Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kpete

(72,028 posts)
Thu Apr 23, 2015, 11:10 AM Apr 2015

Why Hillary Clinton should ditch the Trans-Pacific Partnership

................

The Obama administration clearly sees the TPP as a major foreign policy objective, in no small part because of a strain of Democratic Party neoliberalism that sees each and every piece of paper labeled "free trade" as good by definition, represented today by the The Washington Post op-ed page. But that presents a problem: How to get the deal through Congress? Republicans, though they are generally pro-free trade, might well blow a gasket and decide that the deal contains Agenda 21, while Democrats are likely to balk due to opposition from unions and other constituencies.

That's where the corporate oligarchs come in. Those people have the money and lobbying muscle needed to get something through our jalopy legislature. So the administration slanted the deal heavily towards some key sectors, even allowing some corporate representatives access to the documents that were denied to members of Congress. And now the thing has built up so much momentum that Obama is invested in passing it if only so he doesn't look like he lost something big.

......

Right now, Clinton is attempting to skate on this question, saying that the TPP needs to protect American workers, while not criticizing it or Obama directly. But even if it works as advertised, it will be a minor accomplishment, while the side effects are likely to be large. She might as well co-opt O'Malley's message and come out against the deal.

......
http://theweek.com/articles/551133/why-hillary-clinton-should-ditch-transpacific-partnership

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why Hillary Clinton should ditch the Trans-Pacific Partnership (Original Post) kpete Apr 2015 OP
I really think this is one of the toughest campaign positions to be in. NCTraveler Apr 2015 #1
"I think it is very clear now he feels it is in our best interests." brentspeak Apr 2015 #2
My personal thoughts of "in our best interest" was completely void in my post. NCTraveler Apr 2015 #3
So Obama is not well-intentioned but wrong? He is evil and corrupt? pampango Apr 2015 #4
I agree. mmonk Apr 2015 #5
+1 840high Apr 2015 #6
I just want her to take a position on it cali Apr 2015 #7
 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
1. I really think this is one of the toughest campaign positions to be in.
Thu Apr 23, 2015, 11:18 AM
Apr 2015

The current President is a sitting democrat. She has a long standing relationship with him. He is currently negotiating something enormous. I think it is very clear now he feels it is in our best interests. Does one simply go against the President, who is currently negotiating, during a campaign? I don't think it is as easy as people think. Hillary will be expecting some people who are in the White House to join her team in the coming months. These are the people who make campaigns work. I don't envy the position she is in. If she regularly commented against the deal with Iran she would be charged with sabotaging the President.

Your thoughts on the importance of her relationship with Obama and his team moving forward? Going after the TPP would clearly undermine the sitting president. Not saying it shouldn't be done. Just saying it will have clear and negative ramifications with respect to coalition building in a campaign.

brentspeak

(18,290 posts)
2. "I think it is very clear now he feels it is in our best interests."
Thu Apr 23, 2015, 11:21 AM
Apr 2015

Obama's not stupid. He knows this deal benefits the top 3% while screwing over everyone else. But he is, as he's said in the past, a "moderate 80's Republican", and is paying back the people who financed his campaigns.

The TPP is definitely not "in our best interests".

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
3. My personal thoughts of "in our best interest" was completely void in my post.
Thu Apr 23, 2015, 11:32 AM
Apr 2015

I also think I am correct in Obama thinking it is in all of our best interests. With his economic views, he believes wall street trickles down to main street. Right or wrong he believes it. That makes my comment accurate whether it is borne out in reality or not. I don't think Obama believes it will screw over everyone else. Having the economic thought process of a moderate 80's Republican backs that up. They truly believe in trickle down. They truly believe how main street does is a direct reflection of how wall street does. Under the current economic system we are working off of, it is actually pretty accurate. We need fundamental change.

pampango

(24,692 posts)
4. So Obama is not well-intentioned but wrong? He is evil and corrupt?
Thu Apr 23, 2015, 11:37 AM
Apr 2015
He knows this deal benefits the top 3% while screwing over everyone else.

'Evil' because he is selling us out to the 3%. 'Corrupt' because he is doing it in return for financial considerations.

Did you forget to accuse him of "screwing over everyone else" with TPP so that he can get rich once he retires? That is a key part of the usual argument since he does not need campaign contributions anymore.

Thanks for making your opinion of Obama so clear. I guess we will not count you as one of the majority of the Democratic base that supports Obama on the TPP.

mmonk

(52,589 posts)
5. I agree.
Thu Apr 23, 2015, 11:38 AM
Apr 2015

The track record on these deals concerning what they claim vs the results is pretty bad if not outright ugly. An economically battered public doesn't need this to pass at this time.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why Hillary Clinton shoul...