Why Progressives Vote Against Their Interests When Choosing Hillary Over Bernie Sanders

[tecelote]

Racism, wealth inequality, Wall Street greed, and perpetual wars are perhaps the biggest moral dilemmas we face as a nation. On all these topics, Bernie Sanders has remained steadfast and adamant, ignoring poll numbers and standing upon principle. Sanders has either moved Clinton towards a progressive stance (she once supported the TPP over 40 times, but now opposes it because of Sanders), or Vermont's Senator has challenged Bush's Iraq invasion and championed progressive values long before poll numbers made them popular.

On contentious issues that a Democratic politician could have lost political power for advocating, Hillary Clinton has acted more like a Republican, than a progressive. First, Clinton's 2008 campaign against Obama was a more nuanced version of Trump's insane rhetoric against Muslims and Mexican immigrants. According to The New York Times, South Carolina's James Clyburn stated in 2008 that it was almost "unanimous" among African Americans that Mr. and Mrs. Clinton were "committed to doing everything they possibly can to damage Obama to a point that he could never win."

This quote, by the way, is found in an article titled "Black Leader in House Denounces Bill Clinton's Remarks."

Is it not racism when a Democrat acts in this manner? If Trump was "committed to doing everything" to "damage Obama to a point that he could never win," then what would progressives be saying about such campaign tactics?

More:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/why-progressives-vote-hillary-bernie-sanders_b_8893056.html

[Dr Hobbitstein]

1. Says a Rand Paul cheeleader.

HA Goodman is a terribly written fraud.

[Scuba]

2. Any comment on the content or will you limit yourself to a ad hominem attack?

[upaloopa]

10. H A Goodman is full of it

He carries water for the right and using his bull shit here is also carring water for the right .

We don't have to prove him wrong you have to prove him right

[CorporatistNation]

50. I Wouls Ask That Hillary Supporters Please Define JUst How Hillary Can Be Characterized As

a Progressive? How you can possibly trust ANYTHING that she says? How you can possibly expect Hillary to represent YOUR interests when she owes so much to Wall Street and BIG Business?

Credible answers to these questions regarding Hillary cannot possibly result in a description of Hillary as a progressive.

If you actually look at the facts.

[Hortensis]

58. "Why Baying at the Moon Doesn't Work."

But then we all know why. No need for an article explaining it, right?

Vote to make real change happen.

Don't vote for a pipe dream just to make a statement. Losing candidates are forgotten, along with their promises and would-be policies that never were, as soon as election day is past.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

11. I treat HA Goodman the same way I would Michelle Malkin.

A troll. Yes, it's ad hominem. But it's also true.

[artislife]

64. And they say Bernie supporters are unnaunced in their response

Clinton=republican
Goodman=Malkin


Fair trade, I guess.

We are only voting on one pairing, however.

[rhett o rick]

19. The tactic is to get the first response within two minutes, so you have to forgive the lack of

substance. And ad hominem is about all they have.

[Betty Karlson]

8. Shoot the messenger!

It's the favorite and most popular pastime in camp Clinton these days.

Now what does that say about the way she will govern IF (and that is a big if) she manages to become president?

I would surmise that she will shoot messengers - especially those armed with arguments and facts and Arab names - every time some action of hers translates into legitimate criticism. Which is why she is NOT qualified to be president.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

13. HA Goodman is a troll. Just like Michelle Malkin and other RW hacks.

If Michelle Malkin wrote an op-ed that said "OMG, Bernie is TEH GREATEST!", and I said "Fuck Michelle Malkin", would you also accuse me of shooting the messenger?

[Betty Karlson]

16. I would reserve judgement until I had read (Ms Malkins reasons for) that article.

If she had an epiphany and vowed to start caring about actual issues rather than GOP talking points, if she wanted to honestly devote herself to help elect a great guy (Sanders) president of the USA, then I would no longer call her a troll, and yes: you would be attempting to shoot the messenger.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

22. HA Goodman advocated voting for Rand Paul instead of Clinton.

If you're the type of person who likes Rand Paul, you're not a liberal. When you suddenly switch from Rand to Bernie, and write lots of anti-Hillary screed, you are not a Bernie supporter. You (Goodman) are a troll.

[1StrongBlackMan]

33. I can't wait for Goodman's first piece ...

should Bernie win the primary and lose in the G/E ... I expect one hell of a victory dance piece. I wonder if he'll be honest enough to entitle it, "How I fooled the easily fooled left ... It was really easy!"

And not a peep will be heard from his promoters.

[Betty Karlson]

56. My understanding is he did so in protest over the war:

she supported it, he didn't. So maybe Goodman was a one-issue voter. But a troll? I doubt it.

You, on the other hand, persist in using that one article to shoot the messenger whatever the arguments in all his other articles. Are you so afraid to engage the message?

[Dr Hobbitstein]

60. If that one issue would drive you to vote for a Tea Partier,

you are NOT a Democrat. You're (at best) a troll. At worst, a moron.

HA Goodman's writings are all based in fantasy. There's zero fact, just hyperbole and anti-Clinton bias. It's almost like he's writing for the Onion, but doesn't realize it.

[Betty Karlson]

61. Could you please use a few more slurs in your response?

I think the lack of argument in your post is still visible.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

62. Sure!

FUCK H.A. GOODMAN!

[Betty Karlson]

63. Quod Erat Demonstrandum. n/t

[rhett o rick]

21. Are you really trying to rationalize an ad hominem attack by using the ole "it might not be

right but they deserved it" twisted logic?

[Dr Hobbitstein]

24. No, not at all.

I'm saying it IS true.

[rhett o rick]

26. I do admire your confidence on your knowlege of what is true and not true. Hard to debate

someone with that "ability".

[Dr Hobbitstein]

45. It was easy to deduce...

"Vote for Rand Paul, because Hillary is evil" followed a few months later by "Bernie Sanders is winning the internets!" "Bernie will beat Hillary, and here's why", et al. He's suckering the furthest left of the group by appealing to their biases.

If you think one can go from supporting Rand Paul (a far-right piece of shit) vs Hillary Clinton (who is FAR to the left of Rand) to supporting Bernie over HRC, then you're delusional or gullible. He's a libertarian troll, and a lot of people are falling hook, line, and sinker for his click-bait articles.

[rhett o rick]

17. Kudos, a reply withing two minutes of the post. Too bad it doesn't address the issue. nm

[Dr Hobbitstein]

23. The "issue" is HA Goodman's bullshit writing.

HA Goodman is a RW troll. I don't need to hear ANYTHING he says about the Democratic primary.

[rhett o rick]

27. And you want to make sure no one else does either. Not very Democratic. nm

[Dr Hobbitstein]

28. You can read and believe whatever the fuck you want.

I'm just saying that HA Goodman is a RW troll. You can fall for it all you want, I don't care.
Just don't expect me to be quiet about it.

[FSogol]

44. You are 100% correct. HA Goodman is a troll. n/t

[Thinkingabout]

3. I am not voting against my best interest, I am voting for the candidate who

The most qualified candidate, Hillary Clinton. I agree with her stand on the issues.

[tecelote]

6. Have your wars.

I have children and I care about people worldwide.

Hillary is craven and a hawk. She is promoting regime change.

Before we bring Democracy to the Middle East, how about reinstating it here?

[Thinkingabout]

34. Like the military action Sanders says he will take?

[Android3.14]

9. It's noon on a Wednesday.

What is her stand on the issues today?

[JonLeibowitz]

15. Good point. There were some earthquakes recently. The ground has shifted under her feet.

[Betty Karlson]

18. Laughing Out Loud here. Thanks for that response. Best one I've read today. eom

[Katashi_itto]

20. It's now after 12:00 which policy shifts can we expect from the Hillary camp this hour?

[comradebillyboy]

4. More tripe from HA HA HA HA Goodman

His fantasies get sillier every day. Do you think anyone not already in the tank for Bernie is persuaded by Goodman's nonsense?

[brooklynite]

5. or "you voters are too STUPID to know how to vote right..."

Always a catchy campaign slogan.

[Ken Burch]

7. Not a phrase the author used or a thought the author had.

And not something Sanders supporters indulge in, either.

[1StrongBlackMan]

30. Isn't that EXACTLY what we mean when we talk about ...

"working class (whites) voting against their interests by voting for republicans"?

[Ken Burch]

35. No...it's about false consciousness caused by incessant propaganda, not stupidity.

Sanders supporters haven't questioned anyone's intelligence...simply challenged some narratives.

You, by contrast, have repeatedly insulted Bernie and those of us who support him by making totally unfounded claims that we dismissed the need to fight institutional racism. As the most progressive campaign in the race, we were always going be trustworthy in our opposition to violent repression against POC, and there was never a conflict between opposing economic injustice and opposing institutional racism.

Yes, it should have been in the stump speech at the start, but when have you ever met anyone in the left wing of the party or the post-1954 left activist community in the U.S. who was NOT a passionate opponent of police harassment of POC and police murders of POC? Bernie made the mistake of thinking that decades of personal commitment to the fight against racism spoke for itself.

And the only reason HRC has a (narrowing) lead among POC is that Bernie was lied about for months...was falsely accused of indifference to institutional racism for months. But he gets more POC support and endorsements with each day.

So the situation is changing and the primary race won't end on Super Tuesday(and really, you shouldn't want it to, because once HRC thinks she has the nom locked all, she take every reference to racism out of her stump speech, bust out the Nixonian "law and order" rhetoric again(I don't need to remind you what "law and order" is always a code phrase for in this country) and start filling the bleachers behind her with rows of cops. Then we'll be all the way back to 1996-forever.

[1StrongBlackMan]

37. Speaking of incessant propaganda ...

You, by contrast, have repeatedly insulted Bernie and those of us who support him by making totally unfounded claims that we dismissed the need to fight institutional racism.

I have never cast Bernie's position as a dismissal of the need to fight institutional racism ... I HAVE said that he prioritizes the need to fight institutional racism lower than the need to fight economic injustice. However, I HAVE said that SOME of Bernie's supporters do dismiss the need to fight institutional racism ... and the evidence was all over DU.

As the most progressive campaign in the race, we were always going be trustworthy in our opposition to violent repression against POC, and there was never a conflict between opposing economic injustice and opposing institutional racism.

Really? Don't you feel just a wince of a problem when YOU insist that YOU are "trustworthy", when those that listen to you, tell you directly that they do not find you trustworthy? And cite to examples for WHY you are not trustworthy to them.

And the only reason HRC has a (narrowing) lead among POC is that Bernie was lied about for months...was falsely accused of indifference to institutional racism for months. But he gets more POC support and endorsements with each day.

Well that is the white liberal reason for why he is lacking in support among the African-American community ... the African-American community has other reasons ... and we have told you so, repeatedly.

[Ken Burch]

38. It was all about the misrepresentation of his record and proposals

misrepresentation spread relentlessly by HRC supporters in support of the candidate who(as the most conservative person in the race) was always the weakest in her actual record on fighting racism(the whole point of her and Bill helping to found the DLC was to get the Democratic Party to stop fighting racism...as the first Clinton Administration totally did.

Yes, Bernie has championed economic justice(would you rather he stopped doing that? economic justice has never been a whites-only issue), but that fight was never going to be an impediment to the fight against institutional racism, because those struggles, while distinct, are never in conflict. Bernie wasn't going compromise on the anti-racist struggle to get economic justice measures in place. And he was never going to decide that it didn't matter that Chris Rock gets pulled over by the cops for no reason since Chris Rock is rich. Neither were his supporters.

Bernie now has excellent relations with BLM-and they don't trust HRC as far as they can throw her. That should tell you something.

I totally condemn the small number of Bernie supporters on DU who reduced everything to economics. It is now clear that they don't represent anything close to majority opinion among Sanders. There were others who responded harshly, but that was mainly because they saw the only candidate they feel they can trust being accused of something he was clearly not guilty of. Can you not have some sympathy for how the attacks on Bernie might have felt to them? If you were a Jesse Jackson supporter, it's likely the way you'd have felt when white liberals used the bogus accusations of anti-Semitism against the Reverend to justify refusing to back the one candidate in 1984 and 1988 who actually was progressive and backed the totally compromised centrist sure losers Mondale and Dukakis instead.

BTW, I'm a white(by happenstance of birth) leftist, not a "white liberal". I campaigned for Rev. Jackson twice. You, by contrast, are currently supporting a white centrist who will only be sounding "liberal" as long as Bernie and O'Malley are in the race. After that she'll be back to having rows of cops(and let's be honest, rows of mainly white cops) lined up behind her and loving her some death penalty. How am I the one who's being untrustworthy here?

[1StrongBlackMan]

40. No ... It ... Wasn't ...

the supporters of HRC that spread the misinterpretation ... a simple DU search will show that the only people spreading the "misinterpretation" was Bernie supporters, who "interpreted" what PoC said, as saying something that was never said (except maybe on a rare occasion ... and PoC called those people out, too). You, particularly, are one of those that was spreading the nonsense ... as you are here.

You, by contrast, are supporting a white centrist who will only be sounding "liberal" as long as Bernie and O'Malley are in the race.

How many times, must I tell you that I am not a supporter of HRC? Just another example of your listen to that voice in your head, and interpreting it to mean something that was never said.

But I'm done ... since nothing I say will penetrate.

[Ken Burch]

42. If you're not an HRC supporter, why do you repeat the "It will all be over on Super Tuesday" meme?

O'Malley has nothing to gain from that. She will never choose him as her running mate, and he has nothing to gain from Bernie getting knocked out, since O'Malley has nothing to offer for Sanders supporters.

BTW, I agree that I don't speak for POC, and have never claimed to...but neither do you. You speak simply for yourself as an individual who happens to be A POC. There are 40 million African-Americans-it's not possible that all 40 million regard you are the official voice of the community.

And you speak as a person who has made it your mission in life to demonize Bernie as a candidate and a man from the moment he declared. Why have you been so relentless about that? Why didn't you stop even when he became MORE outspoken on institutional racism than any other Democratic presidential candidate? It was valid to raise these issues when they weren't in his stump speech, but why are you STILL pissed at the guy? Is there anything he could do(other ceasing to mention economic justice at all-which would turn him into a Republican) that would ever get you to stop seeing him as your greatest enemy of 2016? And(if you're an O'Malley supporter) why are early omissions from the stump speech-omissions rectified months ago) worse, in your mind than O'Malley's record of letting the Baltimore PD end as many YBM as possible? Yes, Bernie talks about economics, but he doesn't have anybody's blood on his hands.

So your unending anti-Bernie vendetta here makes less and less sense.

[1StrongBlackMan]

46. Again, more of you listening to the voices in your head ...

First ...

If you're not an HRC supporter, why do you repeat the "It will all be over on Super Tuesday" meme?

The one has nothing to do with the other. Further, though I have said this in reference to, both, the candidate I support and the candidate you support; but, it has nothing to do with whom I support, and everything to do with being able to dispassionately read polling data and having a rudimentary understanding of campaigning. Both, of whether inform my opinion that no matter what, or how much I WISH and HOPE for a particular outcome ... the numbers are the numbers.

BTW, I agree that I don't speak for POC, and have never claimed to...but neither do you. You speak simply for yourself as an individual who happens to be A POC. There are 40 million African-Americans-it's not possible that all 40 million regard you are the official voice of the community.

I don't claim to speak for PoC; however, I can, and do, speak to what I have/do observe and hear of my community. I also, can, and do, speak to what the polling of the African-American community think and say. On the other hand, you consistently tell me what PoC think and know/do not know, citing to nothing but what you think.

And you speak as a person who has made it your mission in life to demonize Bernie as a candidate and a man from the moment he declared. Why have you been so relentless about that? Why didn't you stop even when he became MORE outspoken on institutional racism than any other Democratic presidential candidate? It was valid to raise these issues when they weren't in his stump speech, but why are you STILL pissed at the guy?

I only speak ill of Bernie when his supporters attempt to tell PoC what we should think or know about issues or the man, and then, it's only to tell you ... "No that is NOT what we think" and "No, that is NOT what we feel, or even, should feel", ... if it seems like I do it so often, it's because you, and his other supporters, give me so many opportunities with every time you mention Black people.

And BTW, I'm NOT "pissed at the guy" (recall previous reference to listening to voices in your own head.)

So your unending anti-Bernie vendetta here makes less and less sense.

Of course it doesn't to you ... you are only listening to yourself ... For the last time, while I am not a Bernie fan, I am not "anti-Bernie", and any vendetta I may have is in opposition to white liberals/leftist trying to tell PoC what we do and/or should think, feel or support.

But again ... you will ignore what I said, in favor of the voice in your head, that knows PoC better than PoC.

[uponit7771]

12. Sanders hasn't proffered a good reason why he's going to be THAT much different than Hillary...

... other than saying he's first on some issues and then intimating that Clinton isn't redeemable or doesn't have good judgement either through his own words (claiming Hillary is coming late to leftist views ) or through serogates.

I'm not seeing a total >90 deg difference either

Even on one of Sanders biggest antagonist, Wall Street, he's can NOT outline what Hilllary has done for them other than saying she'll be beholding to them.

my take

[tecelote]

14. War

During the debate Hillary said that we can not afford Bernie's proposals for a better America but at the same time she said we can afford regime change in the Middle East.

That one item should have people with a moral sense voting for Bernie. If all else is similar, Bernie being elected will kill thousands fewer people and improve the lives of millions.

What do you think is more important - bring Democracy to the Middle East or reinstating it here?

[uponit7771]

47. People who are looking at Hillary do NOT believe she's going to start another wasteful needless war

... in the middle east because she needs political capital.

Will she be faster on the trigger than Sanders? Possible, but she's not going to be a Margerate Thatcher ... that's the kind of incredulous talk that is not backed up by hard evidence devoid of degrading her character.

In regards to democracy I don't see her trying to give up voting rights grounds to the GOP either... there's noting in her past that says she's good for that

[rhett o rick]

25. Some here pretend as if they don't understand the concept of quid pro quo, or maybe

in denial that it applies to their candidate. Democrats should all be against corruption of big money in politics.

[uponit7771]

48. Some here don't understand the concept of their candidate can't throw stones and there's no

... need to impugn another candidates character when they have stains on their candidates clothes.

At this point which set of supporters will point out that the another candidate is more of a moral person than the one they backing!?!?!

Lets do something different and expect different results no?

[rhett o rick]

49. That's a lot of words to say that you choose to side with the Oligarchy.

I guess the state of the country is just ok with you.

[WillyT]

31. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[enid602]

32. economy

I think a lot of people support Hill because she, like BHO believes in the markets, and is essentially a non interventionist as far as the markets go. With millions of people facing retirement, non intetventionism will help keep inflation at bay.

[riversedge]

36. Vile H. A. Goodman once again with his stupidity.

[Katashi_itto]

55. Say it long enough...

Sort of force them to drink it one way or another...

[Doctor_J]

39. nominating Mrs Clinton will be the end of the party as an agent of progress, or even as

a functional alternative to the republicans. I'm not going to post the picture again, but she is practically indistinguishable from the republicans on nearly all of the issues that should (and used to) be important to individual democrats and to the party. By nominating her, the party is giving the republicans 90% of what they want. I'm going to be a part of it.

[redstateblues]

53. Dramatic hyperbole

[MohRokTah]

41. H.A. GOODMAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DRINK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Romulox]

43. Occam's Razor: Hillary's "progressives" actually support War, TPP, Wall Street over Main Street, etc

They are ideological remnants of the so-called "Reagan Democrats", come home to roost in a Party that has wrenched hard to the right.

[applegrove]

51. Keeping Republicans out of power is in my own best interest. Hillary can and will do that.

[tecelote]

59. Bernie has better odds...

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/poll-against-bernie-sanders-donald-trump-would-get-schlonged-20151223?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=huffpostlive&utm_campaign=partner

[in_cog_ni_to]

52. "Hillary Millhouse Nixon"

That's good. Really, really good! Fits perfectly.

Great article! Thanks for posting!

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[redstateblues]

54. Libertarians in disguise

[Maedhros]

57. Hillary's biggest donors include JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, the Private Prison Industry

and major media corporations.

Intentionally or not, if one supports Hillary then one is also supporting her financial donors. They want her to be President, and if one helps get her elected, one is advancing their agendas.