General Politics Discussion [ARCHIVED] • Page 298

His name is Steve.

 

That's a weird way to look at Bill Clinton's history from a Congress that literally impeached him and had one of the most contentious relationships I can remember in my lifetime with the Speaker.

 

Ok. Now put her in context of her contemporaries.

 

Why did saying "war hawk" or "hawkish" become so popular?

 

I think it's from the War of 1812

 

It's been around forever and it's been misused just as long. I am getting particularly tired of people repeating that same word in reference to Hillary, however. Not only has it been said a million times about her already, but it doesn't actually mean anything specific and it's not accurate considering "hawkish" by definition implies a threat to democracy.

 

A war hawk is someone who favors war or wants to escalate an existing war, simple as that. Hillary would fit for this so how is it not appropriate to describe her?

 

what. the. hell.

 

fucking hell

 

Waiting for a day where Trump actually doesn't say something extremely stupid. Not sure that day will ever come

 

He just literally took one sentence, broke it down and yelled it again

 

I think you might be confused. War hawk simply means that the person shows an appetite for military engagement abroad. Even if it at some point it took on the meaning you're attributing to it (I've never heard your purported definition), its changed and its now pretty simple and accepted. Hillary Clinton is perfect for the word, sorry. Hilary Clinton has been belligerent in regularly calling for military force or greater military force.

 

The context I'm putting her in is the most progressive platform in party history, according to her and the party. Democrats, including Hillary, are trying to use this non-binding platform to show Sanders supporters and others on the left that they are moving forcefully in his direction. I'm saying there is very real reason to doubt that.

 

Huh, I thought the party was being overrun by entryists. They need to make up their minds.

 

I appreciate the she isn't as left-leaning as you'd like her to be, but I don't know what this has to do with the assertion that she's going to cater to republicans once she's elected.

 

I can't believe this is a story.

 

I believe what we've seen in the past is that whenever the democrats "reach out" to the republicans it tends to lead to a move to the right, not the left. Some would call this an attempt to compromise, and put the blame on republicans for holding their ground at all costs. I believe that many democratic politicians, Hillary and Obama included, are beholden to conservative economic interests and hold, at the least, an american exceptionalism foreign policy view that encourages foreign military engagement. I mention these as what I think are strong examples to support the assertion that Hillary will cater to republican interests once she's elected.