Bernie and Cruz win.

Bernie increased his delegate count but is still behind.

Formerlyjerseyjack said:

Bernie increased his delegate count but is still behind.

Give him time.

springgreen2 said:

Formerlyjerseyjack said:

Bernie increased his delegate count but is still behind.

Give him time.

But don't ask him policy questions.

dave23 said:

springgreen2 said:

Formerlyjerseyjack said:

Bernie increased his delegate count but is still behind.

Give him time.

But don't ask him policy questions.

Don't ask Hillary what she's actually running for president to do, (other than be the first woman president....)

How will Sanders recover from this devastating win?

springgreen2 said:

dave23 said:

springgreen2 said:

Formerlyjerseyjack said:

Bernie increased his delegate count but is still behind.

Give him time.

But don't ask him policy questions.

Don't ask Hillary what she's actually running for president to do, (other than be the first woman president....)

This stuff: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues

Lots of complicated detail and nuance for a complicated world. I know, boring right?

We know she can get it done because her campaign manager is embedded with the enemy (of the middle class). 

http://soprweb.senate.gov/index.cfm?event=getFilingDetails&filingID=8a5bd4fb-2687-4cdf-9906-0a65f4d8d52b&filingTypeID=1

BERNIE and Cruz? Why not Sanders and Cruz? Or Bernie and Rafael? Consistency is a virtue.

RobB said:

springgreen2 said:

Don't ask Hillary what she's actually running for president to do, (other than be the first woman president....)

This stuff: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues

Lots of complicated detail and nuance for a complicated world. I know, boring right?

Lots of complicated detail and nuance which has been put together by a team of advisors and experts over a long period of time and has been focus grouped to death.  I'm not knocking that because that is what you do with published materials and she is running on experience.  But to equate prepared published materials which involved input from probably hundreds of advisors to an impromptu response during an interview is either very naive or very disingenuous.

This air of arrogance that Clinton and her avid supporters have could end up being a big problem for the the democratic party and for progressive ideas.  Instead of mocking Sanders for having grand ideas of trying to help out the majority of the American public, maybe she should work on trying to be a little more inspirational.  All of the great leaders in history have been inspirational and many of them without great technical know how.  Ronald Reagan, with whom I completely disagree with what he did, was a great leader and got a lot done even though he had no grasp of policy details.

I'm not saying that Hillary Clinton isn't qualified to be president, for the nuts and bolts of the job, she is more than likely the most qualified of all the candidates.  But the nuts and bolts will at most will get you a slight nudge in the direction you want to go.  Without inspiration she will never get the groundswell of support that she needs to turn the system around.  Instead of criticizing Sanders for his grand ideas, she needs to inspire with her grand ideas or embrace some of his. 

She has lost 5 out of the last 6, she needs to figure this out.  She is most likely going to be the nominee but she needs to do it by inspiring people and getting some momentum with the vote and not running out the clock and getting it with super-delegates.  If she loses the vote and gets the nomination because of super-delegates, hello president Trump or Cruz.  Because while I will vote for either, those who have been inspired to get involved, may not feel that way if they think the nomination was taken from them.  Clinton needs to make a whole lot more people yearn for her to be in office instead of making them fear Trump or Cruz.

I will be happy with either Sanders or Clinton in the Whitehouse because I think both bring a lot more to the table than any of the other options.  But I am having much less enthusiasm for Clinton mostly because of the attitude that I see in her campaign and with her avid supporters.

springgreen2 said:

dave23 said:

springgreen2 said:

Formerlyjerseyjack said:

Bernie increased his delegate count but is still behind.

Give him time.

But don't ask him policy questions.

Don't ask Hillary what she's actually running for president to do, (other than be the first woman president....)

I like Bernie, but that Daily News interview was a joke. And I'm not referring to the exchange about breaking up the banks. I respect it when a politician says "I don't know," but when the question is about modern and future warfare (drones) you have to wonder where he's been. His focus on equitable distribution of wealth is great, but the president does a lot more than that and Bernie tends to get a bit lost when the topic of conversation goes elsewhere.

dave23 said:

springgreen2 said:

dave23 said:

springgreen2 said:

Formerlyjerseyjack said:

Bernie increased his delegate count but is still behind.

Give him time.

But don't ask him policy questions.

Don't ask Hillary what she's actually running for president to do, (other than be the first woman president....)

I like Bernie, but that Daily News interview was a joke. And I'm not referring to the exchange about breaking up the banks. I respect it when a politician says "I don't know," but when the question is about modern and future warfare (drones) you have to wonder where he's been. His focus on equitable distribution of wealth is great, but the president does a lot more than that and Bernie tends to get a bit lost when the topic of conversation goes elsewhere.

thats true,  and i'm also concerned about it, but I prefer that he is far more adverse to using military force than any of the other candidates.   the president certainly gets advice on military matters from military personnel and its obvious that Clinton has the edge there in experience, however the edge, for me, in approach and disposition on use of force goes to Sanders.

Agreed. My major hesitancy with Hillary is her seeming reflex to want to use military force.

I've said it before but I will say it again.  Hillary is ABSOLUTELY the most liberal Republican running for President.  Its good to see the GOP finally coming around.

hoops said:

dave23 said:

springgreen2 said:

dave23 said:

springgreen2 said:

Formerlyjerseyjack said:

Bernie increased his delegate count but is still behind.

Give him time.

But don't ask him policy questions.

Don't ask Hillary what she's actually running for president to do, (other than be the first woman president....)

I like Bernie, but that Daily News interview was a joke. And I'm not referring to the exchange about breaking up the banks. I respect it when a politician says "I don't know," but when the question is about modern and future warfare (drones) you have to wonder where he's been. His focus on equitable distribution of wealth is great, but the president does a lot more than that and Bernie tends to get a bit lost when the topic of conversation goes elsewhere.

thats true,  and i'm also concerned about it, but I prefer that he is far more adverse to using military force than any of the other candidates.   the president certainly gets advice on military matters from military personnel and its obvious that Clinton has the edge there in experience, however the edge, for me, in approach and disposition on use of force goes to Sanders.

Exactly. I know Bernie's view of Israel is counter- neo-con, because he wants Israel to control it's outreach, but  he is the only candidate currently holding that opinion and I appreciate it.

jeffhandy said:

Lots of stuff

That was too long to quote.

I was responding to the person I quoted who suggested Hillary has been evasive about why she's running, other than the fact she's a woman and we've never had a woman president. I'd say more, but I'd probably be banned.

librarylady said:

BERNIE and Cruz? Why not Sanders and Cruz? Or Bernie and Rafael? Consistency is a virtue.

The BERN and Lyin' Ted

jeffhandy said:

 Clinton needs to make a whole lot more people yearn for her to be in office instead of making them fear Trump or Cruz.

No, however unfortunate it may be, she really doesn't. 

That is, if either Cruz or Trump is the Republican nominee which I doubt. 

Bernie is a visionary. Hillary is a status quo defender. You ask yourself which is more necessary for our time?

LOST said:

jeffhandy said:

 Clinton needs to make a whole lot more people yearn for her to be in office instead of making them fear Trump or Cruz.

No, however unfortunate it may be, she really doesn't. 

That is, if either Cruz or Trump is the Republican nominee which I doubt. 

@jeffhandy: That's exactly it. What the heck are we left with and where are we going if she wins?

springgreen2 said:

Bernie is a visionary. Hillary is a status quo defender. You ask yourself which is more necessary for our time?

No offense, but that doesn't even mean anything.

dave23 said:

springgreen2 said:

Bernie is a visionary. Hillary is a status quo defender. You ask yourself which is more necessary for our time?

No offense, but that doesn't even mean anything.

Bernie has goals. He wants to win the White House to achieve things. Specific things. What exactly is Hillary interested in achieving? Can you tell me? 

Let's turn the liberal circular firing squad on the real problem.  Hint:  It's not either of the Democratic candidates.

mjh said:

Let's turn the liberal circular firing squad on the real problem.  Hint:  It's not either of the Democratic candidates.

The right is defeated, long-term, if that's what you mean.

springgreen2 said:

mjh said:

Let's turn the liberal circular firing squad on the real problem.  Hint:  It's not either of the Democratic candidates.

The right is defeated, long-term, if that's what you mean.

Groovy.  

springgreen2 said:

dave23 said:

springgreen2 said:

Bernie is a visionary. Hillary is a status quo defender. You ask yourself which is more necessary for our time?

No offense, but that doesn't even mean anything.

Bernie has goals. He wants to win the White House to achieve things. What exactly is Hillary interested in achieving? Can you tell me? 

Rob provided you a link. There are lots of other resources available at your fingertips. (That is, if you are genuinely interested.) I'm not going to write an essay for you, especially since you've resorted to the sexist canard that she's only interested in winning the presidency because she has a vagina.

Like I've said, I like Bernie. But he couldn't even answer questions from The Daily News. I greatly admire his advocacy for the poor and middle class, but he is increasingly sounding like a Johnny One Note.

dave23 said:

springgreen2 said:

dave23 said:

springgreen2 said:

Bernie is a visionary. Hillary is a status quo defender. You ask yourself which is more necessary for our time?

No offense, but that doesn't even mean anything.

Bernie has goals. He wants to win the White House to achieve things. What exactly is Hillary interested in achieving? Can you tell me? 

Rob provided you a link. There are lots of other resources available at your fingertips. (That is, if you are genuinely interested.) I'm not going to write an essay for you, especially since you've resorted to the sexist canard that she's only interested in winning the presidency because she has a vagina.

Like I've said, I like Bernie. But he couldn't even answer questions from The Daily News. I greatly admire his advocacy for the poor and middle class, but he is increasingly sounding like a Johnny One Note.

I think it's Hillary and the pro-Hillary forces who have absolutely nothing to offer in the way of goals, or plans, or problem-solving. What do they stand for? Bernie's goal is to restructure the economy and the social order. Too much for your narrow view? Don't vote for him.

LOST said:

jeffhandy said:

 Clinton needs to make a whole lot more people yearn for her to be in office instead of making them fear Trump or Cruz.

No, however unfortunate it may be, she really doesn't. 

That is, if either Cruz or Trump is the Republican nominee which I doubt. 

I'm not saying that she needs to do that to win, I'm saying that she needs to do that if she wants to get anything done.  A squeaker of a win will get no backing for putting pressure on congress.  If you only want a placeholder "D" in the whitehouse, the fear of Cruz or Trump will do.  If you want to reverse even a little of the damage that the right has done since Reagan, we need inspiration and leadership.

springgreen2 said:
@jeffhandy: That's exactly it. What the heck are we left with and where are we going if she wins?

Well for one thing, we will get a better SCOTUS than Cruz or Trump will give us, so I won't complain.  I just want more and I don't care if it comes from her or Bernie.

springgreen2 said:
I think it's Hillary and the pro-Hillary forces who have absolutely nothing to offer in the way of goals, or plans, or problem-solving. What do they stand for? Bernie's goal is to restructure the economy and the social order. Too much for your narrow view? Don't vote for him.

Okay, you don't have to read about Hillary. 

dave23 said:

springgreen2 said:
I think it's Hillary and the pro-Hillary forces who have absolutely nothing to offer in the way of goals, or plans, or problem-solving. What do they stand for? Bernie's goal is to restructure the economy and the social order. Too much for your narrow view? Don't vote for him.

Okay, you don't have to read about Hillary. 

I'm advocating, or trying to advocate for a candidate who just won 7 out of 8 of the last state Democratic primaries. I will read MOL, which is clearly mostly pro-Cinton, who were often dragged kicking and screaming into recognizing Obama's' qualities, not even there yet in many cases, to argue my position.