Posted on 05/02/2014 11:40:57 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
A new French book that decries income inequality has become such the rage among the U.S. left that it is sparking debate on a smoldering political issue: That Hillary Clinton isn't liberal enough to win the Democratic nomination in 2016.
Thomas Piketty's “Capital in the Twenty-First Century” uses a mountain of historical data to show that income inequality, a subject President Obama has seized on, will grow without government intervention. One idea is to devote up to three-quarters of income to taxes.
Progressives, many of whom are eyeing Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren or even Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders leading up to 2016, see the issue as a winner in the election and aren't satisfied with Clinton's more moderate approach.
Scott W. Rasmussen, the former pollster, took that one step further in his column Thursday, suggesting that if Democrats continue to seek more government intervention, Clinton won't win the nomination.
“It is,” he wrote, “the latest reason to believe that Hillary Clinton will not be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2016.”
Rasmussen writes that many Democrats don’t believe that Obama has been liberal enough, and he’s left of Clinton. “People with such attitudes see former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as even more ‘conservative’ than the ‘centrist’ Obama.”(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
I know some people who live in that kind of world in their own heads. I even know a few people who think Obama leans right on some issues.
Rasmussen is an idiot.
Her college thesis was on Saul Alinsky. What does he want the reincarnation of Vladimir Lenin?
Who else is going to win the black vote?
It is going to be Hilary if she runs.
I HOPE the go that far off that deep end in 2016.
Then even the GOP's retard can beat them.
Yeah, that's what we said in 2008 about the clean and articulate magic negro. I never underestimate the idiocy of the voters.
Weyuve cum tew faar tew tarn bayack nowyuh
Scotty is off his meds again. The Dims will pick Hilarious if they
think she has the best chance to win.....and they do.
____________________________________________________________
“Hillary and I and some of our friends in this audience who live in New York probably pay the highest aggregate tax rates in America, and I thank God every April 15th that I’m able to do it,” Clinton said.”
Why do you suppose Bill Clinton is in early campaign mode for the Mrs.?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/28/pope-francis-tweet-inequality_n_5227563.html
Huffingtonpost is giving my computer issues, but this article is regarding Pope Francis’ twitter that came right after a sell out in the US of this book.
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/03/27/video-obama-meets-pope-francis-talks-for-50-minutes/
Video: Obama meets Pope Francis, talks for 50 minutes; Update: Vatican says abortion, religious freedom issues raised; Update: Curious omission on income inequality
So it seems the progressive world leaders have found themselves a new economics teacher.
“Imagine living in a world where Mr. Obama is a “centrist” and Secretary Hillary Clinton isn’t left-wing enough.”
Many Democrats I debated on Compuserve in the 90’s thought Bill Clinton was too conservative. Just one thing to remember when you see poll numbers. Not all who are dissatisfied with Democrats are that way because they think they are too liberal.
Whether or not she gets the nomination, I think we’ve got an opposite situation than the usual conventional wisdom.
A Democrat, unless he happens to have been so ground-breaking as the first black president, has to work very hard to convince the electorate that he is a moderate in order to win the election. (As the majority of Democrats to be elected president in the last sixty years have demonstrated.)
A Republican, however, has to likewise convince voters that he’s not simply a Democrat-lite in order to win the election.
Running a liberal in the primary against Hillary is probably the best way to give her the patina of a moderate that she’d need in order to win the general election.
If somehow, that greater liberal were to win, as in 2008, the Dems are in good shape anyway, because at this point they are quite certain that the GOPe will poor enough money and united effort into getting another Dem-lite to be their nominee.
I think Hillary can be exactly as liberal or as conservative as she thinks she needs to be.
The Evil Lunch Lady is going to be our President. Just great.
Obama speaks to the left but governs for the elite.
#3 - agree, as the left will have a “My commie can out-commie your commie” attitude for the next election.
Our nations has descended to the point where “common core” teaches children thAt the presidents job is to make sure the laws are “fair” rather than to execute the law as decided by the people.
We cannot endure long with such a massive amount of ignorance that is growing in size, not lessening.
> Thomas Piketty’s “Capital in the Twenty-First Century” uses a mountain of historical data to show that income inequality, a subject President Obama has seized on, will grow without government intervention. One idea is to devote up to three-quarters of income to taxes.
Better to devote up to three percent of income to bullets for self-defense.
Unrelated sidebar — The best defense is a good offense.
Thanks 2ndDivisionVet.
People like us do not appreciate how powerful American communists have become. Our fight with them is not, cannot be, confined to politics.
Sooner or later, it’s going to guns. The bad news is that plenty of people are willing to kill for socialism.
The good news is that few are willing to die for it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.