Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

RandySF

(57,659 posts)
Tue May 26, 2015, 01:11 AM May 2015

Bernie Sanders: 'Maybe I shouldn't say this: I like Hillary Clinton'

Bernie Sanders, the independent Vermont senator who is running for the Democratic presidential nomination on 2016, on Sunday denied that he would be a “spoiler” for the electoral chances of the establishment favourite and said: “Maybe I shouldn’t say this: I like Hillary Clinton.”

Sanders also asked if the media would “allow us to have a serious debate”, and said: “Or is the only way you get media attention by ripping apart somebody else?”

Clinton is the clear frontrunner for the Democratic nomination to succeed Barack Obama in the White House, polling well over 50% ahead of Sanders, the only other declared candidate, and potential contenders such as former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley and the former Virginia senator Jim Webb.

Sanders, a self-declared “democratic socialist” who has repeatedly championed social reform on a Scandinavian model and attacked the influence and behaviour of the wealthiest sections of society, appeared on CNN. He was asked how he differed from Clinton on income inequality, a key issue in both campaigns so far.


http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/17/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-spoiler

19 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

DJ13

(23,671 posts)
1. I like her too
Tue May 26, 2015, 01:17 AM
May 2015

But I disagree with her priorities.

Socially liberal is admirable, but fiscally conservative is the wrong mix to right all the conservative fiscal policies that are at the heart of our faltering economy since the 80's.

More of the same just wont solve things for the majority of Americans.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
5. This part of the "rest of the story" is salient to what is happening here on DU.
Tue May 26, 2015, 02:29 AM
May 2015
" But taking cheap shots at people, making it personal, I don't think that's what politics should be about.”
Senator Bernie Sanders
 

TM99

(8,352 posts)
8. I am opionated
Tue May 26, 2015, 06:07 AM
May 2015

about my stance on Clinton's history, policies, and positions.

I don't take cheap shots.

I will tumble with the very few Clinton supporters that I see playing games and fighting dirty.

But I have plenty of DU friends who I vehemently disagree with about Clinton versus Sanders and I won't fight with them in nasty ways.

I don't speak for others though.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
12. Nothing wrong with that. But let me give you an example of something I've seen that looks trollish.
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:57 AM
May 2015

Clinton has said--and it has been posted here--that she "admires" Henry Kissinger's dedication to the nation, even while she vehemently DISAGREES with his world view. As anyone with even a half a brain knows, that's State-Department-Speak for "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Despite this, just a few people like to post a picture of the two of them together at an awards presentation where Kissinger was the presenter of an award to Clinton, as though this is some kind of "gotcha" moment. Secretaries of State WILL gather together on occasion. They will work together, too, because that's the nature of the club. Presidents will, too. Where they can find agreement, they'll use that for the benefit of the nation.

I am not sure what the purpose of this sort of goading and baiting is, but I doubt that Sanders supporters would be thrilled if the response to that was a cut-and-paste of Sanders' campaign filing, showing he took cold, hard, CASH from his friend Hillary Clinton for his Senate run. And if Clinton is "wrong" for associating with Henry Kissinger in the context of award and public ceremonies, and as a consequence of their shared experience in the SECSTATE position, then how does one "explain away" Sanders' entirely voluntary friendship with Clinton over a quarter century?

It's just STUPID to play those kinds of "gotcha" games. It's immature. I am pretty certain that neither Sanders nor Clinton would think much of this kind of dumbass back-and-forth, and the people who engage in it diminish the political process when they get into that kind of rhetoric. It makes DU look as dumb and mouth-breathing as Freak Republic. It's embarrassing--who wants to be associated with that kind of moronic shitflinging?

It really needs to stop. It's driving people away to more intellectual sites, and that's a shame, because this is a vibrant online community, and it feels like the rightwing trolls as well as partisans who don't think twice about firing up two or three socks just so they are "winning" (in their dreams if not in real life) are destroying the place.

I don't think many people think ill of Sanders. They may not think he can win, but they think he's a good fellow with a heart in the right place. I haven't seen anyone mocking him or making fun of him, and I can't say the same for the former SecState. And, like I said, I doubt Sanders would approve of some of the stuff his "supporters" (cough) are doing in his name, here.

 

TM99

(8,352 posts)
15. I know that of which you are referencing.
Tue May 26, 2015, 07:52 PM
May 2015

Do you have any actual quotes to back up what you believe she is saying. I am not necessarily disagreeing but I am wondering.

I look at Clinton's time at State and her record on war and it is very different than Sanders. She is definitely far more hawkish than he his.

I can see how some would tie the two together given their more 'in sync' stances on war and military intervention.

With that said, however, I agree that doing gotcha games is not helpful. I don't see everyone doing it on the Sanders side. And I also don't see all Clinton supporters being asshats either. But yes, there are a few.

I personally have been called racist, sexist, misogynistic, ignorant, naive, the far left hair on fire brigade and a few other bogus & choice insults. I have also seen a few mock him and deride him, but yes, only a few.

If both sides agree to keep it focused on the facts and positions even if there is a heated debate I see nothing wrong with that.

I have to say though that I do look at the difference in top posts in the HRC room versus the Sanders room and wonder if there is a bit of a persecution complex going on. Strong attacks on positions are not mean or bad. Sanders supporters myself included will continue to do that.

But outside of the issue of gun control, I have yet to see disagreements with Sanders actual positions from Clinton supporters. Instead I see attacks on his supporters and/or statements of prognostication that only she with billions and more name recognition can win. That is not debating his positions versus hers.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
18. It's in her review of his book in the WAPO. The money quote is this:
Tue May 26, 2015, 09:25 PM
May 2015
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-reviews-henry-kissingers-world-order/2014/09/04/b280c654-31ea-11e4-8f02-03c644b2d7d0_story.html

Kissinger is a friend, and I relied on his counsel when I served as secretary of state. He checked in with me regularly, sharing astute observations about foreign leaders and sending me written reports on his travels. Though we have often seen the world and some of our challenges quite differently, and advocated different responses now and in the past, what comes through clearly in this new book is a conviction that we, and President Obama, share: a belief in the indispensability of continued American leadership in service of a just and liberal order.



Translation: We both had the same job, he had a lot of institutional memory and I availed myself of it. A lot of it came in handy--thanks Henry. Like every former cabinet official, when he traveled, he carried water in an unofficial capacity when back channel communications were mandated, as I've done myself, and my husband has done as well--it's what you do when you serve at the highest levels of government. You never really retire. He kept me in the loop if he heard anything squirrelly and I appreciated that, too. We don't see eye to eye on pretty much anything, but there's no good reason to be an asshole about it--what's the point, really, it won't change anything. He did his thing and thought he was right, I did mine and feel my choices were way better than his. Bottom line--he loves his country, as do I, even though we're not on the same page in most instances.

The difference between Clinton and Sanders, vis a vis war, is viewed as minor according to his anti-war detractors-- if you look at the World Socialist newspaper, those guys don't see substantial daylight between them. He voted for Kosovo and Afghanistan, though not Iraq, BUT he voted for every military appropriation that made war possible, so those guys have the attitude that he's fronting with the peacenik stuff. They also point to the basing of military jets in VT as "proof" that he's a closet hawk.

I don't think most Clinton supporters have any dislike for Sanders--he's a nice guy. They just don't think he can win, for a lot of the reasons that include both his national profile, his perception as being far more to the left than he actually is, and yes, petty ones--but American voters are petty. It takes them a long while to get to know someone, and no one has to be introduced to Hillary or her husband, warts and all. They're so familiar, they're like relatives. Sanders, an unknown from a mostly white state with a state-wide population smaller than that of the city of Boston, just doesn't have name recognition. He doesn't have donors, and money talks. All that great money he raised for his 2006 senate challenge was raised because people like Hillary got on the phone and asked HER donors to give him some love. That ain't gonna happen this time around. He doesn't resonate with the black community, he sure as hell doesn't resonate with the hispanic community (as the socialist paper angrily reported!). It's just an uphill climb for him. His wife is unknown, she had some kind of issue in her job that someone tried to make something of, but she's not going to be allowed to hide out forever. Yes, we should ignore all that stuff--and maybe we can. But the rest of the nation will not and cannot. They like the frou-frou stuff--it's what sells papers, draws page clicks, and puts eyes on screens. We can 'ban' it--but the rest of the nation will be ON it and talk about it.

I don't think there's all that much difference, policy-wise, between Clinton and Sanders, frankly. I guess I've got more in common with the Socialist Workers than I realized...only I think that's a good thing, while they think it's the reason Sanders should be tossed under the bus in favor of someone else who can't win, like Jill Stein. I do think Clinton has better experience--all that FLOTUS time wasn't spent baking cookies, she was working issues within her portfolio, and getting to know world leaders. As Senator, she had some great committees, and as SECSTATE, she knows pretty much every sitting leader of the world by their first name. She can get them on the phone. That kind of thing does matter.

Here are a few of the Socialist Workers' observations (warning, these comments come from SANDERS' left, the people who once regarded themselves as his "base," and some of them are quite critical):

http://socialistworker.org/2015/05/26/bernie-sanders-is-no-eugene-debs

http://socialistworker.org/2015/05/05/problem-bernie-sanders

http://socialistworker.org/2015/05/20/what-should-the-left-say-about-sanders

http://socialistworker.org/2012/08/09/vermont-says-no-to-the-f35 (this didn't succeed...see: http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pentagon-firming-f-35-block-4-configuration-412762/ )


I think it's kind of curious that the people to Sanders' left excoriate him for being too much like Clinton, while the people aligned with him are saying that there's a huge gap there (I don't see it, myself).
 

TM99

(8,352 posts)
19. Thanks for the quote.
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:29 PM
May 2015

I can see now where you are coming from.

I am not surprised that a 'true' far left Socialist organization would see Sanders as not being a 'true' socialist. He is not one. He is a socialist democrat. He caucuses with Democrats. He is now running as a Democrat and not a third party.

I still see quite a big gap between him and Clinton.

On social issues? No, not so much, at least not anymore.

On foreign policy? Yes, Clinton is still hawkish, and I am not comfortable with her response to Gaffadi's death. I have concerns about her vote on Iraq in 2002/2003. I also note that she was a big TPP supporter while at State, and that she really did not have a very remarkable tenure there. It was status quo at best.

On economic issues, I think there is the greatest disparity.

But all of these we and will debate and discuss as the primary truly gets under way.

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
9. First, does Bernie know that, to some, this means he is endorsing Hillary? :-)
Tue May 26, 2015, 08:00 AM
May 2015

Second, it seems to me that any criticism of Hillary at all is now deemed a "personal attack."

MoonRiver

(36,926 posts)
10. Senator Sanders is a stand up guy!
Tue May 26, 2015, 08:05 AM
May 2015

I also have not heard Secretary Clinton say one negative thing about her rival. Nice to have two decent people running for our highest office.

gaspee

(3,231 posts)
11. I like them both
Tue May 26, 2015, 10:11 AM
May 2015

I am fully prepared to vote Bernie in the primary and Hillary in the general. If enough people vote with me for Bernie in the primaries, then I will get to vote for him in the general. If enough people don't agree with me to give Bernie the nomination, I will not whine and cry like a little spoiled brat and I will vote for Hillary. I like her too, when compared to every single one of any of the potential GOP nominees.

I WISH the rest of the country felt the way that I do, but 40 years of brainwashing has turned this country into a poor hating, intellectual hating wasteland of ignorance. We've lived the republicans theories since Reagan - it's led to income inequality, poverty, militarized police forces, endless war, reproductive rights being scaled back, environmental disaster... I could go on and on.

I get frustrated sometimes that enough other people can't see it. But in a democracy, you have to take the good with the bad. You can't MAKE people behave in their own best interests. You can try to convince them, you can get the word out, you can live by example and just have faith that as Martin Luther King said, The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice... look at the world now as opposed to 100 years ago. it's better, it truly is, but society moves slowly, oh so slowly.

If the two Democrats live what they preach by not trying to destroy each other while the clown car goes all Lord Of The Flies on each other, I think people will react well to it.

I like them both.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Bernie Sanders: 'Maybe I ...