Hillary had similar views than Trump regarding the deportation of illegal immigrants in 2006 and nowdays "conveniently" changed it to mention an example, she's rather a moderate conservative than a liberal. I don't know who Michael would have supported but Bernie is a populist, socialist who wants to instill politics to help the people.
Or perhaps she changed her mind when presented with new facts a decade later as rational people do? Have your opinions not evolved in any way for the past 10 years? And I don't believe for a second that Hilary Clinton ever advocated the forced deportation of 12 million people. I'd love to see some evidence of that - preferably something that's not plucked from a rabid right-wing conspiracy website.
Plus, Bernie is not a socialist even if he chooses to call himself that. The Scandinavian countries he so admires are not socialist either.
That's the JW in him. They are not supposed to take political sides or vote...
That said, he probably would have agreed more with Clinton's agenda. Just my gut feel.
I think it's more the Motown PR training of "don't discuss politics or religion in public". Michael never shied away from sharing his political views in his music though. Which is why I find it hard to believe that the man who wrote Earth Song would agree with Trump that climate change is a hoax invented by the Chinese -_-
I think it's irresponsible stating opinions on Michael's behalf when we don't for certain what he'd think on this matter himself. I didn't attach my opinion on him, I just stated why Bernie is a better choice IMO because Hillary is a liar, racist warmonger who has no respect over human lives. She's no better than Donald Trump and if I were a citizen of the United States, I'd have given my vote to Bernie Sanders who has been more consistent in his views and proposals to help the people than Clinton.
I agree specially with the first half mentioned.
I find it interesting how Michael Jackson fans of all people engage in this witch hunt against the Clintons. Hilary is a racist - really? She has no respect for human lives? She is just as bad as Trump who calls Mexicans rapists and drug dealers, who has a long history of objectifying women, who retweets bogus statistics of "black crime" from a neo-nazi account, who is endorsed by the KKK and white nationalists, who admires brutal dictators like Putin, Sadam Hussein and Kim Jung-il, who thinks it's a great idea for Saudi Arabia to get nuclear weapons, who would reverse gay marriage and restrict abortion rights for women, who believes climate change is a hoax? To pretend like Clinton is "no better" than Trump is just nonsense from a progressive point of view.
I have no doubt in my mind that Hilary Clinton believes that her proposals help the United States move forward in the best way. Even if I don't agree with all her policy positions (particularly on foreign policy), I see no need to ascribe all kinds of sinister motives to her. We should all be careful not to get dragged along in the witch hunt against her that has been waged for two decades now. After Michael, the Clintons are probably the most scrutinised people in America. And Michael sympathised with them (see his comments in the Schmuley book). You can disagree with her
on substance but to say she is insincere or racist or uncaring is going too far, imo. I miss the days when politicians could engage with each other in a civil manner and actually get things done on a bipartisan basis. Nowadays everyone is swept up in toxic populism. But I digress -_-
Joseph Jackson ?@Joe5Jackson 