General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBernie Sanders WANTS Clinton To PICK A SIDE
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)lewebley3
(3,412 posts)Hillary has said she is against Trade give away deals, that's enough,
The only way the Dem win, is too work as a team, not to divide Dem's.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)And if she has said she is against Trade give away deals that is fine; how does she characterize this one?
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)If Hillary were listening to people like you giving her advise, her
campaign won't last a second. Bernie can say whatever likes
it has no consequences: To win the white house takes more
than being right on the issues, it takes someone who can
play a political game well. If one cannot get elected it won't
mean a thing being right on the issues.
The people who supported Nader, voted ideology on their issues, but they
helped the GOP into power, and then nothing the Nader people wanted got
done. In fact they help the country into war, by putting Bush in!
Hillary is also going to be running on Obama record's, she can
have no better person out in the campaign trail for her than
Obama.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)President Obama is going against the wishes of his own party on TPP--do you seriously think his support of Hillary will be a plus with the party's base after that? Do you seriously think that Hillary supporting TPP is "playing the political game well"? Do you also think her vote for AUMF was playing the political game well? If so, that's fine but be clear on what you are supporting.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)Just a fact!
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)Like the 200,000 registered Democrats in Florida who crossed over and voted for Bush! Like the butterfly ballot! Like purging the voter rolls! Like the Supreme Court selecting Bush! And even like Gore only contesting the vote in selected counties, instead of all of them!
Just facts!
Got anything more responsive?
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)If Nader had come out in support of Gore, that would have helped,
and any division between liberals or Dem's damaged Gores chances.
Sorry, but Nader was part of Gore's problem's not a solution.
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)both New Hampshire and Florida, either of which would have tipped the election. Just a fact that Nader intended the result.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)Everything Nader did helped the GOP: He was self indulgent with the
countries future, and American kids went to war! To many liberal
thought it didn't make any difference which party controlled the white
House, they chose to be ideologue with the country
Any vote out side the two parties, helps the GOP.
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)Let's hope that we don't have a Dem split vote in 2016.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)erronis
(15,328 posts)It's hard to believe that a robotic reply can contain so much crap.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)Also, Obama is the leader of the Democratic Party: it will
take a strong Dem party to get Hillary elected.
Bernie, is only able to run at all because the Dem's have
place on every state ballot. He had to change his party status
so he could use the money Obama, Clinton's, and other Dem's
have raised.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)There is nothing robotic about being a loyal Dem, Hillary has worked
in and for the Dem party all along.
To get elected it takes Dem party team work: Hillary will be well served
to work with Obama and other Dem's in getting elected.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)In a magazine interview.
She can give an opinion on screwing the 99%, too.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)and what she did say got her called to white house for a discussion.
Hillary has never given a opinion about " screwing the 99%", those
are your words.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)She'll triangulate her way through.
djean111
(14,255 posts)Populist_Prole
(5,364 posts)It's strong enough to irritate republicans and sound populistic to the GOPs enemies, but it's weak enough not to upset the PTB's apple cart that favors lower pay for everybody.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)erronis
(15,328 posts)It really only deals with a two-dimensional space such as figuring out where C is given the coordinates of A and B.
Politics and most human interactions deal with tens, or probably thousands of points. Triangulation among all of these, especially when they can change over time is a particularly bad strategy.
Pick your position, broadcast it, stand by it. Let other people, if they like where you are standing come to you.
840high
(17,196 posts)staff as much as her male staff.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)She said so in her kickoff speech where Bernie Sanders only talked about economic policy. She has solutions for all the struggles of people of color, gays and women. DU has spoken!! Her speech will go down in history as...oh wait...
FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)the battery in her political calculator died.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)rock
(13,218 posts)Keep in mind that I'm openly supporting both Bernie and Hillary. Now Bernie says he does not do negative criticism and I strongly agree with that attitude. And in fact for this case it is neither negative nor personal. But it is the wrong opinion. Hillary is not in office. She will have no vote on the trade bill. By the rime she is president (or Bernie is) it will be all over. Now it's just not practical that on the campaign trail that she can invest great amounts of time on every issue. In fact, I wonder how she can obtain the details (while not in office) so that she could make an educated decision. This in my opinion is definitely a tic mark against Bernie (though obviously not a big enough one to be a decider). Finally to echo the sentiment expressed by lewebley3 above: it's not nice to slam the your (ex-) boss who happens to be the current president if you are running for his office!
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)Support for corporations who wrote the agreement is a big issue, whether or not TPP has been passed by the time either one becomes president.
rock
(13,218 posts)Bernie did not explicitly nor implicitly mention the corporations who wrote the agreement as being the issue. The issue he talked about was do we or do we not pass the TPP?
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)I know exactly where Senator Sanders stands on all aspects of thris raping of America's workers and America's sovereignty, because he has made it quite clear in PUBLIC STATEMENTS.
Hillary Goldman Sachs MIC Clinton has yet to do anything close to making her position anything better than indecipherable and uncommitted to anything. The same old SOP we've come expect from triangulating neoliberals.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)Not lately, of course, so I won't insist on her taking a side immediately.
There is no excuse, however, for her not presenting us with her make-or-break wish list. If it's not yet quite clear to everyone just what the TPP will contain, Clinton knows by now where she stands on every possible aspect. Let's hear it, please, and soon.
cali
(114,904 posts)let voters know where she stands on important issues. Furthermore, she's very familiar with the TPP and by the time she left office it was in late draft stage.
And there is more than enough information extant to come to a conclusion on the TPP.
Now we're supposed to think it's ok for a politician running for the highest office to dodge issues that will effect millions of Americans? Really??
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)But you have to understand that TPP is the biggest issue for some people, even trumping gay rights and incarceration of minorities.
bklyncowgirl
(7,960 posts)I'm finding it difficult understanding how opposing TPP trumps gay rights and incarceration of minorities.
It is a very big issue. For some people, I'm one of them, the decline of the middle class and the increasing marginalization of the poor is the most important issue. There's nothing wrong with that. There's also nothing wrong about people for who are passionate about Gay rights, racial justice, women's rights or global warming.
Seriously, can't we walk and chew gum at the same time?
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)The TPP or health care
The TPP or education
The TPP or incarcerated minorities
Why can't we walk and chew gum at the same time? What a ridiculous question?
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)Who ever thought that?
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)male student was pretty damn awesome
this is what i am saying.
i cant help it. i see, i find interesting, i discuss.
cool. thanks for sharing. i do like hearing sanders out there.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)He should be able to make considerable political hay if she doesn't.
But it's early yet, I guess, and if there are nuances I hope Clinton will elaborate.
Populist_Prole
(5,364 posts)Not the sandwich, the issue.
whathehell
(29,090 posts)Funniest thing I've read all day.
Populist_Prole
(5,364 posts)A wedge between corporatist/Third-way democrats and populist democrats.
If you don't realize it; then it's because maybe you don't want to. You tell me then. Why isn't it one?
Back at you.....
whathehell
(29,090 posts)I think I misunderstood -- Thought you meant it as "unimportant".
Egnever
(21,506 posts)He knows that. Yay for bullshit posturing!
Guess he is a politician just like all the rest.
cali
(114,904 posts)recent book.
Egnever
(21,506 posts)It is not static it is an ongoing negotiation she has been out of office for a while now and she has already stated her general wishes for the TPP as you said yourself in her book.
And if as you say she has already stated her support then WTF is Bernie talking about?
Guess he isn't as smart as you and doesn't know she has already covered this .
Or ....
He is playing politics.
cali
(114,904 posts)and it wasn't about her "wishes". that's utterly laughable.
She's backtracked and waffled- as she does on so many issues. Finger in the wind Hillary. That's what Sanders is referring to.
Hillary does nothing but play politics.... and "evolve".
It appears that you know very little about the TPP- and yes, there's a good deal of information extant.
Egnever
(21,506 posts)Who is clearly playing politics like everyone else.
She called the TPP "the gold standard for trade agreements." Yes, really.
Egnever
(21,506 posts)So what's he going on about?
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)upaloopa
(11,417 posts)a junk yard dog. As soon as Bernie runs out of $10 contributions they will let Hillary run her campaign as it should be.
cali
(114,904 posts)I won't be letting it go for HRC. And I'll do all I can to see that HRC doesn't get the nomination. She is simply not to be trusted on issue after issue. And she's far too willing to compromise herself to get elected. I won't soon forget the campaign she ran in 2008.
If you think Progressives will back off from criticizing Hillary's record and rhetoric, hon, you are going to be one very disappointed loopa.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)the nomination.
She is supported by a majority of Dems
I read your stuff everyday and you are living in your own mind not reality
frylock
(34,825 posts)Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)something that I actually read on this site. smdh.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)You mean never stating her position or sharing it with the voters?
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)It's like those late night comedy shows where they stop people on the street and ask them to name the three branches of government. A train wreck.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)On TPP he can give his opinion. He has a record of voting against trade agreements in the past. Hillary has stated she will make her opinion AFTER the FINAL AGREEMENT is given. I don't read where Sanders has given his stand on ALL issues so he needs to run his campaign without giving stands on all issues and his opponents should be given the same consideration. There has been lots of posts in the last day or so and it has gone overboard because a serious problem was not addressed in Sanders announcement. It is time to cease the demanding of ANY candidate give their stand on all of the issues. Back off with this, the campaigns are just beginning, I just hope this is not going to be a campaign norm.
Sancho
(9,070 posts)they reported that Hillary and Obama met and agreed she would not go after his initiatives and he would not go after her campaign to both their benefits.
I heard the interview in the car on the radio, so I don't have a link - likely it was the "On Point" show.
At any rate, it makes sense.
yuiyoshida
(41,861 posts)philosslayer
(3,076 posts)Perhaps Senator Sanders need to spend more time explaining HIS record, and building HIS numbers, instead of trying to tear Secretary Clinton's down.