clinton vs. sanders your vote?- Page 109

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 12:11pm

Oh, ignore fflag.  It's quite easy.

I meant the Hillary question in earnest.

 

The only things I hate are war, corporate cronyism, and coups that empower dictators and/or apartheid.  I guess these things will destroy me.  Interesting. 

[Auggie27]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 7:26am

Awaiting sides to be taken in the Sanders vs. Clooneys for Clinton debate, swirling in social media. George Clooney threw a fundraiser (for those comfortably able to afford donations), and it has deeply offended Sanders. The Clooneys, Mr. and Mrs., human rights activists both, seem an odd target for the Sanders vitriol. Yes, he's stated that he's only pointing out the donors' wealth as a symbol of what's wrong in campaigns, not trashing the Clooneys , but is this what correcting income equality is about?  Disavowing the simple fact that people in show business can afford a fundraiser?  Not everyone only gives $27. So people who give more are doing something "obscene."? I thought it sounded small and petty. We can all agree that the 1% are by definition elites. But people make money, and some people put it where there mouths are, as the Clooneys often do.  Many funded President Obama thus. Is this an appropriate target?   

Updated On: 3/28/16 at 07:26 AM

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 8:25am

Why Young People Are Right About Hillary Clinton

Listening to the youth vote doesn't always lead to disaster

By Matt Taibbi March 25, 2016


"Young people have repudiated the campaign of Hillary Clinton in overwhelming and historic fashion, with Bernie Sanders winning under-30 voters by consistently absurd margins, as high as 80 to 85 percent in many states. He has done less well with young African-American voters, but even there he's seen some gains as time has gone on. And the energy coming from the pre-middle-aged has little to do with an inability to appreciate political reality.

Instead, the millions of young voters that are rejecting Hillary's campaign this year are making a carefully reasoned, even reluctant calculation about the limits of the insider politics both she and her husband have represented.

For young voters, the foundational issues of our age have been the Iraq invasion, the financial crisis, free trade, mass incarceration, domestic surveillance, police brutality, debt and income inequality, among others.

And to one degree or another, the modern Democratic Party, often including Hillary Clinton personally, has been on the wrong side of virtually all of these issues.

Hillary not only voted for the Iraq War, but offered a succession of ridiculous excuses for her vote. Remember, this was one of the easiest calls ever. A child could see that the Bush administration's fairy tales about WMDs and Iraqi drones spraying poison over the capital (where were they going to launch from, Martha's Vineyard?) were just that, fairy tales.

Yet Hillary voted for the invasion for the same reason many other mainstream Democrats did: They didn't want to be tagged as McGovernite peaceniks. The new Democratic Party refused to be seen as being too antiwar, even at the cost of supporting a wrong one.

As The New Jim Crow author Michelle Alexander noted, America when Bill Clinton left office had the world's highest incarceration rate, with a prison admission rate for black drug inmates that was 23 times 1983 levels. Hillary stumped for that crime bill, adding the Reaganesque observation that inner-city criminals were "super-predators" who needed to be "brought to heel."

You can go on down the line of all these issues. Trade? From NAFTA to the TPP, Hillary and her party cohorts have consistently supported these anti-union free trade agreements, until it became politically inexpedient. Debt? Hillary infamously voted for regressive bankruptcy reform just a few years after privately meeting with Elizabeth Warren and agreeing that such industry-driven efforts to choke off debt relief needed to be stopped."

 

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-young-people-are-right-about-hillary-clinton-20160325#ixzz44CRtyzpe 



 

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 9:24am

Just one of the many responses to Taibbi's bullsh*t article.

 

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/main/2016/3/26/honest-and-unmerciful-an-open-letter-to-matt-taibbi-of-rolling-stone-magazine

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 9:38am

^ Talk about bullsh*t lol. Unmerciful...and stupid.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 9:51am

Oh give me a f*cking break. 

[PalJoey]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 10:14am

 

How about this one then?

 

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/03/matt-taibbi-case-against-hillary-weak

 

[Auggie27]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 10:30am

Response to the Sanders candidacy is loaded with ironies, starting with the obsession with the youth vote.  In a country fairly blind to the systemic ageism in every profession and milieu, this 74 year-old is being touted as having greater resonance, viability and electability because of the street cred provided by these mysterious "millennials," as if their imprimatur signifies either critical progressive evolution or bestows gravitas to Sanders' ideological platform.  Yeah, it's notable and wonderful, a generation unfairly categorized as mere "meh" responders is participating.

But the same people who use this voting block's validation of Sanders also like to dismiss Clinton's embrace by people of color. When she wins in the south, it's been written off as some sort of cultural phenom, she was First Lady of Arkansas, it's "in her narrative." So what?  And may we notice what demographic's corresponding "narrative" is being ignored or worse?  Why is that voting block's fervor so categorically marginalized, while predominately white college students and young adults are suddenly the most astute and savvy of our idealists?  How classist and elitist. If anything, the boomer vote reflects experiential wisdom, a generation that has lived through the immorality of Vietnam, egregious AIDS indifference, decades of  upheaval and countless debacles. Our measured pragmatism doesn't reflect naivete or selling out; it suggests a specific kind of reality check, as far as evaluating fitness for the myriad demands made on a world leader.  The idea that the millennial voter's fervor should be weighted is only another marker in our ageist climate.  Love Bernie, but please stop pretending that "the youth vote" makes him better, cooler, or frankly likely to cause revolution.  And stop patronizing us with all the schooling and shaming about our lesser, or wrong, alternative.    

Updated On: 3/28/16 at 10:30 AM

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 10:36am

[PalJoey]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 10:57am

Well said. Very well said.

[javero]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 1:45pm

Ordinarily, I find Matt Taibbi's articles insightful.  But, that Mar 25 hit piece on Hillary is somewhat sophomoric.  The mythical youth vote alone will not sew up the nomination for Sanders nor will it guarantee victory for the Democrats in the general election.  I understand young adult angst.  But, the rest of us make up a huge chunk of the electorate as well and this is not our first (or second) rodeo.  We've lived through several blistering defeats of the Democrats at the top of the ticket and down ballot alike. 

 

It takes time and experience to learn how to work within any system.  No better example of that is Bernie Sanders who opted to run as a Democrat when it was politically expedient.  To become Mayor of Burlington, he successfully took out a centrist Democrat, running as an outsider.  However, for the much grander stage of White House hopeful, he made a calculated move that would gain him national exposure to facilitate fund raising.  In the simplest terms, he plays it both ways.  As kids in the hood say, player's got major game.  I see you Bernie for your works!

 

ETA: I hadn't scrolled down to Auggie's brilliant rejoinder before my post.  Having done so, I have to add that Auggie totally nailed it.  Some of us have always regarded the Pied Piper of Hamelin as a cautionary tale.

Updated On: 3/28/16 at 01:45 PM

[South Florida]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 3:29pm

You guys are having a tough time admitting Bernie is the better candidate, with better judgement, not untrusted by 65% of the population, has a more vibrant campaign, and is beloved by the "mysterious millennials" throughout the country.  While they don't make up the majority of the Democratic party yet, their time will come.  This is just your first taste.  Thanks for Clinton folks, the only person she can beat is Cruz or Trump, good thing the other side is dumber than we are. 

[javero]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 3:47pm

"While they don't make up the majority of the Democratic party yet, their time will come."

 

They'll gain life experience, possibly get married, possibly have kids, possibly own property, possibly start businesses, possibly have to layoff (or fire) employees, possibly get divorced, possibly have to provide elder care, etc.  And that is when they'll learn that wishes and reality are not the same.  I was under the impression that most folks figure it all out in their 30's but by all appearances there are some 50-somethings among us with latent development.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 3:57pm

 

South Florida--why do so many of your posts sound like they were translated from a foreign language by Google Translate?

 

[mar6411]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 4:36pm

^^

This!!!

 

And great post by Auggie.  Thank you.  I so appreciate how articulate so many of you are.

[South Florida]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 5:02pm

"South Florida--why do so many of your posts sound like they were translated from a foreign language by Google Translate?"

Brevity.

PJ, why are we running a candidate with a 65% untrustworthy resume?  I'm not saying I'm part of that 65%.  I certainly trust her more than any Republican.  But we can elect a trusted guy who dosen't inspire hate.

This story may be irrelevant, but I remember being on one of those marathon lines for the 2008 election, on either sides of me were black voters who were determined to have their Obama votes counted.  I spent a lot of that time trying to convince the voters around me that voting against gay marriage was as discriminatory as voting against the Civil Rights Act.  I doubt I swayed anyone.  I write here to try and convince you guys that Bernie Sanders is the right candidate for everyone, but mostly for poor people who get disenfranchised and have no voice.

 

[StageManager2]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 5:45pm

 Thanks for Clinton folks, the only person she can beat is Cruz or Trump, good thing the other side is dumber than we are. 

 

Sanders hasn't been tested on a national level. Before he ran, almost nobody outside Vermont had ever heard of him. Since then, more people know his name, but he has been free of attacks from either Clinton or the Republicans, who have not missed an opportunity to trash Hillary in the debates (or elsewhere) and have pretty much left Sanders alone, since they don't consider him a threat. Sanders has also been very critical of Hillary, even though he pledged last year to run a clean campaign.  So, Hillary has been constantly under attack by the Republicans for at least a quarter-century, and this year she has been the target of attacks from either side. It's amazing that she's still polling well and leading the Democratic primaries. 

 

Sanders, on the other hand, has benefited from no mud-slinging so far. If he were to get the nomination, his favorable ratings would plummet, because the Republicans would not hold back. They will try every dirty trick in the book, and Sanders would be an easy target to take down. For one, he calls himself a "democratic socialist" and has extolled Communist leaders in the past. (In his tenure, Obama has been accused of being a socialist and socialism has become a dirty word to many Americans.) They will also bring up that he didn't hold a steady job until he was around 40 and didn't accomplish much in the House and Senate. Remember, in 2004, the Republicans managed to discredit Kerry's military record and attacked his subsequent antiwar activities (i.e. swiftboard) despite the fact that Kerry actually served in Vietnam and Bush didn't.

 

In short, Sanders is untarnished... for now, which is why he's polling so well. But it won't remain so if he were to be the Democratic nominee and the Republicans took out the knives and daggers. 

[South Florida]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 5:53pm

"Knives and daggers", certainly there won't won't be any of that with Hillary as the nominee.  You can't be serious.

 

[South Florida]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 5:58pm

Hillary supporters what if Bernie gets the at large vote? 

[StageManager2]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 6:23pm

"Knives and daggers", certainly there won't won't be any of that with Hillary as the nominee.  You can't be serious.

 

Of course, they'll go after her, too, but the difference is that Clinton has 25 years of experience with that. It's old hat to her and she knows how to deal with them. The Republicans have tried every dirty trick to bring her down (more recently Benghazi and the e-mails), but she remains standing. She has managed to become a two-term Senator, Secretary of State, and now the Democratic frontrunner for president despite the mudslinging. We don't know how Sanders would prevail under a similar onslaught. He hasn't faced national scrutiny nor the wrath of the GOP. More likely, his campaign would flounder.

[South Florida]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 6:36pm

I respect your opinion.  I'm wrong a lot, but I love what this guy stands for, and always has stood for.

[Tag]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 6:45pm

As an outsider (Canadian) who has no real stake in this (except for global repercussions!!), I can't understand how Democrats can't see that Trump would wipe the floor with Sanders.  At least Clinton has a chance.  I just don't get it.

[StageManager2]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 7:32pm

Tag, Sanders' supporters (many who are Independent and not registered Democrats) don't care about beating the Republicans as much as their candidate being 'pure.' Also, they think the Democratic Party is in need of an overhaul or outright dismantling. I've heard many of his followers state that the DNC and GOP are one and the same, so unless Sanders (an 'outsider' gets the nomination, the party is not worth saving.

[South Florida]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 7:37pm

Get a grip girls, we're voting for Hillary.

[wonderfulwizard11]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 8:27pm

I truly think either Democratic candidate would wallop Trump. Obviously they would still have to campaign, but a huge coalition of women and people of color loathe the man. One of the big reasons Romney lost is because he lacked support from people of color, and he was never as awful as Trump has been this entire campaign. Even my very Republican father hates Trump and doesn't want to vote for him. Yes, a rabid minority loves him, but I think most Americans are repulsed by him for one reason or another.