European leaders should push for greater control over immigration in order to deal with the rise of Republican politics, according to former 2 time loser Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton.
Clinton’s remarks are likely to prove very controversial across Europe, which has struggled to form a unified position ever since more than 1 million migrants and refugees arrived in the EU in 2015.
She's gonna run again....omg please let it happen.
shareOh man that would be awesome. I think she will considering all the paid public speaking she has been doing lately.
shareLol, there isn't enough money in the world she could give the DNC to get them to back her again. They know she's poison at the ballot.
shareHillary has come out against immigration for all the wrong reasons. It's not because of crimes and wages and overpopulation or anything else. It's because those things are rousing the rabble causing the global elite like her to lose their electoral birthright.
"Hey establishment leftists, we're pushing too hard too fast. Boil the frog slowly".
Too late, Panadora's box was alllllmost successfully closed, but you cant't fuck with Pandora.
shareI think Trump is just delaying their "new world order". But he's certainly forced people to notice that both sides were really the same open borders team. There's a realignment.
shareI have theorized that Rep. and Dem. are the same Party. Except one Party always comes out smelling like a rose.
shareJust confirms my belief that she's a sell out who doesn't really stand for anything except power. Her entire career is largely defined by her being a doormat - first to the Republican opposition in Arkanas who thought that as a Governor's First Lady she should just shut up and withdraw her opinions, which she complied. Then throughout her national career, bowing down to corporations and the war machine. Now she bows down to Neo-fascism and nativist sentiment.
She's a moron to think that bowing to the far right will stop them or win their support. She's inexplicably the most hated figure of the Right despite decades of being a doormat to them. How can she not have learned that by now?
So she's won no support from Trumpsters (duh), who continue to salivate at the prospect of her running against their Orange Man. Well sorry to burst your bubble but you'll be hard pressed to find anyone beyond your base wanting that.
Also um...it's a sign of weakness hoping your President runs against the most dismal candidate in modern history.
You think T-rumpsters want to see Hillary beat him again with 3 million votes???
shareI'm sure Trump would much rather go against Corey Booker or Kamala Harris.
I don't want Hillary to run, but she'd win. I give Booker and Harris 50/50. Elizabeth Warren probably only gets slightly better odds than that, with Bernie Sanders still being the one guy that absolutely destroys Trump no matter what stunts republicans try to pull. The problem is the democratic establishment hates Bernie nearly as much as republicans do.
Hillary lost twice, she wouldn't win again.
shareThere's still the Electoral College, the fact that Clinton symbolises all that is wrong with status quo politics and why many flock to Trump and populism.
sharePopulism has always had the advantage, but the problem was for a populist to get enough money to run a solid campaign. Populism does no good if nobody knows who you are, and the establishment candidate almost never has that problem. The reason Trump was able to secure enough money is because he's not a real populist. He sucked up to his big donors like every other establishment candidate. But luckily for him, his supporters are complete morons.
shareShe never bowed down before the war machine. She is the war machine.
She's not trying to win support from the right. She's trying to win back white working class who used to all vote Democrat, particularly in the rust belt. And she doing it by telling crazy leftists to tone it down with the open borders rhetoric which is scaring them away.
You don't understand something about your party. It's bifurcated between the super wealthy in Hollywood and Wall Street, mostly Jewish, and the super poor, blacks, single mothers. Out of these two, one group is always necessarily going to be "voting against their own interest". That's why you see these issues come up. It sure as heck isn't going to be the super wealthy. But the one thing they both have is common is neither wants Bernie Sanders, who despite being against open borders, is a candidate only for white liberal hipsters. POCs destroyed him in southern state primaries.
This is where more POC immigration is going to get you. Maybe you ought to rethink why you're on the same side as Hillary. "Nativist"? That's exactly what Hillary is talking about. Keep it up. Hello Trump 2020.
Your rants are ridiculous. Name one Liberal who wants absolute open borders. If primary delegates hadn't been locked in their support of Clinton months before, Sanders quite possibly would have toppled her. He came close anyhow.
I'm not a Democrat and I'm not on the same side as Clinton.
Please, please keep thinking that Sanders or somelike him has no chance against your beloved Orange fascist...Please warn everyone against the evils of free health care, education, the minimum wage etc...