Hillary Clinton today announced her opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership deal citing concerns about Asian currency manipulation, pharmaceutical price gauging, labor and environmental issues.
This leaves Joe Biden as the only potential Democratic candidate to support TPP.
Republicans Bush and Rubio support TPP, Trump and Carson are opposed and Fiorina is undecided.
Clinton will explain her position tonight in a PBS interview.
This race is getting very interesting very fast. Fasten your seatbelts everyone. We’re all in for a bumpy ride. Damn, but I do love politics !
Fred Rich LaRiccia
Please share widely!
And hope she starts lobbying the many members of Congress who endorsed her but voted for this proposal to change their minds. Her insiders perspective is quite valuable as this is an agreement she has spent considerable time trying to craft, if she opposes it, than it is certainly a bad deal.
.
Ezra Klein has a good take on this new position.
that has resulted from America’s conservative turn in the late 70s (see the Powell Memo) has hacked off so many people that deals like TPP are toxic.
I’m glad Hillary has the sense to distance herself from TPP.
It’s too bad Ezra Klein can’t see how TPP is a step toward more inequality, but he’s been ingratiating himself with DC Villagers for over a decade.
Does Clinton’s governing policy, or seeming lack thereof, not concern you?
I think there’s a gray zone between a “seeming lack” of “governing policy” and a refusal to adjust policy based on constantly changing data and information.
This is, for me, the reason why I care so much more about the values of a candidate than specifics about what they do or do not support or oppose.
In a new corporate entity, the values of the founders shape the entire culture of the new entity. When a company is small enough, the values of the founders ARE the priorities of the company. Founders who value “quality” over “profit”, for example, will prioritize technical development over getting what’s done out the door. As the company grows, it becomes large enough that the founders no longer control the day-to-day priorities — and the priorities they set earlier become embedded in the corporate DNA as the “values” of the company.
I think the evolution of the staff of a newly-elected official follows a similar trajectory. In the early days, the official sets the day-to-day priorities of his or her senior staff (who then pass those along to the organization). In relatively short order, the conduct of the office pulls the official further and further away from day-to-day management of the staff. The values of the candidate become embedded in the organizational DNA of the administration (of a President) — and become increasingly hard to change.
A candidate who values self-preservation above the good of the nation, for example, will end up with an administration that shamelessly distorts the facts (and administration policy) to fit whatever the current political agenda dictates. The administration of George W. Bush exemplifies this.
In my view, an effective government official adjusts policy decisions every day based on constantly-changing data. The priorities of the official and their staff guide how those adjustments are made, and those priorities reflect what the REAL values of the candidate were during the early days just after taking office.
I am most concerned about the values that motivate each candidate I consider. When I evaluate a candidate’s position on issues, I look to see how those values are reflected in that position.
I will support Hillary Clinton as the nominee over any of the current GOP candidates because her values — and her policy decisions shaped by those values — are far more consistent with my own than ANY of the GOP candidates.
I agree with most of that, and evaluate candidates in similar fashion, but this change in position on TPP (especially when the specific areas cited ended up being stronger than in earlier versions of the agreement that Clinton supported) combined with the recent change on Keystone and a long record of seemingly convenient “evolutions,” make me worry about where her values lie. It’s not just one policy change, it’s the collection of the record.
Luckily she lands on the right side of most things, but I honestly cannot decipher where her compass points.
She may be a slight progressive, or she may fall into this category:
Either way, she’s better than any Republican running, but for this primary contest, these questions are much too great to overcome for me.
I know you and I agree on Sanders, but I will always have a tough time trusting that any of us might know Clinton’s values.
that perhaps she’s doing the primary/general slide? I’m sure you’re aware I’d never vote for her, so it’s curiosity that prompts my question. We all know how difficult it is to win a primary as it’s the base voters who are being courted, versus the general where candidates usually have to move back to the center. Mitt’s famous etch-a-sketch comment comes to mind. Some flip-flop and some evolve. I assume to her supporters, she is evolving.
Sounded a little snarky. Didn’t mean to. It’s that I seriously don’t understand her support.
I guess I see the arguments for and against TPP, and I’m not sure I know where I come down on it myself. I surely don’t have the information that any of the candidates have, and I don’t have staff to explain it one way or the other. I’m therefore not surprised the Ms. Clinton (or any other candidate) moves back and forth on it. I don’t see her doing any “sliding”, though.
Mitt Romney has more in common with Scott Brown than Hillary Clinton. The differences that separate the supporters of Bernie Sanders from Hillary Clinton are tiny compared to the warring factions of today’s GOP.
I don’t see any similarity between Mr. Romney and Ms. Clinton at all.
I just meant Romnney swung right for the primary and back to the center for the general. Is Sec Clinton perhaps doing that too? (In the opposite direction of course).
I think the electorate is already ahead of Ms. Clinton on the key issues of this campaign season — wealth concentration and police violence, especially against minorities. I think Bernie Sanders is helping Ms. Clinton and her team recognize and respond to that. I also think that, unlike the GOP circus, significant portions of “Red State” voters are responding to this reality.
The “center” has moved. I’m not sure if it’s “leftward” or “rightward” — it’s moved towards increasing taxes on the wealthy and stopping excessive police violence, especially towards minorities. I think Ms. Clinton is following the center. I therefore don’t expect her to reverse herself if she wins the nomination.
The sad spectacle of the Republican House falling into complete dysfunction will only accelerate this movement of the center. These Tea Party clowns in Congress make Donald Trump look mature and wise. THAT is an accomplishment.
That movement of the center is longer-lasting than the primary season, and is largely orthogonal to the left/right dichotomy. The 1% are plundering Tea Party voters just as much as radical Democrats.
Voters who are tired of having their pockets picked and bank accounts emptied will support whichever candidate most effectively stops the 1% from doing that.
My money’s on the Democrat — whether it’s Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton.
Just like Keystone, she is only taking a position once it is too late to make a difference. While I would love to applaud her for coming to the right conclusion, I am seeing a pattern where she finds herself unable to make these difficult decisions when she is actually in the position that requires them.
As more evidence that she’s a phony, here is a blog on Vox about how her new stated position doesn’t even make any sense.
Politicians like her don’t lead, they just hold a wet finger in the air to feel the direction of political winds. It’s up to us, then, to change the wind.
…she was working for the President, at his direction and pleasure. If it is the administration’s wish for the SoS to work on Keystone or TPP, then that is what she does. Who knows what if any cautionary advice she gave him in the process? Until people actually start voting early next year it is not too late to make up, or possibly even change, one’s mind.
http://imgur.com/gallery/YfqOtgU