# Clinton's Mandate? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics and Social Issues\ **Created:** [February 24, 2016, 7:40pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816 "2016-02-24T19:40:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![vyazma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d9b06d/32.png) [@vyazma](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/vyazma)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 7:40pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/1 "2016-02-24T19:40:09Z")
Given the dynamics of this election cycle, what could HR Clinton’s mandate possibly be if she becomes President? Has anyone asked themselves that? After the Bernie supporters are crushed out, and the Trump supporters are quelled, and the Congress being what it is, from what position is Clinton going to govern? What possible ground is she going to have? Luke warm milk? ---
**Author:** ![hazelnut](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/bbce88/32.png) [@hazelnut](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/hazelnut)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 7:57pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/2 "2016-02-24T19:57:58Z")
Globalism to the hilt? ---
**Author:** ![vyazma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d9b06d/32.png) [@vyazma](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/vyazma)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 8:07pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/3 "2016-02-24T20:07:15Z")
> Globalism to the hilt? :-) Well thought out Mid-A. You beat me to that. And that's it. That's one area where she'll have establishment consensus. Internal popular politics...including the current trend eschewing globalism, that's another ball of wax. That's why her presidency will be the most vacuous. I'll bet she doesn't make a second term. If she thinks she can ignore this voter referendum, she's got another guest coming. And that's the thing...she ain't got it. She's a stuffed shirt. She will be neck deep in doo-doo. ---
**Author:** ![timb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3e96dc/32.png) [@timb](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/timb)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 8:16pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/4 "2016-02-24T20:16:23Z")
> Given the dynamics of this election cycle, what could HR Clinton's mandate possibly be if she becomes President? Has anyone asked themselves that? After the Bernie supporters are crushed out, and the Trump supporters are quelled, and the Congress being what it is, from what position is Clinton going to govern? What possible ground is she going to have? Luke warm milk? As is often the case, seemingly, you insert a premise in your rhetorical questions that is stilted. e.g., "Bernie supporters are crushed out" ignores the impact that Bernie and his supporters are having, even if Bernie does not win. ---
**Author:** ![vyazma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d9b06d/32.png) [@vyazma](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/vyazma)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 8:23pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/5 "2016-02-24T20:23:28Z")
> As is often the case, seemingly, you insert a premise in your rhetorical questions that is stilted. e.g., "Bernie supporters are crushed out" ignores the impact that Bernie and his supporters are having, even if Bernie does not win. That's my whole point Tim!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hello? :roll: Clinton's Mandate?!?!? ---
**Author:** ![timb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3e96dc/32.png) [@timb](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/timb)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 8:30pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/6 "2016-02-24T20:30:02Z")
> As is often the case, seemingly, you insert a premise in your rhetorical questions that is stilted. e.g., "Bernie supporters are crushed out" ignores the impact that Bernie and his supporters are having, even if Bernie does not win. That's my whole point Tim!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hello? :roll: Clinton's Mandate?!?!? Clinton will necessarily need to absorb some of Bernie's, would-be mandate, if she is to win. (insert lots of exclamation points, exasperated question marks, and cute sarcastic emojis, here) ---
**Author:** ![vyazma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d9b06d/32.png) [@vyazma](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/vyazma)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 8:38pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/7 "2016-02-24T20:38:09Z")
> Clinton will necessarily need to absorb some of Bernie's, would-be mandate, if she is to win. (insert lots of exclamation points, exasperated question marks, and cute sarcastic emojis, here) Right. Now you're up to speed. Now go back and read where I said she won't be capable of doing that. You're getting there...I hope I'm not inserting a point that is too stilted. I'll wait for ya. You catch up. ---
**Author:** ![hazelnut](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/bbce88/32.png) [@hazelnut](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/hazelnut)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 8:56pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/8 "2016-02-24T20:56:17Z")
> That's why her presidency will be the most vacuous. I'll bet she doesn't make a second term. If she thinks she can ignore this voter referendum, she's got another guest coming. And that's the thing...she ain't got it. She's a stuffed shirt. She will be neck deep in doo-doo. True. Hillary is pretty much the epitome of "soulless careerist". Fortunately, a lot of young women [don't like her](http://http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-35526459)]. ---
**Author:** ![vyazma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d9b06d/32.png) [@vyazma](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/vyazma)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 9:02pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/9 "2016-02-24T21:02:54Z")
> Fortunately, a lot of young women [don't like her](http://http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-35526459)]. Yeah, that was one of the other factors I mentioned in the other thread. There's some good old fashioned psychological dynamics there.......inescapable. In a general election context. On the primary side she's insulated with liberals. ---
**Author:** ![timb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3e96dc/32.png) [@timb](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/timb)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 9:06pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/10 "2016-02-24T21:06:04Z")
> ... Now go back and read where I said she won't be capable of doing that... Would that be where you said "congress being what it is"? If so, the same could be said of anyone who becomes the next POTUS. Perhaps, you should consider condensing your message to "I hate Hillary." ---
**Author:** ![vyazma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d9b06d/32.png) [@vyazma](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/vyazma)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 9:21pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/11 "2016-02-24T21:21:55Z")
> ... Now go back and read where I said she won't be capable of doing that... Would that be where you said "congress being what it is"? If so, the same could be said of anyone who becomes the next POTUS. Perhaps, you should consider condensing your message to "I hate Hillary." That was only part of my post Tim. But, that couldn't be said of _anyone_ who is elected President. There's a portion of Congress that want's to indict Clinton for those e-mails. Which is _still_ a case. Large sections of the populace can't stand Hillary(dems and gop)...their reps in Congress reflect that heartily. Keep up with the snide remarks...it shows you have no useful input to my points. Which are actual points that many people are considering. I know you prefer soft, generalized commentary that can't be put up to scrutiny. Kind of like oatmeal. ---
**Author:** ![timb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3e96dc/32.png) [@timb](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/timb)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 9:56pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/12 "2016-02-24T21:56:23Z")
> ... Now go back and read where I said she won't be capable of doing that... Would that be where you said "congress being what it is"? If so, the same could be said of anyone who becomes the next POTUS. Perhaps, you should consider condensing your message to "I hate Hillary." That was only part of my post Tim. But, that couldn't be said of _anyone_ who is elected President. There's a portion of Congress that want's to indict Clinton for those e-mails. Which is _still_ a case. Large sections of the populace can't stand Hillary(dems and gop)...their reps in Congress reflect that heartily. Keep up with the snide remarks...it shows you have no useful input to my points. Which are actual points that many people are considering. I know you prefer soft, generalized commentary that can't be put up to scrutiny. Kind of like oatmeal. You follow enough of my postings to recognize that I rarely use snide remarks pre-emptively. It is generally in response to someone who has been snide to begin with. And what's up with your use of "vanilla ice cream" and "oatmeal" as sarcastic pejoratives? Every perspective doesn't have to be hip and edgy in order to be valid. In fact it seems to me that it is, often, a weak substitute for making valid points. As far as the Repub Congress and parts of the populace wanting to indict Clinton, they would/will do the same as heartily if Sanders becomes the presumptive Dem nominee and/or POTUS. Bernie will be branded as a communist who will bring down America if not intensively and obstructively opposed. ---
**Author:** ![vyazma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d9b06d/32.png) [@vyazma](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/vyazma)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 10:12pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/13 "2016-02-24T22:12:58Z")
> And what's up with your use of "vanilla ice cream" and "oatmeal" as sarcastic pejoratives? Wheww... Because that's all I can get away with here... ---
**Author:** ![vyazma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d9b06d/32.png) [@vyazma](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/vyazma)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 10:16pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/14 "2016-02-24T22:16:29Z")
> As far as the Repub Congress and parts of the populace wanting to indict Clinton, they would/will do the same as heartily if Sanders becomes the presumptive Dem nominee and/or POTUS. Bernie will be branded as a communist who will bring down America if not intensively and obstructively opposed. Right. Blah, blah blah blah. Blah? Blah blah. You do know that you aren't required to respond to every post if you don't have much in the way of a response right Tim? ---
**Author:** ![timb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3e96dc/32.png) [@timb](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/timb)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 10:22pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/15 "2016-02-24T22:22:09Z")
> As far as the Repub Congress and parts of the populace wanting to indict Clinton, they would/will do the same as heartily if Sanders becomes the presumptive Dem nominee and/or POTUS. Bernie will be branded as a communist who will bring down America if not intensively and obstructively opposed. Right. Blah, blah blah blah. Blah? Blah blah. You do know that you aren't required to respond to every post if you don't have much in the way of a response right Tim? Hmm... Not having much in the way of a response, doesn't seem to have stopped you. But granted, my responses don't have the eloquence of your repeated use of the word "blah". ---
**Author:** ![mikeyohe](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/mikeyohe/32/28536_2.png) [@mikeyohe](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/mikeyohe)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2016, 4:29pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/16 "2016-02-25T16:29:54Z")
What’s Clinton’s mandate? Would want to read a book that came out about Clinton’s money before I answered that question. ---
**Author:** ![vyazma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d9b06d/32.png) [@vyazma](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/vyazma)\ **Post date:** [February 29, 2016, 8:42pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/17 "2016-02-29T20:42:39Z")
> What’s Clinton’s mandate? Would want to read a book that came out about Clinton’s money before I answered that question. Well we know alot of the money comes from Wall St. and Wal-Mart. Remember when Clinton was on the Board of Directors at WalMart? Today the Waltons contribute millions to the Clinton Foundation. Some of the Waltons are donating money to Clinton's Super Pac. WalMart is a notorious union fighter. 99% of Walmarts goods are made in other countries. The Clintons promoted numerous Global Trade agreements that benefited WalMart and crushed the American worker and small businessperson. She gives highly paid speeches to Wall St banks as well. That's what I like in my Democrats... ---
**Author:** ![vyazma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d9b06d/32.png) [@vyazma](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/vyazma)\ **Post date:** [February 29, 2016, 8:52pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/18 "2016-02-29T20:52:17Z")
By the way, a Super-Pac is an off shoot of Citizen’s United. Hillary has Super-Pacs. So Hillary is benefiting from Citizens United. Trump and Sanders do _not_ have Super Pacs. The definition and legal use of Political Action Committees changed after the Citizen United Ruing. This created the legal use of Super Pacs. ---
**Author:** ![yosemitesam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/7feea3/32.png) [@yosemitesam](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/yosemitesam)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2016, 12:29am UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/19 "2016-03-01T00:29:26Z")
> By the way, a Super-Pac is an off shoot of Citizen's United. Hillary has Super-Pacs. So Hillary is benefiting from Citizens United. I though you understood the big picture. It's mainly the ultra rich oligarch masters-of-the-univers\* who are benefiting. Politician have been pushed over the edge to having to spend most all their time as donation whores. Not sure if the serious ones like that much. _\*Oh yeah, Hillary would be in that crowd, now wouldn't she._ ;-P ---
**Author:** ![vyazma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d9b06d/32.png) [@vyazma](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/vyazma)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2016, 12:33am UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816/20 "2016-03-01T00:33:38Z")
> By the way, a Super-Pac is an off shoot of Citizen's United. Hillary has Super-Pacs. So Hillary is benefiting from Citizens United. I though you understood the big picture. It's mainly the ultra rich oligarch masters-of-the-univers\* who are benefiting. Politician have been pushed over the edge to having to spend most all their time as donation whores. Not sure if the serious ones like that much. _\*Oh yeah, Hillary would be in that crowd, now wouldn't she._ ;-P I don't know if you're being sarcastic or not? Also quick edit..."serious ones"? Clarify? [Next page](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/clintons-mandate/4816.md?page=2)