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

amborin

(16,631 posts)
Mon Jun 6, 2016, 08:07 PM Jun 2016

2016 Is NOT Remotely Comparable to 2008

President Obama had a great record and had campaigned as a progressive.

President Obama was not under any investigations of any kind, especially FBI investigations.

President Obama was against the Iraq war

President Obama campaigned for peace

ETC......

Hillary is under FBI investigation

Hillary disregarded FOIA rules and the public's right to transparency and access to the historical record

Hillary has a demonstrated record of repetitive lies

Hillary has a record of implementing reckless regime change in the Middle East

Hillary has a record of supporting anti-democratic coups in Honduras

Hillary has a record of making promises to voters about FTAs, then lobbying for them and voting with Republicans and against Democrats for them

HIllary has a record of supporting a right wing regime in Colombia that brutalized union organizers

Hillary has accepted massive speaking fees from big banks, big pharma, etc and refuses to release the transcripts

Hillary cites as role models such war criminals and Neo Cons as Kissinger and Kagan

Hillary championed the TPP

Hillary's senate record shows she promised to rein in the big banks and fight inequality and loopholes for the wealthy, but instead upheld tax loopholes for big hedge funds and investors

Hillary is on tape and video saying she is "adamantly against illegal immigrants" and voted many times for a border wall


Plus, many more differences.

So, bottom line is: there IS NO comparison between this primary cycle and the one in 2008

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

floriduck

(2,262 posts)
2. Barack and Hillary agreed on so many issues. That's another reason Hillary conceded after CA.
Mon Jun 6, 2016, 08:13 PM
Jun 2016

But she wrangled the SOS position from Obama as she began her run for 2016. If Bernie is not the nominee, he will hand off the movement to others. That's why she clung so tightly to Obama, at least she said that, so she could slip in behind him when his term expires.

Bernie and Hillary are not even close in ideology. Hillary is a corporatist and Bernie is a middle class kind of guy.

 

beachbumbob

(9,263 posts)
3. Just ignore the fact that Bernie was ok with a black guy using super delegates
Mon Jun 6, 2016, 08:13 PM
Jun 2016

And against a woman using same super delegates....either sexism or hypocrisy or both

JimDandy

(7,318 posts)
7. Two corporate candidates were on the slate in 2008. Why would Sanders care
Mon Jun 6, 2016, 08:40 PM
Jun 2016

who was declared the presumptive nominee or give a hoot who had the most SDs back then. He wasn't even in the Dem Party in and had no skin in their game. He cares now because it's him, a progressive Dem, up against one of the same corporatists who ran in 2008. The game is rigged against a populist candidate like Sanders, as Debbie Wasserman Schultz acknowledged. No sexism or hypocrisy required.

 

annavictorious

(934 posts)
4. Plus in 2008, Clinton was ahead in votes
Mon Jun 6, 2016, 08:24 PM
Jun 2016

and only behind by 127 pledged delegates.

In 2008, neither candidate joined a political party only to exploit its resources and then complained of a "rigged system" because he didn't like the rules that were in place in 2008.

In 2016, the race is not nearly as close as it was in 2008, and in 2016 the loser is losing in every way and by every metric.

And one other key difference, in 2008 the person who lost did not feel...what's the word?...entitled to undo the will of the voters.



democrattotheend

(11,605 posts)
6. She was not "ahead in votes"
Mon Jun 6, 2016, 08:34 PM
Jun 2016

I don't want to refight the 2008 primaries, but her argument about the popular vote was total BS. She was only ahead in votes if you counted 1 state where Obama wasn't on the ballot, one state where nobody campaigned and she won by default as the most well-known candidate, and didn't count all the caucus participants in states that did not release raw vote totals from caucuses.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»2016 Is NOT Remotely Comp...