2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWait... do people here actually think Sanders or Warren *feel* the way they do about HRC?
People seriously think that?
Oh my God that's hilarious. I had no idea the projection had gone that far.
No, neither Sanders nor Warren think Hillary Clinton is a crook, nor a tool of the "banksters" (neither of them would use a silly made-up word like that to begin with), nor that she would be a bad President. Either would serve as her VP if asked.
My God, people: this is a partisan primary; it is not an auto de fe. Sanders is saying the stuff he needs to say to maximize his chance of getting the nomination (and you're falling for it; which is fine, he's good at this, which is why I'm voting for him). Bernie is not your spirit animal here to defend the noble American people from evils of the political process.
Do not mistake your emotions with political realities. That's politics 101.
Journeyman
(15,001 posts)oh08dem
(339 posts)Nor do I think Drumpf believes the majority of what he says about Mrs. Clinton either, after all they were friends not too long ago (and probably still are).
Recursion
(56,582 posts)A moderate to conservative one, sure, but one that you could see Jim Webb or Evan Bayh or somebody running on.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)KKK. He's a Butterball Turkey of hate. Doesn't belong in a discussion.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)dchill
(38,324 posts)The RNC has more. It's not November yet.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)But I'm not going to bank on that.
dchill
(38,324 posts)The endorsements of KKK and Jeff Sessions are NOT the cap feathers he thinks they are.
platitudipus
(64 posts)I've always suspected they put him up to running in order to cause chaos in the Republican party and then drop out at the appropriate time. He wouldn't (and hasn't) need to spend much money since he wasn't serious in the first place, plus the payback in favors the Clintons would owe him would be priceless.
But no one counted on his ratings going up the more buffoonish he acted, he even tried to piss off the Pope for F's sake!
I think what started out as a political favor (in true Trump grandiose style), may have taken on a life of it's own. Even 'The Donald' couldn't have predicted 6 months ago he would still be in this thing. Maybe now that he might be able to pull it off, he has changed his mind and will play it out all the way to the end.
One things for sure - The man is never what he seems, and he's certainly not an idiot, he just likes to come across as one.
GeorgeGist
(25,294 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)He supports universal healthcare, a wealth surtax, planned parenthood, and strengthening the social safety net while pulling back from free trade.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Oh, that is right you don't. So this post is simply flamebait. By all means, carry on.
radical noodle
(7,990 posts)Elizabeth Warren said it herself. For a group of people that relate to 1964 so often, you seen to forget things that have happened much more recently.
"All of the women Democratic women I should say of the Senate urged Hillary Clinton to run, and I hope she does. Hillary is terrific," Warren said during an interview broadcast Sunday on ABC's "This Week," noting that she was one of several senators to sign a letter urging Clinton to run in 2016.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2014/04/27/elizabeth-warren-i-hope-hillary-clinton-runs-for-president/
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)radical noodle
(7,990 posts)Or are you saying she joined others in asking Hillary to run, AND that she said Hillary was great but that was all a lie?
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)or the multitude of mistakes she has made since.
radical noodle
(7,990 posts)You cannot logically claim she didn't say it. She wanted Hillary to run for President. She said Hillary is terrific. There's nothing here to argue about as it's undeniable.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)attempting to change the frame of the conversation.
I never claimed she didn't say anything. I simply posted something else she has posted.
Nor, do I care what she says. I know Hillary is not wonderful, she is a liar that voted for the IWR and is responsible for a myriad of other terrible policies that have damaged the country. She will not get my vote no matter what anybody says. Truth is truth.
Tortmaster
(382 posts)Donald Trump thanks you.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)a corner. I'll survive, I survived Dubya's 2 terms. Too bad the planet won't.
Trump and Hillary will get along just fine. They always have.
dchill
(38,324 posts)artislife
(9,497 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)the horrendous choice they made. Glad I won't be one of them.
agracie
(950 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)Why do you think he wouldn't?
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)Like I said he's much better at this than I thought he would be, which is why I'm voting for him.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)What special legislative power does Biden have as VP, that he didn't have as a Senator (besides a tie-breaking vote)?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)They have fallen out of favor lately but procedurally it's a very powerful position, and if anybody would use it it would be Sanders.
artislife
(9,497 posts)And he wouldn't run again until 2024? He will not be here then.
Oh ...and the policies issues. They have some real differences on so many. Pay attention, please.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Like what? I can think of Glass-Steagall (Clinton would rather do the firewall through FDIC rather than legislation), but then again Sanders and Warren both like Clinton's financial regulation proposal.
artislife
(9,497 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)What are some actual policy questions the two disagree on? I mentioned how Sanders wants to reinstate a law preventing retail banks from operating proprietary desks (this is sometimes glossed as "keep banks from gambling with your money" when in fact Glass Steagall kept them from gambling with their own money). That law would also keep investment banks from offering retail accounts, but AFAIK none of them do. In contrast, Clinton wants to use FDIC regulations rather than legislation to enforce that separation, and is frankly much harder on the shadow banking system (mostly large insurers) than Sanders is (though I'd imagine Sanders agrees on those points and just doesn't talk about it much because it's less rhetorically effective).
There's also guns; Sanders is more skeptical of gun control than Clinton is (I am too).
What's another issue they disagree on?
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)way to advance her own image among anti gay faith groups. She did that for years on end. Bernie has never done any such thing.
Some people believe that LGBT are 'different' and mistreating us is somehow not the same as mistreating real persons like themselves, but they are incorrect.
kerry-is-my-prez
(8,133 posts)He is a person, just like the rest of us.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)artislife
(9,497 posts)But he is the best out of the two.
kerry-is-my-prez
(8,133 posts)Yes, we forget there are many reasonable and logical people out there.
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)Whether Bernie is just being gracious or if he hates her. I hate her. I am not Bernie.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)Again and again. I don't want anything g to do with her.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
dchill
(38,324 posts)ThePhilosopher04
(1,732 posts)nm
artislife
(9,497 posts)RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Bernie has said as much - that H is a tool.
Warren, if she liked H would endorse her. She hasn't.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)Passing that, as a separate Part 2 of my reply: Wait....you actually imagine you know what Sanders and Warren think?
Cool. I'm not always even sure what I think, let alone the thoughts of someone whom I've never met and whose life experiences are very different from mine.
Do not mistake your emotions with political realities.
And don't mistake your emotions for the ability to read the minds of politicians, either.
Sorry, Recursion, your entire OP is, um, imaginative and nonsensical. Whether I agree with you or not, you are usually so much more sensible than this OP.
angrychair
(8,594 posts)"No, neither Sanders nor Warren think Hillary Clinton is a crook, nor a tool of the "banksters" (neither of them would use a silly made-up word like that to begin with), nor that she would be a bad President. Either would serve as her VP if asked"
I promise you they do.
Sanders has held back to play nice, that is very obvious, yet he is unequivocally demanding the release of transcripts from her multimillion dollar speeches. He has challenged her as bought and corrupt for taking in millions from criminals like Goldman Sachs.
Warren has indirectly taken back-handed comments that are poorly veiled comments directed at HRC.
The fact that they are playing nice should not be misconstrued as acceptance.
At the same time, don't misunderstand what is going on here. We are not following Sanders or Warren's lead, they are not following our lead. We share a common cause and are following the same path but we are not depending on them to see it through nor are they depending on us. We don't "hate" anybody. It's not about hate. Its about a rigged economy and no longer being forced to choose between the lesser of two evils.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)It's a comedy.
SamKnause
(13,043 posts)I do not think Bernie thinks Hillary has good judgment.
I do not think Bernie thinks that Hillary's policies will be good for the U.S.
or for the majority of its people.
He may like her as a person, but I don't think he is very fond of her
as a politician and he doesn't want her to be president.
YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)I think Hillary supporters put their fingers in their ears and blinders on: they don't want to know the truth. You are seeing a whole different Hillary right now, thanks to Bernie pushing her to take a more progressive stance on so many issues. It's all rhetoric. No, I don't trust her either.
highprincipleswork
(3,111 posts)betsuni
(25,138 posts)I have one of those "your newspaper" homepages, headlines from the sites I frequent. Most are normal news headlines, but when I see "Would you trust Hillary not to HAND over American sovereignty to BIG corporations before starting WWIII???" or "THE IGNORANCE OF EVERYONE EXCEPT ME ABOUT EVERYTHING IS APPALLING!!!!!!" or "Is Hillary a compulsive LIAR? Just asking an INNOCENT question" and the like, I know exactly where they come from. Embarrassing, the hysteria.
What a day for an auto de fe!
mhatrw
(10,786 posts)Just wondering ...
Recursion
(56,582 posts)She's consistently voted the most admired woman in America. I think she'd be a marginally better President than Senator Sanders, but I think her electoral path in the general is slightly more fraught (not that I'm ecstatic about either candidate). She was a great Senator and SecState.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)in trustworthiness and "cares about people like me"????
Recursion
(56,582 posts)I mean, it's pretty clear they don't, isn't it?
retrowire
(10,345 posts)thats enough to make it clear to you?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)She always wins it (maybe Oprah won a couple of times) and has for over a decade.
4 states have voted so far, and she's won three of them. Democrats overall prefer her for the nomination by about 20 points or so (55/35 was the last average I saw). I disagree with them but I at least acknowledge that she is in fact the preference of the majority of the party.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)This is quite a bit down from her 2012 peak of 21% naming her as most admired. The top 5 are Hillary, Malala, Oprah, Mrs Obama and Carly Fiorino....Palin in #11 with 1%, down from her personal best of 15%.
Among men It's Obama at #1 at 17% followed by a tie for #2 with Trump and the Pope each pulling 5%. Then Bernie and Bill Gates.
It's such an arbitrary list and all that really seems to count is the trend lines.....
mhatrw
(10,786 posts)Sorry, I was thinking about people who know them personally.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)One of my wife's friends was on her line detail at State and absolutely adores her.
mhatrw
(10,786 posts)The Clintons are true masters of political patronage.
That is what I sincerely respect the most about them. They know how to work the pay-to-play system we currently have better than anyone.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)though Bernie wouldn't use the terminology that Hillary is a "tool" of Wall st, he certainly does feel that she is indebted to them.
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)What people feel - and what they say, are often very different. Also, there is often a difference between what people feel and what people think.
What makes you so certain Sanders isn't exactly who he says he is - and isn't going to do his absolute best to do exactly what he's promising? What exactly are we "falling for"? The notion that we can get things done? The hope for real change? Are we being suckered by the guy who practices what he preaches? Who has represented and fought for core democratic principles his whole life?
As for serving as her VP - Clinton would not choose Sanders for obvious reasons, but here's one of them: He would not get along with her friends.
You underestimate Sanders - and you insult the intelligence of people who believe deeply in him. I frankly don't give a damn what he thinks about Clinton, or how he feels about Clinton, that's his business. I care about what he can do for his Country - and what we can do for it, and for ourselves, with the aid of progressive leadership.
All of this "pretty pony/magical unicorn/etc" bull shit is just that - bull shit. For the sake of argument, let's say that it's possible that there are actually intelligent people supporting Sanders and working for his campaign. For the sake of argument, let's say that these people understand that change requires hard work, that the things we want aren't going to be just given to us on a silver platter. For the sake of argument, let's say that Bernie is exactly what he seems to be - a decent man with a great deal of integrity - and compassion.
I'm sure there were a whole lot of people who believed we could never walk on the moon. I'm sure there were people who believed that public education was an impossibility, that democracy was an impossibility, that many great things accomplished throughout our history were just too hard, couldn't be done. We did them anyway - and we're going to keep on doing them.
Painting Bernie as a politician who is making up shit to con us into voting for him is ridiculous - which is what your post seems to be attempting to do. You're voting for him because you believe he's a good con artist? Really? How supportive.
Our emotions are the best damn thing about being human. They encourage us, inspire us, move us forward. Passion and compassion change the world every day - you would never have a single good or great thing about our race without them. What do you think inspires art, music, poetry? I suppose it's possible that you dislike these things, but in the event that you don't? Don't be so quick to dismiss emotions, they become political realities.
I'll march on the strength of my emotions over your notion of "political reality" any day.
snort
(2,334 posts)mikehiggins
(5,614 posts)First, recursion, the idea that Sanders is saying what he needs to get the nomination, then he must have started running for President twenty five years ago or so. There are ample numbers of his speeches and talks posted all over the Internet that make it clear that he has been preaching the same sermon since, well, forever. You can compare that with HRC's consistent wanderings if you want but please spare yourself the effort.
Second, there are 48 states and territories still to go, as it happens and there is one thing about the Super Tuesday states that you should keep in mind. How many of them have establishment Democratic candidates carried since, oh, let's say LBJ? How will that effect the GE? Well, electoral college votes are awarded by states, not general population. So, lets say HRC takes Texas in the primary. Odds are the Texas electoral votes are going to the GOPuke candidate regardless. Just saying...
Third, the media and pundits and surrogates claim that without a massive bunch of victories the Sanders campaign will have to lick it's wounds and slink away into the desert. Well, anytime a campaign can be beaten like we were in South Carolina (and I won't bore you with yet another litany of the advantages HRC had going into that State) and then raise forty million dollars while doing it, it just doesn't seem that there is any reason for us to give up until the Convention.
But fourth, and finally, there are a sizeable number of older Sanders supporters who see THIS election as an Alamo moment, that is, losing the election is akin to losing the nation. That may seem like hyperbole to people who haven't been paying attention to the Third Way's drive to the Right and the rise of the arrogant oligarchy (they always were scum but now that they own the media they can be a lot more blatant) but to a lot of us old timers it is anything but.
The old question was what kind of government do we have? A republic, the founding fathers said, if you can keep it. A lot of us feel Sanders is our last, best chance at doing that. So, see you at the convention.
tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)that HRC lives in a washington/wall st world where she see nothing wrong with taking large sums of money for herself, her campaign and her foundation from the same entities that are significantly damaging our democracy, economy, society, and environment. that she does not believe there is anything wrong with this and it does not have any impact on her judgement simply illustrates the boundaries of the playing field on which HRC operates.
so yes, i believe Bernie and Liz agree with me on this assesment
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)a politician you have actively promoted take to the podium and denigrate their families in the name of God and country.
I don't think you know how they feel, nor how I feel.
You should do an experiment in which you talk about how YOU feel. The whole 'let's gossip and denigrate those we don't agree with' routine comes from something in you. The need to preach about the flaws you see in all those others, who are so very much the other. What drives that? Now that's an OP I would find interesting. Straight men preaching about how flawed others are, boring!!!!!