clinton vs. sanders your vote?- Page 123

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/15/16 at 10:34am

SHE was pandering? Gurl. 

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 4/15/16 at 10:37am

Just my opinion, but morality and ideological purity are not one in the same.  Sometimes (again, IMO) the moral decision is to compromise on your ideals for the greater good.  What is the quote... "don't make the perfect be the enemy of the good"?

[madbrian]

Posted: 4/15/16 at 10:54am

"This election is a job audition, not a test for ideological purity."

 

I tend to agree with HRC on this.  A big part of my problem with Bernie and his supporters is that if you're not far enough to the left, you might as well be a Republican.  The last thing the progressive movement needs is the sort of purity test the GOP has.  What's next, calling folks DINO?

[javero]

Posted: 4/15/16 at 11:06am

"The last thing the progressive movement needs is the sort of purity test the GOP has."

I agree.  The reason several Libertarians I know including me are supporting Hillary is because, despite the pox on both houses, she doesn't attempt to claim some sort of moral high ground over the rest of the field on either side.  I'm also comfortable suggesting that were it not for aborted Hillarycare there'd be no Romneycare nor Obamacare of any fashion.  She still displays battle scars from the bruising she took trying to usher in universal health care well ahead of its time in this nation over a decade ago.  And man did the House Select Committee on Benghazi put her through the ringer.  In other words, she's not all talk from afar...she's got skin in the game. 

Updated On: 4/15/16 at 11:06 AM

[South Florida]

Posted: 4/15/16 at 11:57am

He's going to stay in after he gets beat on Tuesday, wish he wouldn't.

[xxdrewboy85xx]

Posted: 4/15/16 at 1:50pm

madbrian said: "What's next, calling folks DINO?

 

"

 

I actually saw a headline yesterday (on Politico I think) that called HRC a DINO. 

 

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/15/16 at 3:29pm

 

It was HuffPost Politics and it was disgusting.

 

[kdogg36]

Posted: 4/15/16 at 4:10pm

The reason several Libertarians I know including me are supporting Hillary is because, despite the pox on both houses, she doesn't attempt to claim some sort of moral high ground over the rest of the field on either side.

I don't doubt you, but, wow, you sure operate in a different circle of libertarians than I do. :)

[javero]

Posted: 4/15/16 at 5:16pm

We're all former blue dog democrats turned libertarians who fought back against a few bullies while growing up.

[xxdrewboy85xx]

Posted: 4/15/16 at 5:33pm

PalJoey said: " 

It was HuffPost Politics and it was disgusting.

 

"

Thanks PJ-- that makes more sense than politico. I'll read Huffpo, but not their political articles and opinions. All the "Bernie Bro's" on my FaceBook are constantly sharing Hillary bashing articles by huffington post and usauncut. I've learned to tune out and scroll past those posts the same way I do to certain posters here without actually blocking them. The ignorance and denial from so many Bernie supporters and journalists/bloggers makes my blood boil. It's starting to come across like the left is splitting the way the GOP has been for 7+ years.

[binau]

Posted: 4/15/16 at 7:12pm

I assume it's because they're tired of a broken political system, a corrupt campaign finance system and the ridiculously slow pace of change in the USA. They are annoyed that America is going to keeping falling further and further behind other western nations with what seems likely to be at least another 8 years of incremental change. They want someone to disrupt the system, and they know the only way to do that is by electing someone who isn't part of the system.

They'd be fools not to vote for Hillary should the time come, though.

 

Updated On: 4/15/16 at 07:12 PM

[HorseTears]

Posted: 4/15/16 at 9:29pm

I'm pleasantly surprised at how measured and reasonable this post-debate conversation has been.  Well done, BWW!

 

A couple of unsolicited takeaways:

 

I agree with the consensus that there was no clear winner or loser and that this debate was unlikely to change minds.  If that is the case, though, that maintenance of the status quo will benefit Hillary and hurt Bernie, so, in a way, she's the potential "winner" of the debate.

 

I liked Dana Bash as a moderator; she asked several tough (but fair) questions and she repeatedly pushed back whenever Hillary or Bernie evaded the questions.  

 

I think Bernie missed a...YUGE opportunity last night to move beyond his stump speech.  If he really wants to reach beyond his base, he needs to get out of the weeds and engage in some more inspiring rhetoric.  More poetry; less prose.  I thought he was about to do just that early in the evening when he touched upon the need to "think bigger".  Yes, it is implied throughout his campaign that Bernie thinks and dreams big and Hillary thinks small, but he never explicitly (nor, inspiringly) gets that message across.  Whether or not you actually agree with that premise, I think it could be an effective communication strategy.  "Yes, Hillary is an intelligent and knowledgeable candidate, but the kind of change she's advocating for is slow, incremental and ineffectual - it's time to think big, to dream big and demand more" etc.  Instead, he droned on with his usual talking points.  

 

In contrast, I thought Hillary's line about it being easy to diagnose the problem, but quite another thing to do something about the problem was effective.  The actual language requires some fine-tuning, but I think she'd be smart to hammer that point home over and over.  

 

 

Bernie got his ass handed to him on guns; even if some of Hillary's assertions were a bit of a stretch.  I was surprised at how unprepared he seemed to be to defend himself on a charge he had to know was coming his way. 

 

Yes, to whomever mentioned Bernie's comments on Palestine.  They were a truly astonishing thing to hear a major Presidential candidate say during a campaign.  Has there ever been a major Dem or Repub candidate, in the heat of a competitive campaign, who publicly called for a balanced approach to the Israeli/Palestinian crisis? I can't think of one.  Even more ballsy to do so in NY.  

 

I thought Hillary rather stupidly painted herself into a corner last night by drawing a comparison between her refusal to release her paid speech transcripts and Bernie's delay on releasing his tax returns.  Bernie's camp very smartly held back his releases so that he would have a chance to fulfill a campaign promise to release them - which he started to do this afternoon.  It allows him to appear more transparent and allows him to contrast his relatively modest means with the Clintons' massive wealth.  When Hillary was asked about releasing the transcripts of her paid speeches, she suggested that she might do that when Bernie got his act together and actually released his tax returns.  Last night, that seemed like a somewhat effective deflection to me.  Today, with Bernie releasing last year's returns as promised and, presumably, more of them on the way in the weeks ahead, she will face even more pressure to release those transcripts.  Have to imagine there's a big internal argument going on over at Hillary HQ as to whether or when to release them.  The longer they stonewall, the wilder the conspiracy theories will get.  But, let's face it, what's most likely is that she said some complimentary things about these institutions - perhaps some of them invested in women's businesses etc. - and she doesn't want those quotes to be taken out of context.  On this one, it felt like she walked right into the Sanders campaign's trap.  

[StageManager2]

Posted: 4/15/16 at 10:39pm

I think Hillary is trying to withhold her transcripts in an effort to get Trump to release his in the general. She's getting so pressured by Bernie she's going to lose her leverage. Thanks Bernie.

 

Trump made 17 speeches for $1.5 million EACH. Wouldn't you like to know what they're about?

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/15/16 at 11:04pm

Actually, no.

[South Florida]

Posted: 4/15/16 at 11:17pm

He's going to lose Tuesday just as he has with the other entrenched Democratic states where Independents cant vote.  It's over, you played the game and you failed Bernie, you lose, your message has been received, time to close ranks.  God is giving us Trump or Cruz, we have to make that real now or else we lose.  Those transcripts are Bernie's last hope, expect him to pound this every day now once his taxes are released.

 

.  

[HorseTears]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 2:05am

StageManager2 said: "I think Hillary is trying to withhold her transcripts in an effort to get Trump to release his in the general. She's getting so pressured by Bernie she's going to lose her leverage. Thanks Bernie.

 

Trump made 17 speeches for $1.5 million EACH. Wouldn't you like to know what they're about?"

 

 

Nah, I don't buy that for a second.  As though there could possibly be anything Trump has said in a paid speech that would be more inflammatory, irresponsible or contradictory than the garbage he has been publicly spewing for a full year now.  

 

The only reasonable assumption is that there is something in Hillary's speeches that - when taken out of context - will inflame the far left purists who are pouring into the Democratic party this election season and reinforce Bernie's (unproven) assertion that she's in bed with Wall Street.  But, I do agree that, at this point, she's held out for so long, she should probably just keep stonewalling until the general.  It's only progressives who care about these speeches.  Moderates in the general election are not going to give a **** about them and, heck, are conservatives gonna be mad if she said something mildly complimentary about a big financial institution?  I don't think so.  

 

I can understand why she's choosing this tactic, but by walking into the Sanders campaign trap of criticizing him for not releasing his tax returns, she's all but invited Bernie to constantly hammer her on this (non) issue for the next several weeks.  

 

Updated On: 4/16/16 at 02:05 AM

[javero]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 2:31am

"Those transcripts are Bernie's last hope, expect him to pound this every day now once his taxes are released."

Let him pound away from the sidelines well out of frame.  I've always regarded the matter of Hillary's speeches as a tempest in a tea pot.  She was a private citizen at the time earning a living which isn't criminal.  The following assertion is probably the height of hubris.  But, if I were Hillary's campaign manager she would have sewn up the nomination by now.

Sanders is one of the least distinguished members of the US Congress after nearly 30 years of alternating between gadfly and seat-filler. There's a reason the Dems in Congress have kept him as far away as possible from the budget, the armed services, homeland security, banking, and foreign relations.  If anything Hillary has played nice at her own expense.

Hope and change worked for candidate Obama because he was fresh-faced with the backing of the Kennedy clan.  Also, he lacked a wafer-thin 30-yr record in Congress that could be used against him.  If you've spent 30 years poking the system in the eye at every turn, fat chance of the system paying you any mind when you attempt to call in a chit that you never earned in the first place.  Everyone knows that DC is a cesspool of politicos, political appointees, political assassins, policy wonks, lobbyists, non-profits with ties to politicos, info-brokers, the DC press corps, and fixers.
 

Updated On: 4/16/16 at 02:31 AM

[South Florida]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 8:43am

The Hillary love in here is nauseating, release the transcripts Wall Street lackey.

 

[javero]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 8:59am

Disclose only what you're required to Hillary...anymore would create an unnecessary distraction.  You're the front-runner for a reason.

ETA: South Florida, my most recent posts have been about Bernie's shortcomings.  To date, you've not been able to fend off the two most damning claims that I've made: (1) his free college plan has no legs to stand on legally, and (2) he's an opportunist whose set of sponsored bills in the House & Senate over the span of 30 yrs is synonymous with "dead in committee".  In short, Bernie's on trial, so defend him!

Updated On: 4/16/16 at 08:59 AM

[South Florida]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 9:32am

I'll answer the first one after I become more informed.  An opportunist who can't get legislation to pass because it's too radical for the people who are supported by big money lobbyists, how is that opportunist? Give it up Clintonites, stop it.  I read in here of the obnoxious Bernie Bros, they're not in here, in here we have an overwhelming amount of people who are willing to accept that Hillary hasn't been late to the game on every moral issue of our time, brought along when the winds of change said it was time.  I'd rather not say any more bad things about her because there are so many and she's about to win the nomination on Tuesday. Go Hillary, thank God we'll probably get Trump or Cruz, because any one else will mop the floor with her. 

[javero]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 9:42am

Unlike you, I'm not bad mouthing my favorite's competition with respect to his character.  I'm simply pointing out the lack of a legal framework within which your favorite could decree free public college for all as POTUS and the paucity of sponsored bills converted to law on his part.  In all fairness, I should point out that in nearly 30 years Bernie has been successful in getting 2 post offices renamed in VT.  His bill/law conversion rate as a legislator is a notch above Rand Paul's on the other side and that ain't saying much.

I'll allow you time to mount a proper defense.

Updated On: 4/16/16 at 09:42 AM

[South Florida]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 10:06am

Yesterday Sanders was in Rome talking to the world about the very same issues he has raised in this campaign, issues that resonate worldwide more than they do here.  I don't think the Vatican cut him a check.  Clinton is at George Clooney's house making some money.  The contrast says it all.

[javero]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 10:17am

There are talkers and there are doers.  I'll make this easier for you South Florida.  Name a signature piece of legislation with nationwide impact sponsored by Sanders that was enacted into law apart from the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2013?

Grandstanding is not leading nor coalition building!!!

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 10:49am

Do we still care about Citizens United?  Or has that gone the way of Wall Street ties, Libya, Honduras, Israel, corporate ownership, insurance company ownership, absurdly late support of gay marriage, "superpredators", "bring them to heel", "We came, we saw, he died", and the no-brainer support of the Iraq war as dismissable bits of inconvenient integrity we are expected to ignore so that Our Lady gets the nomination.

 

https://theintercept.com/2016/04/14/to-protect-clinton-democrats-wage-war-on-their-own-core-citizens-united-argument/

[javero]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 11:16am

Borstalboy,

I will not dispute the corrupting influence of corporate campaign donations post Citizens United v FEC.  But, it's now the law of the land and corporations unfortunately are legal persons.  Until the law is repealed, I'm not inclined to cry foul when a candidate accepts donations from a constituent or supporter.  Last I checked, the effort in the Senate to repeal the law was D.O.A.  See The Senate Tried to Overturn ‘Citizens United’ Today. Guess What Stopped Them?

I have to say though that if Bernie were to exit the Senate and launch a non-profit committed to repealing the law, I'd gladly send him a check.  That's right in his wheelhouse.