Motivations for the far-left / “progressives” supporting someone as dishonest as Hillary

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 27, 2015 2:03 AM GMT
    The circumstantial and direct evidence of Hillary’s dishonesty have been discussed in other threads, and poll results in swing states indicate much of the public is not fooled. But the interesting question is why many continue to support her. One reason, of course, is the Democrats have put themselves in a corner by not having a good alternative, so some hold their noses while supporting her.

    Some make excuses for her dishonesty, but they know by accepting that, they also accept dishonesty in themselves. In other words, they put the bar down pretty low.

    I have come up with one possible motive. But make no mistake, explaining a motive for dishonesty in no way excuses it. For example, if someone were a short distance behind another person walking and the person in front dropped some money without being aware, and there was no one else around, what would the person following do? Would he call out to the person in front and return the money, or decide to keep it. His motive may be he was short on cash and justified his action by thinking he needed the money more than the person who dropped it.

    Dishonesty with a motivation is still dishonesty.

    Which brings me to one of the motives possibly in play here. Many baby boomers are completely unprepared for retirement. Some plan to live off Social Security, which was never intended to provide a full retirement income. Take a look at this article, published in April of this year:

    5 Frightening Retirement Statistics That Demonstrate Baby Boomers Are in Serious Trouble
    http://www.fool.com/retirement/general/2015/04/19/5-frightening-retirement-statistics-that-demonstra.aspx

    I don’t want to minimize their plight, realizing some may have encountered tragedies, but regarding others, ask yourself: if someone has worked for 30 years and still lives paycheck to paycheck, did they make a series of decisions leading them to their current situation? I know of people in this situation who drive new luxury cars, take very nice vacations, and are not saving much.

    These people are likely stressed out and very open to politicians who say soothing words to them, tell them nothing is their fault, and will work to give them additional benefits. In other words, the “free shit army” is not just the protestors you see on TV, but people who seem on the surface to be comfortable, but are anything but. The same attitude that the system is rigged, nothing is our fault, and class warfare themes also resonate with younger people, who are also fearful.

    So, in a nutshell, my thesis is the motivation and excuse for some to support a politician as dishonest as Hillary is driven by stress and fear. It still represents lack of integrity on their part, but there is at least a reason for it.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14348

    May 27, 2015 2:56 AM GMT
    That is a large part of it, but Hillary is saying anything to get the democratic nomination. Anyone who is familiar with this ethically challenged, power hungry bitch will clearly tell you that Hillary will say what you want to hear and than after being elected she will throw all her faithful supporters under an oncoming bus. Just like most other politicians. They are all great bullshit artists.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 27, 2015 12:54 PM GMT
    roadbikeRob saidThat is a large part of it, but Hillary is saying anything to get the democratic nomination. Anyone who is familiar with this ethically challenged, power hungry bitch will clearly tell you that Hillary will say what you want to hear and than after being elected she will throw all her faithful supporters under an oncoming bus. Just like most other politicians. They are all great bullshit artists.

    When someone is basically dishonest, whatever they say in a campaign isn't worth anything.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 27, 2015 12:56 PM GMT
    In a nutshell, she's the better of the available evils we have to choose from.
  • Hypertrophile

    Posts: 1021

    May 27, 2015 2:09 PM GMT
    paulflexes saidIn a nutshell, she's the better of the available evils we have to choose from.


    Fortunately, we have another choice at the moment who isn't one of those. I think Bernie is the most honest and transparent Senator in congress and there's no doubt in my mind that what he says, what he means, and what he does will all be in line. If you agree with him, or even if you don't, at least it's with an honest view of the issues and not some focus-group tested batch of catch-phrases, buzzwords, and platitudes that are designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator and have no real meaning.

    Personally I think in reality Sanders appeals to the most common denominator.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 27, 2015 2:58 PM GMT
    Physiqueflex said
    paulflexes saidIn a nutshell, she's the better of the available evils we have to choose from.


    Fortunately, we have another choice at the moment who isn't one of those. I think Bernie is the most honest and transparent Senator in congress and there's no doubt in my mind that what he says, what he means, and what he does will all be in line. If you agree with him, or even if you don't, at least it's with an honest view of the issues and not some focus-group tested batch of catch-phrases, buzzwords, and platitudes that are designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator and have no real meaning.

    Personally I think in reality Sanders appeals to the most common denominator.

    I have in the past in California voted for a Democrat, even if I didn't agree with all their positions, based upon them being more honest than the Republican. I have no doubt that Sanders is honest, but his positions are so far different from what I think the country needs that it would be hard to support him.
  • Hypertrophile

    Posts: 1021

    May 27, 2015 3:07 PM GMT
    I'm not sure to which positions you're referring, but I'd say Bernie Sanders ideas regarding a real audit of the Fed, putting or restoring restrictions on Wall Street, revisiting trade agreements, and investing in modernizing our infrastructure, are among the most important if we want to restore the economy. And he's the only one talking about them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 27, 2015 3:31 PM GMT
    Physiqueflex saidI'm not sure to which positions you're referring, but I'd say Bernie Sanders ideas regarding a real audit of the Fed, putting or restoring restrictions on Wall Street, revisiting trade agreements, and investing in modernizing our infrastructure, are among the most important if we want to restore the economy. And he's the only one talking about them.

    Not referring to specific economic policy issues, which I agree are not widely understood. Referring more to social issues, role of government in our everyday lives, role of the US in the world, immigration, etc.
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    May 27, 2015 5:21 PM GMT
    I read this OP and the linked article yesterday and wanted to think things over before commenting.

    None of the stats about retiring boomers surprises me now I have thought about it. I would have been one of them had it not have been for unintended consequences of decades collecting gold items other than jewelry, the life insurance policies from Steve's death and a 30+ year business relation and friendship with an CPA who's knowledgeable and a pseudo-nazi about clients sticking to her financial planning and investment advice. Twice she's threatened to fire me as a client over things I've done without first running it by her before large outlays of cash. Both times she was correct about how foolish I had been.

    I believe it's impossible for anyone to say they don't know people who're solely dependent on Social Security now they're retired. I've noticed some things about them. Many of them are hard core advocates to younger people not to make the mistakes they themselves made by not planning for retirement. This is even more true for retired boomers with children and grandchildren than those without. For those boomers with the resources to do so, many have taken active roles in making sure their children and grandchildren start early in investing for their own retirement.

    With my CPA's advice, I did that with my sons who are now in their mid 40's and helped them develop sources of income outside their careers that have helped them get further ahead of the learning curve to retirement than I was at their age. This has been passed on to their six children in their late teens and twenties who all work their asses off not only to cover their personal expenses but more importantly to start saving. The 22 year old grandson who lives with me has started a career in healthcare from which close to 30% goes to savings. For his crazy money he works days on weekends - and has transferred this habit to his boyfriend who works with him now, working at a seafood market, cleaning fish and shucking oysters, waiting on customers.

    Also, I'm surely not alone in encouraging others besides family to save, invest and develop secondary incomes with some success. The greatest example of this is a 12 year seasonal employee who developed her love for sewing into a small tailoring/alterations shop that branched into custom dresses for brides and bridesmaids which brought in three employees. For fun, she still works for us part-time doing seasonal sales on weekends. Not too shabby for a high school drop out, single mother of two who finally got off the government dole road to nowhere, bought a home 2 years ago and took control of her own destiny.

    The point I'm getting at is that the mistakes of so many boomers in not planning for their own retirements may not be proportionately passed on to the oncoming generations.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 27, 2015 6:36 PM GMT
    Very good points. I suspect the people you have influenced will be less likely to buy into the promises of entitlements as compared to others who don't have such plans in place.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 27, 2015 6:38 PM GMT
    paulflexes saidIn a nutshell, she's the better of the available evils we have to choose from.


    Perhaps, judging from what's out there so far. But, November 2016 is a year-and-a-half away.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 27, 2015 6:43 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    paulflexes saidIn a nutshell, she's the better of the available evils we have to choose from.

    Perhaps, judging from what's out there so far. But, November 2016 is a year-and-a-half away.

    I'd say many of the others are far better choices.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 27, 2015 8:20 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    MGINSD said
    paulflexes saidIn a nutshell, she's the better of the available evils we have to choose from.

    Perhaps, judging from what's out there so far. But, November 2016 is a year-and-a-half away.

    I'd say many of the others are far better choices.

    Nor do I disagree; my point was meant only to keep the door open for more challengers from wherever they may appear.

    As for the original post, I long ago stopped trying to understand evil, and focused instead on just identifying and eliminating it. Billary is as evil as they come.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 27, 2015 8:52 PM GMT
    "I am sure that Senator Clinton would make a good president."
    Senator John McCain
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    May 27, 2015 8:58 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    socalfitness said
    MGINSD said

    Perhaps, judging from what's out there so far. But, November 2016 is a year-and-a-half away.

    I'd say many of the others are far better choices.


    Nor do I disagree; my point was meant only to keep the door open for more challengers from wherever they may appear.

    As for the original post, I long ago stopped trying to understand evil, and focused instead on just identifying and eliminating it. Billary is as evil as they come.



    All of that deserves repeating and emphasizing. Running one candidate as the sole contender for a party's "nomination" to become their candidate for the November 2016 election is a "all the eggs in one basket" proposition for the party considering Hillary is facing monumental hurdles from diverse scandals she and her husband have created for themselves. Not even their decades of hands-on experience with corrupt and barely legal shenanigans has thus far been able to turn the tide or turn off the flow of near daily new revelations of more corruption and self serving financial manipulations.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 27, 2015 9:15 PM GMT
    bobbobbob said

    All of that deserves repeating and emphasizing.


    I'm not one for repetition for its own sake, but if you insist.

    "I am sure that Senator Clinton would make a good president."
    Senator John McCain
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 27, 2015 9:17 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    paulflexes saidIn a nutshell, she's the better of the available evils we have to choose from.


    Perhaps, judging from what's out there so far. But, November 2016 is a year-and-a-half away.


    No worries, old man, Hillary will win the White House in 2016, and all of the GOP gerrymandering in the world can't keep the Dems from gaining control of Congress. icon_wink.gif
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14348

    May 27, 2015 9:43 PM GMT
    credo said
    MGINSD said
    paulflexes saidIn a nutshell, she's the better of the available evils we have to choose from.


    Perhaps, judging from what's out there so far. But, November 2016 is a year-and-a-half away.


    No worries, old man, Hillary will win the White House in 2016, and all of the GOP gerrymandering in the world can't keep the Dems from gaining control of Congress. icon_wink.gif
    In your dreams bunky. Hillary is not going to win in 2016. All your commie crats are going to be outvoted in the democratic primary. Hillary is totally unfit for the office of President. Get your head out of your ass and learn to think.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 27, 2015 10:10 PM GMT
    credo said
    MGINSD said
    paulflexes saidIn a nutshell, she's the better of the available evils we have to choose from.


    Perhaps, judging from what's out there so far. But, November 2016 is a year-and-a-half away.


    No worries, old man, Hillary will win the White House in 2016, and all of the GOP gerrymandering in the world can't keep the Dems from gaining control of Congress. icon_wink.gif


    Careful w/ that "ageism," credo; Billary's got a few years on me, and your predictive powers remain to be seen.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 27, 2015 11:18 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    credo said
    MGINSD said
    paulflexes saidIn a nutshell, she's the better of the available evils we have to choose from.


    Perhaps, judging from what's out there so far. But, November 2016 is a year-and-a-half away.


    No worries, old man, Hillary will win the White House in 2016, and all of the GOP gerrymandering in the world can't keep the Dems from gaining control of Congress. icon_wink.gif


    Careful w/ that "ageism," credo; Billary's got a few years on me, and your predictive powers remain to be seen.


    I'm fast approaching 50, making me an old man in the gay community, too. This isn't about ageism, it's about not living in the past.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 28, 2015 3:02 AM GMT
    credo said
    MGINSD said
    paulflexes saidIn a nutshell, she's the better of the available evils we have to choose from.


    Perhaps, judging from what's out there so far. But, November 2016 is a year-and-a-half away.


    No worries, old man, Hillary will win the White House in 2016, and all of the GOP gerrymandering in the world can't keep the Dems from gaining control of Congress. icon_wink.gif

    Many here said the Democrats would never lose control of Congress. These kind of predictions are good for pumping up your chest but not much else.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 28, 2015 4:12 AM GMT
    paulflexes saidIn a nutshell, she's the better of the available evils we have to choose from.


    Even the dems could come up with something better. It gives gov Walker of Wis a chance. Think about that.


  • OutdoorAdvent...

    Posts: 361

    May 29, 2015 1:42 AM GMT
    My motivations for supporting Hillary Clinton...

    Jeb Bush
    Marco Rubio
    Ric Santorum
    Rick Perry
    Scott Walker
    Rand Paul
    Donald Trump
    Ben Carson
    Ted Cruz
    Mike Huckabee
    Carly Fiorina
    Chris Christie
    Lindsay Graham
    Bobby Jindal

    ...actually, though, I support Bernie Sanders.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 29, 2015 2:25 AM GMT
    OutdoorAdventurist saidMy motivations for supporting Hillary Clinton...

    Jeb Bush
    Marco Rubio
    Ric Santorum
    Rick Perry
    Scott Walker
    Rand Paul
    Donald Trump
    Ben Carson
    Ted Cruz
    Mike Huckabee
    Carly Fiorina
    Chris Christie
    Lindsay Graham
    Bobby Jindal

    ...actually, though, I support Bernie Sanders.

    You didn't include George Pataki, ex-Gov NY, but understand given he only recently put his hat into the ring. So just for discussion, let's add him and note his position on same-sex marriage, as described below.

    I'm not suggesting that is a key issue or the only issue for you, but I'm trying to understand why you discount all Republicans in favor of a dishonest Hillary Clinton.

    If, and this is a big if - I don't know your response - But if you would discount Pataki in favor of Clinton, solely because he is a Republican, then I would suggest you would be a simplistic thinker, thinking only of party and not of an individual, and tolerating dishonesty, which would be a reflection on your own degree of integrity.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/29/us/politics/george-pataki-on-the-issues.html?_r=0
    "Mr. Pataki, who signed into law a gay rights bill when he was governor, has said that Republicans should not focus on issues like same-sex marriage and abortion, calling them “a distraction” that would hurt the party’s chance of retaking the White House. He believes the issues are best left to individual states to decide."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 29, 2015 2:33 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    OutdoorAdventurist saidMy motivations for supporting Hillary Clinton...

    Jeb Bush
    Marco Rubio
    Ric Santorum
    Rick Perry
    Scott Walker
    Rand Paul
    Donald Trump
    Ben Carson
    Ted Cruz
    Mike Huckabee
    Carly Fiorina
    Chris Christie
    Lindsay Graham
    Bobby Jindal

    ...actually, though, I support Bernie Sanders.

    You didn't include George Pataki, ex-Gov NY, but understand given he only recently put his hat into the ring. So just for discussion, let's add him and note his position on same-sex marriage, as described below.

    I'm not suggesting that is a key issue or the only issue for you, but I'm trying to understand why you discount all Republicans in favor of a dishonest Hillary Clinton.

    If, and this is a big if - I don't know your response - But if you would discount Pataki in favor of Clinton, solely because he is a Republican, then I would suggest you would be a simplistic thinker, thinking only of party and not of an individual, and tolerating dishonesty, which would be a reflection on your own degree of integrity.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/29/us/politics/george-pataki-on-the-issues.html?_r=0
    "Mr. Pataki, who signed into law a gay rights bill when he was governor, has said that Republicans should not focus on issues like same-sex marriage and abortion, calling them “a distraction” that would hurt the party’s chance of retaking the White House. He believes the issues are best left to individual states to decide."

    The ex-mayor of Peekskill was a lousy governor, why does anyone think he'd be a good president?