I have generally posted on matters about which I believe I can claim some knowledge and some expertise — health care, the Amarillo City Council and downtown development. I shy away from some of the national news and stories. But occasionally something resonates strongly with me and Thomas Farragher’s article did just that.
I’ve wanted to go “all in” about Hillary Clinton’s presidential aspirations and, in 2008, was inclined to back her until Barack Obama came along with a more populist message. Now, however, I see both of them as different sides of the same coin — corporate captives who have long abandoned the middle class and the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Maybe I don’t understand national politics and the concessions politicians must make to move incrementally to a goal.
What Farragher’s column demonstrates to me is that the Clinton campaign will be a marketing/sales blitz to paint her as “the people’s” candidate. I won’t be buying it. As Farragher points out, using the word “inauthenticity,” Clinton neither can, wants to nor will listen to or understand anyone but those in the plutocrat class. More’s the pity, because I see a backlash against her that would open the door to a Republican presidency — and at this point in the United States’ history — that would be a disaster.
If those in our country want a clear choice, and if the Democratic Party wants to give us a clear choice, we need a ticket like Warren-Sanders or the equivalent thereof. It ain’t gonna happen, but I can hope.