HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Hillary backing out of De...

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:42 PM

Hillary backing out of Debate PROVES she'll back out on her Progressive policies.

After all, what else does she have to gain?
She won't gain anything if she leans left.
Neither will the lobbyist or corporations that donate to her.

**I'm talking about her AS President.. not Running. For president. What would she GAIN AS President?**

90 replies, 6289 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 90 replies Author Time Post
Reply Hillary backing out of Debate PROVES she'll back out on her Progressive policies. (Original post)
Joob May 2016 OP
MariaThinks May 2016 #1
RobertEarl May 2016 #18
Arneoker May 2016 #37
RobertEarl May 2016 #40
Arneoker May 2016 #66
RobertEarl May 2016 #71
Baobab May 2016 #83
JDPriestly May 2016 #56
MyNameGoesHere May 2016 #63
JDPriestly May 2016 #64
Arneoker May 2016 #69
JDPriestly May 2016 #72
MyNameGoesHere May 2016 #87
George II May 2016 #50
CorporatistNation May 2016 #82
Thinkingabout May 2016 #2
Cali_Democrat May 2016 #4
Thinkingabout May 2016 #55
workinclasszero May 2016 #45
Thinkingabout May 2016 #58
Chezboo May 2016 #68
Thinkingabout May 2016 #75
Chezboo May 2016 #79
restorefreedom May 2016 #74
JDPriestly May 2016 #59
TimPlo May 2016 #85
Thinkingabout May 2016 #86
eggman67 May 2016 #88
NurseJackie May 2016 #3
Tal Vez May 2016 #5
Jester Messiah May 2016 #14
Tal Vez May 2016 #21
Jester Messiah May 2016 #25
Tal Vez May 2016 #36
JDPriestly May 2016 #61
Tal Vez May 2016 #65
Arneoker May 2016 #41
annavictorious May 2016 #54
rhett o rick May 2016 #31
JDPriestly May 2016 #60
Andy823 May 2016 #6
Joob May 2016 #12
Cheese Sandwich May 2016 #7
Mnpaul May 2016 #32
JaneyVee May 2016 #8
rhett o rick May 2016 #38
snowy owl May 2016 #44
anotherproletariat May 2016 #9
nc4bo May 2016 #15
anotherproletariat May 2016 #23
nc4bo May 2016 #27
snowy owl May 2016 #47
fasttense May 2016 #10
randome May 2016 #11
Jester Messiah May 2016 #29
rhett o rick May 2016 #39
Arneoker May 2016 #48
highprincipleswork May 2016 #13
Joob May 2016 #16
highprincipleswork May 2016 #22
rhett o rick May 2016 #53
stillwaiting May 2016 #17
oasis May 2016 #19
Joob May 2016 #20
oasis May 2016 #26
annavictorious May 2016 #24
tularetom May 2016 #33
annavictorious May 2016 #46
yolla331 May 2016 #81
Dem2 May 2016 #28
FarPoint May 2016 #30
Maedhros May 2016 #34
annavictorious May 2016 #49
kstewart33 May 2016 #35
George II May 2016 #42
annavictorious May 2016 #52
SidDithers May 2016 #43
pnwmom May 2016 #51
bigwillq May 2016 #57
oldandhappy May 2016 #62
LAS14 May 2016 #67
99Forever May 2016 #70
litlbilly May 2016 #73
BillZBubb May 2016 #76
Demsrule86 May 2016 #77
HassleCat May 2016 #78
Joob May 2016 #80
riderinthestorm May 2016 #84
B Calm May 2016 #89
John Poet May 2016 #90

Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:44 PM

1. hardly

It means she wants to stop wasting time and go take on trump

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MariaThinks (Reply #1)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:59 PM

18. That's not true at all

 

She is afraid of Bernie. Bernie is about to smoke her in California and she always been ducking debates because she is so afraid of the truth that make come out while she's talking.

Besides that she is showing great disrespect for the voters, again. Not a winning combination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #18)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:25 PM

37. On the other hand, there's the saying

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Quite honestly, making whether to debate or not an issue is typically the mark of a loser.

There have already been nine debates. Both of them are giving speeches and making their case. Bernie is hardly forced to wear a muzzle that can only come off when there's a debate.

I think most people in California will make their decisions based on the issues and their perception on who would be best for them and the country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arneoker (Reply #37)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:30 PM

40. Right

 

Screw educating people. To hell with the voters and telling them what the facts are. Hiding is a proven successful way to keep voters stupid. Bush proved it and the media does an excellent job of hiding truths. Why go against what works so well and keeps the 1% on top?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #40)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:15 PM

66. So basically you have no hope of accomplishing anything?

Hate to tell you, but nobody's going to do it for you!

Yes, there is a lot to overcome. There's always been. If you can help advance things a bit, then you've done a lot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arneoker (Reply #66)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:24 PM

71. Right

 

Hillary is not going to do it for me.

As far as I can tell she is only doing it for herself.

Unlike me, who has never gained a dime from my involvement, Hillary has become super rich.

And now she is hiding!

If she were even on DU she'd get smacked down so hard it would make heads spin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #71)

Tue May 24, 2016, 09:13 PM

83. Mrs. Clinton is hardly a progressive

She's far right on military issues and she's center right on social issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arneoker (Reply #37)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:44 PM

56. I'm in California. We want a debate.

Hillary's voters tend to be uninformed.

The types who think about who they will vote for just days or hours before going to the polls, the types who can't tell you why they will vote for her.

So if she debates, her voters might pay attention and decide they prefer Bernie.

That's why she doesn't want to debate in California.

She does not want her voters to be informed as to who she really is and what she really stands for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #56)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:53 PM

63. Hillary's voters tend to be uninformed.

Sanders voters tend to be assholes. Is that fair?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MyNameGoesHere (Reply #63)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:58 PM

64. Proud to be an informed asshole to Hillary. Thank you.

If you knew me, you would understand that I am an extremely inoffensive person. I always take joy in the small victory in assertiveness that a nasty epithet, especially a vulgar one provides me. I don't swear myself, and I don't use crude words.

I remember the first time someone called me a word for women that starts with "b." I was in my late 40s I think, and I was so delighted that someone actually thought I was that obnoxious.

So thanks for making my day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #64)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:24 PM

69. IMHO

I am very much informed. I certainly have been wrong more than a few times. But I do think that I have been right about things too. One thing I think that I am right about is that people don't like to be called uninformed. Now if people REVEAL themselves to be uninformed, I don't hesitate in calling them such. But besides that, or if they truly reveal themselves to be indecent, I think people deserve the courtesy of respect for expressing disagreement.

I do think that the media, with a few exceptions, has done a terrible job of informing people. But even so, somehow people know things. I think I know things. I daresay you think you know things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arneoker (Reply #69)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:37 PM

72. I respect people who disagree with me. I don't respect people who vote and can't say

why they are voting for the candidate they vote for. If a person votes, that person has a responsibility, a duty to inform him- or herself and be able to explain why they are voting as they are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #64)

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:21 AM

87. Inoffensive?

You passive aggressively called most Clinton supporters ignorant. You're not as inoffensive as you think you are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #18)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:37 PM

50. She's not afraid of Sanders nor is he going to "smoke" her in California.

There have been about 10 debates, and they've been the same boring rant about "Wall Street", "corrupt campaign finance system", "rigged economy", "rigged primaries" (note he uses rigged to describe more than one of his "issues"

She's not showing the voters any disrespect. Were there supposed to be 57 debates? That's how many states and territories will have held primaries/caucuses by mid-June.

If what she's been doing is "not a winning combination", what would you call the combination of her opponent? Remember, she's slaughtering him in popular votes, pledged delegates, and superdelegates.

One would think what she's been doing IS a winning combination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MariaThinks (Reply #1)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:55 PM

82. baloney! Hillary Cannot Be trusted As Far As You Could Throw Her! She Cannot Tell You With A

straight face... what she had for breakfast! She is a compulsive pathological LIAR!

Reference Material Below!





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:44 PM

2. What debate did she back out ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #2)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:45 PM

4. A Fox News debate.

 

Hillary should be applauded for avoiding that clusterfuck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #4)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:43 PM

55. She did not back out, she declined the invitation, some people needs to know the difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #2)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:32 PM

45. A fox news set-up

 

Bernie wasted all his supporters money, spending it like a drunken sailor so he's desperate for free publicity.

Along comes the devil Fox and offers a debate where their boy Trump and broke ass Bernie can gang up on Hillary for 2 hours or so.

Hillary being a smart person and knowing shes got the nomination locked up, turned them down because its GE time now.

Yay Hillary!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to workinclasszero (Reply #45)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:45 PM

58. Some does not know the difference in declining an invitation and backing out, backing out means she

agreed to the debate and then changed her mind. Just more wrong talking points.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #58)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:22 PM

68. She agreed in February to a debate/forum in CA before our June 7 primary.

She now declined. That is backing out. We're good enough to fill her coffers with cash several times a year, but not to have debate about what is important to Californian's? Seriously? There's a reason why her favorables are in the toilet, and she keeps proving it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chezboo (Reply #68)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:50 PM

75. Good for Sanders, he hasn't won a debate yet and to subject him to more embarassment is not good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #75)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:02 PM

79. No defense, so deflect.

Such a predictable response from a Clinton supporter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #58)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:48 PM

74. she did agree to one in may

back when she was desperate to debate before nh

bernie honored his end of the bargain. too bad she can't do the same....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to workinclasszero (Reply #45)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:47 PM

59. She agreed to debate in California.

Now she is breaking her word.

And then her supporters wonder why we Bernie supporters don't trust her.

It's pretty clear.

I'm in California. I want a California debate and a California primary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #2)

Tue May 24, 2016, 09:23 PM

85. Back in start of the primary the DNC

 

Only had 6 debates on the books because DWS and DNC did not want more in this election because to have more debates would give free exposure to Sanders. Clinton already had enough exposure that she was at a 80% advantage at start of primaries over Sanders. We come to Iowa and it was a toss up which shocked the hell out of her camp, she lost the 80 points over 4 months to Sanders. They decided they need a debate before NH so in a deal with Sanders they promised x number of debates with at least 1 in May before CA primary. So now she is backing out of this deal because it is to her advantage now. So that shows a lack of honesty in a candidate that people should not take as OK.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TimPlo (Reply #85)

Tue May 24, 2016, 09:44 PM

86. Lack of honesty, now in the name of honesty, Sanders has not won one debate, he

knows he is not going to be able to advance himself. Hillary did not accept the FOX invitation for a debate, its over.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TimPlo (Reply #85)

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:34 AM

88. Yes, but in fairness...

that's only 'cause she's dishonest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:45 PM

3. Oh brother!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:46 PM

5. "She won't gain anything if she leans left." That is debatable. A more certain fact is

that we won't gain anything if she loses. So, she does need a sensible strategy to win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tal Vez (Reply #5)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:52 PM

14. I take the long view.

 

If she loses a message will be sent: Fuck over the progressive wing at your peril. If this message is heeded, the effect will be better candidates and policies in successive elections.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jester Messiah (Reply #14)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:05 PM

21. I like that. I wish I could tell you how many Republicans I heard say just that.

In 2008, they said, "If we stay home and don't vote for McCain, the party will have to give us a real conservative next time.'

And, the next time, they got Romney. Then it was "If we stay home and we don't vote for Romney, the party will have to give us a real conservative next time."

And, the next time, they got Trump.

How long is your long view?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tal Vez (Reply #21)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:08 PM

25. As long as it takes.

 

Either the demo come around or the progressives get a new party. Either way works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jester Messiah (Reply #25)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:25 PM

36. Yeah, these parties, they just come and go.

The Democratic party might go back to the 1820's, but the Republicans were formed to replace the Whigs - why, it was just a bit more than 150 years ago.

Seems like only yesterday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tal Vez (Reply #36)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:49 PM

61. But the parties changed viewpoints.

I remember my grandmother telling me that she was a Democrat. She said she had been a Republican (probably during the time right after Teddy Roosevelt and up to Hoover, but that the Republican Party had left her, so now she was a Democrat, an FDR Democrat, I might add.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #61)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:06 PM

65. Yes, the parties do change over time.

When I was younger, the Democratic party was extremely divided. Part of the party was leading the charge to repeal the worst segregation laws imaginable and another very important part of the party was promising "segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." The losers became Republicans very soon after a Southern Democrat signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Certainly things change within parties over time, but they actually change more quickly when a party is on a winning streak. FDR's New Deal was a product of major electoral successes. LBJ's Great Society began during a year (1964) when the Democrats were in the process of winning with a huge majority.

It's been my experience that if you want the Democratic Party to change, then you should help them to win and the larger the majority, the better. When a party loses, it often becomes more cautious. I can think of a few exceptions (Goldwater, McGovern and Trump), but usually the parties respond to losses by moving closer to the center.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jester Messiah (Reply #25)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:30 PM

41. Works for what?

In Europe there are all kinds of parties. Are those countries paradises? My impression is that the more progressive countries over there have less parties, and the rise of new parties has marked at least as much as a turn to the extreme Right as any kind of progressive turn.

Now I acknowledge that is not a slam dunk argument against a new party. You could make an argument that you build one up over a long period of time. But it is hardly the magic bullet a lot of people seem to think.

You have answer the question, why reinvent the wheel?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jester Messiah (Reply #25)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:42 PM

54. I think progressives should get a new party.

 

But that's hard work, and Sanders has proven the point that you can exploit an established party's organization when you choose to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jester Messiah (Reply #14)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:15 PM

31. Obama sent that message on his inauguration day. It is obvious that the Conservative/

 

Corporatist Wing of our Party doesn't like progressives. How many progressives did appoint?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jester Messiah (Reply #14)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:47 PM

60. Interesting. I hope she is paying attention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:46 PM

6. More right wing BS

Don't you and your gang get tired of helping republicans by spreading their BS day in and day out?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Andy823 (Reply #6)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:51 PM

12. I'm not helping republicans Hillary is, hell she get's their donations

Her word is meaningless.
"I'll release the transcript of my speeches when my opponents do"
no...speeches from her opponents now.. Where are those speeches?

Oh I forgot, her word is meaningless

She said she'd debate Bernie, even in the past vs Obama said, should always debate Anytime , Anywhere.

But oh.. I forgot her word is meaningless.

When should we take HER words seriously? When does it matter what she says?

What I get from her... is that it doesn't matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:47 PM

7. Her word means nothing.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #7)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:16 PM

32. and she has the nerve

to blame Sanders for her bad poll numbers

Look in a mirror. Quit blaming others and own it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:47 PM

8. Shes doing Bernie a favor after shellacking him in all previous debates.

 

I think shes looking to not run up the score. Kinda like a mercy rule thing.

Bernie fans would just get more mad seeing Bernie go down in flamez again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #8)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:25 PM

38. LOL, running away from a fight and then saying you are doing the other person a favor.

 

She wants to start leaning to the right and she can't do that with Sander pressing her from the left.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #38)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:32 PM

44. The more she debates, the more her duplicity will show. She's pandering as is.

Otherwise why all the two-front memes? Nothing authentic about her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:47 PM

9. Or it proves that she is too smart to debate on FOX, in a race that she has already won.

 

The goal of the party at this point should be establishing unity to take to the general election. Any situation, such as a debate, that brings up more animosity is a bad idea at this point in an already contentious race. Time to stop the bickering.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to anotherproletariat (Reply #9)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:55 PM

15. Obama was never ever afraid of Fox. He out foxed THEM.

However I do agree it takes a special kinda gonads and a strong conviction in what one believes to go into the lion's den and not everyone is cut out for it.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nc4bo (Reply #15)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:05 PM

23. By all means, Bernie is free to go on FOX for a one on one interview.

 

We would all be interested to see either:

Them building him up, showing that the repubs think he is the easier candidate for them to beat.

OR

Them bringing up all those hard questions that would lose him the general election, knowing that a majority of Americans are against big tax hikes, socialism, atheism and a healthcare program that they see as far more liberal than Obamacare. They could also bring up many items from his past...everything from his sex-fantasy writing of the '70s, his honeymoon to the USSR, visiting and praising Cuba, going to Nicaragua and meeting with the Sandinista leader, and on and on.

Either way I will watch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to anotherproletariat (Reply #23)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:09 PM

27. Lol I doubt it. Sanders had no baggage compared to you know who.

I don't blame her for wanting to avoid at all costs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to anotherproletariat (Reply #23)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:34 PM

47. Which all goes to show his authenticity. Given all, he was never a Goldwater Girl.

Bernie always on left: socialist, social democrat, democrat but never a republican.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:50 PM

10. Yeah, she'll embrace globalism and trickle down economics

 

So fast it will make your head spin. They can write anything they want in the party plaform but, much like Obama's platform, 80% of it will be ignored.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:50 PM

11. And all your post PROVES is that you are still unwilling to work as part of a team.

 

Just like Sanders. Maybe all you non-team players could, like, form your own...never mind.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #11)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:10 PM

29. Ok.

 

(Cue the howling how Trump is our fault.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #11)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:30 PM

39. No one has asked us to "work as a team". We've been disparaged by the Conservative Wing for

 

years and now they are demanding we sell our souls. The Conservatives have disenfranchised us over and over and told us they don't need our working "as part of a team."

Sanders is a better candidate to defeat Trump but some decided that they hated the Left sooo much they'd rather chance losing the general than nominate a progressive.

As far as starting our own party, bullcrap, the Democratic Party is our Party and the DLC/Third Way/Corporatists must be driven out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #39)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:34 PM

48. Why don't you concentrate more on building

Than getting revenge? If the Sanders people had some clout then they would find a lot of people would be listening. But you have to organize and strategize, not just demand what you think is your due.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:52 PM

13. You know what she'll gain if she leans Left or continues Left as she has been in the primaries?

 

She'll gain as many Bernie supporters and people who like his message of all types.

She's gain credibility for staying true to her word.

She'll gain the best available platform for going up against Donald Trump, politician of the hour and of the people till proven otherwise.

She'll gain a separation from Bill Clinton's administration, which is really what she needs if she wants to be the politician of this hour and of the People as expressed today.

There's more, but there's quite a lot to gain.

Nothing but old habits the other way. At least for her role as representative of the Democratic Party.

What she has to gain from going right is all her collusion with Wall Street and so forth.

I'm not naive enough to think that isn't a large incentive, although a wholly dishonest and reprehensible one. In my opinion, she can
1. stay as Progressive as the primaries or even take it further or 2. she can go backwards to the right, very possibly lose the GE, of if she wins become the ultimate Wall Street tool.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to highprincipleswork (Reply #13)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:55 PM

16. I understand what she gains "running" for president.. BUT AS president?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Reply #16)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:05 PM

22. She gets a legacy. From what I read of the country, I don't think that the country or history are

 

going to be impressed by a DLC Democrat. She could, of course, just have the reputation of being the first woman President, as Barack is the first Black President. That is, if she wins the nomination and wins the GE, highly questionable in my opinion with a regressive campaign. I can already see the attack ads, and feel the lack of defense from the Democratic side.

Personally, I think even Bill Clinton would have done better during impeachment proceedings if Democrats in some part didn't feel he had sold them out. Obama I think could have done better if he hadn't alienated Progressives at most turns. It's hard to vehemently and ardently support someone who keeps sticking their thumb in your eye.

And Hillary, at this stage, at this moment in history. Yes, I think she could become not only the first woman President, but a woman FDR, as popular as he was. And to do that as a separate person very different from Bill, running a much more solidly Progressive campaign and more solidly Progressive administration. C'mon ladies, particularly Progressive minded ladies - wouldn't you enjoy the Hilary who could do this?

I know there's enough ambition in Hillary to take this course, and run with it. I just don't know if her political calculations plus her ambition can lead her in this direction, especially when the money on the other side is so damn tempting!!!!

That's truly the Hillary dilemma, in my opinion. Greatness or money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to highprincipleswork (Reply #13)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:42 PM

53. She is done leaning left. She doesn't need the Left if she can steal voters from the Right.

 

In fact a voter from the Right is worth more to her by a lot than a voter from the Left. Many on the Left will vote for her with their noses plugged. So if she leans left she would only pick up a few as some will vote for her anywayz. But if she steals a vote from Trump that's one less for him and one more for her.

She will start leaning right very soon. That's why it's important to her for Bernie to drop out. Frack that stuff, go Bernie go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:55 PM

17. Wall Street believes that as well.

I really do not think they would have lavished so much money on her if they believed otherwise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:00 PM

19. Fox News moderators with biased debate agenda, Smart move. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oasis (Reply #19)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:02 PM

20. You do release this is for the nominee in the general election right? It would further prove who

could repel attacks on them. And I'm pretty sure they'll be debates on fox in the GE

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Reply #20)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:08 PM

26. No need to expose herself to a right wing ambush since she

already has the nomination locked up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:07 PM

24. The race is over.

 

It's unwise to indulge Sanders's delusions on a public stage. It would only serve to legitimatize his bizarre claims to a nomination he didn't win and he didn't earn.

Sanders had a major debate opportunity in NY, and he left quite an impression here.

His debate pre-game included a rally during which one of his surrogates (a formerly respected health care activist) called Democrats "corporate whores" to the cheers of a crowd that couldn't actually vote in the primary because they had never registered with the party that Sanders was exploiting.

Sanders's debate strategy was to be as peevish, sneering, and nasty as possible. Sanders was left with egg on his face when he couldn't support his virulently negative claims about Clinton with actual facts.

Immediately after the debate, Sanders whisked family and friends off on a chartered Delta 767 jet for a whirlwind 36 hour European junket during which he had a pretend meeting with the Pope.

Sanders wouldn't have needed a California debate for exposure if he hadn't blown through the $210,000,000 in donations that supporters (apparently from all corners of the world) entrusted him with.

I's not on Clinton to dig Sanders out of the very deep hole that he dug himself into. He's got until June 7 to get himself out. Enough with his ridiculous entitlement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to annavictorious (Reply #24)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:18 PM

33. Wow, you seem like such a happy cheerful person

I'll bet you're a hoot at parties

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tularetom (Reply #33)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:32 PM

46. Actually, I'm a very observant person.

 

and certainly cheerful about the outcome in NY. It felt a lot like vindication.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to annavictorious (Reply #46)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:23 PM

81. Are you sure?

 

Vindication for whom? For anyone who could not change their registration six months before the NY primaries?

Or the 128,000 Brooklyn Democrats that were purged? Care to answer that one for me?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:10 PM

28. I like eggs.

I looooooove eggs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:14 PM

30. The message is clear..

Bernie and his Fox and Friends were trying to use Hillary for attention and public leverage... Truthfully, Bernie is below Hillary on the national scale ....he needs to appear equal, which he is not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:20 PM

34. Was there ever any question as to whether she would renege on her campaign promises?

 

It's what Democratic candidates DO: pretend to be on the liberals' side, then govern from the right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #34)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:36 PM

49. Sanders reneged on his promise

 

to run a clean and positive campaign.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:20 PM

35. Hillary's backing out because there's no sense is debating a loser.

Her focus is on Trump, not a lost cause.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:31 PM

42. How could she back out of something she was never in in the first place?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #42)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:38 PM

52. I think reality and rules are different when the

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:32 PM

43. Hillary is the presumptive nominee...

Bernie is the presumptive loser.

What's the point in having another debate, when the outcome of the primary race has been decided?

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:38 PM

51. No network besides Fox has offered and no Democratic debates have been held there for 12 years.

For good reason.

But she knows she's won. She's got a lot better use of her time than having another repetitive, predictable debate. Every other Town hall and Debate has been nationally televised. Californians who were interested could have been watching them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:45 PM

57. Makes no sense for her to debate. There were too many debates already, imo.

 

Seen one, seen them all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:52 PM

62. no surprise

she is a right-leaning centrist

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:17 PM

67. She NEVER agreed to a Fox debate, and...

... would be less qualified as president if she had been stupid enough to agree to a couple of hours "questions" based on discounted smears.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:24 PM

70. If her lips are moving and sound is coming out...

... it's almost certain Hillary is lying.

Lying is a Clinton default setting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:46 PM

73. 72 replys and i can see 8. the shills must be out in force today. total panic mode i would guess

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:59 PM

76. Of course she will. Hillary always does what's best for Hillary, no matter what she has said.

Her word means nothing. This is just the latest example.

She's the most dishonest Democratic presumptive nominee in my lifetime--very much like a republican.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:00 PM

77. Oh I don't know

Maybe re-election?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:00 PM

78. It doesn't prove anything like that.

 

It proves she feels more debating would not be to her advantage, and she can win the nomination without debating, so it's an easy choice. It does not prove she will welch on her progressive promises when she becomes president. Yes, I believe she will do exactly that, and she will have exactly zero progressive accomplishments when she gets primaried by a real progressive in 2020, but it's not connected to the debates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HassleCat (Reply #78)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:13 PM

80. It proves she'll do things to her advantage. Regardless of promises.

And if it's her "advantage" as president to NOT progess on progressive Ideas. She'll do it.

I think it does proves that because of what she's said and done in the past

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 09:16 PM

84. Just another lie by Hillary. .. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:36 AM

89. Too me it shows she is a coward.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Joob (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:28 AM

90. Hillary's word is worth NOTHING.

 

Nada. Zilch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread