Why Hillary Clinton is more progressive than Bernie Sanders, in one sentence

[SecularMotion]

Bernie Sanders attracted a 20,000-person crowd in Boston over the weekend with his uncreative wish list of a platform, in which college would be free for all, Social Security would be expanded for all and medical coverage would be highly subsidized for all — regardless of whether you actually need the help. Hillary Clinton finally pushed back Monday against “progressives” who propose shoveling public benefits at rich and poor alike. One sentence in particular drew a clear distinction between her campaign and Sanders’s:

“I am not in favor of making college free for Donald Trump’s kids,” she said, after explaining that “I’m a little different from those who say free college for everybody.”

She then pitched her college affordability proposal, which would allow students to graduate debt free but wouldn’t end tuition or work requirements. Clinton’s system would be means-tested: Those who can afford to invest in their educations would have to. Sanders’s wouldn’t be.

Sanders’s platform isn’t visionary, it’s dull. Rather than devising smart solutions that target scarce federal resources where they’re most needed, he wants to waste massive amounts of money Congress wouldn’t ever give him — and shouldn’t — to provide benefits to a lot of people who don’t need them. The government already spends astounding amounts subsidizing the housing, education, health care and retirement of the upper and upper-middle classes through tax breaks for mortgage interest, cut-rate student loans, in-state tuition, the tax exemption for employer-provided health-care, universal Medicare and universal Social Security. That’s billions upon billions every year that could go into anti-poverty programs, research or roads without raising taxes. Rather than scaling back this nonprogressive nonsense, Sanders proposes to double down on it — just as the impending retirement of the boomers is straining the social programs we already have and just as the country’s infrastructure requires upgrading.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/10/06/why-hillary-clinton-is-more-progressive-than-bernie-sanders-in-one-sentence/

[TM99]

1. "Clinton seems set on making higher education a means-tested welfare program."

There are a few things to say about this, but to start with, Clinton's example is a straw man. “Hillary Clinton needs to take a good hard look at where people like Trump send their kids to college. They go to private schools,” Sara Goldrick-Rab, a higher education expert at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, told Alternet. Sanders's proposal only offers tuition-free college to students at public universities — everything from the City University of New York to the University of Georgia.

But the greater point here is that Clinton seems set on making higher education a means-tested welfare program. Imagine if someone were to argue that we should only pay for K-12 education or police for children up to a certain income level; for years, progressives have resisted such income caps on programs like Social Security and Medicare, arguing that universality is important as a principle, both in and of itself and for political reasons. After all, wealthier people are much more likely to support programs if they benefit from them as well.

And there are only 500-something billionaires in the United States. If they decided to stop sending their kids to elite private schools and instead opted for sending them to public colleges, we're talking about a handful of families, not exactly a huge drain on the public treasury. Especially when you consider the fact that education is a public investment that pays for itself.

“Free college is about the public sector, and it's very well-targeted to where the need really is. Frankly, if Hillary is knocking free college, then Bernie must be doing something right,” says Goldrick-Rab.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/hillary-clinton-delivers-lame-attack-bernie-sanders-free-college-tuition-plan?akid=13551.319429.ue4LxG&rd=1&src=newsletter1043594&t=2

More progressive my ass! Just the same old neoliberalism wrapped up in a strawman argument. Yes, let's shrink the government down. Billions upon billions every yer on anti-poverty programs... Scale back this nonprogressive nonsense? Doublespeak as usual from the corporate media for a corporate candidate.

I will say it again for emphasis.

More progressive my ass!

[djean111]

2. Exactly!

And I thought that even Hillary has announced that she is more moderate than Bernie.

Really, someone needs to empty the recycle bin.

[TM99]

5. Yes, indeedy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=41&v=LTL767hKxHo

Not only admitting to being a moderate/centrist (i.e. neoliberal!) but also bringing both extremes together (the classic triangulating Third Way rhetoric!).

[Hortensis]

36. The issue is making higher education affordable, not partisan bickering.

I loved our community college system in California. Class tuition so low for residents that you could pay for a semester the way you'd pay for a bag of groceries. No big deal. I'd support that everywhere.

BUT those classes also tended to contain a certain number of students who just allowed their parents to push them there so they could continue playing sports (a lot of those) or put off growing up, getting a job (a whole lot of those). I saw a lot of this because I worked as a tutor for English and economics. Parents were willing to pay quite nicely to get their kids dragged somehow to a passing grade, but I wasn't interested in playing that game. There were plenty of others who wanted to learn.

Give all students free four-year college, and what you'll end up with are campuses and classes overfull and dumbed down by dullards and slackers, to the detriment of all of us, but especially students who want to learn.

I believe -- know! -- society has a powerful interest in a well educated populace, and I support everything needed to accomplish that. But you can't force a thirst for knowledge or even simple ambition in people who don't have them. And even in those who do have some ambition and goals, people tend to value more what they pay for. They will try harder because it's costing them and they will want their return.

I support lowering tuition costs enormously, so even kids working full time at McDonalds can afford them, but no way free four-year college for everyone, regardless of means.

[TM99]

39. I strongly disagree.

Failing students fail. They leave colleges and drop out all of the time. When college is free, the parental factor is removed from that equation even further.

I am all for the European model, especially Germany's, where those students not wanting or capable of higher university studies are still provided a solid education and real job training that leads to apprenticeships and internships. These in turn become real jobs, and there is no shame in being a carpenter or undue glory in being a college professor. All roles are needed in a healthy society, which we are rapidly moving away from.

[Hortensis]

41. I support job training, but trade school's not "college" even if the for-profit

education industry has tried to pump up the "prestige" of certificate programs, along with tuition prices, by calling that college.

I'd say we pretty much agree. I have no real objection to two years of absolutely free college, even though I think even $50 a class would help dropout rates a bit, but I'd pass on giving several months of free education at any level before tossing nonperformers out with application papers for trade school.

[TM99]

46. Perhaps we are not that far off after all.

I want to see two year, four year, and basic trade school trainings being public supported and free for all who qualify or desire it.

I don't know if you teach or not, but I have never seen money alone be a sufficiently strong motivator for learning if a student simply lacks the will and/or desire. Some mature faster than others. Some prefer other types of education or trainings.

We definitely agree on for-profit at least now that it has run amok. The initial ideas almost 30 years ago were not bad. Provide alternatives to traditional college and graduate school education for working adults willing to pay modestly for that option. Unfortunately, the greed took over, and the student loan debts have become ungodly.

[Hortensis]

50. We definitely agree. And it's not that I'm too "cheap" with

taxpayer dollars. Most students would get something out of it and some would come back later when, as you say, they matured. It's mainly the (further) dumbing down of courses and curricula and what that means for those who are there to learn that concerns me.

[dsc]

11. no upper middle class people at Berkeley or UNC or the University of Michigan

or Ohio State or Ole Miss all of which are public universities. I would bet the farm that is a pile of stinking bull shit.

[TM99]

13. Read the whole article.

[MoveIt]

19. Yep, this "opinion" writer just pulled the "Smear Sanders" card.

More Rovian bullshit, attack your opponent's strength (Bernie is a true progressive) with illogic and assert loudly and strongly the complete opposite from the truth. Keep track of who is naughty and nice and remind those journalists where they stand, ominously talking about future access to the candidate, rinse & repeat. Oh and always get approval from huffpo before emailing a smear, those bastards!

-signed David Brock

[Champion Jack]

27. Agreed

[Blue_In_AK]

59. College was virtually free back when I was going to school.

I went to the University of Houston from 1964-68 and paid $50 a semester for tuition (ALL of it, not just per credit hour) and maybe $250 a year for books. I was easily able to pay for it with my summer jobs and only took a full-time after-school job my senior year since I had moved out of my parents' house. My one college-educated daughter, however, graduated from law school back in 2003 and sees no end in sight to her student loan debt. The other two girls lament that they weren't able to complete their educations, but at least they aren't slaves to the banks.

[TM99]

62. My parents knew that reality.

My father's GI bill covered just about every thing and scholarships did the rest all the way through graduate school. My mother went to state schools all they through her Ph.D.

I was on tracking to paying off my very large graduate school student loan debt, and then I got sick. After three years of surgery and chemo, with no payments made during that time, my debt has skyrocketed. I won't have it all paid off until I am pushing eighty years old particularly as I have only been able to work half done with a now chronic condition. But how does one predict in their twenties when taking on such a debt load that in their late 30's they will deal with a medical crisis.

The system is broken, and while relief will likely never come for me, I do not want to see the generations after me suffer anywhere near the same. Sanders has a plan to make that relief a reality.

[Blue_In_AK]

65. My daughter has been healthy and has a good-paying job

as a lawyer for the Directors' Guild in LA, but the cost of living is so extreme down there that, with three kids and the student loans and other debts, they're barely able to make ends meet. My son-in-law has been caring for the kids to cut child-care costs, and two of them are now in school, which is good, so maybe when the little one, who is two now, goes to school and they have two incomes things will look up. But still, you would think that a family wouldn't have to penny-pinch with a lawyer's income.

Honestly, I would hate to be a young person just starting out these days. I know I personally didn't have anything to do with the economic situation that we find ourselves in now, but somewhere along the line, someone dropped the ball. (Thanks, St. Ronnie.).

[Fumesucker]

3. The government also spends astounding amounts on war, something the twit doesn't mention

And they seem very concerned about keeping taxes low.

[CanadaexPat]

4. And the dollar amount will keep dropping - and will end up at, I'm not paying to send

the kids of someone making $50K a year to school for free. Then will come other conditions,like, I'm not sending the kids of drug users to school for free. And so on. Until there's just enough left to claim credit for something,without actually delivering on it.

[frylock]

54. I'm not paying to send some kid to college without them submitting a urinalysis..

for all members of the family. I wonder how many folks here would support that if it was proposed by Hillary?

[dmosh42]

6. Duh!

[BuelahWitch]

7. Isn't Bernie pushing for free tuition for public universities?

The kind no Trump or Bush or Clinton would ever consider? Blogeneer Dude fails to mention this part of it...

[dsc]

8. bush

applied to u of t and jeb went to a public school

[frylock]

55. So let's fuck everyone over to ensure that doesn't happen..

isn't that the winger attitude about welfare programs?

[leftofcool]

9. Good. I don't want to send Trump's kid to college either.

[LondonReign2]

22. How about grade school?

Should we hold your taxes back to only fund "non-wealthy" kids' schooling? Should the wealthy then hold THEIR taxes back and not subsidize your children? Should we, in effect, end public schools all together since you don't want to share your dollars?

[leftofcool]

24. Public education is free, college is not.

And no, I do not want my taxes paying for some wealthy C average frat boy to go to college free. I know lots of kids working their way through college. We did. Our kids did with a bit of help for books from us, our grand daughters will as well. You act as though working for something is a crime against humanity. And by the way, I already pay a ton of taxes for public education. That is what most of my property taxes go for.

[LondonReign2]

28. Yes, and that is what Bernie is proposing we change

Why is it ok for you to pay taxes for the wealthy kid to go to public grade school, middle school, and high school, but not college? Do you want to stop paying taxes for that? If a wealthy person chooses to send their kid to a private school, should they be able to withhold the taxes that pay for your kid's public education?

Do you realize that public universities already receive some of your tax dollars, and those dollars are used for the education of the wealthy kids that go there? Do you want to stop paying those tax dollars as well?

>You act as though working for something is a crime against humanity
No, but if you want to make up stupid shit and make believe I said it I can't stop you

[leftofcool]

33. Wealthy kids do not go to our public schools, period!

I am so sorry but I am not keen on the idea of paying more taxes out of my social security check or my teachers retirement for kids to go to college free. If you can get the money from the rich folks offshore tax havens, go ahead, send them free. But, I have done my part and did so for 50 years of work. No thanks.

[LondonReign2]

34. No wealthy kids go to public schools? LMAO

Hilarious that you are so partisan that you ignore reality because it would conflict with your candidate's position. Further, you seem to have no idea how Sanders is proposing to fund this. HINT: No additional taxes come out of your social security or retirement checks. But I know you won't let inconvenient facts like that get in the way of your argument.

You also failed to answer: should your current taxes be withheld from public universities because you don't want them being spent on "wealthy" kids? And if wealthy kids don't go to public schools, why should their taxes go to support those schools?

"No new taxes", where have we heard that before?

[leftofcool]

35. I can assure you that no wealthy kids go to school in our county.

The median income here is about 32K. And if you believe that Bernie will tax the rich to pay for free college I have some swampland in Arizona to sell you. Every time there is a tax increase it falls on the back of the middle class and you know it. So, don't tell me that additional taxes don't come out of my retirement. I know better.

[LondonReign2]

37. SMH. I can see why you are a Hillary supporter

1) Do you know what median, be definition, means?
2) Do you know that there are other counties in the country?
3) Do you know the proposed funding mechanism for Bernie's plan? (Apparently not if you are still convinced it comes out of social security and retirement checks)
4) You haven't answered a third time: should you withhold your taxes that currently go to public universities?
5) You also haven't answered: if the wealthy aren't sending their kids to public schools, do you think it would be OK for them not to have to pay the taxes to support those public schools?
6) You haven't answered: why is it OK to have taxes pay for grade school, middle school, and high school, but not university?

[leftofcool]

48. Yes, I am a Hillary supporter.

[LondonReign2]

53. Yes. Yes, indeed.

Both your answers and your non-answers in this thread make clear why.

[AgingAmerican]

64. Taxing the rich = taxing the poor?

Only a right winger would actually believe something so silly.

[TM99]

30. The Libertarian argument I thought I would never see here!

Well, I do not want my taxes paying for bank bailouts or the droning of a hospital in Afghanistan.

Yeah, we wouldn't want that wealthy C average frat boy to get a free college education now would we? How about the C average black kid who is getting a basketball scholarship?

And you bet, work is extremely important. Food stamps and all welfare should have work requirements and drug testing requirements. And it should be limited to only those who really can't work. It doesn't matter if they are trying to work or if the work they have doesn't pay enough for their family to eat. Arbeit mach Frei, nicht wahr?.

Jesus, no wonder you want Clinton. You are a neoliberal supply side, welfare reforming, social libertarian with enough wealth obviously to whine about how you want your taxes to be paid and for what!

[LondonReign2]

38. They twist themselves into pretzels trying to defend Clinton, in defiance of all logic

The same ones making the Libertarian arguments will turn around and screech "Rand Paul" at you without the slightest bit of self awareness.

[TM99]

40. No shit!

It is mind boggling at times.

But bluntly what it is is conservatism. We hear these same arguments constantly from the Right about not wanting their taxes to pay for welfare or pension plans or education or whatever. This is the neoliberalism that has been allowed to infect the Democratic Party. It is sad and well nigh time that it is removed.

[LondonReign2]

42. Exactly right

It is the identical argument you hear from Republicans who don't want their taxes to go to "those people".

In this case I think it is a position based on partisanship rather than conviction. If Hillary were to once again "evolve" and agree with Bernie's plan, these posters would injure themselves in the rush to reverse field and agree with her.

[frylock]

56. Trump would be paying more taxes so that his kids to go to school for "free"

[One of the 99]

10. Article is unfair analysis

of Bernie's policies.

[99Forever]

12. Like that dickhead's or any other .01%ers kids are going to a public school.

Hillary's "gotcha" is more proof that she is still as tone deaf as ever.

Here's your card SecularMotion:

FAIL

[restorefreedom]

14. +1000 nt

[kelliekat44]

25. You might be surprised to learn that quite a few children of 1% attend public universities and colli

Some do not have stellar academic records and have to go where they can be accepted.

[azmom]

29. Legacy students get in regardless of

SAT scores

[99Forever]

31. And because "some of the 1%" MIGHT also ...

....get some benefit from this, its okay with you and Hillary that MILLIONS of regilar Americans sysrt life under a mountain of debt? How very fucking "progressive" of you.

And btw, how difficult was it for The Idoit Son to get into an Ivy League university.

Alsp, I said the .01% NOT the 1%. Pay attention to ehich eords you try to put in my mouth.

[Fumesucker]

15. I'll take "Longest sentence in the English language" for $100 Alex

[Le Taz Hot]

16. . . .

LOL! I opened up the thread expecting to read another variation of "Bernie is a poopie head."

[MoveIt]

17. eager opnion writer pulls the "smear sanders" card

more meaningless drivel. Calling a program that's already working in europe, ie. making sure college is free for all, is more progressive than anything Hillary has ever done, or will ever propose.

Period.

This Rovian bullshit where her elite supporters in the media take potshots at policies that somehow work in europe.... this shows American Exceptionalism at its worst, working as designed. fuck the neoliberals, fuck bipartisanship.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

43. +1 n/t

[NorthCarolina]

18. Who believes this crap? eom

[LondonReign2]

23. Everyone at hillarycheerleaders.com

Critical thinking isn't important to the people that vote on personality.

[HooptieWagon]

57. That's pretty much it.

It's the political equivilent of a Justin Beiber fan club. How dare those meanie Hendrix fans claim the Beeb sucks!

[kacekwl]

20. Trumps kids would never be

seen in a community college.

[TheKentuckian]

21. No, means testing is more worried someone "undeserving" will get something Republicanism.

You stupid fuck Sanders is actually willing to tax the 1% to pay for it so if some pitiful tiny number also take advantage then so be it.

The stupid fuck being the writer. If one happens to agree with the writer too bad so sad stop chasing elephant dung and various forms of turd to the right.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

26. The author doesn't like Bernie..or environmentasts.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/09/22/why-hillary-clintons-keystone-xl-decision-is-a-bad-call/

Hillary Clinton came out against the Keystone XL oil pipeline on Tuesday, reversing previous indications that she favored approving the project and blatantly pandering to misguided environmentalists. Clinton called the pipeline “a distraction to the important work we have to do on climate change” that “interferes with our ability to move forward with all the other issues.”

“I don’t think it’s in the best interests of what we need to do to combat climate change,” she concluded.

It’s important to note what Clinton did not say. She did not say that the pipeline would significantly increase carbon dioxide emissions. She did not say that it would significantly undercut President Obama’s climate policies. She did not say that Keystone XL would be “game over for the climate,” nor did she repeat any of the other rank hyperbole that activists have deployed in the pipeline fight.

Clinton is unquestionably a serious decision-maker. But on every score Levi described, she’s made the wrong choice. U.S. politics hardly need more base-oriented pandering. If she were president, moreover, Clinton’s opposition would hardly help cultivate cooperation on trade and cross-border regulation with Canada. And the opposition would undermine the notion that countries should treat each other’s companies fairly, according to predictable regulatory procedures rather than the fickle fancies of politically influential domestic constituencies.

[riversedge]

32. I suggest you all read her plan . Link...

If not so already.


https://www.hillaryclinton.com/p/briefing/factsheets/2015/08/10/college-compact-costs/

[Maedhros]

44. This writer must be either deeply ignorant, or incredibly dishonest, to suggest that Hillary

is a Progressive.

The facts just do not bear that out.

[Armstead]

45. PLEASE READ this thread by Prtlander for a rebuttal to this nonsense

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251653583

[Jester Messiah]

47. Doesn't pass the laugh test.

Also: brevity is the soul of wit.

[Broward]

49. This is the most absurd editorial I've read in a while.

[floriduck]

51. Umm, that's two sentences.

“I am not in favor of making college free for Donald Trump’s kids,” she said, after explaining that “I’m a little different from those who say free college for everybody.” Just FYI for future reference.

[frylock]

52. Why Hillary Clinton isn't more progressive than Bernie Sanders, in one word..

policies. This is fucking pathetic, and it's the same rationale that wingers use to deprive people of welfare benefits.

[INdemo]

58. The guy that wrote this OP (Stephen Stromberg) in this WP article

is probably not old enough to have voted in that many elections or observe that many national elections to actually define in his own words what a liberal politician is.

How could someone that is financed with the majority of her funding from Wall St. and corporate PACs really be defined as a liberal?

I suppose you could call her a Southerner because when she went to South Carolina gave a couple speeches using that phony Southern accent.

Hillary by her own definition is a moderate politician. She just recently tried to take up some liberal issues since her closet rival Bernie Sanders was closing the gap on her poll numbers.

Now we shall see after the Iowa Caucus how "liberal" she is. In the mean time she might try and come across as a liberal but she will only go as far with he "liberal" sounding speeches as her corporate sponsors allow her to.

[nolabels]

60. Don't Delude yourself

I remember back in 08 another person saying a lot things and making promises that were only playing to the crowd and never meant to happen.

If your wish was for a Dalmatian puppy you would you go out buy a parrot that was painted up and sounded like one ?

[INdemo]

61. So you think Hillary is a liberal?

[nolabels]

66. What I am trying to point out that all them will espose views and plans that might not be possible..

(at least at some point in the campaign wooing) Some might believe what they have to say and the candidate might even believe it themselves. The important part to recognize is that you cannot go from zero to million miles a second at the snap of a finger. The idea is we would believe what they say without question and that is what needs to change

[INdemo]

69. Yep I understand now.

FDR was really a Republican and Hoover was misunderstood.Hoover was actually a progressive

[AgingAmerican]

63. She isn't a progressive, she is a 'Moderate'

'Moderate' is to the right of 'Progressive'.

Her, 'People are poor because they are lazy', college plan is insulting to everyone but the wealthy.

[Zorra]

68. Hillary is more progressive than Bernie?