this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2026
-1 points (49.5% liked)

Progressive Politics

4503 readers
480 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] GalacticSushi@piefed.blahaj.zone 61 points 4 days ago (17 children)

Why are we still talking about shit that Hillary Clinton said nearly 20 years ago?

[–] MushuChupacabra@piefed.world 25 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Because the Republicans are going to get their asses handed to them during the next midterm elections.

Both Parties Are The Same rhetoric gets pumped out by the right, as a part of their broader voter suppression strategy.

[–] justOnePersistentKbinPlease@fedia.io 12 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It is important to recognize which Democrats are Neoliberals or ruling elite like the Clintons.

[–] Jax@sh.itjust.works 17 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (33 children)

By jerking off about something Hillary said nearly 20 years ago?

Yes I'm sure we'll gain much insight from discussing how much we all hate the Clintons again.

Edit: that is a crazy instadownvote — sus

load more comments (33 replies)
[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe 7 points 4 days ago

Have you been in a coma since 2008?

[–] etherphon@piefed.world 5 points 4 days ago

Just more noise, like really.

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 1 points 3 days ago

nearly 20 years ago

Fuck, where does the time go?

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works 26 points 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (9 children)

Why is an ancient quote by a failed presidential candidate that was made 8 fucking years before her campaign being posted anywhere outside of a history sub? Why don't you post complaints about her email server too?

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 6 points 3 days ago

The infamous "Buttery males"?

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] tiredofsametab@fedia.io 22 points 3 days ago

Well, that settles it. There goes my vote for 2008 Clinton.

[–] Fishnoodle@lemmy.world 18 points 4 days ago

Oh good. Shit no one cares about...

[–] leoj@piefed.social 16 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (7 children)

I mean there are reasons she lost the 2016 election, part of it was the progressive wing staying home, this is pertinent from that lens, but I'm not sure what else?

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I wouldn't project it into a progressive lens, at least not first.

You need to contextualize the moment Hillary' and the country are in 2008-2016. There had been an anti-war movement as soon as the war plans were announced, but it was dutifully ignored by corporate media, in accordance with American tradition. The American economy was being swept by the peak of the "great-recession", occupy wall street happens around this time. But that energy really doesn't get funneled into electoral politics until much later. It was grass-roots, outside power almost exclusively in the context of that time. Many of the leftist orgs that are now considered passe would have been avant-garde in that time (code pink etc). And keep in mind, Hillary was an opponent of Obama. She lost an election, and badly, speaking like this.

Political Progressivism as we understand it today doesn't really become a thing in the US until Bernie taps into that occupy wall street energy (really, as a direct effect of the both hope given to, and subsequent failure of, the Obama administration) and funnels it into electoral politics.

[–] leoj@piefed.social 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Disagree, I think you have your timeline mixed up.

The 2016 election occurred well after Occupy Wallstreet, and Bernie Sanders and the progressive wing in the democrats felt snubbed in 2016, which is why many of them stayed home.

I know this because I was one of them, and I will have to live with that decision for the rest of my life.

Edit: I am not realizing you might be referring to the 2008 primary election, I'm talking about the 2016 presidential election here and in my original comment. Contextually it (your response) makes sense based on the date of the video, so I get your point, but not what I was talking about.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

re edit:

Yeah I'm talking about her in the 2007/8/9 time period. Just that a progressive or even vaguely left win element in electoral hadn't manifested politically. Those ideas and political power were 100% outside power at the time. So its a bit anachronistic to use the term progressive because in the 2008 time period when this was said we really didn't neccessarily use that word. At the time might use the term "anti-war" for the same basket of policies. That period was also just after the peak of the neo-cons where the litmus test among Democrats was being "anti-war", and obviously, Hillary failed that.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] elevenbones@sh.itjust.works 13 points 3 days ago (1 children)

This whole post is just silly.

load more comments (1 replies)

At the time, she and Donald Trump were besties.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 2 points 4 days ago

In the Southern hemisphere, they call her Killiary for reasons.

load more comments
view more: next ›