Sharpening Contrast with Clinton, Sanders Touts Bold Positions in Tough Times

[UglyGreed]

'When the going gets tough, when leadership was needed, I was there,' Bernie Sanders tells Rachel Maddow

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/10/27/sharpening-contrast-clinton-sanders-touts-bold-positions-tough-times

[Agschmid]

1. Lol...

Except for gay marriage where "it just wasn't the time"...

C'mon don't make it so easy.

ETA: YES Hillary sucked at this issue, I am aware.

[kenfrequed]

8. Oh really?

Last edited Wed Oct 28, 2015, 12:44 PM - Edit history (1)

Were there a lot of congressmen more progressive on this issue than Bernie Sanders at that particular time?

[Agschmid]

9. But apparently "it wasn't the right time"

Yet he was always there is what I'm told.

C'mon... It's going to be great in the next cycle when we have the potential to have a candidate who really did fight for marriage equality.

We don't right now.

ETA: I'm going offline for a while, so I'll get back to your response later.

[kenfrequed]

14. Post the source

I want you to post the source of that comment in full context.

[Armstead]

10. I get confused by all the mixed messages. Is practuicality better than principles? Or vice versa?

On one hand, Sanders is criticized as an unrealistic ideologue who doesn't know how to use politics to advance solutions in the real world. We need a pragmatic problem solver like Clinton who knows how to compromise, shuft positions for politcal purposes, and is smart enough to understand when it's time to "keep the powder dry."

But whenever there is evidence that Sanders uses politics to advance solutions, takes a pragmatic approach or counsels to "keep tge powder dry" on an issue, suddenly he's a two-faced hypocrite who sells out his principles. When Clinton backtracks or sidesteps oin an issue, it;s an indication of how smart and effective she is.

This place is like Alice in Wonderland sometimes.

[DanTex]

12. It is very confusing. Apparently shouting about single payer and free college and a bunch

of other things that are never going to happen is great, but when it comes to gay marriage or guns, everyone needs to calm down and really think about what's politically feasible.

Somehow Bernie supporters actually believe both of those things at the same time.

[Armstead]

13. You believe it is impossible to have any form of single payer?

You believe it is impossible to expand the mandate for free public education upwards?

If you think those things are a bad idea, and should not be fought for, then we have nothing to talk about.

I don't think any of those things are mutually exclusive.If you think Sanders wants to gut gun control laws and never achieve any progress you are just plain wrong.

I don't give a rats ass whether you think Clinton is better at accomplishing things. That's a matter of opinion.

But don't mischaracterize stuff.

[DanTex]

2. Except when it comes to guns. There he touts weak positions and the toning down of rhetoric.

[AgingAmerican]

20. What 'weak positions' does he 'tout' on guns?

[leftofcool]

4. Except on guns.

[Agschmid]

6. I'm saddened that you don't have a come back for me...

I expect a well reasoned come back up thread.

[AgingAmerican]

19. There is nothing wrong with Sanders positions on guns

He supported every measure in Obama's gun control package after Sandy Hook.

[NCTraveler]

11. Really?

People really don't get how close a pathway to citizenship was to passing in 07. It was extremely close. Siding with the republicans, Sanders. He took up the fight with republicans working against Kennedy, Obama, Biden and Clinton and many other great democrats. Do you think Sanders could have wrangled three more votes with his great "leadership" skills? Literally one of his biggest legislative accomplishments was stopping a pathway to citizenship for over ten million people when we only needed a couple of votes in the senate. Get a clue people. Today there would be tens of millions more people not living under this level of oppression in our own country. His reasoning? Economics. I'm not shitting you. Did the republicans respect his efforts enough to not shove the exact same odorous economic policies through in the coming years? Democrats, labor, and decency got fucked while the oppression of the millions this would have lifted up continues to this day.

[NCTraveler]

18. Not one single part of my post is a strange vision of history.

Not one single part.

What in the world does Rahm have to do with it? He was a chairman of the DCCC at this time. There is no level of deflection Sanders supporters won't go to in order to try and spin this. You provided not one single thing except to bring a non-elected official into it and place the blame on him. Your deflection didn't rise to the level of impressive on this one.

[NCTraveler]

26. Sorry. Many are new here and I forget might not be as aware.

It's pretty clear I am talking about 2007. Rahm wasn't in congress. I will edit to clear that up for others just coming into the fold. Ohh wait, it was in there.

You do know Obama wasn't President and was fighting for this piece of legislation in the Senate, don't you?

"He bumped immigration to Obama's second term."

Seriously, just stop. You are now claiming that he bumped the '07 immigration bill to Obama's second term. What?

[AgingAmerican]

17. The nonsense coming out of Hillary supporters gets stranger every day

[NCTraveler]

21. Not one thing I posted was innacurate.

That is why your few words, and blaming it on Rahm who wasn't even in congress, is all I'm getting back.

It's Rahm's fault!!!!!! What a joke. Not one part of my post is inaccurate.

[AgingAmerican]

22. It really has to suck having to spin a few vague subjects to have something, anything to attack with

[NCTraveler]

24. Once again, you bring nothing.

I was actually discussing policy in my post. You just deflect. It's simply because my post is completely accurate.

[AgingAmerican]

33. You were spinning and attacking Sanders character, as usual

Hillary supporters don't talk about policy, they spin it.

[NCTraveler]

34. Nothing again. I was directly discussing policy. nt.

[AgingAmerican]

35. What other GOP bills do you plan on attacking him with?

Since you are so relegated to attacking from the right? You do know that bill was pushed heavily by GW Bush, McCain, Kyle, Lindsey Graham, etc.

Sanders didn't support it because it did not protect US citizens jobs being taken over by cheaper immigrant labor.

[NCTraveler]

38. You clearly don't know your history.

You do know that Sanders and republicans killed it, don't you. They did so in opposition to Clinton, Obama, Kennedy, and Biden. Talk about making up your own history.

[AgingAmerican]

45. The bill called for a militarized border and gigantic fence

Thank you Bernie!

[AgingAmerican]

44. The bill was backed by the GOP and heavily pushed by GW Bush

The bill would have militarized the border and built a gigantic fence, which the GOP still fantasize about.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Immigration_Reform_Act_of_2007

Try reading beyond the name of the bill. Hint: Any immigration bill backed by the GOP and especially GW Bush is akin to used toilet paper.

[NCTraveler]

29. You are having a serious issue with your timeline.

Really not a cool way to deflect.

[NCTraveler]

30. He was Chief of staff during the '07 immigration debate?

The things I learn on du.

[NCTraveler]

36. Ted Kennedy was the point man for republicans? lol

First Rahm was chief of staff in '07. Now later down the road. Truly no lengths you will go to spin Sanders actions in '07. We were literally a couple of votes away from moving past cloture. Sanders didn't even want a fair vote. Literally. He voted against cloture. You call it a republican bill yet Sanders teamed up with the most vile of republicans to block it, while Obama, Kennedy, Clinton, and Biden worked with democrats to pass it. You are calling it a republican bill yet republicans voted in big numbers against it while democrats supported it.

You clearly aren't familiar with this point in time. Literally calling a bill squashed by Sanders and the republicans a republican bill. I submit. You have left me dizzy. What, eight out of the forty six yes votes to move it past cloture were from republicans?

[NCTraveler]

40. And if you would open your eyes, you would see Sander does as well.

But it is much more fun to spin and blame what happened in 2007 on Rahm, even though he wasn't there. Also, to call a bill supported by what, a total of eight republican senators, a republican bill? It's simply laughable what you are doing. And a couple of those republicans only voted yeah because they were dismayed at the cloture rules.

[NCTraveler]

42. It failed miserably???

It passed the house and was a 46-53 vote for cloture in the senate. Can you imagine if Sanders used the leadership skills his supporters claim he has? lol. The Clinton Machine. I love it. Depending on the conversation, the Clintons are either as weak as it comes or the most powerful people in the world. You have to be kidding. Trashing Kennedy and the Clintons and showing how much you appreciate republicans blocking a pathway to citizenship for over ten million people. I've seen this before.

[AgingAmerican]

46. The bill called for militarizing the border and building a huge fence

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Immigration_Reform_Act_of_2007

[NCTraveler]

47. 370 miles of fence and 20,000 agents.

That isn't shit when you are talking about the rights of over ten million people living in oppression today. Fuck. 370 miles of fence. I would start a fund to pay for that myself if it meant bringing over ten million people currently living in this country out of the shadows.

The excuses made to continue to oppress tens of millions of people.

[AgingAmerican]

48. Militarization of the border

And building a gigantic fence. You are spinning RIGHT WING TALKING POINTS again

[NCTraveler]

49. Not one single word I said was spin. You keep saying things and don't know what they mean. nt.

[AgingAmerican]

50. You are trying to spin right wing policy

Into left wing policy. It's what her supporters do.

[NCTraveler]

51. The overwhelmigly majority of those who shot it down were republicans.

Kennedy, Obama, Clinton and Biden all supported it. What you are doing is one hundred percent spin and goes against facts. Dems supported it, it was rejected overwhelmingly by republicans. You don't even know that yet are speaking on this topic as if you think you are educated on it. It is what happens when one has to come up with reasons as to why they want to block a pathway to citizenship for over ten million people. Contrary to your beliefs, that is not right wing policy. I see you would have happily fought with the republicans on this one. You are trying to erase their actions each time you have posted here. Have at it.

[AgingAmerican]

52. The Republicans who resisted the bill did so out of fear of amnesty

Initially the bill had wide Democratic support. Guest worker programs were added to woo Republicans and corporations. Once that happened, support from the left fell apart. The AFL/CIO opposed the bill over the right wing guest worker provision. The bill also lost the support of PRO IMMIGRATION groups like the League of United Latin American Citizens.

Knowledge will set you free!

The bill was GW Bushes baby.
"WASHINGTON, June 28 — President Bush’s effort to overhaul the nation’s immigration policy, a cornerstone of his domestic agenda, collapsed in the Senate today, with little hope that it can be revived before Mr. Bush leaves office in January 2009."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/28/washington/28cnd-immig.html?_r=0

[NCTraveler]

53. Your spin is awful. It's not even based in reality.

The bill was supported by democrats and opposed by Sanders and republicans. Clinton, Obama, Biden, Akaka, Boxer, Dodd, Durbin, and so many more dems. You are flat out being disingenuous. Every single part of my argument has been based in fact. You are spinning falsehoods. Have at it.

[AgingAmerican]

54. I have provided links

Everything I have said is in the links.

I didn't expect you would click on them, or even read beyond the title of my post.

[AgingAmerican]

16. 'Moderates' do not take bold positions

Moderates are satisfied with the way things are.

[kelliekat44]

27. "bold positions" is different from "bold actions." And sometimes bold actions are not popular.

Also, bold positions is different from "bold plans." And bold plans do not always lead to successful results.