I read the NYT's analysis of Super Tuesday to find two real gems for how voters are "thinking" through their vote:
Bernie Sanderss odds of getting the nomination are maybe not that great, said Mitchell Westall, 19, of Suffolk, Va., who added that he had been intrigued by the Vermont senators vision. So Im looking at the other Democrat.
Not to be outdone in the competition for most ludicrous logic for backing one's chosen candidate, Ms. Hermer chose pretzel logic that would make a certain contingent on DU very proud.
Through such a pragmatic frame, Ms. Hermer saw a silver lining to Mrs. Clintons ties to Wall Street, which Mr. Sanders has assailed as emblematic of a rigged campaign finance system: She knows how to earn money and keep her campaign running, Ms. Hermer said.
This may be the most appalling statement I have seen yet today in support of a Democratic candidate. If that is Clintonian pragmatism for the 2016 election, deal me out.
Reaching even lower, the NYT declined to quote any actual Sanders supporters for why they were voting (who knows, they might actually have a substantive response, we couldn't have something as radical as that in the Grey Lady!); the lone Sanders voter was doing so simply to push Hillary leftwards.
I wonder sometimes if Idiocracy is debuting earlier than expected.
You just turn off the car, declare that this is where you wanted to end up, and call that progressivism.
Oh yeah, and,
In 1996, Hillary Clinton said on NPRs Morning Edition that her political beliefs were, "Rooted In Conservatism," and touted the fact she was A "Goldwater Girl.
MR. SIMON: I mean, did you ever back in the '60s, between when -- I believe you were a Goldwater girl --
MRS. CLINTON: That's right.
MR. SIMON: -- and whenever you became politically
MRS. CLINTON: That's right. And I feel like my political beliefs are rooted in the conservatism that I was raised with. I don't recognize this new brand of Republicanism that is afoot now, which I consider to be very reactionary, not conservative in many respects. I am very proud that I was a Goldwater girl. And then my political beliefs changed over time.
(NPR's Weekend Edition, 1/13/1996)
. . . is transparency, so that voters know all potential conflicts of interest and where people really stand on the issues.
If this were really about her opponents wanting to look for things she has said which are incriminating and politically damaging, the New York Times editorial board, which endorsed her candidacy, would not have called for her to release them.
That is all.
I don't know, just ask Bill Richardson & Joe Biden (start at 2 minutes, 15 seconds in)
I have been busy the last 2 days -- did she release them and I missed it? I would hate for that to happen. Can someone update me? If not, I am sure they are forthcoming, because Hillary is an honest candidate.
Also I saw this press release:
Edited to add: Today is my birthday; maybe Sec. Clinton plans to release them today as her birthday gift to me?
I am continuously told she has always been fighting for Black People for the last 20-30 years, so is there a list of the Pro Black/POC legislations she has gotten through? Or written and put up for a vote? I'd like to see for myself what her track record is on fighting for their rights in government.
I am not joking! See the test balloon over in the AA forum: http://www.democraticunderground.com/118739916
As if disagreeing with one of many laws your spouse is bound to enforce as part of the job means your opinion is invalid. I suppose that is supposed to be some kind of smear.
Anyway, be prepared for this new meme in the coming days.
The answer is: serious. Since Sanders public mention of me, I have been asked repeatedly whether I think his foreign policy positions and experience are sound. I do.
In my dealings with him, and in analyzing his record in Congress over the past 25 years, I have found that Sanders has taken balanced, realistic positions on many of the most critical foreign policy issues facing the country. In the mold of realists like Brent Scowcroft, national security adviser to Presidents Richard Nixon and George H.W. Bush, Sanders voted against the invasion of Iraq in 2002, while wisely supporting the war against in Afghanistan in 2001 and the intervention in the Balkans in 1990s. And Sanders certainly isnt a foreign policy lightweight: In fact, given his long tenure in the House and Senate, he has more foreign policy experience than Ronald Reagan or Barack Obama did when they were running for office the first time.
I have no doubt that Sanders will be willing to challenge the foreign policy establishment, as Obama did on such issues. Does Sanders have the same amount of foreign policy experience as Hillary Clinton? Obviously not. But Bill Clinton had far less foreign policy experience than George H.W. Bush, and Obama had less than John McCainand both presidents had effective foreign policies. If he is elected, I believe Sanders will also be able to attract a competent foreign policy cohort, just as Obama didincluding many of the current Clinton team. With the right partners in placeand, above all, the right principals and instinctsa President Sanders could be just the foreign policy president we need.
This confirms what many DUers have been saying for quite some time. Good judgement can be more important than more experience.