# Is there any chance Hillary would actually be a progressive president **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [July 2, 2015, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-chance-hillary-would-actually-be-a-progressive-president/724012 "2015-07-02T01:37:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2015, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-chance-hillary-would-actually-be-a-progressive-president/724012/21 "2015-07-03T14:17:52Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > If Obamacare is the most progressive thing that could be got thru with Democratic control of Congress, nothing more progressive is going to get thru a Republican-controlled one. I suspect that might no longer be a problem after 2016. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2015, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-chance-hillary-would-actually-be-a-progressive-president/724012/22 "2015-07-03T15:38:04Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > What are the odds that if she actually gets to be president she will be a competent progressive? Someone who can use the executive branch, or who will work with congress to get quality legislation passed that angers the right and the wealthy? She already voted for an illegal war that killed a hundred thousand innocent Iraqis and cost trillions of dollars. What else does she have to do to convince you she cannot be trusted? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-chance-hillary-would-actually-be-a-progressive-president/724012/23 "2015-07-06T12:51:14Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > She already voted for an illegal war that killed a hundred thousand innocent Iraqis and cost trillions of dollars. What else does she have to do to convince you she cannot be trusted? She and the majority of both houses. It was the sad spirit of the times, unfortunately. Michael Moore was one of the first public figures with the guts to publicly call the war what you’re calling it, and at the time he was reviled for it. Do you want Moore or someone who thinks like him for POTUS, then? I do, but do you? ---
**Author:** ![RickG](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rickg/32/5174_2.png) [@RickG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickG)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-chance-hillary-would-actually-be-a-progressive-president/724012/24 "2015-07-06T16:14:40Z")
In response to me pointing out that the House is unlikely to flip before 2022: > [@Shayna](#): > > Not necessarily so. While the mainstream media went nuts covering the SCOTUS rulings on health care and marriage, they largely ignored another really important one: gerrymandering. That is all about to change. Even if every state moved to non-partisan redistricting panels like the ones in Arizona and California, redistricting only happens after the decadal census, which will be completed in 2020 too late for that year’s elections. That’s why I said 2022 is the earliest reasonable date for the House to change. Moreover, the SCOTUS decision (which I applaud) was, so far as I understand as a non-lawyer, very narrow in scope. The GOP argued that the Arizona redistricting commission took away the state legislature’s Constitutional power, but the state constitution specifically makes the initiative process that led to the creation of the commission to be a co-equal part of the legislature, and therefore the argument in the suit was without merit. Depending on how other states created similar commissions, a suit of the same type might succeed. And legislatures controlled by either party are loathe to give up the redistricting power. Also, given the Roberts Court’s other decisions on the Voting Rights Act and how it applies to Southern states redistricting plans, we may see even _more_ gerrymandering next time (especially in Texas). So I’ll stick by my original argument that Clinton, should she be elected, will be dealing with an obstructionist House (and possibly Senate) that will prevent any even vaguely progressive legislation from going anywhere. ---
**Author:** ![Andiethewestie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ba9def/32.png) [@Andiethewestie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andiethewestie)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-chance-hillary-would-actually-be-a-progressive-president/724012/25 "2015-07-06T21:17:22Z")
And here I thought Bernie was the progressive, but Hillary is left of him on this: > **[Bernie Sanders Doubles Down On Support for Law That Protects Gun Sellers From...](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2015/07/bernie-sanders-doubles-down-on-support-for-gun-sellers.html)** > > On Sunday, CNN's Jake Tapper pressed Vermont senator and Democratic president candidate Bernie Sanders on his support for the Protection of Lawful... ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-chance-hillary-would-actually-be-a-progressive-president/724012/26 "2015-07-06T21:22:55Z")
> [@Andiethewestie](#): > > And here I thought Bernie was the progressive, but Hillary is left of him on this: > > [Bernie Sanders doubles down on support for gun sellers.](http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/07/06/bernie_sanders_doubles_down_on_support_for_gun_sellers.html) Let’s see her actually take a gun control stance in the election. Bernie’s being sensible, he’s rejected gun control laws that would be overturned in the end and doesn’t think the issue will be resolved with devisive measures. ---
**Author:** ![Andiethewestie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ba9def/32.png) [@Andiethewestie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andiethewestie)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-chance-hillary-would-actually-be-a-progressive-president/724012/27 "2015-07-06T21:56:48Z")
But there’s more. The writer of the article talked about an on line dealer who didn’t do any background checks. The Lucky Gunner who sold the amo to the Aurora shooter gets their court fees paid by the plaintiff, the parents of a girl who died in the Aurora Theatre. The judge in the case felt the Brady Centre, who were supporting the plantiffs had a political agenda. Yeah, a dead child. > **[Lucky Gunner Awarded Legal Fees to be Paid by Plaintiffs | JDJournal](https://www.jdjournal.com/2015/07/01/lucky-gunner-awarded-legal-fees-to-be-paid-by-plaintiffs/)** > > Summary: The Brady Center sought to make an online ammunition company responsible for the 2012 Aurora shooting for their lack of screening their buyers of military-grade equipment. The federal judge over the case between the Lucky Gunner, an online... [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-chance-hillary-would-actually-be-a-progressive-president/724012.md?page=1)