Rodham - Curtis Sittenfeld Audiobook
Language: EnglishKeywords:
Alternate History
Clinton
Shared by:Gweilo
Written by
Read by Carrington MacDuffie
Format: MP3
Bitrate: 128 Kbps
Unabridged
From the New York Times bestselling author of American Wife and Eligible, a novel that imagines a deeply compelling what-might-have-been: What if Hillary Rodham hadn’t married Bill Clinton?
In 1971, Hillary Rodham is a young woman full of promise: Life magazine has covered her Wellesley commencement speech, she’s attending Yale Law School, and she’s on the forefront of student activism and the women’s rights movement. And then she meets Bill Clinton. A handsome, charismatic southerner and fellow law student, Bill is already planning his political career. In each other, the two find a profound intellectual, emotional, and physical connection that neither has previously experienced.
In the real world, Hillary followed Bill back to Arkansas, and he proposed several times; although she said no more than once, as we all know, she eventually accepted and became Hillary Clinton.
But in Curtis Sittenfeld’s powerfully imagined tour-de-force of fiction, Hillary takes a different road. Feeling doubt about the prospective marriage, she endures their devastating breakup and leaves Arkansas. Over the next four decades, she blazes her own trail—one that unfolds in public as well as in private, that involves crossing paths again (and again) with Bill Clinton, that raises questions about the tradeoffs all of us must make in building a life.
Brilliantly weaving a riveting fictional tale into actual historical events, Curtis Sittenfeld delivers an uncannily astute and witty story for our times. In exploring the loneliness, moral ambivalence, and iron determination that characterize the quest for political power, as well as both the exhilaration and painful compromises demanded of female ambition in a world still run mostly by men, Rodham is a singular and unforgettable novel.
| Announce URL: | udp://tracker.torrent.eu.org:451/announce |
| This Torrent also has several backup trackers | |
| Tracker: | udp://tracker.torrent.eu.org:451/announce |
| Tracker: | http://tracker2.dler.org:80/announce |
| Tracker: | udp://tracker.tiny-vps.com:6969/announce |
| Tracker: | udp://tracker.opentrackr.org:1337/announce |
| Creation Date: | Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:00:00 +0000 |
| This is a Multifile Torrent | |
| Listen Online at AudiBoi.com 39 Bytes | |
| Rodham (AudiBoi.com).mp3 767.9 MBs | |
| Combined File Size: | 767.9 MBs |
| Piece Size: | 256 KBs |
| Comment: | Rodham Written by Curtis Sittenfeld Read by Carrington MacDuffie 128 kbps MP3 13h58m |
| Info Hash: | 0ec2e3ede571aa40790f65fad2e549c41850490a |
| Torrent Download: | Torrent Free Downloads |
| Tips: | Sometimes the torrent health info isn’t accurate, so you can download the file and check it out or try the following downloads. |
| Direct Download: | Start Direct Download |
| Tips: | You could try out alternative bittorrent clients. |
| Secured Download: | Download Files Now |
| AD: |
|
This post has 36 comments with rating of 5/5
November 12th, 2020
Thanks!
November 12th, 2020
“In the alternative history, Republicans demand accountability for the 287 Americans who died as a result of President Rodham’s mismanagement of the novel coronavirus SARS-2.”
-not mine
November 12th, 2020
Thanks so much!
November 12th, 2020
Her public image is a fictional story.
In reality, her story is one of corruption, lies, betrayal of the American People, greed and death.
November 12th, 2020
I would guess that for many years to come the American People (at least, the patriots) will dwell on Hillary Rodham as one of their great missed opportunities (Benjamin Franklin never got to be President either).
But somehow I can’t see her as Mrs Trump IV.
Too much class I suppose.
November 12th, 2020
@apollo60: drinking the Qanon kool-aid.
The GOP “investigated” Hillary for thirty years, could not find one thing to take to a real court where you need real evidence.
November 12th, 2020
Upon “mature” consideration, it was probably the particularly terrifying nature of Hilldawg’s bloodcurdling, radical Jacobinism which caused a critical swathe of Americana to demur in the most intensely apathetic fashion.
Sounds like an interesting exploration of the motivating psychology behind the Machiavellian quest for political power. As Billy Connolly observed: “The desire to be a politician should bar you for life from ever becoming one.”
November 13th, 2020
@caesar963: same misogynistic blather as Apollo, using more syllables. Why is Hillary “Machiavellian”, more than any other politician? And the US tried electing someone whose schtick was that he wasn’t a politician; did not work out well.
November 13th, 2020
Machiavels all, whether Clintons, Bushes, Trumps, or whatever you’ve got. Also politicians elsewhere in the world (yes, there is a rest of the world). They can even manipulate eejits into defending their garbage. As to the rest of the polysyllabic blather: how is it misogyny/misandry to be sceptical of politicians’ motives? A person who detests Margaret Thatcher’s policies only does so because they’re a “misogynist” now? Or would that be political illiteracy?
November 13th, 2020
Sure, you are even handed. You could use the same words to attack every poltician; yet you only actually deploy it for Hillary et al. Really, Apollo is a loonie but at least he’s honest enough not to claim to be nonpartisan.
And “Machiavellin” doesn’t make much sense for Hillary in any case. Who, aside from someone looking for word to denigrate her, would describer her as an unprincipled political mastermind or operator? As I said, the same grabbag of insults as Apollo, after running them through a thesaurus.
November 13th, 2020
Ah, you must’ve missed the stuff on trump - on virtually every trump topic. It was really quite good. I even used the “same words” in the above comment. How does that selective thing work? It is mechanically reliable!
On Hillary; I think Bernie, his campaign, and his supporters would describe those deceitful machinations a few years ago as Machiavellian. Damned Machiavellian, in fact. Elizabeth Warren and Donna Brazile also condemned Hillary and her campaign for “hijacking” and “rigging” the DNC primary.
Then there was describing young African-Americans as “superpredators” and having to “bring them to heel” - the very worst form of dog whistle politics. As you said: “an unprincipled political mastermind or operator.” When I studied law, we looked in depth at that “3 Strikes” legislation, in the context of Penology (don’t worry, it just relates to prisons) - as the prof would say: “It did not satisfy the interests of justice.” Meaning it was phucked up.
Of course, there are Machiavellian continuities: both Hillary & Donald will never admit they lost.
On a comparative basis: I’m not sure that “bipartisan” even applies over there. As Gore Vidal said: “One party, with two right wings.” It just looks like 2 Machiavellian gangs. Over here, as a supporter of the Democrats, particularly the Clintons, you would be most definitely on the right.
November 13th, 2020
In the words of Reagan, there you go again. Slide in off topic attacks on Bernie and Biden and another swipe at Hillary.
Hillary conceded the morning after the 2016 election. So you are just lying about that.
Your pretensions of being above the fray while you never pass by a chance to piss on the Democrats is what annoys me.
– 30 –
November 13th, 2020
Off-topic? How? Who attacked Bernie? You said Machiavellian doesn’t apply to Hillary, yet she quite skillfully “engineered” the primary. That’s the point. Bernie Sanders & his supporters were the victims of this intentional disenfranchisement scheme. People in her own party condemned her following the corroborating leaks concerning this back room orchestration.
Again, who mentioned Biden? Hillary used the dog whistle phrase/manoeuvre “superpredators” in support of the “3 Strikes” legislation. This was in 1996, prior to Bill’s re-election. Her speech was from Keene State College, New Hampshire, broadcast on C-SPAN.
Trump in two of the recent debates falsely accused Biden of using the term “superpredators” - he did not. Biden actually referred to them as “predators” in support of the same legislation. He used the term twice in the Senate, in 1993 & 1998.
Indeed, I am seeing “off topic attacks” - diversions, “miscomprehensions” and, well, I hesitate to call them lies, but…
Of course Hillary lost - just like Trump lost. However, admitting that YOU lost as a candidate, because of YOUR specific failures as a candidate, well that’s something else entirely. For inst, check out the BBC article “What Happened: The long list of who Hillary Clinton blames,” for a selection of the litany of excuses.
Just to add insult to injury, this includes “Bernie Sanders (and his supporters).” Why not take honest responsibility for the failure, without the puerile obfuscation? Assert otherwise if you like, but that election was an open goal. That’s on the candidate.
Concerning wee-weeing on Democrats: why not? They’re a disgusting collection of frauds who should be reviled. Merely look at their history. The Republicans also. In the interests of full disclosure: the British Conservative & Labour parties are disgusting as well. Have a piss party. But this book is about one character, so the misdirecting whataboutery is not helpful.
On Clintons: I’ve said it multiple times here: the Northern Ireland Peace Process happened when it did because of their support. Many people are alive because of that. Credit where it’s due. (The deal is also safer with Biden) This does not mean that anyone’s critical faculties should go into permanent abeyance.
November 14th, 2020
You said “Hillary & Donald will never admit they lost.”
Demonstrably lying about Hillary, since she formally conceded the next day. What she thinks about it is another thing. She did not dispute the loss, that the vote count was true.
That, and your other attacks on Democrats, are off topic because they are nothing to do with this book. You keep doing it = you are a troll.
November 14th, 2020
Obfuscating, misdirecting & deceptively diverting is the definition of trolling, young man: “Slide in off topic attacks on Bernie and Biden” = false. And you can’t try to maintain you don’t know this. In addition: your irrelevant whataboutery apropos the Democratic party. And always doubling down with insults only serves to reveal the falsehood.
Read it back, with honest understanding. The clear issue: Hillary & the political machinations regarding the Sanders campaign at the convention - manifestly Machiavellian. Also the dog whistle manoeuvre involving African Americans, which was repulsive. Defending everything these people do is fatuous.
This is how such people hope to engineer election victories. Then they can never admit that they were the cause of their own failure. Hoist by their own petard, as it were.
In Newsweek’s Oct 2017 analysis of the book “What Happened” they count 16 separate excuses Hillary uses to blame for her election failure. An election that, as the qualified candidate, was hers to win.
November 15th, 2020
@Caesar: “Hillary & Donald will never admit they lost.”
And Caesar will never admit he was wrong about that. At this point, it’s a deliberate lie. Your usual anti-Democrat whataboutism doesn’t change that.
November 15th, 2020
Falsehoods are indeed in flight! Of course, as the failed candidate, any possible contrived, rhetorical nod to personal responsibility and fault will always be concealed, obscured, and diluted by a bewildering smokescreen of recrimination of every conceivable party and entity. It’s always they, them, and the other. In fairness, it’s not difficult to understand why Hillary refuses to accept such an enormous burden of moral culpability.
Naturally they lost; naturally they will never admit that they lost. For one clown, it was the Deep State; for the other clown, it was: Barack Obama;
Bernie Sanders;
Sexism;
James Comey;
Self-Hating Women;
The Media;
Uninformed Voters - low information voters;
Voter Suppression;
Russia;
Her Campaign Staff;
The Democratic National Committee;
Campaign Finance Laws;
Jill Stein;
The Electoral College;
Anthony Weiner;
Her ‘Basket of Deplorables’ Comment; - as I said: utterly bewildering.
Also to be filed under the “utterly bewildering” rubric: why any anyone would want to carry water for such, er, deplorables.
November 15th, 2020
@caesar963:
“Hillary & Donald will never admit they lost.”
Of course she was not happy about losing, but SHE DOES NOT DENY THAT SHE LOST.
===========
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-election-night-concession-call-what-happened-2017-9?r=US&IR=T
“I congratulated Trump and offered to do anything I could to make sure the transition was smooth,” she wrote.
Clinton called Trump in the early morning hours of November 9, shortly after he won the state of Wisconsin, overcoming the 270 electoral vote threshold.
============
Full concession speech, 9 Nov 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khK9fIgoNjQ
There is no equivalency between Trump and Clinton.
He tries to ignore disasters, makes up inane conspiracy theories. Her problem was that she did no pander enough.
November 15th, 2020
It’s true that there is no substantial equivalency between Trump and Clinton. He does not even pay lip service to truth. However, as Christy Moore sang of other such: “They’ll never lose.”
She did concede that night, while a different message was being delivered to supporters at the Javits Convention Center by John Podesta (”She is not done yet!”). Subsequently, the silly excuses & prevarications began.
The original objection remains: the deceitfulness of expediently targeting African Americans as “Superpredators” and “without conscience or morality” in order to “justify” exponentially expanding the prison population via the dubious medium of a nexus of offences. Bernie properly called her out for using this despicable slur.
It’s reminiscent of appalling regimes labelling human beings as “rats” - thus dehumanised, they may be disposed of as the regime sees fit. In prisons, camps, etc. Or of my own people being dismissed as “pigs” and “vermin” merely because they had the impertinent audacity to starve to death, on the oppressor’s watch, and with their shameful connivance.
November 16th, 2020
@caesar963:
“Hillary & Donald will never admit they lost.”
Still a lie.
Seems a virtue of the right, to boldly state falsehoods about your opponents.
Then segue into another few pages of vitriol, all the while insisting on your even handedness. Cognitive dissonance or hypocrisy? Same result.
November 16th, 2020
To avoid further distraction & related contrivances: Your actual complaint: use of “Machiavellian” - my corroborating examples: Hillary engineering the Convention, thus disenfranchising the real Left; and her use of the dog whistle racial slur “Superpredators” - for which she was condemned by the real Left, Bernie Sanders, his campaign, etc. These right/left characters failing to admit they lost seems to be in the ether!
You seem desperate to evade the proofs, for some left/right reason.
Reality check: Hillary is on the Left?! Crucially, because of her Machiavellian manoeuvrings, and appeal to conservatives, the Left avoided the polls, or voted Green.
November 29th, 2020
You can’t debate someone who just lies about facts.
“These right/left characters failing to admit they lost seems to be in the ether!”
Still lying about this.
Hillary publicly conceded the morning after the election.
YOU CONTINUE TO LIE ABOUT A FACT OF RECORD.
Your use of “Machiavellian” is selective. The term is applicable more or less to any successful politician, but you only use it to demonise ones you dislike for other reasons.
The same tactics by someone you approve of would be “shrewd” or “playing 3D chess”, etc.
I guess you prefer Trump’s tactc of just repeating a dumb lie over and over no matter how easily it is debunked.
November 30th, 2020
…I refer the honourable gentleman to the supreme evasion & prevarication of Hillary’s “What Happened?!” wherein genuine personal responsibility is anything but responsibly embraced. As I explained, don’t look merely to a candidate’s (as it subsequently emerged) empty formula of words in concession, look to their lengthy, expressed testament. Interminably lengthy, as it turned out.
Politics is a complex area - lots of moving parts of which to be aware.
As with all else, there are degrees of Machiavellianism; Hillary & co engineering the Convention, and her use of the dog whistle racial slur “Superpredators” objectively puts her on the extreme end of the spectrum, in a democratic society. You’re not upset by Hillary’s proven deceptions? At all? You’re comfortable with racial slurs & corruption?
Also, you expediently put words in my mouth, and complain about debating etiquette? I chose to try to regard you as a more decent person than that would reveal.
However, do look at what your almost Trumpian levels of evasion & repetition indicate: you are doing anything possible to escape the realisation of the fixing of the Convention, and Hillary’s use of the racial slur “Superpredators” - for which egregious acts Hillary was roundly condemned by the actual Left in her party and country.
It’s tantamount to a fugue state at this juncture.
December 1st, 2020
@caesar SHE ADMITTED SHE LOST.
You just keep stating a blatant falsehood then shift to another subject.
Feel free to paste up another slab of obfuscation that makes you feel superior. Does not change the facts.
######################
Back on topic: the novel this is all supposedly about is actually quite good. Probably would appeal more to the female readers with the aspects of her romantic life, with Bill and others, fictional though it is.
Trump in this timeline never runs for president; he actually supports Hillary and then tries to take credit when she wins against Jeb Bush.
December 1st, 2020
You made that a point of contrived controversy, in order to obfuscate the Machiavellianism - which was established (you specifically asked for it, recall - “Why is Hillary “Machiavellian”, more than any other politician?”). And which you immediately became desperate to avoid addressing.
We both observed Hillary’s concession above - what seems like several weird years ago. We both also observed her associated inability to take full personal responsibility for the loss. Consequently, your insistent repetition of & reference to this factual conjunction is suggestive of nothing so much as significant cerebral trauma.
Hillary is obligated to own her own loss - in her own capacity, unshielded by all of the silly, expedient contrivances & puerile excuses which she actually deployed; just as you are obligated to own the facts of her racial slur, her deceitful Convention rigging, and her repeated, dishonest insistence that her loss was everyone else’s fault, and not her own.
None of that is helpfully equivocal or ambiguous, nor is it intended to be. People should have the guts to take their medicine. Ritualised, slippery evasion will not serve.
December 3rd, 2020
@Caesar: “Hillary & Donald will never admit they lost.”
Still a lie.
You keep trying to redefine the simple words to mean something else. Sorry, no.
If you had actually said her “inability to take full personal responsibility”, I would not argue. How “full” is “full”? Who cares.
At this point, a month after the 2020 election, we can see what a candidate not admitting he lost actually looks like. Yet you expend all your rhetoric on Hillary, for not abasing herself sufficiently 4 years ago WHEN SHE PUBLICLY CONCEDED THE NEXT DAY.
Thus my contempt for your pretension to even-handedness.
December 10th, 2020
Thanks a lot!
December 19th, 2020
Still Machiavellian. Still avoiding the racial slur & convention rigging. Profoundly suspicious at this point, considering they were the justifications which you requested. Mmmmm.
Consequently, I’ll see your facile contempt & raise you hearty disdain.
No need to redefine the non-technical meaning of full (non-abasing) responsibility; it’s simply not blaming every conceivable entity in the local star system for the inexcusable loss to a buffoon. Buffoons all round.
Not admitting Hillary’s distinctly deceitful dissembling and Machiavellian manoeuvrings, is indeed dishonest.
December 22nd, 2020
Still refusing to acknowledge you lied
“Hillary & Donald will never admit they lost.”
She ADMITTED the FACT in 2016.
Meanwhile, Trump today is talking about using the military to retain power.
Every successful politician is “Machiavellian”. Niccolò just codified what politicians everywhere do.
You only use the word to attack Hillary, not because her tactics were in any way unusual, but because of her ideology and gender.
December 22nd, 2020
“Every successful politician is “Machiavellian””?! That’s a revealingly expedient view of humanity. Three of the most successful political figures of the Twentieth Century, Ghandi, MLK & John Hume, led successful political movements in direct opposition to Machiavellian “principles” - they led with the force of sheer moral substance & character.
They did not deploy racial slurs or rig conventions as did your Machiavellian idol (still blatantly ignoring that behaviour. Why not condemn it?). Such conduct is, as I observed, at the objectively extreme end of the spectrum, in a democratic society. Nor did they falsely transfer the blame to everyone else when it was expedient to do so.
Ideology? Not even in your darkly comedic, domestic political framework is your idol on the left (if that’s what you imagine), so “ideology” is unhelpfully ambiguous here.
On the plus side, your actual original objection, that Hillary is Machiavellian - this you finally and fully admit. As this is what started the crazy ball rolling, your admission represents substantive progress. Kudos!
However, your assertion that Hillary was “successful” is unfortunately also demonstrably false. As we already observed, she conceded defeat. In the rest of the world, and everyone else’s reality, Hillary is the catastrophic candidate who ensured the bizarre & avoidable victory of Trump. That fact, at least, cannot be evaded. Hillary is to blame, which is why she tries every possible ruse to deflect that blame onto others (16 targets). Political realities, I fear.
January 3rd, 2021
@caesar: “On the plus side, your actual original objection, that Hillary is Machiavellian - this you finally and fully admit.”
My original objection was you singling her out for this epithet, when the great majority of politicians are at least as “Machiavellian” as she. (Well done, finding a few exceptions, though actually both Gandhi and King were canny political operators if you read their biographies).
And while that ultimately remains a matter of opinion,
“Hillary & Donald will never admit they lost” is still a bare-faced lie.
So you fit in well with your fellow travellers on the Trump Train, no matter you sneer at those in economy class. Just keep repeating the same mendacious BS regardless.
Equating how these dealt with electoral defeat is looking more absurd by the day, as Trump madly schemes to negate the election.
January 9th, 2021
PS, following events at the Capital: for “mad schemes”, substitute “commits violent insurrection, treason and sedition”.
January 9th, 2021
As ever: “Don’t follow leaders, watch your parking meters” - especially if you’re a dead-in-the-wool Trumpsta, or a committed Clintonista (move away from the light!).
But that’s the point, “canny political operators” does not equate to the brutal amorality of a self-serving Machiavel. The campaign was always of the highest moral importance for people like Gandhi and King (& John Hume, Konrad Adenauer, Jean Monnet, Garret FitzGerald, Robert Schuman, Daniel O’Connell, et al) - lest you try to lump them in with the reprehensible Trumps & Clintons of this world. Because that would be another lie.
However, admitting that Hillary was/is Machiavellian is a positive good. “Why is Hillary “Machiavellian”, more than any other politician?” Answer: deploying racial slurs & rigging conventions. Which conduct is at the objectively extreme end of the spectrum, in a democratic society. And falsely transferring the blame to everyone else when it was/is expedient to do so. None of this is objectively “mendacious” - yet another untruth.
You can’t possibly imagine that Trump or Clinton (& Wall St friends) are for the people in economy class? Is that what Sanders, his supporters, and working class voters believed?
January 11th, 2021
“Hillary & Donald will never admit they lost” is still a bare-faced lie.
Your excuses for misogynistic abuse of Hillary shows you are irredeeemable.
January 11th, 2021
“Irredeemable” is clearly a person whose only desperate defence of a person guilty of racial slurs & convention rigging is to mindlessly cry “Misogyny!” Addressing that elephant - even at this bizarrely late stage - might restore a tincture of shamed credibility.
January 14th, 2021
Whataboutism, projection and misogyny.
The right wing trifecta.
And the elephant in the room has been impeached.
“Hillary & Donald will never admit they lost” is still a bare-faced lie.
Add a comment