you a bully?
Trump: I'm not.
And we'll have the usual backpedaling and refusal to answer the moderators' softball questions in favor of memorized talking points.
Liam White
desu calling him those words might work. baka
Jordan Gutierrez
>party of "WE LOVE MINORITIES, WE HATE WHITE PEOPLE" chooses an old boring white guy for VP
wew lad
Gavin Campbell
I'm mostly upset with her choice of outfits. It's like she's intentionally trying for that "dystopian future" look
Cooper Morgan
holy fuck nigga its CAMBODIA
Eli Reyes
It's because she's a woman and it's time to ((((MAKE HISTORY))))
No, lefties are this retarded.
Isaiah Peterson
that's the official propaganda
actual lefties tend to say "We need to vote for Clinton so the GOP won't get to nominate Supreme Court justices"
They recognize that, since Congress has absolutely no interest in the general public's desires or needs, the Supreme Court is the only avenue left for social change
Robert Adams
If Trump wants a good angle to hurt her chances with he should argue that he will nominate populist judges for the supreme court.
That's not something he's done yet and he needs to play that card at some point — and not pander to the right wing by promising another corporatist.
Jackson Bell
Hungover Britbong here
Can you please explain TPP to me? Assume I am a retarded child
Evan Clark
It's more for the international monied elite and less for everyone else.
Big globalized money wins. You don't.
Brandon Cox
he speaks spanish tho!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Kayden Ortiz
It'll be like any other time she or any leftist "debates".
Repeat talking points, slander slander slander, and never actually answer any questions. Hopefully most swing voters will be able to see this for what it is and she'll only be left with the far left who are only voting for her because she's not Trump.
Jackson Bennett
and, of course, this typical progress is joined at the hip with the expansion of the police state
Levi Thomas
Will electing a female cure their sexism?
Ian Martin
Like Rubio's talking point that made him look like a malfunctioning Microsoft Windows 10 app?
Or Dubya's "It's hard work!" line that he parroted like five times in the second or third debate?
They're all guilty of evading the actual questions, questions that are usually softball to begin with.
Noah Baker
And whats your point, exactly? Are you trying to say something or not?
Aiden Harris
>that he will nominate populist judges for the supreme court
assuming there are any anymore at the federal level
Nathan Price
Yes. And Trump demolished them.
Camden Reed
My points were clear.
1) Clinton has exposed the fraud that was her fake populist pitch that she used, temporarily, against Sanders. She has tossed that aside now that he has been dealt with, in a calculated move to abandon superficial liberalism almost entirely in favor of big money. (I say superficial because it's always about big money regardless when you're talking about politics beyond the grass roots — and even most grass roots orgs are heavily tainted.)
2) People who want the Dems to win are concerned that her lack of fake populism will hurt her against Trump in the election.
3) Trump needs to use populism against her quite a bit, especially when it comes to beliefs about supreme court nominations
4) Both parties' candidates have a long history of evasion, obfuscation, and parroting during debates. Moderators have a history of being ineffective.
Easton Edwards
not Dubya.
He was never pitted against Mr. FOUR MORE YEARS war-time president.
Owen Adams
the Rove machine would have ruined Trump back then.
Of course, John Kerry was one of the weakest nominees from the Dem side of modern times.
Their decision to turn their backs on Howard Dean cost them all possibility of unseating Bush.
Connor Martinez
no
sexism is everywhere, including from people like Michele Malkin who whinge about "emasculation"
