Hillary Offers a Path Forward Beyond the Gridlock

[upaloopa]

Last edited Tue Jun 9, 2015, 12:26 AM - Edit history (1)

http://correctrecord.org/
At her Silicon Valley speech last week, Hillary spoke about the importance of bipartisanship, saying that we can’t make progress on the biggest issues facing our country if we don’t work across the aisle and listen to each other. Hillary said, “I’d like to bring people from the right, left, red, blue, get them into a nice, warm purple space where everybody is talking and where we’re actually trying to solve problems.”

In the meantime, a slew of potential Republican presidential contenders spent the week at the Conservative Political Action Committee conference in Washington, where they engaged in hyper-partisan rhetoric and distracted from the real issues at hand.

Hillary’s message was a positive one aimed at bringing both sides together. She said, “I don’t think I have all the right ideas. I don’t think my party has all the right ideas.” And she even praised Republican Congressman Paul Ryan for working with Democrat Senator Patty Murray on a budget deal in 2013 to avoid a government shutdown.

Ted Cruz’s message at the conference was fiercely combative, telling the audience they should “stand up against” President Obama and those Republicans who disagree with him ideologically. Carly Fiorina’s speech was even worse — full of one attack after another against President Obama, Secretary Clinton, and Senator Warren.

Instead of using this opportunity on the national stage to talk about real issues and deliver a positive message for the American people, these politicians decided to stick with negativity.

No wonder Americans are so fed up with Washington. This kind of hyper-partisanship embodies everything that is wrong with our political system. Americans want Washington and Congress to work again, for all of us, which is exactly what Hillary Clinton wants, and what she did in the Senate. Notable Republicans from Lindsey Graham to John McCain have praised Hillary Clinton’s ability to put politics aside for the sake of progress while she was in the Senate.

When asked if she could wave a magic wand and have her wish granted, Clinton said, “that we could get back to working together cooperatively again, that we could get out of our mindsets, our partisan bunkers. You can’t run a great country like that, and this is the greatest country, and we need to start acting like it and working like it again.”

[Wilms]

1. More...

^T^H^I^R^D ^W^A^Y

[bunnies]

2. The path forward aka the third way.

Last edited Tue Jun 9, 2015, 10:23 AM - Edit history (1)

Triangulating centrism at its finest. Praising Paul fucking Ryan? Really?!

editing to add the actual link: http://correctrecord.org/hillary-clintons-bipartisanship/ so I can find it in the future.

[Thinkingabout]

11. Do you have a better plan to lift congress out of a grid lock?

[Scootaloo]

55. You assume that the gridlock is a bad thing

If the gridlock is what's stopping fascist Republican bullshit from spewing out with a Democrat stamp of approval, then i welcome gridlock.

[historylovr]

65. +1

[Thinkingabout]

102. The GOP loves gridlock.

[snooper2]

110. Actually, companies love gridlock- regardless of their political persuasion

Gridlock means nothing is getting done-

When nothing is getting done, nothing changes. So you don't have to worry about new rules, regulations, laws, anything...


Just, business as usual. What we should do is tell Congress to take a couple years off

[historylovr]

115. So?

The GOP also loves it when Democrats go along with their agenda in "bipartisan" fashion.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

73. Here here.

[LanternWaste]

124. The corollary is then also true, and any progressive legislation is denied too, yes?

The corollary is then also true, and any progressive legislation is denied too, yes?

(insert alleged and unsupported prophecies of "but there'd be no progressive legistion regardless" below)

[PatrickforO]

64. Yeah. Elect more people like Sanders and Warren to the Senate and House.

It wouldn't hurt either to end gerrymandering - maybe have the Census Bureau draw the boundaries instead of politicians.

It would also be a REAL good idea to a) end the TPP before it ever can become law, and b) end Citizens United.

THEN, maybe we can have single payer healthcare, stronger Social Security and massive cuts to the 'defense' bloat so we can instead fund infrastructure upgrades and CREATE GOOD JOBS.

[Thinkingabout]

71. They are both members in the Senate, they could lead the way to bipartisanship.

[leveymg]

101. Gridlock keeps the GOP from dashing the country to pieces and reversing 80 years of progress.

You want Hillary to help them? This shows how misguided the Third Way agenda really is.

[rhett o rick]

129. Absolutely. The American people are tired of the same rhetoric that the billionaire's

candidates spew forth. The will rally behind Sen Sanders, who isn't owned by billionaires and speaks to issues that effect every American. Goldman-Sachs not only wants more of the same crap we've been getting for decades, they want to accelerate it. Their goal is to increase their profits at the expense of the 99%. We need a candidate that will tell Goldman-Sachs that they must start paying their fair share.

Sticking with the status quo isn't going to fix our poverty, crumbling infrastructure, collapsing economy, the Black Security State, or our imperialistic wars.

[kenfrequed]

133. I think President Obama tried that

He tried it by cluttering his cabinet with centrists to form his "team of rivals." And he wasted a lot of time letting them debate him towards being moderate and move to the middle and compromise.

What did he get? He offered his hand to the most radical, obstructionist, political minority party in modern American history and what did it earn him? He got his goddamned hand chewed off.

The republicans were able to secure their win in 2014 because no one challeneged them on their obstructionism and because we had stupid moderates like Blanche Lincoln who continually stabbed the party in the back and provided fillibuster cover for the re-pug-niks.

What will work is standing bold and strong for progressive policy and then working towards a compromise in between progressive ideas and conservative. Going third way and compromising before you even get to the bargaining table is a recipe for failure.

[Thinkingabout]

134. so you really do not have a better plan to suggest.

[kenfrequed]

136. Uhm...

You must have missed my last paragraph. Stand tall and strong and use the bully pulpit.

[Thinkingabout]

138. Then I wonder why Congressional members are not using the bully pulpit. They are supposed

to be intelligent enough to do their jobs, hasn't happened and I am doubtful we have the right members there.

[kenfrequed]

148. Well...

Do you mean other than the "Bully Pulpit" being traditionally a term associated primarily with the president and their ability to address the nation due to the attention that the office naturally garners?

Senator Sanders has put for legislation occasionally in order to grab public attention and rally public support around an issue, but a senator doing that is not anywhere near as effective as a president.

Also, being almost a branch unto themselves, a president actually has a bit more in the way of bargaining power.

But all that should be fairly obvious.

[Doctor_J]

39. she is as revolting a candidate as the party has ever put forth.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

74. That seems a bit harsh, but I do see why some here feel that way (her own doing, btw).

[leveymg]

104. It isn't just that she's ideologically too right-wing. She's also a highly vulnerable candidate

to inconvenient facts the other sides brings up. She's lucky that the GOP is so inept and conflicted in its scandal-mongering, because her history contains actions, alliances and decisions that are truly unacceptable and, IMHO, disqualifying.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

72. I hear ya. Time to bust Rethug heads, take back the Senate and House, and screw bi-partisonship.

[jwirr]

112. Exactly. Which means making trades often at the expense of the vulnerable. No thanks. To

compromise with people who are actively working to destroy our country is evil.

[PowerToThePeople]

4. "I don’t think I have all the right ideas." - Hillary

I agree.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

75. Gee, ya THINK?!?!

[closeupready]

130. Agree, and some of her ideas are in the direction OPPOSITE

of where we need to go.

[TheKentuckian]

6. Forward to corporate domination and rule of the wealthy. The path surrender.

Can't wait to scurry back to the bipartisanship bullshit and the pretending the right wing has any non insane ideas much less any broadly beneficial ones.

What nonsensical pandering stupidity spitting in the eye of all reason have you not heard and seen what these fuckers agenda is?!?

Puffing up Paul Lyin' Ryan and spouting off about fairy tales of warm purple places. Delusional as the TeaPubliKlans but seeing different illusions or at least pretending to.

[jeff47]

7. .......so has she forgotten the last 30 years or something?

Perhaps she should have that looked at. There were a few events that kinda indicated this approach is FUCKING STUPID and doesn't ever actually solve any problems.

[Fumesucker]

8. "Republicans from Lindsey Graham to John McCain have praised Hillary Clinton’s ability"

Well with endorsements from Graham and McCain Hillary should have the Democratic nomination sewn up tight.

?w=490

[JEB]

9. Ugh!

[hatrack]

10. Yes, since "reaching across the aisle" and "bipartisanship" have worked SO FUCKING WELL

Notably between 1993 and 2001, but even more so from January 2009 to the present.

What fucking planet has she been on?

[Thinkingabout]

12. I haven't seen a lot of working across the aisle especially from 2010 to the present, if I missed

I would appreciate more information.

[jeff47]

15. "Working across the aisle" would require Republicans to compromise.

They don't do that anymore.

The removal of earmarks by Gingrich means there's no reason for them to compromise. It just earns them a primary challenge.

When there's no upside, why do it?

"For the good of the country?" They're the party that believes government is destroying the country. If they make that claim come true, so much the better.

[Thinkingabout]

16. This is why I questioned the time line from 2009 to present. it is gridlock,

Working across the aisles is needed.

[jeff47]

18. Go read the post again instead of repeating yourself.

"working across the aisle" requires having someone to work with. No Republican will work across the aisle to solve our country's problems. They will only work across the aisle to fuck us more. Say, by cutting Social Security or passing "trade" deals.

[Thinkingabout]

25. Go back to the post in the thread, I know what bipartisanship is, I know republicans refuse to give,

Hillary wants to change this.

[jeff47]

29. She can want a unicorn that shits gold. Doesn't mean it will appear.

There are zero incentives for Republicans to be bipartisan.

• They are the "government is awful" party. So if government is actually awful, they benefit.


• No earmarks means it's not possible to bribe a Republican to go along with your bipartisan proposal. Those bribes were the way bipartisanship actually worked.


• Working with Democrats earns them a primary challenger, not accolades.


• Their donors will make sure they are personally well off, even if everyone else is fucked.

Seriously, this argument is a copy-n-paste from 1992. It has never worked. Returning to this argument after spending the last two months claiming to be a populist is an incredibly dumb campaign move. Only thing I can think of to top it would be to announce Palin as her running mate.

[Thinkingabout]

32. So you want congress to remain a do nothing congress?

[jeff47]

35. Nope. I want a functional Congress.

Pretending that there are Republicans willing to compromise will not get that to happen. Because a Republican willing to compromise is as real as that gold-shitting unicorn.

They've given us three decades of proof. How much longer do you need to start believing them?

[Thinkingabout]

40. And if she should be successful i doubt she would want to take credit but enjoy

The fruit from her work. Actually it hasn't been gridlock for three decades, even Joe Scarborough admits they were had by Bill Clinton many times.

[jeff47]

42. The "compromises" of Bill Clinton like ending welfare and NAFTA?

Yeah, we totally need more of that.

This "bipartisan" argument is exactly what Obama did from 2009 to 2014. How often did it work?

Never. The ACA is Bob Dole's response to health care reform in 1993, and zero Republicans voted for it.

Obama was begging for Republicans to slash Social Security in return for unding some of Bill Clinton's compromises, and the Republicans would not do it. They even ate large defense spending cuts from the sequester in order to avoid compromising.

And yet Hillary Clinton is proposing we do more of the same tactic that has utterly failed. After spending the last month trying to recast herself as a populist.

This article is why Clinton can not be our nominee. This is utter and complete incompetence from her campaign. Last week, she's a fighter determined to help Latinos and fight for voting rights, and this week she wants to do whatever is necessary to make the Republicans happy. And that isn't helping Latinos and fighting for voting rights. It is an utterly and completely incoherent message.

[Doctor_J]

41. you prefer the McConnell/Ryan agenda to gridlock?

Your hero worship of Mrs Clinton is disgusting and destructive

[Thinkingabout]

44. Where have I said I prefer McConnell/Ryan agenda, quiet the opposite.

And your snark is back to you.

[jeff47]

47. You said it when you wanted to compromise.

Since they will not compromise, you are asking for the McConnell/Ryan agenda.

[Thinkingabout]

48. Maybe your definition of comprise is different from the one I use.

[jeff47]

49. Nope, I understand that compromise requires both sides to give up something.

And since all the incentives are for Republicans to not compromise, we're going to have to give up virtually everything in order to get the compromise you seek.

That results in the McConnell/Ryan agenda, with a few meaningless trinkets thrown on top.

[Thinkingabout]

51. Bye

[jeff47]

53. Fleeing is always the indication of a winning position. (nt)

[tkmorris]

59. If only you fucking meant it

[Comrade Grumpy]

135. Better a do-nothing Congress than an actively regressive one.

Taking back the House and Senate is the thing to do.

[Thinkingabout]

137. This would be very good, we would need a 60 members in the Senate and 218 in the

House, a good start to returning a functioning congress. If we do not take the House and Senate back then some of the congressional members needs to do their job and start working across the aisle in order to improve this country.

[hatrack]

30. Yes and since her name is "Clinton", Republicans will be eager to cooperate!

Right?

[Thinkingabout]

98. What would be your plan to change a gridlock disfunctional congress?

[Dawgs]

103. How about the Democratic party fight for what they believe so people will vote for them.

It's THE ONLY WAY to deal with the gridlock. Nothing else will work.

[Thinkingabout]

108. Just explain how this is going to work when the Democrats are not in the majority.

They can fight all they want but until congressional member grow up and accept the responsibility of doing the business in which they are elected of which is working with each other. The GOP is really good at gridlock by fighting for what they want, it has only resulted in gridlock. Fighting is not going to stop gridlock, it will insure further gridlock.

[Dawgs]

109. It won't work. Republicans will never grow up.

They will ensure gridlock as long as the President is a Democrat. Doesn't matter if the president is Obama, Clinton, Sanders, or anyone else.

[RobinA]

97. So Did Obama

Which he repeated again and again. How did that work for him?

[Scootaloo]

56. Needed for what?

I've asked you and other clintonistas many times - what,and who are you willing to sell out? 'Causethat's what your "compromise' fetish necessitates, democrats giving up shit for the republicans. yes, it really only goes the one way,m and you know it.

So who needs to do the bending over?

[RiverLover]

13. Well at least this is authentic. Better than being a fake progressive.

Conservatives are on the same page...and its purple.

Hillary’s ‘Progressive’ Effort Backfires, Wall Street Calls Her Out
— June 3, 2015

http://www.ringoffireradio.com/2015/06/hillarys-progressive-effort-backfires-wall-street-calls-her-out/

[Thinkingabout]

17. The one guy did not scare Hillary, she said what she needed to say.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

79. I'm with you there River. Better to be who she really is than a complete phony.

[RiverLover]

87. It isn't going to last long. It makes me ill that she'll be making her first major speech at FDR

Four Freedoms Park in NYC...

Clinton & FDR shouldn't even be used in the same sentence, unless its talking about how Bill Clinton dismantled several of FDR's great policies for our country under the guise of "bipartisanship", when it was just infiltration by the rethugs.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/09/will-hillary-channel-her-inner-warren.html

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

144. Well said.

[DonCoquixote]

14. so wrong

At her Silicon Valley speech last week, Hillary spoke about the importance of bipartisanship, saying that we can’t make progress on the biggest issues facing our country if we don’t work across the aisle and listen to each other

Here you are being elected as the one that will fight, yet you say the bad word (bipartisanship) right off.

[Thinkingabout]

20. Bipartisanship may be a dirty word, Congress should be about working on problems and resolving issue

We see how the party of NO worked, and especially Green Eggs and Ham, cost lots of money to the tax payers.

[jeff47]

23. The party of NO and Green Eggs and Ham got them a majority in both houses.

Why would the Republicans change course?

[Thinkingabout]

28. Then an election is coming up in 2016 and by voting it can change.

[jeff47]

34. Nope. They will keep the House in 2016.

Republican-lite campaigns in 2010 and gerrymandering FTW!

Also, the Republican Senators that will lose and cost them the Senate in 2016 are the "moderate" Republicans. The ones who get re-elected are the most extreme.

"The great moderation" was an artifact of the Dixiecrats. They're gone. We are returning to the normal state of US politics, with two parties that are at each other's throats.

[Doctor_J]

37. she lies, every day, on every subject

No morals, no principles. Say good bye to social security and public schools.

[morningfog]

19. Why are you not providing links to the site?

[jeff47]

22. Optics. It has to look like spontaneous posts from a bunch of "regular" people. (nt)

[morningfog]

24. This is some ham handed optics. What a joke.

[jeff47]

26. Bah. These are experienced operatives! They know how to win a campaign!

(just forget about the last one they ran, ok?)

[Aerows]

50. Completely short-sighted

:Throws hands up in the air:

And this is the person that everyone tells us is the only one that can win.

[Duckhunter935]

31. Kind of looks like spam.

[daredtowork]

21. Triangulation! The Triangle is purple!

Why even bother to have parties if you aren't going to adhere to a platform and try to offer it to the American people as the best one.

The Purple Triangle is why I distrust Hillary. Politicians always invoke "bipartisanship", but it only evokes backroom dealmaking (give-aways to the GOP), not a "way out of gridlock".

Hillary has shown her hand, and it's exactly what the people who are reluctant to vote for her have been saying it was.

Given her audience, this also depresses the hell out of me about how the influence of Silicon Valley money (including the younger generation of employees...?) is going to influence American culture.

[stevenleser]

27. She is striking the right tone. Even if a Democrat ends up having to go it alone

They should tell the people they are willing to work with Republicans if Republicans are prepared to be reasonable. That has to be said and said many times.

Of course the experience of the last two Democratic administrations is that those times are few and far between, but we're not the hyper partisan ideologues that the Republican crazies are and that needs to be emphasized.

[Thinkingabout]

33. Yes, she worked across the lines while she was in the Senate.

[Aerows]

46. If that's the right tone

I'd hate to see the wrong one.

[stevenleser]

83. Yep, it's the right one. Nt

[TheKentuckian]

58. No, the TeaPubliKlan radical regressive are all but utterly wrong, willfully destructive to

government, criminally wrong-headed, and have a whole slew of dangerously delusional at best policies.

The right tone is to stop legitimizing the wickedly absurd, cruel, and ideologically bankrupt and start calling a spade a spade.

The only tone that needs to be set to move toward a functional government is to put the regressives in the corner with their mouths duct taped shut with a dunce cap on for a few generations until they can once again feign sense and decency.

[stevenleser]

84. Yes, it's the right thing to say. I wouldn't want to elect someone who says otherwise. Nt

[TheKentuckian]

93. Of course you wouldn't. I suggest your mindset is even more a share of the problem than the

opposition themselves as the brand of thinking legitimizes and creates a beachhead in our party for their batshit concept of government and wicked policy positions.

Why do they come back from depravity, cruel neglect, criminal behavior, and insane behavior time and time again? Because folks like you whitewash, excuse, and resuscitate them every single time with this inane bullshit and foolhardy lies.

[stevenleser]

118. That you don't get it is sad. nt

[TheKentuckian]

141. Oh I get it and have had quite enough of it, thank you.

[Dawgs]

105. Big surprise.

[stevenleser]

117. That you don't get it is also no big surprise. nt

[Dawgs]

120. Oh, I get it. n/t

[Doctor_J]

36. I can't even believe that she is campaigning on giving the republicans even more.

Absolutely disgusting. Complete disaster on the horizon.

[Joe Turner]

38. Yawn, her long record of supporting the Status Quo is firmly entrenched

Now that she is running for president she talks about all the populist reforms that she voted against with the hope that peoples' memories are short. 3rd Way Hillary is going to have to come out with a better message than her old 2008 campaign pledges.

[Prism]

43. "a warm purple space"

Is that from all the bruising of the lower and middle classes?

It's sort of a weird speech, because she's not even pretending she won't go the triangulating centrist route of her husband. She's announcing it proudly.

Ooft. No thank you.

[hootinholler]

94. Reminds me of Sybil

And the purple crayon.

[Aerows]

45. That path that she speaks of

seems like the yellow brick road, and we are supposed to pay no attention to whatever is behind the curtain.

[jeff47]

52. Btw, thanks for this post.

Now I can link it to every single post where Clinton pretends to give a damn about women, voting rights, immigration and every other issue she has been trying to use to claim she gives a damn about the little people.

[cantbeserious]

54. This Approach Did Not Work For Obama - Why Will It Work For HRC - More Empty Rhetoric

eom

[truebluegreen]

57. That's a laugh and a half.

Takes two (sides) to tango, and if only one side is prepared to compromise AT ALL, which side gets screwed? This is an easy one, since we have seen it lo these past 6 years. Hillary is no better liked than Obama on that side of the aisle and will do no better.

[Scootaloo]

60. I just came back for a re-read... Purple sauce?

[Luminous Animal]

61. And what is strategy, her plan, for bringing my neighbors and I into that warm purple space.

[Kip Humphrey]

62. Appeasement and capitulation or revolution... I choose revolution.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

77. I'm with you Kip.

[joshcryer]

63. Bipartisanship is damaging to a 50 state strategy.

You can't have both. So if this is the approach to leadership (beyond the first 2 years) then it is a failing strategy. I can get behind it to keep things normal until the House can be taken back (first two years of playing nice) but you want to fix gerrymandering and take back Congress (which can only be done with a 50 state strategy).

Obama had a wasted opportunity to make great gains in 2010 by putting on his comfortable shoes but admittedly his hand was poorly dealt with the crap he had to resolve after Bush's disastrous presidency.

[SoapBox]

66. I'm stuck on the point that she was in San Jose area, LAST week...

Never heard that she was even in the state...where else was she chatting up Silicon Valley/rich people types?

I'll bet she didn't make any pit stops in Redding or Fresno.

[WillyT]

67. Jesus... Here We Go Again...

[Unknown Beatle]

68. Hillary Clinton has more baggage

than Samsonite.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

69. Oh, Joy! Triangulation....again.

No thanks.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

70. "Hillary spoke about the importance of bipartisanship"

[Scootaloo]

76. ...Dead armadillos?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

80. It's based on a famous Jim Hightower quote....

"All you find in the middle of the road are yellow stripes and dead armadillos."

[TransitJohn]

78. Perfectly calculated to appeal to

moderates, independents, and conservatives who aren't batshit crazy. All centrists campaign saying the same thing, and it's positively Orwellian. It's a perfect recipe for continuing gridlock and preserving the status quo. Double plus good.

[ms liberty]

85. excellent comment. n/t

[Divernan]

81. Rank & file Rs & Ds bipartisanly support Bernie

Why? Because the rank & file of all political persuasions want to keep our jobs home, keep our tax dollars home and most importantly, keep our children home - i.e., not suckered into enlisting as cannon fodder for the MIC and One Percent in their endless bloodthirsty profiteering. The rank & file don't want endless war as a vehicle to keep transferring wealth - what pittance of wealth is left in the rank and file, that is.

Witness Bernie's warm reception in red state New Hampshire: http://politicalmoll.com/and-the-crowd-went-wild/

HRC's response: I want to listen to Bernie milking a cow? Or maybe, I want to listen to cows?
HRC, as per usual is long on words, short on actions.
Still waiting for her to condemn TPP, which would involve her apologizing for her previous support of it. Oh wait, she can just claim it was a "tough choice."

The toughest choice HRC has to make? Which billionaire supporter's private jet to borrow.

[Wilms]

82. Cool thread. n/t

[Betty Karlson]

86. Mrs. Clinton is right to ask for bipartisanship

But now that even "the great conciliator" (Obama) has given up on the GOP, and with Mr. Sanders closing the gap on her left wing, is this the right time to exhibit centrism? Isn't that centrist image her biggest weakness in the primaries?

[cali]

88. wow. what utter nonsense.

[99Forever]

89. ...

[madokie]

90. Let me say something

Hillary has a snowballs chance in hell of being elected President.

[closeupready]

131. Yes. That's not even hyperbole.

I'm not sure if it's scary or pathetic how mid-90's her campaign sounds.

[madokie]

132. So yesterday

[NCTraveler]

91. K&R

The start to her campaign has been excellent. Thanks for the op.

[cali]

95. seriously? you actually believe that bipartisanship with today's republicans

is anything but democratic caving?

[NCTraveler]

100. On numerous issues, yes. One hundred percent.

Sanders has done excellent bipartisan work on major issues as has Hillary. With great outcomes. Not all issues lend to this. That is why simple black and white statements such as yours are more often than not wrong. I wouldn't insinuate Sanders is caving in the manner in which you are just because he worked across the isle on major legislation. Granted, Sanders, like Hillary, won't reach across the isle very often. But to see this type of rhetoric on the campaign trail shouldn't be a shock to anyone paying attention to politics for more than a day.

.“He accomplishes this on the one hand by being relentlessly active and on the other by using his status as an independent to form left-right coalitions,” Matt Taibbi wrote in Rolling Stone. <- Taibbi talking about Sanders.

Sanders has authored or cosponsored bills with Richard Burr, John McCain, John Boozman, Dean Heller, John Isakson, Jerry Moran, Susan Colling, and many more. Numerous were successful in passage.

Hillary has a similar record. At this pace of purity, there are going to be a whole group of people left without a candidate to support.

[Dawgs]

106. Co-sponsoring bills as Senators is a lot different than getting cooperation as President.

You should know that.

[NCTraveler]

107. I fully agree with you.

They are two different things. One is working with the other side as an executive, the other is working with the other side as an equal colleague. Are you saying he won't work with those people once he becomes President? Many of these aren't simply cosponsoring a bill. Many he played a serious role in with his republican colleagues.

[Vinca]

92. She shouldn't waste her breath singing "kumbaya."

If she is elected POTUS, which she may well be, the GOP will immediately transfer their reason for existence to "Hillary Hatred" rather than "Obama Hatred." She must face reality and not waste years on end trying to compromise with people who have no intention of being compromising.

[RobinA]

96. Freakin' Seriously???

Where have I heard this one before? Tall, lanky AA man with the nice looking family. Closet smoker. Lives in DC somewhere. Seems like a nice guy. Been in the news a lot over the past 6 years. Might be fun to share a j..., well, not exactly a beer, with. Failed regularly to meet his stated bipartisan goal. In fact, has demonstrated without a doubt that "reaching across the aisle" is a good way to get your arm cut off and then beat with the severed limb.

Hilary - You aren't stupid, so I can only assume that you think I am. You are parroting a failed strategy WHILE YOUR PREDECESSOR IT IS STILL FAILING AT IT. Just no.

[muriel_volestrangler]

99. What a waste of a magic wish

She could have gone for 'an end to world poverty', 'cheap unpolluting energy', 'world peace' or something. Instead she wants an end to American political partisanship. Talk about a Village mentality.

[FlatBaroque]

121. It's the correct answer for HIllary

because that is the 800 pound anchor around the neck of her political ambitions- her divisiveness. So, of course, she wishes that would go away.

[muriel_volestrangler]

123. Yes, worrying about 'divisiveness' is the 'correct' DC Village thing to do

It's what you get from reading David Brooks op-eds, or the Washington Post. It's the correct thing to say to please think tanks, foundations, and White House correspondents. It's not leadership, or imaginative thinking, it's 'correct'.

[LondonReign2]

111. More Third Way bullshit

Third Way compromise consists of throwing a few scraps of social justice our way for the compromise of accepting Republican Corporate economic policies.

[SidDithers]

113. DU rec...nt

Sid

[Phlem]

114. What a load.

[whatthehey]

116. Nice, but either naive or bullshit I'm afraid

When Tsongas said the same thing in 92 I agreed vigorously and supported him. When Obama said the same thing in 2008 I knew it was hopelessly Panglossean, because I had seen the RWNJ hysteria try to take down an incredibly successful trade-expanding welfare-cutting center-left white Southern President with ferocious single-minded abandon. The intervening years have made the prospect even more laughable. The Republicans aren't pretending, even publicly, that they seek the best for the nation any more; only that they seek to stop and attack a Dem POTUS in anything they attempt at any cost.

I like HRC. I know she is not naive. I know she understands Obama has tried bipartisanship and been viciously rebuffed at best and dragged rightward at worst. To think that she, their #1 target for 24 hour hate for the last quarter century, could in any way be more successful working with them is either intentional arrant nonsense or utter stupidity, and stupid she certainly isn't.

Even if, in some strange drug-induced bliss, she actually believed that, it's not what I want in a president. I want one who knows this is a fight, that it is a team sport no matter what idealists pretend. Republicans aren't for working with. They are for negating, stopping, outmanoeuvering, destroying if possible. Sure in a la-la fantasyland I'd prefer it to be otherwise, but I know it won't be for a long long time, and I know HRC has forgotten more politics than I'll ever know, so she is surely blowing smoke here.

[Broward]

119. She hasn't learned anything.

[Fumesucker]

122. Sure she has, she has learned that you can fool some of the people all of the time

[Fumesucker]

125. I thought that the talking point is Hillary will *fight* the Republicans better than anyone else?

[Tarheel_Dem]

126. K&R!

[Thinkingabout]

127. I am surprised to see so many here who wants to continue with the GOP gridlock, I would have

thought there would have been more who wants to see something done about the gridlock.

[SaranchaIsWaiting]

140. What would you like the people to give up to please the Republicans?

Because that is what it will be. They will not budge one inch, so it is the Democratic side that has to do the giving in. What are you willing to risk, Social Security cuts? more loss of women's rights or more tax cuts for the extremely wealthy all for the cause of getting something done, even if that something is a disaster?

[Thinkingabout]

143. Where did the conclusion risk of Social Security, women's rights etc come?

This my way or the highway sure has not worked. Right now there needs to be some funds transferred into the SSDI and unless the republicans "compromise" happens there are going to be a big problem for some folks. Oh, dragging out the false boogie bear is not going to change much.

[SaranchaIsWaiting]

146. The Repuglicans will not give in. That has been well established over this President's term.

That leaves Democratic values to be put up for sale to make that purple color.

[Thinkingabout]

147. This is why talking to each other and co-sponsoring bills together and it still does happen

and just stare at each other or we can demand they work together and get America working again, the non functional congress needs to go away.

[peacebird]

128. Obama said same thing after his election. Why would we believe it would turn out differently?

[Maven]

139. Ugh she's following the Obama playbook from '08

The worst thing about this (or maybe the best thing?) is that I don't even think she really believes it.

[JHB]

142. Ok, so what's her actual plan? How does she break up the Republican phalanx?

I'm all for making happy-talk about bipartisanship, as long as there are no illusions about the real situation. The conservatives have built an entire system that engages in 24/7 "two minute hates" against Democrats and liberals (they make no distinction, especially in Hillary's case), rewards increasing intransigence and absolutism while punishing any hint of compromise. They've filibustered their own bills when Obama has decided "ok, we'll do it your way, but let's get it done" and all of a sudden they'd have to actually work with him. None of them wanted that photo op, because it would be used against them.


The hyper-partisanship exists because conservatives insist on it. Until their stranglehold on the Republican party is broken, "compromise" is nothing of the sort. It's simply "meeting them halfway" as they pull the goalposts ever further to the right.

What is Hillary's plan to fight that?

[FrankUnderwood]

145. I will not let Hillary take this road. I hitched my wagon

to one star and got burned. I'm not gonna let that happen again.