Post by jeaniebueller on Mar 23, 2017 9:40:36 GMT -5
...the best thing for her political career.
Its so strange but not surprising to me, the amount of vitriol aimed at Chelsea Clinton right now. By all accounts, she is just acting as a private citizen and tweeting on her twitter account. I am really disappointed that the washington post even published this piece, and just to note, it was written by a pop culture columnist, not a political columnist.
So if Clinton does want to run for office, or to be a successful advocate for an issue, or even just to continue to be credible when she tweets or speaks on a subject, the most strategic thing she could possibly do would be to disappear (as much as it’s possible for a famous person to do in the United States these days). She should decline graciously when she’s asked to be an award recipient and send substantial checks to the relevant charities instead. She should stick to publishing substantive volumes such as her previous “Governing Global Health,” written with Devi Sridhar, rather than the sort of children’s volume public figures dash off all the time. And she should find an issue-oriented job that she goes to every day, and at which she has significant, substantive responsibilities.
Is she even really out there that much? I see a few articles about things she's tweeted about, but not a whole lot.
That's what is so ridiculous. She hasn't even hinted at wanting to run for political office. She is still giving lectures, and writing books, but that's it. The idea that she should decline public awards and hole up in her house so as not to offend angry Berners and the far left is just so offensive.
Post by spunbutterfly on Mar 23, 2017 9:46:19 GMT -5
She should smile more.
That's basically what the article should say.
Only the last sentence seemed substantive IF she wants a career in politics, but it doesn't seem she's too interested in joining politics herself? She's 37. I get the feeling she'd have dabbled a toe in a little while ago if politics were her thing.
But yet, Ivanka can have a fucking office in the White House and be present at meetings.
Fuck you and your double standards.
Right? The continued Clinton scrutiny, and double standards (for the Clintons and women, in general), is infuriating.
But the more I think about it, the more I want all his adult kids to remain inextricably tied to this administration. Hell, give them all an office in the WH, and formally involve them in everything. You know they view this as the beginning of their political dynasty, and I want them all to be forever tainted by this so that whenever it all comes down, be that next week or 3 years from now, not a single one of them can distance themselves from the wreckage.
Link them to this shit show forever so we never see another Trump spawn in office (reserving judgement for Barron because he's still a kid, and doesn't deserve to be lumped in with the rest of his siblings in this regard).
Post by W.T.Faulkner on Mar 23, 2017 10:19:37 GMT -5
Not concerned about Chelsea. Don't have time to be concerned about Chelsea. If we are concerned about a daughter of a president, Ivanka is the obvious fucking choice, here.
But yet, Ivanka can have a fucking office in the White House and be present at meetings.
Fuck you and your double standards.
Right? The continued Clinton scrutiny, and double standards (for the Clintons and women, in general), is infuriating.
But the more I think about it, the more I want all his adult kids to remain inextricably tied to this administration. Hell, give them all an office in the WH, and formally involve them in everything. You know they view this as the beginning of their political dynasty, and I want them all to be forever tainted by this so that whenever it all comes down, be that next week or 3 years from now, not a single one of them can distance themselves from the wreckage.
Link them to this shit show forever so we never see another Trump spawn in office (reserving judgement for Barron because he's still a kid, and doesn't deserve to be lumped in with the rest of his siblings in this regard).
Post by mominatrix on Mar 23, 2017 10:31:45 GMT -5
A friend posted some piece about Chelsea getting a lifetime achievement award from somebody... As evidence that "the Clintons" aren't giving up their hold on the Democratic party, and on and on.
Not concerned about Chelsea. Don't have time to be concerned about Chelsea. If we are concerned about a daughter of a president, Ivanka is the obvious fucking choice, here.
That is the other thing too. I know nothing about the author of this opinion piece, other than what is stated in her byline, but I bet a million dollars she is a Bernie or Bust person. That said, we need to focus on the real enemy. Not Chelsea Clinton writing a But She persisted book, but Cheetos Mussolini. (also, I take exception to them attacking her for writing that book because it wasn't her original idea. Please. She has seen her mother dragged through the mud her entire life. If there is anyone who is qualified to write that book, its Chelsea.)
re: the Lifetime achievement thing ... Do these people know why people receive awards like this? It's all about name recognition and attracting attention.
I mean, my mom keeps getting "honored" by local cultural organizations and schools because they know she can sell a bunch of tickets to her family and friends. My sister just got honored by a club she's in, despite the fact that she does nothing, because they knew she could bring in four tables full of people plus they'd all spend money on raffles and program ads and the bar.
I find this extra annoying because hrc got shit from a lot of people for "being too quiet" or "disappearing" after the election but CC keeps just living her life & she's "too out there." Proof that women, especially with this last name, just can't do anything g right.