CNN article: Hillary Clinton was right about Bernie Sanders (Ron Paul, school, politician)

[Ringo1]

Originally Posted by ohio_peasant

Hillary lost, first and foremost, because in modern America, we seem to have five shrill activist groups:

- Christian theocrats
- Jingoistic nativists
- "Social Democrats" (for lack of a better term)
- the aggrieved white blue-collar set
- the aggrieved non-white blue-collar set

Hillary appealed to none of them. Bernie appealed to one or two. Trump appealed to three. But never mind Hillary. There's a broader question here: if you're not a Christian, if you're not blue-collar, if you' re not a social-democrat, if you embrace free-trade and international movement of labor and capital, well, for whom would you vote?

From the first posting in this thread: ""Neoliberal" unfortunately remains ill-defined -- in theory it means a social liberal who favors global capitalism and corporate-friendly policies at the expense of social welfare".

Well then, thank you for clarifying who I am: a neoliberal! Now back to the question: in 2017, which is my political party?



Pray tell, who do you hate more - Hillary, or Obama?

Well, I would say Hillary was your girl - strictly using your criteria. She was socially liberal and a fan of regulated capitalism.

Today? Who knows? It depends on how far left the Democratic party goes and if the Republican party can EVER rid themselves of the evangelical wing of their party.

Originally Posted by pknopp

That's not me but to simply answer the question, probably Trump.

I don't know. I believe he's probably a social liberal at heart, somewhat, but as long as he lets Pence and company dictate his decisions and supreme court judges ~ not so much.


He purports to be an economic nationalist but . . again, who really knows what he is? He certainly surrounded himself with globalists.


But he's a definite YES for corporate friendly parties, ehhh policies.

[TheDusty]

**** CNN.

That's about all I can come up with.

In 1960, Bernie's platform would have been pretty predicable as far as a Democrat's platform goes. He probably wouldn't have called himself a socialist, and to be fair, he's really not that much of a socialist anyway. He's more of a social Democrat, which as I said, was once pretty normal in the Democratic party.

Hillary Clinton is center right by the standard of people who know how stupid it is to define liberal as "big government."

[serioulsy, take a ****ing course in language. What are the root words of liberal and conservative respectively? With that in mind, you'd realize how ridiculous the American understanding of politics actually is.]

Bernie ran a good campaign as a social democrat (calling himself a democratic socialist), and Hillary did not, calling herself a progressive but not really being much of a progressive at all. That's her fault, and to blame that on Bernie is childish.

[Hellion1999]

Originally Posted by Yeledaf

I must disagree. The Democrats are going to be fine. They still have the media, Hollywood, the educational system, and some good ideas (e.g., healthcare reform) which counterbalance their bad ones (identity politics, catering to eccentricities of screwball groups, etc.). Above all, the Democrats have the Republicans, who are totally tone-deaf when it comes to expressing much except anger, and have yet to prove that they can govern worth a damn.
rm, they may well lose the Senate -- and possibly the House.

are you kidding me? ...the last time the Democrats did healthcare reform, healthcare premiums and healthcare cost went up by over 65% and their benefits cut and the middle class got screwed and small businesses .....you call that a good idea? LOL


now they want to double and triple down on a National Healthcare in a country of 330 million people and open borders. Even nutty liberal California rejected Medicaid for all because it would have double their debt, imagine for the rest of the nation......another good idea, right?


don't forget, free college for all including illegals again keeping open borders and hardly deporting anybody. The immigration policy of the Democrat party is if you enter here illegally you get to stay especially if your skin is not white, if you bring your kids you get to stay and get a bonus.....the only ones who fall under the deportation policy of the Democrat party is an illegal alien that kills somebody and it has to be proven by a jury first before they deport anybody.....another great idea by the Democrat party.....and then they complain that our prisons are too crowded but don't want to deport illegals committing felonies here.


and please don't talk about the anger from Republicans....the side that is angry since Trump won is the left. I have never seen a bunch of grown ups cry for an election defeat and be so mad.......their platform is HATE TRUMP.

You won't see Trump supporters and Republicans going to Democrats rallies and events to look for a fight and destroy public property.....you won't see Republicans protesting in colleges for liberals making a speech. So get it right when you talk about anger, is not coming from the right, Try again!

[ohio_peasant]

Originally Posted by TheDusty

[serioulsy, take a ****ing course in language. What are the root words of liberal and conservative respectively? With that in mind, you'd realize how ridiculous the American understanding of politics actually is.]

The "root words of liberal and conservative" are its own debate, and a vast one. American conservatives in particular have spent 2+ generations wrestling with their own moniker, at least since Russell Kirk.

Does a conservative wish to regulate what private citizens do in the bedroom? Or on the contrary, is it liberals who wish to do that? What exactly are conservatives trying to "conserve"? And what exactly are liberals trying to "liberate"?

Instead, I'd argue that broadly speaking, to be "liberal" means to be skeptical of national borders and national identity; and within a nation, to be skeptical of states, provinces, and other regional jurisdiction, instead deferring to the national government; and within a state, to be skeptical of local control, at the city or county or town-level, instead preferring the state capitol. To be "conservative" is exactly the opposite.

Originally Posted by TheDusty

Bernie ran a good campaign as a social democrat...

Indeed. Bernie's positions, however foolish or impractical, were well-defined. His political orientation is easy to discern. For the other major candidates, well, not so much.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by Yeledaf

What answer? That you disagree with me? Hardly profound. I had hoped you'd address my honest challenge to cite your differences with Senator Sanders.

And regarding Geppetto's creation, I apologize for assuming you have a sense of humor.

That wasnt humor, that was you saying that any answer I gave other than the one you liked would be seen as me lying in your eyes.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by TheDusty

**** CNN.

That's about all I can come up with.

In 1960, Bernie's platform would have been pretty predicable as far as a Democrat's platform goes. He probably wouldn't have called himself a socialist, and to be fair, he's really not that much of a socialist anyway. He's more of a social Democrat, which as I said, was once pretty normal in the Democratic party.

Hillary Clinton is center right by the standard of people who know how stupid it is to define liberal as "big government."

[serioulsy, take a ****ing course in language. What are the root words of liberal and conservative respectively? With that in mind, you'd realize how ridiculous the American understanding of politics actually is.]

Bernie ran a good campaign as a social democrat (calling himself a democratic socialist), and Hillary did not, calling herself a progressive but not really being much of a progressive at all. That's her fault, and to blame that on Bernie is childish.

She isnt blaming Bernie for some twisted label, she is blaming him for calling her corrupt when she isnt.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by Yeledaf

Excellent job copying and pasting the article. PBS was the first source I came upon that provided a point-by-point list. Are you disputing their accuracy?

The answers are all simplistic. There is an episode of The West Wing that sums this up nicely . its called "Game On"(season 4, episode 6, its on Netflix)

The basic argument is that people try to sum every subject up into a "10 word answer", But politics, policy, and life are way to big for 10 word answers.

You want to ask me my policy differences with Sanders, thats fine, but asking me to respond to 10 word answers( that you most likely dont even disagree with other than 3 or 4 of those) is intellectually dishonest .

Complexity is not a vice.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by Katarina Witt

Education is a local responsibility.

Yeah, right:



How is this different from Hillary's position?

The rest of these are similar.

There are more than 10 positions in the world,and even the 10 listed are more complex than one word answers.

[Timmyy]

Originally Posted by Hellion1999

are you kidding me? ...the last time the Democrats did healthcare reform, healthcare premiums and healthcare cost went up by over 65% and their benefits cut and the middle class got screwed and small businesses .....you call that a good idea? LOL


now they want to double and triple down on a National Healthcare in a country of 330 million people and open borders. Even nutty liberal California rejected Medicaid for all because it would have double their debt, imagine for the rest of the nation......another good idea, right?


don't forget, free college for all including illegals again keeping open borders and hardly deporting anybody. The immigration policy of the Democrat party is if you enter here illegally you get to stay especially if your skin is not white, if you bring your kids you get to stay and get a bonus.....the only ones who fall under the deportation policy of the Democrat party is an illegal alien that kills somebody and it has to be proven by a jury first before they deport anybody.....another great idea by the Democrat party.....and then they complain that our prisons are too crowded but don't want to deport illegals committing felonies here.


and please don't talk about the anger from Republicans....the side that is angry since Trump won is the left. I have never seen a bunch of grown ups cry for an election defeat and be so mad.......their platform is HATE TRUMP.

You won't see Trump supporters and Republicans going to Democrats rallies and events to look for a fight and destroy public property.....you won't see Republicans protesting in colleges for liberals making a speech. So get it right when you talk about anger, is not coming from the right, Try again!

I didn't vote for Trump or Clinton. I didn't vote for Obama in 2012. That being said the GOP congress did everything in their power to defy Obama. They were and still are the party of "no". The hate has come full circle.

[Three Wolves In Snow]

Originally Posted by dashrendar4454

Hillary Clinton is right about Bernie Sanders (opinion) - CNN




Thoughts?

I thought the left was butthurt. She needs to get over it. She lost because of herself. And the more she whines about cries about it, the more people are aware that it was her own fault that she lost.

Originally Posted by sonnymarkjiz

I mean, yeah...Donald Trump has been really big since the 1980's. I knew of him even when I was a kid. So...I'm not really sure why you try to deny that he was really famous when he kinda was.

I heard of him as a kid, too. Didn't understand who he was because he wasn't on any show I watched or was in any band I listened to, but he was all over the place. My parents always watched the news and the media could not stop talking about Trump even back then.