2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBernie Sanders whiffed in his big debate moment against Hillary Clinton.
But the most telling moment of the night came when CNN's Dana Bash drilled to the heart of Sanders' signature attack against Clinton. "Senator Sanders, you have consistently criticized Secretary Clinton for accepting money from Wall Street," she said. "Can you name one decision that she made as senator that shows that he favored banks because of the money she received?"
Here's the long version of his answer:
Sure. Sure. The obvious decision is when the greed and recklessness and illegal behavior of Wall Street brought this country into the worst economic downturn since the Great Recession the Great Depression of the '30s, when millions of people lost their jobs, and their homes, and their life savings, the obvious response to that is that you've got a bunch of fraudulent operators and that they have got to be broken up.
That was my view way back, and I introduced legislation to do that. Now, Secretary Clinton was busy giving speeches to Goldman Sachs for $225,000 a speech.
So the problem response the proper response in my view is we should break them up. And that's what my legislation does.
[font size="6"]Here's the shorter version: No, he cannot name such a decision.[/font]
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/robert-schlesinger/articles/2016-04-14/bernie-sanders-whiffed-in-his-big-brooklyn-debate-moment-against-clinton
DrDan
(20,411 posts)w4rma
(31,700 posts)http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/276397-clinton-refuses-to-budge-on-releasing-speech-transcripts
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/276401-clinton-would-sign-law-creating-15-minimum-wage
onehandle
(51,122 posts)So cool story, bro.
Bohemianwriter
(978 posts)What logic!
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Which I find odd, I'm sure there is a decision which was effected yet he said nothing.
BeyondGeography
(39,376 posts)Details, details. He can be flat-footed.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)I know that in actual conversations, interviews, forums, debates in calmer circumstances (like non amped up TV debates for state office) Bernie is very agile, and has a great command of the facts.
But in the contecxt of the presidential debates, he has been more clumdy than he should have been.
I personally wish there's been at least one sit down debate without a live audience with an honest, self-effecing moderator like Jim Leher, where they could actually talk and engage like human beings.
robbedvoter
(28,290 posts)Maybe not at 9 AM?
Armstead
(47,803 posts)Cha
(297,348 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)NON ANSWER. Pure gobbledegook.
Whifffff...
TheFarseer
(9,323 posts)Filling up her campaign team with banksters, opposing glass-schtegall, favoring the bailout. I'm just spitballing. Anyone got anymore?
apcalc
(4,465 posts)Seem to be very good at naming specifics about much of anything.
He is good at speaking in generalities and giving the principles he has been speaking of for years.
Lack of preparation? Age?
mcar
(42,337 posts)You think he would have prepared for that one.
livetohike
(22,147 posts)it and his accusations won't be questioned.
What does he offer America other than his angry accusations and whining?
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Didn't matter what he said after that. The fat lady sang.
itsrobert
(14,157 posts)Mod, "can you name any legislation that Hillary sold out for?." Bernie, "um, um, wallstreet, big banks, um, did I say wallstreet, big banks, big banks, big banks, big banks, um, um,um, I need a reboot." Great laugher from the audience because it's true. Live, FROM NEW YORK, IT'S SATURDAY NIGHT!
onehandle
(51,122 posts)mhatrw
(10,786 posts)And that's why he "lost the debate."
But does anyone here or anywhere else actually believe that all those millions she takes never influence her decision making?