clinton vs. sanders your vote? — Page 123

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"?

"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

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



"



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

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. :)

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.

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.

Actually, no.

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

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

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.

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.

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/