clinton vs. sanders your vote?- Page 141

[theaterdrew]

Posted: 5/26/16 at 9:56am

Oh for heaven's sake, it will be nothing more than political spectacle, with people tuning in to see who is the first one to blow their top.  Trump is an idiot savant when it comes to finding people's triggers.  What you'll have is a man who got into the race to focus on issues and who asserted he was above all the political shenanigans being dragged into the worst display in modern political history.  His fans need to take a step back and realize this is all to his ultimate disrespect.

[South Florida]

Posted: 5/26/16 at 10:17am

The Sanders/Trump debate sounds like good fodder for an SNL skit.

 

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 5/26/16 at 10:59am

Not really.  I think its a great idea.  Countdown to the Baroness of Blood flip-flopping on a California debate in 5...4...3...2...

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 5/26/16 at 12:20pm

I couldn't care less about Clinton's email. But the coverage has been damning.

I honestly think there is one Democrat Trump could beat and it's Clinton.

Morning Joe this morning was brutal.

http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/i-think-it-really-hurts-clinton-email-woes-693268547749

[madbrian]

Posted: 5/26/16 at 12:29pm

The coverage may be damning, but the actual report really isn't.  Morning Joe has no credibility whatsoever; they've been bolstering Trump for a year now.  When their panel of political experts includes Donny Deutsch, are you really going to listen to them?

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 5/26/16 at 12:32pm

With the issues facing this country and the real and present danger of a Trump presidency - voters will decide the future over e-mails?   I think not! 

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 5/26/16 at 12:48pm

I don't think people give a damn about the report, but it does inevitably underline the fact that voters really don't trust Clinton.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/26/16 at 2:25pm

Not true. So far, more voters voted for Hillary than Bernie. Three million and counting.

[South Florida]

Posted: 5/26/16 at 5:32pm

Forget it Borstal, these are not reasonable times.  There are hyperventilating Clintonites, who keep repeating their mantra over and over again.  Forget everything you've heard or read about Clinton, she has 3 million more votes, so any inclination you have that she may be unpopular is nonsense.  It dosen't exist, a myth.

[binau]

Posted: 5/26/16 at 6:45pm

I am not trying to be antagonist at all (just discussing the issues presented in this thread) - but based on actual evidence (i.e., polling) it's hard to deny that Hillary has issues with her perception of being trustworthy/honest, and it's hard to deny Hillary has issues with her general favourability ratings (if you search google, there are probably dozens of articles on this subject, and tens and tens of polls). 

The reason she has received 3 million more votes than Sanders is probably not because she is perceived as more honest/trustworthy by a representative general population, but in my opinion for a variety of reasons such as 1. She is perceived as a better candidate/more experienced despite her flaws; 2. Many people probably prefer her policies to Sanders; 3. She is much more well known than Sanders; and/or 4. The people who think she is untrustworthy may not be voting in a primary election.

 

Updated On: 5/26/16 at 06:45 PM

[South Florida]

Posted: 5/26/16 at 6:55pm

And for some mystifying reason she has the black vote.

 

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 5/26/16 at 7:39pm

I guess they finally came to heel.

[South Florida]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 7:51pm

I was rereading this thread a little.  It seems obvious no convictions have been changed.  Bernie should withdraw.  We lost, deal.

 

 

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 8:38pm

Watch your whitesplaining.

So now Trump has played Bernie for a fool--ageeeing to debate him, then saying he won't debate the loser. Trump is a schmuck and Bernie is a putz.

[HorseTears]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 8:44pm

SF, pull it together, man.  This isn't last call at the Rusty Anchor.  I have a feeling that Bernie's going to surprise a lot of people and wind his campaign down in late June with a very optimistic note for the future of progressive politics in this country.  

 

I don't know if this got posted back in April, but I figured a few of you might enjoy reading it, too.  Whenever some of my diehard Bernie friends ask why progressives should support Hillary (other than her being the first female POTUS and her being the only alternative to Trump), I've been posting this piece.  I had some reservations about Hillary, too, but I'm with her now.  

 

"A Progressive Case for Clinton
I am a progressive, I like Hillary Clinton and I do not feel remotely conflicted about that.
by Sady Doyle | InTheTimes.com | April 6, 2016

In In These Times' Hillary vs. Bernie roundtable last July—oh, what a faraway, innocent time July was—I was aware that I was making nice rather than making my case. My reticence was due to a fear that I voiced at the end of the conversation: that “Sanders vs. Clinton will become ugly, and we’re going to get to the finish line unable to get behind the nominee, and then I am going to wake up one day and Ted Cruz will be president.”

Now, the ugliness has arrived. So here comes my full-throated case for Hillary Clinton for president of the United States.

When I hear claims about Hillary Clinton, the money-grubbing shill for Wall Street who thinks just like a Republican, I don’t recognize the woman who once snapped at her husband for not fighting hard enough for universal healthcare, telling him, “You weren’t elected to do Wall Street economics.”

READ FULL PIECE HERE."

 

Updated On: 5/27/16 at 08:44 PM

[binau]

Posted: 5/27/16 at 11:24pm

So disappointing that Trump backed out! Maybe he will change his mind again. I wonder if he'd want more preparation to rehearse his counter-arguments, talking points etc. though. Oh well, a Clinton vs Trump debate would be almost as exciting.  

RE: that article above, it seems easy to recognise "money-grubbing shrill for Wall Street" (their language, not mine) with Elizabeth Warren's discussion of Hillary Clinton below: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12mJ-U76nfg

I also think the article spends far too long talking about gender biases. I don't doubt that sexism might have fed into some of her unpopularity and perception of dishonesty. But where does that article address that Clinton has flip flopped on so many of her policy positions? Where does the article address that Clinton wants to reform campaign finance systems while at the same time taking advantage of this system? Where does the article address that Clinton has tried to construe DOMA as being pro gay marriage while years ago told an audience she has had a chance to 'defend' traditional marriage? Where does the article address that Clinton proclaimed she was landing under 'sniper fire' time and time again until videos showed otherwise?

Is it possible that events such as these could help feed a perception that she is dishonest? (or at least, misguided). 

Hillary is without doubt a better candidate than Trump (particularly because of her policy positions) and I'm sure she will do wonderful things in her presidency. But I don't think she deserves a 'free pass' or the perception of dishonesty explained away in terms of sexism.

It has surprised me that her record does not appear to be a deal breaker for many of her supporters. But I guess she has indeed done a lot of good work and had a lot of valuable experience (she was Secretary of State!). Plus, she is articulate and seems very intelligent. I can see how all these qualities would be appealing.

Updated On: 5/27/16 at 11:24 PM

[HorseTears]

Posted: 5/28/16 at 1:45am

qol - I wasn't suggesting that one random blog post was an answer to all of the criticisms Hillary faces. It was certainly not comprehensive nor all inclusive.  I just thought it was a good starting point for those who are starting to ask that question: "why should I, as a progressive, support Hillary?"  

[madbrian]

Posted: 5/28/16 at 5:01am

HorseTears said: "I just thought it was a good starting point for those who are starting to ask that question: "why should I, as a progressive, support Hillary?" 

Trump

 

[HorseTears]

Posted: 5/28/16 at 5:08am

mb - think you missed my prior post.  I've seen a lot of folks recently pose that question with this qualifier:

 

"Tell me why, as a progressive, I should support Hillary, aside from the fact that she's not Trump and that she'd be the first female POTUS."  

 

I thought that blog post did a nice job of starting that conversation.  That's all.  

[madbrian]

Posted: 5/28/16 at 6:04am

Hopefully, that point will be driven home once Sanders suspends his campaign, and Warren can turn her focus to pro-Clinton rhetoric instead of only anti-Trump.  Of course, she's very good at the latter, but her oratory skills can go a long way in making a case for Clinton, too.

[HorseTears]

Posted: 5/28/16 at 6:17am

Yes!  I can't wait to see Warren's full rhetorical power unleashed in the general.

 

BTW, I wonder if Debbie WS's support of predatory payday lending practices will cause Warren to follow Sanders' suit and endorse Tim Canova in Florida.  

[madbrian]

Posted: 5/28/16 at 6:19am

By the way, Rachel Maddow reported last night that the Sanders campaign is demanding that Gov Malloy and Barney Frank be bumped from their committee positions, and are threatening to use procedural tactics to stall the convention if they don't get their way.

While I don't agree with their assertions, I know the Sanders campaign feels victimized, but they already got a major concession with representation on the platform committee, and now they just seem even more unreasonable.

[madbrian]

Posted: 5/28/16 at 6:26am

With respect to Canova versus DWS, that's an uphill battle.  I believe Sanders only got 31% of the vote in her district.  And I don't know if Warren is going to get into the middle of this fight.  She has stayed out of it so far.  I think Dem resources are better used to unseat Republicans rather than ousting Dems who don't pass a purity test, or offend Sanders.  Republicans call that "Cantoring," so will Dems call it "Wasserman-Schultzing"?

Updated On: 5/28/16 at 06:26 AM

[South Florida]

Posted: 5/28/16 at 6:52am

This Canova thing is strange.  He gets money from all over the country because of how much Schultz is hated.  What he spends it on is a mystery.  I live in this district, you're not going to get the rank and file out to the primary to vote for her.  Primary day is for haters and thankfully this absurd woman will lose.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/28/16 at 1:39pm

Sanders really screwed over some longstanding leaders of the HIV-activist community, finally meeting with them after postponing several times, then issuing a press release claiming they were supporting a measure he;'s behind, despite their reservations about it,

Then, when they objected, the Sanders campaign resorted to character assassination.