2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThe economist who vouched for Bernie Sanders’ big liberal plans is voting for Hillary Clinton
Washington Post:He likes Sanders. And he has written, in consultation with the Sanders campaign, an analysis that projects Sanders ambitious domestic agenda would raise economic growth to as high as 5.3 percent per year, yielding sustained income gains for the middle class.
But Friedman, an economist at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, says hell vote for Hillary Clinton in the Democratic presidential primary.
I support Clinton, he said in an interview on Thursday. I donate $10 a month to Clinton. I remember the woman who said, womens rights are human rights. I think she did a great job as secretary of state. I agree with Bernie on economic issues, but there are other issues.
vdogg
(1,384 posts)That one's gotta sting.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Iliyah
(25,111 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)oasis
(49,390 posts)hollysmom
(5,946 posts)I m fine with that.
I am also at the point where I want people to stop fighting and just go and vote for someone, be involved.
Alfresco
(1,698 posts)TCJ70
(4,387 posts)...I don't see why this matters? He says Bernie's policies are sound but prefers Clinton. Fine.
Uncle Joe
(58,366 posts)What is your relationship with Senator Sanders?
Ive had almost no relationship with Senator Sanders. I met him once, when I did a paper in 2013 for the group Physicians for a National Health Program. Ive done many studies on single-payer health plans.
Then I testified about my work in front of the Senate, and thats the one time I met him. I took on this analysis on my own, and reached out to the campaign to make sure I had my numbers right. I wasnt paid. The Bernie Sanders sticker on my wifes car, she paid for. Ive gotten nothing from the campaign, but Ben and Jerrys are supposedly coming to town next week, so maybe Ill get some ice cream.
http://fortune.com/2016/02/18/bernie-sanders-economic-growth/
Thanks for the thread, brooklynite.
nichomachus
(12,754 posts)Oh, that's right. I have a mind of my own. I vote based on the issues -- not based on celebrity endorsements, endorsements by retread politicians, or corporatist newspapers.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Right wing talking points much?
And if women's rights are so important what does he think of putting abortion on the table?
libtodeath
(2,888 posts)Cool!
SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)in the failed trickle down Chicago school of thought.
Nothing she says or does indicates that she has any understanding or even knowledge of any other options. Two generations of economist and business men/women are infused with these destructive ideas. They heap scorn on dissenters like the church did when it was faced with the idea that the earth revolves around the sun. Forty years of declining prospects for the American people has done nothing to shake the unfailing worship of Chicago school philosophy.
One of the more insidious pillars of this philosophy is that unemployment is necessary. Let that sink in. Unemployment is necessary.
For me, supporting a system or supporting the advocates of a system that ensures many millions of people must scramble and struggle to survive is abhorrent.
Full employment, a high minimum wage and income security changes everything.
Everything.
And that is what this fight is about. Far too many of the comfortable among us fear change and they will blindly fight against the ideas that they do not understand or care about.
thesquanderer
(11,990 posts)It would be interesting to know which issues he thinks Hillary is sufficiently stronger on, to counter being weaker on economic issues. Foreign policy, maybe?