She’s lost 7 of the last 8. New poll shows her as establishment voice in change year. Dems rise to moment or get left behind
It’s time for Hillary to go: Clintonism is the past, bad for Democratic Party’s future
The 2016 presidential election is among the most interesting political campaigns in the history of the U.S. More so than perhaps any other, it has exposed just how tired Americans are of the status quo, and just how much they yearn for an alternative. Bernie Sanders’ big win in Wisconsin last night — his seventh victory in the last eight contests against Hillary Clinton — is only part of the story.
The explosive growth of the grassroots movement behind Sanders — a self-declared democratic socialist who refuses to take Wall Street money, a longtime independent senator from Vermont who was little-known before declaring his presidential bid and who was immediately written off as a mere protest candidate when he did so — attests to this widespread frustration with politics as usual.
Sanders has slammed his opponent, hyper-hawkish Wall Street-backed multimillionaire Clinton, as part of the establishment so many Americans are railing against. She has pushed back, largely ignoring Sanders’ political critiques and instead insisting he “is the only person who I think would characterize me, a woman running to be the first woman president, as exemplifying the establishment.”
A new poll, however, shows that, while she may pretend otherwise, Clinton is widely recognized as the true establishment candidate.
Approximately two-thirds of American voters say the U.S. needs “radical change,” according to an April 5 Quinnipiac University poll.
When asked what they thought about the statement “the old way of doing things no longer works and we need radical change,” the survey found that 64 percent of voters agreed.
The responses were split up based on party and on voters’ candidate of choice. 71 percent of Republicans agreed that the U.S. needs radical change; so too did 58 percent of Democrats.
Supporters of every presidential candidate expressed desire for radical change, save for one. The only exception? Hillary Clinton.
More than three-fourths (76 percent) of Sanders’ supporters agree that the U.S. needs radical change. 41 percent strongly agree.
Just 46 percent of Clinton’s supporters feel the same, on the other hand. And only 14 percent strongly agree.
On the Republican side, a majority of voters for all three candidates want to see the U.S. change radically.
Clinton is the only candidate who has a majority of supporters who oppose radical change.
This is not surprising to anyone who has closely monitored the election. Clinton has long been the preferred establishment candidate. Her long history of backing neoliberal economics, “tough-on-crime” policies that led to mass incarceration, pro-corporate environmental stances and war after war ensures that things will carry on as they have for decades.
Large sections of international capital have also thrown their weight behind Clinton. For 30 years, Clinton’s top donors have been banks and corporations (while Sanders’ top donors have consistently been labor unions).
Many of Clinton’s supporters are fine with the status quo. It has benefited them, after all. In primary after primary, young Americans overwhelmingly vote for Sanders, in landslides. Clinton’s most devoted voting bloc consists of families who earn more than $200,000 per year.
Most telling of all is that many prominent neoconservatives have come out in support of Clinton — although they already have for years (Dick Cheney has heaped praise upon her). The neocon establishment, the embodiment of the status quo, admires Clinton’s pledge to preserve American empire, and shares her proclivity for flexing U.S. military muscle at any possible opportunity.
Neocons recognize that Donald Trump, the Republican Party’s front-runner, is a wildcard, extreme and unpredictable; whereas, while Clinton has also been inconsistent on a huge variety of issues — from trade deals to the environment to the criminal justice system to LGBTQ rights — there are a few issues she has always been consistent on: namely Wall Street and war. Hillary almost never fails to look out for the banks, and she’s a die-hard hawk.
American voters are waging a full-scale rebellion against both of the parties that have maintained a duopoly on U.S. politics for decades.