Hillary backing out of Debate PROVES she'll back out on her Progressive policies.

[Joob]

After all, what else does she have to gain?
She won't gain anything if she leans left.
Neither will the lobbyist or corporations that donate to her.

**I'm talking about her AS President.. not Running. For president. What would she GAIN AS President?**

[MariaThinks]

1. hardly

It means she wants to stop wasting time and go take on trump

[RobertEarl]

18. That's not true at all

She is afraid of Bernie. Bernie is about to smoke her in California and she always been ducking debates because she is so afraid of the truth that make come out while she's talking.

Besides that she is showing great disrespect for the voters, again. Not a winning combination.

[Arneoker]

37. On the other hand, there's the saying

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Quite honestly, making whether to debate or not an issue is typically the mark of a loser.

There have already been nine debates. Both of them are giving speeches and making their case. Bernie is hardly forced to wear a muzzle that can only come off when there's a debate.

I think most people in California will make their decisions based on the issues and their perception on who would be best for them and the country.

[RobertEarl]

40. Right

Screw educating people. To hell with the voters and telling them what the facts are. Hiding is a proven successful way to keep voters stupid. Bush proved it and the media does an excellent job of hiding truths. Why go against what works so well and keeps the 1% on top?

[Arneoker]

66. So basically you have no hope of accomplishing anything?

Hate to tell you, but nobody's going to do it for you!

Yes, there is a lot to overcome. There's always been. If you can help advance things a bit, then you've done a lot.

[RobertEarl]

71. Right

Hillary is not going to do it for me.

As far as I can tell she is only doing it for herself.

Unlike me, who has never gained a dime from my involvement, Hillary has become super rich.

And now she is hiding!

If she were even on DU she'd get smacked down so hard it would make heads spin.

[Baobab]

83. Mrs. Clinton is hardly a progressive

She's far right on military issues and she's center right on social issues.

[JDPriestly]

56. I'm in California. We want a debate.

Hillary's voters tend to be uninformed.

The types who think about who they will vote for just days or hours before going to the polls, the types who can't tell you why they will vote for her.

So if she debates, her voters might pay attention and decide they prefer Bernie.

That's why she doesn't want to debate in California.

She does not want her voters to be informed as to who she really is and what she really stands for.

[MyNameGoesHere]

63. Hillary's voters tend to be uninformed.

Sanders voters tend to be assholes. Is that fair?

[JDPriestly]

64. Proud to be an informed asshole to Hillary. Thank you.

If you knew me, you would understand that I am an extremely inoffensive person. I always take joy in the small victory in assertiveness that a nasty epithet, especially a vulgar one provides me. I don't swear myself, and I don't use crude words.

I remember the first time someone called me a word for women that starts with "b." I was in my late 40s I think, and I was so delighted that someone actually thought I was that obnoxious.

So thanks for making my day.

[Arneoker]

69. IMHO

I am very much informed. I certainly have been wrong more than a few times. But I do think that I have been right about things too. One thing I think that I am right about is that people don't like to be called uninformed. Now if people REVEAL themselves to be uninformed, I don't hesitate in calling them such. But besides that, or if they truly reveal themselves to be indecent, I think people deserve the courtesy of respect for expressing disagreement.

I do think that the media, with a few exceptions, has done a terrible job of informing people. But even so, somehow people know things. I think I know things. I daresay you think you know things.

[JDPriestly]

72. I respect people who disagree with me. I don't respect people who vote and can't say

why they are voting for the candidate they vote for. If a person votes, that person has a responsibility, a duty to inform him- or herself and be able to explain why they are voting as they are.

[MyNameGoesHere]

87. Inoffensive?

You passive aggressively called most Clinton supporters ignorant. You're not as inoffensive as you think you are.

[George II]

50. She's not afraid of Sanders nor is he going to "smoke" her in California.

There have been about 10 debates, and they've been the same boring rant about "Wall Street", "corrupt campaign finance system", "rigged economy", "rigged primaries" (note he uses rigged to describe more than one of his "issues&quot

She's not showing the voters any disrespect. Were there supposed to be 57 debates? That's how many states and territories will have held primaries/caucuses by mid-June.

If what she's been doing is "not a winning combination", what would you call the combination of her opponent? Remember, she's slaughtering him in popular votes, pledged delegates, and superdelegates.

One would think what she's been doing IS a winning combination.

[CorporatistNation]

82. baloney! Hillary Cannot Be trusted As Far As You Could Throw Her! She Cannot Tell You With A

straight face... what she had for breakfast! She is a compulsive pathological LIAR!

Reference Material Below!

[Thinkingabout]

2. What debate did she back out ?

[Cali_Democrat]

4. A Fox News debate.

Hillary should be applauded for avoiding that clusterfuck.

[Thinkingabout]

55. She did not back out, she declined the invitation, some people needs to know the difference.

[workinclasszero]

45. A fox news set-up

Bernie wasted all his supporters money, spending it like a drunken sailor so he's desperate for free publicity.

Along comes the devil Fox and offers a debate where their boy Trump and broke ass Bernie can gang up on Hillary for 2 hours or so.

Hillary being a smart person and knowing shes got the nomination locked up, turned them down because its GE time now.

Yay Hillary!!

[Thinkingabout]

58. Some does not know the difference in declining an invitation and backing out, backing out means she

agreed to the debate and then changed her mind. Just more wrong talking points.

[Chezboo]

68. She agreed in February to a debate/forum in CA before our June 7 primary.

She now declined. That is backing out. We're good enough to fill her coffers with cash several times a year, but not to have debate about what is important to Californian's? Seriously? There's a reason why her favorables are in the toilet, and she keeps proving it.

[Thinkingabout]

75. Good for Sanders, he hasn't won a debate yet and to subject him to more embarassment is not good.

[Chezboo]

79. No defense, so deflect.

Such a predictable response from a Clinton supporter.

[restorefreedom]

74. she did agree to one in may

back when she was desperate to debate before nh

bernie honored his end of the bargain. too bad she can't do the same....

[JDPriestly]

59. She agreed to debate in California.

Now she is breaking her word.

And then her supporters wonder why we Bernie supporters don't trust her.

It's pretty clear.

I'm in California. I want a California debate and a California primary.

[TimPlo]

85. Back in start of the primary the DNC

Only had 6 debates on the books because DWS and DNC did not want more in this election because to have more debates would give free exposure to Sanders. Clinton already had enough exposure that she was at a 80% advantage at start of primaries over Sanders. We come to Iowa and it was a toss up which shocked the hell out of her camp, she lost the 80 points over 4 months to Sanders. They decided they need a debate before NH so in a deal with Sanders they promised x number of debates with at least 1 in May before CA primary. So now she is backing out of this deal because it is to her advantage now. So that shows a lack of honesty in a candidate that people should not take as OK.

[Thinkingabout]

86. Lack of honesty, now in the name of honesty, Sanders has not won one debate, he

knows he is not going to be able to advance himself. Hillary did not accept the FOX invitation for a debate, its over.

[eggman67]

88. Yes, but in fairness...

that's only 'cause she's dishonest.

[NurseJackie]

3. Oh brother!

[Tal Vez]

5. "She won't gain anything if she leans left." That is debatable. A more certain fact is

that we won't gain anything if she loses. So, she does need a sensible strategy to win.

[Jester Messiah]

14. I take the long view.

If she loses a message will be sent: Fuck over the progressive wing at your peril. If this message is heeded, the effect will be better candidates and policies in successive elections.

[Tal Vez]

21. I like that. I wish I could tell you how many Republicans I heard say just that.

In 2008, they said, "If we stay home and don't vote for McCain, the party will have to give us a real conservative next time.'

And, the next time, they got Romney. Then it was "If we stay home and we don't vote for Romney, the party will have to give us a real conservative next time."

And, the next time, they got Trump.

How long is your long view?

[Jester Messiah]

25. As long as it takes.

Either the demo come around or the progressives get a new party. Either way works.

[Tal Vez]

36. Yeah, these parties, they just come and go.

The Democratic party might go back to the 1820's, but the Republicans were formed to replace the Whigs - why, it was just a bit more than 150 years ago.

Seems like only yesterday.

[JDPriestly]

61. But the parties changed viewpoints.

I remember my grandmother telling me that she was a Democrat. She said she had been a Republican (probably during the time right after Teddy Roosevelt and up to Hoover, but that the Republican Party had left her, so now she was a Democrat, an FDR Democrat, I might add.

[Tal Vez]

65. Yes, the parties do change over time.

When I was younger, the Democratic party was extremely divided. Part of the party was leading the charge to repeal the worst segregation laws imaginable and another very important part of the party was promising "segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." The losers became Republicans very soon after a Southern Democrat signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Certainly things change within parties over time, but they actually change more quickly when a party is on a winning streak. FDR's New Deal was a product of major electoral successes. LBJ's Great Society began during a year (1964) when the Democrats were in the process of winning with a huge majority.

It's been my experience that if you want the Democratic Party to change, then you should help them to win and the larger the majority, the better. When a party loses, it often becomes more cautious. I can think of a few exceptions (Goldwater, McGovern and Trump), but usually the parties respond to losses by moving closer to the center.

[Arneoker]

41. Works for what?

In Europe there are all kinds of parties. Are those countries paradises? My impression is that the more progressive countries over there have less parties, and the rise of new parties has marked at least as much as a turn to the extreme Right as any kind of progressive turn.

Now I acknowledge that is not a slam dunk argument against a new party. You could make an argument that you build one up over a long period of time. But it is hardly the magic bullet a lot of people seem to think.

You have answer the question, why reinvent the wheel?

[annavictorious]

54. I think progressives should get a new party.

But that's hard work, and Sanders has proven the point that you can exploit an established party's organization when you choose to.

[rhett o rick]

31. Obama sent that message on his inauguration day. It is obvious that the Conservative/

Corporatist Wing of our Party doesn't like progressives. How many progressives did appoint?

[JDPriestly]

60. Interesting. I hope she is paying attention.

[Andy823]

6. More right wing BS

Don't you and your gang get tired of helping republicans by spreading their BS day in and day out?

[Joob]

12. I'm not helping republicans Hillary is, hell she get's their donations

Her word is meaningless.
"I'll release the transcript of my speeches when my opponents do"
no...speeches from her opponents now.. Where are those speeches?

Oh I forgot, her word is meaningless

She said she'd debate Bernie, even in the past vs Obama said, should always debate Anytime , Anywhere.

But oh.. I forgot her word is meaningless.

When should we take HER words seriously? When does it matter what she says?

What I get from her... is that it doesn't matter.

[Cheese Sandwich]

7. Her word means nothing.

[Mnpaul]

32. and she has the nerve

to blame Sanders for her bad poll numbers

Look in a mirror. Quit blaming others and own it.

[JaneyVee]

8. Shes doing Bernie a favor after shellacking him in all previous debates.

I think shes looking to not run up the score. Kinda like a mercy rule thing.

Bernie fans would just get more mad seeing Bernie go down in flamez again.

[rhett o rick]

38. LOL, running away from a fight and then saying you are doing the other person a favor.

She wants to start leaning to the right and she can't do that with Sander pressing her from the left.

[snowy owl]

44. The more she debates, the more her duplicity will show. She's pandering as is.

Otherwise why all the two-front memes? Nothing authentic about her.

[anotherproletariat]

9. Or it proves that she is too smart to debate on FOX, in a race that she has already won.

The goal of the party at this point should be establishing unity to take to the general election. Any situation, such as a debate, that brings up more animosity is a bad idea at this point in an already contentious race. Time to stop the bickering.

[nc4bo]

15. Obama was never ever afraid of Fox. He out foxed THEM.

However I do agree it takes a special kinda gonads and a strong conviction in what one believes to go into the lion's den and not everyone is cut out for it.

[anotherproletariat]

23. By all means, Bernie is free to go on FOX for a one on one interview.

We would all be interested to see either:

Them building him up, showing that the repubs think he is the easier candidate for them to beat.

OR

Them bringing up all those hard questions that would lose him the general election, knowing that a majority of Americans are against big tax hikes, socialism, atheism and a healthcare program that they see as far more liberal than Obamacare. They could also bring up many items from his past...everything from his sex-fantasy writing of the '70s, his honeymoon to the USSR, visiting and praising Cuba, going to Nicaragua and meeting with the Sandinista leader, and on and on.

Either way I will watch.

[nc4bo]

27. Lol I doubt it. Sanders had no baggage compared to you know who.

I don't blame her for wanting to avoid at all costs.

[snowy owl]

47. Which all goes to show his authenticity. Given all, he was never a Goldwater Girl.

Bernie always on left: socialist, social democrat, democrat but never a republican.

[fasttense]

10. Yeah, she'll embrace globalism and trickle down economics

So fast it will make your head spin. They can write anything they want in the party plaform but, much like Obama's platform, 80% of it will be ignored.

[randome]

11. And all your post PROVES is that you are still unwilling to work as part of a team.

Just like Sanders. Maybe all you non-team players could, like, form your own...never mind.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Jester Messiah]

29. Ok.

(Cue the howling how Trump is our fault.)

[rhett o rick]

39. No one has asked us to "work as a team". We've been disparaged by the Conservative Wing for

years and now they are demanding we sell our souls. The Conservatives have disenfranchised us over and over and told us they don't need our working "as part of a team."

Sanders is a better candidate to defeat Trump but some decided that they hated the Left sooo much they'd rather chance losing the general than nominate a progressive.

As far as starting our own party, bullcrap, the Democratic Party is our Party and the DLC/Third Way/Corporatists must be driven out.

[Arneoker]

48. Why don't you concentrate more on building

Than getting revenge? If the Sanders people had some clout then they would find a lot of people would be listening. But you have to organize and strategize, not just demand what you think is your due.

[highprincipleswork]

13. You know what she'll gain if she leans Left or continues Left as she has been in the primaries?

She'll gain as many Bernie supporters and people who like his message of all types.

She's gain credibility for staying true to her word.

She'll gain the best available platform for going up against Donald Trump, politician of the hour and of the people till proven otherwise.

She'll gain a separation from Bill Clinton's administration, which is really what she needs if she wants to be the politician of this hour and of the People as expressed today.

There's more, but there's quite a lot to gain.

Nothing but old habits the other way. At least for her role as representative of the Democratic Party.

What she has to gain from going right is all her collusion with Wall Street and so forth.

I'm not naive enough to think that isn't a large incentive, although a wholly dishonest and reprehensible one. In my opinion, she can
1. stay as Progressive as the primaries or even take it further or 2. she can go backwards to the right, very possibly lose the GE, of if she wins become the ultimate Wall Street tool.

[Joob]

16. I understand what she gains "running" for president.. BUT AS president?

[highprincipleswork]

22. She gets a legacy. From what I read of the country, I don't think that the country or history are

going to be impressed by a DLC Democrat. She could, of course, just have the reputation of being the first woman President, as Barack is the first Black President. That is, if she wins the nomination and wins the GE, highly questionable in my opinion with a regressive campaign. I can already see the attack ads, and feel the lack of defense from the Democratic side.

Personally, I think even Bill Clinton would have done better during impeachment proceedings if Democrats in some part didn't feel he had sold them out. Obama I think could have done better if he hadn't alienated Progressives at most turns. It's hard to vehemently and ardently support someone who keeps sticking their thumb in your eye.

And Hillary, at this stage, at this moment in history. Yes, I think she could become not only the first woman President, but a woman FDR, as popular as he was. And to do that as a separate person very different from Bill, running a much more solidly Progressive campaign and more solidly Progressive administration. C'mon ladies, particularly Progressive minded ladies - wouldn't you enjoy the Hilary who could do this?

I know there's enough ambition in Hillary to take this course, and run with it. I just don't know if her political calculations plus her ambition can lead her in this direction, especially when the money on the other side is so damn tempting!!!!

That's truly the Hillary dilemma, in my opinion. Greatness or money.

[rhett o rick]

53. She is done leaning left. She doesn't need the Left if she can steal voters from the Right.

In fact a voter from the Right is worth more to her by a lot than a voter from the Left. Many on the Left will vote for her with their noses plugged. So if she leans left she would only pick up a few as some will vote for her anywayz. But if she steals a vote from Trump that's one less for him and one more for her.

She will start leaning right very soon. That's why it's important to her for Bernie to drop out. Frack that stuff, go Bernie go.

[stillwaiting]

17. Wall Street believes that as well.

I really do not think they would have lavished so much money on her if they believed otherwise.

[oasis]

19. Fox News moderators with biased debate agenda, Smart move. nt

[Joob]

20. You do release this is for the nominee in the general election right? It would further prove who

could repel attacks on them. And I'm pretty sure they'll be debates on fox in the GE

[oasis]

26. No need to expose herself to a right wing ambush since she

already has the nomination locked up.

[annavictorious]

24. The race is over.

It's unwise to indulge Sanders's delusions on a public stage. It would only serve to legitimatize his bizarre claims to a nomination he didn't win and he didn't earn.

Sanders had a major debate opportunity in NY, and he left quite an impression here.

His debate pre-game included a rally during which one of his surrogates (a formerly respected health care activist) called Democrats "corporate whores" to the cheers of a crowd that couldn't actually vote in the primary because they had never registered with the party that Sanders was exploiting.

Sanders's debate strategy was to be as peevish, sneering, and nasty as possible. Sanders was left with egg on his face when he couldn't support his virulently negative claims about Clinton with actual facts.

Immediately after the debate, Sanders whisked family and friends off on a chartered Delta 767 jet for a whirlwind 36 hour European junket during which he had a pretend meeting with the Pope.

Sanders wouldn't have needed a California debate for exposure if he hadn't blown through the $210,000,000 in donations that supporters (apparently from all corners of the world) entrusted him with.

I's not on Clinton to dig Sanders out of the very deep hole that he dug himself into. He's got until June 7 to get himself out. Enough with his ridiculous entitlement.

[tularetom]

33. Wow, you seem like such a happy cheerful person

I'll bet you're a hoot at parties

[annavictorious]

46. Actually, I'm a very observant person.

and certainly cheerful about the outcome in NY. It felt a lot like vindication.

[yolla331]

81. Are you sure?

Vindication for whom? For anyone who could not change their registration six months before the NY primaries?

Or the 128,000 Brooklyn Democrats that were purged? Care to answer that one for me?

[Dem2]

28. I like eggs.

I looooooove eggs.

[FarPoint]

30. The message is clear..

Bernie and his Fox and Friends were trying to use Hillary for attention and public leverage... Truthfully, Bernie is below Hillary on the national scale ....he needs to appear equal, which he is not.

[Maedhros]

34. Was there ever any question as to whether she would renege on her campaign promises?

It's what Democratic candidates DO: pretend to be on the liberals' side, then govern from the right.

[annavictorious]

49. Sanders reneged on his promise

to run a clean and positive campaign.

[kstewart33]

35. Hillary's backing out because there's no sense is debating a loser.

Her focus is on Trump, not a lost cause.

[George II]

42. How could she back out of something she was never in in the first place?

[annavictorious]

52. I think reality and rules are different when the

candidate is a woman.

http://www.theonion.com/blogpost/hillary-clinton-is-too-ambitious-to-be-the-first-f-11229

[SidDithers]

43. Hillary is the presumptive nominee...

Bernie is the presumptive loser.

What's the point in having another debate, when the outcome of the primary race has been decided?

Sid

[pnwmom]

51. No network besides Fox has offered and no Democratic debates have been held there for 12 years.

For good reason.

But she knows she's won. She's got a lot better use of her time than having another repetitive, predictable debate. Every other Town hall and Debate has been nationally televised. Californians who were interested could have been watching them.

[bigwillq]

57. Makes no sense for her to debate. There were too many debates already, imo.

Seen one, seen them all.

[oldandhappy]

62. no surprise

she is a right-leaning centrist

[LAS14]

67. She NEVER agreed to a Fox debate, and...

... would be less qualified as president if she had been stupid enough to agree to a couple of hours "questions" based on discounted smears.

[99Forever]

70. If her lips are moving and sound is coming out...

... it's almost certain Hillary is lying.

Lying is a Clinton default setting.

[litlbilly]

73. 72 replys and i can see 8. the shills must be out in force today. total panic mode i would guess

[BillZBubb]

76. Of course she will. Hillary always does what's best for Hillary, no matter what she has said.

Her word means nothing. This is just the latest example.

She's the most dishonest Democratic presumptive nominee in my lifetime--very much like a republican.

[Demsrule86]

77. Oh I don't know

Maybe re-election?

[HassleCat]

78. It doesn't prove anything like that.

It proves she feels more debating would not be to her advantage, and she can win the nomination without debating, so it's an easy choice. It does not prove she will welch on her progressive promises when she becomes president. Yes, I believe she will do exactly that, and she will have exactly zero progressive accomplishments when she gets primaried by a real progressive in 2020, but it's not connected to the debates.

[Joob]

80. It proves she'll do things to her advantage. Regardless of promises.

And if it's her "advantage" as president to NOT progess on progressive Ideas. She'll do it.

I think it does proves that because of what she's said and done in the past

[riderinthestorm]

84. Just another lie by Hillary. .. nt

[B Calm]

89. Too me it shows she is a coward.

[John Poet]

90. Hillary's word is worth NOTHING.

Nada. Zilch.