• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Hllary Thumps Bernie in New York

The Country is about ready for revolution. And the only people not ready for Sanders' ideas are the 535 people who work under that dome in the middle of DC and corporatists who own them.

With rare exception, every Clinton supporter I have talked to (alone and without an audience) agrees with almost everything Sanders says and will say while "I'm ready for those kind of changes, but the rest of the country isn't."

To which I reply, "Sweetie, you are the rest of the country."

And when fascism is rearing its ugly head, this is not the time to have courage fail, or talk and walk in the ways of appeasement and compromise.

I say, "I'm ready for those kinds of changes and they need to happen with a solid stepwise plan. Clinton is one of those steps, Sanders has not demonstrated the steps."

I'm glad Sanders has run. I think he's been great for our party and I welcome his leftward shove.

He has put forth legislation to achieve some of these goals, although not all of them directly. Most are compromises to work within the existing system. They have not passed, typically. So he needs to discuss what he'll do differently to make them viable. If they weren't viable before, none of us can claim that if only he's president they will become viable.

I like a lot of these bills, and I think history has shown us that we need to make step-wise un-terrifying changes in order to get any changes. In that vein, I personally believe that Clinton can enact more of Sanders' ideals than Sanders can. I think she is a better negotiator.

Nevertheless, I do appreciate the pressure his capmaign has put on the Dem party. Very much. And I'm glad for him staying in til the end - as long as - he does it by promoting his ideas and not by trying to make his supporters hate Clinton. I like his ideas. I don't like anything that gives footing to the fascists. Not worth the damage.

My 2¢
 
The Country is about ready for revolution. And the only people not ready for Sanders' ideas are the 535 people who work under that dome in the middle of DC and corporatists who own them.

With rare exception, every Clinton supporter I have talked to (alone and without an audience) agrees with almost everything Sanders says and will say while "I'm ready for those kind of changes, but the rest of the country isn't."

To which I reply, "Sweetie, you are the rest of the country."

And when fascism is rearing its ugly head, this is not the time to have courage fail, or talk and walk in the ways of appeasement and compromise.

I say, "I'm ready for those kinds of changes and they need to happen with a solid stepwise plan. Clinton is one of those steps, Sanders has not demonstrated the steps."

I'm glad Sanders has run. I think he's been great for our party and I welcome his leftward shove.

He has put forth legislation to achieve some of these goals, although not all of them directly. Most are compromises to work within the existing system. They have not passed, typically. So he needs to discuss what he'll do differently to make them viable. If they weren't viable before, none of us can claim that if only he's president they will become viable.

I like a lot of these bills, and I think history has shown us that we need to make step-wise un-terrifying changes in order to get any changes. In that vein, I personally believe that Clinton can enact more of Sanders' ideals than Sanders can. I think she is a better negotiator.

Nevertheless, I do appreciate the pressure his capmaign has put on the Dem party. Very much. And I'm glad for him staying in til the end - as long as - he does it by promoting his ideas and not by trying to make his supporters hate Clinton. I like his ideas. I don't like anything that gives footing to the fascists. Not worth the damage.

My 2¢

I agree with this. If Hillary is so weak she can't withstand the challenge of a reality TV star, and a dumb ass one at that, she needs to give up now. As for the Republicans being clever and not as stupid as people think and all that...BULLSHIT. These assholes they've fielded this year is their best and brightest. Perhaps with the exception of "Mr. Intellectual", "I can't do math" and "I still think Ayn Rand is a good writer" Paul Ryan.
 
I say, "I'm ready for those kinds of changes and they need to happen with a solid stepwise plan. Clinton is one of those steps, Sanders has not demonstrated the steps."

I don't see how one can believe that. Hillary is a Third-Way, DLC democrat. That is a fact. That is exactly the wrong direction we need to go.
 
I say, "I'm ready for those kinds of changes and they need to happen with a solid stepwise plan. Clinton is one of those steps, Sanders has not demonstrated the steps."

I don't see how one can believe that. Hillary is a Third-Way, DLC democrat. That is a fact. That is exactly the wrong direction we need to go.

Here's how I believe it... just personal opinion, this is the evidence that convinces me that she can accomplish goals. Not all the goals, and not all of them in one step, but that she can slog along and slowly grind through the crap, and wants to:

Her first foray into health care. She wanted to see big changes, she made concrete plans. She was torn to shreds. Crucified. I remember this clearly as I was paying attention at the time to this issue because it was important to me. But I don't forget that she wanted big changes at a time when they were pretty radical.
She retrenched from this. She got technical and learned more about what was possible. Changed her approach to fit the realistic environment.
She has faced more constant and vicious opposition than any other person running for office. Over things that are mostly manufactured. She has shown how she can deal with incorrigibles - and it isn't by losing her cool or the upper hand.
When she became the junior Senator from New York, she buckled down and did work introducing legislation for health care, environment, civil rights and fair pay. Showing again that she believes in these issues and is willing to put forth work to enact them, while showing that she did not seek the spotlight.
Her work in the State Department on negotiations and consensus building.
The reports of many individuals who count stories of her taking time to personally help and care on issues of concern and stress in the lives of her subordinates.
She has not been still, she has not been coasting, she has not been freeloading. She's been working hard every one of those years.

I am not familiar with "third way" other than a basic definition of "middle of the road," and I don't agree that middle of the road is what she's demonstrated. What I see is someone slogging along on a clear-to-me path toward progressivism, at the speed necessary to continue making headway all the time.

I realize others don't see that, I'm only answering what things make me convinced of this.
 
I say, "I'm ready for those kinds of changes and they need to happen with a solid stepwise plan. Clinton is one of those steps, Sanders has not demonstrated the steps."

I'm glad Sanders has run. I think he's been great for our party and I welcome his leftward shove.

He has put forth legislation to achieve some of these goals, although not all of them directly. Most are compromises to work within the existing system. They have not passed, typically. So he needs to discuss what he'll do differently to make them viable. If they weren't viable before, none of us can claim that if only he's president they will become viable.

I like a lot of these bills, and I think history has shown us that we need to make step-wise un-terrifying changes in order to get any changes. In that vein, I personally believe that Clinton can enact more of Sanders' ideals than Sanders can. I think she is a better negotiator.

Nevertheless, I do appreciate the pressure his capmaign has put on the Dem party. Very much. And I'm glad for him staying in til the end - as long as - he does it by promoting his ideas and not by trying to make his supporters hate Clinton. I like his ideas. I don't like anything that gives footing to the fascists. Not worth the damage.

My 2¢

^^^ All of that exactly! I also think Bernie and Elizabeth Warren have helped show Clinton that maybe this country (and the younger voters) are hungry for a progressive push.

But I also know that even Hillary, much less Bernie, will not accomplish crap if we (Dems) don't start doing something local so we can elect progressives all the way up and down the ticket
 
Her first foray into health care. She wanted to see big changes, she made concrete plans. She was torn to shreds. Crucified. I remember this clearly as I was paying attention at the time to this issue because it was important to me. But I don't forget that she wanted big changes at a time when they were pretty radical...

I also remember this very clearly, which is also a large part of the reason I believe she is progressive at her core.

I do think she started letting public opinion polls dictate too much of her political platform, and allowed that to push her too far right too often, but at the same time she's not going to accomplish anything at all if she's too radical to be elected.

I am just so very very very glad that Bernie has run as hard as he has, because the grumpy old man with the rock star crowds is showing Hillary very clearly that "realistic" is fine, but it is time to find her "idealistic" side again too
 
Last edited:
The first mistake you guys are making is believing that Hillary actually gives a shit about any of the issues Bernie has brought up.
 
The first mistake you guys are making is believing that Hillary actually gives a shit about any of the issues Bernie has brought up.

Given that she has introduced legislation to support them, I don't believe it's a mistake. personally.
I think they are both progressives with different work styles.
 
The first mistake you guys are making is believing that Hillary actually gives a shit about any of the issues Bernie has brought up.

I don't think we are mistaken in that belief :shrug:

Again, I voted in the primaries for Bernie. The one thing I like about him above all else is that he has been consistent and consistently vocal about his core beliefs throughout his career. I think that if he is the Dem candidate for the general election, he will win and I will be over-joyed.

But he has also never gone through the political hell that Hillary has lived for most of her career. I do remember her very clearly in the early 1990's, and she was at least as idealistic as Bernie; at least as determined to accomplish sweeping reforms as Bernie... and she was slapped down hard. Who knows what Bernie would be today had he gone through what Hillary has :shrug:

I don't love the political machine Hillary has become. I'm still too idealistic and unrealistic to love it. But I do believe Hillary has a progressive core because I remember.
 
The first mistake you guys are making is believing that Hillary actually gives a shit about any of the issues Bernie has brought up.

Hillary has been forced to be something of a realist as to what she could accomplish given the not so loyal opposition. But the Bernie phenomena has shown the ground is shifting and the rules are not quite the same now. All politicians in the future may have to give some rather big shits about the political views of the millennials in the future. Hillary will not be able to ignore them and pass legislation. She will need the Bernie supporters to push back at the tea party scum, and if she plays her cards right, she could get it. I think she is smart enough to realize that.
 
She will need the Bernie supporters to push back at the tea party scum, and if she plays her cards right, she could get it. I think she is smart enough to realize that.

I hope, as Rhea also noted earlier, that Bernie realizes that, too, and does not pursue a scorched earth campaign. At the beginning he focussed on issues even to the point of defending her...

“I think the secretary of state is right, the American people are sick and tired about hearing about your damn emails,” Sanders said to hoots and cheers from the audience, after CNN moderator Anderson Cooper pushed Clinton on the ongoing scandal.

He concluded by saying: “Enough of the emails – let’s talk about the real issues facing the American people.”

He has strayed from that a little bit, and it is not becoming. Part of what so many of us like about him is that he runs honorable campaigns
 
The first mistake you guys are making is believing that Hillary actually gives a shit about any of the issues Bernie has brought up.

Given that she has introduced legislation to support them, I don't believe it's a mistake. personally.
I think they are both progressives with different work styles.

She was part of the DLC, which explicitly repudiates the progressive wing of the party!
 
The first mistake you guys are making is believing that Hillary actually gives a shit about any of the issues Bernie has brought up.
What matters is if she thinks it is political expedient to "care" about them. And I think in order to hold onto Sanders supporters, she will take a couple planks.
 
This is crazy. Hilary Clinton has been consistently on the side of the right-wing of the Democratic party. Her and her husband's political careers has been a repudiation of left-wing values. If you think she is secretly some leftist then I really don't know what to say.
 
This is crazy. Hilary Clinton has been consistently on the side of the right-wing of the Democratic party. Her and her husband's political careers has been a repudiation of left-wing values. If you think she is secretly some leftist then I really don't know what to say.

Well... all right, we'll leave you with not knowing what to say.

You believe she is her husband. I don't believe the evidence supports that.
You believe that she (through her husband?) repudiate the left wing.
I don't agree that the evidence supports that.

I like Bernie - donated to his campaign.
I would be happy with either candidate getting the nomination, for completely different reasons. Bernie because he'd try to go 100 miles - probably only get 5, but that will be good. Hillary because she will try to go five - and do it.

Either way I get 5 miles down the progressive road after a primary season that has rattled the cages of the conservatives and allowed the progressives to come out of the closet and count each other up and find we are growing in numbers.


I don't know how old you are, J842P, but an interesting article about the age differences of supporters rings true for me. Generally, those who as adults have for 30 years watched Hillary Clinton be smeared, excoriated, lambasted, libeled, besmirched, maligned, slandered and yes, cuckolded believe that she is a lot more human and progressive than those who haven't. We look at what might have caused her to be more measured and cautious in her speech and approach and we forgive her for it knowing that it's the world in which she has had to operate. Bernie Sanders has never faced this. He has great ideas, but he has never had to be cautious, measured or quiet about how he brings up his ideas.

Anyway, so yes, it's possible you won't know what to say when others see something different in her actions than you ascribe.
And really, that's totally okay.
 
This is crazy. Hilary Clinton has been consistently on the side of the right-wing of the Democratic party. Her and her husband's political careers has been a repudiation of left-wing values. If you think she is secretly some leftist then I really don't know what to say.

So what makes reworking welfare programs so they work better, improving them so states are more willing to manage them, and means testing to eliminate some of the building trade worker vacation usage of such programs. Seems the military lost size every year Clinton was in office, social programs stabilized, and the economy actually did bust a move.

Dinos aren't actually conservative, gun loving, states righist, racists as some on the left are fond of chanting Instead they are either Roosevelt democrats who live in rural states or moderates who expect social reform to include business and states.

So enough of the tarring of those who reliably vote with you on most things. We are all about a more inclusive government and society. There is room for experimentation with including local and state entities in social programs if they are willing to get on board. Central administration of some programs is not a good thing especially when local interests vary greatly as they do in land management. Western states bear the brunt of revenue loss because of federal refusal to participate as citizens in hefting their weight for lands held in public trust for instance.

Since we are a two party organized political system the strain by total federal organization of social programs need to be adjusted to include enough centrists to put our party in power. For that we pay a price, but, America, I think, benefits in slower incorporation of social agendas for disenfranchised and left out citizens of all stripes.

Look at what is happening in Europe right now. They did move left pretty quickly after formation of EU, but,now when stress is applied the Eu seems to be coming apart at the seems like a rag doll constructed with bad thread. The founding member of EU, Belgium, has rejected integration. Britain is likely to request distancing itself further from integration and southern Europe is generally bankrupt. From evidence there is no way it can stand up to diversity like that found in the US.

No sir, I'm happy to be part of a democratic party of moderates and leftists of all varieties, from cities, from rural and low density regions, and from the now dominant suburban and semi-suburban regions. Bernie pointing to the EU as example should be taken with much salt given the adjustments being made to social systems as neo-nazi and nationalist movements move to dominant political positions.

I'm not much of a fan of business in government since it is the business of government to regulate and control greed of business to the benefit of its citizens. Should motivation and best practices be a focal point for government. Indeed it should.

So how about we just end this little high Bernie has brought, sober up a bit, and get about incorporating Bernie's ideas and the ideas of Bernie's people into our mantle and march on.

We really do have to figure out this midterm democrat malaise else we'll rocket back and forth between liberal federal motivated leadership and states rights social minimalism every two years.
 
This is crazy. Hilary Clinton has been consistently on the side of the right-wing of the Democratic party. Her and her husband's political careers has been a repudiation of left-wing values. If you think she is secretly some leftist then I really don't know what to say.

Well... all right, we'll leave you with not knowing what to say.

You believe she is her husband. I don't believe the evidence supports that.
You believe that she (through her husband?) repudiate the left wing.
I don't agree that the evidence supports that.

I like Bernie - donated to his campaign.
I would be happy with either candidate getting the nomination, for completely different reasons. Bernie because he'd try to go 100 miles - probably only get 5, but that will be good. Hillary because she will try to go five - and do it.

Either way I get 5 miles down the progressive road after a primary season that has rattled the cages of the conservatives and allowed the progressives to come out of the closet and count each other up and find we are growing in numbers.


I don't know how old you are, J842P, but an interesting article about the age differences of supporters rings true for me. Generally, those who as adults have for 30 years watched Hillary Clinton be smeared, excoriated, lambasted, libeled, besmirched, maligned, slandered and yes, cuckolded believe that she is a lot more human and progressive than those who haven't. We look at what might have caused her to be more measured and cautious in her speech and approach and we forgive her for it knowing that it's the world in which she has had to operate. Bernie Sanders has never faced this. He has great ideas, but he has never had to be cautious, measured or quiet about how he brings up his ideas.

Anyway, so yes, it's possible you won't know what to say when others see something different in her actions than you ascribe.
And really, that's totally okay.
Both her and her husband have identified as New Democrats and when she was elected to the Senate she was a member of the New Democratic Caucus!

Why should I trust someone that joins groups that are opposed to the progressive wing of the party, with upholding those values?

Your argument boils down to her having been maligned by the right-wing, therefore, you believe she is progressive despite her stated positions and political alliances. How do you square her membership in the Democratic Leadership Council with being a progressive? How do you explain her consistent support for DLC policies? Or for that matter, her Iraq War vote? It's like saying Elizabeth Warren is really a New Democrat at heart, but she can't say those things outloud because she would receive flak.

At the very least, you have to admit that she is, on foreign policy, the opposite of a progressive. She cite Henry Kissinger as her role model!
 
This is crazy. Hilary Clinton has been consistently on the side of the right-wing of the Democratic party. Her and her husband's political careers has been a repudiation of left-wing values. If you think she is secretly some leftist then I really don't know what to say.

So what makes reworking welfare programs so they work better, improving them so states are more willing to manage them, and means testing to eliminate some of the building trade worker vacation usage of such programs. Seems the military lost size every year Clinton was in office, social programs stabilized, and the economy actually did bust a move.

Dinos aren't actually conservative, gun loving, states righist, racists as some on the left are fond of chanting Instead they are either Roosevelt democrats who live in rural states or moderates who expect social reform to include business and states.

So enough of the tarring of those who reliably vote with you on most things. We are all about a more inclusive government and society. There is room for experimentation with including local and state entities in social programs if they are willing to get on board. Central administration of some programs is not a good thing especially when local interests vary greatly as they do in land management. Western states bear the brunt of revenue loss because of federal refusal to participate as citizens in hefting their weight for lands held in public trust for instance.

Since we are a two party organized political system the strain by total federal organization of social programs need to be adjusted to include enough centrists to put our party in power. For that we pay a price, but, America, I think, benefits in slower incorporation of social agendas for disenfranchised and left out citizens of all stripes.

Look at what is happening in Europe right now. They did move left pretty quickly after formation of EU, but,now when stress is applied the Eu seems to be coming apart at the seems like a rag doll constructed with bad thread. The founding member of EU, Belgium, has rejected integration. Britain is likely to request distancing itself further from integration and southern Europe is generally bankrupt. From evidence there is no way it can stand up to diversity like that found in the US.

No sir, I'm happy to be part of a democratic party of moderates and leftists of all varieties, from cities, from rural and low density regions, and from the now dominant suburban and semi-suburban regions. Bernie pointing to the EU as example should be taken with much salt given the adjustments being made to social systems as neo-nazi and nationalist movements move to dominant political positions.

I'm not much of a fan of business in government since it is the business of government to regulate and control greed of business to the benefit of its citizens. Should motivation and best practices be a focal point for government. Indeed it should.

So how about we just end this little high Bernie has brought, sober up a bit, and get about incorporating Bernie's ideas and the ideas of Bernie's people into our mantle and march on.

We really do have to figure out this midterm democrat malaise else we'll rocket back and forth between liberal federal motivated leadership and states rights social minimalism every two years.

I disagree that the welfare reform of the 90's "made welfare work better." Regardless, I don't see how that is a response to my claim that she is not, and has never been, a member of the progressive wing. It's all well and good to talk about diversity of opinions in the Democratic Party, but that doesn't mean that Hillary Clinton is a progressive. She is a centrist. Really, on the world stage, she is right-wing.
 
Back
Top Bottom