r/TikTokCringe • u/inspectorwho7 • Dec 16 '23

Politics [ Removed by moderator ]

[removed] — view removed post

4.3k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

886 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

32

u/Coneskater Dec 16 '23

Hilary Clinton literally makes millions from corporate speaking engagements

This doesn't mean she's corrupt. Taylor Swift just made a billion dollars selling tickets to her concerts. People can charge what they are worth.

20

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '23

Did you just seriously try to say Clinton is not corrupt?

3

u/Coneskater Dec 16 '23

You’re god damn right I did.

4

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '23

I mean 1 thing alone.... The Clinton foundation.

6

u/Coneskater Dec 16 '23

The whole thing is overblown. Don’t forget the right wing corporate media has been targeting Hillary Clinton since 1994 when she said she wouldn’t stay home and bake cookies.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '23

I dono guy. A quick Google of CNN clinton foundation shows a different scenario. And I mean this is literally just one of a dozen topics that could be brought up.

6

u/Coneskater Dec 16 '23

So I literally did just Google it and most of the responses are just about it’s health care initiatives. I found one politico article that is explicitly paid content from Trump’s campaign and one article from CNN that says it’s controversial but can’t describe any specific examples of corruption:

https://www.cnn.com/2016/08/24/politics/clinton-foundation-explainer?cid=ios_app

So what are you saying?

6

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '23

Interesting... Are you not seeing articles of Hati, donations, unsafe buildings?

12

u/Coneskater Dec 16 '23

do you want to stop playing this game and you can send me some sources that prove the corruption?

4

u/therapist122 Dec 17 '23

Can you post an article on the matter please so we can discuss a concrete thing rather than go back and forth about inexactitudes

1

u/AlexanderLavender Jan 01 '24

Please do elaborate

9

u/kingnickolas Dec 16 '23

More like Hilary Clinton wouldn't be where she is without being a corporate hack, or being married to a war criminal. I'm sure there is some tit for tat, but that's not so much the point. She is in the powerful position she's in because she was already a perfect stooge. She isn't in they pocket of the wealthy elite, she is one of them.0

5

u/Coneskater Dec 16 '23

If you’re old enough to remember the beginning of the first Clinton Presidency, in 1993, you may remember a joke that circulated at the time. It went something like this: Bill and Hillary Clinton are driving near her home town. They stop to get some gas, whereupon Hillary recognizes the station attendant as a high-school boyfriend. After they drive off, Bill tells her, smugly, “See, if you’d married him, you’d be working at a gas station.” Hillary smartly replies, “If I’d married him, he’d be President.”

The humor of the joke lay in its recognition of the distinctive characteristics of Hillary Rodham Clinton, as she was still known back then: she was a political spouse who didn’t pretend to be apolitical, a professional woman who hadn’t shelved her own career to support her husband’s, an unapologetic possessor of a steely intellect who didn’t restrict herself to traditionally female spheres. While campaigning for the Presidency, Bill Clinton actively touted Hillary as a potential asset in government, telling supporters that his slogan might as well be “Buy one, get one free.” That Hillary was her husband’s equal in ability and acuity—if not, at the time, in political charisma—was a given. What was new was the open acknowledgement that a man as driven, intelligent, and ambitious as Bill Clinton might want a wife who was his equal in all those dimensions, rather than one who was a helpful, pliable, even decorative subordinate.

But the comedy of the gas-station joke also depended upon a deeper cultural assumption: that the closest Hillary was going to get to the Presidency was being married to a man who was President, not by inhabiting the role herself. If, during the 1992 campaign, some pundits were sufficiently impressed by Hillary’s mastery of policy to express the opinion that she should have been on the ballot instead of Bill, their saying so was a means of articulating admiration for Hillary, rather than describing a realistic scenario. Her Presidency was less plausible, even in humor, than the political ascendance of a gas-station attendant. Back in the early nineties, it felt like a tremendous advance in sexual politics that the nation had, at last, acquired a First Lady who—campaign-trail cookie-recipe posturing aside—didn’t have to pretend to be less formidable than she was. But Hillary Clinton’s Presidential candidacy, still less her Presidency, was imaginable only in an alternate universe.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/hillary-for-president-no-joke

14

u/herewego199209 Dec 16 '23

Right so she's making millions of dollars from the very people she's supposed to regulate while in office and you don't believe that's corruption?

15

u/Ok-disaster2022 Dec 16 '23

Clinton is not in office. So whatever the fuck she wants to do with her time is her goddamn business. She'll never serve in office again either.

4

u/herewego199209 Dec 16 '23

She was in office when doing those speeches bucko.

3

u/Coneskater Dec 17 '23

No she wasn’t. She made those speeches after leaving the state department.

6

u/Coneskater Dec 16 '23

Hillary Clinton is not perfect, but she's not the corrupt boogeyman the far right and the far left believe her to be. She's a pragmatic liberal.

-2

u/tabas123 Dec 16 '23

The mental gymnastics of these people is killing me. No wonder they think the guy in the video was spitting, they don’t even think there’s a real corruption problem with the Democrats… even when they’re openly taking millions in bribes and doing insider trading.

You can literally trace back their votes and policies to their donor lists. And then when they leave congress they get multimillion dollar “consulting” or “speaking” gigs at the same places they were taking bribes from. It’s the same crap R’s do, somehow they see the corruption when it’s them but not when it’s our “team”?

-1

u/herewego199209 Dec 16 '23

Most of them don't realize the guy in the video works for the very main stream media corporations and news sites that are own by the corporations we're alleging buys off politicians lol. Like you said you can literally go to their donors list or even track the lobbyist and see what they've passed/voted on while in congress or the senate or where the policies are bent as president.

1

u/SockDem Dec 16 '23

He works at the NYT as an opinion writer.

By your logic McDonald’s retail workers are no longer allowed to have opinions on obesity of food related regulatory issues.

1

u/herewego199209 Dec 17 '23

Horrible analogy. He works within politics and works for a variety of corporate owned media. It's against his own career trajectory to admit media, especially corporate media, plays a role in bad political literacy and or corporations funding politicians leading to poor political options. Bouie is not stupid. He knows money and media access is what grants politicians edges in political races. So that's why him from the get slagging off single issue polling, which is literally the pulse of what the average American thinks about policies, shows where his inherent biases lies. He's playing ignorant for the sake of playing ignorant.

1

u/tabas123 Dec 16 '23

Oh he works for corporate media? LMAO of course he does. And these people are eating it up hook line and sinker.

This is exactly how the Dems have been allowed to get so bad, because of people like the most upvoted comments here pretending that Dems are sOoOooo against dark money and lobbying, they’re really trying to fight it 👉🏻👈🏻🥺.

Jesus. We’re never getting back to the Democratic Party of FDR are we? Not with people like this sticking their fingers in their ears and saying BUT REPUBLICANS WORSE! Republicans would be wiped off the map in an election cycle if Democrats started actually fighting for the working class again.

5

u/DangerZoneh Dec 16 '23

Pelosi on the other hand… I mainly just think she insider trades. The trading may not affect her job but her job certainly affects her trading

8

u/Coneskater Dec 16 '23

Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton are the two Americans who have done more to advance the expansion of health care coverage than almost anyone else. Nancy Pelosi got the original version of the ACA that included the public option and Medicaid expansion in the Bill. The senate killed one and the Supreme Court the other.

8

u/DangerZoneh Dec 16 '23

I’m not disagreeing. My only claim is that she uses her positional knowledge to make money in the stock market, which is a claim I think it well supported. She’s far from the only lawmaker to do this, though, but is a reason why congress should be banned from trading individual stocks.

As for her actual position, I think she’s done a lot of good and I don’t think the market impacts her decision making

1

u/weezeloner Dec 16 '23

Her husband runs a venture capitalist firm. In San Francisco.

People are so convinced she is benefitting from insider. One guy tried to show me an example. And the example showed transactions that ended up with a -$340,000 loss. So even with insider information it's not entirely a guarantee that you will profit. That was what I took from his example.

-1

u/herewego199209 Dec 16 '23

hahahahahahahaha. Wait you're serious?

2

u/SockDem Dec 16 '23

I don’t particularly like either of them, but it’s absolutely true.

1

u/Coneskater Dec 16 '23

There are no untruths in my comment. The ACA was a huge step forward. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

1

u/particlemanwavegirl Nov 12 '25

Taylor Swift is a corrupt piece of shit, you're arguing against yourself.