There is a difference between what you're describing is different from what is occurring -- she campaigns on LGTB rights and freedoms but her private positions is nothing short of abject disdain for LGTBs.
She tries to run on anti-establishment but there is no-one that is more establishment than her.
She tries to run on fighting for women's rights but she is an apologist for her husband's sordid history of sexual abuse towards other women, and not only that but she will readily accept funds from people that are the most misogynistic on the face of the Earth (the Gulf monarchies).
The difference is her stance is opposite from what she campaigns on -- there is a word for this: hypocrite. She clearly has no moral center.
Based on my reading of the emails, their morality is similar to that of members of a college fraternity trying to pull off the biggest prank imaginable, except the prank is not harmless. The absolute delight in being able to do this repeatedly and get away with it is what keeps these people going. It helps them reenforce their feelings of superiority and thus self-justifies their right to do just about anything they want to.
> There is a difference between what you're describing is different from what is occurring -- she campaigns on LGTB rights and freedoms but her private positions is nothing short of abject disdain for LGTBs.
Source?
> She tries to run on anti-establishment but there is no-one that is more establishment than her.
Sure, but that's just marketing, not substance.
> She tries to run on fighting for women's rights but she is an apologist for her husband's sordid history of sexual abuse towards other women, and not only that but she will readily accept funds from people that are the most misogynistic on the face of the Earth (the Gulf monarchies).
It is not clear that Clinton ever sexually abused women. He cheated on his wife, yes. But that is a far cry from 'sexual abuse'.
What is a political opportunist? The Clintons have always operated via the polls. Against gay marriage when being against it was popular, now an ardent supporter.
She tries to run on anti-establishment but there is no-one that is more establishment than her.
She tries to run on fighting for women's rights but she is an apologist for her husband's sordid history of sexual abuse towards other women, and not only that but she will readily accept funds from people that are the most misogynistic on the face of the Earth (the Gulf monarchies).
The difference is her stance is opposite from what she campaigns on -- there is a word for this: hypocrite. She clearly has no moral center.