Sorry, Hillary supporters.

[Dawgs]

Last edited Fri May 22, 2015, 09:36 AM - Edit history (1)

You can't tell us one day that Hillary is every bit as liberal as Bernie, and the next day tell us that Bernie is so liberal that he won't get anything done if he's elected President.

You have to pick one argument. You can't use both.

EDIT: Just to clarify. I didn't mean to direct this at all Hillary supporters. I'm sure there are many that haven't used both arguments.

[MoonRiver]

1. I don't have to do shit because I could care less about what you think.

Got that?

[monmouth4]

4. Wow...Classy...n/t

[Dawgs]

13. Fine with with me. You want to look like a fool, go for it. n/t

[MoonRiver]

34. Just telling it like it is.

The DU bubble is irrelevant.

[MohRokTah]

46. ^^ This right here.

The DU bubble is ridiculous.

[workinclasszero]

62. Welcome to the Bernie Underground

The DU bubble is hilarious!

[MohRokTah]

71. I wasn't here duing '04 or '08.

I bet Kucinich Underground was a hoot, too!

[workinclasszero]

73. I have no doubt lol

Well Bernie fans need a place to go where they can pretend to be the majority in the democratic party and unfortunately its DU.

Oh well reality will set in when the first primaries happen but its going to be a bumpy ride on the Bernie Underground till then.

[A Simple Game]

104. No, but the Obama underground seemed to work out alright. n/t

[workinclasszero]

130. Surely you are not comparing Bernie's run for president

to Obama's are you?

Really?

[A Simple Game]

139. No there is no comparison between the two. Bernie is much more of a people person than

President Obama was or is. Senator Obama said he was against large donors but still took their money, Bernie hasn't and probably won't take large donations not that he will have many offers with his positions mostly favoring the 99%. I could go on but you know most of this already don't you.

So you are right the only real comparison will be the final outcome of the primaries. The gap is closing fast and I don't think Bernie has spent a penny of his only small donations money yet.

By the way, how's Hillary's listening tour working out? Has she finally found out what the people want from their government? I think Bernie already knows. Listening tour... sounds like an excuse not to say anything that may get you in trouble like the last time.

[workinclasszero]

141. No problems, no problems at all

See you Bernie-ites...

Monday, February 1: Iowa caucus

Tuesday, February 9: New Hampshire

Saturday, February 20: South Carolina

Tuesday, February 23: Nevada caucus

[leftofcool]

143. Bernie will be toast after that and out before Super Tuesday.

[workinclasszero]

146. Definitely

Thats gonna let a lot of hot air out of Bernie's bandwagon around here LOL

[AgingAmerican]

214. Or

You will look mighty silly. Either or.

[A Simple Game]

145. We should have a pretty good idea after those four are done if not before they even start. n/t

[AgingAmerican]

213. Obama was relatively unknown

Hillary was the assumed nominee.

Yep, sounds the same to me.

[Historic NY]

176. Oh yeah....

now he makes his living as a "token liberal" for FAUX.

[Rockyj]

224. Its just a PRIMARY!

If Bernie doesn't WIN I am sure most will support corporate owned Hillary like they did with Obama!

[Mojorabbit]

101. Then why are you here? :) nt

[corkhead]

19. A might bit touchy are we? You are quite the ambassador of your team.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. You keep jerking people's chains, that's what happens but it is nothing compared ...

You keep jerking people's chains, that's what happens but it is nothing compared to what happens when you exhibit that behavior in real life.

[MoonRiver]

35. Yeah, I'm a little sick of the absurd threats against Hillary supporters.

Like we "have" to do something, or else.

[George II]

55. At least Hillary Clinton is a REGISTERED Democrat!

[truebluegreen]

78. Whatever that means.

What does it mean?

[A Simple Game]

108. A Registered Democrat that used to support Barry Goldwater.

She and her husband hang with the Bushes and she loves a guy named Kissinger.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

111. Her first Vote was for Eugene McCarthy

She roomed with Janet Hill,future mother of Grant and wife of Calvin, when dorms were segregated by race.

What were you doing then?

[A Simple Game]

119. I was probably sitting in my Junior year high school history class back in '68. n/t

[George II]

124. Yes, she "supported" Barry Goldwater way back in 1964 when she was 17 years old...

..I've been called a "communist" and a left-wing radical by people over the years. But back in 1965 (also 17 at the time) I was a "supporter" of William F. Buckley when he ran for Mayor of New York City.

Tell me, every opinion and position you had when you were 17 have gone unchanged over the years?

She and her husband "hang" with the Bushes? What's you definition of "hang"?

[A Simple Game]

137. I was born a liberal and will die a liberal.

Buckley was a pompous ass, you are known by the company you keep.

My definition of "hang?" Well let's just say that none of the Bushes call me their brother from another mother.

[mythology]

201. If you haven't changed your mind about something since you were 17

I feel sorry for you. So many things have changed over even the last 15 years since I was 17 and I have so many new life experiences that I would have wasted to have not learned or changed.

Hell I've learned two major things about myself that have significantly changed how I view the world since October.

[A Simple Game]

206. Change my mind? I do it daily. But my core liberal principles? No, I have no need

to change any of them, those are what my life is based on. They used to be what almost all Democrats believed in, not so much now. What is there about the liberal principles you would change? Equality for all, safety net, support of unions, or something else?

What may have changed is what I now believe is the best means to achieve the best ends. The means can never be static, but the ends can never be moving. For example to guarantee the ability to provide adequate nutrition for a family in 1970 may have taken $50 per week, but now it would be closer to $150 per week. The means, or amount of money, has to change but the goal, to guarantee the ability to provide adequate nutrition can not.

[bvar22]

228. There is a big difference between "changing your mind",

and selling out your Values or Moral Compass.

[Historic NY]

181. Woot thats all you got....

how many other college age kids hung with the Communists & other parties until they realized it wasn't going to work out.

I remember backing McGovern the 72 election. The McGovern–Shriver ticket suffered a 61-percent to 37-percent defeat to Nixon – at the time, the second biggest landslide in American history, with an Electoral College total of 520 to 17. McGovern's two electoral vote victories came in Massachusetts and Washington, D.C.; McGovern failed to win his home state of South Dakota.

[A Simple Game]

199. You were just a college kid and yet you still voted for the best candidate.

What was wrong with that? Wasn't your fault that he lost.

[Hekate]

207. In high school. I'm sure you were a fount of wisdom when you were 16. nt

[A Simple Game]

209. Is it that obvious? Thanks for noticing. n/t

[MaggieD]

149. Always a plus if you're a DEMOCRAT

Good thing this site didn't exist in 1999. It would have been Nader Underground.

[L0oniX]

174. You make it sound like it's a pedigree.

[George II]

175. To seek the Democratic nomination for office, one should be a Democrat

[L0oniX]

178. Wow ...I had no idea. Thanks.

[frylock]

220. you learn something new everday around here

[L0oniX]

230. *

There is an invisible sarc tag with that post.

[2banon]

223. You Read the OP as a Threat?

[cali]

23. I've got it. I'm convinced. Of what, I can't say

[MoonRiver]

39. Only thing I'm convinced of is that some DU blogger is irrelevant to what I think.

[reddread]

50. Post "what" again

one more time.

[tularetom]

26. You "could" care less?

In other words, you do care, to some degree.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

31. The grammar police.

Maybe you should initiate a citizen's arrest.

[tularetom]

38. You know, normally I couldn't care less

It's just that when somebody acts like a dick...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. The Caring Continuum

[floriduck]

115. Perfect DSB

It's one of the most misstated phrase in the English language and a pet peeve of mine too. Well played, DUer!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

125. Yeah, picayune mistake though

Like there, they're, and their, or loose and lose, or to and too, and you're or your or then and than, or site, cite, and sight,...

[MoonRiver]

40. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

[L0oniX]

27. Your Hillary campaign slogan?

[-none]

77. ^^^This^^^

Like Hillary is somehow assured of a lock.

[Marr]

91. LOL /nt

[99Forever]

41. Oh my, isn't that special?

Well bless your heart.

[MoonRiver]

43. And bless your little heart too.

[99Forever]

56. Excellent!

I'll be sure and add your respectful responses in this thread to my list of reasons to support Hillary Goldman Sachs Clinton.

Thanks again.

[kenfrequed]

60. Sure

A: I don't think you really are a Hillary supporter. I think you are just here to try to wreck up the joint.

B: If you really are you are doing your candidate a serious, serious disservice.

C: If you really didn't care, you wouldn't have replied at all and would have just ignored this entire OP.

[raouldukelives]

117. The supporter doesn't fall far from the candidate tree. nt

[cwydro]

121. "Could" care less

means you do care.

Just sayin.

It's funny when people mess up that saying.

[AgingAmerican]

129. Nice non rebuttle

Spose we will be seeing a lot of this over the next year.

[earthside]

131. Thus far ...

... an expected response from a Hillary fanatic.

This is precisely why Mrs. Clinton will lose if she gets the nomination.

(Although since this commenter is saying she/he 'could' care less, there might be some slight hope for redemption.)

[leftofcool]

132. +1

[frylock]

219. Watch out!

[el_bryanto]

2. The two step that isn't

While I agree that if one person makes both arguments they should be called on it; the truth is that Clinton supporters are a wide group - some probably think she is just as liberal as Bernie and others think that Bernie is too liberal to get anything done.

And I can see the argument that while both Clinton and Sanders are equally liberal, Clinton has shown herself to be a practical politician who can get things done, while Sanders has stuck to his guns more, and hasn't accomplished as much.

I don't buy that myself - I support Sanders because he's much more liberal on the issues I care about - Clinton has shown herself to be a willing to do what Wall Street wants.

Bryant

[Dawgs]

14. Curious. What has Hillary accomplished as a politician, compared to Bernie? n/t

[George II]

67. You have a point, she's never been mayor of a tiny city in a relatively small state.

[zeemike]

76. Well there you go.

She has never been around or worked with the "little people"

[George II]

127. There are no "little people" in New York State, where she was elected Senator twice?

[zeemike]

182. Not the same as being mayor of a small town though is it?

She went from FL to Senator...that is what elite people do...no need for the little people and the little elected office. Strait to the top because you can.

The more we talk about it the more clear it becomes.

[George II]

183. News Flash! If we're making comparisons of Vermont "little people" and NY "little people"...

The 2012 median houshold income in Vermont is $52K, in New York its $56K. Considering the much higher cost of living in New York, I'd venture to guess that there are a lot more "little people" in New York than Vermont.

But it's silly to even try to compare the two, they are so different.

[Exilednight]

185. Only a 4k difference? I've lived in NYC and couldn't afford it on 60k a year. Thanks for

Helping me make my choice. It looks like Bernie knows how to get stuff done and raise the standard of living for his constituents.

You're info was a real eye opener to Bernie's accomplishment as a senator.

[George II]

189. Well, you sure turned that around, even unconsciously confirming what I said about....

..."little people" in each state. By the way, the median income in Vermont has dropped since Sanders has been Senator (even though a Senator has little or no affect on median income in a particular state)

Next?

[Exilednight]

193. A senator has no effect on income? Then let's stop all

Federal spending and make Vermont give back their +2.6% that they get for every dollar they contributed in federal income tax. If that money has no direct effect on median income, then what's the point?

[zeemike]

190. No we are not.

We are making comparisons between Senator and Mayor of a small city...which Hillary has never done...nor has she ever served in the house.
Unless you don't understand that a mayor is in close contact with "little people"...sees them on the street talks to them daily and a Senator goes off to DC and opens an office in the city and hires people to run it.
A vast difference there...one lives and works in the community and the other only makes stage appearances once in a while.

But nice job of trying to re define the issue.

[Hekate]

208. That smacks of Sarah Palin's slam on Obama's community organizing not being a real job ....

....she compared it to herself before she was governor, when she was on the city council and whatnot. Sneering is so often specious.

[zeemike]

210. Yes it does doesn't it.

The post 67 I replied to was snarky implying that being mayor of a small city is not really political experience.

[A Simple Game]

116. Come on, tell him about all of the legislation she introduced when she was my Senator. n/t

[George II]

136. Too much to list here, google "legislative accomplishments" for both Clinton and Sanders...

....you'll find that in their tenure in Congress, Clinton introduced 3387 pieces of legislation, Sanders 6071

The difference is that Clinton did that in 8 years (423/year), Sanders in 24 years (357/year).

https://www.congress.gov/member/bernard-sanders/S000033?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22bernie+sanders%22%5D%7D

https://www.congress.gov/member/hillary-clinton/C001041?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22hillary+clinton%22%5D%7D

Now that that's cleared up, it really has little relevance today.

[MaggieD]

152. Boom!

[bvar22]

211. Don't forget that while she was a Senator,....

...Hillary spear headed the War on Flag Burners and Video Games.

[MaggieD]

215. The "war" on video games?

LOL! Rating labels on video games is a "war" on games?

As a parent I appreciated it. I didn't purchase toy weapons for my kid when he was growing up and I didn't want him immersed in violence via games either. It made it much easier for me to decide which games were okay and which weren't. We enjoyed a lot of good times playing video games together too.

On the plus side he never turned into a video game addict either. He read books and practiced guitar and piano. He's now a successful musician.

So what's the beef with ratings on video games? SMH.

[bvar22]

229. ..."so what's the beef with ratings on Vdeo Games?

For me, it was the rampant hypocrisy.

On one hand, Hillary takes on Cartoon Violence on computers with the passion of a Temperance Union Marcher,
telling us that Video Games spawn violence without ANY Scientific Proof what-so-ever...
.
.
.
On the OTHER hand, she co-signs and publicly supports Shock & Awe,
and the invasion and brutal occupation of the only secular country in the Middle East,
one the did not threaten us, could not threaten us, and posed no threat to our security,
killing over 1 MILLION innocent people, maiming another 2MILLION for life,
killing over 4,000 young Americans, displacing another 5 MILLION Iraqis,
turning Iraq into another Failed State.

Now which one of those actions do YOU believe is responsible for bringing violence & death into our World on a wholesale basis.


You CAN see the disconnect?
Yes?

I wonder how she can sleep at night.
I wouldn't be able to sleep.

[karynnj]

95. Bernie has accomplished a significant amount in his career - even though his early career

was way less public than hers.

His first office was mayor of Burlington. I have lived in this wonderful town for 2 and a half years. Obviously everything I know of his tenure here is either from the comments of the many new friends I have made or from reading. I have heard no one counter the fact that he was a very significant and effective mayor.

In fact, everyone should watch whatever coverage there will be of his event next Tuesday. It is very significant that it is being held at the gorgeous Waterfront Park. Why is it significant? That park is a major legacy of the Sanders administration. He ran his first time on the "Waterfront is not for sale". With different leadership, it is easy to speculate that wonderful park could have been sold for near town expensive condos or private homes.

Now, I KNOW it was Bill who was governor of Arkansas, not Hillary -- but I think Bernie can easily make the case that Burlington was a better place when he left office than it was when he entered. (One non subjective measure of this was that he won in a landslide the last time he ran against a person who had BOTH the Democratic and Republican lines.) At least on the environment, Bernie easily wins this one -- google Tyson chicken Clinton.

Bernie has been a Senator since 2006 - 9 years. This is very near the 8 years that Hillary Clinton was Senator. Two major accomplishments that he had were that it is his provision of ACA that gave money to the community health care centers - something Teresa Kerry noted as something good from ACA noting it was Sander's contribution. The other was that the bill on health care for Vets was Sanders and after the scandal with the VA, it passed. These are two issues where Sanders really did lead. I challenge anyone to list two things Clinton did AS Senator that equalled these accomplishments.

Bernie Sanders is an accomplished Senator, with a very high approval rating from a state where politicians really DO have to answer to the people. In 2 and a half years, I have seen more Sanders town halls than I saw of ANY Democrat in 30 years in NJ -- and there were others, I could have gone to.

Now, Hillary Clinton is a candidate with a resume that extends back to the 1970s. She worked on children's issues before she married Bill Clinton, worked on education for Bill Clinton when he was governor of Arkansas (mixed results due to Arkansas continuing to be near the bottom on any objective measure), then worked on healthcare as First Lady. In 2008, Obama gave her the position of SoS, where she helped restore relations shattered under Bush.

She is almost certainly going to be the nominee and there are many things to argue that she had a hand in over her long career. That is why I am surprised that many of her supporters here (not directed to the person I am responding to) are not taking the obvious high road - praising Sanders, for what he has done. There is absolutely no reason to try to tear him down.

I am also appalled by the almost militant nature of some supporters considering that ANY discussion of anything less than 100% positive about Clinton is unacceptable. I suggest that they look back at how THEY supported candidates in the past. Even after the nominee was selected, there was not the rejection of even discussing issues of disagreement. It seems obvious to me that ONLY through discussing any possible negatives will we hone any arguments that could defend HRC. Simply labelling everything as right wing - or even swiftboating as Peter Doar just did - will not be an answer that will help persuade anyone on the fence.

[Blue_Adept]

3. That only works if it's the same person saying it

Which often isn't the case. you're conflating the posts of lots of people to make a poor argument.

[Dawgs]

15. Sure, but I saw one using both arguments in the very same thread just today. n/t

[MohRokTah]

48. Link? eom

[thesquanderer]

75. Then I think it would have been better to have posted your comment there. (n/t)

[rock]

5. This is politics

So we can.

[TM99]

6. When your candidate is a mess of contradictions,

incongruencies, and spin, you are going to find many of the supporters to be the same way.

The mind has to make sense of it all somehow.

[AtomicKitten]

216. rationalization is hard work

[sufrommich]

7. There just aren't enough threads on DU attacking Hillary supporters.

[Dawgs]

17. I don't think you know what attacking means. n/t

[corkhead]

22. Apparently one person's legitimate assertion is another person's "attack"

[L0oniX]

28. ..because every pro Bernie OP is an attack.

[Cosmocat]

58. No, but every Hillary dig OP

is a Hillary dig OP, see this OP.

[leftofcool]

134. They know Bernie will never get near the Oval Office so attacks make them feel better.

[d_legendary1]

184. Yeah if only Bernie would sell out to Wall Street

and pander to everyone like in 08, then Bernie would be like Hillary and become POTUS!

Oh wait....

[KittyWampus]

8. Not a Hillary supporters BUT, the issue is pragmatism. Which many DU'ers who gravitate to Sanders

think of as a dirty word.

Except when it comes to Sanders and guns.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. You forgot Israel and the F-35./NT

[onecaliberal]

57. Further capitulation on things that are destroying America the environment and lives

Is NOT being pragmatic. It is protecting the people who own you from paying their share.

[FLPanhandle]

9. The stupid in this OP

It actually hurts my brain

[Dawgs]

18. Great argument. Care to explain why? n/t

[FLPanhandle]

21. Sure

The biggest is lumping all Hillary supporters together assuming they all make the same argument. That's nowhere true. Even if you found an example or two of specific Hillary supporters making contradictory arguments, then the smart thing to do would be to call them out on it. To make a new OP implying all Hillary supporters make that argument, frankly makes you look kind of stupid.

I'd delete the post if I were you and figure out a more intelligent argument.

[Dawgs]

25. Edited for your flavor. n/t

[MohRokTah]

49. Where did you get your degree in internet psychology?

Let me guess, the University of Phoenix.

[MosheFeingold]

51. Almost 50 years as a Congressional staffer sadly

But on a bright note, I really like your tag line.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

122. What congressperson?/NT

[George II]

59. I'm a Hillary Clinton supporter and I don't "know in my heart" any of the accusations you make...

...and she doesn't "hide" from reporters. It's a good seven months before the first primary, and then there will be months of primary campaigning and then the general election campaign.

Plenty of time to speak to reporters and the public.

I could turn your accusation around - all the OTHER potential Democratic candidates aren't hiding from reporters, they're hiding from their very own DECISION. Even Sanders, who now is a quasi-declared candidate, not only hid from deciding for months but he hid from deciding from under what affiliation he would run until just recently.

Anyone claiming that a candidate is "hiding" months before a campaign truly starts doesn't understand how this all works.

[staggerleem]

110. Taking the time to consider the consequences of all possible courses of action ...

... is quite different from "hiding from a decision".

Actually, I've been listening to Bernie Sanders' weekly phone-in hour on the Thom Hartmann program for years now, and I can tell you that he's thought long & hard about this run. He stated that he MIGHT do this over a year ago, but only if he felt he could make a credible run. And he also stated, at that time, that IF he did run it would ONLY be as a Democrat, to avoid splitting the vote from the left a la Ralph Nader. Bernie's goal is to become the Democratic nominee, and then President, but along the way, he wants to build a REAL, GRASS-ROOTS PROGRESSIVE POLITICAL MOVEMENT in the USA - something we've been lacking since the Gene McGovern ran against Dick Nixon.

Best I can tell, the candidate that's "hiding" is Jeb Bush. He's attending campaign events, making speeches and doing TV appearances, but he hasn't officially "kicked off" his campaign. Why? So he can obey the letter of campaign finance law, while pissing all over that law's intent. Once he officially declares, he's gotta pretend real hard that all that beautiful PAC money is hands-off! Until then, he can direct those funds however he wants. Cuz THATs who we NEED for President - another guy who believes that if you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin 'hard enuff ... NOT!

[Adrahil]

10. Neither one will really be able to do much without Congress....

... so I'm not all that concerned with a race to the left. The biggest deal, to me, is the Supreme Court.

[HassleCat]

11. It would be this

Here is the argument as I understand it. Sanders is liberal, and is perceived by the media as more liberal than he really is, perhaps even socialist. Clinton is liberal, but perceived by the media as less liberal than she really is. Therefore, the media will burn Sanders by talking about his "far left" opinions and proposals. They will give some attention to Democrats who are not satisfied that Clinton is liberal enough, which is what they frequently do to Obama. The net effect will be to make Clinton look like a moderate, while Sanders will be marginalized. I don't know if I buy that or not. The Republicans are very successful at espousing extreme views to appeal to the "core" voters in the primary, then sounding all reasonable for the general election. I don't see why Sanders, or Clinton for that matter, could not do the same thing.

[brooklynite]

12. I've never said he won't get anything done if he's elected President...

...I've said he won't get elected President.

[Dawgs]

20. That's fine. I was really just talking to those that have used both arguments.

BTW, I don't think either Hillary or Bernie will get elected President.

[Thinkingabout]

16. I haven't said Hillary is as "liberal" as Bernie, I have said Bernie is too far left.

I have said Hillary and Warren or neck and neck. I have said O'Malley and Webb are listed as moderates. These are the facts.

[Dawgs]

24. I didn't say every Hillary supporter uses those arguments.

And, many Hillary supporters have been touting the fivethirtyeight study that shows Hillary being only slightly less liberal than Bernie. I'm only pointing out that some of her supporters have no problem using both arguments.

[Thinkingabout]

44. I understand and if she was as far left as Bernie it would be a concern for me.

[Dawgs]

142. Not a populist, huh? n/t

[Thinkingabout]

144. Don't guess I am. I don't like far left.

[Agnosticsherbet]

30. Neither Senator Sanders nor Secretary of State Clinton will get anything done if Republicans

control congress.

At some point the two sides should declare a truce to support the election of more Democrats to the House and the Senate.

[lapfog_1]

33. The difference is perception

For example, lets look at the last few Presidents...

Bill Clinton - ran in the middle, was President in the middle

GW Bush - ran in the middle right, was President to the far right.

Barack Obama - ran to the middle left, tried to be President in the middle.

Perception of Bernie is that he runs to the left, will be President on the left

Perception of Hillary is that she is running to the middle left, will be President in the middle to middle right.

Of course, where they run and actually govern depends on the issue... but this is my judgment when taking in the totality of their statements and records... Hillary will govern to the left on some social issues, but foreign policy and some economic policies (lack of regulation of Wall Street, trade) she will govern to the right of almost all Democrats.

Hence the argument that Hillary is "left" (is running a campaign to the left) but will "wink wink" actually govern to the middle or middle right (but she will be a strong supporter of certain social issues like LGBT rights, equal pay, etc).

[Thinkingabout]

52. You had a good post going until you got to this point

Hillary will govern to the left on some social issues, but foreign policy and some economic policies (lack of regulation of Wall Street, trade) she will govern to the right of almost all Democrats.


Hillary will be strong on national security, but the govern to the right of all democrats is a little hard on your prediction. National security is a very serious issue, it has to be strongly addressed, Hillary will strongly address this issue.

[kenfrequed]

65. That is a problem

We have been dealing with center-right economics for decades now. Even president Obama threw in tax cuts into his stimulus package. We really need to move back towards progressive economic policy and I don't see Hillary as the one to do this. We do not want someone that will lead to the right of President Obama.

We desperately need to rein in Wallstreet and get some serious economic and environmental regulations in place to benefit the American people

National security is Not a serious issue. We spend more on defense than the next seven countries combined and over half of those countries are ostensibly allies. We need to stop convincing ourselves that terrorist boogiemen are out to get us and that we need new and bigger aircraft carriers to stop them.

[Thinkingabout]

92. Have you been listening to Hillary in the past few months?

And if you think national security isn't a problem do you listen to the news lately?

[kenfrequed]

96. What is the national security problem?

What is the problem that you want to throw more tax dollars at in the name of national security? Is there another war we should be ginning up for? Seriously, what is the national threat? I served in the army and I am getting dog tired of this constant, stupid drumbeat. Explain who the threat is and why we don't already have enough of a military to annihilate it and then Maybe I will will listen.

Otherwise this is just more panicky fear mongering bs.

[Thinkingabout]

97. OMG, you can be against military action but to ask what is the national security problem, don't know

[kenfrequed]

103. ok, that didn't make sense.

You implied there was a problem and now...

I cannot tell what you are saying. Could you please finish a thought or argument? Because you really are being kind of vague.

[Thinkingabout]

118. Do you keep up with current events? There is information every day, we just had an attempt in Texas

for ISIS wannabe's trying to attack a group. You was the one asking what national security problems. If it is still vague then the conversation is over.

[kenfrequed]

140. So...

There was a supposed Isis thing assaulting a crazy texas cartoon thing and law enforcement easily dealt with it.

At what point is this a big deal for national defense? Should we buy more fighter jets and tanks to deal with this problem?

Seriously, terrorism is not something we need extra aircraft carriers for and it isn't going to be resolved by the standard bullshit "strong on defense" nonsense.

I mean, you are basically just conceding this whole thing to the republican narrative. If you are going to support Hillary at least try to make it sound like you aren't playing to the 'fear' vote. That never really works in the general election in our favor anyhow.

[Xyzse]

45. Clinton is nowhere near as liberal as Bernie.

However, stating that, I do not see any one trying to make a case that she is as liberal as Bernie.

Merely saying, that in the grand scheme of things, she is nowhere near as bad as her possible Republican counterparts. Which really isn't saying much... but it is enough for me to support her in the General Election. Primaries, I am currently at the moment for O'Malley.

I like what Bernie is saying. If he wins the primaries, I would be happier than if Clinton were to win but I don't know his chances at this time.

Unless he can make inroads with more of the base, and generate excitement with the younger crowd, I just don't see him being able to win the primaries. Which is a shame, since I think Hillary Clinton would probably depress the turn out, and energize the opposition. I still think she has a high chance of winning, but... she to me is a risky bet, which sadly, I don't know other options at the moment.

[kentuck]

47. It's called having your cake and eating it too...

Hillary loses nothing by going left to appeal to the base. Bernie would lose support if he went to the middle or to the right. Watch what I say, not what I do...

[darkangel218]

81. Dammit! Why did you have to talk about cake?! Now i want some

[MaggieD]

159. She doesn't have to "go" left - she has been there for decades

[JoePhilly]

53. Bernie has to convince rank and file democrats that he would beat ...

... any GOP opponent.

Rank and file democrats already believe Hillary will beat anyone the GOP puts up against her.

Before rank and file Dems will consider switching from Hillary to Bernie, they'll have to be confident that he would beat any GOP opponent as well.

Efforts to tear down Hillary do nothing to help Bernie cross this hurdle.

Much of the rest of the screaming around here is mostly noise.

[NYC_SKP]

61. I don't think Hillary is as strong against the GOP as some think.

When there's a herd of GOP hopefuls pit against one well known Dem, her polling numbers are going to be high.

By the time it boils down to one from each party, I'm not that confident she can win.

In fact, I would put money on her losing because of her negatives and the fact that she's so centrist on trade and unions and minimum wage, etc.

I think Sanders and maybe O'Malley would do better.

Warren, if she would run, would nail it.

[JoePhilly]

80. Most Dems think she's going to beat anyone the GOP puts forward.

You don't have to agree with them. And you can feel free to bet against them.

But regardless, for Bernie to beat her in the primary, you still have to convince them that Bernie would also beat anyone the GOP has.

And attacking Hillary doesn't help make that happen.

[NYC_SKP]

83. What Dems think? We don't really know and it's very early in the game.

[JoePhilly]

84. ok.

[Exilednight]

113. Is it really an attack to point out that she is a weak candidate that has no real possibility of

Winning a GE? The people in real life that I know who support her and openly pushing for her are aging female boomers.

Other than that, she's skating by on name recognition.

[JoePhilly]

138. Its politically naive.

There is a small group of you who think she has no chance of winning. There is a much much larger group who is sure she will beat any GOP candidate.

Now, you can come to DU and spend your time trying to convince all of those people who already believe she will win, that she can't.

You've still done nothing to advance your preferred candidate.

And I'll go further. Many of those who already believe she will beat any GOP opponent have watched the endless shrill right wing attacks against her over the last 20 or so years.

And its only hardened their view about her, and their resolve to have her win has grown stronger. Many of the current attacks from the left sound exactly like the attacks from the right, and they will get tossed into the same bucket.

Before your average Democrat even considers switching from Hillary to some one else, they'll have to see that alternative candidate as a sure thing come General Election time.

Having said this, you should feel free to discount those "aging female boomers". Those smart, highly qualified women who have been passed over for promotions and paid less than male peers, over and over and over, all throughout their careers.

Go ahead and discount them, talk down to them, use terms like "aging" as if its a negative, and then expect them, and their sons and daughters, to appreciate your candor. And then magically shift to your preferred candidate.

Seems like a brilliant political strategy for your alternative candidate, whoever that is.

[Exilednight]

164. First things first

I don't discount them as individuals, and to insinuate otherwise tells me volumes about you. Just like you and I, they are a demographic, and their numbers aren't as strong as other demographics. Other demographics that actually decide elections.

Second, there may be a small handful of people here on DU who may use right-wing talking points, such as Benghazi or the e-mail scandal, but many of us criticize her for her IWR vote and claiming to being duped by the dumbest President in centuries, being against NAFTA before she was for NAFTA before she was against it again, endorsing KXL, her endorsement of the TPP etc etc etc... All of which are legitimate concerns to Democrats.

If you think Hillary was attacked in the past, you're in for a huge surprise if she wins the nomination and goes into the GE. Republicans have only lobbed softballs at her to slightly bruise her, in a GE they will launch nukes. And if you think negative campaigning doesn't work, I have two words for you ........ SWIFT BOAT.

And what they will do to Hillary will make swift boating look like a pleasant day in the Bahamas.

Last time she ran she couldn't make it past a first term Senator from Chicago. How in the hell does anyone think she can make it past the full cast of tea bags and the establishment? That's political naïveté if you actually believe she can.

[JoePhilly]

187. Obama demonstrated he would also beat ...

... any GOP opponent, just as Hillary already had. She would have beat the GOP in 2008 if she won the nomination. We had two great candidates. Either of whom would have won the general.

As for legitimate concerns, those will remain secondary to letting the GOP win, until some other candidate crosses the hurdle I've mentioned repeatedly.

That's what your preferred candidate will have to do to beat her in this primary.

As for GOP attacks on Hillary, meh.

They will scream bloody murder no matter who we nominate. Their 7/24/365 attacks on Obama make that obvious. Trying to pick a candidate that they won't try to "nuke" is a fools errand.

[Exilednight]

192. Those are my voting issues, not my secondary comcerns. She stands on the

Same footing as the republican party when it comes to those issues. Everything else is meaningless if those issues aren't addressed.

So, you're telling me my choices for office, should Hillary win the nomination, will be a candidate who stands for EVERYTHING I'm against, or a candidate who stands for EVERYTHING I'm against?

[JoePhilly]

194. I'm telling you what needs to happen for your preferred candidate to beat Hillary ...

... in the Democratic Primary for the General Election in 2016.

You will either try to get people who would already happily vote for Hillary to switch to your candidate, or you won't. That's totally up to you.

And if Hillary still wins the nomination, your choices will be Hillary, and some member of the GOP.

How you deal with that reality will be totally up to you.

[Exilednight]

195. You're as good at ducking questions as Hillary. n/t

[JoePhilly]

196. Did you ask me a meaningful question?

I didn't see it in your post.

[Exilednight]

198. Yes, it's the sentence that ends with a question mark.

So, you're telling me my choices for office, should Hillary win the nomination, will be a candidate who stands for EVERYTHING I'm against, or a candidate who stands for EVERYTHING I'm against?

[JoePhilly]

202. It's not a great question, but I did answer it.

I don't "expect" anything from you if and when you face that choice.

You are free to deal with that reality however you want.

[Exilednight]

203. It's a direct question concerning where she stands on key policies. Allow me to rephrase,

Does her policy decisions in those above mentioned areas mirror those of the Republican establishment?

[JoePhilly]

204. In a few somewhat, but certainly not all ... and certainly not to the same extent.

And ... given I know how extreme the GOP has become ... I (and lots of other Dems) simply will not risk letting those insane psychos win the general election.

And so ... to get my vote in the primary (by which time the primary may be over already), a candidate will have had to make me absolutely certain that they'd beat the GOP nut jobs. Period.

[Exilednight]

205. Just winning isn't enough. You have to do something when you get there. n/t

[JoePhilly]

225. Or stop the GOP from doing what they'd do.

Rank and file Democrats see that as their first objective. If the GOP wins, everything else you claim you want, becomes moot.

After letting Bush win in 2000, I struggle to understand how any democrat can not recognize just how much damage a GOP controlled white house can do. Of course the reality is that most democrats DO understand this. Which is why most have no problem supporting Hillary.

Keeping the GOP OUT of the white house is a priority of the first order.

You have to get your preferred candidate to be seen as ensuring that the GOP will not gain the White House. If you can't do that, you can't win the primary.

It is that simple.

[Exilednight]

226. Everything I want becomes moot if hillary gets elected. N/t

[JoePhilly]

227. Sad for you. Not true for me.

[Exilednight]

231. A tea bagger will same the same to you when

Hillary loses in the general election.

[JoePhilly]

232. Cross your fingers!!!!

You have no pan to promote an alternative candidate to Hillary, so here where are.

Hillary will get pretty much all of the Obama voters plus a very large number of moderate GOP women.

But you feel free to hope for a teabagger prez in 2016.

[Exilednight]

233. I was a huge Obama supporter, so we're many of my friends and family - none of which, except

My two aunts, would ever consider voting for Hillary.

[JoePhilly]

234. So they'll stay home .... Good political strategy.

You should run with it.

[Exilednight]

235. I can't force them to vote.

[bluegopher]

157. Not much of a poll watcher, are you?

[Exilednight]

165. At this point, polls mean nothing. n/t

[Cosmocat]

70. WINNER POST!

I have posted something along these lines as is.

I have come around to knowing I will vote for Sanders.

But, this little brothers shit is literally repulsive, it GETS Sanders no votes.

Its funny, HE doesn't do it.

The more I just read and listen to him the better I feel about him.

Reading the shit people post here about Hillary "in support" of Bernie nerves me to no end.

If I want to hear/read Hillary bashing I would lurk right wing hell holes.

[JoePhilly]

82. Right ... I also think Sanders gets this point. nt

[Dawgs]

150. Probably won't convince anyone but here is my list of why Bernie will do well in general.

The millennials like him.

He has very low negatives, and not a lot of baggage.

He's an independent running on the Democrat side. Many people don't vote because they don't like either party.

He's a populist. Almost all of his ideas and proposals are extremely popular...even with Republicans.

He's not considered an establishment candidate.

The Republicans suck.

[KMOD]

172. most millennials are supporting HRC.

Any poll will show you that.

[Dawgs]

186. Millennials can like more than one candidate, and...

What does that have to do with how Bernie will do in the general?

[KMOD]

200. It's an important part of getting him to the general elections.

There is a lot of time until the primaries, but he does have to make stronger gains in a few demographics.

Now yes, if he can do that, I think he would do well in the general elections.

[JoePhilly]

197. Good ... that's a positive start.

The way to get Bernie considered by democrats is to talk about how much better he is than any of the GOP candidates.

Compare Sanders to them ... and tear them apart. You need him beating them in head to head polls.

Do this paritcularly in the early primary states. Make sure the Dems in those states come to believe that Bernie would win their state, and also kick the butt of any of the GOP candidate in the general.

If he wins one or two of those states, more dems in other primary states will start to consider whether he would beat any GOP candidate in the GE. And it can build.

If he hangs around long enough, takes some early states, he could do what Obama did.

[George II]

54. Another day, another anti-Clinton red meat post. Nice.

[Dawgs]

151. You're welcome.

Any ideas for tomorrow?

[George II]

180. Yes, start a positive thread about somebody....ANYBODY!

[darkangel218]

63. +1!

[Cosmocat]

64. And, this OP gets Bernie votes, how?

If only his "supporters" acted more like him.

He never says boo about Hillary on his own and goes out of way to avoid saying anything about her when he relentlessly is dogged to do so by the dimwit media.

I am voting for Bernie.

I WANT to support Bernie, and based on him I am probably going to support him.

But, what you and those who keep posting shit like this here just don't get is that there are a LOT of people like me, who don't see Hillary as incredibly horrible AND see her as likely the best shot to keep the White House away from republican hands, who get turned off by it.

You win Bernie Sanders no votes by this petty snipping at Hillary.

You only push people away.

Your best bet if you can't make a compelling argument in his support is to stfu and just post clips or videos of him.

Inane stupidity in 3, 2, ...

[Dawgs]

156. Uh first, the post is about Hillary supporters...not Hillary.

Second, maybe the point of my OP is the same as your post - that Hillary supporters need to use legitimate arguments to promote Hillary, instead of using contradictory statements to tear down Bernie.

I don't understand why it's fair for them and not me.

[Cosmocat]

188. Sorry, but the ratio of this stuff is pretty marked

The hillary/hillary "supporter" bashing here is never ending.

I know the hard core Bernie people don't want/can't hear this, but ...

Hillary has been running for President for almost a quarter century in essence.

She is the presumptive democratic candidate at this point.

Just the way it is.

You want Bernie to win, he has a LOT of ground to make up.

It does him NO good whining about Hillary.

He gets that clearly.

His campaign will better serve him when everyone associated with it figures it out.

You want to actually help him, SFTU about Hillary and make the case FOR him.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

221. This ^ ^ ^ ^

[KingCharlemagne]

66. Are there actually people with the chutzpah after Iraq to claim that Hillary is as liberal

as Bernie? That would be news to the 1,000,000+ Iraqi civilian dead.

[workinclasszero]

87. It would be news to all those dead american kids that Bernie the gun nut is considered liberal too

Bernie Sanders, Gun Nut
He supported the most reprehensible pro-gun legislation in recent memory.

By Mark Joseph Stern

During his time in Congress, Sanders opposed several moderate gun control bills. He also supported the most odious NRA–backed law in recent memory—one that may block Sandy Hook families from winning a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the gun used to massacre their children.


http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/05/bernie_sanders_on_guns_vermont_independent_voted_against_gun_control_for.html

[Snotcicles]

100. I think Mrs. Clinton would want you to lighten up on that gun stuff. nt

[workinclasszero]

126. Is that a fact?

I thank you for your concern.

[Snotcicles]

133. Someone may point out the hypocrisy of a Hillary supporter criticizing someone else's

views on guns.

[KMOD]

173. Mr. Sanders respects Mrs. Clinton.

[Snotcicles]

191. So do I. I would prefer Bernie Sanders for president. But will vote for whomever wins the

Democratic nomination. Calling him a gun nut goes to far. I have a long memory and would prefer not to sling mud.

[arcane1]

109. Haha! That desperate, this early?

[JEB]

89. There is the sad truth, stated simply and directly.

[raouldukelives]

123. They could care less what the dead think. For some, winning is the best disinfectant. nt

[ejbr]

68. Thanks for posting!

[jalan48]

72. Hillary doesn't sound very "underground" to me.

She sounds like a traditional Democrat tied to the status quo.

[Robbins]

74. They want to dismiss him and all who support him

as fringe.

For record i supported obama in 2008.I suspect i am not only one who feels betreyed by him.I supported him in large part because of
iraq.being totally betreyed.we are now in middle east more than ever before.TPP was last strew for me.attacking elizabeth warren
like he has like he never went after republicans was final strew for me.Before that i might have voted ofr hillary in november 2016 if she beats sanders in primary now i am staying home if he isn't nominee.FIrst time i would ever do that.I am sick and tired of corporate Dems in name only.Which are what obama and clintons are.

[abelenkpe]

79. The responses to this thread make me want to puke

[longship]

85. Just to clarify...

The negative posts against 2016 Dem candidates is getting fucking tiring. And apologies do not help.

First, it is nearly 18 months to the election.

Second, we are all (putative) Democrats here.

Third, and most importantly, tearing down one Democratic Party 2016 candidate does absolutely nothing to raise your choice. Especially this far out.

Basically it all makes it seem childish.

I have no preference at this point because it is fucking over 17 months until the election!

Relax. Take a deep breath. Have a beer and a sandwich, or something.

I am sorry, too. Very sorry.

[darkangel218]

88. Umm.. no thanks, @ "relax"ing thing. nt

[longship]

93. By all means then, stir the pot.

That is why I will not express a preference for a candidate this fucking far out.

BTW, I really love those DUers who say that they will never, ever vote for a specific Democratic candidate because of a perceived political butt hurt from the past. Especially 17+ months before the election.

I support Democrats. And I will do nothing to undermine Democrats in the upcoming presidential election. BTW, you do know that it is 17 months away, don't you?

That is why I see expending so much vitriol is fucking useless and very likely counter to any Democratic goals.

But by all means tear down any Dem candidates you want. After all, who can it help? Except maybe the lunatic theocratic GOP.

Did I mention that it's over 17 months until the election? Where is the fucking urgency?

Breath! Relax! Have a martini. Have some dirty sex. Look at the stars at night. Paddle a canoe down a river with a good friend. But don't be tearing down Democratic presidential candidates this far out.

[reddread]

94. or you can give a damn about the wrong direction

lay back and enjoy it?
uh, yeah
fuck no

[darkangel218]

99. +1

[longship]

105. You presume that I don't give a damn?

Or, maybe I just would rather not dip into the political necrotizing fasciitis that has become of 2016 presidential politics a fucking 17 months before the election here.

I care very much about who is nominated. But given the disgusting two year old behavior here, I prefer not to delve into Hell with those who do.

And unlike some here have expressed, I will vote and support for whoever the Dems nominate.

That's why I support all of them, and none of them.

Did I mention that it is fucking over 17 months until the election?

Some people need a pitcher of martinis and maybe about fifty joints. Relax! There is time for things to pan out. No urgency.

[reddread]

106. smoke it up

that would be one explanation.

[longship]

120. Really? A straw man?

I have a preference.

But I prefer not to dip into the necrotizing fasciitis that has become DU 2016 politics, especially 17 fucking months out. There are too damned many DUers acting like two year olds and I would prefer to not play those sophomoric games. It is political science 101. Tearing down ones opponent does zero to raise yours up! One would hope that folks here would open their eyes and realize that.

I am not laying back. But given the juvenile and toxic environment here -- a fucking 17 months out -- I will not express a preference here. Especially a fucking 17 months out.

[darkangel218]

98. "Stir the pot"? That is not what i said.

[Dawgs]

147. Except I didn't say anything negative about any 2016 Dem candidate.

My comment and apology were for the SUPPORTERS...not the candidate.

I don't why some are so sensitive that they can't handle simple reading comprehension.

[reddread]

86. trying to teach sense or manners to certain advocates

is wasted, but it is one sure way to annoy.

[LanternWaste]

114. I imagine we'll rationalize

"trying to teach sense or manners to certain advocates is wasted..."

I imagine we'll rationalize "smoke it up, that would be one explanation." as either sensible or with manners in such as way as to justify holding others to a higher standard than we may hold ourselves to.

[reddread]

128. first come first serve

Nobody has to tell me to smoke fifty joints.
wasted papers, im strictly a water filterer.

[Dawgs]

160. Been here since 2004.

I should know better.

[Marr]

90. They don't have to pick. Cognitive dissonance is incredible.

[reddread]

102. like a super power or something

I lean a little more towards mission.
seeing genuine paid PR posters at work, and then discovering them to be exactly that has been eye opening.
There is much more at play than just cognitive dissonance, sometimes.

[stevenleser]

153. You might want to self delete. Posts like yours are often hidden by juries. nt

[MissDeeds]

158. This is really uncalled for

The OP has been here for more than a decade. Your snark is way over the top.

[Dawgs]

161. What is "the likes of you"?

Been here since 2004 causing trouble...first for Kerry, then for Obama (2008 & 2012), and now for Bernie.

BTW, I'll gladly vote for Hillary in the general. I always enjoy watching republicans lose.

[Stellar]

135. I don't care who it is that has a 'D' next to their name as long as they speak to our causes...

"Hands up don't shoot", - "stop and frisk" That is just as important to me as many of the Democratic causes.

I'm tired of my people being locked up (sometimes with a death sentence) and/or killed for none or very little reason at all. I'm hearing the candidate getting behind the Latino immigration and that's good, but they can't forget the AA community. It must stop.

[MaggieD]

148. I don't think anyone is arguing....

That Hillary is as liberal as Bernie. He is a socialist after all.

I believe the argument is that she isn't the right wing republican lite you all make her out to be 24/7. At least that is MY argument.

But nice strawman attempt.

[Dawgs]

163. There are plenty of recent posts about an article posted at fivethirtyeight.com

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/hillary-clinton-was-liberal-hillary-clinton-is-liberal/

Clinton also has a history of very liberal public statements. Clinton rates as a “hard core liberal” per the OnTheIssues.org scale. She is as liberal as Elizabeth Warren and barely more moderate than Bernie Sanders. And while Obama is also a “hard core liberal,” Clinton again was rated as more liberal than Obama.

Many of Hillary's supporters jumped on it, saying that it proves that she's a far left liberal. In one of the threads a Hillary supporter actually used both of the arguments that I put in my OP.

So, not a straw man.

[MaggieD]

170. You know that...

"Barely more moderate" is the opposite of saying she is MORE liberal than Bernie. Right?

[Dawgs]

171. Actually, it was just as liberal (not MORE) and barely is close enough anyway. n/t

[uponit7771]

154. She's liberal enough to progress the country...

[Dawgs]

166. I never said she wasn't.

I apologize if that's not what you meant.

[upaloopa]

155. We are not comparing Hillary to anyone. These pro Bernie memes get better everyday.

Hillary is her own person and you don't get a sense of her commitment to our country by standing her up to someone else.

As First Lady, Senator and Secretary of State she is better qualified to hold the office of POTUS than anyone currently running.

We most certainly are not sorry in the least too bad you are!

[Dawgs]

169. I didn't know you speak for all Hillary supporters on DU. That's fascinating.

And by the way, some have been using those arguments (comparing Hillary to others). So, as someone that speaks for others, maybe you should tell them that they are off message.

And, did you just call me sorry?

[upaloopa]

218. Again you make shit up

Why can't you live in a reality based world?

[KMOD]

167. It would be helpful,

if you provided a link to what your OP is about.

[hrmjustin]

168. I don't think Sanders can win largely because he won't raise enough money.

[workinclasszero]

177. Yup but remember all money raised for Bernie is holy money

While all money raised for Hillary is of the devil!!

[hrmjustin]

179. lol yes i know.

[Lil Missy]

212. Who cares what you think?

[Buns_of_Fire]

217. Please, everyone, can't we just unite behind the best candidate?

Which is, of course, Vermin Supreme. Two words to remember: FREE PONIES!

[PowerToThePeople]

222. but

[JoePhilly]

236. When did I tell you Hillary is as liberal as Bernie?

Please, show me where I said that.

You can't because it never happened. I have not argued Hillary is as liberal as Bernie.

Your reading comprehension is severely flawed.

Along with your efforts at political strategy.