Like it or Not, Hillary Clinton is Being More Honest with Voters Than Bernie Sanders

[fun n serious]

Snip ~First, there’s almost zero chance Democrats reclaim a majority in the House of Representatives this November, though there is a distinct possibility that they can retake the majority in the Senate. But even if, by some miracle, Democrats took back the House and gained a majority in the Senate – they would still need 60 seats in the Senate to prevent Republicans from being able to filibuster legislation. That’s even more unlikely than Democrats winning back a majority in the House.

But even beyond all of that, there’s another reality many Sanders supporters seem to ignore. That is, there are quite a few congressional Democrats from somewhat conservative areas of this country supported by left of center voters who would oppose some of the policies on which Sanders is running. So it’s not just that Sanders would need Democrats to take back both the House and Senate, he would need overwhelming majorities in both houses to stand any chance of his proposals getting through the legislative process.

Now if you want to tell yourself that’s all possible this November, go right ahead if that makes you feel better. But that’s not going to change what the political realities are.

http://www.forwardprogressives.com/like-it-or-not-hillary-clinton-is-being-more-honest-to-voters-than-bernie-sanders/

[daleanime]

1. So she's releasing the transcripts?

Sweet!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

3. lol, that was my first question! If Hillary is SOOOO honest, where are the transcripts? Hillary is inherently dishonest, period.

And I'm SICK of it!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[Thinkingabout]

12. Maybe the same place Sanders transcripts are from his fund raising meeting with Goldman Sachs

along with other issues. NOTHING requires Hillary to release the transcripts.

[TheFarS1de]

16. "NOTHING requires Hillary to release the transcripts"

By the same token no one has to vote for someone who can't even talk to the voting base about her dealings with those suspect oligarchs . There is a reason the word "trustworthy" runs and hides whenever the Clinton name is brought up .

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

23. Good point... the fact that Hillary refuses to release the transcripts tells you EVERYTHING you need to know!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[cui bono]

39. Exactly. n/t

[Thinkingabout]

86. There you go, good answer, you don't have to vote for someone

Who can't talk to voters about his dealings with those suspect oligarchs. Actually Hillary has talked about her dealings with the Wall Street firm, I am still waiting for Sanders to talk about his dealings with those same firms.

[riversedge]

102. 1+

[AgingAmerican]

69. Projection

nt

[GreatGazoo]

127. Here is the transcript of THAT meeting:

.
.
.
.
.
.
(since it didn't take place as you allege in your unartful smear)

As for the OP, here is some reality for you:

[Betty Karlson]

95. We may need to supply barfing bags if she ends up the nominee.

I know I would have a difficult time making it to the polling booth to cast a vote for a candidate stuck in the 20th century, tone-deaf, who denied me my civil rights until 2013. In fact, with every passing day I more fervently hope for Sanders' candidacy, just so I won't have to call in SICK on election day.

[Duckhunter935]

35. good for her

I knew she would if she actually told the truth

[Merryland]

105. and her medical records?!?

like Bernie did? Wow, that's fanfreakingtastic!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

132. Never gonna happen... so much for transparency.

[napi21]

2. Even Bernie has said all this can't happen right away.

It will take time.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

9. Bernie's honesty is so refreshing! Hillary can't be honest about her true intentions... it's plain as day!

Go Bernie!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[Jarqui]

14. Exactly. And this "Hillary Clinton is Being More Honest with Voters Than Bernie Sanders"

That's so bad it's funny.

[Ferd Berfel]

122. THAT is the inconvienent truth that the Hillary people

lie about outright or by omission.

[hobbit709]

4. Is this today's BS talking point?

[litlbilly]

40. It's one of them, they keep rotating the same stupid memes. They are running out of shit to make up

[stevenleser]

139. Nope, it's the everyday talking point. The one that we keep raising. nt

[metroins]

5. I'm center left

I don't think Sanders has a chance of enacting his ideas.

I also think he'd somehow lose us even more congressional seats.

I think Obama is an amazing President. I also think he's pretty moderate but a lot of seats were lost due to crazy RW propaganda and some racism.

If Bernie somehow managed to win the Presidency (unlikely to beat Trump in my opinion, polls be damned), I foresee Sanders being a 4 year President and then 8-16 years of GOP.

I'd much prefer a pragmatic President Clinton.

[fun n serious]

11. Very true.

Good insight.

[Robbins]

113. terrable insight

Clinton gurantes complete gop control of congress in 2017 and house a lost cause for decades to come.

[daleanime]

13. The only thing worst then running for congress on Hillary's non-existent coattails...

would be running for congress during 'President Hillary's' term. But thank you for playing. Have a lovely night.

[metroins]

34. Your post makes zero sense nt

[Art_from_Ark]

49. Actually, it makes quite a bit of sense

In the vast majority of presidential elections, the party that wins the White House also has a net gain of Congressional seats. However, one President who bucked that trend, that is, he won the White House but his party had no net gain of seats, was Bill Clinton. When Clinton was elected in 1992, the Democrats lost 9 House seats, and had no net gain or loss in the Senate. When Clinton was re-elected in 1996, the Democrats gained 2 House seats, but lost 2 Senate seats.

In mid-term elections, the party in the White House almost always loses seats. Clinton lost seats big time in 1994, so many in both the House and Senate that we lost control of both houses.

So the first Clinton had no coattails, and under him we lost control of the Senate for the first time in 8 years, and control of the House for the first time in 40 years. With Hillary's net negative favorability, how can we expect her to have any better coattails than her husband did in 1992?

[mythology]

67. Have you looked at the Senate seats lost in 1996?

Alabama, not exactly a Democratic stronghold, Arkansas after the Democratic governor was convicted of mail fraud and a major upset in Nebraska, again not exactly a Democratic stronghold.

It adds a little perspective when you look at context.

2016 has 34 Senate seats up for election, Republicans hold 24 of them including generally Democratic states like Illinois and Wisconsin where Republicans managed to win in 2010. Additionally Rand Paul's chances took a hit with his lousy attempt at running for President and Marco Rubio is retiring his Senate seat (pending a potential clumsy attempt to back out if/when he loses the nomination).

But how does Sanders have coattails when Republicans can load up Sanders saying it would be hypocritical of him to run as a Democrat given the things he's said about the party? I'm not sure it's an easy sell to go "yes vote for candidate Smith even though I've said their party is corrupt in the past".

[Art_from_Ark]

74. Perhaps you should look a little more into the 1996 Arkansas election

The governor who was convicted of "fraud", Jim Guy Tucker, was a target of Ken Starr's witch hunt. Starr targeted Tucker precisely because of Tucker's ties to Clinton and Whitewater, and because there was a Republican lieutenant governor at the time, someone named Mike Huckabee. Starr relied on the "testimony" of two known liars to get his conviction. If the lieutenant governor had not been a Republican, Starr would not have pursued such a flimsy case.

[earthshine]

38. We lost seats because Obama never fought for the change on which he campaigned.

I've seen Obama fight for four things:

1) His election.
2) His reelection.
3) The ACA, which is recycled, warmed over Republican health insurance. People still can't afford to get sick.
4) The TPP, which is the ultimate sell out of working people around the world.

Obama's a very intelligent man. One of the signs of intelligence is being able to take the perspective of the other. He's so good at it that's where he begins his negotiations with Republicans -- on their side.

Remember chained CPI? H-1B visas?

Third-way democrats love Republican economic policies, while projecting an air of being socially liberal.

I've been a registered Democrat for more than 30 years. I voted for this man twice. I'm entitled to my opinion.

[metroins]

47. You can have your opinion all day long

I just remember what he inherited and how much/faster he made things.

So I'm pretty happy

[earthshine]

73. I agree with you that he was handed a raw deal.

By his own words, in 2007, he stated that his policies are akin to that of a 1980s Republican. Think Reagan.

He said this after he defeated Hillary in the 2008 primaries. Had he said that during the primaries, Hillary would've been the president for the last eight years.

And just a few days ago ...

But he also admitted that he was partly to blame for the hyperpartisan environment by failing to reach out more to Republicans.

“There is no doubt that every step of the way, every day that I’m in that office, maybe I could have done that a little better,” he said.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/tv/showtracker/la-na-obama-interview-20160211-story.html

Unquestionably he has done some good things. But, when I think of Obama, I think of a man who put Social Security on the chopping block. A man under whom the security state has grown exponentially. A man who fights tacit wars with drones who killed 30 times more innocent people than terrorists.

It's important to keep these things in the open, so that the next president doesn't do them.

Thanks.

[mythology]

50. You are entitled to your opinion, no matter how incorrect it is

The parties are objectively further apart and more polarized than any time in recent memory. I have no idea how you manage to reconcile that fact and claim that Obama is all but a Republican.

http://io9.gizmodo.com/its-been-150-years-since-the-u-s-was-this-politically-1590076355

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/long-division-political-polarization-worse-ever-here-stay-n228441

The President's party almost always loses seats in the mid-terms and when there's only two realistic parties, it kind of limits which party can win seats. And after 2010, Republicans badly gerrymandered the House such to the point that Democrats won close to 1.5 million more votes in the House in 2012 and still didn't get control. You are free to chalk this up to Obama, but it's kind of hard to make that argument.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/feb/19/steny-hoyer/steny-hoyer-house-democrats-won-majority-2012-popu/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-03-19/republicans-win-congress-as-democrats-get-most-votes

[earthshine]

75. The losses in 2010 were catastrophic. We were not hopelessly gerrymandered before then.

Who put Debbie Wasserman Schultz in charge of the Democratic Party? She's the one who chucked out the 50 state strategy. She's the one who supported Republicans for offices in Florida. Obama's her boss -- period.

My opinion is, Obama campaigned on Main Street, and governed on Wall Street starting with his first week in office.

He had majorities in both houses and used them to compromise with Republicans instead of pushing a progressive agenda. Remember how Robert Gibbs, his Press Secretary chastised "the professional left"?

I'm not interested in pointing out Obama shortcomings in a vacuum. Right now I'm concerned about how the next president is going to behave. We need to learn from history to see what curveballs we might expect in the future from our top politicians.

Thanks for the links and honest dialog. But frankly, you have not provided anything here of which most are not aware.

[Cosmocat]

88. Your opnion and reality differ

If you think if bho "just fought harder" it somehow overcomes the fecklessness of democrats and the unified resistance of republicans.

[earthshine]

128. He begins negotiations from their point of view.

He's the Compromiser in Chief and he still is.

Your notions of reality are only your opinions. Same for mine.

Peace.

[Cosmocat]

130. Point stands

if you honestly think if he were only TOUGHER in his negotiations it would have changed even a single republican's vote.

Seriously, that is some bullshit republican thinking.

BHO is a WEAK LEADER, we don't get respect.
We need a puffy chested POTUS like Bush II to let them know whos is boss!

IF BHO had only got on the bully pulpit, went on TV every day telling the country we had to have universal health care, we would have it today!

[earthshine]

133. I realize you stated things sarcastically, but I agree with some of them literally.

FDR was a man who new how to use that bully pulpit. He rallied the people behind him and the Congress fell in line.

You're entitled to your opinion. Do you allow me mine?

Obama is a third-way centrist. The third way is to campaign on social issues, and then rule based on the wishes of the corporate oligarchy.

You bet we'd have universal healthcare if Obama bothered to fight for it. He had a mandate in 2008 with majorities in both houses. I'd say he blew it, but I think he got what he wanted.

By his own words -- policies so mainstream that it fits the mold of a 1980s Republican.

[Cosmocat]

143. He is not the issue

It is the 535 representatives and senators that are the problem.

I don't know what it looked like in 1940, but it was in no way what it looks like today.

How many votes did ACA get from republicans?

0.

And, you think if he just fought harder for a MORE LIBERAL version of health care reform they would just go, well, since BHO is being so pushy about it, sure, we will vote for it.

Obama is not the issue - CONGRESS is the issue.

TODAY, in reality, republicans vote as one uniform block.

There is no coddling them, no goading them, no bullying them that will get them to vote with a democrat, ANY democrat. On anything other than something that THEY want.

Health Shuler was one of the Blue Dog democrats who voted against ACA, despite outreach from the white house trying to get him on board.

You think that the Blue Dogs who did not vote for ACA would have thrown their hands up and voted for a more liberal version of health care reform just because BHO "got on the BULLY PULPIT?"

ACA was the first major health care reform this country saw since the implementation of medicare.

Decades and many presidents came and went, and the Clintons tried to get an even more liberal version passed and got their teeth kicked in, with them being a lot more aggressive from the white house trying to get it done.

But, gee, if BHO had only wanted it more, we would have universal health care today!

It all fine and well to say "its my opinion."

But, that is a cop out when your "opinion" is so far removed from reality.

My beef is this is democrats way of channeling bullshit republican framing of BHO.

To them, he is the most evil, america hating liberal POS ever to live.

But, somehow democrats want to rail on him as some kind of sell out.

Here is how surreal this is.

While it is your "opinion" that BHO is to weak and soft with republicans, it is THEIR "opinion" that all their resistances against him is justified BECAUSE HE WON'T WORK WITH THEM.

I call bullshit on both memes ...

[BklnDem75]

146. +1000 nt

[Cosmocat]

145. Additionally

I stated that it was congress's fault ACA was the best HCR we could get, and there is truth to that.

But, the greater truth, the greater burden of the why we have our ridiculous health care system is the PEOPLE of this country.

WE are to blame, because while you and I know the inane stupidity of this system, there are a LOT more people who don't care to bother with fighting to change it and even worse, are flat stupid enough to fight to keep it.

There is this conservative I talk with at the gym. He lives in our neighborhood and is ok for the most part.

But, is 100 percent koolade drinking rushbot.

He started up last week about how Obamacare is such a disaster that this country can't stand, and how it screwed up his health care coverage.

I knew his wife works for our school district, and while I pretty much assumed, I asked if he was on her coverage, and he said yes, and OBAMA CARE SCREWED IT ALL UP!

Except it didn't.

I was on the board of education when that contract was negotiated.

ACA was not even in place when we negotiated that contract.

FURTHER, prior board had negotiated ridiculously weak contracts that up until this one, school district employees literally could cover their entire family paying less than $100 a year. This was how it worked in the 90s, and we readjusted things to reflect what everyone else in our area had to pay into for their health care coverage.

SO, this guy wants to complain about how high his school district taxes are while wanting free health care coverage that I am paying for. While glibbly talking down to me about how democrats buy votes by giving people something for nothing with his tax dollars.

There was no telling him that ACA did not change his health care. All he knows is that BHO has destroyed this country and ACA caused him to actually have to pony up for some of his health care.

And, this is not isolated - NO LIE, I had a similar go around prior to ACA with another conservative dickbag at the gym who said the same shit about how I just want people to get something for nothing, while bragging about how good his health care coverage was because he did not take his company's coverage, but his wifes, who ... worked for the school district.

I literally had to hold back from putting a dumb bell into his skull when he wore these anti Obama t-shirts in the gym spewing his Glenn Beck bullshit how I was just looking for handouts while my taxes were paying his health care.

I don't know where you were in 2009/10, but here in America, just to get the REPUBLICAN version of health care passed, it took a year of bullshit over death panels and all kinds of other stupidity, conservatives trampling town halls with democrats who were supporting it ...

THEN, after BHO barely managed to get a republican version of health care reform passed, this country saw fit to give to throw out the democrats who voted for it fire breathing republicans who voted to tear it down in the largest mid term blood bath since ... the Clinton's tried to get HCR done.

You and I are part of a VERY SMALL percentage of people in this country who get how bad it is, and would fight for single payer.

But, the other 90% of this country is made up of 45% who are dumb assed, brain washed republican pods who will fight agianst health care reform because of what AM radio pours into their heads 25% who get the importance of it, but don't have the fire or energy to do anything about it 20% of the country who just don't care.

But, sure, it is all BHOs fault for NOT FIGHTING HARD ENOUGH.

[earthshine]

147. You raise good points. We're pretty much on the same side.

My opinion is that he didn't give us anything worth fighting for. And, he didn't lead the fight.

Telling me about how you argue with conservatives doesn't add to the discussion. Might as well piss in the wind.

The ACA has good points, like eliminating pre-existing conditions. But, it's still insurance based. Deductibles and premiums are rising faster than people can pay them.

He had majorities in both houses, but used it to show how he wants to be the president of ALL the people, even those morons in your gym. And, so, he stands in the center, instead of center left. And then compromised to the right.

If you got two mins, this video here (by Ring of Fire) sums up how I feel about it.

In 2008, I supported Edwards. (Arg!) Then, I went to Hillary. Then, after she turned me off with her vile campaigning, I went with Obama.

But, Hillary is a fighter, and obviously still is. Obama, simply put, is not. I regretted not staying with Hillary.

Obama worked very hard to just fit in, with Washington as a whole.

Unfortunately, Hillary has become deeply entrenched in the big money. I can't go with her this time.

Thanks for your very thoughtful responses.

Let me just leave it at this ... Obama could've done so much more if he didn't put so much effort into making compromises.

[RiverLover]

90. I agree completely. He got the whole country behind him & then flipped us the bird. Many said why

bother after that.

[AzDar]

131. ...

[litlbilly]

42. they lost the seats in 10 , 12 and 14 because of DWS and the DNC. Are you like 9 years old?

Kind of seems like it from your nonsense post,

[metroins]

48. I disagree

90% or more of America doesn't know who DWS is.

Quite a bit of the Tea party movement vilified Obama.

[litlbilly]

53. where's the proof? dont post bullshit unless you can back it up

[metroins]

54. What proof do you want?

You're arguing DWS lost the seats.

You should be the one to prove that claim.

Shit, all I have to do is go to Walmart and ask 10 people to tell me who DWS is.

[litlbilly]

57. 90% of Americans dont know who DWS is? Where is your proof? If you cant prove it, stop

posting total bullshit you cant back up. Got it?

[metroins]

59. Look

If you want me to, I'll literally go to Walmart and ask 10 people tomorrow.

Now you prove to me how she lost the Congressional seats.

I'm not just going to ask people for fun, I'll even bet $100 for a donation to DU that 9/10 don't know who she is.

[litlbilly]

61. Prove it or get fucking lost. BTW, you are now ignored

[metroins]

100. Why are you so uncivil?

That is a very rude and unbecoming post.

[hedda_foil]

58. They don't have to know who she is for the results of her disastrous reign to be felt.

Her failures and favoritism led the party into a very deep ditch.

[metroins]

60. Delve deeper

Explain what DWS did.

I'm blaming the RW, you're blaming the D.

[hedda_foil]

62. Look, we've written and posted page after page on DWS. Use the search function.

You're obviously not very familiar with DU or the level of political knowledge and experience of Bernie supporters here. That results in your posting ridiculously jejeune preconceptions and expecting us to buy it. You're fighting a losing battle with your posts.

That's the last time I bother with you.

[Rocky the Leprechaun]

96. Use the Google Fu. I'll help you with a great example.

Put this in your Google search:

"Debbie Wasserman-Schultz" site:democraticunderground.com

You will see what she did in 2010, 2014, and now.

[RiverLover]

91. Its what DWS has done, not that most people are even aware. She's rigged the party and

she's a conservative repub so of course she's screwed things up.

On purpose or just a misguided attempt to continue trying to make Dems into repubs, who knows.

[Lorien]

78. You are not center left then

You are solidly right wing. Hillary can't possibly win. She won't have the support of Bernie liberals, or any "true" Republicans (who hate her with the heat of 10,00 suns), or Libertarians, or Independents (Bernie leads her 63% to 37% there), and Trump can talk at length about how he gave her money and she hurried to his wedding when he told her to be there. She's toast. Meanwhile Bernie gets 20% of Republicans, the vast majority of independents and liberals in his home state, has the highest approval rating in the Senate, and has no enemies on the Hill. He also has a congressional army in the wings: https://newrepublic.com/article/129047/bernies-army-running-congress
he also gets a shit ton more DONE than Billary does: http://giphy.com/gifs/clinton-vs-sanders-bills-passed-according-to-congressgov-3o6gaQaIZcGAW7hCfu

You could have easily supported G.W. Bush or McCain:

[UnBlinkingEye]

6. I like it

Makes me laugh

[Thinkingabout]

7. Yes, she is providing reality and not over promising her agenda.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

30. No wonder Wall Street is funding the shit out of her campaign!

I just don't think that's anything to be proud of... but that's just me!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[Thinkingabout]

87. Would this be the reason Sanders has not explained his fund raising with these

Same firms?

[beedle]

114. Link please?

[Thinkingabout]

118. here:

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/sanders-democratic-fundraisers/index.html

[jeff47]

107. Ok, how does she get Republicans to vote to expand the ACA?

That is some of the "reality" she is providing.

[uponit7771]

8. Sanders WHOLE CAMPAIGN hinges on him minimizing the effects of the historically gerrymandered

... GOP congress.

He admits Congress is and has been a road block and his arguments against Obama look petulant at best.

Like someone screaming at a cabby for not going through stop and go traffic fast enough

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

15. If Bernie can bring enough new voters into the democratic process, there is NOTHING that CAN'T be accomplished!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[earthshine]

45. Straw-man argument.

No one thinks Bernie's political revolution can happen in a single election cycle. He certainly doesn't. It will take at least several cycles to get back the House.

IMHO, Hillary will not muster enough enthusiasm in a general election matchup such that we can get back the Senate. With Bernie I believe we can take it.

When Obama was elected he had the House and the Senate. Give the third-way dems power and they will use it to move the country to the right.

[eridani]

137. He's the only candidate bringing in new voters

Without ongoing engagement of presidential year voters, we are toast in 2018. With Sanders, we have the best chance of keeping new voters mobilized.

[Jefferson23]

10. The word corruption does not enter anywhere in this OP until one reads the responses.

The author has no idea what Sanders campaign is about, he thinks its about
"free stuff"...he is wrong on many levels.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

18. True dat! The author is wrong beyond belief!

[Jefferson23]

21. I was encouraged by the reponse telling him he was off the mark...so there was that! lol

[fun n serious]

25. I don't think you read the article.

Commenting and not reading

[CentralMass]

17. I think that falls under the heading of an oxymoron.

[CoffeeCat]

19. That's baloney and the vast majority of America disagrees

According to the latest YouGov poll, 56 percent of respondents say that Hillary Clinton is not trustworthy. That is the highest "untrustworthy" rating of any politician in the poll--Democrat or Republican. Trump beat her by 4 percent.

Bernie's rating on honesty is the highest of any candidate, Republican or Democrat. Clinton and Republican Donald Trump fare the worst,” writes YouGov’s Kathy Frankovic.

Clinton, honest? Really now.

[fun n serious]

20. Read the article. nt

[CoffeeCat]

26. I don't read articles with absurd titles. (nt)

[AgingAmerican]

22. lol

She has devolved into mud slinging.

[noiretextatique]

24. her attacks on sanders are honest?

sure. she can't even be honest about her ever-evolving positions.

[CoffeeCat]

28. She's going to break up the big banks

...and really hold them to account! And she's going to do it with her magic golden cufflinks!

Wait...what?

[noiretextatique]

63. her goldman handcuffs

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511257052

[CoffeeCat]

68. It was supposed to be a joke...

...and apparently not a very funny one!

[noiretextatique]

72. sorry

i am humor-impaired from all the drama here today actually, idiot-weary. some of her supporters are just not very bright.

[Fumesucker]

79. I disagree about that, they are bright but have little to work with

They couldn't possibly bob, weave and jink the way they do if they were actually stupid. The fact is they have almost nothing to work with in terms of honest argument so are forced into making stupid ones.

[noiretextatique]

82. some are just dumb as a box of rocks

like ones believe Obama and Clinton are progressive. others pretend they are undecided, but they are not...they are very annoying shit-starters. some are as you describe: twisting and parsing and turning like dervishes. sad, really.

[CoffeeCat]

98. Look at it this way

The stronger Bernie gets, the more they have to "work" the Internets.

Haven't you noticed that?

You can literally figure out how awful Clinton's internal polling is by the level of online activity. If you've got a flurry of ridiculousness--you can bank on the fact that her internals are tanking.

[noiretextatique]

109. you make sense

had a bad day

[CoffeeCat]

93. I have those days too

and my joke was pretty lame. Sometimes my humor doesn't translate well online.

And don't be weary. That's what they want.

[dana_b]

29. actually they're Bernie's positions

but she can take credit - sure.

[noiretextatique]

65. at least for this week

let's see where her weathervane lands next week.

[Major Hogwash]

84. She'll tell Wall Street "Cut it out!"

She's cracking me up.
I'm dying here.
She's so tuff.

[merrily]

27. LOL! nt

[Live and Learn]

31. Hillary Clinton and honesty equals oxymoron. nt

[cui bono]

32. Which time? About which position on which issue?

Let's face it. Hillary is not an honest person.

The only thing your post is saying is don't bother trying to achieve anything great.

.

[Csainvestor]

33. Hillary is promising the status quo

The problem is, if you work for a living the status quo is killing us. I'm paying more rent, tuition costs more, medical coverage costs more and wages, and benefits are stagnant. I know College grads working for TaskRabbit and uber, but on the flip side of the ledger, the billionaire class made 1 trillion dollars in the last 10 years.

The status quo is killing us, and it's turning billionaires into trillionaires.

Hillary is promising more of the same, and she sure as hell doesn't have any solutions to the current mess we're in.

So why is anyone going to vote for hillary. She is telling us she is going to make the rich richer, and the poor poorer.

[Fuddnik]

36. Poor attempt at comedy.

[Beowulf]

37. Like it or not,

Bernie is the only candidate looking past the next election. The myopia of HRC and the DNC is stunning.

But I suppose you have a point about Hillary being honest with the voters. She and the rest of the political and economic elite are going to continue beating the 99% with a stick until our morale improves.

[fun n serious]

41. I haven't seen any viable promises past the election. nt

[Beowulf]

46. No we can't! No we can't!

[kas125]

70. Of course you haven't, because he hasn't MADE any promises. He has said what he thinks

we need and he asks us to help make it happen. None of Bernie's proposals or his ideas or whatever you want to call them are promises, nor will they happen overnight. They may not all happen for a long time. We know that, but we think it's better to try to make people's lives better than to just vote to continue on the same path that has screwed us all over again and again.

[fun n serious]

71. He has said " I will"

That is a promise

[Samantha]

43. It wouldn't take a miracle to overcome gerrymandering-it simply takes a win over 7 percentage points

Some people like to say gerrymandering can't be overcome so people will stay home. It can be overcome with big enough wins and the right opponents.

Those congressional Democrats from somewhat conservative areas are often Third-Way Dems, and the true left doesn't really care if they oppose Sanders' policies. They see Third-Way Dems as Democrats in Name Only (read "Republicans&quot .

He has said his plans would not be implemented the first day, that his supporters (voters) would have to lean on Congress and that it would take time. He has been very honest about it.

But your statement Hillary is more honest with voters than Bernie Sanders begs the question, how long have you been listening to her and are you aware that 25 percent of Republicans in Vermont vote for him because of his honesty.

Other than that, welcome to DU. You will love it here.

Sam

[AZ Progressive]

44. Do the politicians serve the people? Or should they serve the special interests?

If the people force the politicians to do their job, they will do their job.

[jillan]

51. Then why do the majority of voters think she is dishonest if she is being so truthful?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/10/hillary-clinton-has-a-major-honesty-problem-after-new-hampshire/

[mindwalker_i]

52. The most striking thing about this argument...

... is that it says, essentially, that things just can't be done. Republicans and some Democrats will oppose them. Therefore, we shouldn't even try, even though there is such a long history of "crazy" ideas being put forth and, eventually passed. Like women's suffrage. Like ending slavery. The argument doesn't say Bernie's ideas are bad. It implies that they are crazy, but what, exactly is crazy? Breaking up banks that we've bailed out? Free college education (CA used to do that, before Reagan)?

Momentum for ideas takes time. That's just the way it is, but dropping the fight before even starting it is, unfortunately, something democrats do far too often. Then we end up with what we have now: a very extreme situation where the rich pay far less in taxes than people who actually do work, corps moving overseas on paper to avoid taxes, etc.

Yeah, fuck this shit!

[Vote2016]

55. lol!

[saltpoint]

56. Voters don't think she is, though,

and in very significant percentages.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clintons-advantage-hits-campaign-low-lags-trust-leading/story?id=36524847

[liberal_at_heart]

64. going on ignore list. Buh-bye.

[mhatrw]

66. Exactly! She is more honest about what SHE can't possibly do because she is so

corrupt and compromised.

Bernie is far too much of a gentleman to be that honest with us about her.

[Ichingcarpenter]

76. Truth Medicine

[lovemydog]

77. Sanders is telling the left what it wants to hear.

Possibilities of it actually happening be damned. It's very easy to run to the democratic frontrunner's left in the primary. It's also very easy to run to the republican's right in the primary. I think Cruz is trying to do that in the republican race. I would like most all of Sanders' proposals too. I'm just not so sure he can deliver on them if he's president. Not without a much more liberal majority in Congress. More significantly, I'm not sure he can win in the general election.

Sanders supporters who may feel disillusioned with the system (and I can understand their frustrations) should also be trying to change the makeup of Congress, starting with their local politics. I don't mean just now. I mean in the future. That's my hope, that they harness their energy into creating a much better climate for real revolutionary change. I feel it must start locally, then regionally, then spread out from there.

Clinton is trying to say what policies she's proposing that she can actually deliver with a democratic Congress. One thing I think is significant is the number of those in Congress who are endorsing her. They're essentially saying 'I will stand with her and fight for her policy proposals and stake my Congressional career on it.' Bernie just hasn't had many do that. For whatever reasons, but I think it's partly because they know their districts well enough that if they ran on those proposals they'd lose. Or they're very risk adverse (or sellouts to the establishment, lol).

I think this is a good article. I don't know much about that web site, is it good? Thanks for posting it. I'm sorry you get so many replies that call it a 'meme' or attack you personally for it.

[fun n serious]

80. Thank you. I'm thick skinned. I don't mind.

It's gotten pretty ugly here for those who support Hillary. They have successfully bullied people on the Hillary side away. They can not stand seeing a positive Hillary post. This isn't my first rodeo. lol. The people saying a Hillary nominee will be the end of DU have to be narcissist. DU has been around 15 years? Nothing here will change with a Hillary nominee. Lol

[lovemydog]

81. You're welcome. I developed a thicker skin

being a pro-Obama person here. Always was, always will be. I got some creepy responses back in the day but I think now democrats are less willing to trash him. Especially knowing he's still popular, lol. Agree with everything else you say.

I've been pretty honest in that I try and say good things about all our candidates. It's easy for me because I actually believe it, lol. I think we all have feelings and don't want to be personally attacked just for stating an opinion. I saw that post you mention and almost fell over laughing. As though there's nothing else to do like support democrats and progressives and leftists in state races, congressional races, discuss what we're doing, laugh, have fun etc.

[Robbins]

115. bullcrap

The MSM has been all in favor of her and ignored and bashed bernie.

you and fellow clinton supporters have called us bernie supporters racists,sexists and anti-women and now according to bill clinton
we are all tea party.

Clinton as nominee will destroy du and will be for nothing she will lose to any republican.

[lovemydog]

142. I haven't decided yet who

I'm voting for in the primary. My state doesn't vote until June. I've given positive comments on threads that are pro-O'Malley, pro-Sanders and pro-Clinton. I'm interested in reducing tensions among the left (of which I'm a part) and mainstream democrats because we need sheer numbers to win.

I don't believe Clinton as nominee will destroy du. As for the suggestion that she will lose to any republican, sorry but I don't buy that either.

[cali]

85. Fail. Vermonter here. You know zip about Bernie. I do.

Bernie is saying what he's been saying for fucking decades. And he isn't promising anything but to fight for his proposed policies. And unlike Hillary, he's not corrupt.

[jeff47]

108. The gigantic flaw in this

Is she can not possibly get a Democratic Congress with her milquetoast plans.

Taking back the House is going to require a massive increase in turnout among Democratic-leaning independents. Clinton is going to have a difficult time getting enough of them to turn out just for Clinton to win. There's no way in hell she gets the D+10 to D+15 election necessary to flip the House.

Which means Clinton's "promises" are just as empty. Unless you want to reveal how she will get Republicans to vote to expand the ACA.

[lovemydog]

119. I'd love to take back the House.

I hope we win the general election and pick up House seats regardless of our nominee.

[eridani]

140. Campaigning on doing what you think the Reukes will let you do is just bullshit

If you want a public option, demand single payer. If you want $3K for your used car, ask for $6K

[bbgrunt]

83. total bull hockey

[MrMickeysMom]

89. NO, WE CAN'T! NO, WE CAN'T!

Just love the mantra for all of the things people can't do with a budget in congress and lemmings falling off the cliff.

The lemmings are FAILING with their attempt to make little of how the American People are represented.

[madokie]

92. The mid term election will finish the 'CONs off

Then we make sure the 'CONs actually have to filibuster, you know like stand up there and talk for hours, days or weeks. Whatever it takes. we have to win this election with new blood for our grand kids if nothing else. Hillary is the same as where we are now. Bernie is the only one talking sense about change.
For my Grand Daughter I must and will vote for Sanders. He is my first choice.

[eridani]

136. If Hillary is elected, 2018 will be a major disaster for Democrats

That's because she isn't bringing any new voters in, and the supporters she does have have more money than enthusiasm.

[madokie]

138. thats why we have to elect Bernie

through him we can get there but only with him at the head of the pack can we.

[VulgarPoet]

94. She is the representative of the machine I've been fighting since I was 17.

Mind you, that's five years. She could come out about all the reprehensible shit she's done since the eighties, wouldn't change a thing to me. I have 0 confidence in her as a leader, and honestly think if she gets the presidency, that several people I trained with, several people I've worked with, several people I've gone to the sand pit with will end up in a pretty box with a fuckin' flag draped over it. Better a pacifist than someone who doesn't know the cost of American blood.

[Betty Karlson]

97. Just because you call her honest every six hours doesn't suddenly make her so.

She is calculating, and never takes a position that hasn't been poll-tested and focus-grouped. She is a follower, not a leader, and I don't trust the company she keeps.

As such, she cannot be trusted, even if there was some honesty to her character.

But in all probability, when it comes to Clinton and a shark approaching the millennials: the only difference would be the shark's basic honesty of purpose.

[Triana]

99. By this then, it's no more possible for Hillary to get her legislation through, either.

None of that logic changes if Hillary is President. Sneer all you want at Sanders supporters for supporting a candidate that represents their ideals and claim he can't get any of them passed BUT --- the political realities mean that Hillary can't either.

It's really interesting to me that these "political realities" (basically, logistics) apply to Sanders but NOT to Clinton.

If you think that Republicans anywhere are going to be any more accommodating to Clinton than they have been to Obama you are sadly SADLY mistaken.

IOW, this entire argument is invalid.

Oh I know Clinton is a master politician and has many years of experience as first lady, senator, secy of state and so on and has years of experience dealing with Republican attacks. But Sanders has years of political experience too and NONE of that CHANGES. THE. LOGISTICS.

So. The argument is invalid.

Clinton will not get her legislation passed. She MIGHT get some half-assed, lukewarm thing done that won't help anyone but corprats and Wall St. Because that's what she's been paid to do.

Sanders will not het his legislation passed.

So....The argument is invalid.

And THAT, mydears, is the true REALITY.

UNTIL and UNLESS CONGRESS CHANGES (and guess what - it WILL!) neither of them will get jack shit done.

So what do you propose, we all pack it up and not bother voting? Or, vote for someone whom we know doesn't represent us in very many ways due to the money she's getting from certain very interesting quarters AND from her past record.

Look, I have TWO RULES when it comes to politicians (besides that they MUST be Democratic or Progressive):

1. LOOK. AT. THEIR. RECORD.
2. FOLLOW. THE. MONEY.

Bernie Sanders wins with me on both hands down.

[noretreatnosurrender]

101. Nice Try

Nice try on that uphill climb but there is just too much evidence to the contrary.

[redstateblues]

103. Bernie has come up with a brilliant scheme

Targeting gullible segments of the electorate with promises he knows he can't keep but that could possibly win him the nomination. Unfortunately in the GE those same promises would put him in company with the last Democrat that ran for POTUS on raising taxes- Walter Mondale. He won ONE state. His home state MN. Brilliant!

[Android3.14]

104. Did she release the transcripts? No? Then this OP is nonsense

'nuff said.

[jeff47]

106. No, she's actually being just as dishonest.

How, specifically, does she get the Republicans to vote to expand the ACA?

[beedle]

110. Just saw Hillary with a 'dreamer' child on her knee

She told the child, don't worry, let me do the worrying for you.

Her record on this issue?

2003– As a Senator says “I am adamantly against illegal immigrants”

2006– Votes for the Secure Fence Act, devised to allow for the construction of a 700 mile fence along the US-Mexico border

2007– Expresses she is against providing drivers licences for undocumented people

2014-During a town hall meeting is asked about what she would do with children from Central America who are coming across the US-Mexico border. In her response, after saying she would send them home, she states – “Just because your child gets across the border doesn’t mean your child gets to stay”

2015– States that she supports a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. Also expresses support for state policies which would allow drivers licenses to undocumented immigrants

For over a decade Hillary was “against illegal immigrants”, favoring building walls and sending people back where they came from (sounding conspicuously similar to a current Republican candidate). Then in 2015, as she embarked on another attempt to become President, she engaged in a dramatic reversal. So what changed? Likely Hillary recognized that Hispanics are the fastest growing ‘minority’ in the United States, already making up approximately 17% of the population, and that their disproportionate numbers in swing states such as Florida, Arizona, and Colorado (among others) make their votes crucial. She also likely looked at her potential competition in her quest for the White House. People like Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, who are Hispanic themselves, or Jeb Bush, who speaks fluent Spanish and is married to a Mexican woman. Not to mention Democratic rival Bernie Sanders, who has long championed an extremely progressive immigration policy. One wonders if one year of opportunistic progressive lip service can really undo a decade of aggressive rhetoric.

She makes me want to puke. Really.

[beedle]

111. So how would the most hated woman in America

especially hated by Republicans, be able to work better with House and senate Republicans?

Wait, I know how she would do this ... she would move way over to the right and give them exactly what they want ... good plan Hillary.

[Robbins]

112. no

clinton is lying.she is no progressive.of course that doesn't matter to supporters who now claim goldwater wasn't against civil rights and kissinger wasn't a war criminal.like bill she will sign gop bills if she were to win.won't happen.she is sure loser to GOP.

[asuhornets]

116. Agreed!!!! n/t

[Armstead]

117. Total Honesty. We're all going to die anyway, so why bother?

How's that for a message for the "can't do, don't try" party?

[Warren Stupidity]

120. I'm left of rabid far right nut jobs so I'll vote for nope!

I think that gets your point across more succinctly.

[libtodeath]

121. I doubt vote for Hillary "she is almost as republican as X" is a good campaign slogan.

[Skwmom]

123. Honest. Flipping your position with qualified language so you can later flip back is NOT honesty.

[fun n serious]

124. Are you talking about Bernie running as (D)

and flipping back to (I) running in Vermont?

[lumberjack_jeff]

125. Right. And Hillary's being honest that she's going to win the White House...

... with those same "somewhat conservative" voters?

Pull the other one.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/266412-before-attacking-sanders-on-guns-clinton-was-annie

[EdwardBernays]

126. BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!!!

Hillary supporter supports Hillary.

[head explodes]

[Maedhros]

129. "forwardprogressives.com"?

[JackRiddler]

134. Republican Congress forever!

No chance of returning to the New Deal!

The banks and megacorps rule, and that's that!

It's a kind of honesty, I suppose.

[Vattel]

135. No one is saying it happens overnight.

In any contest between Straw Bernie and Bernie, I stand with Bernie!

[basselope]

141. The premise is false.

"First, there’s almost zero chance Democrats reclaim a majority in the House of Representatives this November"

That is fundamentally untrue.

If you get 2008 level turnout the democrats take back the house.

No chance under Clinton. Good chance under Sanders.

[Vinca]

144. It's not an "honesty" thing. It's a "let's strive for something better" thing.

Would anyone have called out JFK as being dishonest when he gave the moon speech? Hillary is running on "same old, same old, don't rock the boat." Bernie is running on "we can be so much better than this."