New Economic Perspectives has the post An Open Letter to Hillary Clinton about Pragmatism in 2016.
Here is a woman that presents a great understanding of what ails the country and the world, but is so dedicated to Hillary Clinton that she cannot see the Clinton’s roll in all of this. She is also blind to the facts that Bernie Sanders (and Jill Stein) do see the issues in the same terms that she does.
And in spite of the fact that I have supported Hillary for the last thirty years (since I was thrilled to discover that someone who had worked for the Children’s Defense Fund was running for Yale Alumni Trustee) and went out of my way to stick up for her over Bernie Sanders in the Minnesota caucuses, I still have no idea whether she sees the issues – the defining issues of our day – in the same terms that I do.
Here is one example of Carbone’s understanding of the issues.
While Hillary gets most of this right, she still pays lip service to the importance of balancing the federal budget. In fact, as Paul Krugman points out at least once a weak (sic) that conviction is in the same league with denying the reality that humans are causing climate change. Democrats once embraced the notion that a principal purpose of monetary and fiscal policy ought to be a full employment economy and that infrastructure spending and, yes, deficits, are necessary to that end.
Here is an example of Carbone’s blindness.
I have more optimism that Hillary fully gets the third piece – the need for a political realignment in the United States and the defeat of what she termed the “vast right wing conspiracy” that has plagued her for her entire public career.
Perhaps the right wing conspiracy has plagued Hillary Clinton, but Clinton is still a corporatist who has made over 100 million dollars from the very forces that she needs to rein in. I wish I could be plagued to the tune of millions of dollars in speaking fees.