It does appear Trump is trying to move "left" to pick up disgruntled Bernie supporters.

[DCBob]

He is now back-tracking and may support a higher minimum wage and also higher taxes on the wealthy.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trump-walks-back-tax-plan-negotiated/story?id=38959168
http://www.aol.com/article/2016/05/08/trump-says-hes-allowed-to-change-his-stance-on-taxes-minimum/21373091/

The question is will Bernie supporters fall for it?

[TransitJohn]

1. Fuck these two parties.

Hillary going after disgruntled Republicans, and Trump going after disgruntled Democrats. It couldn't be more obvious that the same interests are in charge of both.

[DCBob]

2. I have no problem with Hillary going after disgruntled Republicans.

This could be a historic opportunity to convert some moderates to our side.

Trump on the other hand is playing games and doesn't mean anything he says.

[JPnoodleman]

10. Does Hillary mean what she says?

More or less I see zero difference between the two.

[DCBob]

13. If you sincerely cant see the difference between Trump and Hillary I cant help you.

[CorkySt.Clair]

25. Sanders supporters were praising his crossover apoeal

All throughout the primaries. Now it's a bad thing.

[DCBob]

30. Yep... a bit hypocrtical.

I dont get it either.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

61. I think the main difference might be that

Sanders speaks of his values in terms the right can understand and a number of them joins him
Hillary goes to them and says I share your values

that is an important distinction in my eyes

A secondary point might be that he went for the people whereas hillary seems to have gone after the money guys(and girls)

This is just my personal musings on it tho just so thats clear.

[tymorial]

51. I will support Hillary but she has a record

Of changing, no scratch that, evolving her opinions to catch the political wind.

[Hortensis]

9. TransitJohn, Hillary's going after MODERATE conservatives,

not more hard right anti-establishment conservatives.

Trump is going after disgruntled STRONG LEFT AND/OR RADICAL ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT Bernie Sanders supporters.

It's just a natural sorting out now that our candidates are identified. Moderate conservatives know they can't vote for him. The kind of SBS supporters who hate her so malignantly that they've actually been hoping for her destruction presumably won't vote for her.

[TheKentuckian]

26. If you are still voting TeaPubliKLAN in this day and age you are no "moderate"

Nothing about the right wing establishment is "moderate" either.

[Hortensis]

29. Kent, imo that's biased nonsense and why should anyone

even want to believe it?

In reality, a very large block of conservatives are moderate by nature. Although they have been encouraged to adopt hard-right ideology since the 1980s, this election their manipulators have lost control of many. It is an opportunity that no responsible leader should pass up.

[TheKentuckian]

39. There is no want to, it is decades of observation especially the last 15 years.

Not only are they anything but moderate but they are either flaming bigots or willing to turn a blind eye.

They have tolerated the repression of women.

They cheered as the New Orleans drowned.

They have cheered for war.

They have stood by applauding as our civil liberties have been violated and flushed down the toilet.

They stood by or encouraged madness as their fuckwits shut down the government.

They have thumbed their nose at physics putting life as we know it at risk.

They have supported destabilizing governments around the world.

They have fought for decades to starve the old and poor in the fucking streets.

They have time and time again encouraged bankrupting the government in an effort to "shrink the pig".

They are anti tax zealots.

They rallied to prevent access to birth control.

They applaud the destruction of organized labor.

They are fans of destroying our fresh air and water, they opposed access for our children to education.

They have ignored at best and I say full throatedly supported (anything to win right? Sounds awfully familiar too) their party's efforts to disenfranchise minority voters over and over and over again.

I don't have to believe anything but my apparently lying eyes.

Don't me get started on their nasty ass southern strategy utilizing, robber baron, and evil neocon establishment that you'd also paint as "moderate".

[Hortensis]

49. Bias is what I said and now the impression heavily reinforced.

"Cheered while New Orleans drowned." That's hate speech painted with a very large brush.

Moderate conservatives is what I said. You might try to understand what that means, if the very concept of moderation is not impossible to get around.

[TheKentuckian]

53. My bias is reinforced by observation of reality. I'm not supposed to believe my eyes and ears?

I understand if someone was moderate they'd have been sent running scared years ago. There has been nothing but hard right to radically regressive for some time.

Hell, they've been hanging around the edge of the map for a generation for the most part much less the last decade or two.

Let me guess, you are one of these that thinks an arch conservative like Anthony Kennedy is "moderate".

[TransitJohn]

59. They rooted against America getting the Olympics just because Obama was from Chicago

There are no moderate Republicans. Moderate conservatives are Democrats for Christ's sake.

[Lazy Daisy]

62. Translation....

Hillary is going after the monied establishment. Those who want low - no taxes on the extremely wealthy, those who want TPP and all other trade agreements that leave us jobless but them even wealthier, those who want to cut SS, medicare, medicaid, SNAP, etc. those who really don't care either way about abortion, gay rights, minorities etc, as long as they see maximum profits.

Cause, you know, she's one of them.

[jamese777]

17. Nothing new

Going after disgruntled members of the other major party goes back to the election of 1856. It has happened in every election since then.

[CoffeeCat]

48. Both candidates are embarrassing

Last edited Mon May 9, 2016, 12:05 AM - Edit history (1)

and so disliked that they have to scrounge the other side for votes.

Both of them are pathetic, in my opinion. Both are ripping up and imploding the parties that they represent--leaving a big wake of destruction behind them.

And neither of them gives one whit.

It's all about winning. So much winning.

[TransitJohn]

60. Winning like Charlie fucking Sheen!

Great post.

[JonLeibowitz]

3. "many seem to be captivated by brash simplistic one-liners."

Gee, thanks for the insults! Great work reaching out.

But perhaps you must be speaking of Clinton supporters who think that this tripe is anything but a simplistic one-liner:

“I want to be the president for the struggling, the striving, and the successful.” --HRC

I have read all of Clinton's platform, as well as Bernie's. Bernie has detailed policies, almost none of which are attainable. I at least know where he stands, whereas Clinton's verbiage is couched with weasel words.

[DCBob]

4. I took that out.

That was a bit over the top.

[SidDithers]

5. DU rec...

Maybe he'll ask Bernie to be his running mate.

Sid

[DCBob]

15. He actually might try.

Nothing will surprise me coming from that lunatic.

[jamese777]

6. There are always third parties

and Independents.
Nobody is forced to join either major party and just because a person is registered in one party does not obligate that person to vote for the candidate of that party. "Reagan Democrats" were a significant factor in the elections of 1980 and 1984.
Bernie Sanders chose to switch from being an independent of many years and run as a Democrat.
I happen to think that if Senator Sanders had run as an Independent he would have stood a chance of beating both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in the general election. But now it s nearly past the time to file to get on the ballot in every state.

[DCBob]

8. Well that's completely different matter...

and would be about the dumbest thing any liberal/progressive could do in a critical general election when the likely beneficiary would be the lunatic candidate.

[Fawke Em]

43. It is not "dumb" to try to put the brakes on the party going further right.

You may not agree with the solution, but it is not "dumb." I do know that the definition of insanity is to continue to do the same thing over and over and expect different results.

If liberals keep voting for right-leaning "Democrats," the party will never go back to the left, where it belongs.

[DCBob]

46. Its "dumb" if it risks putting a lunatic in the White House.

[joshcryer]

7. Some will.

But they were never supporters to begin with, just anti Hillary.

[DCBob]

11. Yeah.. that's probably correct.

I hope the majority see though Trump's shallow insincere overtures to them. There is no predicting what this lunatic will do once in power.

[jamese777]

12. 2012 Exit Polls

showed that Barack Obama got about 7% of the registered Republican vote, mainly pro-choice Republicans and folks who don't like Mormonism. That was more than 4 million Republicans.

[DCBob]

14. I suspect Hillary will get alot more than that..

Or maybe they will just stay home and not vote.

[Warren Stupidity]

16. Gee guess what, perhaps running as a corporatist knob is not too clever a strategy.

[jamese777]

21. Who wasn't?

Can you name anyone ever elected to the presidency who wasn't a "corporatist knob?" Whatever that is.

[Jitter65]

18. He won't have far to move. Some are already moving to him. nt

[DCBob]

19. Why would they do that?

It seems ridiculous given what Trump is.

[TheCowsCameHome]

20. Hillary can go it alone. You've told us that.

Good luck.

[uponit7771]

22. So vote for the hate filled overt bigot? wow... sooooooo progressive

[TheCowsCameHome]

23. Where did I say that, hoss?

I'm here, waiting..................

[DCBob]

27. I never said that.

[libdem4life]

24. Pretty interesting. Hillary goes to the Republicans and, if true,

Trump goes to Democrats. They are both sleazy and unliked. Vote poaching is nothing.

The other question is, will disaffected Republicans (donors) fall for Hillary?

[DCBob]

31. Well Trump is a charlatan.

I would hope a good liberal/progressive would recognize that.

[libdem4life]

55. And going to the Republicans is exactly....um, unheard of.

Doesn't take a good liberal/progressive to recognize that for exactly what it is.

[silvershadow]

28. Looks like Hillary left him an opening. nt

[DCBob]

33. I would hope no good progressive would be stupid enough to fall for a psychopath..

but who knows?

[silvershadow]

35. I agree

[Fawke Em]

45. There are two running.

[DCBob]

47. ...

on that comment.

[silvershadow]

50. I will defer to my own judgement on that, and choose the one who most closely matches my

Union Labor/FDR roots.

[JackRiddler]

32. Actually Trump is moving "left" in order to pick up the country's majority.

People support robust Social Security, single-payer health care, and no more trillions for regime-change wars. That's the American majority - not exactly leftist but NEW DEAL for sure. You know, like Democrats are supposed to be.

And that was true before Bernie tapped into that feeling and coalesced a more powerful movement for change, which will continue no matter what happens this year.

Of course when the Bald Mussolini of Professional Wrestling tries to horn in on it, his words are worth nothing. But for some reason he thinks it's a good strategy against Clinton. Why, I wonder? Doesn't HRC support robust Social Security, single payer health care, and no more trillions for regime change wars?

Oh! Right, she doesn't.

Meanwhile Trump has reiterated in no uncertain terms his real program, insofar as he has one: The Wall and No Entry for Muslims. That's still good for a third of the vote, in this crazy country.

He's just looking for the right lies to peel off another 15-20%.

[DCBob]

34. He will try but he wont succeed.

Most voters are smarter than that.

[JackRiddler]

36. I agree but it shouldn't even be conceivable.

Why is Hillary Clinton not willing to guarantee and expand a robust Social Security? Why does she say that the single-payer system that is affordable and more effective in so many other countries not possible in the U.S.? Why has she always been a supporter of trillions for regime change wars? Why did she do what she did to Libya and Honduras? Why would she have prevented the Obama Iran deal, if it had been up to her? Why does she honor Henry Kissinger?! All this gives Trump his small chance of moving left, which should have never been.

[DCBob]

38. Hillary is more of a moderate on a number of issues.

No candidate will fit your perfect ideology.

Hillary will be our nominee. We can try to push her left on issues that we are most concerned about. But the first order of business is winning this election.

[JackRiddler]

40. Uh-uh. Social Security is not an "ideological issue."

Neither is the blood on her hands! But okay, for Americans, there is no "ideology" in Social Security and there is absolutely nothing "moderate" in wanting to "save" it by partially privatizing it, as Bill Clinton had agreed with Gingrich. That is an extremist position that only plutocrats can love.

[DCBob]

42. “I won't cut Social Security. ... I'll defend it, and I'll expand it.”

HILLARY CLINTON, FEBRUARY 5, 2016

[KingFlorez]

37. He's clearly lying

[JackRiddler]

41. Thank god you're here to explain that.

I said the same thing on a radio call in today, but it's kind of superfluous here, don't you think?

It should concern that Hillary Clinton is so far to the right and so much now pandering to the defeated Republican establishment that it is even possible for Trump to pull this move.

[DCBob]

44. No doubt.. but he is really good at it.

The weak of mind have fallen for it.

[wendylaroux]

52. you mean like hc is doing? no,no believing either of them.

the only ones falling for anything are the clinton clan.

[timmymoff]

54. No, we aren't supporting Trump.

We did, however; warn Hillary supporters Trump will be able to run against her on the left. The warning wasn't heeded. Basically because the establishment doesn't actually give a shit about us peons, nor does our front runner, but she will sell it like she does. we've seen it enough, some choose to ignore it though.

[jillan]

56. Hillary is going after Bush supporters.

[AgingAmerican]

57. Apparently Hillary supporters don't want Sanders supporters help

Cognitive dissonance fueled lack of foresight, IMHO.

[Ace Rothstein]

58. Trump flip-flopped on minimum wage again.

Now the federal minimum wage should be abolished according to Trump. This guy changes his mind on the same subject a few times per day.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/08/federal-minimum-wage-trump

[slipslidingaway]

63. Trump will move left, Hillary will move right, who could have predicted such moves ...

Will Clinton supporters fall for it?

[ContinentalOp]

64. They have a lot in common.

They're both trying to appeal to anti-establishment sentiment, Trump more convincingly so since he didn't spend the last 35 years as a career politician.

They're both trying to appeal to disaffected working class white men who think that their jobs have been exported to China. But Trump does it with a more explicit level of xenophobia than Sanders does.

Both of their isolationist trade policies extend to their vague foreign policies. But Trump appeals more to the belligerent side of the American id which probably plays better among the people they're both targeting.

Neither of them are convincing on social issues imo.

It's a good thing Sanders isn't our nominee because Trump is beating him at his own game.