Top products from r/hillaryclinton
We found 30 product mentions on r/hillaryclinton. We ranked the 95 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.
2. Stronger Together: A Blueprint for America's Future
Sentiment score: 0
Number of reviews: 3
Simon & Schuster
3. Political Evil: What It Is and How to Combat It
Sentiment score: -1
Number of reviews: 2
4. Spigen Tough Armor Designed for Apple iPhone 5S Case (2013) / Designed for iPhone 5 Case (2012) - Champagne Gold
Sentiment score: 0
Number of reviews: 2
Extreme Protection from drops and scratchesAir Cushioned & Spider Web Patteren TPU case1.5mm lip to protect the screen even with Tempered Glass screen protectorSlimmer but more protective than other protective cases on the marketCompatible with iPhone 5S (2013) / iPhone 5 (2012)
5. Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty
Sentiment score: 0
Number of reviews: 2
Crown Business
6. Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business
Sentiment score: -1
Number of reviews: 1
Amusing Ourselves to Death Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business
7. Greed, Lust and Gender: A History of Economic Ideas
Sentiment score: 0
Number of reviews: 1
8. Empire of Liberty: A History of the Early Republic, 1789-1815 (Oxford History of the United States)
Sentiment score: 0
Number of reviews: 1
Oxford University Press USA
10. Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War
Sentiment score: -1
Number of reviews: 1
11. Hillary Rodham Clinton: Some Girls Are Born to Lead
Sentiment score: 1
Number of reviews: 1
Balzer Bray Harperteen
13. Money, Banking, and the Financial System (2nd Edition)
Sentiment score: 1
Number of reviews: 1
14. Macroeconomics: Policy and Practice (Pearson Series in Economics)
Sentiment score: 1
Number of reviews: 1
Used Book in Good Condition
16. The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America
Sentiment score: 1
Number of reviews: 1
Farrar Straus Giroux
17. The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life
Sentiment score: 0
Number of reviews: 1
HARPER ONE
18. Intermediate Microeconomics: A Modern Approach (Ninth Edition)
Sentiment score: 1
Number of reviews: 1
Slight water damage, nothing that interferes with content
Is anyone else super excited for Hillary's book!??!?!?!
https://www.amazon.com/Untitled-Memoir-Hillary-Rodham-Clinton/dp/1501175564/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1501181422&sr=1-1&keywords=hillary+clinton+what+happened
This thing is already #1 best seller on Amazon, I was laughing. I literally saw the tweet like two seconds after it was posted, pressed the Amazon link, and it was already #1 best seller in civics. Now it's just #1 best seller period. Hooray!
Intermediate econ if you're up for it:
http://www.amazon.com/Macroeconomics-N-Gregory-Mankiw/dp/1464182892
http://www.amazon.com/Macroeconomics-Policy-Practice-Pearson-Economics/dp/0321436334
http://www.amazon.com/Intermediate-Microeconomics-Modern-Approach-Ninth/dp/0393123960
http://www.amazon.com/Money-Banking-Financial-System-2nd/dp/0132994917
EDIT: For intro econ, you can just get started with the books by Krugman and Wells. I'm sure we all love Krugman here yea?
As far as history goes, just FYI, Zinn's People's History has a very poor reputation among (even left leaning) academic historians. You can ask about it at /r/askhistorians if you want to know more. You can also check their excellent book list, organized by region and topic.
EDIT: For an overview of US history, The Oxford History of the US series is an excellent primer.
I know less about sociology, but I think a good intro would be Khan's Privilege in that it touches on a contemporary sociological issue in a lay friendly manner but also goes into some theoretical foundations in the tradition of Bourdieu.
Yeah, pretty much. Obviously, I only know about it historically, but yeah. Peace and love and all that, which I believe in, but they really took it to an extreme. One of the more horrific scenes I've ever seen was a documentary about the time, and this guy is interviewing these parents who had given their 3-5 year old child acid. The kid is freaking out, and the interviewer is asking them why they did it and the parents are just like "acid is beautiful" or something (I forget the details, sorry). The point is, there was something to the liberalization of society, but there were definitely people who took it way too far.
There's a book called 1968 - The Year that Rocked The World by Mark Kurlansky that goes into detail about the era. It's really well-done and both sympathetic and critical: https://www.amazon.com/1968-Year-That-Rocked-World/dp/0345455827
You still get the reflexively anti-war people at rallies all the time, who basically are against any military engagement regardless of the situation. Again, I'm not saying you can't make the case for pacifism, but I always point out that Ghandi was a medic in two wars, had a deep respect for soldiers because of their civic courage, and that non-violence as he practiced it is a step above conventional warfare in that it's basically a willingness to go to war without weapons, rather than a means to avoid conflict.
There was also real stuff happening, just like there is today. My understanding is that Vietnam really drove people nuts. From what I've read, it was kind of this underlying thing that really stirred the pot. As much as people might talk about Iraq and Bush 1) there were far, far fewer casualties, and 2) There was no draft.
If you're actually trying to understand, George Packer had a big article in The New Yorker about it recently. I haven't finished it yet, but it's good so far, and Packer's a superb journalist who has been looking at this question since before the election (he wrote a book called The Unwinding).
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/31/hillary-clinton-and-the-populist-revolt
https://www.amazon.com/Unwinding-Inner-History-New-America/dp/0374534608
That's awesome!!! This book about Hillary looks sooooo cute!
The thing is that Trump is not completely wrong (although he would have been a bit more correct about the currency manipulation a few years ago). The Japanese, South Korea, Taiwanese... and now the Chinese got rich protecting their own markets/currencies and selling to markets in North American and Europe (they did it by applying variations on what's called the 'developmental state" model). You could buy a South Korea car in the US long before you could buy an American car in South Korea. Their explicit national policy was to prioritize their growth over and above any "free market" considerations. In other words, they ignored the rules of free trade when it suited them. This is in fact not free or fair, and the costs of these policies are often borne by a concentrated unlucky few (even though everyone else benefits).
There is a fairly established literature on the politics surrounding trade, if anyone is interested. (I always tell people to start here and here to get in the proper analytical mindset). Notice that that NYT article never really quoted political economists, but only economists? That because the math of economics pretends the political consequences of trade do not exist. Trade absolutely needs to be accompanied by a generous welfare state to compensate the losers and keep them invested in the process.
Don't dismiss the anger of working class democratic voters. It's not sourced in irrationality.
On a related note, if you're a reader and love RBG, you should check out this book.
someone better tell Amazon then /s https://smile.amazon.com/Stronger-Together-Hillary-Rodham-Clinton/dp/1501161733/ref=zg_bs_11105_21
His autobiography has quite good reviews. It's all about his decisions of course.
Pick up a Spigen ToughArmor. I've got one on my iPhone 6 and I've dropped that thing about seven thousand times. No scratches. It's great.
https://www.amazon.com/Subtle-Art-Not-Giving-Counterintuitive/dp/0062457713/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1478214988&sr=8-1&keywords=the+subtle+art+of+not+giving+a+fuck
Might help a bit. I'm enjoying it.
I'm also quite depressed, though. So who am I to say.
> Campaigning on the sole basis of "Hey, at least we're not the other guy" and half-hearted centrist policies isn't enough.
She didn't though. The biggest word in the word cloud of her speeches in "Jobs" and there is an actual book you can download called Stronger Together about her gazillion policy proposals that supplements her web page and many many policy oriented speeches.
Which you would know if you went to her web site, read her book, listened to her campaign speeches (hers or her surrogates), or subscribed to her mailing list (which sent me awesome policy videos like this one).
If you don't know these things then you probably got all your news from Bernie and yeah, Bernie did an absolutely horrible job promoting her. After spending all primary slandering her character and record he couldn't wave pom poms for her without admitting he'd been lying himself blue in the face during the primary so instead Bernie pushed the narrative, "At least she's not trump".
And I agree, thats a stupid horrible useless narrative. I'm proud to say that when Hillary lost to Obama in 2016 she showed massively more class than Bernie and honestly supported him with a whole heart.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0307719227?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o08_s00
You can already preorder her next book btw: https://www.amazon.com/Untitled-Memoir-Hillary-Rodham-Clinton-ebook/dp/B01MYE7QP0
Here is the mobile version of your link
Does anyone know the difference between these two versions of What Happened:
Apparently, the photo cover version has a couple of pages less, at least according to my local book store.
Which one did you get?
https://hbr.org/2016/04/even-the-thought-of-earning-less-than-their-wives-changes-how-men-behave
http://www.amazon.com/Greed-Lust-Gender-History-Economic/dp/0199238421
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00571820/document
Empire of Liberty
This does not remotely surprise me. Expect much more of this.
On another note, there's this very strange parody book.
Maybe because in the years following the invasion, no evidence was found to support the administration's main justifications for the war: namely, Iraq was engaging in large-scale manufacture of biological/nuclear WMDs and Saddam Hussein had ties to Osama bin Laden and the 9-11 attacks?
Or maybe because of the numerous revelations in the years since that indicate Bush was determined to go to war with Iraq and was seeking an excuse to justify it?
This happened pretty recently - it was in all the papers. Maybe read a book or two and educate yourself?
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/
https://www.amazon.com/Stronger-Together-Blueprint-Americas-Future/dp/1501161733/
She had more policy than any other candidate, including during the primaries. The notion that her entire campaign was "Trump bad" is an invention by Bernie Bros who don't like to listen to what women actually say.
Galifianakis : We chatted about a book I didn’t expect her to know about. We kind of bonded over this book called “Amusing Ourselves to Death” [by Neil Postman].
Now I feel bonded to the two of them!! I read Amusing Ourselves to Death about 30 years ago! TV IS BAD, IIRC. ;)
Link to reviews: https://www.amazon.com/What-Happened-Hillary-Rodham-Clinton/product-reviews/1501175564/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_viewopt_rvwer?ie=UTF8&filterByStar=one_star&reviewerType=all_reviews&pageNumber=1#reviews-filter-bar
Lets fight fire w/ fire. Please report abuse on all that you can.
Excerpt from an opinion piece published in USA Today back in 2012:
> I realize, of course, that a dualistic world view is an effective way to rally supporters and get out the vote. As Bill Reidway, a politically astute member of my congregation, said to me, "It's easiest to get votes when you can convince people the stakes are high — that is, that the other side is evil, as opposed to just wrong."
> Since good and responsible people know that they should never compromise with evil, they end up entering the polling place with a battle mentality. But such an approach only makes sense when Satan is running for president — and despite what you might hear in the darkest recesses of the online world, Satan is not running in 2012.
Excerpt from a review published on Slate, of Alan Wolfe's book Political Evil: What It Is and How To Combat It:
> Nothing is gained, and much is lost, if, in seeking to mobilize opinion to stop a massacre, you call it genocide. You debase the coinage of outrage. Next time you cry wolf, no one will believe you.
> We are indiscriminate in our use of the language of evil, Wolfe argues, because we like what the language does to our own moral standing. It makes us self-righteous. To call others wicked is to give us a moral privilege we may not deserve and a moral permission we are likely to misuse. The language of good and evil only seems to create moral clarity: It actually creates moral entitlement.
> Moral clarity mobilizes: Who does not want to enlist on the side of good against absolute evil? But clarity also anaesthetizes. If I am on the side of good, they on the side of evil, what am I not permitted to do? The authors of President Bush's torture memos claimed the privilege of moral superiority after 9/11 and used it to justify torture.
Reducing politics into a righteous struggle of us vs them, good vs evil, is how people like Trump stir supporters into supporting vile policies that really do destroy lives. There's always some villain in the stories they whip up; the immigrants, the Muslims, the democrats, the media, Wall Street, the republicans, the one percent... they're all convincing from a certain point of view. Both sides have their bugbears, both sides have their "Jews that are destroying Germany."
Just be careful. Remember that you can be smart without calling the people you disagree with stupid, that you can be good without calling the people you disagree with evil, and that the most horrific atrocities are rarely the result of mustache-twirling villains who know right and wrong and choose to be bad, but from otherwise decent people engaging in reductionist thinking that allows them to forgive even the most horrific acts against their enemies.