Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BigBearJohn

(11,410 posts)
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 04:06 AM Feb 2016

HuffPost: Democratic Debate Exposes The Real Divide Between Clinton And Sanders:

He thinks it's possible to change politics. She doesn't.

Sanders’ argument is a lot more inspiring. It promises big changes -- a revolution, literally. It suggests that progressives can realize their goals if they only put in enough effort, and build a coalition large enough to overcome the power of special interests. It’s precisely the kind of message that resonates with idealists, which probably helps explain why Sanders has been such a hit on college campuses and with young voters.

But Sanders’ vision also requires a big leap of faith. While mass movements have changed American politics before -- the Civil Rights movement comes quickly to mind -- it’s taken years and sometimes decades of organizing and fighting. Even then, progress was slow, painful, and disheartening to many of its proponents.

Clinton’s argument, by contrast, isn’t likely to excite anybody. It amounts to saying that the future is limited, rather than limitless -- and that best hope for the next four years is to avoid backtracking, rather making great strides forward. That’s not a lot of comfort to people struggling with tuition or medical bills, or unable to find a good job.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/clinton-sanders-debate_us_56bd67d2e4b0b40245c60e1f

15 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

pat_k

(9,313 posts)
1. Instead of Obama's "Yes We Can!" Hillary's message is "No We Can't!"
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 04:14 AM
Feb 2016
...In stark contrast to Obama’s 2008 campaign slogan “yes we can,” Hillary seems to be telling voters “no we can’t" -- Link to Article on Salon.com


Note: The Salon page doesen't seem to be loading properly, so I've included a good bit of the text below.


February 1, 2016
The big “Hillary realism” lie: Clinton supporters present a false choice — and misread our political moment
Walker Bragman

...Over the past few weeks, media outlets like the Washington Post and the New York Times, as well as the usual talking heads, have been weighing in on the growing split between “idealists” and “realists”; Bernie’s dreamers against Hillary’s pragmatists. This dichotomy presents a false narrative...

Although poll data shows that Bernie Sanders, the Independent senator from Vermont, performs better against the GOP field in a general election than the current Democratic front-runner, according to Real Clear Politics averages; although he draws the biggest crowds of any candidate in the race, and has set the record for most individual donations of any candidate in history; although many voters agree with his message, and trust him, his electability remains a concern among Democrats. Additionally, even if he were to be elected, many worry about the feasibility of his ideas.

Hillary Clinton has been distinguishing herself from the senator by playing up these fears that Sanders, a self-described “Democratic Socialist” is too far removed from ‘politics as usual’ to be a viable candidate...

... In stark contrast to Obama’s 2008 campaign slogan “yes we can,” Hillary seems to be telling voters “no we can’t.” Of course, it might be more accurate to describe her message as “we tried, but couldn’t do it back then, so we can’t do it now—let’s settle.”

Since the ’90s many Democrats have become disheartened and disillusioned as a result of their party’s perceived weakness. Instead of digging their heels in, and preparing for the tough fights ahead, they now resign themselves to limiting their goals such that expectations and hope match only the incremental progress they perceive as feasible. This is dubbed “realism.”...

... the corruption of establishment politics due to the influence of money, as well as the greatest wealth inequality our country has seen since the Gilded Age, are the defining issues of a new realignment. The rigged system is, as Amy Davidson of the New Yorker put it, the meta-issue that encompasses all others; it transcends party lines, ideology, generations, skin color, sexuality and gender...

The reality of politics today is that in order to get even half of what you want, you need to ask for the whole farm. No matter how “reasonable” and “achievable” Clinton’s policies may be on paper, she will still face as much opposition as Bernie Sanders would from Congress. So the real question for voters to decide is which of the two candidates’ watered-down policies they prefer. Bernie’s single-payer system might very well get shot down by the GOP, but we could still end up with a public option from that battle—and that’s the point. We should at least have the debate....

cui bono

(19,926 posts)
4. I don't understand why people say "but it takes a long time", as if Bernie thinks it's going
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 04:40 AM
Feb 2016

to happen overnight.

OWS was 4 years ago. That was the spark, imo. That's already a good amount of time to get to where we are now. We elect Bernie now and then we take over the House and Senate on his coattails. We get a lot of local liberals elected too. It will be amazing. And during Bernie's 8 years in office we will get some great legislation that will really help this country and its people. Then another 8 years for whoever his VP was and we're on the right path for a Newer Deal.

.

MisterP

(23,730 posts)
12. just look how far the REPUBLICANS got: that's why Sanders always jokes about
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 03:31 PM
Feb 2016

being a little to Ike's right--not to position himself but to point out what the well-heeled right has been able to do since the Second Red Scare

SamKnause

(13,108 posts)
5. She seems to be running on protecting the Obama legacy.
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 04:45 AM
Feb 2016

I think that is a strange approach.

Just my 2 cents.

Hydra

(14,459 posts)
13. Not really from an establishment POV
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 12:28 AM
Feb 2016

Getting Obama's support for her campaign is exactly the kind of thing an insider wants to do- and you can see how terrified her team of that becoming irrelevant.

The establishment is not polling well though lately...

dixiegrrrrl

(60,010 posts)
9. 84% of her money comes from BIG contributions.
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 06:51 AM
Feb 2016

Read that somewhere here on DU before I hit the hay last night.

 

billhicks76

(5,082 posts)
7. See Called Black Kids Super Predators.
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 06:05 AM
Feb 2016

Lock em she said. Most racist policies in real time I've seen.Bill Clinton locked up more kids than Bush Sr or Reagan. And supported GW Bush when he broke the record. They are despicable.

intheflow

(28,484 posts)
11. Completely dismisses the fact that some of us HAVE been organizing and fighting for decades.
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 09:35 AM
Feb 2016

Remember the Battle of Seattle? And I was at a protest march in DC in 1996 about the welfare "reform" Clinton signed off on. We had 9/11 Interruptus, but the fight for economic equality never went away, it just went underground and reemerged at the Occupy movement.

Hydra

(14,459 posts)
15. You're right, the fight never stopped
Sat Feb 13, 2016, 12:30 AM
Feb 2016

But now it looks like we may have a vocal majority support from the people we needed to get moving.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»HuffPost: Democratic Deb...