So, the two quotes from the Guardian liveblog that strike me as most immediately significant…
First question from a student at the University of Pennsylvania: “Will you encourage your supporters to vote for Secretary Clinton?”
“We’re not a movement where I can snap my fingers and tell you what to do,” Sanders said. “It is incumbent upon her to tell millions of people who right now do not believe in establishment politics or establishment economics, who have serious misgivings about a candidate who has taken millions from Wall Street.”
“She has got to go out to you,” Sanders said. “It is incumbent upon Secretary Clinton to reach out, not only to my supporters, but all of the American people with an agenda that they believe will represent the middle class.”…
When pressed, Bernie Sanders says that he will help elect whomever it takes to keep Donald Trump or another Republican candidate from being elected president.
“I will do everything in my power to make sure that no Republican gets into the White House in this election,” Sanders said.
Now you’re on the record, Senator Sanders. Thanks!
And then, in the second townhall…
First question from a volunteer councilman: “Will you say what role you would trust Senator Sanders in in a Clinton administration?”
After demuring that she can’t begin to speak to administration positions before she’s even won the nomination, Clinton affirmed that she supports down-ballot Democrats.
“I’m already raising money for Democrats up and down the ballot – I’m dedicated to that,” Clinton said. “You can count on me doing that because I feel very strongly that we need to have a vital, dynamic Democratic party.”
“I wanna be a very strong ally of elected Democrats against the county,” she concluded.
My interpretation: President Clinton will be very happy to have Senator Sanders caucusing with the Democrats during her administration. She will absolutely help raise funds for his re-election — just as she does now for so many downticket Dems, despite attacks on her motives for doing so!
Sanders wants more than that, he’s gonna have to get off his soapbox and start working towards a mutually beneficial deal. You know — like a professional politician would do.
As Jane Austen said, in Persuasion: Reciprocal compliments, which would have been esteemed about equal.
Your thoughts?
parmenides
Oh for gods sakes. He says a truism, i.e. he can’t just tell his supporters to switch, and she dodges the question. Thus reciprocal? He’s got probably the most valuable email list in the country at the moment and he needs money? I’ll be giving Hillary money soon and am happy that everything is working out but this is stupid.
Mnemosyne
Fuck migraines.
That is all.
? Martin
Also today:
California debated which of two democratic women would defeat which of three republican men for the CA senate seat.
Jerry Brown signed legislation that will automatically register voters in California. As with abortion, CA tells the confederacy to go fuck themselves.
Omnes Omnibus
@parmenides: Of course she dodged the question. Bernie is best placed as a senator. But, If she says that, it will be seen as an insult.
redshirt
@? Martin: Progress! I love CA.
I’m surprised to find myself liking Hillary more and more with each passing day.
Mike J
@parmenides: Hillary has a lot more cash. She’s going to be helping him retire his campaign debt, at least if learns how to mind his smart mouth.
parmenides
@Omnes Omnibus: I know that
Smiling Mortician
@parmenides:
Especially if they might “have serious misgivings about a candidate who has taken millions from Wall Street.” Amirite?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
it was a dumb question
eta: still, she could have been a little faster on her feet and said something about looking forward to partnership as an important voice in the coming Dem senate majority. I thought you could also hear her frustration when she got bogged down in a too-long discussion of process and all the different ways she’s ahead
NR
@Smiling Mortician: Clearly the fault lies with Bernie Sanders for mentioning the money and not Hillary Clinton for taking it in the first place. If he just hadn’t said anything, everything would have been fine.
Darkrose
@Mnemosyne: Migraines suck.
parmenides
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: I look forward to partnering on many issues with Bernie Sanders gives the right level of obfuscation and on pointness to have been seen to answer the question that works. Everythings done but for the fat women. All she’s going to get is process questions. So being annoyed at them in April when only the crazy people like us are paying attention to politics is foolish.
Bobby Thomson
@Smiling Mortician: He didn’t doge the question at all. He answered it in his usual passive aggressive way, but honestly. He won’t lift his finger except to wave it.
PhoenixRising
Christ, what an asshole. Used to be the universal caption for NYer cartoons; is now my first response to everything Senator Sanders (whom I once respected) says.
Was there a more cranky, disingenuous and useless way to reply to that utterly predictable question?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
damn, damn, damn, damn, damn, damn and damn
PhoenixRising
@NR: The fault lies with Bernie Sanders that he literally has nothing productive to add to our national dialogue, as demonstrated by his ineptitude in answering what should be a very, very easy question. ‘Yes.’ is a complete sentence.
He has nothing to say other than ‘my opponent is corrupt, and I’m the only good guy’. And if you’re not old enough to remember Ralph Nader, trust me when I say that the jokes write themselves. Except after 8 years of W, it’s not funny.
Mike J
Is Bernie a gamergater?
Elie
@Darkrose:
Does coffee work? How about a nice iced coffee?
FlipYrWhig
@PhoenixRising: Bernie Sanders’s default mode is cranky, disingenuous, and hectoring. Not just on the campaign trail, in, like, life. Hey, Bernie, want some iced tea?
” Billionayuhs and Wull Shtreet drink iced tea, political revolution, 27 dollahs, I’ll take wahtuh.”
NR
@PhoenixRising: It just pisses you off so much that he’s right, doesn’t it? There are a lot of people out there who don’t want to vote for a candidate who’s taken millions of dollars from Wall Street. That’s a handicap Hillary has to work to overcome. I don’t know how she’ll do it, but she has to.
I also love the attitude around here that if only mean ol’ Bernie hadn’t said anything, no one would care about Hillary’s Wall Street $$$. People, Trump is going to hammer her on this in the fall.
Mike in NC
We spent the day in Virginia City, Nevada and it was a blast. Freezing cold and snowing, but we thoroughly enjoyed the trolley tour, local gift shops, seeing the remains of an old silver mine, paranormal activity tour of an abandoned building built in 1860, and lunch at a great saloon.
FlipYrWhig
@PhoenixRising: He’s been saying “everyone is corrupt but me, and you can tell I’m not because of my crappy hair and crappier suit” for 50 consecutive years.
chopper
@parmenides:
I guess if you think “I can’t just make it happen and oh yeah my opponent is corrupt” is a simple truism then sure.
Darkrose
@Elie: Actually, I haven’t had any caffeine today. Thanks for mentioning that! I should probably eat, too.
satby
@PhoenixRising: Yeah, that was my reaction too. The more Sanders talks the more I dislike the guy.
patroclus
Well, the defending Stanley Cup champs just lost, so I’ll catch a little of the townhalls. I sure hope it’s not just about process and campaign contributions! I like the Bernie who talks big ideas; not the one who obsesses on process and contributions and the “big money interests” and the “powers that be” and “political revolutions.” I’d like to hear more about free college and free health care and specifics on proposed climate change laws, financial restructuring and foreign policy. So far, I’m unimpressed.
Cacti
Lolwut?
Bernie could create a 21st century Jonestown scenario if he felt like it.
redshirt
@NR: Oh noes! Trump is going to get her on speaking fees! Making money! Capitalism!
Time to source some obscure favorability poll.
NR
@efgoldman: Clap louder or Tinkerbell will die.
Elie
@PhoenixRising:
He is undoing his own credibility with each similar response. That will have impacts for him when time comes around re-election or other goodies. Too bad… No happy warrior for him…
chopper
@efgoldman:
he can’t. why do you think he has so few real friends in congress?
aimai
@PhoenixRising: Well his very free thinking, independent, voters who he can’t “tell what to do” have been repeating this line ad nauseum over at dKos. Its just amazing how lock step they are with Bernie when, apparently, he can’t tell them what to think.
redshirt
@Darkrose: I’ve learned I might literally die without daily caffeine. How can you wait till 23:11?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
i was hoping Hayes would ask him how it felt to be running his first negative campaign.
Elie
@Darkrose:
Si! That is an “intervention” that I never miss — Yummmm! Food!
NR
@redshirt: Scoff all you want, but Trump has a very simple message for the general election: Vote for me because I can’t be bought.
So far, Hillary’s response to criticism of her Wall Street money has been “That’s what they offered!” and “I had to take their money because 9/11.”
She’s going to have to do better than that.
FlyingToaster
I am so glad I was working on [redacted] with Shetland on in the background.
This is my official hell-week* — right now is my last gasp before sacking out in order to get up a little early. W-F I have to get up ‘way early, in order to be at [redacted] ‘way early.
At least we’re now down to implementation. No more planning. And I’ll spend the down times writing the documentation so that someone else can take over and I can go be the emeritus.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
In other news, Jim Van Dehei has tossed out a farewell column that is currently being knocked around twitter like a smug, unlikable piñata. As best as I can tell, he’s calling for a Bloomberg/Zuckerberg ticket to bring us the cuts to Social Security Americans are too dumb to know they really want
patroclus
I really wish Sanders would stop harping on contributions and get to real issues – he’s gonna have to better than this if he really wants to change any minds. And why does he oppose Philly’s effort to implement universal pre-school? He just took that question and pivoted right back to “big money” in politics.
Paul Gottlieb
In 2008, Hillary Clinton mourned for about five minutes and then threw herself wholeheartedly into the task of helping elect Obama. I would be shocked if Bernie was even one tenth as helpful
FlyingToaster
@NR: BS.
She took the money because if someone offers you a quarter-mil per half hour to talk, you TAKE THEIR FUCKING MONEY. Jeebus, this isn’t rocket science, nor even brain salad surgery.
If someone ever offers you a like amount for a like task, trust me, you’ll take the money, too.
gf120581
Hillary – someone who actually has plans to get things done.
Bernie – guy who stands off to the side and complains that you’re not doing the job right.
Mike J
@NR: Tinkerbell is already dead.
Elie
@NR:
The point is: SO WHAT? If Bernie could even vaguely articulate an approach or plan, there would not be an issue. But he slings this shit out, and then — OK — what does it mean we should doooooo? And when he is asked he just turns and runs away. Its like saying we shouldn’t have starving children and then so what should we do? Well, feed them I guess and (runs off). No one is saying that he is not without the beginning of an argument, but he doesn’t ever get there!!!! We are in Khmer Rouge territory — should we murder all the “elite”? The dude aint ready and till someone of his folks can either interpret what he means or BE that messenger, than just sit down. Right now, we are seeing that interrupting the Orks is at least a practical strategy. He isn’t even talking about THAT or about electing other Dems. I want someone to tell him to STFU unless he has even a semi strategy.
Cacti
@patroclus:
Yeah, about that.
The NYDN interview pretty much exposed why Bernie blows the same couple of notes all the time. Beneath all the righteous sounding bluster and fury…
He’s really kind of dumb.
NR
@FlyingToaster: Never said I wouldn’t. But I’m not running for President of the United States claiming I’ll be tough–oh so very, very tough–on the same people who made me rich.
That doesn’t pass the smell test for a lot of voters.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@NR: you also spent eight years sniveling and tantruming about how you didn’t get your ponies because Obama wouldn’t fight, and he won re-eleciton anyway, so maybe we can take heart that halfwitted emoprog fucks like you are a noisy but tiny minority.
Did it ever occur to you that maybe the reason your parents didn’t like you is that they knew you very well?
shomi
Is there any interview where Sanders does NOT try tie Hillary to Wall Street at least once and usually many more times? That’s pretty much the ONLY angle he has. Ask him about his foreign policy and he will probably mention Wall Street somehow.
Omnes Omnibus
@NR: So you say.
redshirt
@NR: Do you ever wonder if your opinions are wrong?
NR
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Oh, are we back to you putting your psychological issues on display for everyone? Look, as entertaining as this always is, I really suggest you talk them out with a licensed therapist. The way they pop up all the time probably isn’t healthy.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@NR:
You’re as tiresome a one-note fraud as your candidate. BS are the perfect initials for him. Where are the rest of his tax returns? Jane give up looking for them?
NR
@redshirt: My opinions are not who you have to worry about. I’m voting for Hillary despite her flaws.
But when 56% of the country doesn’t like your nominee and fully two-thirds think she’s dishonest, that’s a lot of other opinions you have to worry about.
Cacti
Bernie can’t be bought…
Unless you give his wife a job on a board deciding which Hispanic communities should be a dumping ground for Vermont’s nuclear waste.
aimai
@NR: Not a lot of voters or she wouldn’t be winning. Anyway stop with this passive agressive crap about how Hillary isn’t tough enough to take Bernie’s criticism. She’s tough enough to eat his liver for breakfast and use his tanned hide for her slippers. We are objecting to his attempting to kneecap the entire Democratic Party in order to continue to pose as the outsider savior. He can’t win the primary. All that is left for him is to destroy the Party and the Country. He needs to stfu and sit down.
NR
@the Conster, la Citoyenne: Yes, complaining about Bernie Sanders’ tax returns is going to be a huge help to Hillary against Trump.
I really hope the people she has working for her are better at this than you guys, because if not, we’re in trouble.
patroclus
@Cacti: I don’t think Bernie is dumb, but he is kind of a johnny-one-note on “Wall Street” and “contributions” – that’s pretty much all he’s talked about in this townhall, which is now 40 minutes over and not one real question from a citizen as yet. I really wish he’d answer these questions without pivoting back to “Wall Street” and “contributions.” It just gets old.
Finally! A good question on mass incarceration! And a 4-part answer from Bernie – wow, 45 minutes in and he finally gets beyond “Wall Street” and “contributions.” This is the Bernie I like!
parmenides
@efgoldman: Bernie has been running a slightly purity pony campaign which many of his supporters have eaten up. Yes for gods sake she’s going to have to deal with the issue he’s been raising since the beginning. I’ve worked on political campaigns and get it. When I said its a truism I meant he can’t tell people to do anything. Reiterating the same criticism he’s had for the entire campaign doesn’t even register at this point. And hell its pretty banal point. The hand wringing over this campaign has been pathetic. Its like no one remembers 2008.
Darkrose
@redshirt: Now that I’m not working, my schedule is seriously fucked up, so I tend to eat and caffinate very late. Though it’s actually 20:34 where I am (PDT).
Elie
good night all! Tomorrow is a wonderful day!
hovercraft
@NR:
He can say that all he wants, but the fact is he will not be self financing during the general election, he can’t afford to. He is already in talks with the RNC about financing the campaign. Even if he wanted to he doesn’t have the cash on hand or for that matter the net worth. So that argument will be moot, unless he wants to explain what he will be giving his large donors and superpacks.
NR
@aimai:
Winning the primary and winning the general election are two very different things.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
honest to god? Hayes has to bear some/much of the blame for that
does anyone ever ask him why “Wall St” couldn’t get immigration and infrastructure passed? or gun control? or stop the House Republican brinksmanship on budget resolutions?
Ruckus
@Mnemosyne:
Absolutely second or whatever this.
Migraines suck donkey balls.
NR
@hovercraft: Finally, an actual cogent argument. Yes, that may be a good line of attack to use against Trump.
However, we are not just talking about campaign contributions when it comes to Hillary, we’re talking about money she was personally paid, and that complicates things a lot. I don’t know how it’s going to shake out.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@NR:
Trump has nothing to do with Sanders and his wife being frauds and hypocrites.
redshirt
@NR: I hear ya, but this Hillary seems way better than the Hillary of old. I’m really liking her and I bet a lot of other people have the same impression. Given that and built in numbers of this race, she’s a big big favorite to win it all. And that’s all I care about: Defeating Republicans.
patroclus
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: He just had to get those process and “Wall Street” and “contributions” questions in, I guess. And even if they weren’t about “Wall Street” and “contributions,” Bernie just pivoted back to that, so they might as well could have been. But he just answered a good question on marijuana deregulation at the federal level and the VAWA and the assault weapons ban. So, 51 minutes in, he’s actually now trying to win over some votes. But that obsessive focus on “Wall Street” and “contributions” was really unhelpful.
NR
@the Conster, la Citoyenne: Look, I know you hate Bernie Sanders and think he’s the devil incarnate, but we’re talking about the general election here, where Bernie is not running. Not everything is about your intense hatred of Bernie Sanders.
Ruckus
@gf120581:
Sanders is the guy at the construction site without the foreman’s hardhat but who never has a tool in his hand and is always talking. In that road side sign about men working, he’s always the one standing off to the right who isn’t holding down a shovel.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Ruckus: i love the story about Bernie being asked to leave a commune cause he would never shut up and work
Cacti
@Ruckus:
Sanders is the working class hero who never held down a steady job.
patroclus
Some good answers on ISIS and women’s liberty – these last 10 minutes have been quite effective for Bernie. But that’s it for the citizen questions and now it’s back to Hayes with the ridiculous questions – will he serve in a Hillary administration, what has he learned in the campaign? Arrgh.
Mnemosyne
@NR:
Wait, you actually think that the guy who makes his living by literally renting his name to anyone who will buy it is going to be able to get traction in the general election by claiming Hillary is for sale and he’s not?
Whatever it is you’re smoking, I want some of it.
hovercraft
@NR:
I am sure that He Donald has never taken speaking fees. No really, do you imagine that to be the case? The fact that it didn’t come up in a Republican primary is not suprising. If you want to talk about shady dealings and dodgy associates I’ll take Hillary over him.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@NR:
Oh fer fuck sake you’re even giving him too much credit for being as evil as you give him as being some kind of saint. He’s not evil, he’s a hypocrite and a holier than thou fraud who’s never accomplished anything, now doesn’t know how to pivot and start making nice, because he isn’t nice. He’s nothing but a PITA.
NR
@efgoldman:
A rather massive assumption on your part and, as far as I can see, totally baseless.
patroclus
HBO’s Real Sports just did a really good hit piece (er, factual reporting) on Trump’s golf course in Scotland (by Bernard Goldberg, a notorious right-winger) and all the opposition he generated and how he hasn’t followed through on his promises and how he sued Scotland (and lost) and how he’s threatening to give up because Scotland is building a bunch of wind farms out in the waters just off the golf course.
tastytone
@Cacti:
I don’t think he’s so much dumb as he is too lazy to do the work of getting from problem to solution. He never got beyond his “thousands of people will march on Washington” strategy to enact legislation. The most effective, dead-on line Clinton has (finally) come-up with is “it’s not enough to diagnose problems”. Once that NYDN interview got play, it was the beginning of the end. I had really high-hopes for him, and I’m genuinely sad that after months of debates and speeches–everything I know about Bernie Sanders I already knew from Tom Hartman’s “brunches”. Scold. Bitch. Moan. Repeat.
Mnemosyne
@hovercraft:
Donald Trump makes his money by selling his name to developers. That’s what he does for a living. And NR thinks Trump is going to be able to accuse Hillary of being for sale while he’s not?
Cacti
And now we all know, the one candidate who can credibly run on his inability to be bought is the namesake of Trump University.
Ruckus
@Cacti:
I hired that guy once.
It took him longer to unload his 6 toolboxes (the average was 1 toolbox and a small cardboard box for incidentals, the way older guys may have had 2 toolboxes) than it did for me to let him go (which took less than an hour, a 33 yr record for any of my employees) for not having one actual clue about what he said he knew or what any of those tools were or how they were used. I of course did as always and paid him for a full day, it was going to take him that long to load all of his crap back in his car.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@Mnemosyne:
Four bankruptcies were involved in making that living, too. Trump is target rich if he tries to accuse anyone of being shady.
Ruckus
@Mnemosyne:
Why would you want any of that? It is obviously a crap product, look at the results.
Cacti
@Mnemosyne:
As we speak, Trump is fighting having to testify in the racketeering lawsuit against Trump University.
The very picture of incorruptible he is.
hovercraft
@Mnemosyne:
Don’t you get it SHE’S EVIL no one will vote for her !!!
Supposedly the democrats have a whole bunch of oppo research on him lined up for the general election.
Mnemosyne
@the Conster, la Citoyenne:
I mean, I know Trump has the balls to stand in front of one of the numerous Trump Towers that he doesn’t own and claim that he’s not for sale, but I really don’t think too many Democrats and independents are going to buy it.
MomSense
@Mnemosyne:
Fuck migraines!
hovercraft
@patroclus:
There was a sympathetic family he was fighting for land adjacent to that golf course that engendered a lot of bad will towards him because of it. Between that fight and the wind farm he is persona non grata in Scotland.
Darkrose
@shomi: Samantha Bee had a great line about how Bernie’s policy positions range from Wall to Street.
Mnemosyne
@Darkrose:
@Ruckus:
@MomSense:
Yes! It’s making me very grouchy. Stupid weather migraines.
burnspbesq
Trolling Patriots fans today has been so much fun.
burnspbesq
@NR:
Which makes those people dumber than a box of rocks.
Omnes Omnibus
@efgoldman: More typing than NR is worth. Either a purity troll or a pro-troll.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
BS grudgingly admits to making a teeny tiny voting error on deregulating swaps, then bullshits his way to parsing his crime bill vote, pivots to attacking Clinton. It will be a good day when he’s in the rear view mirror.
Ruckus
@Mnemosyne:
They are delightful aren’t they?
My sister told me that she couldn’t understand why they gave her painkillers for her cancer, the pain level there never came anywhere near to that of the migraines that she’d had all of her adult life. We both inherited some fun stuff from our parents. Not their fault of course, just the way it is.
Major Major Major Major
@Mnemosyne: Ah man, I used to get those all the time, back when California had weather. :( feel better!
aimai
@NR: She earned money. By giving speeches. That people wanted to pay for. So they could say they had attended a speech by a famous person. She worked for that money. Giving speeches is, in fact, work. You know how I know? She gets taxed on it as income.
Ruckus
@Omnes Omnibus:
NR has been a troll from his first day. Don’t know which column that puts him in but he’s always been in one of them.
feebog
I can’t wait for tomorrow night to be over. HRC is going to sweep all five states and the bathwater will be circling the drain at that point. And while I’m not going to bad mouth Sanders, because after all of this, I still think he is a decent guy in over his head, just shut up already, its over. Ditto that to his supporters.
NR
@efgoldman: Nice rant. All I’ll say is that the irony of someone who uses the term “blind berniebots” whining about disrespecting voters is rich.
Ruckus
@aimai:
And if I’m not mistaken, she paid those taxes. I believe it’s in those 30 yrs of returns.
Omnes Omnibus
@Ruckus: Hey, I know. I just ain’t sure what genus of troll he is.
Mnemosyne
@Ruckus:
I’m lucky that they’re relatively mild — Excedrin usually does the trick. But for some reason the extra caffeine is making me twitchy tonight.
@Major Major Major Major:
Today’s weather was bizarre — sunny, cloudy, sunny, rain pouring down sideways, sunny. Add in the high winds and i was pretty much guaranteed a weather migraine.
tastytone
@Mnemosyne:
I don’t know if this is helpful or not, but pseudoephedrine helps with my seasonal migraines. The vasodilation effect takes the edge off. Sorry you’re getting hammered.
Major Major Major Major
@Omnes Omnibus: Hopefully not one of those underwater ones. Scrags are nasty!
Omnes Omnibus
@NR: Explicate, please.
NR
@burnspbesq: It’s stupid to not want a president who’s taken millions of dollars from the industry that crashed our economy and left millions of people jobless and homeless?
And people wonder why both major parties are losing members faster than you can say “regulatory capture.”
NR
@hovercraft: They’d better. They’re gonna need it.
redshirt
@Omnes Omnibus: Heh. What’s your classification system?
burnspbesq
I don’t consider NR a troll. He/she sincerely believes a lot of truly stupid shit, and doesn’t know when to quit. That’s a different thing.
Mnemosyne
@NR:
Still waiting to hear how the guy who sells his name to the highest bidder is going to be able to claim that, unlike Hillary, he’s not for sale.
redshirt
@efgoldman: A+ rant. 9.7
Ruckus
@Mnemosyne:
I have a prescription migraine med that sometimes is not even enough but when that happens at least it takes the edge off. It is very expensive though. I used to buy it from Canada and save about $75-100 per box of 10 applications. And it still cost $150/box then. Worth every penny. There are now a few more drugs specifically for migraines. I’m sticking with what works.
Omnes Omnibus
@efgoldman: Cool. And my thoughts are with you over the next days.
redshirt
@burnspbesq: I agree. I think he’s serious and sincere.
patroclus
Well, I think continuing to insult Sanders’ supporters is counter-productive, even if they deserve it. NR said s/he is going to vote for Clinton, so that makes it okay, in my view. But I agree that getting paid for speeches is not really anything that justifies criticism – I’d rather Hillary have the money than investment banks, because she generally uses it for good purposes. And, like it or not, Wall Street is part of America and I want it to do well and I think people who work in the financial industry have the right to contribute money to campaigns and pay people for speeches if they want. Having contacts on the “Street” is actually a good sign, in my view, so long as a candidate has a broad perspective and and advocates policies for all the people. When Wall Street does well, Main Street doesn’t necessarily do well, but Main Street rarely if ever does well when Wall Street does poorly. I want both to do well.
Mnemosyne
@Ruckus:
Like most of my sinus issues, I think my migraines are tied into my asthma. I need to get back to see my asthma doctor and renew my Singulair prescription, but I need to have my doctor request an official referral from the horrible medical group she belongs to.
redshirt
@Mnemosyne: While I agree with your point, it’s also fair to say Trump will probably be able to get away with accusing Hillary as being for sale, due to our media. It will be up to discerning adult voters to understand the hypocrisy. Many – at least 42% – won’t.
Omnes Omnibus
@redshirt: Still working on it. I am still at asshole troll vs non-troll. Hey, it took Darwin years.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@patroclus: NR’s been trolling here forever, long before he ever heard of Bernie Sanders
burnspbesq
@NR:
All money is green and fungible. No dollar is better or worse than any other dollar. There is nothing illegal, immoral, or fattening about taking campaign contributions from anyone. If you can’t take their money and then fuck them once you’re in office, you don’t deserve to be elected.
Secretary Clinton has never been in a position where she could influence legislation, enforcement priorities, or regulatory policy related to the securities industry. WHY DON’T YOU GIVE HER A FUCKING CHANCE TO PROVE YOU WRONG?
What the fuck does the mythical “regulatory capture” have to do with this or anything else?
Omnes Omnibus
@burnspbesq: @redshirt: I disagree. And my opinion is noted above.
redshirt
@Omnes Omnibus: Heh. I believe you have to start with the fundamental division of asshole and idiot. Everything flows from that.
Ruckus
@burnspbesq:
I consider a person who never listens, never learns and is always wrong and keeps spewing crap to be a troll. Maybe not the same kind of troll as those paid (hopefully not enough to buy a bag of Cheetos with a years trolling) but a troll none the less. It’s not that I don’t agree with them, which is a given, it’s that they can’t stop being a waste of time and pixels and annoying everyone with their wrongness.
Mnemosyne
@redshirt:
There’s pretty much nothing Trump could do or say at this point that would turn his current fans against him, except maybe move to the middle.
What I’m doubting is that he’s going to be able to turn currently undecided voters against her by claiming she’s for sale to the highest bidder and he’s not.
patroclus
@NR: It was the failure to regulate credit and OTC derivatives that tanked the economy in 2007-08, not the industry itself. What the financial industry did was (virtually) all legal, it was a combination of the CFTC Modernization Act and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, together with the collapse of derivatives regulation reform in the 90’s which led directly to the crisis. The blame lies with the politician’s responsible (Phil Gramm, George Bush and many others). Do you blame the wild animal in a zoo for escaping and attacking people? You should blame the zookeepers and the zoo designers for allowing it to happen.
burnspbesq
@burnspbesq:
ETA: Until Clinton asks for the resignations of Preet Bharara, Andrew Ceresney, and Rich Cordray, i’m giving her the benefit of the doubt.
NR, do you have any idea (without Google) who any of those people are?
Mike J
@burnspbesq: Like the guy who the Vespa said, Pecorino ain’t oleo.
redshirt
@Mnemosyne: Agreed. So it’s a moot point, to go against NR’s conjecture. It won’t mean anything in the electoral vote.
burnspbesq
I think I’ll go back to trolling Patriots fans on FB. That’s less like beating your head against a wall.
Frankensteinbeck
@Mike J:
Actually, yes. In one of the many, MANY fucked up things about that book, at the end of Peter Pan says he thinks Tinkerbell is dead, but he isn’t sure because he wasn’t paying attention and doesn’t care.
@NR:
He certainly does.
But that’s not it. You are confusing one of the many random contradictory things he has said for his actual message, which is consistently ‘White people are poor because non-white people are taking their jobs.’ Trump has the worst message discipline of any candidate I’ve ever seen. He has been both for and against Planned Parenthood in the space of days, for example. He’s also the king of corruption, who has upgraded his closet to a very classy mausoleum where the skeletons are plated with gold.
He’s not going to hit Hillary from the left on anything. Or if he does, five minutes later he’ll forget and go to her right on that issue, and look like an idiot. I have zero worries about him making Wall Street an issue. Plus, it’s an issue his base doesn’t give a damn about. When they examined his base, the ‘crossover’ voters turned out to be Democrats who’ve been voting Republican since Reagan.
PatrickG
@NR:
It was easier to believe you weren’t a troll when you were pumping Bernie instead of attacking Hillary every chance you got.
On the other hand, you crossed that line months ago, didn’t you?
redshirt
@burnspbesq: I’m a Patriots fan, and am willing to be trolled.
Omnes Omnibus
@redshirt: Above that is douchebag. Then why. And both comes into play.
dollared
@burnspbesq: You don’t think regulatory capture occurs, Burnsie? Seriously? Maybe you should tell that to the widows and children of the people killed by BP.
RaflW
My reaction is that whatever Sanders and Clinton can do in the next 24 hours to keep relatively quiet and let Cruz and Kasich ratfuck each other publicly, that’d be swell. Quite some divvy ’em up strategy those two thought up.
dollared
@aimai: Wow. Another Republican meme. Money earned influence peddling is still earned. Oh, that’s right, since the Clintons hit New York, “influence peddling” has dropped out of our vocabulary. Because……I don’t know, you tell me.
redshirt
@Omnes Omnibus: I’m not sure I understand your taxonomy.
NR
@burnspbesq:
1. We’re not just talking about campaign contributions, we’re talking about the millions of dollars paid to Hillary personally.
2. Your position on campaign contributions is ridiculous. Money buys access. An average voter is not going to be able to pick up the phone and talk to the president when he wants to get something done, but someone who bundled a few million in campaign contributions for the president’s party sure as hell will.
You realize that “There’s nothing wrong with unlimited money in politics” is literally the Republican position, right? That’s not the direction I want to see the Democrats go in. And I may have to vote for Hillary this time because the alternatives are so awful, but I won’t keep supporting the Dems if that’s where they go. And judging by the number of people leaving the party, I’m not alone in that.
ruemara
@NR: The same could be said of your intense hatred of Hillary Clinton. If you think the fact that she earned a paycheck for giving speeches is a major event, you have your finger on the pulse of a dead society. If anything, hammering her for earning what she’s worth is going to go as well for Trump as it has for Sanders.
Omnes Omnibus
@redshirt: One category is Douchebags. Then why they are d-bags. But I acknowledge that there are overlaps at the next level.
As I said, I am working on it.
redshirt
@dollared: Yes. Influence is important. Sanders and supporters don’t seem to understand that (except as mentioned before in getting Jane Sanders college president jobs). Influence, in fact, is a key ingredient in politics. Politics being how we as a society organize.
dollared
Seems like good advice. If she and the Democrats take it, the sweep could be on. If not, well, then a nice win, crushed at midterms, and 35 fully Republican-controlled statehouses for the 2020 gerrymandering
Omnes Omnibus
@dollared: Okay, Bernie wins and what?
dollared
@redshirt: That’s what you got? Jane Sanders got a job? The Clintons got a Billion Dollars. Can you do math?
Jesus Christ, if that’s your measure of corruption, Chelsea got a job, too.
redshirt
@dollared: Now see, that’s a realistic Doom and Gloom scenario. Work that instead of your current material.
redshirt
@dollared: I don’t give a fig, but it’s pretty clear Saint Sanders is not clean either. Isn’t that your point?
feebog
@RaflW:
And the strategy is bizarre. You would think that Kasich should make the play in Indiana, given that it is next door to Ohio and the voters presumably have more in common. Cruz has done pretty well in the Rocky Mountain West, and he is going to cede that to Kasich. Sounds more like a mutual suicide pact than an actual plan.
redshirt
@Omnes Omnibus: Seems like a pretty poor system to be honest.
dollared
@Omnes Omnibus: I don’t understand your question. Bernie never had more than half of a puncher’s chance. If he had won, he would have had to govern using the Democrats’ team and infrastructure, and unless the Dems ratfucked him, he would have done just fine, but the only difference between HRC’s first term and Bernie’s would be that Bernie wouldn’t sign TPP, and HRC will.
Bernie’s just giving the Democrats some advice they’ve been refusing since Dukakis: focus on the middle class and sell, sell, sell. They are stupid not to take it.
redshirt
@feebog: Indeed. Maybe they are just as stupid as their followers. Maybe they’ve all bought into their self created mythology.
NR
@feebog: Kasich is also telling his voters to still vote for him in Indiana (a winner-take-all state). So it looks like this “plan” of theirs means precisely dick-all.
redshirt
@NR: I LOL at the idea that Kaisch has supporters. I’m sure they exist, but their existence makes me chuckle. Like, why?!
Omnes Omnibus
@redshirt: You are judging the subjects. I am working on the taxonomy. Back off. It may be years before I get it right.
burnspbesq
@NR:
Way to take a partial quote out of context. Intellectual dishonesty, it’s what’s for dinner.
If you’d care to respond to the entirety of what I wrote, feel free.
Major Major Major Major
@redshirt: @Omnes Omnibus: I uh, *clears throat* know a guy if you’re having a hard time developing a hierarchical ontology…
scav
For those needing a break from the usual usuall, here’s Patrick Stewart and he swears at the end. Change of political pace.
redshirt
@Major Major Major Major: LOL.
But NR has enlightened me to the fact that the 2020 census will occur during a Presidential election year, ensuring best possible results for lazy ass voting Democrats. Viva la Progressive Future!
Ruckus
@feebog:
Kasich is probably better known in IN than in the west so IN would could be a loser for him. The devil you know is still the devil. Or better in this case the asshole you know is still an asshole.
ETA Forgot to add, yes it’s a suicide pact. But that’s about all either one of them has left. Especially that guy in third place, what’s his name.
NR
@redshirt: Oh, he’s the reasonable one, don’t you know?
He’s also a moron. The smart thing for him to do would have been to actually cede Indiana to Cruz and tell his supporters to vote Cruz. Literally his only chance of getting the nomination is if no one hits 1,237 and he can convince the delegates to choose him because he runs the best against Hillary. That argument would either succeed or fail on its merits. Him having 200 delegates instead of 150 will make no difference whatsoever. All he does by continuing to campaign in winner-take-all states is give Trump a better chance of hitting 1,237–in which case he will be the nominee.
Maybe we shouldn’t be worried about him. Apparently the guy isn’t too bright.
dollared
@redshirt: Really? you do understand that politics is a family business, and people get their relatives jobs all the time. The real question is “is it a real job and did they do it in good faith?”
And you seriously want to compare Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton? Again, can you do any math at all? Do you understand how flawed it is to accept millions from foreign kleptocrats for your “charity” when you are the US Secretary of State? I believe that she is legit and relatively uncorrupt, but the appearance of the thing is exactly like a corrupt Latin American ruling family.
redshirt
@NR: Right? They’re all stupendous morons, and yet they can still threaten to ruin our great nation. It’s perplexing.
NR
@burnspbesq: You said what you said. If you didn’t mean that there’s no problem with big campaign contributions, you shouldn’t have said there’s no problem with big campaign contributions.
redshirt
@dollared: So you believe she is legit and uncorrupt, yet are upset at what? Appearances? Lies? Fox News?
Omnes Omnibus
@dollared: My actual point is that it should start to be transition time. Bernie can’t win. If he pivots back to his original issues and doesn’t take shots at HRC, he will provide is all with a great service.
dollared
@redshirt: relatively. She is still a stupid neoliberal who has failed to understand the economic and moral lessons of the last 20 years, and because of her activities she has all the wrong friends. But I think she is wrong in good faith, and at worst she has the simple biases of a rich person who doesn’t know better.
And yes, the appearances are terrible – because they signal to 1) the sophisticated, that she thinks she is above normal rules, like a Latin American family operating with privileged impunity; 2) if you are an ordinary voter, that she genuinely looks corrupt; and 3) if you care at all about international relations and international development, she is using a financial structure and set of practices that have been abused by kleptocrats all over the world for at least the last two generations.(pay money to my “charity” heh), and she is legitimizing it at a time when transparency organizations are fighting it all over the world.
MBunge
Has everyone actually forgot what the Hillary and Wall Street thing is really about? It’s not about Hillary being as casually corrupt as everyone else in politics, including Bernie, or at least it wouldn’t have been if Hillary didn’t react like a scalded dog every time it comes up.
The Wall Street thing is about why, when she was already very rich and already planning to run for President, did she go out and do something that would so obviously create a completely avoidable political problem?
Mike
Major Major Major Major
Misuse of ‘neoliberal’! Drink!
redshirt
@dollared: While I might agree with the gist of your response, your opening phrase threw me:
What does that mean? What are the lessons of the last 20 years?
dollared
@Omnes Omnibus: He’s still urging her to make a direct appeal to the middle class and promise policies that will benefit them, and he’s urging her to stop with the neoliberal “we technocrats know better than you do” rhetoric.
I think that’s good advice. For the umpteenth time, I will support her. But she doesn’t make it easy.
Take an afternoon one of these days. Drive over to Racine, then drive up through Milwaukee and up to Sheboygan. Stay off the freeway. When you get to 500 hundred abandoned factories, big and small, stop off for a beer. We cannot continue the policies of the last 40 years. She should say that loudly.
Omnes Omnibus
@dollared: Never mind. You are on your own.
redshirt
@dollared: You know how we help rural America? We fight a war on Global Warming.
It will take all of us, and lots of new industries and jobs. Maybe we should try it?
Major Major Major Major
@Omnes Omnibus: Neoliberal $hill.
redshirt
@Major Major Major Major: I thought you were sober?
Major Major Major Major
@redshirt: I didn’t say I was playing the Balloon-Juice Drinking Game.
redshirt
@Major Major Major Major: It can be played with non-alcoholic drinks too! Cheers!
dollared
@redshirt: We did horrible things:
1. We transferred wealth from the middle class and lower middle class to the rich through a thousand tools: lowered tax rates, union busting, financialization, LBOs, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc,
2. we facilitated the deindustrialization of our country through trade agreements, cutting jobs that supported 10s of millions of Americans, lowering wage rates for ALL Americans – even doctors, lawyers and bankers make comparatively less than before, all for the benefit of the top 1%.
3. We doubled the defense budget in the absence of enemies
4. We turned post K-12 education into a profit center, and student loans into a $100B business, for profit, all on the backs of our kids.
5. We inflated the price of real estate to mask the pain of deindustrialization, and when it finally blew up, we bailed out the bankers and not the homeowners, causing the largest decline in family net worth in US history.
6. dont’ get me started on welfare reform or mass incarceration.
And Hillary is taking money from every single bad actor category in this series of horrible developments. And every time she or a Hillbot reject Bernie Sanders’ proposed policies, it’s with the clear statement that “things aren’t going to change.”
Omnes Omnibus
@dollared: I live in the state. Don’t imply that I don’t know the problems here. I live here and am working on them. I will stop now because someone asked me to be polite.
Miss Bianca
@feebog: tell me about it. Cruz swept CO delegates. I don’t understand their Sooper Sekrit game plan.
@Omnes Omnibus: I wish I trusted him to do that. But every day he just seems to dig a little deeper into plain surly intransigence.
dollared
@Major Major Major Major: Please, Major Major, tell us how it was misused. Please be specific.
redshirt
@dollared: You make great points.
I’m actually taken back by some of them.
And yet still, I don’t see our options. Clinton is the only candidate guaranteed not to bring about the apocalypse this fall.
dollared
@Omnes Omnibus: I’m glad you’re there. But how are you working on them if the national policies of your country are going to close more factories every month?
dollared
@redshirt: Agreed. I just wish people here would stop calling Sanders an asshole for begging Clinton to address them. And guess what, it would be good politics!
Major Major Major Major
@dollared: “we technocrats know better than you do” isn’t neoliberal, it’s technocratic. It might annoy you, but it’s not neoliberalism.
Neoliberalism refers to a resurgence in ‘economic liberalist’ thought, which is where we get the same sense of ‘liberty’ that is used in ‘libertarian’, and you know what i know you can use the google machines. what it doesn’t mean it “obamacare is a neoliberal hand-out to Big Insurance and Hillary would be more of the same” or whatever. Yes, I know you only said the first direct quotey thing.
AxelFoley
@NR:
Damn, I’m tired of your butthurt bullshit.
dollared
@redshirt: Yup. That would be a great start. Totally agreed.
Omnes Omnibus
@dollared: Which factories are going to close? They already have. Now what? Wisconsin Rapids is a ghost town. It was a mill town. How would Bernie fix that?
Miss Bianca
@Omnes Omnibus: He’s gonna vote against the TPP, duh. That’s going to fix everything.
cokane
the nastiness on display here, over essentially nothing, is disheartening
redshirt
@cokane: So you’re a Bernie supporter?
Yutsano
@burnspbesq: I got 2 out of 3. Do I get a cookie?
dollared
@Major Major Major Major:
Wikipedia:
So, neoliberalism does include quite specifically 1) market based solutions utilized in place of socialized solutions, such as Obamacare rather than Public Option 2) Free trade agreements; 3) Obama’s reductions in government spending; 4) and Clinton’s preference for Wall Street self regulation rather than strict financial regulation. And of course the mass incarceration, privatized prisons and welfare reform of the 90s are all neoliberal.
So you have been blowing smoke. I don’t get why.
redshirt
@dollared: It seems so logical and like it would solve so many problems: Why not build new alternative energy companies? A new alternative energy infrastructure?
And yet Republicans are against it. Being Pro-Business, of course.
Major Major Major Major
@dollared: What we done learned in podunk grad school was that neoliberalism generally refers to lasseiz-faire deregulation and the preference of corporate institutions over international governance. i was also quite specifically and repeatedly disabused of the notion that it’s “conservative solutions to liberal priorities”, but what do i know
Yutsano
@efgoldman: *applause*
@hovercraft: I still say he has several federal tax liens from his bankrupt businesses out there.
Miss Bianca
Actually, now that I’ve done some reading up on the TPP, particularly the environmental and clean energy provisions, I think promising to veto it is a stupid move.
cokane
@redshirt: rofl, i think both are fine — if flawed — candidates. the vitriol on display here is disgusting. these are two of the better candidates either party has fielded in decades (except Obama) imo.
Major Major Major Major
@Miss Bianca: i like the TPP but i’m a neoliberal shill paid by the hillary campaign to troll online, so
Mike in NC
The shitbird Bernistas of 2016 are worse than the asshole Naderites of 2000, although both are mostly the same gang of dreamy-eyed fools and cretins that will happily deliver us another Republican presidential disaster. Enjoy eight years of Ted Cruz, you morons.
redshirt
@Miss Bianca: While I too lament the loss of local manufacturing and jobs and such, I’m also about the World as much as I am about America, so every trade agreement is awesome because it means another part of the World just got Americanized.
seaboogie
@dollared:
I think it’s officially time to change the meme to “Thanks, Hillary”.
cokane
@Mike in NC: polls say most sanders supporters will vote the dem nominee regardless — more than 08 clinton supporters did at the same point in time. But yeah, keep dogging on fellow democrats
dollared
@Omnes Omnibus: I agree the situation is now disastrous. What should we do? First, apply the Hippocratic oath: first do no (more) harm. No more trade agreements. Better health care. Better access to education. Go to war with Walker over labor, gerrymandering, health care cuts. Don’t perpetuate the current situation, where there is a real death spiral going on.
It’s going to be uphill for a long while. But at least stop making it worse.
dollared
@redshirt: Awesome. Glad you favor taking the livelihood, health and well being of your neighbors and giving it to someone else far away, all to make the wealthy wealthier. Does it make you feel more cosmopolitan and sophisticated?
Darkrose
@Mnemosyne: Is it windy down there? It’s been hella windy the past few days here in Sacramento, and the pollen was already bad.
patroclus
@dollared: Obama got the stimulus bill enacted, and just got $80 billion more in both domestic discretionary and defense spending – and spending on SS, Medicare and defense have increased since 2009 above the rate of inflation. You’re blowing smoke if you think Obama “reduced spending.” Clinton and Obama got Dodd-Frank enacted, which is the strictest direct financial reforms since the New Deal, including a new CFPB, which strictly regulates consumer finance disclosure, new strict derivatives disclosure requirements, Basel III, which strictly requires capital adequacy, push-out regulation which strictly moves speculative investment banking out of commercial banks, the Volcker rule which strictly regulates speculative activity by commercial banks, a new FSOC, a new OFR and lots more. You’re blowing smoke if you truly think that is self-regulation. Increased spending across all sectors and strict financial regulation are not neo-liberal, even by your definition.
dollared
@Major Major Major Major: OK, then. Maybe you should stop feeling so smug about your superior knowledge, and read Wikipedia. Or any critique of Rubin and Summers.
redshirt
@dollared: Yep. I’m a citizen of Earth first, above all nationality. We’re the human species and we ALL need to act to safeguard our game reserve.
seaboogie
@Yutsano: I’m the one who made the comment about my gratitude for my revenooer. She is wonderful. So helpful in walking me through the steps to compliance and wisest course of action in a practical way. You IRS guys and gals rock.
AxelFoley
@FlipYrWhig:
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
dollared
@patroclus: 1) as I said, Obamacare is classic neoliberalism; private solution providing a public good for private profit. 2) Obama’s government spending rate is the lowest since the end of WWII http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/05/business/economy/government-is-getting-smaller-in-the-us-off-the-charts.html?_r=0
3) Dodd-Frank is largely self regulation, and many, many economists recommend something stronger, both in classical banking and in shadow banking. But not Hillary.
seaboogie
@dollared:
Ahem.
dollared
@redshirt: hoo boy. May you be sentenced to live in what’s left of Youngstown, OH all those unemployed people can enjoy your ethereal superiority.
NR
@AxelFoley: Oh, this is hilarious. The people who can’t stop whining about every little thing Bernie Sanders says are calling me butthurt. Project, much?
Major Major Major Major
@dollared: Well, Rubin and Summers certainly have their problems.
Frankly the wiki article lets you define neoliberalism as whatever you want it to be, depending on where you quote from, which is why I didn’t reference it. Shrug. The point is, as patroclus pointed out, it doesn’t get to mean “this isn’t liberal enough so it must be neoliberal”, which is how most people (yourself included) seem to use it.
dollared
@Mike in NC: And they should vote the way you suggest? And why should they listen to you?
patroclus
@Major Major Major Major: The problem is that the term “neoliberal” has different definitions in different countries and across different disciplines. The wiki article is using the definition usually applied to the financial reforms favored by consultants such as Jeffrey Sachs (sp?) when he was hired by numerous developing countries to reform their economies in the 90’s (many Latin American as well as former Sovier SSR’s). In Germany, it is/was usually applied to the policies of the FDP, which advocated socially liberal economic policies but robust foreign/defense policies. To understand how the term is being applied, you have to know what country and what discipline you are referring to. Sanders supporters tend to favor the Latin American economic definition.
redshirt
@dollared: I don’t need to go far. The paper mill towns of Maine are all dying. Rumford is right up the road and will strand thousands.
dollared
@Major Major Major Major: I get what you’re saying about the Wikipedia article. I think I gave you some very specific reasons why I used the term, and how specifically it applied to specific policies and actions.
dollared
@redshirt: but you feel good about that.
redshirt
@dollared: Somewhere some Chinese family is living better. Probably many Chinese families.
tastytone
@dollared:
She has. Her agenda has been heard and deemed better, and has (seemingly) won her the nomination–by quite a bit, actually. I’m sure she’ll continue to do so, thanks for the advice Sen. Sanders.
As he has (seemingly) lost, maybe Sanders will eventually realize that it will be incumbent on him to help massage his supporters into accepting, despite his claims that Clinton is a lying- bullying-war-mongering-incremental-Wall Street-establishment-$hill, that they need to suck it up and vote for her for the benefit of all of us; the unsullied or otherwise. I hope he has it in him.
NR
@tastytone:
No. It’s Hillary Clinton’s responsibility to get people to vote for her. If she can’t do that, the fault is hers. No one else’s.
patroclus
@dollared: The 2012 article you cite directly contradicts your summation – in fact, in its first sentence, it states that federal spending has increased (albeit more slowly than under Bush but increased nonetheless) and total spending in state and local government declined. You should read it, and then update it with the new figures from the Omnibus bill enacted last October. Federal spending has increased, as I stated – there is no doubt whatsoever about it. To assert otherwise is inaccurate.
Dodd-Frank is not self-regulation in any manner whatsoever. As I listed, the CFPB is not self-regulation; the Volcker rule is not self-regulation, Basel III is not self-regulation, the push-out rules are not self-regulation, the derivatives disclosure is not self-regulation, the requirement that all OTC derivatives be traded on exchanges is not self-regulation and on and on and on. You really should do some reading on the subject -your summation is wildly inaccurate. Yes, there could have more regulation – Barney Frank has discussed this at some length, but to dismiss what was enacted as mere self-regulation is blowing smoke with no specifics whatsoever.
patroclus
@NR: I agree with you that unifying the party is primarily the responsibility of the nominee, but it’s shared. The runner-up has responsibilities as well. It takes two to tango – the nominee in the lead, but the runner-up as well.
tastytone
@NR:
No. It’s Hillary Clinton’s responsibility to get people to vote for her. If she can’t do that, the fault is hers. No one else’s.
Death Panel Truck
@NR: This, if nothing else, proves NR is a RWNJ posing as a Democrat.
redshirt
@NR: So Sanders supporters have no larger commitment to defeating Republicans?
wmd
I read this piece and it made me recall that there was a time when the Democratic Party was more effective at promoting better policies. Perhaps we could get the funding to resurrect the Democratic Study Group.
Bernie’s fundraising lists would be effective for some of the funding of a new working group that is actively working to better the working class’ lives.
How many of us here recall the Princeton study on how policy actually is made – what influences policy in the US? This isn’t an indictment of Clinton, it’s on the system as a whole.
For Hillary fans – there was a good interview of her for Business Insider, where she almost says policy should discourage corporations from thinking on a quarter to quarter basis. If you squint really hard and tap your heels together you might see a glimmer of a Tobin tax.
dollared
@patroclus: And the rate of growth is the lowest since post WWII. I stand by my statement.
Also, you don’t seem to understand how regulation works. There is pure self-regulation, where the government has no role. That would never work, because of the Federal Reserve put. There is active Federal regulation, which was the state of affairs until the 1990s. And then there are varying degrees of self regulation and reporting, with federal oversight. Dodd Frank, rather than reinstating the re-1999 rules, is mostly self reporting and self regulation, with Federal assessment rights (stress tests) and Federal minimum requirements, which have not yet been met. So on the regulatory continuum, it is much closer to self reg than full reg.
And the lack of tight Federal oversight, as Senator Clinton has said, is because “businesses know best how to manage themselves.” That is a classic neoliberal statement, amply disproven by the $1T we had to come up with to bail them out the last time they “managed themselves.”
NR
@Death Panel Truck: Sure. No one cares about money in politics. It’s just a made-up issue by right-wing trolls. Whatever you need to tell yourself to sleep at night, I guess.
AxelFoley
@efgoldman:
DAMN
patroclus
@wmd: Back in the day (1930;s-1970’s), there used to be a large infrastructure of think tanks and other policy-oriented organs that did promote liberal policies much better than today – Brookings was merely the lead group of a whole panoply of such organizations. But today, that ground is largely occupied by the right wing; not liberals, and even Brookings is today, at best, a center-left organization. There used to be DSG’s at all the state levels as well – while an intern in the then-Dem-dominated Texas Lege, I worked with them in the 1970’s. They are all long gone now. And it takes decades to build them.
dollared
@Miss Bianca: yes, because you believe that those provisions will be enforced. Even though similar provisions have never been enforced in any trade agreement ever.
NR
@redshirt: Some do. Others will have to be convinced. Like a lot of other voters.
patroclus
@NR: We all care about money in politics – there is virtual unanimous support amongst Dems to overturn Citizens United and Buckley v. Valeo. And to do that, it will take the confirmation of a new Justice on the USSC. But earning money for speech-making as a private citizen is not the same thing and most people recognize this. Your attempt to conflate the two issues is not very convincing, but if it helps you to sleep at night, go for it.
patroclus
@dollared: There have never been any similar provisions in trade agreements – the TPP is breaking new ground by including them. The “side” agreements in NAFTA were never really the same thing – they had different (i.e., no) enforcement provisions and could not be enforced by the enforcement provisions in the main agreement. You should read up on both NAFTA and the TPP and the differences between the two – especially as they relate to climate change. The recent Paris agreements also contain novel enforcement provisions – we are all hoping that they can and will be enforced as the deadlines for compliance approach.
patroclus
@dollared: Your statement was inaccurate and remains so. Federal spending was increasing as of 2012 and it has increased since then. To state that it instead constitutes “Obama spending cuts” is ludicrous. The rate of increase declined due to the idiotic sequestration rules (imposed by the Republicans), which were eliminated last October. There is no doubt whatsoever that federal spending has increased above the rate of inflation and even the article you cited confirms this.
Sorry, but your understanding about how bank regulation works is inaccurate. There was never any kind of derivatives regulation in place prior to Dodd-Frank – none in the 1990’s, none in the 1980’s or before. Banks just set their own rules, if any. Now, all OTC derivatives are strictly regulated, there are strict limits on each bank, on each of the affiliates, on each transaction, and on all transactions as a whole. And now, they are strictly required to be traded on public exchanges. Basel III is, most definitely, strict regulation, requiring at least 8% capital on a per-transaction basis and as a whole. The CFPB is, most definitely, strict regulation. As is the strict Volcker rule and the push-out provisions. Like I said, you really need to read up on the specifics of Dodd-Frank – you just seem to be regurgitating gibberish without any specific knowledge. It makes you look foolish.
BillinGlendaleCA
@Major Major Major Major: Shouldn’t that be neoliberal $hill?
dollared
@patroclus: First, you are dead wrong about spending growth under Obama. I’ve given you the NYT, here’s Politifact: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/may/23/facebook-posts/viral-facebook-post-says-barack-obama-has-lowest-s/
This is not rocket science.
Second, you may not understand that prior to the 1990s, it would have been very easy to simply block derivatives. They were (and are) Securities under the 1933 Act, so the idea that they were unregulated before then is silly and ahistorical. In fact, some derivatives would violate most 1970s gambling regulation, since the more tenuous the connection to an actual instrument, the more like a simple wager they appear.
The rest – again, you don’t seem to understand the massive holes in a self reporting regime. And you don’t seem to understand the alternatives before the regulators. Yes, the boundaries are mandatory. But nobody really knows how much the boundaries are exceeded. Except that we know that the banks have not satisfied the capital requirements – and we’re taking no action.
dollared
@patroclus: We do know that the ANTI-environmental clauses of trade agreements have been enforced to deny countries sovereignty over their own environmental and consumer protections. There has been no enforcement of any labor or environmental clauses in any trade agreement with the US.
Your tell is your “hope” that there will be enforcement. Good luck with that.
patroclus
@dollared: The NYT directly contradicted you as does Politifact – both of which state clearly that federal spending increased, albeit at slower rates since WWII. That’s an increase no matter how you slice it. You were wrong originally; you are wrong now. Both articles you cite directly contradict you. Why do you persist?
Until Dodd-Frank, the SEC took the position that derivatives trading by banks was not under its purview; rather, it was under the various bank regulators. This was confirmed in the 1990’s under Arthur Levin, despite the efforts by Brooksley Borne (the CFTC head) to try to establish some form of oversight. As I stated, there was no regulation of derivatives until Dodd-Frank. Period. Your lack of understanding of the turf wars between the SEC and the bank regulators is typical of someone who does not understand the situation. State regulators tried to use the anti-gambling state statutes and failed miserably; until the strict regulation imposed by Dodd-Frank. As I said, you should read up on the history of the law and on Dodd-Frank; your understanding of it is inaccurate.
The rest – you ignored. You ignored the Volcker rule, you ignored the CFPB, you ignored Basel III, you ignored the push-out regulations; you ignored the clearing exchanges, you ignored the FSOC, you ignored the OFR, you ignored the new rules for thrifts, you ignored Dodd-Frank’s delineation of regulatory responsibility between the SEC and the other regulators. Banks have to adhere to the capital rules or they are issued PCA Directives and their boards are replaced and the bank is placed under receivership by the FDIC. All strict regulations. You really should read up on how this works – your understanding of it is shallow, at best.
patroclus
@dollared: There hasn’t been any enforcement because there haven’t been any environmental clauses; except, as you correctly summarize, anti-environmental clauses. The TPP is breaking new ground by, as Ms. Bianca said, including pro-environmental clauses for the first time ever. You’re right – it is a hope at this stage. Because there is no precedent for enforcement (because there have never been any enforceable provisions). We’ll see.
AxelFoley
@NR:
Keep playing the victim.
Applejinx
Buh, this thread :/
Yeah, let’s not campaign on this, okay?
The best optimistic spin I can put on stuff from THIS godawful thread is: looks like the Wall Street thing is the last frontier and on many other subjects (such as climate change, where Clinton’s been making unprompted statements) there is no difference anymore.
I don’t know how else to pressure Clinton, other than ‘not vowing blind loyalty and unilateral surrender to whatever she wants to do’, so Bernie’s position seems politically appropriate to me. It’s specifying conditions for support over that one remaining touchy subject.
Burns, if you seriously think being the Senator of New York is ‘no position from which you could possibly make legislation regulating Wall Street’, that sounds kind of insane and I’d like to know what the hell you’re thinking. I’m happy to consider that she was representing them directly because that was her job (though this does not preclude regulating ’em for their own good) but suggesting that she was completely helpless to do a thing about it, is either terrifying or disingenuous. Who could possibly be better positioned to handle such a task? She got regulatory-captured by them and believed all their bullshit. Let her say she’s learned better from watching the bailouts and misbehavior.
Gravenstone
@NR: Ya know genius, one must manage to do the majority of the first in order to have any chance to do the second.
sparrow
@Applejinx: I’m impressed you are still around, oh reasonable Bernie supporter. I used to come here regularly and thought the place was mostly populated with reasonable people, but this place gone impressively downhill since the Clintonistas lost their damned minds. I’ve never seen so many previously sane people support awful, anti-progressive positions that they wouldn’t tolerate for 5 minutes in a republican, all for the sake of tribal loyalty. (Because you’ll ask: fracking, regime change, supporting murderous coup governments in Latin America, privatization of prisons, uninterest in regulating wall street, sheer greed in taking the speaking money at all, getting involved in another war in Syria, taking essentially bribes through the Clinton foundation to reward foreign powers with arms deals, being anti-15 dollar minimum wage, and honestly a whole lot of ??? about what she will actually do as opposed to just say to get elected).
Perhaps most of the people here finally realized they were really conservatives once someone came along that packaged neoliberal “manage the decline” doctrine in a way that didn’t beat up on minorities and gays too much and said nice things about women. I was going to support Clinton in the general, but the rhetoric of the Clinton supporters towards those expressing their preference AT THE TIME THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO (you know, the whole point of the primaries), and the precipitous drop in my opinion of Clinton (especially regarding foreign policy) are making it really tempting to join the fucking Greens after I vote for Bernie today.
Gravenstone
Buzzword bingo!
Seriously, did the talking points specify “neoliberal” as the word of the day?
trnc
@NR:
That’s only partly true, as it’s only partly true for any candidate. There are plenty of republicans who would never vote for either Bernie or Hillary. Is that Bernie’s or Hillary’s fault? Both of them have laid out their visions.
It seems to be the opinion of many here, including some who supported Bernie early on, that Bernie has the idealism they are looking for seems to be using magic numbers and has trouble articulating a realistic way of executing those ideals into actual policy.
Also, if taking money from a company automatically makes them support all of the bad things about that company, why aren’t balloon-juice, dailykos, TPM, etc all right wing sites? They all take ad money from various right wing orgs.
Matt McIrvin
@sparrow:
Are you referring to Honduras here? If so, her “support for the murderous coup government” consisted of being against US intervention. Was there any possible course of action that wouldn’t have been one or the other of these awful things?
DCF
@sparrow:
Well said…the myopic meme of ‘support-anyone-as-long-as-s/he-identifies-as-a-Democrat’ is superficial and sophomoric…the Sanders candidacy is not simply ‘moving the party to the left’…it is moving a generation further in that direction….
For those of you who consider ‘down ballot’ contests a high priority – it certainly isn’t DWS, goddess knows – here is an article describing real progressive (Democratic) candidates taking on the political establishment:
Bigger Than Bernie:
The Other Progressive Candidates Taking On the Democratic Establishment
By Christopher Hass
http://inthesetimes.com/features/bernie_sanders_democrats_political_revolution_candidates.html
Cheap Jim, formerly Cheap Jim
@redshirt: “this Hillary seems way better than the Hillary of old”.
That’s the thing that gives me pause. Which mask is the real one? Of course that’s true of anyone, but there seem to have been a lot of Hillary Clintons over the years. What will she be on January 21?
Tripod
@redshirt:
Neither of which have fuck all to do with FTAs, but the Chitty Chitty Bang Bang left keeps on fucking that chicken.
Uncle Cosmo
@feebog:
The Failgunner’s not conceding anything. His minions will be hard at work worming Stealth Cruzers into those western pledged-to-Kasich delegations for the second ballot (& later if necessary).
A mutual suicide pact where DetesTed hands Kasich the revolver & says, You go first,
Betty Cracker
@DCF: I’d like to see the Democratic Party move further left too, and the down-ticket races highlighted in the linked article are a great place to start. If there’s a true political realignment afoot, that’s great news — lord knows we need one. I’m not convinced we’re there yet, personally.
You expressed concern about “the myopic meme of ‘support-anyone-as-long-as-s/he-identifies-as-a-Democrat,” but the opposite of that is cause for consternation as well. For good or ill, there are two viable political parties in the US. To actually effect change rather than just talk about it, we have to use our party as a vehicle.
That doesn’t mean slavishly toeing the party line on all issues and mindlessly swallowing every Democratic candidate’s position, but it does mean working within the party to drive your agenda, and it absolutely means uniting to defeat Republicans. Everything else is self-referential wanking, IMO.
Miss Bianca
@redshirt: If that was snark, I think you’re missing the point. You think we should have no trade agreements? Or no worldwide economic pact that recognizes environmental or labor concerns? TPP ain’t perfect, but it’s better than what we’ve got now – and better than NAFTA by a country mile.
Robert Sneddon
@Betty Cracker: There are thousands of “down-ticket” races Democrats are involved in, from Senate seats and House seats through Governorships and State legislatures through school boards and city mayors etc. The DNC is involved in promoting and helping to fund a lot of those races, as many as they can (but sadly not all of them). They don’t cherry-pick a handful of “progressive” candidates and stop unlike the ideological more-left-than-thou types who don’t see defeating Republicans as the primary mission.
gwangung
@Cheap Jim, formerly Cheap Jim:
If folks are committed to moving the party leftward, then this is a question that has much less force than you’d think. Clinton HAS to change and present multiple faces.
Anyone would have to over 20-25 years, but she would do so more than most, given her starting point AND given the pressure from the party as a whole to move leftward.
gwangung
@Robert Sneddon: Sorry to Sanders fans, but his “slate of candidates” has been pathetic. Some revolution. Only three candidates supported. Functionally, this has been a power trip to aggrandize power for Sanders and Sanders only.
Applejinx
@sparrow: I don’t know what to tell ya, Sparrow.
My facebook crew are grueling right now. The current claim is that Hillary PACs are en masse posting child pornography to Bernie FB groups to get them shut down. I’m like, documentation, snopes, politifact pls? That’s an awfully big claim and it’s being made in meme form (pictures, no background, no references)
Then I see the folks right here and they make it seem possible that other Hilbots are cranking it up to scorched-earth levels, and it’s all so narcissism-of-minor-differences. I think some of it is people not being able to tolerate ANY pressure applied to Hillary, and flipping out in completely unhelpful ways.
We’re so close to being able to put in some really big ‘increments’ but now we’re depending on the Hil folks to not run rightwing out of SPITE. I guess we end up seeing what we’ll get. I’m consoled by the belief that Clinton is and always has been very calculating and not easily rattled by hysterics on either wing.
I’m not really a natural hysteric. I can put details together, but I can also be wrong.
I’m gonna give Bernie another $10 AFTER he loses. If I could write ‘don’t fuck up the platform’ on it, I would.
Applejinx
@Cheap Jim, formerly Cheap Jim: The real one is shown when she fails, but doesn’t set policy.
The real Hillary is both the one who’s super impressed by military discipline (not that generals will always go along with her saber-rattling, but I think she’ll take a ‘no’ from them) and the one photographed failing to enact progressive healthcare with Bernie standing right behind her.
So there kind of is no real Hillary, because it’s quickly overruled by the will of the electorate as that’s shown. That also means the post-Bernie Hillary is significantly more Bernie-like so long as people continue to show demand for the bullet points Bernie keeps going on about. It becomes Hillary’s job to come up with a real implementation for these things. I like that situation. I don’t care about ‘the real Hillary’ because it’s nowhere near as set in stone as it’d be for say Bernie.
Applejinx
@Robert Sneddon: Given that the DNC has been fighting Sanders with everything it has and only barely prevailing, I think you can safely say there isn’t a left-wing ‘bench’ out there to be swept into office. The DNC wouldn’t support such candidates.
That’s now changing, but on the whole there is not going to be a big wave of super-lefty down-ticket races. If we’re lucky there’ll be some. It’s taken Sanders to establish that you can run and fundraise that far left, and he’s done it against the will of the Democrats, so NOW we might start seeing some if they don’t just all piss off and go Green or something. I hope not, setting up camp within the Democrats seems more practical.
John M. Burt
Sanders said he would want some concessions. Clinton said she’s already won so why would she bother doing anything to court Sander supporters.
I’m still hoping it won’t come to that.
Robert Sneddon
@Applejinx: I didn’t say anything about “left-wing”, I said “Democrats”. Democratic Party candidates, if they win, will be a reliable opposition to Republican State House majorities that are passing religious exemption Jim Crow laws today. They will be a force against the crazy Tea Party crowd that are passing yet more bin-the-ACA bills and granny-starving tax-cutting budgets in Washington while crying out to spend more on defence, blocking Supreme Court and other Justice Department appointments etc. etc. Senator Sanders is in a bomb-proof seat in Vermont, he’s not going anywhere but as a self-professed member of the Democratic Party (today) it’s incumbent for him to fund-raise, endorse and push for Democrats to get elected even if they’re not progressive or left-wing enough for his refined tastes. If he’s unwilling to do that why is he a Democrat?
DCF
@Applejinx:
Here is the documentation you requested:
Hillary Clinton Trolls Shut Down Pro-Bernie Sanders Facebook Groups
Amanda Girard | April 26, 2016
http://usuncut.com/politics/bernie-facebook-groups-trolled/
BUSTED: Pro-Clinton Super PAC Caught Spending $1 Million on Social Media Trolls
Tom Cahill | April 21, 2016
http://usuncut.com/politics/clinton-super-pac-busted/
DCF
@Betty Cracker:
I believe – from all the evidence within the Democratic presidential primary to date – that a significant ‘political realignment is afoot’. The socioeconomic and political fallout from the Third Way Democratic party path of the last quarter century is increasingly clear and undeniable. We are in the process of that reassessment – and realignment. It won’t happen instantaneously, but the demographics and trends are there for all to see….
If we are ‘…to use our party as a vehicle’, it is incumbent upon us to remove and replace the Third Way politicians who are content to support center-right policies in the name of pragmatism and political expediency. These changes, IMV, have already begun….
David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch
(photo #2)
(photo #3)
(photo #1)